Digitized by the Internet Arcinive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/beforetableinquiOOhowsrich 
 
"BEFORE THE TABLE." 
 
"BEFOKE THE TABLE;' 
 
 AN INQUIRY, HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL, 
 
 INTO THE TRUE MEANING OF THE CONSECRATION 
 
 RUBRIC IN THE COMMUNION SERVICE 
 
 OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 APPENDIX AND SUPPLEMENT, 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 PAPERS BY THE KIGHT REV. THE BISHOP OF ST. ANDREWS, 
 AND THE REV. R. AV. KENNION, M.A. 
 
 BT 
 
 J. 8. :^OWSON, D.D., 
 
 DEAN OF CHESTER. 
 
 ^^^ OR' THB «^ 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 1875. 
 
 {The Right of Traiislalion and Reproduction is Reserved.] 
 
D^2 I / ' 
 
 LONDON : 
 R. CLAY, SONS, AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS, 
 BREAD STPEET HILL. , 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 From various friends, to whom warm acknowledg- 
 ments have been privately made, I have received much 
 assistance in the preparation of this essay. Not- 
 withstanding this help, however, I cannot expect that 
 in a volume written in fragments of time, amid many 
 and serious hindrances, and without easy access to 
 books of reference, I can, even with the exercise of the 
 utmost care, have avoided some mistakes. That w^iicli 
 I earnestly claim is, that these pages may be judged, 
 not by collateral errors, which do not affect the general 
 question, but by conclusions resting on the main points 
 of the case. 
 
 In an inquiry of this kind, it always happens either 
 that the case breaks down as the investigation becomes 
 closer, or that the conviction becomes stronger and 
 stronger from point to point. My experience in the 
 matter before us has been of the second kind ; and I 
 am persuaded that, with a larger command of informa- 
 tion and of time, this argument could have been con- 
 siderably strengthened. In reading what has been 
 written by some who have been led to an opinion 
 contrary to mine, I have been much struck by their 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 imperfect treatment of the subject, and by their 
 omission of many things which, as it seems to me, 
 imperatively demand notice. I impute no blame for 
 such omission. AVe need only imagine that the habit 
 has been formed of looking only on one side of the 
 question, that there is an eagerly- cherished desire to 
 prove a point, and that the writer is surrounded by 
 the pressure of a party eager for success ; and the 
 phenomenon is explained. Still, such a state of things 
 is not conducive to the elucidation of truth ; and I 
 will take leave to illustrate what I mean in two or 
 three particulars. 
 
 The books or pamphlets to which I refer are pub- 
 lished without the slightest intimation of the exist- 
 ence of other publications, containing formidable 
 arguments which have not been answered. I will 
 here mention more particularly the pamphlets and 
 articles of Mr. Droop,^ Canon Elliott,^ and Canon 
 Simmons.^ I must indeed confess that I myself, in 
 the following pages, have referred very slightly to 
 these writers, and that I have not even yet read care- 
 fully and thoroughly what they have laid before the 
 public. But I venture to think that it has been good 
 policy on my own part to write independently ; while 
 certainly it will, in the long run, be found bad policy on 
 the part of others to keep out of view those reasonings 
 which demand a reply. 
 
 1 See p. 145, Note. To this pamphlet by Mr. Droop is now to "be added 
 another, of nearly equal importance, on the Edwardian Vestments. 
 ^ See Appendix G. 
 ^ Ihid, See also p. 55, Note. 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 A second instance is connected with the famous 
 name of Bishop Cosin. Again and again, in the 
 Lower Houses of both Convocations, and in various 
 sj)eeches and publications, the charge which was 
 brought against him, as regards his alleged practice 
 of consecrating in the Eastward Position, has been 
 reiterated ; but perfect silence has been maintained, 
 except when such silence has been forcibly interrupted, 
 respecting that prelate's disavowal of the charge/ In 
 the case of a living man it is acknowledged by all 
 persons to be culpable to repeat an accusation which 
 has been refuted. How far, in the case of the dead, 
 this rule of charity and justice ought to prevail, I will 
 not inquire. Concerning Bishop Cosin I will, to what 
 is contained in the following pages, only add this, that 
 since they were written, I have had an opportunity of 
 examining the MS. notes (intermingled with those of 
 Bancroft) in the Prayer-Book which is one of the 
 great treasures of the Diocesan Library at Durham,^ 
 and that I am persuaded that if his life and opinions 
 were fully set before us, certain results would appear 
 not acceptable to some of those who confidently quote 
 his authority. 
 
 Another case in point is the oblivion to which a 
 very important and explicit passage in L'Estrange's 
 *' Alliance of Divine Offices '' has been, carelessly or 
 carefullv, consisjned. This writer, as one of the 
 Laudian school of divines, is of peculiar weight. His 
 
 » See pp. 81—83. 
 
 ' These MS. notes have been published, but not completely, in the 
 Corrcspoiide)Cce referred to below, pp. 15 and 21, Notes. 
 
viiL PREFACE. 
 
 work has been thought worthy of a place in the 
 "Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology;" and the first 
 edition having been published in 1659, and the second 
 in 1690, it bridges over, in a most significant manner, 
 the period with which we have chiefly to do. Now in 
 this book, among the comments on the Eucharistic 
 Service, we find these words from the " MS. Collections 
 of a Learned Man " quoted with approval : — *' As for 
 the Priest standing at the North side of the Table, 
 this seemeth to avoid the fashion of the Priest's stand- 
 ing with his face toivards the East, as is the Popish 
 practice."^ I must confess that I have myself forgotten 
 to quote this passage in its proper place, though it was 
 often in my thoughts.^ Perhaps the persuasive effect 
 of it will be equally secured by its being placed be- 
 fore the reader's attention here. 
 
 Another very remarkable instance is the neglect of 
 all reference, on the part of authors who have written 
 on the general subject with both eager interest and 
 considerable learnii»g, to that rubric of the Non- 
 jurors, which shows that the word *^ before " was used 
 by them as synonymous with " on the north side," 
 
 1 P. 245 of the fourth ed. (1846. Lib. of Anglo-Catholic Theology). 
 The same paragraph contains remarks, which ought not to be overlooked, 
 having reference to the placing of the Lord's Table. The 82nd Canon 
 is compared with Queen Elizabeth's Injunction ; and these words are 
 added — "Nothing can be more express and demonstrative that the 
 Table placed where the Altar stood was but seposed, set out of the way, 
 daring only the time of non-communication, and that at the time of the 
 Communion it was to be removed." 
 
 ^ I had fallen into a similar omission, which I cannot account for, in 
 respect of certain equivalent and most explicit words in the Catechism 
 of 1674. This omission I have endeavoured to remedy at the end of 
 Appendix D. 
 
PEE FACE. ix 
 
 in reference to the Lord's Table, even when it was 
 placed altarwise. If L'Estrange gives us the general 
 view of divines of his school for the period of 1662, 
 this other evidence carries us, on the same lines, to 
 the early part of the following century. But I need 
 not here dwell on this point further.-^ 
 
 The strangest omission of all, as it seems to me, 
 is the deliberate leaving on one side, in a document 
 which recently emanated from the Lower House 
 of the Convocation of Canterbury, of one parti- 
 cular, as if it were of no moment, whereas it is a 
 subject of vital importance in this whole coDtroversy. 
 I refer to the recent report on the Eastward Position, 
 where the question of the placing of the Lord's Table 
 itself is avowedly made of no account ; though it is 
 quite evident that the placing of the Table (whether 
 viewed legally or historically) must be a very import- 
 ant element in determining the true meaning of the 
 rule for the position of the Consecrating Priest.^ 
 
 This leads me to make a brief allusion to what 
 took place a short time previously, in the Lower 
 House of the Convocation of York. There a resolu- 
 tion was passed to this effect : that whatever position 
 is assumed by the minister during the Consecration 
 Prayer, no doctrinal meaning is to be assigned to it : 
 and, further, that the Church of England has connected 
 no doctrinal meaning therewith.^ I doubt whether 
 this second statement in the resolution is historically 
 correct ; but, leaving that part of the subject, I can- 
 
 1 See pp. 91—93. ^ See pp. 20, 25, 73. 
 
 3 See p. 53. 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 not see anything but disaster as likely to result from 
 granting an optional use in this matter, under the 
 shelter of the former proposition.^ If to those who 
 demand a certain thing on the ground that it is full 
 of meaning, this thing is granted on the ground that 
 it means nothing, we are brought into a very strange 
 position. To those who feel seriously on the subject, 
 the gift, clogged by such an interpretation, seems 
 almost an insult ; while of others, who have no such 
 serious feeling, it would surely be a breach of charity 
 to suppose that they are willing to endanger the safety 
 of the Church for the sake of that which is not a 
 matter of principle, but merely of preference. 
 
 It is too late now to insist that there shall be no doc- 
 trinal significance in a ceremonial act, which was intro- 
 duced among us on the special ground that it had a 
 doctrinal significance. It would be very difiicult now to 
 exorcise that which has been so thoroughly possessed.^ 
 Those who have taken so much pains to secure a 
 recognized place in the Church of England for this 
 new ceremonial act have not been remiss in tellino: us 
 its emphatic doctrinal significance. Dr. Pusey said, 
 in a letter to the Times (March 24th, 1874), that 
 " the position of the Celebrant is not a matter of mere 
 dry law, but an expression of our faith," and, more 
 
 1 Mr. Gladstone urges (Contemporary Review for July 1875, p. 212), 
 that, in the matter of Kitual, "all existing latitude of law or well-estab- 
 lished practice should as a rule be respected." But if a new practice, 
 contrary to law, is introduced, and then, by the adhesion of a strong party, 
 becomes " well-established," and is therefore to be sanctioned, is not this 
 a method which might gradually revolutionize all our Ritual ? 
 
 2 This image is suggested by Mr. Gladstone's own strong language, 
 p. 201. 
 
PREFACE. xi 
 
 explicitly, at a meeting of the English Church Union 
 in the same year, that " the standing before the altar 
 means the primitive doctrine of the Eucharistic Sacri- 
 fice ; '' and Archdeacon Denison had said previously, 
 *' In two or three years the Kitual has done as much 
 as, or more than, the teaching has done in five-and- 
 twenty." With such statements^ before us (and they 
 might easily be multiplied), I find it impossible to 
 share Mr. Gladstone's hope that this ceremonial act can, 
 in the eyes of the English people, be denuded of doc- 
 trinal intention. 
 
 My misgiving, too, is increased, when I read what 
 has been written by Mr. Skinner since the well-known 
 essay in the "Contemporary Eeview'' was published. 
 "It seems to me," he says, "that the position from 
 which my own argument sets out, is just that * basis of 
 doctrinal significance ' which Mr. Gladstone depre- 
 cates as * the noxious element ' in the discussion : 
 just that 'consideration of devotional significance' 
 which conflicts with his ' first condition of sanity,' 
 and which, he says, ought to be ' expelled from the 
 controversy as a demon from one possessed.'" Mr. 
 Skinner proceeds to say that a Parish Priest is bound 
 to defend '' Catholic Ritual " by pleading " the signi- 
 ficance which has been traditionally assigned to it," 
 rather than " the insignificance with which some may 
 think it would be wiser to be content, in order to ward 
 ofi" or postpone attacks ; " he thinks " that * to cease 
 altogether from importing devotional significance ' into 
 
 ^ I quote them from an important speech by Archdeacon Prest, made 
 in Convocation at York last February. 
 
xii PREFACE. 
 
 devotional acts is a course imcompatible with devo- 
 tion ; " lie urges that " a Eitual that means nothing 
 has no place at all in the Church of Christ ; " he 
 submits that " the plea for Eucharistic Eitual is pre- 
 cisely the plea for Eucharistic Doctrine ; '' and for him- 
 self he declares that he should feel himself no more 
 able to yield the Eitual which has always expressed 
 the Faith, than the Faith, which has always been 
 expressed by the Eitual of the Catholic Church of 
 Christ ; "^ and he quotes Hooker, who says that 
 exterior acts of worship are " memorials wherein they 
 which cannot be drawn unto hearken to what we 
 teach, may, only by looking upon what we do, in a 
 manner read whatsoever we believe."^ 
 
 It has been urged by the Bishop of Lincoln that 
 inasmuch as each of the two positions of the Celebrant 
 has its own special significance, — " the one represent- 
 ing the divine grace and gift to man, the other 
 expressing man's plea for mercy and acceptance with 
 God, — the one looking manward from God, the other 
 looking Godward from man, — the one position exhi- 
 biting the benefits of communion with Christ, the 
 other commemorating and pleading the merits of His 
 one Sacrifice for Sin," it might be well that the 
 Church, by permitting and authorizing both positions, 
 should set before her people this double aspect and 
 meaning of that Sacrament; and he adds that it 
 
 * The Church Crisis of 1875, reprinted from the Literary Churchman, 
 with a Preface touching Mr. Gladstone's doctrine of "Significance/* 
 pp. i. V. 4, 8, 11. 
 
 2 Keble's Edition, vol. ii. p. 406. 
 
PREFACE. xiii 
 
 might be right and safe to permit that third 
 position, which is *' perhaps the most ancient of all/' 
 in which the Celebrant looked westward towards the 
 people from the East side of the Holy Table : and then 
 a comparison suggests that we should derive benefit 
 from this variety ; " We should have a fuller view of 
 the manifold significance of the Holy Eucharist, from 
 these three positions, just as we have a clearer view 
 of the Gospel from having four Gospels, than if we 
 had only one Gospel. " ^ 
 
 Whatever fs written by the Bishop of Lincoln must 
 be read with the respect due to his learning and with 
 a desire to imitate his charity. But may not a 
 double answer be offered to this argument ? While 
 granting that two different aspects of the Eucharist 
 are presented to us by the two supposed positions of 
 the Priest during the Prayer of Consecration, the 
 further question arises, whether sanction for both these 
 aspects of that Sacrament is to be found in the Prayer 
 Book and the Bible. If one aspect is made conspicu- 
 ous and emphatic in both, while the other is not to 
 be discovered in either, then to allow choice in the 
 Priest's position during Consecration is to disturb '' the 
 proportion of the Faith." But again, assuming both the 
 
 1 Plea for Toleration by Law in certain Ritual Matters, reprinted with 
 Senates and Synods, their Respective Functions and Use. Pp. 21, 22. 
 I must here hazard a criticism on what is found upon an earlier page. It is 
 there said that an alternative mode of placing the Holy Table is allowed 
 in the Church of England— viz., either in the Chancel, in which case it 
 stands North and South, or in the Body of the Church, when it stands 
 East and West. It seems to me that in either case the lengthwise or 
 breadthwise position of the Table is quite an open question. See p. 60, Note. 
 
xiv PREFACE. 
 
 Eastward and Southward positions to be equally autho- 
 rized, they will not be equally used hy the same persons; 
 but on the contrary, they will supply the opportunity 
 for a strongly marked contrast between two different 
 sections of the Church. The same persons study the 
 four Evangelists with a reverent regard to each. 
 Thus the parallel seems to break down. In order to 
 maintain the parallel, we ought to compare the state 
 of things which would ensue from optional orientation 
 at the Eucharist, with the study of the Synoptists in 
 order to throw discredit on St. John, or the study 
 of St. John in order to throw discredit on the 
 Synoptists ; and nothing could be further than such 
 a thought from the mind of the Bishop whom I have 
 quoted. 
 
 I will add only one remark in concluding. It is said 
 that this, after all, is a trivial matter, and that much 
 harm is done by treating "the infinitely little " as if 
 it were important. To this I must simply reply that, 
 after the exercise of careful thought, I have been 
 brought to the conclusion that this is a very serious 
 matter indeed. I honestly believe that the granting 
 of an optional use of the Eastward Position would 
 strain to the utmost the Church of England's power 
 of cohesion, and that it would place a most powerful 
 instrument in the hand of those who desire to trans- 
 form the character of our public worship.^ This being 
 
 * Potentially, as it seems to me, there is more in the Eastward Position 
 than in the use of Vestments. The latter (as in the case of the Cope on 
 high festivals in Cathedrals) might he viewed as merely part of the out- 
 ward enrichment of worship. The former might work a gradual change 
 in the whole conception of our services. 
 
PREFACE. XV 
 
 the case, I cannot possibly abstain from offering the 
 following argument to the notice of my fellow- 
 churchmen ; and, taking the lowest view of the 
 subject, I am re-assured by the reflection that no 
 harm can be done to those who come after us by such 
 an investigation of the true sense of a disputed rubric. 
 One indirect advantage which may perhaps be ex- 
 pected to result from " the present distress," is that 
 it may lead some of us to a more exact knowledge 
 of the history and meaning of our precious Book of 
 Common Prayer. 
 
 Ellerqreen, Kendal, 
 Oct. 16, 1875. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Distress caused by the present controversy — Its apparent triviality and real 
 importance — Manner of approaching the subject — A party identified 
 with the Church — ** Table" assumed to be synonymous with "Altar." — 
 Heb. X. 13. . . / Pages 1—9 
 
 11. 
 
 CHANCELS AS IN TIMES PAST. 
 
 Bearing of the Ornaments Kubric on our subject — Direction concerning 
 Chancels — Question concerning its meaning, originally and afterwards — 
 Opinion of Wren, L'Estrange, Cosin, and others — The general question 
 not affected by this point Pages 10-— 17 
 
 III. 
 
 HULE FOR THE PLACING OF THE HOLY TABLE. 
 
 Fourth rubric before the Communion Service — Its important bearing on the 
 subject before us — Defeated attempt to alter it — Eighty-second Canon- 
 Danger of enforcing this rubric and this canon — A possible compromise 
 suggested Pages 18—26 
 
 IV. 
 
 THE TROUBLES OF 1640. 
 
 The Canons of 1640 — "Declaration concerning some rites and ceremonies" — 
 Its strong protest against Romanism — Illustration from the Diocese of 
 Chester — Brian Walton — Letter from the Vice-Dean to Bishop Bridge- 
 man Pages 27—35 
 
 h 
 
xviii ' CONTENTS. 
 
 V. 
 
 HISTORY OP THE PLACING OF THE HOLY TABLE. 
 
 Recollection in 1662 of 1640 — Eastward placing of the Table improbable — 
 The evidence from books — The case of kneeling and the Surplice in 1662 
 not really similar to the case of Vestments and the Eastward Position 
 now — Catechism of 1674 — Evidence from Parliamentary debates— From 
 the continuance of chancels in their old condition — Recorded defeat of 
 the attempt to change Pages 36—45 
 
 VI. 
 
 THE "north side" OF THE TABLE. 
 
 Imaginary analogy with Jewish Altars — The late Archdeacon Freeman — 
 "End" and *^Side" — Mr. Beresford Hope's argument from length as 
 opposed to breadth — Extreme importance of the change from the front 
 to the north side — Indirectly it involves doctrine — Beneiit of the change 
 in promoting congregational worship Pages 46 — 55 
 
 VII. 
 
 THE PRIEST STANDING "BEFORE THE TABLE." 
 
 Intermediate rubrics in the Communion Service — True meaning of the words 
 " Before the Table" — Discussion in Convocation at York — Testimony of 
 the Welsh Prayer Book Pages 56—62 
 
 VIII. 
 
 .THE BREAD BROKEN "BEFORE THE PEOPLE." 
 
 This act the main point of the Rubric — Possible meaning of coram populo — 
 Its true historical meaning — How understood by the Puritans — The 
 act suggested by them — Evidence of the Savoy liiturgy — Religious 
 meaning of this act — Testimony from devotional writers — The "Welsh 
 Prayer Book Pages 63—73 
 
 IX. 
 
 USAGE BEFORE 1662. 
 
 Custom from 1552 onwards - Evidence from Bishop Jewel — "Wren's ap- 
 proval of Jewel — Bishop "Wren's defence of himself — Archbishop Laud's 
 chapel — His answer to his accusers — Bishop Cosin's answer to his 
 own accusers — Defence of these three prelates against the charge of 
 dishonesty Pages 74—85 
 
CONTENTS, ' xix 
 
 X. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE USAGE SINCE 1662. 
 
 Settlement of 1662 — Contentment of the Puritans with the position of the 
 consecrating priest — This view confirmed by the events of 1689 — No 
 choice admitted by this rubric under the Act of Uniformity — Consecra- 
 tion still in the Southward position, when the Table was placed altarwise 
 — Liturgy of the Nonjurors — View of Wheatly, Mant, and Blunt — The 
 Eastward position a novelty Pages 86 — 96 
 
 XL 
 
 CRITICISM OF THE PURCHAS JUDGMENT. 
 
 Mr. Morton Shaw's verbal arrangement of the Consecration Rubric— Correct 
 grammatical analysis of the sentence — The late Professor Selwyn — The 
 Parenthetic view not necessary — Speech of Lord Cairns — The Purckas 
 Judgment substantially correct and just Pages 97 — 103 
 
 XIL 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OP THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Exaggerated language concerning the Eastward Position — ^Determination to 
 obtain a victory, if possible — The first three Evangelists and St. Paul — 
 St. John VI. — The natural interpretation of words on this subject used in 
 the New Testament — No trace there of a sacrificial Christian priesthood 
 — The Holy Communion as an act of worship . . . Pctges 104 — 112 
 
 XIII. 
 
 TEACHING OF OUR COMMUNION SERVICE. 
 
 Final exclusion of the word "Altar" from the Prayer Book — True meaning 
 of the word ** Priest " in the Prayer Book — Teaching of the rubrics in the 
 Communion Service — Teaching of the prayers and thanksgivings in that 
 service — Doctrine of the Consecration Prayer . . . . Pages IIB — 120 
 
 XIV. 
 
 TEACHING OF OUR OTHER FORMULARIES. 
 
 Language of the Ordination Service — Doctrine of the Church Catechism — 
 The Articles— The Homilies Pages 121—127 
 
XX CONTENTS. 
 
 XV. 
 
 PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 
 
 The School of Jacobean and Caroline Divines — Freedom to hold an opinion 
 does not imply freedom to express it by a ceremony — Liberty in this 
 respect would disturb the balance of doctrinal expression in the Church 
 — This mode of introducing doctrinal change not fair — Option, in this 
 respect, contrary to the principles of the Prayer Book — And full of peril 
 for the future — "Would foment religious discord — Further results to 
 be feared Pages 128—140 
 
 XVI. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Bearing of this subject on the question of the Reunion of Christendom — Its 
 connection with other parts of the Romeward movement of the day — The 
 Confessional — Party combinations — Changes in our religious phraseology, 
 our devotional manuals, and the arrangements of oui- churches — Appeal to 
 Moderate High Churchmen — The lesson of Whitsuntide — Duty of main- 
 taining the Tight proportion of the Faith Pages 141 — 158 
 
 Appendix Pages 159 — 186 
 
 Supplement Pages 187—196 
 
^ OP THE -^ 
 
 "BEFORE THE TABLE," 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 P. 16, 1. 20, for "conditions" read "condition." 
 
 P. ,,1. 22, /or "furnish" rmd "furnishes." 
 
 P. 24, note 1, 1. 1, for "this" rmd "this volume." 
 
 P. 34, note 3, for " Scotis " read " Scotist." 
 
 P. 35, 1. 14, d^le the second comma. 
 
 P. 50, 1. 1,/or "term" read "terms." 
 
 P. ,, 1. 21, /or "verbally " rea<Z "verbatim." 
 
 P. 54, note 2, 1. 2, dele " while." 
 
 P. 60, note 1, 1. 2, the inverted commas should be commas. 
 
 P. 72, 1. 21, /or "have" read "has." 
 
 P. 73, 1. 8, for "depends " read "to a considerable degree depends." 
 
 P. 80, 1. 6, for "if the Table was " read "the Table being." 
 
 P. 83, 1. 16, /or "heard" read "have heard." 
 
 P. 92, 1. 23, dele semicolon. 
 
 P. , , note 2, for " third " read " first. " 
 
 P. 109, 1. 16, f(yr " Qavarov " read ''rhu edvarov." 
 
 P. 130, 1. 21, dele inverted commas. 
 
 P 131 1 7 
 
 P.* 172', 1. 1, for''* Bishops'" read " Bishop's. ' 
 
 P. 184, 1. IS, for " recents " retw? "recent." 
 
 P. 186, 1. 17, for "questions" read "question." 
 
 P. „ 1. 19, for " those " read " these. " 
 
 of all tlie Beatitudes''^ — Beati pacifici, quoniamjilii 
 Dei vocabuntur. Mere compromise for the present 
 
 ^ Rev. H. N. Oxenham in the preface to his translation of Dr. 
 Bollinger's Lectures on the Reunion of the Churches, p. xxxiii. 
 
XX CONTENTS. 
 
 XV. 
 
 PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 
 
 The School of Jacobean and Caroline Divines— Freedom to hold an opinion 
 does not imply freedom to express it by a ceremony — Liberty in this 
 respect would disturb the balance of doctrinal expression in the Church 
 — This mode of introducing doctrinal change not fair — Option, in this 
 respect, contrary to the principles of the Prayer Book — And full of peril 
 for the future — Would foment religious discord — Further results to 
 be feared . . J^a^ms 19A—ia(\ 
 

 "BEFORE THE TABLE," 
 
 UTC, ETO. 
 
 L 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Distress caused by the present controversy — Its apparent triviality and 
 real importance — Manner of approaching the subject — A party 
 identified with the Church — " Table " assumed to be synonymous 
 with "Altar."— Heb. x. 13. 
 
 Beginning to write these pages on the morning 
 after Christmas Day, I feel very deeply both the 
 loving severity and the solemn truth of the Saviour's 
 words : " Think ye that I came to send peace upon 
 earth ? I came not to send peace, but a sword.'' As 
 the history of the Church of Christ passes through 
 its various stages, contention is inevitable. Yet this 
 contention, if rightly conducted, is for peace in the 
 end. The "wisdom that cometh from above" is 
 '' first pure, then peaceable ; " and those who seek to 
 follow this Divine order may still hope for some share 
 in that which has been well called " the most musical 
 of all the Beatitudes"^ — Beati pacifici, quoniamjilii 
 Dei vocahuntur. Mere compromise for the present 
 
 ^ Rev. H. N. Oxenham in the preface to his translation of Dr. 
 DoUinger's Lectures on the Reunion of the Churches, p. xxxiii. 
 
2 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 is, at all events, a very clumsy and weak expedient 
 for securing peace in the future. 
 
 There is another sad reflection which comes into 
 my mind as I enter upon my task. Our harshest 
 struggles at this moment are connected with the very 
 ordinance which represents our unity. ^ It seems 
 strang-e that the course of most of our modern 
 controversy in the Church of England has been de- 
 termined by the two Sacraments. A mathematical 
 theologian might say (and the comparison would be 
 very just) that it has revolved in the curve of an 
 ellipse, of which these two ordinances are the 
 foci. Those who remember the agitation that set 
 in upon us soon after the publication of the earlier 
 " Tracts for the Times," will easily call to mind 
 the angry debate which was connected with Holy 
 Baptism. Now that Sacrament of initiation seems 
 to have been left almost unnaturally in the shade, 
 and the battle rages round the Sacrament of com- 
 munion. 
 
 There is much also to humiliate us, and to make us 
 ashamed, in the form which this contest is for the 
 moment assuming. Nothing more grave appears, at 
 first sight, to be at issue than the vestment and the 
 position of the officiating priest during the Adminis- 
 tration of the Lord's Supper ; and these might well 
 be said to be trivialities unworthy of a Christian's 
 serious thought and earnest zeal. The battle, how- 
 ever, must be fought out ; for these outward things 
 are the flags which represent great principles contra- 
 dictory of one another. 
 
 The uneasy feeling which has been for some time 
 
 1 See Matt. xxvi. 27, and 1 Cor. x. 17. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 eddying round the Holy Eucharist has for this 
 obvious reason concentrated itself with extreme vio- 
 lence on these two points, because we are here brought 
 in contact with the great question whether a proper 
 sacrificial priesthood is or is not a part of the re- 
 ligious system established by Christ on earth ; and 
 it is incumbent on every one who has strong convic- 
 tions on such a subject to make his convictions 
 known. It is not much that any one man can do ; 
 but each man who has thought calmly and carefully 
 on what is before us can do something. In a case 
 like this some division of labour is almost inevitable 
 among those who are in general agreement with one 
 another ; and, leaving to others more competent to 
 deal with that matter, the " Eucharistic Vestments/' 
 I have turned my thoughts, using as much' time as I 
 could command, and to the best of my ability, to the 
 question of the " Eastward Position."^ Observing, 
 too, that the fifth chapter in Mr. Beresford Hope's 
 recent work on Public Worship in the Church of 
 England, and the Eev. Morton Shaw's pamphlet on 
 the position of the " Celebrant " at the Holy Com- 
 munion, are viewed by many persons as able and 
 careful expositions on one side of the question, I 
 have kept these two essays more particularly in 
 view, without limiting myself to their contents, or 
 making my own essay a formal reply to theirs.^ 
 
 1 Though these two questions are constantly, and very naturally, 
 grouped together, it ought to be carefully remembered that they must be 
 settled on different grounds. In their relation to the Eubrics they do 
 not depend upon one another. If they were re-argued before the Courts, 
 it is conceivable that the Vestments might be declared legally binding 
 and the Position again declared illegal. 
 
 2 While the writing of these pages was in progress, two of my friends — 
 I am sure they will allow me to call them so— the Eev. Canon Trevor and 
 
 15 2 
 
4 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 In dealing with a subject like this, which confes- 
 sedly has its difficulties (otherwise highly competent 
 men could not have written so confidently and so 
 well on both sides) much depends on the manner 
 in which the subject is approached. These two 
 writers, and others in a more excessive degree, 
 appear to me to have entered on their work by 
 giving to the whole matter a colouring which inter- 
 feres with their own candour, and therefore diminishes 
 the force of all their reasoning. I w^ill illustrate 
 what I mean by two instances before proceeding 
 to my argument on the special subject that is be- 
 fore me. 
 
 It is assumed that the true expression of the 
 Church of England is given by a certain party, 
 which is represented by such men as Laud in 1640, 
 by Bancroft in 1660, and by Wren at both periods. 
 Those who are in harmony with the sentiments of 
 this party are viewed as having the proper spirit of 
 our Church, while those who hold the opposite senti- 
 ments, though sometimes spoken of with condescend- 
 ing kindness, are treated as really hostile to that 
 spirit.^ Now the settlement of 1662 does not re- 
 present the victory of this party, but rather its 
 
 the Rev. Malcolm MacColl, published their thoughts on the subject, the 
 former in a pamphlet entitled The Disputed Bubrics, the latter in the first 
 of his letters on Lawlessness, Sacerdotalism, and Ritualism. In various 
 parts of this pamphlet I have carefully kept in view their remarks on 
 the topic before us. 
 
 ^ Thus " the revisers of 1662" are constantly spoken of by Mr. Morton 
 Shaw and Mr. Beresford Hope, as if they were the sole depositaries of the 
 true doctrine and settled policy of the Church of England. That with 
 which we, however, are concerned is not what the Bishops, or some of 
 them, or any particular party, wished to introduce into the Prayer-Book, 
 but what was ultimately agreed on by Convocation and Parliament. 
 
IMTBODUCTION. 5 
 
 defeat.^ Setting on one side Laud's mode of pro- 
 cedure, which does not seem very worthy of ad- 
 miration or imitation,^ he was really foiled. He 
 helped to convulse the country, and he is perhaps 
 the author, more than any other one man, of English 
 Nonconformity. In 1662 our Book of Common 
 Prayer came into its present (which for us, hitherto, 
 is its ultimate) form, before indeed Nonconformity 
 existed as a great external fact, but while the re- 
 membrance of those troubles was very fresh in the 
 minds of the men who did retire from the Church of 
 England on the celebrated St. Bartholomew's Day. 
 There is no doubt that revisers of the school of Wren 
 
 1 In justification of this remark, it is enough to adduce two facts, the 
 evidence of which is clearly supplied by the photozincographed Fac- 
 simile of the Black Letter Prayer-Book, with manuscript additions and 
 alterations made in the year 1661, recently published by authority. 
 Attempts were made, but in vain, to procure the placing of the Lord's 
 Table " at the communion time," by rubric, " in the upper end of the 
 chancel, or of the body of the church where there is no chancel," and to 
 alter, in the title of the prayer which follows the offertory sentences, 
 " Christ's Church militant here on earth," into " the Catholic Church of 
 Christ." Had these changes been effected, a great part of the argument 
 of this pamphlet would have been impossible, and Prayers for the Dead 
 might plausibly have been claimed to be a recognized part of our public 
 supplications. Not that the placing of the Lord's Table against the east 
 wall implies eastward consecration, or that Wren and Cosin, in desiring 
 the former, advocated the latter. But much of the argument against 
 eastward consecration depends on the rule for placing the Table otherwise. 
 So as regards the above-mentioned part of the Communion Service, the 
 change of its title would not have sanctioned prayers for the dead, 
 unless such prayers were introduced into it ; but the removal of the 
 words " militant here on earth " would have removed a protest against 
 such prayers. 
 
 2 Mr. Beresford Hope (p. 189), writing with natural sympathy of 
 Laud's endeavour to secure everywhere the placing of the Holy Table 
 altarwise at the communion time, says : " However persons may differ as 
 to the nature and manner of the proceeding, there is no doubt of the fact." 
 I should have thought that few persons now would differ as to Laud's 
 manner of proceeding, however sony they may be that what he endeavoured 
 in 1640 was hot done in 1660. 
 
6 BEFOBE THE TABLE. 
 
 and Sancroft would have obtained much more, if they 
 had been able, from the Convocation and Parliament 
 of their day. It seems to me a very curious kind of 
 reasoning to say that because these men wished to 
 obtain certain things and failed, therefore our rubrics 
 are to be understood as denoting what they wished 
 they might denote. 
 
 But I will here, as in duty bound, refer to another 
 name, which comes before us at every turn of this 
 controversy. The long and energetic life of Oosin 
 bridges over the whole period w^ith which we have 
 chiefly to do. He represents Laud's principles, alike 
 in 1640, when the famous Archbishop was living, and 
 in 1660, when the harvest was growing of which, 
 during that archiepiscopate, the seed had been sown. 
 To concentrate the whole matter in one point, no 
 one who reads Cosin's notes on the Prayer-book can 
 doubt that he would gladly have replaced the word 
 ** altar " in that book if it had been possible.^ But in 
 
 1 A learned friend, to whom I have shown this, doubts whether I am 
 right, at least as regards the latter part of Cosin's life, when his views 
 had been modified. Still I think my statement is justified by that 
 prelate's notes, at various dates, on liturgical questions. A good illustra- 
 tion will be found in his donation of " ornaments " to his chapels in 
 Durham Castle and at Auckland, where the terms " Altare " and " Meusa 
 Dominica" are used interchangeably. See the second volume of his 
 Correspondence, &c., as published by the Surtees Society (1870), p. 169. 
 
 In the use, however, of this phraseology, there does not appear to have 
 been perfect agreement among the members of this school. In answer 
 to the charges made against him, Bishop Wren admitted that he had 
 ordered the "communion table" to be placed altarwise at the east end 
 of the church, and not removed ; but in his defence, which was written 
 deliberately, and not given out in the midst of danger on the spur of the 
 moment, the following words occur : '^ He saith that he was ever so far 
 from having any thought or intention of resembling the Popish manner 
 of altars, that he believeth that he never did by any words of his own so 
 much as name the word altar, in any of his Articles or Directions ; much 
 less did he ever term the Table an Altar." — Farentalia, p. 75. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 7 
 
 1662 no power could briiig back this word into 
 our Book of Common Prayer. This introduces my 
 second illustration of the great importance of the 
 mode in which we approach the subject under our 
 present consideration.^ 
 
 This second illustration is found in the habit which 
 some writers have of using the word "Altar'' as if it 
 were synonymous with " Table." I do not allude to 
 a mere conversational habit, acquired before existing 
 controversies forced upon us the duty of being exact. 
 Nor should I think it necessary to be very critical in 
 judging the language, on such a subject, of Archi- 
 tects, Antiquarians, and Poets. But when Theologians, 
 writing theologically, use as synonymous two words 
 which are vitally distinct, it seems to me that, 
 whether consciously or uncons'-iously, they give an 
 unfair twist to the subject which they are handling. 
 Mr. Beresford Hope faces the matter boldly, and argues 
 that these two words ought to be treated as meaning 
 the same thing. With this deliberate argument I 
 shall endeavour to deal on a later page. What I am 
 objecting to now is the tacit assumption of that which 
 ought to be proved. Thus, Mr. Morton Shaw speaks of 
 consecrating in front of the " altar," of moving the 
 *' altar " into the body of the church, or allowing it 
 to remain against the east wall ; of the " altar " as 
 symbolising our united approach to the Divine Mercy- 
 
 1 The free use of the word "Puritan" as a term expressive of con- 
 tempt and dislike is also to be marked as unfavourable to fairness of argu- 
 ment. Several instances of this could be quoted from the volumes be- 
 fore us. Canon Trevor (p. 87) goes so far as to use the word " devotion " 
 as the antithesis to " Puritanism." Such language cannot be expected 
 to be persuasive with those who see a great deal of devotion in Baxter's 
 Saints' Best, or Rutherford's Letters, and very little in the Book of Sports. 
 
8 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 seat.^ This kind of language, while not justified in 
 the least degree by our Prayer-book, prepares the 
 mind of the unreflecting reader to accept, without 
 proof, the doctrine of a strictly sacrificial priesthood. 
 And as with the word " altar,'' so with other language 
 used in the same manner, and so as to produce the 
 same result. Thus, while I am writing these pages 
 and reading the controversial letters which each week 
 produces, I find it urged that the Eastward Position is 
 most natural in the Consecration Prayer, because it 
 is the most natural position for the priest luhen he 
 makes an offering, — in utter forgetfulness, apparently, 
 that whether the priest does make an ofi'ering in the 
 Consecration Prayer is the very point to be estab- 
 lished. Thus again, about the same time, I have the 
 pleasure of receiving from Canon Eawlinson^ a sermon 
 on the " Eucharistic Sacrifice." To the substance of 
 the sermon I will refer again. I am here objecting 
 to the manner in which the text is used. That is 
 taken for granted as to the meaning of those words 
 in the Epistle to the Hebrews, *' We have an altar," 
 which (to say the least) requires very skilful argu- 
 mentation to prove consistent with the whole tone 
 and tenor of the Epistle.^ 
 
 But, without further introductory remarks, I hasten 
 to my subject, which is the position of the officiating 
 priest, in regard to the Lord's Table, during the 
 
 ' See pages 8, 9, 61, 68, 137, 145, 146, 151. 
 
 2 See Appendix A (The Brighton Church Congress). 
 
 3 The point I am urging here is that a literal and earthly meaning is 
 assumed for one sentence of an inspired argument, the whole general drift 
 of which is spiritual and heavenly. It would surely be more to the pur- 
 pose to prove that Aquinas was wrong in saying, as Epiphanius said 
 before him, and Waterland after him: "Per altare signijicatur ipse 
 CimisTUS." 
 
INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 saying of this Prayer of Consecration at the Holy 
 Communion. It will be convenient first to take the 
 question historically, and to see what the circum- 
 stances were under which the regulations of our 
 Prayer Book, in regard to this matter, came into 
 existence, and then to turn to the rationale of the 
 subject, and to inquire into the true religious mean- 
 ing of the rubric with which we are specially con- 
 cerned. 
 
 ;UJfIVSRSIT 
 
11. 
 
 CHANCELS AS IN TIMES PAST. 
 
 Bearing of the Ornaments Eubric on our subject — Direction concerning 
 Chancels — Question concerning its meaning, originally and after- 
 wards — Opinion of Wren, L'Estrange, Cosin, and others — The 
 general question not affected by this point. 
 
 I BEGIN with the Ornaments Eubric. The Vest- 
 ments indeed I leave on one side, except to make this 
 one remark, that neither in the period immediately 
 succeeding 1559, when this rubric first came into 
 existence, nor in the period immediately succeeding 
 1662, when, with some very significant changes, it 
 was reinstated, is there any satisfactory proof that 
 " Eucharistic Vestments " were used in the Church 
 of England ; but very much the contrary. Now 
 laws are not commonly made for the precise pur- 
 pose of being broken ; and the whole 07ius prohandi 
 in this matter rests on those who have disturbed, or 
 desire to disturb, the usage of the Church of England 
 for 300 years. This point, however, I leave. And 
 yet I must pause, and must ask my reader to pause, 
 on the Ornaments Eubric, even when nothing beyond 
 the position of the " celebrant " in the Consecration 
 Prayer is in question. There are, in fact, two 
 stepping-stones on which it is desirable to stand, 
 before we reach our main point in the rubric 
 prefixed to that prayer. It is because so many 
 
CHANCELS AS IN TIMES PAST, 11 
 
 persons have insisted on taking this whole space 
 in one leap, that so many persons have set their feet 
 in the wrong place. On the first of these stepping- 
 stones, indeed, which is the Ornaments Eubric, I lay 
 comparatively little stress ; yet I think it ought not 
 to be altogether overleapt. 
 
 In one part of this Rubric it is directed that " the 
 Chancels shall remain as they have done in times past!* 
 Two questions here arise, first as to the meaning of 
 this direction in 1552, when it made its earliest ap- 
 pearance ; secondly, as to its meaning in 1662, when 
 it was fixed as a rule which is still binding. On 
 these points we derive no help whatever from the 
 Reports of the Ritual Commission.^ And yet I con- 
 ceive this sentence is not without its argumentative 
 value in reference to the subject before us.^ 
 
 I was first led to give close attention to this par- 
 ticular sentence, or at least to publish some thoughts 
 in regard to it, in connection with a curious Catechism 
 of Church Doctrine and Church Practice, which was 
 printed in 1674; and I will write of the matter in 
 this connection now, though I shall have occasion to 
 refer more particularly to this book afterwards.^ 
 
 ^ No complaint is implied in this phrase. So far as I know, this sub- 
 ject was never separately before the attention of the Commissioners. It 
 is important however to note that new rubrical topics have come into 
 prominence even in the short interval that has elapsed since the sitting 
 of the Commission. 
 
 2 I must confess that I have less confidence in the argument of this 
 chapter than I had when I first drew it out. Still I leave it as it stands. 
 I have no wish that this should be merely a partizan book : and what- 
 ever the worth of my remarks may be, I shall be glad to have called atten- 
 tion to a neglected part of this general subject. See note below, p. 16. 
 
 ^ The argument concerning Chancels, arising out of the consideration of 
 this book, was the subject of correspondence in the Guardian for January 
 6, 20, 27 ; February 24, and March 24 in the present year. 
 
12 BEFORE THE TABLE, 
 
 This sentence concerning Chancels first, as I have 
 said, found a pLace among our rubrics in 1552 ; and, 
 amid great variations in other rubrics, it has held its 
 ground ever since. It appears to me that it ought to 
 be understood now in the same general sense which 
 was intended originally. Great changes had been 
 made in the chancels during the two or three years 
 immediately preceding ; ^ the main particular in these 
 changes being, I imagine, the substitution of a mov- 
 able Table for communion instead of the previously 
 lixed Altar for sacrifice.^ This state of things 
 receives illustration from the volume in question. I 
 do not refer merely to the picture representing the 
 administration of the Lord's Supper, which exactly 
 fulfils the conditions of the fourth of the rubrics pre- 
 fixed to our Communion Office, as well as those of the 
 eighty-second canon, the Holy Table standing free in 
 the chancel, and the Priest standing on its north side ; 
 but to two other pictures, the subjects of which are 
 Matrimony and the Churching of Women. ^ In the 
 former the Lord's Table appears to be placed against 
 the east wall ; in the latter it is removed from that 
 position, the priest standing close to the east wall, 
 the woman kneeling before him, and a boy holding 
 the book standing by his side. I name these par- 
 ticulars by the way as an elucidation of the condition 
 in which (as will be pointed out more fully after- 
 wards) I conceive the chancels to have generally been, 
 
 ^ Bishop Kidley in 1550, and Bishop Hooper in 1551, took, if I am 
 not mistaken, very definite steps for transforming the condition of the 
 chancels in the churches of their dioceses. 
 
 2 To this end the removing of steps would in many cases be necessary. 
 
 ^ In each of these three pictures the Commandments are conspicuously 
 placed on the east wall. This particular, however, belongs to a later period. 
 
CHANCELS AS IN TIKES PAST. 13 
 
 in harmony with this rubric, during the period im- 
 mediately succeeding the year 1662. 
 
 But this whole mode of viewing the matter may 
 he disputed, and has been disputed. It is contended 
 that this rubric concerning Chancels does not refer to 
 their condition at all, but merely rules that they shall 
 be preserved, and not pulled down ; and in reply to 
 the view here advocated, it is urged that, according 
 to this theory, the sentence ought to stand thus — *'and 
 the chancels shall be as they were in times past.'^ It 
 must in candour be admitted that there is some force 
 in this verbal criticism.^ The phrase is perhaps not 
 exactly what we should expect, if it related merely to 
 the maintenance of the arrangement and condition of 
 the chancels. But then I answer that it is not exactly 
 what we should expect, if it related merely to their 
 preservation from destruction. On this theory it would 
 have been enough to say '* the chancels shall remain," 
 or " the chancels shall not be destroyed." Something, . 
 in fact, of the obscurity of the Ornaments Kubric in 
 general seems to have crept over this clause. 
 
 Let me now submit to the reader that the following 
 considerations are of some weight in favour of inter- 
 preting the clause as having respect to the condition 
 as well as the retention of the chancels. 
 
 The clause first appeared at that exact moment, when 
 "alb, vestment, and cope" were expressly forbidden, 
 and when the " surplice only " was allowed, and when 
 
 1 Stress also has been laid upon the fact that in 1552 there was, after 
 the word " remain," a comma, which afterwards disappeared. This, how- 
 ever, seems to me an argument in favour of my theory. Whatever am- 
 biguity there may have been in the rubric at the first, the removal of the 
 comma has decided that the chancels are not simply to remain, but to 
 remain after a certain particular fashion. 
 
14 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 other most significant changes in the Protestant direc- 
 tion were made in the Prayer Book and its rubrics. 
 It is hardly likely that just at that moment any special 
 love for chancels, or earnest anxiety for their preserva- 
 tion, should have been manifested ; bub it is extremely 
 probable that importance would have been attached 
 to the condition into which they had been brought. 
 This mode, too, of interpreting the rubric derives 
 some justification from a Latin Prayer Book pub- 
 lished in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, where the 
 words are — '' Chorus etiam manebit eadem forma, 
 qua superiorum temporum fuit."^ I turn now to the 
 remarks of Bishop Wren, recently made known to 
 us by the present Bishop of Chester in a most inter- 
 esting volume. Wren asks, in reference to this rubric, 
 " Who knows hoiu the chancels were in those times 
 past, so many having siuce been demolished, and 
 many disused ? " from which language I thiuk it is 
 evident that he regarded the words as having reference 
 rather to the condition of the chancels than to their 
 mere retention.^ From Wren, who wrote shortly before 
 the revision of 1662, let us now pass to L'Estrange, 
 the second edition of whose book was published in 
 1680. Commenting on these w^ords, he quotes Queen 
 Elizabeth's order, ''that the steps which be as yet 
 remaining in any our cathedral, collegiate, or parish 
 churches, be not stirred nor altered, but be suffered to 
 continue ; and if in any chancel the steps be trans- 
 posed, that they be not erected again, but that the 
 
 ^ Liturgies set forth in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth (Parker Soc.) 
 p. 327. I do not quote this Latin Prayer Book as an authoritative trans- 
 lation, but as showing the popular understanding at that time of the 
 phrase under consideration. 
 
 '^ Fragmentary Illustrations of the History of the Book of the Common 
 Prayer, p. 55. 
 
CHANCELS AS IN TIMES PAST. 15 
 
 place be decently paved." The reference here is 
 clearly not to retention but to condition. L'Estrange 
 adds : — " By which words evident it is authority had 
 no design to end the dispute by closing with either 
 party, but by stating things in their present posture." * 
 My last quotation shall be from Mr. Beresford Hope's 
 work, where he says, in one place, that the phrase in 
 question " obviously refers to the furniture of the 
 chancel." ^ In another place he brings forward, to the 
 same effect, the authority of Bishop Cosin, who con- 
 siders that the rubric refers to the open screen sepa- 
 rating the chancel from the nave, and to the row of 
 chairs or stools on either side within.^ I am not 
 concerned with the conclusion drawn alike by Bishop 
 Cosin and Mr. Beresford Hope, which I venture to 
 controvert, but with their mode of interpretation, in 
 which I am disposed to agree. 
 
 The only question which remains relates to the 
 particular period, which we ought at this day to view 
 as indicated by the expression "times past." In 1552, 
 when the words were first used, they certainly cannot 
 have pointed to the condition of the chancels in the 
 reign of Henry VIII. It is equally evident that in 1 559, 
 when they were again used (and this is, perhaps, the 
 
 1 Alliance of Divine Offices (Lib. of Anglo-Catholic Theology), 
 pp. 103, 104. I cannot help here noting what seems to me worthy of 
 blame in the Hierurgia Anglicana, edited in 1868 by members of the 
 Ecclesiological Society. There (p. 67) the second half only, relating to the 
 retention of steps, is quoted from the Queen's order, the fact being thus 
 withheld that she equally forbade the replacing of steps. 
 
 2 Worship in the Church of England, p. 67. See also p. 129. 
 
 ' So far as I know, the only proposal to change this phrase in our 
 Eubrics was made by Bishop Cosin, who suggested the following words : 
 "And the chancels shall be divided from the body of the Church, and remain 
 as they have done in times past." Correspondence, published by the 
 Surtees Society, Part II. p. 44. 
 
16 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 best point from which to look backwards, for then 
 they formed part of an " Ornaments Rubric " very- 
 similar to that which our Prayer Book contains now), 
 the words cannot have referred (in this sense) to the 
 reign of Queen Mary. It seems to me obvious, on 
 the other hand, by parity of reasoning, that it would 
 be equally unfair to suppose that, when used in 
 1662, they referred to the times of the Common- 
 wealth immediately preceding, when the chancels 
 were treated with a disregard which none of us 
 now would wish to see repeated. On the whole I 
 venture to contend, from the nature of the case, that 
 these words, as finally adopted in 1662, are an echo 
 of 1552. This interpretation, too, is in harmony 
 with the fourth rubric before the Communion Office 
 and with the canon of 1603, both of which (as we 
 shall see) contemplate the Lord's Table as movable, 
 and as liable to be moved ^' at the communion time." 
 All lines of thought in reference to this subject appear 
 to me to converge to this result, that the conditions 
 of the chancels in the times immediately preceding 
 1552 furnish to us a theoretical standard and guide. 
 
 I am aware that this argument concerning chancels, 
 derived from the words of the Ornaments Rubric, 
 taken in connection with the history of changes in the 
 Church of England, and with a consideration of the 
 probabilities of the case, will be closely criticised ; 
 and r have no wish to press it except as subsidiary.-^ 
 
 ^ At first sight it might appear that this whole argument could easily 
 be turned against me. In 1549 there was an " altar" at the east end of 
 the chancel, and the consecrator stood " in the midst of it." Looking 
 back from 1552, it might be said that these were the arrangements "in 
 times past," which were now directed to be retained. On this view how- 
 ever the rubrics of 1552 would be made to contradict themselves. The 
 
CriANCELS AS IN TIMES PAST. 17 
 
 But believing it to have some force, and not having 
 observed that it has been made use of before, I have 
 thought it right to set it forth ; and I have two 
 remarks to make in regard to it. First, the argument 
 at this point is, to use Archdeacon Paley's expression,^ 
 cumulative: the force of what follows does not de- 
 pend upon what is here laid down : if all that I have 
 said concerning chancels is fanciful, the weight of 
 what may be urged on other grounds, to which I now 
 proceed, is unimpaired. And, secondly, this reason- 
 ing on the phrase in which chancels are mentioned 
 derives some confirmation, as we shall see, from the 
 condition in which some chancels are known actually 
 to have remained in the Church of England to a 
 comparatively late period. But now let us turn to 
 the fourth rubric at the beginning of the Communion 
 Office, which rubric is the second of our stepping- 
 stones as we approach our main subject, and a 
 stepping-stone on which for a short time our feet 
 ought to be very firmly set. 
 
 strong objection to my argument is that "times past" would more 
 naturally refer to long usage than to the years between 1549 and 1552. 
 If this objection is decisive, then I admit that we are forced to restrict 
 the phrase before us to the mere retention of the chancels. 
 
 1 See " the exposition of the argument " in the Horce Paulince : " I 
 have advanced nothing which I did not think probable ; but the degree of 
 probability by which diflFerent instances are supported is undoubtedly 
 very different. If the reader, therefore, meets with a number which con- 
 tains an instance that appears to him unsatisfactory, or founded in mistake, 
 he will dismiss that number from the argument, but without prejudice to 
 any other." 
 
III. 
 
 BULE FOR THE PLACING OF THE HOLY TABLE. 
 
 Fourth rubric before the Comnnmion Service— Its important bearing on 
 the subject before us — Defeated attempt to alter it — Ei^dity-second 
 Canon — Danger of enforcing this rubric and this canon — A possible 
 compromise suggested. 
 
 The fourtli rubric prefixed to '' the Order of the 
 Administration of the Lord's Supper," consists of two 
 parts, the first having respect to the placing of the 
 Lord's Table at the Communion time, the second to 
 the Priest's position at the Table when he is engaged 
 in this sacred service. It is the latter part to v/hich 
 we are ultimately tending : but the first part must 
 occupy our attention at this point ; nor can we reach 
 our ultimate destination without travelling this way. 
 The history of the Prayer Book forbids us to consider 
 the Minister's position in the Communion Service till 
 we have first considered the position of the Table. 
 
 The words of the rubric are as follows : — " The 
 Table having at the Communion-time a fair luhite 
 linen cloth upon it shall stand in the body of the 
 Church or in the Chancel ivhere Morning and Eveyiiiig 
 Prayer are appointed to be said!' Now what is the 
 fair and natural interpretation of these words, taken 
 simply as they stand, without any regard to collateral 
 evidence '? First, a distinction is evidently drawn 
 
RULE FOR PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 19 
 
 between *' the Communion time " and other times. No 
 question is raised as to where the Table is to stand 
 in the intervals between two successive administra- 
 tions of the Lord's Supper. So far as any inference 
 can be drawn from these words, we are quite free to 
 place it, in this interval, against the east wall at the 
 upper end of the chancel. But when the Holy 
 Communion is to be celebrated, the Table is to be 
 placed either^ in the Body of the Church, or in the 
 Chancel, but always "where Morning Prayer and 
 Evening Prayer are appointed to be said." In what- 
 ever part of the church it is the custom, under 
 authority, to celebrate those other parts of the 
 service, there " at the Communion time," according to 
 this rubric, the Holy Table is to be placed. It follows 
 further, quite obviously and without any doubt, that 
 the table itself is contemplated as being easily mov- 
 able. Now accepting those arrangements which have 
 been customary, under the sanction of our Ordinaries, 
 during two hundred years, and having no wish to 
 change those arrangements, we must still admit that, 
 according to the rubric, the Holy Table ought, " at 
 the Communion time," to have been brought out into 
 the free part of the nave or the chancel, so as to be, 
 thus to speak, in easy contact w^ith the congregation. 
 In fact this rubric has not been duly observed. A 
 very careful and deliberate regulation, dating from 
 1662, has fallen into desuetude. 
 
 At this point I cannot help putting forward a 
 question which seems to me very serious, and to 
 which I invite the most careful attention. The wliole 
 
 1 It is to be observed that preferentially it is to be placed in the body 
 of the church, i.e., in the nave. 
 
 2 
 
20 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 stress of tlie argument, which, comparatively new as 
 it is, now is pressed upon us so urgently from many 
 quarters, that " hi?fore the Table'' in the rubric j)reced- 
 ing the Consecration Prayer, must mean " in front of 
 the Table facing eastivards" depends upon the assump- 
 tion that the table is placed altarwise against the east 
 wall during the Communion Service. The Table is 
 there, and the word, it is contended, can mean nothing 
 else, and the Priest may stand in this position at this 
 time. Now I do not admit that even thus the phrase 
 " before the Table" is necessarily so restricted in its 
 meaning. I have also to point out that it is hardly 
 consistent to contend for an optional use under a 
 rubric understood as imperative. But, conceding 
 these two points at present for argument's sake, I will 
 ask whether it is candid to plead for a ceremonial 
 act on the strength of an interpretation of one 
 rubric, which interpretation depends upon the break- 
 ing of another rubric. A sense of great unfairness 
 has often come over my mind in reading discussions 
 on this subject, when I have observed that the fourth 
 of the rubrics before the Communion Office is buried 
 out of sight as much as possible, while yet a new 
 sense of another rubric, made possible by the viola- 
 tion of this, is brought out into a relief as strong 
 as possible. A plea of simple justice demands that 
 peculiar attention should be given just now to this 
 rule, which regulates the placing of the Table *'at the 
 Communion time.^' 
 
 And the case is made very much stronger by 
 evidence which has recently come to light, that an 
 attempt was made to alter this rubric with which we 
 are now concerned, so as to confine the Lord's Table 
 
RULE FOR PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 21 
 
 to a position which really would have supplied a 
 plausible ground for that interpretation of the Conse- 
 cration Rubric which is now so urgently recommended 
 to us, and that this attempt was defeated.^ In the 
 facsimile of the Black Letter Prayer Book of 1636, 
 with the marginal manuscript notes and alterations 
 from which the copy attached to the Act of 1662 was 
 written, we find that, instead of the words "m the body 
 of the church or in the chancel," it was proposed to 
 substitute, ''in the most convenient place in the upper 
 end of the chancel, or of the body of the church, 
 where there is no chancel." Nothing could be more 
 significant than the suggested change.^ But it was 
 not accepted. It was decided by Convocation and 
 Parliament that the rubric was to remain as before. 
 Hence this retention of the old form is a fact ol 
 extreme importance. The failure of an attempt to 
 change is a very strong argument to prove a serious 
 meaning in that which is unchanged. That we have 
 gradually become accustomed to act in our churches 
 as if this projected alteration of rubrics had really 
 been accomplished we all know. It does not, how- 
 ever, follow that it is fair to reason from the violation 
 of a rule, as though its intention were something 
 totally different from that which it expresses. 
 
 1 See above, p. 5, 7iote. 
 
 2 To this evidence of a desire, deliberately entertained, but decisively 
 disappointed, is to be added that which is supplied by Bishop Cosin's 
 Annotated Prayer Book, preserved at Durham. The rubric relating to this 
 subject, which he recommended, was as follows: " The table a.^u;a?/es stand- 
 ing in the midst of the upper end of the chancell (or of the church, where 
 a chancell is wanting), and being at all times covered with a carpet of silk, 
 shall also have at the Communion time a faire white linen cloth upon it, 
 with paten, chalice, and other decent furniture, meet for the high mysteries 
 there to be celebrated." — Correspondence, Pt. XL p. 52. 
 
22 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 But I proceed to further evidence. Let us turn to 
 tlie Canons. It is to be presumed that the rubrics of 
 1662 are consistent with the canons of 1603, unless 
 there be some declaration to the contrary. Now in 
 the 82nd of those canons, after provision for the 
 proper repairing and reverent covering of the Lord's 
 Table, we find that between the placing of the Table 
 at the time of Holy Communion and its placing 
 at other times a sharp distinction is drawn by the 
 phrase '' saving when the Holy Communion is to he 
 administered,'': — "at which time," it is added, "the 
 same shall be placed in so good sort within the 
 church-^ or chancel, as thereby the Minister may be 
 more conveniently heard of the Communicants in his 
 Prayer and Ministration, and the Communicants 
 also more conveniently, and in more number, may 
 communicate with the said Minister." Nothing, as 
 it seems to me, can be clearer than both the spirit 
 and the literal meaning of this part of the canon. 
 It could not possibly have been written under the 
 inspiration of that feeling concerning chancels wdiich 
 is so constantly urged upon us now. The chancel is 
 not viewed as being inherently more sacred than any 
 other part of the church. The only question raised 
 is that of congregational convenience. Wherever the 
 Table can be most suitably placed for securing the 
 ends of common participation in this most sacred rite, 
 there it is to be placed at this time ; and it is impos- 
 sible to resist the conclusion that this position during 
 the celebration and administration of the Sacrament, 
 
 1 Again we observe that the " church " is mentioned before the " chan- 
 cel.'' See above, p. 19, note. By the "church," as Mr. Beresford Hope 
 correctly remarks, is meant the " nave." 
 
BULE FOR PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 23 
 
 was to be, not in contiguity with the east wall, but 
 in some part of the church further to the west. But 
 here is presented to us a most serious question, on 
 which it may be wise to pause for a moment before 
 we pass on. 
 
 This new insisting on an eastward position of the 
 Priest during consecration, based upon a particular 
 interpretation of the rubric which affects this point, 
 has forced on us a reconsideration of the rubric and 
 canon which affect the position of the Table itself. 
 This question might otherwise have slept; and most of 
 us would have wished that its sleep should have been 
 unbrol^en. But what if this is no longer possible ? 
 What, if in consequence of a verbal advantage gained 
 by some persons in the interpretation of one rubric 
 by help of the violation of a different rubric, some 
 other persons should insist on their claim to observe 
 that other rubric literally ? What if to counterbalance 
 the claim to consecrate eastwards at a Table placed 
 altarwise, the claim to place the Table, not altarwise 
 «Qt all, but free in the midst of the congregation, should 
 be asserted and acted on 1 Can anyone contemplate 
 without fear the sharp contrast which would then be 
 presented by two sets of churches, and two types of 
 congregations, in all parts of the land ? This would 
 make the division amongst us far more palpable than 
 it has ever been before. The division would be shown 
 not simply in the position of the officiating minister 
 at the Lord's Table, but by conflicting practices in 
 the placing of the Table itself. This would, indeed, 
 be a triumph of **the Catholic Kevival.'' It may be 
 said that in every case the Ordinary might prevent 
 this alarming result by refusing to allow the Holy 
 
24 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Table to be placed otherwise than according to present 
 custom. But is it quite certain that the Ordinary 
 could follow this course in defiance of both rubric and 
 canon ? And if it were legally possible, can we 
 suppose that our Bishops would deferentially yield to 
 one party, who, against a legal decision,^ can only 
 build their case on a doubtful interpretation, and 
 would refuse to listen to another party which could 
 quote authoritative documents, concerning the sense of 
 which there cannot be any doubt ? 
 
 For myself I dread extremely the establishing of 
 such a sharp line of angry separation, running visibly 
 through the Church of England, Sunday by Sunday, 
 when our congregations are assembled for their most 
 solemn act of worship. And yet I fear such a state 
 of things may be inevitable, if those who are urging on 
 a crisis with so much determination will not pause. ^ 
 Let me add that for my own part I earnestly depre- 
 cate any change in that position of our Communion 
 Tables which has long been customary. If the change 
 
 1 The argument in this volume is quite independent of the Purchas 
 Judgment, though I have made it the subject of some separate remarks. 
 I am quite aware that this judgment is vievred by many persons as having 
 little weight, partly because it was given in an undefended suit, partly 
 because the judges on the occasion were few in number, and partly because 
 of a certain utterance by the present Lord Chancellor, to which reference 
 will be made below. Still the judgment is law ; and by law the Bishops, 
 in their administration, are bound. 
 
 2 In the Record of January 1 8th, I read the following : " At our last 
 Sunday Evening Communion I had the Table placed ' east ' and ' west,' 
 and therefore was not compelled for one moment before reading the Con- 
 secration Prayer to turn my back on the congregation. I do not intend 
 that to be the position always. I should wish to have it so at times of 
 Holy Communion, and believe the eighty-second Canon and Rubric will 
 bear me out."' And T could produce later private evidence of the manner 
 in which such thoughts have been forced into the minds of those to whom 
 they were not naturally welcome. 
 
EULE FOR PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 25 
 
 does take place, the responsibility of it must rest 
 with those who will have forced a strict observance 
 of rubric and canon upon those who would willingly 
 have been content with an irregularity sanctioned 
 by usage. 
 
 Yet even here some thoughts of peace and hope 
 suggest themselves. We hear much said, in reference 
 to this matter, of conciliation and compromise. If con- 
 ciliation is to be a reality, it must be offered chiefly, 
 not to those who have caused our difficulties, but to 
 those who are conscious of injury. If there is to be 
 compromise, it cannot be by means of a bargain all on 
 one side. Now, inasmuch as some feel earnestly con- 
 cerning the eastward position, which has not yet been 
 legalised, and is not in harmony with usage — and 
 others have an undoubted right to insist upon a posi- 
 tion of the Holy Table which would make the east- 
 ward position impossible — might not a compromise 
 be effected on this basis, that the right should be 
 given up by one party, and this earnest desire of an 
 authorised change by the other ? So far as I know, 
 there is a perfect readiness among all men to acquiesce 
 in that position of the Lord's Table which, though 
 not really sanctioned by law, has long been familiar to 
 us, — provided that this position is not used for making 
 ulterior demands. May we not hope that these 
 ulterior demands will be given up, if only that posi- 
 tion of the Lord's Table is secured, to which so much 
 importance is attached ? I assume, of course, that 
 our official documents are in due time to be brought 
 into harmony with this supposed agreement — that, on 
 the one hand, the canon of 1603 and the fourth rubric 
 before the Communion Office are altered, so as to 
 
26 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 sanction only the present customary place of the 
 Lord's Table — and, on the other hand, the rubric 
 before the Consecration Prayer made incapable of 
 any interpretation which would sanction the East- 
 ward Position.-^ 
 
 ^ The rubric for the placing of the Holy Table is seen in its true force 
 when it is put in juxtaposition with the rubric of the same date for the 
 place of Morning and Evening Prayer. This is done by Dr. Blakeney, 
 who adds : " Viewing these two rubrics together, and remembering their 
 common origin, we have no difficulty in understanding the words, ' in the 
 body of the Church or in the Chancel where Morning and Evening Prayer 
 be appointed to be said.' The object at which the Eeviewers of 1552 
 aimed was the location of the Minister in such a place, whether in the 
 body of the Church or Chancel, as he should best he heard. The reason of 
 the option as to the position of the Table is obvious. It was to stand 
 either in the body of the Church or in the Chancel, wherever prayer was 
 appointed to be said, as the position best adapted to the edification of the 
 hearer. This exactly harmonises with the canons 14 and 82, the former 
 prescribing the most convenient place for hearing, and the latter direct- 
 ing the Table to be placed, ' as thereby the Minister may be more 
 conveniently heard of the communicants.' " — Booh of Common Prayer in 
 its History and Interpretation. Third edition, p. 466. 
 
"^^ Ofi" THE >^ 
 
 'UK! 7 ^.E SIT Y^ 
 
 IV. 
 
 TRE TROUBLES OF 1640. 
 
 The Canons of 1640— " Declaration concerning some rites and cere- 
 monies" — Its strong protest against Eomanism— Illustration from 
 the Diocese of Chester — Brian Walton — Letter from the Vice-Dean 
 to Bishop Bridgeman. 
 
 The case for the free placing of the Holy Table 
 " at the Communion-time " is by no means yet 
 complete. We must now enter upon the history of 
 the period when this subject convulsed the country, 
 and thus left us a caution, to which, if we are wise, we 
 shall take good heed. And here I will turn at once, 
 without any introduction, to the canons of 1640, which 
 represent the culminating point of Laud's success. It 
 is true that these canons have no binding authority ; 
 but they are a striking and instructive landmark of 
 Church history. The seventh of these canons, entitled 
 " a declaration concerning some rites and ceremonies," 
 has been lately quoted to justify the official use of 
 the word " altar " in the Church of England ; and in 
 studying this document, it is perhaps discernible 
 that those who wrote it would gladly have secured 
 this result, if they could. Yet, even so, the term 
 *' Communion Table " is used in the canon throughout 
 as the official phrase.^ This, however, is not the 
 
 1 In reply to the undoubtedly true statement that the term " Altar " is 
 no part of our official church vocabulary, it has been replied that neither is 
 the term " Communion Table " a part of that vocabulary. This, however, 
 is an error. The 82nd of the Canons of 1603, which are certainly official, 
 is headed with the words " a decent Communion Table in every church." 
 
28 BEFORE TEE TABLE. 
 
 question before us, though evidently it bears upon it. 
 Our subject for the moment is the position of the Com- 
 munion Table in 1640. 
 
 Now, in this canon, after an expression of strong 
 approval of the means taken at the Eeformation for 
 rooting out of the minds of the people both " the 
 inclination " to " the gross superstition of popery " 
 '' and the memory thereof," " especially of the idolatry 
 committed in the Mass, for which cause all popish 
 altars were demolished," it is added that in the royal 
 chapels of three princes, and most cathedrals, and 
 some parochial churches, the holy Tables had con- 
 tinued to stand where the Altars stood. -^ This, it is 
 urged, " doth sufficiently acquit the manner of placing 
 the said Tables from any illegality or just suspicion of 
 popish superstition or innovation." " And, therefore," 
 continue the writers of the canon, "we judge it fit 
 and convenient that all churches and chapels do 
 conform themselves in this particular to the example 
 of the cathedral or mother churches, saving only the 
 general liberty left to the bishop by law during the 
 time of administration of the Holy Communion.'' ^ I 
 might here dwell on the strong Protestant language 
 of this canon, its abhorrence of '' popery," its approval 
 of the demolition of " popish Altars," to illustrate the 
 extreme difference which separates the opinions of the 
 Laudian divines, even at this their point of highest 
 success, from those sentiments concerning ''the Mass^' 
 
 ^ Even this phrase, as it stands, is absolutely contradictory to the theory 
 that "Table" and " Altar" are synonymous. The sharpest distinction is 
 drawn in the canon between " popish Altars " and English Communion 
 Tables, whereas now the most active exertions are made to lead us to 
 believe that they are exactly or nearly the same thing. 
 
 2 See Cardwell's Synodalia, vol. i, pp. 404—406. 
 
TBE TROUBLES OF 1640. 29 
 
 with which we have now to deal. But what I desire 
 to lay stress on is the distinction drawn betw^een the 
 position of the Communion Table '' during the time of 
 administration " and its position at other times. It is 
 true that the canon of 1640 is not quite consistent 
 with the canon of 1603, that of the earlier date con- 
 templating the free position of the Table during com- 
 munion as the rule, whereas that of the latter date 
 contemplates it as an exception.^ Still the later docu- 
 ment is quite enough for the argument in support of 
 which I quote it. When we study it carefully, we 
 perceive very clearly that it represents an endeavour, 
 which was not successful, to procure a change of posi- 
 tion in the Lord's Table ; and that even this endeavour 
 was carried on under reserve. Thus the canon fur- 
 nishes evidence, both of the custom of the period, and 
 of public opinion on the subject.^ 
 
 This year (1640) was a very serious time for the 
 Church of England, precisely in connection with this 
 very subject. The resemblance too between that period 
 and our own, in regard to some Church questions. 
 
 ^ It; is impossible not to remark a certain adroitness of language in this 
 Canon of 1640, as compared with that of 1603. The impression is 
 created that the deviation from the altarwise position of the Table during 
 Communion was simply within the ^permission of the Ordinary, whereas 
 it was prescribed. 
 
 2 It must not be forgotten that near the close of this Canon or declaration 
 the following words occur : — " We declare that this situation of the holy 
 Table doth not imply that it is, or ought to be esteemed, a true and proper 
 altar, whereon Christ is again really sacrificed : but it is only to be called 
 an altar by us in that sense in which the primitive church called it an 
 altar, and in no other." So far as I know, this sentence and the Corona- 
 tion Service are the only documents which can be quoted to sanction the 
 use of the word " Altar " for the Communion Table in the Church of 
 England. The Coronation Service will be referred to below. Of this 
 Canon it is enough to say that it has no official authority at all. 
 
30 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 was very close. The disasters which followed certain 
 religious movements in the former period were very 
 great. Hence we have more reasons than one for 
 reading very carefully this part of the history of the 
 past. Then one of the great efforts of Laud and his 
 party was to change that character of the Chancels 
 which had previously been customary in the churches, 
 and more especially to remove the Communion Tables 
 from the places which they had occupied, so as to 
 fix them altar wise against the eastern wall. The 
 manner in which this was done was very arbitrary, 
 and often attended with violent proceedings ; and the 
 indignation which it produced through the country 
 was extreme. Evidence of this can be furnished in 
 abundalice from the recorded proceedings of the House 
 of Lords and House of Commons, and from the general 
 literature of the period. Two very marked cases were 
 connected with St. Gregory's, London,^ and with 
 Gloucester Cathedral.^ I will content myself with 
 illustrations supplied by the Diocese in which I 
 happen to live, and not, so fur as I know, made use 
 of before in discussions on this subject. 
 
 The two Bishops of Chester who immediately pre- 
 ceded and immediately followed the interval of the 
 Eevolution, J ohn Bridge man and Brian Walton, were 
 both men of mark, and both worthy to be held in 
 high respect. They belonged, on the whole, to the 
 school of Laud, but neither of them was notorious as 
 
 1 See Cardwell's Documentary Annals, Vol. ii., p. 185. In this case the 
 royal prerogative was exerted to effect what was contrary to law. Those who, 
 in resistance to the secular power, identify themselves with the Laudiaii 
 divines, seem to forget that they are opposing the very principle on which 
 those divines were glad to act. 
 
 2 See a pamphlet by the Rev. Canon Eyle, entitled, Archhishoj^ Laud 
 and his Times, p. 151. 
 
THE TROUBLES OF 1640. 31 
 
 a liot partisan ; and while Bridgeman, deprived by 
 Cromwell, was living a secluded life in Shropshire, 
 Walton found solace in Biblical studies, and in pre- 
 paring his great Polyglott. Previously, after 
 maintaining in his act for the degree of Doctor of 
 Divinity at Cambridge, tlie thesis that "the Roman 
 Pontiff is not the infallible judge in controversies of 
 faith," we find Walton, when rector of a London 
 parish, " accused of ordering his churchwardens to 
 place the Communion Table under the east w^indow, 
 which the churchwardens declining," continues the 
 biographer, " Dr. Walton himself, the Bishop of 
 Rochester, and other friends then present tliere placed 
 it."^ This is a specimen of the unseemly parochial 
 squabbles which were then prevalent over the 
 country, in consequence of the attempt of many 
 bishops to rearrange the chancels of parish churches, 
 in violation of both canon and rubric.^ 
 
 Bishop Bridgeman^s life affords an instance of 
 similar troubles, at the same time, connected with 
 cathedrals ; and this passage of diocesan history 
 can be illustrated very fully, and in a most amusing 
 and instructive manner, by a letter addressed to him 
 by John Ley, who held a Parochial Cure in Cheshire, 
 and was also at the time Vice Dean of the Cathedral.^ 
 A few extracts from this book, harmonising as they 
 do with the thoughts of many persons in our own 
 time, are quite worthy of being given and examined 
 here in illustration of our subject. 
 
 1 See Archdeacon Todd's Memoirs of the Life and Writings of BisJiop 
 Walton (1821), Vol. 1, p. 14. 
 
 ^ A Letter {against the erection of an Altar) written June 29, 1635, to 
 the Reverend Father John, L. Bishop of Chester by John Ley, Pastour of 
 Great Budworth, in Cheshire, London, 1641. 
 
32 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 In Chester Cathedral a "new structure of stone" 
 had been erected " at the upper end of the Old Con- 
 sistorie/'' The "Papists" ''had talked of this as 
 an altar, whereupon they exalted their hopes of a 
 re-edification of their Babel amongst us." " It was 
 one of them," says Ley, " from whom, being at Bud- 
 worth, I had the first notice of that newes ; which 
 I told him I would not beleeve : for it seemed to 
 mee more strange than true, that a Papist, dwelling 
 at least fourteene miles from Chester, and comming 
 thither seldome, should know better what was done 
 in the Cathedrall, than I, the Sub-deane of the 
 Church, who was there almost every weeke through- 
 out the whole yeere But at my next 
 
 comming to Chester, I saw hee had but too much 
 and too solid ground for his report . . . and 
 some said, as I was told to my face, that though your 
 lordship, as Bishop, were the Author, I, as Sub-deane, 
 was in some way an Actor or approver of that which 
 was so great an eye-sore unto many good people." 
 
 It is interesting to mark some of the arguments on 
 which Ley bases his respectful but earnest expostula- 
 tion with his Bishop. Eead in the light of our time 
 they are still very fresh. 
 
 Among other things he urges " the danger of depra- 
 vation and corruption of the doctrine of the Church, 
 by changing the Christian Sacrament into a Popish 
 Sacrifice — for," he adds, " from literall and reall Altars 
 
 1 This "Old Oonsistorie" is the Lady Chapel, which happens at this 
 time to contain some fine woodwork marked with Bishop Bridgeman s 
 initials, being part, in fact, of the pulpit which he erected in the choir. 
 It was in this " consistorie " that Marsh, in Queen Mary's reign, was ex- 
 amined and condemned to be burnt. See Foxe's Booh of Martyrs, Vol. 
 viii. p. 49 (Seeley's edition, 1861). 
 
THE TROUBLES OF 1640. 33 
 
 a litterall and reall Sacrifice is inferred : Altars and 
 Sacrifices inferre one another/^ He admits that '* the 
 like inference'' might be made from the word ** Priest," 
 but not, he says, *'with like advantage, for the one is 
 offered but to the eare, the other to the eye ; the one is 
 but a transient word, the other is a permanent worke ; 
 the one is properly an Altar, the other noteth not 
 properly a Priest in the Evangelicall Church."^ And 
 another exception wliich Ley takes to " such new altars" 
 is that they are " schismaticall novelties," inasmuch as 
 from the year 1550, till the time then present, "altars 
 had, by the most authentick constitutions and constant 
 custome of our Church, stood excommunicated, and 
 tables of wood authorised in their stead : and the 
 Canon took it for certaine and undoubted that 
 there be decent and convenient Tables provided in all 
 the churches of the Realme." In this case, in fact, 
 he adds rather quaintly, there would be '* schisme 
 upon schisme, a division from the generall, and 
 a subdivision in our particular church ; for that in 
 the Quire there is a table of wood, and above that, 
 in the upper end of the old Consistorie, an Altar 
 of stone. "^ 
 
 An appeal, which in a later passage is made to 
 the Bishop, is honourable both to him and to the 
 writer. " To another sort of men, who, by way of 
 gratitude for your great moderation towards them, 
 have held it their duty to present their hearty 
 devotions to Almighty God for your long and 
 comfortable continuance among us, this Altar will be 
 a rock of offence, and make them as stiffe against 
 kneeling at the Sacrament, as any of their adversaries 
 
 1 Pp. 9, 10. 2 p 15. 
 
34 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 flexible or pliable to bow to an Altar ;"^ and then it 
 is added, on the other hand, that '* though some 
 men's slighting both of the Lord's Table and Temple 
 required a remedy to keep off contempt, yet there 
 was great care to be taken in this case that tbe 
 remedy of Prophanenesse might not be such as might 
 foment Superstition."^ And, to quote one passage 
 more, the writer says : " Since the Papists never, or 
 very rarely, use the word Table, but Altar, both out 
 of too much devotion to it, and too great disaffection 
 of us and our Church, it were convenient that we 
 were (at least) more spareing in the use of the Avord 
 Altar, and generally more accustomed ourselves to the 
 name Table, the rather because since we have seemed 
 in tearmes, and some other wayes, to comply with 
 them more then in former times, they have multiplied 
 in number and advanced in confidence."^ The result 
 wa.s that the Bishop caused this structure to be taken, 
 down, and an " ironical elegy " commemorated its 
 demolition.* 
 
 ^ We should not fail to observe here the parallel with our own times. 
 Extreme ritual has often the effect of hindering improvements in our 
 Church Services. High Churchmen are apt to boast that the improve- 
 ments of late years are due exclusively to themselves. This, however, is 
 a mistake, and Evangelicals have been kept back from various things 
 which they would willingly have done, but for the suspicion and alarm 
 caused by each new change. 
 
 2 Pp. 16, 17, 29. 
 
 'P. 31. Eemembering the persistent efforts recently made, and still 
 made, to identify Anglican and Eoman doctrine, I cannot resist the 
 temptation to quote one more passage : " A man may sooner eat up an 
 altar of stone, though it were as big as a church, than reconcile our 
 Church and the Eomish together, whatsoever the quirking Scotist 
 " Daraport" masked under the title of " Franciscus a Sancta Clara," hath 
 devised," p. 19. This work of " Damport "' (or "Davenport'') has 
 recently been republished. 
 
 * See App3ndix B. (Elegy upon an Altar.) 
 
THE TROUBLES OF 1640. 35 
 
 These are only samples of an agitation whicli could* 
 be illustrated by contemporary notices from every 
 county in England. But these have a local interest 
 for such as live in Cheshire,^ and they suffice for the 
 purpose of the moment. And now that we have 
 before us this subject of the placing of the Holy Table 
 '* at the Communion-time/^ in church, it is desirable 
 to pursue the subject historically, till we reach tha 
 latter part of the seventeenth century. If it can be 
 established that the Communion Table was not in 
 1662 customarily placed as we place it now for the 
 administration of the Lord's Supper, but, according to 
 this rubric and canon, free in the church or the 
 chancel, then a very firm basis will have been laid 
 for the argument which is to follow. 
 
 ^ Mr. Beresford Hope (p. 206) has occasion to refer to another Bishop 
 of Chester, Cartwright, whose character was not so respectable as those of 
 Bridgeman and Walton ; and the incident may be mentioned here, though 
 it anticipates a notice of one fact to which careful attention must be turned 
 presently, viz., that, to use Mr. Beresford Hope's own words, " it is a mis- 
 take to suppose that, with the Eestoration, the altarwise position became 
 universal." I cannot agree with him in thinking that the non-observance 
 of this position was a disorder, since a dififerent position was ordered, and 
 is still ordered, by both a rubric and a canon. But it is interesting and 
 important to note that in 1687 Bishop Cartwright found in Liverpool the 
 Holy Table not placed altarwise. 
 
 D 2 
 
HISTORY OF THE PLACING OF THE HOLY TABLE. 
 
 Recollection in 1662 of 1640 — Eastward placing of the Table improbable — 
 The evidence from books — The case of kneeling and the Snrplice in 
 1662 not really similar to the case of Vestments and the Eastward 
 Position now — Catechism of 1674— Evidence from Parliamentary 
 debates — From the continuance of chancels in their old condition — 
 Recorded defeat of the attempt to change. 
 
 The year 1640 has just been prominently mentioned. 
 The year we are aiming at is 1662. It is sometimes 
 assumed that because very successful efforts were 
 made about the former year to place the Communion 
 Tables in English churches altarwise, at the upper 
 extremities of the chancels, therefore they so stood in 
 the latter year.^ Could anything be more whimsical ? 
 To write as if the ecclesiastical history of England 
 worked its way quietly and progressively from 1640 
 to 1662 is to write very wildly and quite at random. 
 It is nothing less than to leave out Cromwell from 
 the middle of the seventeenth century. The course 
 pursued by the bishops at the earlier of these dates 
 did not proceed continuously and prosperously, till 
 it reached its highest point of success at the later, 
 but, on the contrary, it was interrupted in the most 
 violent manner, and with a strong recoil of feeling 
 that pervaded a very large part of the community. 
 Is it likely that the very thing which convulsed the 
 
 1 See Appendix C. (The place of the Lord's Table between 1640 and 1662.) 
 
HISTOEY OF PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 37 
 
 Church and country in 1640 would be accepted, 
 without hesitation or opposition, as the law of the 
 Church and country in 1662 ? 
 
 Let the probabilities of the case be considered.-^ A 
 method of church arrangement, associated with re- 
 miniscences so serious and disturbing, could not 
 possibly be accepted without dispute. No storm 
 so violent, except by a miracle, was ever converted 
 into an immediate calm. Let it be remembered, too, 
 that in 1661 those resolute and earnest-minded men 
 were within the ' Church of England, who on St. 
 Bartholomew's day in the following year withdrew 
 from it, and became the founders of systematic Non- 
 conformity; and to these we must add a large number 
 of weaker men,^ who shared their convictions without 
 in the end following their example. Can we suppose 
 that such persons, whether of the stronger or the 
 
 1 As to the facts of the case, see what is said by two writers who 
 advocate the Eastward Position. Mr. Scudamore says, quoting Heylin : 
 "Certain it is that long after the Restoration in most country churches 
 the Holy Table was still set ' at the hither end of the Chancel.' To 
 restore it to the place in which we almost invariably see it now was 
 mainly the work of the last century." — Notitia Eucharistica, p. 147. 
 Mr. Walton says : '' It would seem to be certain that at the actual time 
 of the Restoration the Holy Table was almost universally set lengthwise. 
 .... It may be held indeed that even at the date of the Revision the 
 
 lengthwise arrangement was well-nigh universal The Puritan 
 
 arrangement was being practically acquiesced in ; and, what is more, it 
 
 prevailed very extensively for a long time afterwards Evidence 
 
 of a more positive kind might be added as to the long continuance of the 
 Puritan arrangement, — in other words, of the literal observance of the 
 Fourth Rubric as re-inserted in IQQ2."—The Buhrical Determination of 
 the Celehranfs Position. Note K. 
 
 ^ By this phrase I do not by any means intend to say that these men 
 ought to have seceded with Baxter, but that at such a time there are 
 always many, who agreeing in general sentiment with those who secede, 
 yet shrink from the formation of a gre,at schism. I write this under a 
 vivid recollection of the Scotch disruption of 1844. There is good proof 
 that in 1662 Baxter expected a much larger secession. 
 
38 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 weaker class, would have acquiesced in that which 
 within a few years had been so conscientiously resisted? 
 
 But we are not left to hypothesis or conjecture 
 in this matter. At the Savoy conference this question 
 of the placing of the Lord's Table " at the Communion- 
 time" was never mentioned; other matters, far less 
 obnoxious, such as the use of the surplice and kneel- 
 ing at the reception of the Communion, were made 
 points of the most determined resistance. But no 
 allusion was made to this. It was evidently taken 
 for granted that as regards the placing of the Lord's 
 Table the law of the Church, clearly expressed in canon 
 and rubric alike, was to remain as before. Whatever 
 new regulations for the administration of the Lord's 
 Supper were to be introduced, they were understood 
 to be adapted to a Communion Table placed, at the 
 time of the sacramental service, in the body of the 
 church or free in the chancel. 
 
 In further confirmation of this view, various kinds 
 of evidence can be produced — from books — from Par- 
 liamentary debates — from the condition in which chan- 
 cels have remained, in various parts of the country, to 
 a date comparatively recent — and, above all, from the 
 fact that a definite attempt was made in 1661 to cause 
 the communion tables to be placed altarwise against 
 the eastern walls of our churches, and that this attempt 
 was decisively foiled and defeated under the combined 
 action of Parliament and Convocation. That a canon 
 and a rubric declare explicitly against such a position 
 * 'at the Communion-time" is certain. It is also certain 
 that this canon and this rubric were deliberately left 
 unchanged. But it is certain, likewise, that the 
 placing of the Lord's Tabic altarwise at the east wall 
 
HISTOIiY OF PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 39 
 
 did gradually become the custom of the Church of 
 England. In some instances the change probably 
 took place very speedily ; and in some districts and 
 dioceses more speedily than in others. Evelyn men- 
 tions a case within his own knowledge very soon after 
 1662.^ Under these circumstances it is desirable to 
 bear in mind and to point out that there is collateral 
 evidence of the true intention of the Church, and of 
 its recognised practice, in this matter of the placing 
 of the Lord's Table. 
 
 As to the first class of evidence, I will again refer 
 to that Catechism of 1674, which has been brought 
 forward above in general illustration of the state of 
 the chancels at the period now under our attention. 
 In this book is a picture of a chancel with its Holy 
 Table, at the time of the celebration of the Holy 
 Communion. The Table stands free in the chancel, 
 and lengthwise, east and west, with two clergymen 
 facing one another on the north and south sides. The 
 people are kneeling reverently at the west end and at 
 the north and south sides. But one very curious cir- 
 cumstance ought here to be noticed by the way. The 
 two officiating clergymen appear to wear gowns. It 
 seems to me extremely probable that, inasmuch as 
 serious scruples were felt and expressed in 1662 as to 
 the wearing of the surplice, this point was not in 
 every case, for some time at least, very harshly 
 pressed. This picture cannot represent a merely 
 Puritan communion ; for, as I have said, the commu- 
 nicants are kneeling. We have, in fact, as it seems, 
 here before us a very good illustration of the curious 
 
 1 Swainson, The Rubrical Question of 1874, (Second Edition) p. 24. 
 See p. 35. 
 
40 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 transitional character of that time. Before any long 
 period had passed away, all scruples regarding both 
 kneeling and the surplice had ceased/ 
 
 And at this point, by the way, I could imagine that 
 a question relating to our present difficulties might 
 easily come into the mind of some reader. If all 
 doubts respecting the surplice and kneeling, which 
 w^ere the great topics of dispute two hundred years 
 ago, were gradually set to rest, why may not this 
 same result be hoped for with regard to the East- 
 ward Position and Eucharistic Vestments, concerning 
 which debate disturbs us now ? To this question I 
 think an easy and very confident answer can be given. 
 At that time the use of the surplice and the attitude 
 of kneeling at the Communion were not only legal, 
 but absolutely prescribed. The use of Vestments and 
 the Eastward Position are not now legal. The utmost 
 that can be said for them is that it is bad law which 
 forbids them, and that the perseverance in these two 
 irregularities is right, in order that good law may be 
 procured.^ 
 
 But, passing on from a remark made by the way, let 
 us turn to the second of the above-mentioned kinds of 
 evidence. It will be enough here to quote some 
 remarkable words used by a man of note in the House 
 of Commons during a debate on Comprehension in 
 
 ^ See Appendix D. (Catechism of Church Doctrine and Church 
 Practice in 1674.) 
 
 2 To make the parallel complete, it woidd be necessary to suppo >e that 
 kneeling at the Communion and wearing a surplice was made authorita- 
 tively optional. No one, so far as I am aware, wishes the Eastward 
 Position and the Eucharistic Vestments to be made obligatory on all. It 
 is the power of choice which is claimed ; and it is precisely in this power 
 of choice, as I venture to thi ik, that our danger resides. 
 
HISTORY OF PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 41 
 
 1667-8. We find Sir Thomas Littleton, the future 
 Speaker, addressing the House as follows : " So long 
 as the Church was true to herself, the Nonconformists 
 never hurt the Church ; but as soon as innovation 
 and alteration came in by the Churchmen [Clergy], 
 and they favourites with the Crown, the Church 
 declined. In ceremonies we have much alteration ; 
 the Communion Table set altar-manner, whereas it 
 ought to be in the body of the Church, that the guests 
 might come to the Table, and the Second Service 
 might be better heard."^ This seems very clear as to 
 the recognised law of the placing of the Holy Table, 
 as to the change in its position which was already in 
 progress, and as to the discontent felt in consequence, 
 by some of the Laity against some of the Clergy. 
 But let us turn to 'the third class of evidence. 
 
 If even one chancel had remained till our times 
 in the condition contemplated by our canons and 
 rubrics, this would be a collateral argument of some 
 
 ^ I quote this from Parliament and the Church of England, an import- 
 ant book recently published by Professor Montagu Burrows. So far as 
 I know he is the first who brought this passage to view. He adds in a 
 note, " This passage seems to show that the custom of placing the Holy 
 Table altarwise or ' altarmanner,' which had obtained largely under 
 Laud's auspices before the Great Rebellion, was not legalized at the 
 Eestoration, and was considered illegal in 1667. An alteration of the 
 fourth rubric before the Communion Service, in order to allow the Table 
 to be placed altarwise, and to make the Eastward Position of the cele- 
 brant optional, had been attempted in 1661 by some party, probably by one 
 or other House of Convocation ; but it failed, and the rubric had been 
 left exactly as before, and as we now have it. Yet we see that custom 
 was already settling the question of the position of the Holy Table ; 
 not so the Eastward Position of the celebrant, which Sir Thomas would 
 have been sure to mention, as also the Vestments, if they had been worn." 
 Pp. 91, 92. On this I will only remark that I think an attempt to make 
 the Eastward Position optional was not so clearly a part of the foiled 
 endeavour of 1661 as was the attempt to place the Communion Table 
 altarwise. 
 
42 BE F QUE THE TABLE. 
 
 value in attestation of the intention of the Church. 
 Had it been intended in 1662 that every Communion 
 Table should be fixed altarwise at the east wall, we 
 can very well imagine that the changes necessary to 
 secure this result would in many cases have been 
 made gradually and considerately ; but it is difficult 
 to believe that a single chancel would have remained 
 unchanged during two centuries, whereas, in truth, 
 examples of this kind, overlooked till the present con- 
 troversies began, have been brought to view in various 
 parts of the country. 
 
 The first example I will adduce is that of Hawarclen, 
 in the immediate neighbourhood of Chester, where 
 the Lord's Table is still recollected by many persons 
 as standing not only free in the chancel, but with a 
 considerable space to the east of it. As a second 
 instance, I have now before me a drawing of the 
 church of Langley in Shropshire, where kneeling- 
 boards and desks are fixed on the southern, eastern 
 and northern sides of the chancel, the Table standing 
 east and west in the midst. ^ Similar evidence of a 
 somewhat earlier date is furnished by a manuscript in 
 the Chapter Library at Carlisle, containing Bishop 
 Nicolson's record of a visitation of his Diocese. Here 
 we find the east and west position of the Tal )le noted 
 in three churches, Brough, Ormside, and St. Michael's, 
 Appleby. Of Ravenstondale, the Bishop remarks, that 
 *' the Altar stands at a distance from the east window," 
 of Burgh-by-Sands, that "the Communion Table is 
 not placed in the east end.'' ^ And, to come again to 
 
 1 An engraving of tfiis chancel will be found in the volume of the 
 Anastatic Drawing Society for 1857. 
 
 ' See Appendix E. (Bishop Nicolson's Visitation in 1703.) 
 
IIISTOIIY OF PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 43 
 
 what is more recent, I give the following extract from 
 a letter which has lately been placed in my hands : — 
 "The Lord's Table in the parish church of Orford 
 stood in the middle of the chancel, with rails and 
 kneeling-stools all round ; and, if T remember rightly, 
 it was an oblong within a square. The parish church 
 of Llangybi in Carnarvonshire is a historical and very 
 ancient church : there the Communion Table stands 
 with one end against the east wall of the church, so 
 that one side of the Talkie is really the north side ; 
 and in the adjoining parish of Llauharmon the Table 
 held the same position till within the last few years. "^ 
 The village church of Lyddington in Eutland, is speci- 
 fied by another writer as one in which the Table " does 
 not stand against the east wall, but is surrounded 
 by an enclosure of rails, passing between it and the 
 wall."^ The arrangement, in this respect, which sub- 
 sisted till very lately, in the church of Wiggenhall, St. 
 Mary, in the county of Norfolk, is thus described to 
 me by a friend : " There was a sort of pew in the 
 chancel, which began from the chancel- arch on either 
 side, just like cathedral stalls,^ but continued the 
 whole way round the east end, the Table standing in 
 the chancel, lengthwise." I have preferred to lay 
 stress on these instances, which have been brought 
 indirectly before my own notice : but others are given 
 
 1 This, it will be observed, is from personal recollection. I may add 
 that since this was printed, the writer has communicated with me directly 
 to the same effect. 
 
 2 I take this from a private communication, dated March 1, 1875. 
 
 ^ A sketch, accompanying this description, shows a narrow entrance to 
 the chancel, with what might be termed " return stalls " on each side, the 
 Table standing free to the east of them, but not in contact with the east 
 end of the church. 
 
44 BEFORE THE TABLE, 
 
 by Canon Swainson in his recently published pamphlet 
 on " the Rubrical Question of 1874."^ Nor is this list 
 so complete as it might easily have been made : ^ but 
 it suffices to show that there survived for a long- 
 period evidence of this kind to prove that the chancels 
 of our churches in the period immediately succeeding 
 1662 were in a very different condition from that 
 in which we commonly find them now. 
 
 There is no doubt, as we have seen above, that an 
 attempt was made in 1662 to secure in these chancels 
 the permanent altarwise position of the Holy Tables 
 against the east walls, whether at the Communion 
 time or at other times ; and this very attempt fur- 
 nishes the fourth kind of evidence to which allusion 
 has been made, and the evidence perhaps which is 
 the most conclusive of all. There is no need for 
 quoting here again the words which have already 
 been given from the Facsimile Black-Letter Book 
 and Bishop Cosin s Durham Book ; ^ but it is essential 
 to repeat with the utmost emphasis the conclusion 
 to which this testimony leads. It is sometimes said 
 that the questions connected with the placing of the 
 Lord's Table and the position of the priest during the 
 administration of the Lord's Supper were purposely 
 left by Cosin, and by men of his school, in a state of 
 hesitancy and doubt, with the hope that better times 
 would come, and that advantage would afterwards be 
 taken of this uncertainty. If this were so, I cannot 
 think that such an intention was honourable ; for it 
 would virtually have amounted to this, that one aspect 
 
 1 Second edition, p. 24. 
 
 2 See Appendix F. (Further instances of Chancels remaining in their 
 old condition.) 
 
 3 See above, pp. 5, 21 and notes. 
 
HISTORY OF PLACING THE HOLY TABLE. 45 
 
 of these subjects was presented at tlie time as satis- 
 factory to those who were very sensitive in regard to 
 them, while another aspect was secretly transmitted 
 to the future, for the purpose of being substituted for 
 the former. But I can find no trace of so insidious a 
 design. What Cosin and those of his school desired, 
 in regard to the placing of the Lord's Table, is per- 
 fectly clear. They made a most definite proposal, 
 and met with a decisive defeat. The Church and 
 State of England ruled, io 1662, that they would not 
 sanction that arrangement of the chancels, the attempt 
 to procure which, twenty years earlier, had convulsed 
 the country. 
 
 All this cannot be stated too strongly ; for on the 
 rule of the Church of England in regard to the placing 
 of the Communion Table depends, in a great measure, 
 the right interpretation of the rubric which precedes 
 the Consecration Prayer. We must presently enter 
 upon an examination of that rubric itself. But before 
 we begin to deal with it directly, it is desirable to 
 pause still longer on what I have termed the second 
 stepping-stone in the approach to our main subject. 
 
VI. 
 
 THE ''NORTH SIDE" OF THE TABLE. 
 
 Imaginary analogy with. Jewish Altars — The late Archdeacon Freeman — 
 " End " and " Side " — Mr. Beresford Hope's argument from length as 
 opposed to breadth — Extreme importance of the change from the 
 front to the north side — Indirectly it involves doctrine — Benefit 
 of the change in promoting congregational worship. 
 
 "We are now brought to the consideration of the 
 second part of the fourth of the rubrics which stand on 
 the first page of our Communion Office. We have seen 
 sufficiently the meaning of the first part, which con- 
 cerns the placing of the Communion Table. Let us 
 turn to that which relates to the Priest's position at 
 that Holy Table on the occasions when he administers 
 the Lord's Supper. The direction is simply that he 
 is to " stand at the north side of the Table." It has 
 been shown that, in obedience alike to the canon and 
 to the earlier half of this rubric, and in harmony too 
 with historical evidence, so far as we can obtain it, 
 we must view the Table as standing in the body of 
 the church or in the chancel, conveniently for the 
 hearing of the congregation, and at a distance, greater 
 or less, from the east wall. 
 
 Now I dismiss, as utterly trivial and unworthy of 
 notice, two theories, on which it is to be hoped no 
 more time will be wasted. It has been suggested, 
 by help of some curious analogies with Jewish altars, 
 very inaccurately treated, that by the north side of 
 
THE "NORTH SIDE'' OF THE TABLE. 47 
 
 the Lord's Table is meant the northern part of the 
 west side, the Table itself being presumed to be plnced 
 altarwise. And again we have been asked to believe 
 (on the same presumption of the " altarwise " position 
 of the Table) that *' side " cannot be synonymous with 
 "end/' and that "the north side" must now be viewed 
 as transformed into the " west side," because the 
 north side is now the north end. To each of these 
 subjects I should think it mere loss of space and an 
 utter trifling with the reader, if I were to devote 
 more than one or two sentences. 
 
 As to the theory that "the north side" means "the 
 northern part of the west side," it is a very significant 
 fact that neither Mr. Boresford Hope nor Mr. Morton 
 Shaw take any notice of this theory at all. They 
 clearly view it as untenable, otherwise they would have 
 availed themselves of the obvious advantage which it 
 would have given them. It ought not, however, to be 
 forgotten that this theory has been brought forward 
 and refuted, that an attempt has been made, and 
 made in vain, to justify the Eastward Position on this 
 ground.^ The last echo of this endeavour is to be 
 found in some words used by Mr. MacColl. Writing 
 of the direction to stand " at the north side of the 
 Table'' which I am surprised to find that he regards 
 as "ambiguous," he says : " Two interpretations have 
 been suggested. One is, that the north side means 
 the cornu Evangelii, or north corner of the west side. 
 This interpretation is not to be treated with contempt, 
 for much may be said in favour of it."^ He does not, 
 
 1 See Appendix G. (Theory that " the north side " is the northern part 
 of the west side.) 
 
 ^ Lawlessnois, &c., p. 194. 
 
48 BEFORE THE TABLE, 
 
 however, adopt this interpretation, and it is evidently 
 not worth while now to regard any grave argument as 
 resting upon it. I should hardly have said even thus 
 much on the subject, but for one honoured name, 
 which I could not possibly forget during the writing 
 of these pages. I am aware that the view, which I 
 have here ventured to regard as obsolete, was held 
 by the late Archdeacon Freeman.^ Whether he ever 
 discovered his mistake I do not know. Those who 
 respected him most (and no one could be acquainted 
 with him without respecting him) will admit that 
 he was tenacious in his opinions, and that minute 
 points often filled a large space in his acute and 
 ins^enious mind. But this cannot hinder his friends 
 from rememberinor with affectionate reOTet his wide 
 learning and exact scholarship, his playful humour, 
 his steadfastness of character, and his earnest and 
 gentle piety. 
 
 As regards any difficulty in understanding the 
 north side to mean that boundary of the Table, 
 whether it be broader or narrower, at which the 
 Priest standing, with the Table in front, would look 
 southwards, this difficulty does not really exist at all. 
 The point may be settled sufficiently by the mere 
 customary use of words. Even with the Lord's Table 
 standing altarwise against the east wall, v/ith its 
 narrower boundaries on the north and south, this 
 language is perfectly natural. I was recently con- 
 versing with a friend, whose sentiments were not 
 quite coincident with mine, in the choir of a cathe- 
 dral, on some restorative work connected with the Com- 
 munion Table, and he spoke, quite instinctively, of 
 
 ^ See his Rites and Ritual, pp. 70-74. 
 
THE ''NORTH SIDE" OF THE TABLE. 49 
 
 its front and sides, meaning by the latter word its two 
 narrow ends. And such language has always been 
 used. Those w4io are acquainted with the controversies 
 of Laud's time have met with complaints to this effect, 
 that after the Table had been so placed as if it were 
 an altar, curtains were added on its sides} Even 
 Euclid was quoted in connection with the quarrel 
 between Bishop Williams and the Vicar of Grantham, ^ 
 as Euclid has been quoted recently, to the effect that 
 a parallelogram has four sides which are not neces- 
 sarily equal.^ But we have this matter settled for 
 us in a most decisive manner by the rubric of the 
 Scotch Liturgy of 1637, in which, though it is ruled 
 that the Holy Table itself is to stand at the Com- 
 munion time, *' at the uppermost part of the chancel 
 and church," yet the direction follows that "the 
 Presbyter" is to stand "at the north side or end 
 thereof," when he begins the service.* To this must 
 be added what we find in Cosin's Durham book. He 
 too desired, as we have seen, the Table to "stand 
 alwayes in the midst at the upper end of the chancel 
 or the church," but, even thus, that the Priest should 
 stand at the north ^' side or end'^ of the Table.^ It is 
 quite evident from this either that these prelates 
 
 ^ It may suffice here to refer to a very useful little pamphlet entitled, An 
 Examination of the WaltonScudamore Theory of the North Side 
 Rubric, p. 6. 
 
 ^ This famous quarrel has recently received new illustration in a paper read 
 by Canon Venables at the last meeting of the Archaeological Association. 
 
 ' See the Quarterly Review for October 1874, p. 556, and che Christian 
 Observer for July 1874, p. 528. 
 
 * See Dr. Bulley's Tabular View of Varieties in the Communion and 
 Baptismal Offices, p. 5. 
 
 ^ I have before me a photograph of this part of Bishop Cosin's book ; 
 but the facts of the case may be seen in his Correspondence, as published 
 by the Surtees Society. 
 
 E 
 
50 BEFOBE THE TABLE. 
 
 viewed the term "side" and *'end" as practically 
 synonymous, or that if they had different senses, 
 according as the Table might be placed lengthwise or 
 breadthwise/ still in either case the Clergyman in the 
 service was to direct his face to the south. No argu- 
 ment can be built here on any lengthwise position 
 of the Table. And what if the Table werie square ? 
 There is no rule in the Church of England which 
 directs the Lord's Table to be made of any special 
 form, and in any special proportions. It seems that 
 Communion Tables were sometimes cut, under par- 
 ticular circumstances, in order that their shape might 
 be changed. Canon Trevor tells us of one in his own 
 immediate neighbourhood, which is square to this 
 day.' 
 
 But Mr. Beresford Hope places this question of 
 " end," or " side," in a light so extraordinary, that I 
 must be allowed to devote a few lines to his argu- 
 ment. His theory was first put forth last summer in 
 his " Hints towards Peace in Ceremonial Matters," and 
 has since been repeated verbally in his work on " Wor- 
 ship in the Church of England."^ The- points of the 
 argument are these, that " the usage of the Universal 
 Church points to the celebrant standing at the broad 
 side of the Lord s Table" — that on the old Basilican 
 method, when he stood at the further side, facing the 
 
 ^ It is generally assumed that if the Lord's Table was in contact with 
 the east wall, it was always placed breadthwise, if free in the chancel or 
 nave, lengthwise. I can see no reason for taking either of these things 
 for granted. The point of importance is whether the Priest stands with 
 his face to the south, or his face to the east. 
 
 ' Disputed Bubrics, p. 70. Note. The name of the place is 
 Fraisthorp. 
 
 ^ These Hints were printed in April, 1874, and are embodied in the 
 fifth chapter of the book on Worship. 
 
THE ''NORTH SIDE" OF THE TABLE. 51 
 
 people, he still ''faced the broad side" — that, in the 
 Church of England, when the Table was placed length- 
 wise, "the north side was really one of its broad 
 sides, while likewise this identical north side became 
 the west one as soon as the Table was turned round 
 and put altarwise."^ And he says again that " rela- 
 tively to the 'Board'— whether 'Altar' or * Table' — 
 upon which the Holy Communion is celebrated, the 
 position of the Minister himself remains unaffected ;^^ 
 and, once more, " after the permanent change in 
 position in the altar, the west side was the actual 
 north side turned round." ^ Thus the essential point 
 of the matter is represented as one having reference 
 not to the edification and convenience of the congre- 
 gation, but to the dimensions and shape of the Table. 
 Questions of worship are disregarded, if only the 
 Priests stand correctly in reference to an ornament 
 of the church. The "Lord's Board" is everything, 
 the Lord's people, " the Eoyal Priesthood," is nothing. 
 This great subject, after all, is not a matter of religious 
 principle, but merely of geometry : everything in it 
 turns upon the question of breadth. I have looked 
 at this argument again and again (and others besides 
 Mr. Beresford Hope have used it), and each time I 
 look at it I am lost in wonder. 
 
 Assuming then — all questions of " end " or " side " 
 being discarded — that the position of the officiating 
 priest, as regulated by the initial rubric, is to be on 
 the north of the Lord's Table, with his face directed 
 to the south, I ask the reader to pause for a moment, 
 
 * Worship in the Church of England, pp. 170, 171. 
 » P. 181. 
 3 P. 190. 
 
 E 2 
 
52 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 and to consider the extreme significance of this 
 regulation, introduced first into the Prayer Book in 
 1552, and maintained there ever since. It seems to 
 me that we have in this sentence a very important 
 landmark of ecclesiastical history and a most emphatic 
 expression of the mind of the Eeformed Church of 
 England. 
 
 The two bare facts, that the southward position at 
 the beginning of the Communion Service was adopted 
 and prescribed, — and that this rule has stood since in 
 full force and is still unaltered — are very remarkable. 
 Whatever may be said in depreciation of the Prayer 
 Book of 1552 (and in some quarters it is now the 
 fashion to depreciate it), at all events the fourth of 
 the initial rubrics has held its ground. It remained 
 untouched in 1559 and 1662, and no proposal was 
 made to alter it in 1689.^ Why was the position of 
 the officiating minister at the Lord^s Table changed at 
 all in 1552 ? and why was the change, once made, so 
 tenaciously kept ? no precedent can be quoted from 
 ancient times. There is not a word in the New Tes- 
 tament which touches this subject : nothing can be 
 more contrary to the spirit of the New Testament 
 than the connecting of devotional and ministerial acts 
 with the points of the compass. Nor was the new 
 position suggested by any earlier liturgy. And yet 
 it was maintained at each subsequent revision, not- 
 withstanding the preference felt, at various times, by 
 learned and excellent men, for a different position. 
 
 ^ The words proposed in 1689 were : " And the Minister shall at the 
 North side of the Table say the Lord's Prayer with the collect fol- 
 lowing, all kneeling." Copy of Alterations prepared, &c., printed in 
 1854. 
 
THE "NORTH SIDE" OF THE TABLE. 53 
 
 There must in this deliberate and continued choice be 
 an expression of the mind of the Church of England : 
 and if we ask for the meaning of the selection of the 
 north side ^ for the officiating minister, the answer, as 
 it appears to me, must evidently be this, that it was 
 intended to select for him a place, which, while con- 
 venient for congregational worship, should also be 
 neutral in regard to theology, so that no expression 
 should be given by a ceremony to any doctrine not 
 contained in the words of the Prayer Book. It has 
 been asserted lately in a document of high authority *^ 
 that no doctrinal meaning has in the Church of Eng- 
 land been formally assigned to the ''celebrant's" posi- 
 tion, and this assertion is undoubtedly correct. But 
 it appears to me that, though not formally, yet virtu- 
 ally and inferentially, there is a doctrinal meaning in 
 this rubric. Nothing indeed of this kind is stated in 
 its words. But rubrics do not give the reasons for 
 their existence. They express results and not pro- 
 cesses ; and yet, by the light of history, it may 
 often be that through the result we can see the 
 process. 
 
 And, connected with this rubric, another topic, just 
 touched above, deserves consideration, as we pass on. 
 
 1 It may be asked why the north side, aud not the south, was selected. 
 To this it would probably be enough to answer that the north would instinc- 
 tively be felt to be the more natural. Archdeacon Freeman (Principles 
 of Divine Service, Vol. II. Part ii. p. 464, note), referring to St. Luke i. 
 11., says : " The north or right side (the Presence being westward) was 
 the side of sacrificial power ; " and he adds : " The north is still the 
 
 * Gospel ' side, the side for procuring peace by Jesus Christ ; still the 
 
 * side ' at which the earlier part of our Office is appointed to be said. . . . 
 The consecration, from the ' Sursum Corda,' should doubtless be in the 
 midst of the Holy Table or Altar." 
 
 2 I allude, of course, to the recent allocution of the English Bishops, 
 which was signed by all our Prelates except two. 
 
54 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Our manual of public devotion is emphatically, as 
 its name denotes, a book of Common Prayer. All 
 arrangements in it were made, so as to throw mere 
 priestly functions into the background, and to promote 
 the realisation of the congregationa] idea. This is 
 manifestly part of the meaning of the rubric under 
 our notice. But this has been so w^ell stated in a 
 recent paper by the Bishop of St. Andrews,^ that I 
 will make use of some of his words. He points out 
 that this question, apart from all symbolical and doc- 
 trinal significance, has an important bearing on the 
 comfort and religious benefit of congregations. What- 
 ever be the case with the Clergy who are in the chan- 
 cel, it is not at all the same thing to a poor man in 
 a distant part of the church, whether the Clergyman 
 " ofiiciates at the Holy Table in the eastward position 
 with his back to the congregation, or at the north end 
 with his face sidewards." We are "pre-eminently a 
 practical people ^' adds the Bishop ; and he proceeds 
 to say in reference to the rubric prefixed to the Con- 
 secration Prayer, to which we shall presently come, 
 that '' a regard for practical considerations " has in a 
 great measure, hitherto, *' determined the sense in 
 which it was to be obeyed." I am disposed to quote 
 at length the remarks which follow : " In addressing 
 the people, we have felt it only reasonable to turn 
 towards them ; but in addressing Almighty God, who 
 is present * in the midst of us '^ — while to turn away 
 
 ^ This paper on "The Eastward Position and the Convocation of 
 York," was published last Easter in the Times. 
 
 ^ It is remarkable that Mr. Morton Shaw (in his Appendix A. p. 136, 
 note), while quoting this scriptural phrase " in the midst of," objects to 
 our understanding it as though " any mere geometrical centre " of Chris- 
 tian gatherings were referred to, while yet he does desire to localise our 
 
THE ''NORTH SIDE" OF THE TABLE. 55 
 
 from the people would make it more difficult for them 
 to hear and follow the service — we have felt it no less 
 reasonable to adopt a sideways position, whereby the 
 strictly devotional parts of the service have been suffi- 
 ciently distinguished, and this principle — which has 
 produced in the Church of England a model of congre- 
 gational worship such as no other Church, east or west, 
 reformed or unreformed, has yet attained to — had, till 
 of late years, been adopted and acquiesced in as the 
 law of the Communion Table no less than of the 
 Prayer Book." ^ 
 
 worship in what may truly be called a geometrical manner in regard to 
 the eastern part of our churches, concerning which not a word is said in 
 Scripture. 
 
 ^ The following remarks of Canon Simmons in the first of two ex- 
 cellent papers in the Contemporary lieview (October 1 866 and January 
 1867) are well worthy of attention : — " No doubt they did intend a change 
 from the front ; and indeed a change from this position seems the natural 
 complement of a book of common prayer. When the old prayers were 
 first translated. . . . the priest was directed to ' begin with a loud voice 
 the Lord's Prayer/ and to say the Prayer of Consecration ' plainly and 
 distinctly/ instead of secretly as before. So long as the services were in 
 Latin, it made no difierence to the people whether they could hear or 
 not. . . . When the first book came to be revised, four years later, the 
 principle of 'Englishing' the prayers, namely, that public worship was 
 henceforth to be congregational, as it was at the first, led to further 
 change, and the priest was no longer to turn away from the people, now 
 that they had been required either to join in with, or follow, the service." 
 Vol. iii. p. 264. 
 
VIL 
 
 THE PBIEST STANDING ''BEFORE THE TABLE.'' 
 
 Intermediate rubrics in the Communion Service — True meaning of the 
 words "Before the Table" — Discussion in Convocation at York — 
 Testimony of the Welsh Prayer Book. 
 
 The initial rubric, with which we have hitherto been 
 dealing, from the very nature of the case, controls the 
 whole of the Communion Service, and must be held 
 to comprise within its scope the Consecration Eubric, 
 unless reason can be shown to the contrary. We 
 must now proceed to a direct examination of our 
 main point ; and on our way it is desirable to glance 
 at the intermediate rubrics.^ 
 
 It is to be observed that in no other rubric is any 
 allusion found to any point of the compass. The 
 introductory prayers are to be said by the priest 
 '* standing at the north side.'' In the rehearsing of 
 the Commandments he is to " turn to the people." 
 During the prayers which follow he is " to stand as 
 before." Whatever this may mean, it is certainly not 
 intended that he is to say these prayers in the east- 
 ward position. No rule is given for the Priest's 
 position during the reading of the Epistle, Gospel, 
 or Mcene Creed. After the sermon he is to " return 
 to the Lord's Table : " but how he is to stand in refer- 
 
 1 These intermediate rubrics, especially the earlier of them, will 
 require very careful attention in any general revision of the rubrical 
 directions of our Prayer Book. In two or three cases there is in them 
 ground for real perplexity, and abundant opportunity for great disturb- 
 ance of congregational comfort. 
 
THE PRIEST STANDING " BEFORE THE TABLE:' 57 
 
 ence to it during the reading of the offertory sentences 
 is not prescribed ; nor is any rule given for his posi- 
 tion while " humbly presenting the alms for the poor, 
 and other devotions of the people," or while " placing 
 upon the table so much bread and wine as he shall 
 think sufficient" for the Communion.^ In these 
 matters much would depend, as regards convenience, 
 on the placing of the Holy Table itself. No positional 
 rubric is prefixed to the Prayer for the Church 
 Militant or to the General Confession. In the Exhor- 
 tation it is to be assumed that the priest ^' turns 
 to the people " as he is directed to do in pronouncing 
 the Absolution. He does not "turn to the Lord's 
 Table " again till the service reaches the Trisagion, 
 with or without a Proper Preface. In saying the 
 Prayer of Humble Access he " kneels down at the 
 Lord's Table," in the same direction, it is to be pre- 
 sumed, which he took when turning to it. This 
 brings us to the Consecration Eubric, which is our 
 present subject of inquiry. 
 
 This slight inspection of previous rubrics has cleared 
 our ground. We have seen that up to this point 
 there is no intimation whatever, even in the precatory- 
 parts of the service, of an eastward position or of any 
 deviation from that southward position which the 
 priest was directed to assume at the outset. 
 
 1 It is frequently assumed that when the alms and other devotions are 
 " humbly presented and placed on the Holy Table," and when the Priest, 
 if there is a communion, " places upon the Table so much bread and wine 
 as he shall think sufficient," these acts must be done in the middle of the 
 Table ; and hence it is sometimes inferred that from this point the precatory 
 parts of the service must be gone through in this position. But there is 
 no rule to this effect ; and it is allowable to do both acts at the north 
 end. 
 
68 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 So we come to that which is the main point in all 
 this argument, our inquiry into the true sense of that 
 rubric preceding the Consecration Prayer, which we 
 read thus : '* When the Priest, standmg hefoi'e the 
 Table, hath so ordered the Bread and Wine, that he 
 may with the more readiness and decency break the 
 bread before the people^ and take the cup into his 
 hands, he shall say the Prayer of Consecration, as 
 folloiveth." Our inquiry here is very simple. What 
 is meant by " standing before the Table ? " What was 
 intended by these words when the rubric was written ? 
 In what sense ought we to understand them now ? 
 and what is the fairest and most candid mode of ob- 
 serving the rubric, if irregular usage has brought about 
 any change as regards the placing of the Table itself ? 
 
 Now, I confess I am unable to feel any difficulty as 
 to the natural interpretation of this much-contested 
 phrase. To stand "before the Table" is simply to 
 stand "with the face towards the Table. ''^ With the 
 Table standing free, this condition could be satisfied 
 on any one of its four sides. As to which of these 
 four sides is to be chosen, this is left quite undeter- 
 mined by the phrase itself. But another rubric, as 
 we have seen, determines this point. It is settled at 
 the outset of the service that the " north side " is to 
 be selected. 
 
 A synonymous^ expression would be " standing at 
 
 1 If his back were turned to the Table, he might equally be said to be 
 standing bi^ore it ; but we are here concerned with certain acts which must 
 be done with the face of the priest towards the Table. 
 
 2 I regard, in fact, the " standing before the Table " in the Consecration 
 Prayer as a mere change oi posture, not oi position, from the " kneeling at 
 the Table " in the Prayer of Humble Access, And this is really the view 
 of Mr. Malcolm MacColl. " The priest had been previously directed to 
 * turn to the people/ then to ' turn to the Lord's Table/ then to ' kneel 
 
TEE PRIEtST STANDING " BEFORE THE TABLE. 59 
 
 the Table," with this difference, indeed, that the prepo- 
 sition " before " is more natural and appropriate, and 
 more in harmony with that openness and publicity 
 which, as we shall see, are to characterise the whole of 
 this solemn transaction ; and, to prove that I am not 
 straining a point, or dealing perversely with words, I 
 will bring forward evidence, which suffices to remove 
 any such imputation. And here let us look at this 
 point as a merely verbal question, without any of 
 that collateral proof which can be furnished in abun- 
 dance and part of which will be the subject of the 
 next section. 
 
 The proposal to take the word ^' before '' in this 
 simple, unsophisticated sense, has been treated as if it 
 were absurd;^ and when jokes are made on such a sub- 
 ject, they are indeed just so far useful in debate as to 
 
 down at the Lord's Table ;' and now, ' standing before the Table/ he is 
 directed to do certain things. Does not this imply that he had been 
 kneeling ' before the Table ? ' Where is then the faintest scintilla of 
 an indication that he is to change his place ? " p. 190. The only difference 
 between Mr. MacColFs view and mine is that he conceives the priest 
 throughout (except when addressing the people) to be facing eastwards, I 
 conceive him to be facing southwards, in obedience to the initial rubric. 
 I may add that Mr. Beresford Hope points out himself (p. 180) that in the 
 Prayer Book of 1549 " standing afore the midst of the Altar " is equiva- 
 lent to " standing at God's Board." Again in Bishop Wren's notes we 
 find the direction that in the Prayer of Humble Access the Priest is to 
 " kneel before the Table." See the Christian Observer and Advocate for 
 last April, p. 254. Even if this is to be taken as meaning that he is to 
 kneel eastwards, still it follows that " kneeling at " is equivalent to 
 " kneeling before.'' 
 
 1 In his postscript Canon Trevor says (p. 104) that I am " always 
 actuated by the best intentions," but that my view of the meaning of 
 " before the Table," as stated at York, is "as if one should say that the 
 cart before the horse means a cart having the horse before it." He adds 
 in the paragraphs which follow, that the north part, whether side or 
 end, was originally introduced and is defended to this day on " false pre- 
 tences," that to get the Table back from its legalized position Laud was 
 " guilty of a similar pretence," that in 1662 an attempt was made by an 
 
60 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 turn the mind aside from a close examination of the 
 question in hand. I will, however, leave behind this 
 manner of treating the subject, and will turn to what 
 was recently said in reference to it, with more gravity, 
 in Convocation at York. This whole question is so 
 completely a controversy of the day, that it is pecu- 
 liarly important to observe what is passing around us 
 in regard to it, during the present year. 
 
 In the debate which took place at York, last 
 February, our Prolocutor laid stress on the verbal 
 aspect of this phrase, as decisive in itself. He urged 
 that the words " before the Table" interpret themselves 
 in the sense of ruling that the priest must, at this 
 time, stand on the western side of the Table, facing 
 eastwards. His words were to this effect : — " What 
 does before the Table mean ? Does it mean behind 
 the Table or under the Table or on the top of the 
 Table ? or does it mean before the Table ? " Now it 
 is surely evident that a great historical question is not 
 to be settled in this easy manner. We are looking, how- 
 ever, just now at its merely verbal aspect, and I desire 
 to bring forward what was said on the same occasion 
 by another speaker. I believe the true sense to have 
 been expressed by the Dean of Manchester, in the 
 same debate, when he proposed^ that it should be 
 
 ambiguous word to legalize the Laudian " sophism," that when it failed, 
 the defeated party reverted to an " equivocation," and that Wheatley 
 constituted himseK the advocate of a "further false pretence" and a 
 " sophism." It would seem that all those who have touched the rubrics 
 have been rogues, except Canon Trevor himself, whose honesty no one 
 doubts. 
 
 ^ The proposal was made in an amendment, which was lost, to a motion, 
 which was carried, to the effect that no present change in the Consecration 
 Rubric is desirable. It is important to quote the exact words from the 
 notice-paper. The Dean of Manchester, while agreeing that it is not 
 
TRE PRIEST STANDING " BEFORE THE rai^^^QJ^'S};^ 
 
 made lawful for the minister to stand " before the 
 Table in any position," this choice being extended to 
 the northern, western, or eastern sides. From the 
 proposal to legalize this option I utterly dissent, 
 believing it to be inconsistent with the other rubric 
 which fastens upon the north side, and believing also, 
 as I shall attempt below to prove, that it would be full 
 of peril for the future. But this mode of interpreting 
 the words " before the Table " I conceive to be entirely- 
 correct. And it is of some importance to mark this 
 antithesis between the Dean of York and the Dean 
 of Manchester, because with the Dean of St. Paul's 
 they gave last year the weight of their names to a 
 memorial claiming for all clergymen the right to assume 
 at this Consecration Prayer the position which they 
 conscientiously think right. ^ I will not pause here to 
 remark that a system of rubrics constructed on the 
 theory of giving free play to each individual conscience 
 would set us afloat upon an ocean of disorder. I am 
 only now calling attention to the fact that among 
 those who signed the petition relating to these words 
 there is difi*erence of opinion as to the meaning of 
 the words themselves, and that my interpretation is 
 shielded by high authority from the charge of being 
 ludicrous. 
 
 But here let me add, as a very important part of 
 the verbal argument, the testimony supplied by the 
 
 desirable to alter any words in this rubric, recommended the addition of 
 " a note which should declare that any position of the Priest standing 
 before the Holy Table, may be lawfully adopted ; " and this is made more 
 explicit by the form of note suggested, wherein it should be " declared 
 that the Priest may stand before the Table on the west side, or east side, or 
 at the north end thereof." 
 
 ^ " Declarixtion " published in the Guardian of May 20th, 1874. 
 
62 
 
 Welsh Prayer Book. This translation must give the 
 impression of the meaning of the Rubrics at the time 
 when it was made : and in it we find precisely the 
 same preposition to represent *' before " in the Con- 
 secration Eubric, as that which represents ''at'' in 
 the rubric before the Prayer of Humble Access. This 
 too is felt to be of the greater force, when we find that 
 the word ''before'' in a rubric of the Marriage Service, 
 which is often quoted in connection with this subiect, 
 is rendered by a diiferent preposition.^ 
 
 ^ " The Psalm ended, and the man and the woman kneeling be''nre the 
 Lord's Table, the Priest, standing at the Table, and turning ms face 
 towards them shall say." Here the Welsh equivalent of " before " denotes 
 " in the front of." When this rubric in the Marriage Service is quoted, 
 it is sometimes forgotten that it directs the married couple and the Priest 
 to face each other. 
 
VIII. 
 
 THE BREAD BROKEN "BEFORE THE PEOPLE." 
 
 This act the main point of the Rubric — Possible meaning of coram populo 
 
 —Its true historical meaning — How understood by the Puritans — 
 
 act suggested by them — Evidence of the Savoy Liturgy — Religous 
 
 tning of this act— Testimony from devotional writers— The Welsh 
 
 Prayer Book. 
 
 But now, leaving the ground of merely verbal 
 criticism, let us attend closely to the spirit and 
 real drift of the rubric under our attention. The 
 words " before the Table " are in a subsidiary part 
 of it. The language of the whole works up, so to 
 speak, towards another point, the breaking of the 
 bread "before the People." Whatever be meant 
 by standing "before the Table," it is to be made 
 subservient to the great end of breaking the bread 
 openly in the sight of the congregation. Hence any 
 interpretation of the former phrase, which makes that 
 which is intended by the latter phrase to be impossible 
 or difficult, cannot be correct. If a rubric is made to 
 contradict itself, it has evidently not been treated 
 with propriety aiid respect. 
 
 But here a great question is very confidently, and 
 even vehemently raised. It is urged that the break- 
 ing of the bread " before the people " does not mean 
 the breaking of it so that they may see the act — may 
 be thus vividly reminded of what the Lord did at the 
 Last Supper — and may by this method have their 
 
64 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 devotions quickened : but that the true meaning will be 
 apprehended by comparing the attitude of the Priest, 
 who is presumed at this moment to be making an 
 offering to God, with the attitude of an eastern 
 shepherd preceding his sheep, or of some one who is 
 presenting a petition to a sovereign on behalf of those 
 who stand behind him. It is sometimes stated very 
 confidently that this must be the meaning of this 
 phrase in the rubric, and can be its only true mean- 
 ing, — sometimes more timidly suggested that this is 
 a possible meaning,^ and that therefore the eastward 
 position of the " celebrant,'' though not compulsory, 
 is allowable. 
 
 What we are concerned to know is not the possible 
 meaning of this phrase, taken apart from its historical 
 context, but its true meaning as determined by all the 
 evidence that can be brought to bear upon it. And, 
 first, if the meaning is merely this, that the priest, at 
 this point of the service, is to lead the devotions by 
 turning eastward at their head, as he may have done 
 in saying the Litany at a faldstool, or reciting the 
 Nicene Creed ^ at the Lord's Table, is it not obvious 
 
 ^ That " coram populo " might be used of a priest when engaged in an 
 act of presentation with and on behalf of a congregation standing or 
 kneeling behind him, is obviously true. But whether it is suitably so 
 used in our service depends on what the priest is doing in reference to the 
 congregation. If the chief meaning of the service is, not that they are 
 making an oflfering to God, but that they are receiving a blessing minis- 
 tered to them, then it is natural to give a different meaning to " coram 
 populo" See Mr. Morton Shaw's pamphlet, pp. 31, 32. 
 
 2 I will say once for all that there is a great diflference between turning 
 to the east during the recitation of the Creed, and turning in that direc- 
 tion during the Consecration Prayer. In the latter case the change of 
 position has a distinct local reference to the Lord's Table, and to a trans- 
 action locally connected with it. The former practice, which to my mind 
 has much to recommend it, may be viewed merely as part of the poetry of 
 Public Worship. 
 
THE BREAD BROKEN ''BEFORE THE PEOPLE:' C5 
 
 that the rubric is very strangely worded ? " Standing 
 before the Table/' he is so to order the elements that 
 he may more conveniently "break the bread before 
 the people." There is a stress laid by the very struc- 
 ture of the sentence upon its concluding words, which 
 shews that its main point is to be found there. In answer 
 to this objection I have met with only one argument, and 
 that rests on a mere theory, besides in truth refuting 
 itself. Mr. Morton Shaw suggests (and the Prolocutor 
 at York brought forward this suggestion as if it were 
 an authoritative decision) that these words might be 
 intended to denote that the bread was to be broken 
 publicly in the church during the service, instead 
 of being so made ready previously in private in the 
 vestry. And certainly the seemliness of this pro- 
 vision must be admitted by all. But does not this 
 concede the very point which is disputed as to the 
 meaniijg of the phrase '? for thus, publicity instead of 
 privacy, not turning eastward instead of turning in 
 some other direction, is made to be the essential part 
 of the meaning. 
 
 But now, to pass from verbal to historical argu- 
 ments, is it conceivable that, if this were intended 
 and understood to be the meaning of *' before the 
 people," when this rubric was proposed at the last 
 revision, it can have been accepted without any re- 
 corded resistance ? IX^ Puritans demurred to a 
 direction that the priest in pronouncing the Absolution 
 should *' turn to the people," alleging that it was 
 desirable that he should turn to them always in all 
 parts of the service.^ Now, in this part of the ser- 
 
 1 Mr. Beresford Hope's remark (p. 205) is important that, when the 
 Bishops gave their answer, their words " did not especially refer to the 
 
 F 
 
66 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 vice, SO understood, they were likely to see something 
 more than the mere saying of a prayer with the face 
 turned away from the people. They knew very well 
 the old Koman view of the subject, and they were 
 made nervously solicitous by any apparent approxi- 
 mation to Eomanism. They withdrew afterwards 
 from the Church of England because they could not 
 sanction the wearing of the surplice, or kneeling at Ai 
 the Holy Communion. Is it not quite certain that if 
 they had understood that they were commanded " to 
 break the bread before the people '^ in the sense of 
 turning eastwards to do this, while the people were 
 behind, we should have heard something of this ob- 
 jection also to the Act of Uniformity ?^ 
 
 But in naming the Puritans in connection with this 
 rubric, we encounter something more than a mere 
 argument from probability. There seems the best rea- 
 son for believing that the rubric itself, if not directly 
 due to their influence, was at least, in some degree, 
 a concession to them. It must be carefully observed 
 that until the last revision there was no provision for 
 " the breaking of the bread " at the time of consecra- 
 tion in the Communion Service, and that this defect 
 was noted very strongly from the Puritan side during 
 the Savoy Conference. It may have been the custom 
 with some, or many of the Clergy, to break the bread 
 
 Eucharist: " so also is the remark of the Bishop of St. Andrew's that if 
 the words quoted by them from St. Augustine are closely pressed, they 
 prove too much. 
 
 ^ Either the sense in which the rubric was accepted was the true sense 
 or it was not. If the avowed meaning was that the minister was to turn 
 eastwards during the Prayer of Consecration, it could not have been 
 accepted without debate. If the avowed meaning was different from the 
 true meaning, a fraud was practised at the time, and an injury inflicted 
 onus. 
 
THE BREAD BROKEN "BEFORE THE PEOPLE:' 67 
 
 at the time of consecration ;^ but there was no rule to 
 this effect ; though there is no doubt that others be- 
 sides the Puritans were conscious of the need of some 
 addition to the Prayer-Book, so as to make this im- 
 perative. We first encounter the subject in the 
 following note, laid by the Puritans before the 
 Bishops in connection with the Consecration Prayer : 
 — " We conceive that the manner of the consecratinor 
 
 o 
 
 of the elements is not here explicite and distinct 
 enough, and the minister's breaking of the bread is not 
 so much as mentioned."^ This is not very consistent, 
 it may be observed by the way, with Mr. Morton 
 Shaw's theory that the rule for the breaking of the 
 bread *' before the people" was merely a provision 
 that it should not be previously broken in the vestry. 
 But the point which I desire to urge here is that the 
 Bishops made no reply to this objection, whereas to 
 most of the Puritan objections their replies were very 
 ready and very decided, and that soon afterwards, 
 when the new Prayer Book appeared, it contained the 
 rubric which we are now discussing. That which the 
 objectors had so much desired was now introduced. 
 
 But the argument may be made more complete by 
 examining the Savoy Liturgy itself, as printed in 1661, 
 and presented by the Puritan divines to the bishops. 
 In this book a most distinct rubric is inserted, thus : 
 '' Then let the Minister take the Bread, and break it 
 in the sight of the people, saying : The body of Christ 
 was broken for us, and offered once for all to sanctify 
 
 1 The practice of the English Clergy, as to breaking the bread during 
 the consecration, in the period between 1552 and 1662, is a subject well 
 worthy of inquiry, if only sufficient mateiials exist for making the inquiry. 
 See Appendix H. (The breaking of the Bread before 1662.) 
 
 ^ Card well's History of Conferences, p. 321. 
 
 F 2 
 
68 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 US — behold the sacrificed Lamb of God, that taketh 
 away the sins of the world ; '' and this is followed by 
 equivalent words relating to the cup : ^^ In like man- 
 ner let him take the Cup, and pour out the wine in the 
 sight of the congregation, sayi7ig : We are redeemed with 
 the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without 
 blemish and without spot."^ Can any one who reads 
 and considers this calmly and candidly doubt that the 
 phrase " before the people " in our book is synonymous 
 with the phrase '* in the sight of the people," which we 
 find in the Savoy book ? 
 
 But an objection of a religious kind to this view of 
 the words is here presented to us, which objection, on 
 being closely examined in the light of history, results 
 in furnishing a new and very strong argument in 
 favour of the view. It is contended that the actual 
 sight of the breaking of the bread is not conducive to 
 religious benefit ; that devout people, at this moment 
 of the service, would rather close their eyes than direct 
 them to the manual acts of the minister : and then 
 perhaps the objector will go so far as to quote the 
 words of our twenty-fifth Article, in which we are 
 told that " the Sacraments were not ordained of Christ 
 to be gazed upon." Sometimes indeed this argument 
 is pressed upon us with a sarcasm which is very 
 unseemly, and in a manner hardly consistent with the 
 reverence with which we ought to recollect our Lord's 
 original institution of this Sacrament. In each one of 
 the four accounts of the Lord's Supper, the breaking 
 of the bread before the disciples is emphatically men- 
 tioned ; and St. Paul adds that the Saviour Himself 
 
 ^ See Hall's Reliquim Liturgicce, vol. iv. p. 70. 
 
THE BREAD BROKEN ''BEFORE THE PEOPLE." 69 
 
 said, *' This is my body which is broken for you." 
 With such a scene in our recollection there is no 
 excuse for employing satirical arguments in reference 
 to those who desire their service to resemble as nearly 
 as may be the original institution, and to be con- 
 sciously, as it were, associated with those early dis- 
 ciples to whom the Lord was *' made known in the 
 breaking of bread." ^ 
 
 And such seems to have been the view of English 
 Churchmen of various shades of thought, two hundred 
 years ago, when an obvious want in our Prayer Book 
 was supplied by this rubric. I said above that this 
 objection, duly examined, sujjplies a strong argument 
 in refutation of itself ; and that this is the fact will be 
 seen very clearly by some quotations from devotional 
 books of the period. A considerable amount of evi- 
 dence to this effect could be furnished. I will select 
 some which is connected with three eminent names, 
 none of which can be associated with any Puritan 
 tendency, and all belonging to the period subsequent 
 to 1662 and ranging over a time sufficiently long for 
 our purpose. 
 
 The first name is that of Anthony Horneck, who 
 wrote two devotional treatises on the Sacrament of 
 the Lord's Supper. In his " Crucified Jesus " he says 
 to the communicant : " See here what reflections thou 
 art to make, when thou seest the Holy Bread broken 
 
 1 I am here quite content to fall back upon the general impression pro- 
 duced by the narrative of the Last Supper, by the scene at Emmaus, by 
 the account of what took place at Troas (Acts xx. 1 1), and by St. Paul's 
 question (1 Cor. x. 16), " The bread, which we break, is it not the com- 
 munion of the body of Christ ? " This is really the sum of the informa- 
 tion we possess regarding primitive observance in this part of the 
 Eucharist ; and if it is said that the information is scanty, this is no 
 reason for neglecting it, but rather a reason for making the most of it. 
 
70 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 before thine eyes at this Sacrament ; " and in a later 
 part of the volume he gives directions for devout 
 acts of the mind corresponding with the acts of the 
 priest during consecration.^ In his **' Fire of the 
 Altar " he says : "I must now make some spiritual 
 reflections on the breaking of the bread ; " and these 
 reflections begin as follows : — '' Behold, my soul, 
 thus was thy Blessed Saviour s body broken : thus was 
 His unspotted flesh torn asunder. my sins, ye did 
 this barbarous deed/' And afterwards : '^ See here, 
 my soul, the bread which is broke. Is it not the 
 communion of the Body of Christ ? See how many 
 pieces are here, which all make but one loaf "^ We 
 may question the wisdom or edification of instructions 
 so minute for the communicant ; but this very minute- 
 ness proves the point which is under our thoughts. 
 And as to Horneck himself, and the time at which he 
 lived,^ he became Vicar of All Saints, Oxford, in 1663, 
 was afterwards a Canon of Westminster, and was chosen 
 preacher at the Savoy in 1671. His life was written 
 by Bishop Kidder.* And now, to revert to Kidder's 
 famous predecessor in the See of Bath and Wells, we 
 find in Bishop Ken's own remarks on the Church 
 Catechism such words as these : " When at Thy altar 
 
 1 Crucified Jesus (1686), p. 168. 
 
 » Fire of the Altar (1690), p. 73. 
 
 3 By birth he was a German, like Grabe. 
 
 * Kidder himself may be quoted to the same effect. He succeeded 
 Ken in 1688. In 1684 he had published a book entitled Convivium 
 C(eleste, in which this passage occurs at p. 167 : " When we see the 
 bread broken and the wine poured out, let us meditate at once upon the 
 Passion of our Lord and the heinous nature of our sins that put Him to that 
 pain. Think you saw your dearest Saviour hang upon the cross, that you 
 were eye-toitnesses of the shame and sorrow that He underwent. think 
 you saw the blood that He shed running down His body, that you saw the 
 spear and the nails that pierced His hands, His feet, and side." 
 
THE BREAD BROKEN " BEFORE THE PEOPLE:^ 71 
 
 I see the bread broken, and the wine poured out, 
 teach me to discern Thy body there : let those 
 sacred and significant actions create in me a most 
 lively remembrance of Thy sufierings/' ^ And from 
 Ken we turn to another prelate, whose name it is 
 always natural to associate with his. Bishop Wilson, 
 whose episcopate in the Isle of Man ranged from 1698 
 to 1755, wrote some ** Instructions for the Indians,''^ 
 where, in answer to the supposed question on the part 
 of the Indian, " You will now. Sir, let me know how 
 this Sacrament is observed amongst Christian s,'' the 
 Missionary says, " They do it after this manner : First 
 the minister of Christ placeth, or causeth to be placed,^ 
 upon a table in our churches a portion of bread and 
 wine in the sight of the people. This bread and wine, 
 which are to represent the sacrifice of Christ's Body 
 and Blood, are Banctified, or set apart, for this holy 
 use, by a giving thanks to God for all His favours, 
 and especially for having sent His only Son to redeem 
 us by His death, and by begging of Him that when 
 
 ^ " Church Catechism " in his Prose Works, p. 324. 
 
 ^ Works of Bishop Wilson in the Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology, 
 vol. iv. p. 275. 
 
 ^ These words, " causeth to be placed," should be noticed by the way. 
 There is a curious passage in the Treatise of Hickes, the Nonjuror, on the 
 Christian Priesthood (Pref. p. liii., ed. 1707), from which it would appear 
 that this rubric regarding the placing of the bread and wine at this time 
 by the minister on the Holy Table was not very carefully observed in the 
 early part of the eighteenth century. " As the disuse of this practice had 
 taken deep root from the fifth year of .King Edward VI., and helpt 
 to obliterate the notion of the Christian sacrifice in the minds both of 
 Priest and People ; so this restored Kubrick, to the great reproach of the 
 Clergy, was almost never since observed in Cathedral or Parochial 
 Churches." This seems to me to show that this rubric was then regarded 
 merely as having reference to convenience or propriety, and that the 
 placing of the bread and wine on the Lord's Table was not generally 
 viewed as an oblation. Hickes was, of course, desirous to assign a sacri- 
 ficial meaning to this act. 
 
72 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 we receive and eat and drink this bread and wine, we 
 may be so far partakers of the sacrifice of His most 
 blessed Body and Blood, as to share in all the bene- 
 fits which He hath obtained for us by His death. At 
 the same time he breaketh the bread into pieces, and 
 poureth out the wine into a cup, to repi^esent unto our 
 senses, by these outward and visible signs, the death of 
 Christ, whose body was broken, and blood poured out, 
 upon the cross." It must be remembered that this 
 paragraph occurs in a course of catechetical teaching ; 
 and it seems fair to use it for the sake of giving 
 fulness and definiteness to Bishop Wilson's meaning, 
 when he says, in a shorter manual of instruction,^ 
 " When God's minister breaketh the bread, and 
 poureth out the wine, and blesseth them, let them 
 put you in remembrance of Christ's Body broken and 
 His Blood shed." 
 
 To the same effect Bishop Beveridge might be quo- 
 ted : ^ but to St. Asaph I turn for corroborative testi- 
 mony of a different kind. The Welsh translation of 
 the rubrics in the Prayer Book of 1662 have pre- 
 served for us, unchanged, the impression of their 
 meaning which prevailed at the time when the trans- 
 lation was made. And the present Bishop of that 
 ancient see, whose accurate knowledge of his native 
 language no one will dispute, tells us distinctly, in a 
 note appended to his Second Charge, that the Welsh 
 words for '' before the people " denote " in the presence 
 of the people," and always involve the idea of sight. ^ 
 
 ^ Works, vol. iv. p. 117. Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology. 
 ' See Appendix I. (Bishop Beveridge on seeing the Bread broken.) 
 3 Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of St. Asaph, Sept. and 
 
 Oct. 1874. Note p. 38, where reference is made to the use of the same 
 
 preposition in Isaiah i. 7. 
 
TIIJ^ BREAD BliOKEN ''BEFORE TUE REOl'LE:' 73 
 
 When we connect all this argument with the fact 
 that it belongs to a Table, not fixed altarwise against 
 an eastern wall, but placed free in the chancel, or in 
 the body of the church, so as to be in immediate con- 
 tact with the congregation, we see how harmoniously 
 all parts of this subject hang together. The true in- 
 terpretation of the rubric which regulates the position 
 of the consecrator depends on the rubric which regu- 
 lates the position of the Table. The two subjects 
 cannot, with a due regard to history, be treated 
 separately from one another. Theoretically, however, 
 they can be separated : and even if we are to leave 
 the position of the Table an open question, we can 
 find abundant historical evidence to prove that it has 
 never been the custom or understood rule for the 
 priest of the Church of England since 1552 to conse- 
 crate with his face to the East. To this narrower 
 view of the subject we may now turn. 
 
 ^^ OP THB 
 
 ;UNI7ERSITr 
 
IX. 
 
 USAGE BEFORE 1662. 
 
 Casfcom from 1552 onwards— Evidence from Bishop Jewel— Wren's 
 approval of Jewel— Bishop Wren's defence of himself — Archbishop 
 Laud's chapel — His answer to his accusers — Bishop Cosin's answer 
 to his own accusers — Defence of these three prelates against the 
 charge of dishonesty. 
 
 Hitherto the position of the '^ celebrant" has been 
 treated chiefly in its historical connection with the 
 placing of the Lord's Table. Let us now take the first 
 subject separately, and turn to the simple considera- 
 tion of actual usage in the Church of England. This 
 usage must very seriously either weaken or strengthen 
 the arguments which have been drawn out above. If 
 it could be shown to have been the custom of the 
 Clergy of the Church of England since 1552, when 
 the rubric relating to the " North Side of the Table" 
 was first introduced, to have consecrated in the east- 
 ward position, then it would be necessary to recon- 
 sider all these arguments, however perplexiug the 
 inconsistency might appear. If the contrary custom 
 has prevailed, then we have in this matter that con- 
 sistency between rule and practice which it is very 
 difficult to refute. If there has been a general habit 
 in one direction with occasional exceptions, then it is 
 our duty to ascertain the number of these exceptions, 
 the circumstances under which they have occurred, and 
 the reasons by which they have been justified and thus 
 to enable ourselves to estimate them at their true value. 
 
USAGE BEFOHE 1662. 75 
 
 It is obviously desirable to divide such a survey 
 into two periods, separated from one another by the 
 great date of 1662. The usage, indeed, with which 
 we are more immediately concerned is that which 
 succeeded this chronological landmark ; for our true 
 starting-point for present practice is the last revision 
 of the Prayer Book, when the rubric in question was 
 first introduced. Still, the opinions and controversies 
 of the earlier period led by paths more or less direct 
 to the results which we have inherited ; and the sub- 
 ject would be treated very incompletely, if we were to 
 take no note of the ecclesiastical practices which pre- 
 ceded the Eestoration. 
 
 During this earlier period the rubric in question 
 did not exist, but another rubric did ; and the rule 
 concerning " the North side of the Table " being in 
 full force during the whole of this time, and no other 
 rubric being existent which suggested any change of 
 position at the Consecration Prayer, 1 am not aware of 
 any reason for imagining the prevalence of any habit 
 out of harmony with these facts.^ But if historical 
 instances can be given to show that the harmony 
 subsisted, they are certainly of some value. I will 
 refer chiefly to circumstances connected with the 
 names of Bishop Wren, Archbishop Laud, and Bishop 
 Cosin ; but first I will refer to a circumstance, which 
 seems to have been somewhat overlooked, associated 
 with the name of another and earlier bishop. 
 
 1 Any one examining a Prayer Book of 1552 or 1559 would assume 
 that all the Service was said at the north side : for no other place is 
 mentioned or hinted at. Does " orientation " at the Consecration Prayer 
 depend on the words " before the Table ? " Then it was not prescribed 
 before 1662. And further, what authority is there now for any " orienta- 
 tion " in the Service previous to this prayer ? 
 
76 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 The following sentence from Bishop Jewel has been 
 recently used in this controversy, and very natur- 
 ally '} — '' What father or doctor taught us that the 
 priest should hold the bread over his head, and turn 
 his hack to the people f " This mere sentence is of 
 some importance ; but, taken in conjunction with a 
 fact which comes to view in some Visitation Articles 
 of the period subsequent to Jewel's death, it acquires 
 a more emphatic meaning. The quotation is from a 
 sermon on a text from the prophet Haggai,^ and 
 shows clearly the mind of Bishop Jewel on the sub- 
 ject. But on consulting a large number of the 
 originals of such Visitation Articles, which are pre- 
 served in the Library of Jesus College, Cambridge,^ 
 1 observed that a copy of Jewel's " Apology " was in 
 .some of them reckoned as one of the " ornaments " 
 of the church. I may particularly specify the articles 
 issued by Wren when he was Bishop of Hereford.^ 
 This is not the only instance of the kind ; but for 
 obvious reasons it is very apposite to our purpose. 
 Just as the inquiry in such articles whether there be 
 
 ^ This passage is quoted in an excellent pamphlet by the Rev. J. 
 Bardsley, Eector of Stepney, Eucharistic Vestmeiits and the Eastward 
 Positio7i, p. 16. 
 
 ^ Hagg. i. 2 — 4. See the Edition of Bishop Jewel's Works, published 
 by the Parker Society, II. pp. 990, 991. 
 
 ^ I owe the opportunity of seeing these original documents to the 
 kindness of the Rev. Dr. Corrie, Master of Jesus College. Some of 
 these Visitation Articles are not found in the collection published in the 
 Appendix to the Second Report of the Ritual Commissioners. 
 
 "* The requirement that Jewel's Apology should be among the ornaments 
 of the Church seems to have been a great poiut with Wren. We find it 
 both when he was Bishop of Hereford and also when he was Bishop of 
 Norwich. This fact helps us to appreciate at its true worth the argument 
 drawn from the consecration of a church in Herefordshire, on which great 
 stress has recently been laid. See Appendix J. (Consecration of Abbey 
 Dore Ciiurch). 
 
USAGE BEFOIiE 1662. 77 
 
 in the church "a faire large comely surpless with 
 sleeves," is of some moment in regard to the question 
 of Vestments, so I venture to think the inquiry 
 whether there be in it " a fairly bound copy " of this 
 book, gives some help towards determining the view 
 then current concerning the Eastward Position. The 
 churches were expected to be officially supplied with 
 a copy of a theological treatise by a Bishop who 
 had wTitten emphatically against that position. It is 
 to be observed that we are concerned here not simply 
 w^ith Jewel's opinion, but with Wren's acceptance 
 and approval of his writings. 
 
 But let us come to more direct evidence affecting 
 Wren, and afterwards pass on to Laud and Cosin. It 
 is evident that the opinion and practice of these three 
 men are likely to present the Church of England on 
 the side most favourable to the advocates of the East- 
 ward Position. It will be remembered, too, that I am 
 here treating the position of the Lord's Table itself 
 as if it were an open question. 
 
 ^'^t is well known that Wren was accused both of 
 placing the Lord's Table altarwise against the east 
 wall, and of saying the Consecration Prayer with his 
 face to the east, at a Table so placed. His answers, 
 calmly and deliberately written,^ to these two accusa- 
 tions, we find in the "Parentalia." The former he 
 admitted ; the latter he denied — or, at least, he de- 
 clared that any such action w^as a matter of mere 
 accident and convenience, and thus placed it altogether 
 out of the range of principle. His words are as 
 follows : — " He acknowledgeth that for the better 
 taking of the bread, and for the easier reaching both 
 
 1 See above, p. 6, Note. 
 
78 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 of the flagon and the cup, because they stood upon 
 the table further from the end thereof than he, being 
 but low of stature, could reach over his book unto 
 them, and yet still proceed on in reading of the words 
 without stop or interruption, and without danger of 
 spilling the bread and wine, he did in Tower Church 
 in Ipswich, anno 1636, turn unto the west-side of the 
 table; but it was only while he rehearsed the fore- 
 mentioned collect, in which he was to take the bread 
 and the wine, and at no other time. And he humbly 
 conceive th that although the rubric says that the 
 minister shall stand at the north-side of the table ; yet 
 it is not so to be meant as that upon no occasion dur- 
 ing all the communion time he shall step from it. 
 For it is usual to go before th^ table to read the 
 Epistle and Gospel, and necessary to go from the 
 table to the pulpit to preach, and, with the Bason to 
 receive the oflerings, if any be ; and with the Bread 
 and Wine to distribute to the Communicants. Inas- 
 much, therefore, as he did stand at the north-side all 
 the while before he came to that collect, wherein he 
 was to take the bread and the wine into his hands, and 
 as soon as that was done, thither he returned again, he 
 humbly conceiveth it is a plain demonstration that he 
 came to the west-side only for more conveniency of exe- 
 cuting his office, and no way at all in any superstition, 
 much less in any imitation of the Eomish priests ; for 
 they place themselves there at all the service before, 
 and at all after, with no less strictness than at the time 
 of their consecrating the bread and wine.''^ If any 
 
 ^ Parentalia, pp. 103, 104. Three things of some importance come 
 clearly to view incidentally from this passaoje. In the first place, Wren dis- 
 tinguishes between the "north side" and the "west side ;" hence, in his 
 view, the north side cannot be the northern part of the west side. Next, 
 
USAGE BEFORE 1662. 79 
 
 one, after reading these words, adduces Wren in justi- 
 fication of making the Eastward Position so serious 
 a matter of principle that it cannot be given up, he 
 commits an offence against the prelate's memory. 
 Wren treats this position simply as a matter of 
 accident or convenience. 
 
 From Wren let us now turn to Laud ; and first I 
 will put in evidence the engraving of the chapel 
 which was arranged by him when he was Bishop of 
 St. David's. I cannot help thinking that some persons 
 have mentioned this engraving in debate without 
 having seen the thing itself It will be found opposite 
 page 123 of the book called " Canterburie's Doom,'' 
 published in 1646 ;^ and nothing, as it seems to me, 
 could tell its story more plainly than " the cushion 
 for the service-book," at the north end of the Lord's 
 Table (which is placed altarwise) with " the kneeling 
 stoole covered and stuffed " in the same place below. 
 And it must be remembered that Prynne, who pub- 
 lished this, was Laud's most bitter enemy, that he 
 wished to make him as Popish as he could, and 
 that, if the chapel had afforded evidence of the 
 habit or intention of consecrating in the Eastward 
 Position, the evidence would certainly have been 
 produced.^ 
 
 he uses the word " side " as synonymous with '* end ; " this is certain, 
 because he admitted that he had placed the table altarwise. Thirdly, he 
 entirely disowns any turning to the east during other precatory parts of the 
 Communion Service ; hence he did not do this, for instance, in the Prayer 
 of Humble Access. 
 
 1 This chapel is said to have been arranged after the model of that of 
 Bishop Andrewes ; thus it affords testimony to the practice of that prelate 
 as well as of Laud himself. 
 
 2 Among "this arch- prelate's manifold traitorous artifices," Prynne 
 notes his placing of the Table altarwise against the wall as " not consonant 
 
80 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 And now we must connect this pictorial testimony 
 with the words which Laud used at a later period, when 
 he was Archbishop of Canterbury, in reference to the 
 rubric of the Scotch Liturgy before the Prayer of 
 Consecration. That rubric, as is well known, was 
 different from ours, and did give freedom (if the Table 
 was placed altarwise against the east wall) to the 
 priest to consecrate, as well as to order the elements, 
 with his face towards the east. The words are as 
 follows : — " Then the Presbyter, standing up, shall 
 say the Prayer of Consecration as followeth, hut then, 
 during the time of consecration, he shall stand at such 
 a part of the Holy Table where he may with the more 
 ease and decency use both his hands "^ To this grave 
 exception was taken. It was viewed, very naturally, 
 as meaning somewhat more than it literally expressed. 
 But what was Laud's answer ? " They say this very 
 remove of the Presbyter during the time of consecra- 
 tion, upon trial imports much. The Eubric professes 
 that nothing is meant by it, but that he may use both 
 his hands with more ease and decency about that work ; 
 and I protest in the presence of Almighty God I 
 know no other intention herein than this."^ If Laud 
 thought it necessary to use an oath when he made this 
 
 to Queen Elizabeth's injunctions, which require the Communion Table, 
 when the Sacrament is distributed, to be removed and " placed in such 
 sort, &c." Is it conceivable, if Laud had been in the habit of saying the 
 Consecration Prayer towards the East, that Prynne would not have noted 
 this " traitorous artifice " likewise ? 
 
 1 Either in Reeling's Liturgice Britannicw (p 214), or in Pulley's Tabular 
 View of Variations (p. 53), this Scotch rubric can be seen in very instruc- 
 tive juxtaposition with our own. 
 
 ^ See Canon Craigie Robertson's invaluable volume, How shall we 
 Conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England? (third ed., 1869) 
 pp. 290, 291. 
 
USAGE BEFORE 1C62. 81 
 
 statement, it does not seem very respectful to his 
 memory to quote him in defence of the theory that con- 
 secrating at the Eucharist in the Eastward Position is a 
 matter of principle. We have seen that he did not him- 
 self, when at St. David's, consecrate in that position. 
 It is almost an insult to him to bring forward his name 
 and practice as giving sanction for the ceremonial act for 
 which every possible shelter is now so eagerly sought. 
 
 The name of Cosin is, for the purposes of the pre- 
 sent argument, still more important than that of Laud ; 
 for Cosin, like Wren, belongs to 1662 as well as to 1640, 
 and moreover he is believed, whether correctly or not, 
 to be the author of our present consecration-rubric. 
 The weight of his authority is sometimes set before us, 
 very neatly and compactly, in this way. Cosin wrote 
 the rubric ; ^ Cosin was accused of consecrating in the 
 Eastward Position : therefore the rubric means that 
 we are to consecrate in that position. But a case of 
 this kind is hardly complete when it is rested on the 
 accusation only, without the defence being heard. By a 
 strange freak of controversy Bishop Cosin s answer is 
 constantly kept out of view, while the charge brought 
 forward by Smart is unceasingly repeated.^ In Con- 
 vocation at York, last February, the accusation of 
 Cosin was made prominent ; and I was glad of the 
 opportunity of undertaking his defence.^ 
 
 1 I will not attempt to decide whether Bishop Cosin did write this 
 rubric or not : but it is well worth while to observe that in the Bishop's 
 private notes, on which Mr. Morton Shaw seems to rely for this opinion 
 (see his pamphlet, pp. 28 and 49), great stress is laid on breaking the bread 
 before the people and nothing said of the priest standing before the table. 
 
 2 Mr. Beresford Hope (p. 194) makes the accusation very prominent, 
 but pa'^ses over Cosin's denial in absolute silence. 
 
 3 The same duty was discharged, quite independently, by Canon 
 Swainson, in the Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury. 
 
 a 
 
82 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 The charge ran thus : — '* Concerning Dr. Cosens 
 bowing and officiating towards the East, with his back 
 to the people, and several other postures which he 
 used before the altar." His defence was given thus : 
 " Denieth that he did ever officiate with face purposely 
 towards the East ; but he constantly stood at the 
 north side or end of the Table, to read and perform 
 all parts of the Communion Service there ; saving that 
 the bread and wine being usually placed in the middle 
 of the Table, which is about seven foot in length, he 
 might haply do so as others did there before him 
 (though he remembreth not to have done so these 
 twelve years) and step to the former part thereof, to 
 consecrate and bless those elements, which otherwise 
 he could not conveniently reach. "^ Can we suppose, if 
 Cosin had been in the habit of consecrating Eastwards 
 during those twelve years, and had made this habit 
 a matter of vital principle, as is done by some who 
 quote his authority, that he should have totally 
 forgotten this ? Or must we resort to the shocking 
 conclusion that in a matter of such solemn import 
 he told a deliberate falsehood 1 Or again, are 
 we to imagine that we have here one of his early 
 utterances, and that in a later period of his life he 
 changed both his opinion aijd his practice ? When 
 Smart brought forward his accusation, Cosin was a 
 
 1 Court of High Commissioners at Durham, published by the Surtees 
 Society, pp. 215—218. It should be remarked that four things come 
 incidentally, but very clearly, into Anew here. (1) Cosin uses " end " and 
 " side " as equivalent terms. (2) Herein his language is consistent with 
 that which he used afterwards in the rubric which he proposed for 
 acceptance. See above, p. 49. (3) He distinguishes the " north " end 
 or side in the most emphatic way from the "west" or " former" side. 
 (4) He utterly rejects all thought of turning eastwards generally during 
 the precatory parts of the Communion Service. 
 
USAGE BEFORE 1662. 83 
 
 Prebendary of Durham. After 1660 he was Bishop 
 of Durham. Did he modify his views on this subject 
 during that interval ? There is no proof that he did, 
 so far as I am aware. On the contrary, there are two 
 grounds of probability for supposing that it is even 
 less reasonable to quote him at the later period than the 
 former. First, the conversion of his son to the Church 
 of Eome is believed to have given to his liturgical 
 opinions a more Protestant colour ;^ and secondly, the 
 placing of the Lord's Table permanently at the east end 
 of the church was not officially allowed in 1662, w^here- 
 as the Bishops were endeavouring to procure this 
 placing of it when he was a Prebendary of Durham.^ 
 • When the argument drawn from the very words 
 used by Wren, Laud, and Cosin, is strongly urged, it 
 is sometimes replied (and I heard this in conversation, 
 besides having seen it in print) that these three men 
 were on trial, and possibly in danger of their lives, 
 and therefore spoke with what is termed '' economy." 
 They were not bound to put weapons in the hands of 
 their enemies ; moreover, those enemies would not 
 have been able to understand their religious convic- 
 tions ; thus they concealed their true reasons and 
 alleged what was merely superficial and accidental ; 
 and in this way they sought to secure their own 
 safety.^ But is it not evident that, on this supposi- 
 
 1 See Cosin's Correspondence (Surtees Soc.) Introd. p. xxxvii. 
 
 ^ It cannot be too carefully remembered that the troubles which took 
 place about 1640ain consequence of the attempt of various Bishops to fix 
 the Communion Tables permanently at the upper end of the chancels were 
 previous to the final ratification of the rubric which, in harmony with the 
 canon /distinguishes between their position ^' at the communion time " 
 and at other times. 
 
 ^ I am utterly perplexed when I see the extraordinary laxity with 
 which both Mr. Morton Shaw (pp. 40, 41, 44, 45) and Mr. Beresford Hope 
 
 a 2 
 
84 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 tion, they lost an opportunity of asserting a great 
 principle, and that they showed they were as far as 
 possible from possessing the spirit of martyrdom ? 
 Wren, in fact, as we have seen, wrote under no such 
 pressure. Laud distinctly swore that he knew of no 
 reason except that which he stated.^ Of a character 
 so distinguished and influential as that of Cosin it is 
 very difficult to believe that it was utterly destitute 
 both of courage and honesty. Such an apology, made 
 on behalf of these men for such action, when great prin- 
 ciples were at stake, shocks our moral sense. Either 
 the assuming the Eastward Position at the time of 
 consecration was with these bishops not a matter of 
 principle, but a matter merely of accident and con- 
 venience, or they prevaricated. There is no escape 
 from this dilemma. If the latter supposition is true, 
 I cannot understand why such deference is paid to 
 their authority. I am astonished that men can con- 
 tinue to reverence the idols whom they have dis- 
 honoured ; and I cannot help remembering that a 
 century earlier, when danger did arise out of questions 
 connected with the Holy Eucharist, three other 
 
 (pp. 194, 195) treat the question of truthfulness in these prelates. Mr. 
 Malcolm MacColl (pp. 199 — 201) uses the word " economy ;" and with 
 great pain I add that both he and Mr. Morton Shaw justify this method 
 o^ self-defence by referring to the example of our Blessed Lord, to Whom 
 the hearts of men were open, and Who taught them as they were able to 
 receive the truth. It would have been better to have justified these 
 prelates by referring to such a parallel as that which Canon Eobertson 
 quotes from Dr. Littledale, " We who, in our own day, have known lights 
 on the altar excused on the ground of the darkness of a chancel, need 
 feel no surprise at their employing the only argument to which their 
 adversaries would listen." How Shall we Conform, &c. ? p. 291. 
 
 1 From the time when I first became acquainted with Archbishop 
 Laud's Private Devotions, as published by F. Faber in 1839, I have been 
 very reluctant to think that he can have been a bad man. 
 
USAGE BEFORE 1662. 85 
 
 English bishops did not prevaricate to save tlieir 
 lives. If we are driven by the exigencies of con- 
 troversy to view our subject in this way, then, to 
 say the least, we see Cranmer, Latimer, and Eidley 
 on a much higher moral eminence than Cosin, Wren, 
 and Laud, 
 
X. 
 
 HISTORY OF USAGE SINCE 1662. 
 
 Settlement of 1662— Contentment of the Puritans with the position of 
 the consecrating priest — This view confirmed by the events of 1689 
 — No choice admitted by this rubric under the Act of Uniformity — 
 Consecration still in the Southward Position, when the Table was 
 placed altarwise — Liturgy of the. Nonjurors — View of Wheatley, 
 Mant, and Blunt — The Eastward Position a novelty. 
 
 Before proceeding to a short review of the history 
 of usage between the Eestoration and our own day, 
 in respect of the consecrator's position at the Holy 
 Eucharist, it is desirable that we look at two broad 
 features of the settlement of 1662, which really 
 cover a great deal of the ground before us. It has 
 already been shown ^ how distinct that settlement 
 was in regard to the placing of the Holy Table 
 itself, a question on which this other question largely 
 depends. Here, however, we put that topic on one 
 side. "We are separating in thought two subjects 
 which are not separable historically, and considering 
 simply the position of the " celebrant," leaving that 
 of the Holy Table itself an open question. 
 
 Now we remember that those whom we term 
 ** Puritans " (though many of them would now 
 be regarded as loyal Church of England men) were 
 within the Church till the Act of Uniformity was 
 put in execution. We have seen, too, that they raised 
 
 ^ See Sections III. and V. 
 
HISTOBY OF USAGE SIJ^JCE 1662. 87 
 
 no question as to the mode of placing the Communion 
 Tables in the churches, clearly because they were 
 satisfied with the rubric and the canon which related 
 to this subject Is it not quite certain that they 
 would have raised very serious questions, unless they 
 had been satisfied, likewise, in regard to the position 
 of the officiating minister during the Communion 
 Service ? Is it not quite certain, in fact, that one 
 reason for their contentment in reference to the placing 
 of the Table was because it was a security against 
 the assuming of the Eastward Position during the 
 act of consecration ? This subject has been touched 
 before;^ but it is important to recur to it at this 
 point in order to make it clear what the common 
 understanding must have been in 1662 regarding 
 the " celebrant's '' position. 
 
 In confirmation of this view it is natural to refer 
 here to the attempted revision of the Prayer Book 
 which was made in 1689. No legislation, indeed, 
 took place in consequence of this attempt, but we 
 know the recommendations which were made by those 
 to whom the task was entrusted.^ We know, too, 
 that the contemplated revision was undertaken with 
 the view of satisfying, and, if possible, reconciling 
 Dissenters. Yet we find no change proposed in the 
 rubric which prescribes the position of the minister 
 at the very point of the service concerning which 
 the Dissenters were most sensitive. It is quite 
 evident that on this point they needed no reassur- 
 ance. It was not the custom of the English Clergy 
 to consecrate otherwise than at " the North side of the 
 
 ^ See above, pp. 38 and 66. 
 = See Note, p. 52 
 
88 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Table :" and if it is urged that by this time the Table 
 was frequently, if not generally, placed, even during 
 the time of communion, as the Altar used to be, 
 at the upper end of the chancel, this only gives 
 strength to the present part of my argument; for 
 it is thus shown that even when the altarwise posi- 
 tion of the Table was resumed, this change did not 
 carry the consequence of an eastward position on the 
 part of the consecrating priest. 
 
 But let us now turn to what I have called a second 
 broad feature of the settlement of 1662. The rubrics 
 of this date are often appealed to as though they 
 allowed of choice in the adopting of ceremonial acts. 
 A great point is made now of liberty and toleration. 
 All that is claimed, in fact, even by extreme Eitual- 
 ists, is freedom of choice. They reiterate again and 
 again (and, no doubt, with perfect truth) that they 
 have no wish to interfere with others if only they 
 may be allowed to do what they themselves think 
 right. This always seems to me a very suspicious 
 circumstance. For surely if there is any one charac- 
 teristic of the great Act of Uniformity it is that 
 it was iw.perative} If there could have been an 
 authorised option as to the wearing of the surplice 
 or as to kneeling during the administration of the 
 
 ^ It is possible that some of the earnest advocates of choice in matters 
 of Ritual have not read the preamble of the Act of Uniformity, which 
 begins thus : " In regard that nothing more conduceth to the settling of 
 the peace of the nation, nor to the honour of religion, than an universal 
 agreement in puhlic ivorship, and to the intent that every person may cer- 
 tainly hnow the rule to which they are to conform, Sc." And this is in 
 harmony with one of the answers of the Bishops to the Presbyterians 
 at the Savoy Conference : '' There is no such way to the preservation of 
 the peace as for all to return to the strict use and practice of the form" 
 — Cardwell's History of Conferences, p. 336. 
 
HISTOBY OF USAGE SINCE 1662. 
 
 
 Holy Communion, the history of Dissent in England 
 would have been very different from that which we 
 know it to have been. Nothing, as it appears to me, 
 could be more contTSLvy to the whole spirit and genius 
 of 1662 than the sanction of alternatives in such 
 matters, and the allowance (as men speak now) of a 
 maximum and a minimum in ceremonial acts.^ I 
 shall bave occasion to refer to this subject again at the 
 close of this volume ; but it is of great consequence to 
 call attention to it here, for it bears intimately on 
 every part of the question before us. If I am right 
 in this general view, then either the Eastward Position 
 during the consecration prayer is compulsory upon 
 us, or it is not legally allowable at all.^ 
 
 But let us come at once to that modification of 
 
 1 This has been well pointed out by the Kev. K. W. Kennion in his 
 Letter on The Vestments and the Rubric, reprinted (1867) from the Times. 
 What is said there in reference to the costume of the officiating priest is at 
 least equally applicable to his position : " A notion has been suggested by 
 a leading advocate of Ritualism that though it was not intended to compel 
 anything but the surplice, the Rubric was left as it is in order to allow an 
 alternative, so that the vestments might be worn by those who liked them. 
 Surely no one could say this who reflected what the principles of the 
 High Church party of that day were. The words of the Rubric give not 
 the slightest colour to the notion. Whatever particular things are to be 
 understood by the word * ornaments,' they are all prescribed with the 
 same absoluteness. If albs and tunicles are included, they are not per- 
 mitted, but ordered, just as the surplice is ; and the man is as truly a 
 Nonconformist who omits the one as the other," p. 20. And Mr. Kennion 
 proceeds to quote what Lord Clarendon says in his Autobiography 
 (ii 296) of the Act of Uniformity. " By this Act there was an end put 
 to all the liberty and licence which had been practised since His Majesty's 
 return. Whatever clergyman did not fully conform to whatever was con- 
 firmed in that Book was ipso facto deprived of his benefice, and the patron 
 might present as on a lapse, so that it was not in the King's power to give 
 a dispensation to any man." 
 
 ^ I am not here arguing in favour of extreme stifihess in the law of 
 ceremonial, but only contending that there was this stiffness in 1 662, and 
 that therefore the Consecration Rubric must have had a definite meaning. 
 
90 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 the question before us, which inevitably arises on our 
 reaching the time when the position of the Lord's 
 Table was really changed, and when it became cus- 
 tomary, not only '* at the Communion time,'* but at 
 all times, to fix it against the east wall. That the 
 change did take place is certain. We see the results of 
 it in every church which we enter. That the change 
 took place gradually and silently, and that, with a few 
 exceptional cases, it became very general, after no 
 long interval below the great date of 1662, is most 
 probable.^ It is obvious that it would be convenient : 
 for the removing of the Holy Table, from time to 
 time, for the administration of the Lord's Supper, 
 must have caused trouble to churchwardens and others. 
 Moreover, those who would be likely to raise objec- 
 tions to a customary eastward placing of the Table, 
 were not now, for the most part, within the Church 
 of England, but organised into systematic Noncon- 
 formist bodies outside ; and as to any illegality 
 which might be committed in thus setting aside the 
 directions alike of the rubric and the canon, this 
 would not attract much attention, and the Bishops 
 would not be likely to interfere. The eighteenth 
 century was, on the whole, an easy time in matters 
 ecclesiastical. 
 
 The question before us, however, at the present 
 moment relates simply to the position of the " cele- 
 brant " under the changed circumstances of the placing 
 of the Lord's Table. We have seen that the inten- 
 tion of the rubric of 1662 was that he should look 
 southwards in this part of the service. Did it now 
 become customary that he should look eastwards at 
 
 ^ See above, pp. 38, 39. 
 
HISTORY OF USAGE SINCE 1662. 91 
 
 this time, in consequence of the changed position of 
 the Table ? We have the most distinct evidence that 
 nothing of the kind took place, but, on the contrary, 
 that consecrating in the Southward Position was still 
 the recognised rule in the Church of England : and 
 some of this evidence is very curious. 
 
 Let me refer, first, to the Nonjurors. They certainly 
 in the early part of the eighteenth century represented 
 the theological opinions of Laud and Cosin, more 
 nearly than did any other persons in the country. 
 Moreover, being trammelled by no connection with 
 the State, they were free to adopt any ecclesiastical 
 arrangements and to make their own rubrics. On ex- 
 amining their Prayer Book, printed in 1718, we at 
 once observe two very significant changes. The Lord's 
 Table is now again an " Altar ; " and this " Altar *' is 
 to be placed, and j^^e(i, so far as we see, at the east 
 end of the church or chancel. And yet what do we 
 read concerning the position of the priest ? We read 
 the following very remarkable rubric : — " Note, that 
 whenever in this Office the Priest is directed to 
 turn to the Altar, or to stand or kneel before it, 
 or with his face towards it, it is always meant 
 that he should stand or hneel on the North side 
 thereof!'^ This rubric conclusively settles two things 
 of very great importance. First it gives a decision 
 as to the use of words. To stand or to kneel 
 ** before" the Altar or Table is to stand or to kneel 
 "with one's face towards it," just as I have con- 
 
 ^ Hall's Fragmenta Liturgica, vol. v. p. 10. In the Directorium 
 Anglicanum (p. 38) is a sentence, which, I confess, I do not understand. 
 " The corresponding rubric in the Nonjurors' Office explains their north 
 side to mean the north end ; and thereby shows by implication that the 
 then practice of the Church of England did not." 
 
92 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 tended above. ^ This condition would be satisfied on 
 any one of its four sides. Here it is ordered to be 
 fulfilled by standing on the north, though the *' Altar" 
 is placed north and south. But a second point is 
 determined here. These truest representatives of 
 Ijaud, who had restored the " Altar," and replaced it 
 in its old fixed position, still found it natural to direct 
 the priest to stand and kneel during the Communion 
 Office, with his face towards this '* Altar," but on its 
 north side.^ It is somewhat remarkable that Mr. 
 Beresford Hope, who is seldom at fault in minute points 
 of ecclesiastical archaeology, should not have noticed 
 this liturgy of the Nonjurors.^ Mr. Morton Shaw does 
 make mention of it, admitting that they " represented 
 pre-eminently that section of the Eevisers of 1662, 
 who did their best, at that time, to give a higher tone 
 to the worship and ritual of the English Church ; " 
 and he endeavours to meet the case by urging that the 
 Nonjurors were inconsistent with themselves, and that 
 in some of their liturgies of a subsequent date it is 
 directed that consecration is to take place in front of 
 the Lord's Table with the face eastwards.* This is 
 interesting as an historical fact ; and nothing could be 
 more natural than that the Nonjurors, set free 
 from the law and custom of the Established Church 
 in this respect, should have drifted back to that 
 which was the rule before the Eeformation. But this 
 
 ^ See pp. 58, 59, and the Notes. 
 
 2 As an illustration of the spirit of this Prayer Book, it is enough to 
 quote the first sentence of the Preface : " The Eucharistic Sacrifice, 
 being the most efficacious means for pardon and grace, ought to be per- 
 formed with proportionable care and solemnity." 
 
 '^ Neither does Mr. MacCoU take any notice whatever of this important 
 evidence. 
 
 ^ The Position of the Celebrant, cC*c., p. 47 and Appendix B. 
 
HISTORY OF USAGE SINCE 1662. 93 
 
 is no refutation of the inferences which I have drawn 
 above from this rubric. It still remains true that in 
 the Church language of about 1700 "before the 
 Table " was not understood to mean " in front of the 
 Table facing eastwards," but *' on the north side of it 
 facing southwards." 
 
 The next reference shall be to a very well-known 
 book by a learned and loyal member of the Church of 
 England, but to a particular edition of that book. In 
 the second edition, dated 1714, of '*The Church of 
 England's Man's Companion, or a Kational Illustration 
 of the Harmony, Excellency, and Usefulness of the 
 Book of Common Prayer," I find a frontispiece which 
 represents a priest in the act of consecration at the 
 Holy Communion. In the chancel are the people 
 reverently kneeling eastwards : the Holy Table is 
 fenced off by rails, and standing as we are accustomed 
 to see it stand : the priest is at the north end, standing 
 and facing southwards : above is a representation of 
 our Lord in the heavens, an addition which is worthy 
 of mention, because it is hardly consistent with any 
 mere Zuinglian view of the Holy Eucharist.^ A picture 
 of this kind supplies, as it seems to me, very important 
 evidence, because it shows to us what was customary 
 at the time to which it belongs.^ 
 
 But it is further important to mark the explanation 
 given in words of that which is represented in a 
 picture ; especially since Wheatley was recognised as 
 the standard liturgical writer of his day in the 
 Church of England. His words on this subject 
 
 1 Over the head of the Saviour is the text, Heb. vii. 25, and under the 
 altar before which He stands is the text, Rev. viii. 3, 4. 
 ^ See Appendix K. (Evidence from Engravings.) 
 
94 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 have often been quoted; but they acquire freshness 
 and force by being placed in juxtaposition with this 
 picture. 
 
 " If it be asked," he says, '' whether the priest is to 
 say the prayer standing before the Altar, or at the 
 north end of it,^ I answer, At the north end of it ; for, 
 according to the rules of grammar, the participle 
 standing must refer to the verb ordered, not to the 
 verb say f so that whilst the priest is ordering the 
 bread and wine, he is to stand before the Altar ; but 
 when he says the prayer, he is to stand, so that he 
 may with the more readiness and decency break the 
 bread before the people, which must be on the north 
 side. For if he stood before the Table, his body 
 would hinder the people from seeing, so that he must 
 not stand there, and consequently he must stand on 
 the north side, there being in our present Eubric no 
 other place mentioned for performing another part of 
 ] this office." And Wheatley adds : " In the Eomish 
 Church, indeed, they always stand before the Altar 
 during the time of consecration, in order to prevent 
 the people from being eye-witnesses of these operations 
 in working their pretended miracle." 
 
 And this became the recognised interpretation of 
 the Consecration Kubric, the theory and practice cor- 
 responding with one another, throughout the eighteenth 
 century, and during the present century, till about 
 fi ve-and-twenty years ago.^ Thus, to quote Yejj 
 
 ■^ We should note here how Wheatley assumes, as a matter of course, 
 that " north end " is synonymous with " north side." 
 
 2 See below, p, 98, on the grammatical analysis of the sentence. 
 
 1 Besides Bishop Mant and Professor Blunt, who are quoted here, Mr. 
 Bardsley adduces, to the same effect, Dr. NichoUs, whose notes on the 
 Book of Common Prayer were published in 1710, Archdeacon Yardley 
 
HISTORY OF USAGE SINCE 1662. 95 
 
 eminent liturgical writers of the later part of this 
 period of nearly a hundred and fifty years, Bishop 
 Mant, adopting Wheatley's view, says : " This seems 
 to have been ordered for the purpose of avoiding the 
 fashion of the priest's standing with his face towards 
 the east, as is the Popish practice:''^ and Professor 
 Blunt observes of the priest's position, after the ele- 
 ments have been ordered, " This done, he ' returns to 
 the north side, and breaks the bread and takes the cup, 
 "before ibhe people,' i.e., in their sight — the Church 
 not wishing to make the manner of consecration, as the 
 
 Eomish priest does, a mystery So that they 
 
 mistake this Eubric altogether, I apprehend, and violate 
 both its letter and spirit, who consecrate the elements 
 with their backs to the people, after the manner of 
 the Church of Rome."^ It must be added further 
 that this is the view of the matter upon which the 
 " Purchas Judgment " is based. 
 
 In the preceding paragraphs notices of opinions 
 and practices, in regard to the position of the conse- 
 crator, have been mixed together ; but the purpose 
 of this section is to show that both opinion and 
 practice in the Church, through the whole period 
 between the Restoration and our own day, pronounce 
 most distinctly for the Southward Position. I do 
 not at all doubt that there were sporadic cases of 
 the Eastward Position, both of earlier and later date, 
 throughout the whole of this period. I frankly 
 confess that in our own times there has been a larger 
 
 (1728) "who even in our day would be called a very high Churchman," 
 and Mr. Procter, one of our best recent commentators on the Prayer Book. 
 Fjucliaristic Vestments and the Eastward Position, pp. 20, 21. 
 
 ^ The Book of Com. Pra. with Notes. I quote from Mr. Bardsley. 
 
 * Lectures on the Duties of the Parish Priest, p. 334. 
 
96 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 number than I at first supposed. Many, too, have 
 adopted this position without any doctrinal intention 
 at all. It was most natural that, looking simply at 
 the words " before the Table," and being ignorant or 
 forgetful of those details of history which environ 
 this phrase and fix upon it another meaning, they 
 should have honestly believed that they were thus 
 obeying the law of the Church. T myself know 
 an instance of this belief and this practice in con- 
 junction with religious -convictions distinctively 
 ''Evangelical." Still such cases of "orientation" 
 have been, comparatively, very few. Clergymen of 
 great age and wide experience, and connected with 
 no " Evangelical " partizanship, have recently asserted 
 that till within these last few years they never knew 
 of one.-^ All put together are of no argumentative 
 value whatever when placed side by side with the 
 general practice and clear intention of the Church 
 and the deliberately expressed opinion of the 
 weightiest writers ; and there is special force too 
 in the fact upon which Bishop Charles Wordsworth 
 has laid great stress, that in our Cathedrals, until 
 very recently, there has been an absolute agreement 
 of practice, condemnatory of the Eastward Position.^ 
 
 ^ See Appendix L. (Novelty of the Eastward Position). 
 2 In a published letter addressed to Mr. Beresford Hope (June 4th, 
 1874) by the Bishop of St. Andrew's. 
 
XL 
 
 CRITICISM OF THE PUECHAS JUDGMEl^T, 
 
 Mr. Morton Shaw's verbal arrangement of the Consecration Eubric— 
 Correct grammatical analysis of the sentence — The late Professor 
 Selwyn — The parenthetic view not necessary — Speech of Lord Cairns 
 — The Purchas Judgment substantially correct and just. 
 
 Befoke I make a few remarks on the Purchas Judg- 
 ment, it is necessary to encounter an objection raised by 
 Mr. Morton Shaw on the ground of the mere verbal and 
 grammatical meaning of this rubric. He says that in 
 order to arrive at ''the proper solution '' of the problem 
 before us, '' we must obviously look at the order in 
 which the words of the rubric are placed, for here 
 alone we can expect to find the true key to their in- 
 struction."^ I cannot agree in so restrictive a principle 
 of interpretation. No doubt it is important to observe 
 the order of the words ; but it is no less important to 
 observe the drift and aim of the rubric, and the point to 
 which it tends. If this sentence were given by one of 
 Her Majesty's Inspectors, in an examination of pupil- 
 teachers, as an example of ** analysis" (and it would 
 be a very good example) I feel sure that neither the 
 more intelligent pupil-teachers nor the examiner would 
 come to Mr. Morton Shaw's result. He proposes, by 
 the abolition of two commas, to group together certain 
 words which in the rubric are thus separated, and 
 to make *' The-priest-standing-before-the-Table" the 
 
 P. 13. 
 
98 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 subject of the sentence. But, in fact, the words 
 "standing before the Table" are a part of what the 
 grammatical analysts of our day term an adverbial 
 sentence, of which the verb is " hath ordered," and 
 which is connected with another adverbial sentence of 
 which the verbs are " may break and take," while both 
 are subordinated to the principal sentence, of which the 
 verb is " shall say." Thus Mr. Morton Shaw's theory 
 is thrown to the ground by a due regard to this 
 double subordination in the grammar of the rubric.-^ 
 
 But instead of following further my own reasoning 
 on the subject I will turn, for confirmation of my 
 view, to a great master of language, whom it is a 
 painful pleasure to quote, the late Professor Selwyn. 
 How is it possible to refer to his name without a pang 
 in the thought that so bright a star is extinguished in 
 our dark night of theological debate ? Some of his 
 private letters are before me at this moment ; and 1 
 desire to pause as I write, to lay my tribute of 
 admiration and affectionate respect upon his grave. 
 We shall not soon see again such a combination of 
 learniDg and epigram, of noble-hearted charity and 
 steadfast adherence to truth. That which brings his 
 honoured name into this part of my book is his letter 
 to the "Three Deans/' ^ in which he argues (p. 7) 
 
 ^ See the common-sense language of Wheatley, as quoted above, p. 94. 
 
 ^ Letters to the Very Rev. the Deans of York, St. Paul's, and Manchester, 
 with Historical Documents, showing the Origin and Meaning of the New 
 Rubrics of 1661 in the Communion Office. 1874. We should not fail to 
 notice Professor Selwyn's motto, " Behold how good and pleasant it is for 
 brethren to dwell together in unity ; " and the quotation from Bishop 
 Patteson which follows : " It is clearly better not to view such holy subjects 
 in connexion with controversy ; but then comes the thought, How is 
 Christendom to be united, when this diversity exists on so great a point ? 
 (Written on Holy Innocents' Day, 1867.)'* 
 
CBITICISM OF THE PUBOBAS JUDGMENT. 99 
 
 that while some of the Clergy hold and express the 
 belief that by the position facing eastward " is signified 
 and expressed the solemn oblation and sacrificial 
 presentation made by the celebrant, after the example 
 of Christ," ^ and others celebrate the Lord's Supper 
 as "a continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the 
 death of Christ " and a communion of His Body and 
 Blood, there can be among us no real unity. As 
 respects the rubric before us he says (pp. 13, 17,) that 
 having regard to historical facts, remembering that 
 in 1549 and 1552 the priest was in the same position 
 for all the prayers, and bearing in mind also Bishop 
 Cosin's MS. draft, he regards the words " standing 
 before the Table," as parenthetical, and as referring 
 only to the time of ordering the Bread and Wine, -and 
 he adds (p. 23) that in order to express the view of 
 " the three Deans,'' the rubric would have run thus : 
 — When the Priest lictth so ordered the Bread and 
 Wine, that he may with the more readiness and 
 decency break the Bread before the People, and tale 
 the Cup into his hands, standing before the Table 
 he shall say the Prayer of Conseci^ation, as followeth. 
 And yet I must beg leave in some degree to criticise 
 both the Purchas Judgment and the consensus of such 
 writers as Wheatley, Mant, and Blunt, even with the 
 great authority of Professor Selwyn to support their 
 view. In their determination that the officiating 
 minister's position during the prayer of consecration is 
 on the north side, facing southwards, they are per- 
 fectly correct. This does not admit of a question. But 
 they adopt a verbal interpretation of the rubric, which 
 
 1 Professor Selwyn told me that these words were quoted from Arch- 
 deacon Freeman, and I find them in Rites mid Ritual, p, 73. 
 
 H 2 
 
100 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 is not really necessary to secure this end. If my view 
 of the meaning of the preposition *' before '' is correct, 
 the priest is equally ''before the Table'' on the north 
 side or the west side.^ The position he is to assume 
 in ordering the elements is merely a matter of con- 
 venience. The essence of the matter is that he is to 
 ''stand before" the Table during this part of the 
 service, in contradistinction to his " hneeling at " the 
 Table during the prayer of humble access. The 
 interpretation here criticised is unnecessarily technical, 
 though it secures that one point which is really 
 essential — the breaking of the bread and the taking 
 of the cup at the north end. The performing of these 
 acts and the saying of the prayer of consecration by 
 the minister, with his face to the east, is of all pos- 
 sible interpretations of the rubric the most contrary 
 to its spirit and meaning. 
 
 It will be observed that in adopting the simple 
 view here advocated we steer clear of the difficulty, 
 .which in a speech of great importance, at a very 
 critical moment, the present Lord Chancellor laid 
 before the House of Lords. The most is made, very 
 naturally, by Mr. Beresford Hope,^ of this utterance 
 of one who, both personally and officially, has so 
 high a claim on our respectful attention. The essence 
 of the matter, I apprehend, is this. In the rubric 
 which we are considering either the words " standing 
 before the Table " belong to the whole sentence or they 
 do not. If they do not, how could Mr. Mackonochie 
 be justly condemned, on the ground that they do 
 belong to the whole, for kneeling at this part of the 
 
 ^ See again pp. 58, 59, and the Notes, with p. 92. 
 ^ Worsliijp in the Church of England, p. 175. 
 
CBITICISM OF TBE PUBGUAS JUDGMENT. 101 
 
 service ? If they do, what fault could be justly found 
 with Mr. Purchas for doing what the sentence, as a 
 whole, told him to do throughout the consecration 
 prayer ? When we look at the matter in this way we 
 become conscious of a certain haziness, uncertainty, 
 and faltering, on comparing the two judgments ; and 
 this, I imagine, is the fact which Lord Cairns wished 
 to bring to view. 
 
 And yet is it not obvious, on a rough and general 
 view of the case, that the Purchas Judgment is, 
 in its substance, just and correct ? I do not presume 
 to give any opinion upon the merely legal aspect of 
 the question ; and I am very sensible of the great 
 importance, in all such matters, of legal exactitude. 
 But looking at the subject with unprofessional eyes, 
 I cannot see any inconsistency between the two 
 judgments. In the one case the matter at issue 
 was a question of posture, in the other a question of 
 position. In the one case it was decided that, during 
 the prayer of consecration, Mr. Mackonochie had no 
 right to hneel ; in the other case, that Mr. Purchas 
 had no right to direct his face to the east. The two 
 decisions are not inconsistent with one another. The 
 reasons given by the judges in either case are mere 
 matters of opinion, and are not part of the judgments 
 themselves. Nor is the drawing of this distinction 
 any fancy of my own, or merely an ingenious method 
 of escaping from a difficulty. I fall back here upon 
 the words of Canon Trevor, who, I am quite sure, has 
 a better understanding than 1 have of the legal 
 bearings of this subject. 
 
 Canon Trevor tells us that we must draw a clear 
 and well-marked distinction between that which is 
 
102 BEFORE TEE TABLE. 
 
 termed the ** Judo^ment" of the Lords of the Council 
 arjd that which is really "the Decree of the Court."^ 
 " The Final Court of Appeal is not the Judicial 
 Committee, but the Queen in Council. The Judgment 
 of the Court is her Majesty's Order in Council, passed 
 on the Report of the Judicial Committee ; and this 
 Report is required by the statute to be read in open 
 Court. The (so called) Judgment of the Judicial 
 Committee is not the Report, and is not embodied in 
 it — it is not even communicated to the Court. It is 
 simply the argument or reasoning of the majority of 
 the Lords, read to the parties before the Report is 
 
 made, and published for general information 
 
 It follows that a large number of propositions, which 
 have been hastily quoted as * the law of the Church, 
 declared by the highest Ecclesiastical Tribunal' are 
 of no legal force. Their authority is that of the 
 obiter dicta of the greatest Judges, presiding in one 
 of the highest Courts of the realm.'' He adds that 
 we are under no obligation to attempt the recon- 
 ciliation of apparently couflicting cases of judicial 
 reasoning, " since none of these expositions have been 
 introduced into the Judgment of the Queen in 
 Council : " it is a well-known principle of law, that 
 ** no judgment is to be pressed beyond the issue 
 determined by the court." 
 
 Hence, w^hile I do not agree with that w^hich may 
 be termed the parenthetic view of Wheatley, Mant, 
 and Blunt, as expressing, literally and exactly, the true 
 intention of the rubric, I venture to contend that this 
 view is substantially just. If it is untenable, it is 
 not because the priest w^as intended to stand '* before " 
 
 ^ On tie Disputed Ruhrics, pp. 31 — 26, see p. 43. 
 
CBITICISM OF THE PUBCEAS JUDGMENT, 103 
 
 the Lord's Table with his face towards the east, but 
 because the Lord's Table was intended to be so placed, 
 as to put this turning towards the east out of the 
 question. Grammatically this view is quite tenable ; 
 and it is in harmony with the spirit and the meaning 
 of the Prayer Book. Our Communion Tables, too, 
 being now customarily fixed at all times against the 
 eastern walls of our chancels, it is a most natural and 
 reasonable view to regard the act of standing before 
 the Table to order the bread and wine as a parenthesis 
 in the process of consecration, or, in the words of 
 what is popularly termed " the Purchas Judgment," 
 to regard the Priest as "set free " to move at this 
 time, for convenience, to the front of the Table. But 
 if the Table itself were placed according to the rubric 
 and canon which relate to this subject, perfect clear- 
 ness and consistency would result, in letter as well as 
 spirit. In short, the " Purchas Judgment " is only 
 to be blamed, because it is not so strong and decisive 
 as it might have been made, if more account had 
 been taken of law and history in regard to the 
 placing of the Holy Table in 1662 "at the Commu- 
 nion time." 
 
XII. 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Exaggerated language concerning the Eastward Position — Determination 
 to obtain a victory, if possible — The first three Evangelists and St. 
 Paul — St, John VI. — The natural interpretation of words on this 
 subject used in the New Testament — No trace there of a sacrificial 
 Christian priesthood — The Holy Communion as an act of worship. 
 
 HAViNa now dealt, as I hope, sufficiently, tliougli by 
 no means exhaustively, with the historical aspect of 
 our question, and believing that I have established 
 the fact that the saying of the Consecration Prayer 
 eastwards is entirely contrary to the intention of the 
 Prayer Book, I will turn to the religious meaning of 
 the rubric which contains our rule to this effect. To 
 omit this side of the subject would evidently be to 
 leave tlie matter very incomplete. For it is abun- 
 dantly clear that this rubric is viewed not merely as 
 containing a rule, which has been long misapprehended 
 and which requires that the right practice be restored, 
 but as involving a great principle, which requires a 
 struggle to be made, so that a victory, if possible, may 
 be won. Both Mr. Morton Shaw and Mr. Beresford 
 Hope write upon the subject with the utmost warmth. 
 The former, having argued in favour of a certain 
 doctrinal view of the Holy Eucharist, to which I shall 
 presently turn, says, *' If we regard the Eucharist in 
 this light — and it is certainly, at the very least, an 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 105 
 
 admissible^ Church of England view of it, — such a 
 view must surely justify, must absolutely demand, the 
 use of the Front position, on the part of the celebrant, 
 for its adequate and suitable expression ; " and again : 
 " I am unable to contemplate the prospect of having 
 the north end explicitly and definitively forced upon 
 me, and upon those who think as I do, with any sort 
 of feeling in the least degree resembling equanimity 
 or resignation .... I cannot think of being myself 
 compelled to use the other position but with the most 
 profound repugnance and aversion."^ To this let me 
 add the words with which Mr. Beresford Hope con- 
 cludes his fifth chapter : " I feel more deeply on this 
 question of the priest's position than upon any other 
 question of controverted ceremonial .... If the 
 authorities in whose hands the ultimate solution of 
 all such questions lies were to refuse and to prohibit 
 a distinctive Eucharistic dress, I should regard their 
 decision as a mistake, a misfortune, and a loss ; but I 
 should wait in patience for days in which reason 
 might have the advantage of prejudice. But if, at 
 the highest moment of Christian worship, — when 
 God's priest most impressively pleads Christ's sacri- 
 fice in Christ's own words, in Christ's own ordinance 
 — loyal and peaceable children of the Church of 
 England were to be forbidden to unite themselves 
 with that priest in the great act, according to the 
 
 ^ If a doctrine is admissible as an opinion of individuals, it does not 
 follow that it has a claim to be inculcated in the ritual of a congregation. 
 There is the greatest difference between holding an opinion and expressing 
 it in a ceremomj. If all doctrinal opinions had a right to ceremonial 
 expression, we should be in danger of ecclesiastical dissolution. See 
 below, pp. 130 — 132, and the Notes. 
 
 ^ Position of the Celebrant, dr., pp. 96, 112. 
 
106 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 order in which the Holy Catholic Church has, from the 
 first, been wont to show forth the Lord's death, while 
 thoroughly acknowledging that the efficacy of the 
 Sacrament was in no way affected, I should in my 
 inmost soul, feel that there was a great wrong 
 done."^ 
 
 The tone of this language may be exaggerated, and 
 no doubt it is ; but it evidently implies a deep feeling 
 and a very determined resolve. We have much more 
 before us here than the interpretation of a misunder- 
 stood rule for the settlement of an attitude in itself 
 indifferent ; nor is there any doubt that the idea 
 present to the minds of those who write and feel 
 this is the idea of sacrifice^ — that the Eucharist is 
 viewed here as an offering to God, and not merely as 
 a gift to man. That this great Sacrament is a gift to 
 man no one indeed denies ; though such writing as 
 this has a tendency to throw deeply into the shade 
 
 1 Worship in the Church of England, p. 211. 
 
 2 I often find it extremely difl&cult to apprehend the exact meaning of 
 those who, while repudiating the Roman Catholic view of this subject, and 
 those near approximations to the Roman Catholic view which are now 
 current amongst us, still view the Eucharist as in itself a sacrifice. Some 
 more exact definitions would be of great advantage in this^^ntroversy. 
 That there is a sacrifice of prayer and praise and of ourselves, con- 
 comitant with the partaking of the Holy Communion, is allowed by aU ; 
 and on this point the Book of Common Prayer is very emphatic. That 
 there is an " oblation " of the bread and wine in the Church of England 
 Service is believed by many ; but this is quite a diflFerent subject from 
 that with which we are concerned in the Consecration Prayer. Many 
 persons speak of a " commemorative sacrifice," when they mean simply 
 " the commemoration of a sacrifice ; " but surely there must be great 
 confusion of thought, if these two phrases are treated as having the 
 same meaning. The very fact which we commemorate is the fact that 
 
 j the sacrifice is complete. If in our commemoration we still offer the 
 ^/ I same sacrifice wl;iich we commemorate, we are brought back to the 
 *>- ' Bo iuan j yiew. If it is a difi'erent sacrifice, then we are entitled to ask 
 what that sacrifice is. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 107 
 
 that which, to say the least, is the most prominent, 
 in regard to this subject, alike in the New Testament 
 and in the Prayer Book. Let us now look at these 
 two authorities, reverently recollecting which of them 
 is primary and which secondary. 
 
 Keverting, then, in all simplicity to the New Testa- 
 ment, let us remember, in the first place, what 
 information we find there on this subject, and what 
 we do not find. A proper reverence for Holy Scrip- 
 ture requires us to be very careful not to introduce 
 into the Sacred Volume that which was not in it 
 when it came from God. We have four accounts 
 of the institution of this Sacrament, one from each 
 of the first three Evangelists,^ and one from St. Paul, 
 in the First Epistle to the Corinthians,^ in which 
 letter he also gives some instruction concerning this 
 Sacrament.^ In no other Epistle by any one of the 
 sacred writers is this subject mentioned at all. There 
 are likewise allusions in the Acts of the Apostles to 
 the reception of the Holy Communion as a fact and 
 a custom.* I will add, also, what we find in the sixth 
 chapter of St. John's Gospel.^ Though, as is well 
 known to all theologians, it has been forcibly argued 
 by weighty commentators that the Eucharist does not 
 at all come within the scope of what is said in this 
 chapter,^ yet I would rather assume the opposite view 
 to be correct, partly because I myself think there 
 
 1 Matt. XX vi. 17—30 ; Mark xiv. 12—25 ; Luke xxiL 7—21. 
 
 2 1 Cor. xi. 23- 26. 
 
 3 1 Cor. X. 16, 17, 21 ; xi. 20—34. 
 
 * Acts ii. 42, 46 ; xx. 7—11. 
 
 * John vi. 26—63. 
 
 * I may simply here combine a reference to the note of Maldonatus on 
 St. John vi. 53, with one to a sermon in Dr. Arnold's third volume. See 
 also The Life of Dr. Arnold, Vol. ii. p. 331. 
 
108 BEFORE THE TABLE, 
 
 must have been in our Lord's words on this occasion 
 some anticipatory reference to that which He was pur- 
 posing to ordain, partly because in an argument like 
 this it is a good policy to concede as much as possible, 
 partly because by the utmost concession on this point 
 I gain the more for my argument. For what is there 
 in this solemn discourse that points in the least de- 
 gree to the thought of a sacrifice, as offered by man 
 to God ? Throughout it is the reiterated assurance 
 of a gift from God to man. Let us touch, one by 
 one, with reverent fingers, the sacred links of this 
 golden chain: ''Ye seek me because ye did eat of 
 the loaves — labour for the meat that endureth unto 
 everlasting life — my Father giveth you the true bread 
 from Heaven — I am the bread of life — I am the bread 
 which came down from Heaven — he that eateth of 
 this bread shall live for ever." If I were disposed in 
 the presence of such a passage to use a mere arg amen- 
 tum ad hominem, I would urge that they whose views 
 of the Sacraments lead them to limit the scope of this 
 passage to the Eucharist, prove to themselves that 
 the main aspect of that ordinance is not sacrifice but 
 communion. 
 
 But let us turn to those passages about the reference 
 of which to the Eucharist no doubt can be entertained. 
 They tell us of this Sacrament as a most lively, afiec- 
 ting, and eloquent remembrance of Christ — as a per- 
 petual proclaiming, from age to age, of the death of 
 Christ — as a communication of Christ Himself to our 
 souls — as an act of communion which, by virtue 
 of their union with Him, Christians have one with 
 another — as a solemn ordinance, which is to be 
 diligently purged from all irreverence and careless- 
 

 THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW TEST A ME 
 
 ness. As to those words dvdfjuvijcns and KarayyeXXere 
 in St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, I am, 
 for my own part, firmly convinced that they would 
 never have been interpreted as denoting the remind- 
 ing God of the sacrifice of Christ, if an argument 
 had not been wanted for a sacrificial view of the 
 Eucharist, which had become current, and which it 
 was necessary to justify. Let any one dispossess his 
 mind of conventional theology, and try to reproduce 
 in imagination the scene of the Last Supper when the 
 Lord was addressing those whom He was about to 
 leave ; and can he doubt how tovto iroielrG els Trjv 
 €/jLr]v dvdfivrjacv were meant and understood?^ Let 
 any one call to mind that the other word is one of St. 
 Paul's customary phrases for preaching Christ or pro- 
 claiming the Gospel ; and can he doubt that rov 
 Odvarov tov Kvplov narayyeXXere is the *' setting forth " 
 of ^' Christ crucified " in the congregation and to the 
 world. Nor in the Acts of the Apostles is there any 
 trace of a sacrificial view of the ordinance, or any 
 title anywhere in the New Testament given to the 
 ministers of the Christian Church, Apostles or others, 
 that would in the slightest degree suggest such a view. 
 This last point seems to me to contain an argument on 
 this subject which cannot be answered. The Apostles 
 and Ministers of the Christian Church receive various 
 
 ^ As regards the phrase tovto TroieiTe, and the sacrificial interpreta- 
 tion sometimes given to it, see Dr. Vogan on The True Doctrine of the 
 Eucharist, p. 364, and his Appendix FF. He shows that when irouoi 
 in the Septuagint denotes the offering of a sacrifice, it has some other 
 word connected with it, as in Levit. vi. 22, 2 Kings x. 21. Let it be 
 remarked, too, that in St. Paul's account of the institution of the Lord's 
 Supper, the words are : " this do, as often as ye dririk it." His account 
 and St. Luke's are substantially identical. The words tovto TroieiTe 
 do not occur in St. Matthew and St. Mark. 
 
110 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 designations, but never one which is identical with, or 
 similar to, the customary designation of the sacrificing 
 priests of the Jewish Church/ To take only a single 
 contrast by way of illustration, see the Old Testament 
 overflowing, as it were, into the New, where mention 
 is made of the "Priest Zacharias '' at the ** altar of 
 incense ;"^ and then see how the Apostle of the 
 Gentiles, discarding all literal application of such 
 language to himself, is free to apply it allegoricaHy, 
 and to speak of his Gentile converts as the " sacrifice '' 
 he ofiers to God.^ And in this particular the whole of 
 the New Testament is absolutely consistent with itself. 
 Is it not a very bold proceeding — might I not almost 
 say it is a great irreverence — to insist on present- 
 ing the Holy Eucharist chiefly in that aspect in which 
 it is not exhibited by the New Testament at all ? Is 
 it not strange to make that a distinguishing feature of 
 the Christian Religion, which is not even revealed in 
 Scripture ? How can a human interpolation command 
 for us the same respect as those original writings which 
 we regard as Divine ? 
 
 But it will be said that the Holy Communion is our 
 highest act of worship, and that therefore it was to be 
 a sacrifice, and our greatest sacrifice. Now, I doubt 
 
 ^ In one of the most comprehensive passag3s of the New Testament 
 (Eph. iv. 8 — 16) we are told that after Christ ascended, He gave to the 
 Church ** apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers." If He gave 
 also "priests," how can the omission be accounted for by those who 
 contend that the office of strict priesthood is essential " for the perfect- 
 ing of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the 
 body of Christ " ? 
 
 2 Luke i. 6, 11. 
 
 ^ Kom. XV. 16. The mere fact that St. Paul uses this sacrificial lan- 
 guage allegoricaHy is, to my mind, a very strong proof that it could not 
 be literally applicable to his own office. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, 111 
 
 whether it is wise to institute comparisons as to the 
 relative value of different means of grace. If it were 
 necessary to follow any line of reasoning of this kind, 
 the analogy of Scripture would suggest to us that we 
 ought to set *' the Word" in a higher place than the 
 Sacraments.^ And again, as to nearness of approach to 
 God, the Sermon on the Mount and other passages 
 of the Gospels seem to say to us that this approach is 
 nearer in private prayer than on any other occasion. 
 I should suppose that St. Paul's communion with God 
 was quite as intimate, when on his solitary way to 
 Assos, as when he had broken bread with the congrega- 
 tion at Troas.^ But, as I have said, I doubt the wisdom 
 of such comparisons. Most certainly, when we " draw 
 near " to receive the blessing of this Sacrament, there 
 must be supplication and homage. I should be quite 
 willing to admit that at this time we are engaged in 
 the highest act of our public worship. But is there 
 not some confusion of thought in speaking of the 
 Holy Communion as in itself an act of worship ? It 
 seems to me that worship in this case is collateral and 
 coordinate, and that the Lord's Supper itself is a 
 memorial, a communion, a proclamation of truth, and 
 a conveyance of grace. Kemembering Christ, calling 
 His great atonement to mind, receiving of His fulness 
 
 ^ Not only do we find no mention of this Sacrament in parts of the 
 New Testament, more especially the Epistle to the Hebrews, where, on 
 what I will venture to call the ultra-sacramental theory of Christianity, 
 such mention must have occurred ; but throughout its books the 
 mention of " the Word " meets us everywhere, and always in a position 
 of high supremacy. Let the consensus of such passages as the following 
 be carefully marked : John xv. 3 ; Acts xx. 32 ; 2 Cor. v. 19 ; Col. iii. 16 ; 
 Jam. i. 21 ; 1 Pet. i. 23 ; 1 John ii. 14. No such consensus of pervading 
 supremacy can be traced in the New Testament, as regards the Eucharist. 
 
 2 Acts XX. 11,13. 
 
112 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 by His own appointed way, we must worship, we must 
 offer the sacrifice of our prayer and praise, of our hearts 
 and our lives. I recognise it, too, as highly fitting 
 that such an occasion should be surrounded by circum- 
 stances of reverence,, solemnity and dignity. But all 
 these considerations put together cannot alter what we 
 find in the New Testament, or transform a gift to man 
 so that it becomes an offering to God. 
 
 This must suffice for an allusion to the Scriptural 
 aspect of the case. We are still more closely con- 
 cerned, in the present discussion, with the view taken 
 of the matter in the formularies of the Church of 
 England. That which abstractedly is secondary 
 becomes to us in this instance primary. Even if our 
 Prayer Book were, in this matter, out of harmony 
 with the Bible, still the subject with which we 
 should be obliged to deal would be the doctrine of 
 the Prayer Book. 
 
XIII. 
 
 TEACHING OF OUR COMMUNION i^ERVICE. 
 
 Final exclusion of the word "Altar" from the Prayer Book — True 
 meaning of the word " Priest " in the Prayer Book — Teaching of the 
 rubrics in the Communion Service — Teaching of the prayers and 
 thanksgivings in that service — Doctrine of the Consecration Prayer. 
 
 In endeavouring to state the doctrine of the Book 
 of Common Prayer in reference to the question of 
 Eucharistic Sacrifice, I am disposed, first of all, to 
 urge the immense significance of the absolute and 
 final removal of the word "Altar" from that Book. 
 The force of this argument is shown, partly by the 
 anger with which it is received, and partly by the 
 ingenious and circuitous replies by which it is 
 met. The opinions and habit of various writers in 
 the Church of England are quoted in favour of the 
 use of this term ; but still the fact remains that it is 
 excluded from our authorized ecclesiastical vocabulary. 
 Those who are most vehement in their dislike of 
 Erastianism are sometimes so far able to overcome 
 this repugnance as to adduce the retention of this word 
 in the Coronation Service (the variations of which 
 depend on the government of the day), in order to 
 overbear the deliberate rejection^ of the word by the 
 
 * It is not meant to assert that there was a struggle for the reintroduc- 
 tion of this term in 1662 ; but it is important to observe that if there 
 was any effort of this kind, it was defeated, and that if there was no such 
 effort, then Cosin, and those who were like-minded with him, were willing 
 to dispense with the term. 
 
 I 
 
114 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Convocation of 1662.' It is a policy, more diplomatic 
 than candid, with some writers, to throw into the 
 shade the great fact that from 1552 to that year, 
 the ecclesiastical battle, swaying this way and that, 
 till finally it was decided, was between the principles 
 represented by the two words '' Altar " and " Table." 
 The worst course of all is the contention that the two 
 terms are synonymous. I could not write with any 
 honest sincerity if I did not repudiate this as utterly 
 untenable. This theory is an absolute contradiction, 
 alike to correct etymology and to the facts of English 
 Church history during its most exciting time.^ The 
 
 1 The form and order of the Queen's Coronation has recently been re- 
 published by Mr. Fuller Russell under the title of The Coronation Service 
 according to the use of the Church of England, though this service has 
 never received the sanction of Convocation. It is clear in this service 
 that, as regards the position of the Queen's Chair, the south side of the 
 Altar is used in a general way for the southern part of the West side ; 
 and it is urged that thus " south side " is not synonymous with ** south end^ 
 But what we are concerned with is the north side, and it is overlooked 
 that when the Archbishop takes his place at the " north side" (p. 5), and 
 again pronounces the blessing over the Queen (p. 13) from the north side, 
 he is really at the north end. See also p. 27, where the Queen is said to 
 retire from the Church " through the door on the south side of the Altar, 
 into King Edward's chapel." This cannot be on any part of the west side. 
 
 ^ The distinction, as seen from the historical point of view, was laid 
 down in 1857 by eminent lawyers of calm minds, independently of 
 the heat of the clerical mind. " The distinction between an Altar and 
 Communion Table is in itself essential and deeply founded on the most 
 important difference, in matters of faith, between Protestants and 
 Romanists. By the latter the Lord's JSupper was considered as a sacrifice 
 of the Body and Blood of the Saviour ; the Altar was the place on which 
 the sacrifice was to be made. The Reformers, on the other hand, considered 
 the Holy Communion not as a sacrifice, but as a feast to be celebrated at 
 the Lord's Table." The Judges on this occasion were Lord Chancellor 
 Cranworth, Lord Wensleydale, Mr. Pemberton Leigh (afterwards Lord 
 Kingsdown)^ Sir John Patteson, and Sir William Maule. They proceed 
 to bring forward various authorities of greater or less weight, as, for in- 
 stance, the injunctions of Bishop Ridley, that, "in order to move and 
 turn the simple to the right use of the Lord's Supper, Curates and 
 Churchwardens arc to erect and set up the Lord's board in the form of an 
 
TEACHING OF OUR COMMUNION SERVICE. 115 
 
 argument derived from a comparison of our Prayer 
 Book of 1662 with that of 1549 is so decisive, that I 
 need not dwell on it further. The historical truth of 
 the case comes down on this whole controversy with 
 the force of a hammer. 
 
 But it is urged that the word "Priest," and the 
 word '* Altar," are correlative ; that the one implies 
 the other ; and that having *' Pries,ts " recognised in 
 our Prayer Book, we have literally "Altars" in our 
 churches. If this were really a just and full state- 
 ment of the case, it would be one of the strangest 
 occurrences in history that the word *' Altar " should 
 have been utterly and finally excluded from the Book 
 of Common Prayer, and that the very thing which 
 was intended by our last revisers to be clear, should 
 have been made obscure. It is quite true, indeed, in 
 a certain sense, that the words ** Altar " and " Priest " 
 are correlative. The latter term is ambiguous, and 
 may denote either, according to its derivation, the 
 Christian Presbyter of the New Testament, or, ac- 
 cording to the usage of our Authorized Version, the 
 Sacrificing Minister under the Jewish system. If a 
 doubt were to arise as to the meaning of the word in 
 any particular instance, the doubt would naturally be 
 settled by inquiring whether the word " Altar " is 
 associated with it. A Sacrificer must have an Altar. 
 If the word " Altar " remained in our Book of Common 
 
 honest Table," and the injunction of Queen Elizabeth, that " the Holy 
 Table in every Church be decently made and set in the place where the 
 Altar stood ; " and finally, near the close of the judgment, in answer to 
 observations made on the other side, the great general principle is seriously 
 and strongly laid down again : " To these observations," say these eminent 
 lawyers, " the answer is that the distinction between an Altar and a Table 
 is in itself essential." Ecclesiastical Judgments of the Privy Council, by 
 Brodrick and Freraantle, pp. 144 — 152. 
 
 I 2 
 
116 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Prayer, it would be fair to say that the Church of Eng- 
 land took the word " Priest " in that sense, however 
 inconsistent we might feel this to be with the New Testa- 
 ment. But as the case stands, the meaning of this term 
 in the Prayer Book is narrowed to the other sense. Thus 
 the Bible and the Prayer Book are in this matter con- 
 sistent. The *' Priest" of our English Church Services 
 is the " Presbyter '' of the New Testament, as indeed 
 must be the case if these Services are Scriptural. 
 
 There is nothing new in these statements. They 
 are quite commonplace. But it has become necessary 
 to repeat them. The case does not really admit of 
 any doubt. If any necessity existed for bringing 
 forward authorities, I might quote such unexception- 
 able writers as Hooker^ and Mede.^ But perhaps it 
 is more to my purpose to mention Archbishop Laud 
 himself. Whatever his private opinions may have 
 been, he has given the most public sanction to our 
 making the words *' Priest " and " Presbyter " synony- 
 mous ; for in every part of his Scotch Prayer Book of 
 1637 the latter is employed and not the former.^ 
 
 ^ See Keble's edition, vol. v. c. 78, pp. 471 — 2. 
 
 ^ " Our Curates of holy things in the Gospel are not to offer Sacrifice, 
 and therefore ought not to be called Sacerdotes. .... If it be well ex- 
 amined, Priest is the English of Presbyter, and not of Sacerdos, there 
 being in our tongue no word in use for ISacerdos : Priest, which we use for 
 both, being improperly used for a Sacrificer, but naturally expressing a 
 Presbyter, the name whereby the Apostles both call themselves and those 
 which succeed them in their charge." — Mede's Worhs (1672), p. 27. 
 
 3 In Hall's Frag7)ienta Liturgica, vol. v., are editions of the Scotch 
 Liturgy of various dates ; and in all of them, though in some of the later 
 the word " Altar " has stealthily crept in, the word " Presbyter " holds its 
 ground throughout. In editions of this Liturgy, dated 1800 and 1844 (pp. 
 272 and 302) we find " then shall the Presbyter, turning him to the Altar, 
 kneel down and say," instead of Laud's original form in 1636," then shall 
 the Presbyter, kneeling down at God's board, say." The change seems to 
 have taken place, by authority or otherwise, between 1743 and 1755. 
 
TEACHING OF OUR COMMUNION SERVICE. 117 
 
 But, though the removal of the word "Altar" from 
 our formularies sums up in itself nearly the whole of 
 our present controversy, let us go into the matter a 
 little further. There are several tests by which we 
 can try the Church of England as to its doctrine of 
 the Holy Eucharist. Our Communion Office itself 
 supplies the first and most obvious. 
 
 Let us look through the rubrics, the prayers, and 
 the thanksgivings of this Service. If it is the doctrine 
 of our Church that the Eucharist is inherently, and 
 in itself, and by Divine appointment, a sacrifice, we 
 should expect this doctrine to be expressed in some 
 part of our authorized office. But I search for any 
 such expression in vain. 
 
 First let us glance at the rubrics.^ In them we 
 are met immediately by such phrases as " partakers 
 of the Holy Communion," ''partakers of the Lord's 
 Table." Even as regards the rubric which gives 
 directions for the placing of the bread and wine on 
 the Table, though an effort was made to introduce 
 into it the word " offer," and thus to convert the bread 
 and wine into an " oblation," as in the Scotch Prayer 
 Book of 1637, yet this was overruled by Convocation 
 and Parliament.^ So resolute w^as the determination 
 to exclude from the Priest's part in the service the 
 semblance of sacrificial acts. And if we pursue the 
 rubrics further, we find both exhortations addressed to 
 those who receive " the Holy Sacrament " or " the Holy 
 Communion," the confession made in the name of those 
 " who are minded to receive" and the prayer of humble 
 
 1 It ought to be carefully borne in mind that the authorized desigi ation 
 of the service is " the Order of the Administration of the Lord's Supper." 
 
 2 See Procter On the Book of Common Prayer, p. 351. 
 
118 BE FOE E THE TABLE. 
 
 access said " in the name of all them that shall 
 receive" Finally, it is ordered that there is never to 
 be any celebration of the Lord's Supper at all, " ex- 
 cept there be a convenientnumber to communicate 
 ivith the Priest ; '' and so tenaciously is the principle 
 which this implies maintained, that it is added : '^ If 
 there be not above twenty persons in the parish of 
 discretion to receive the Communion, yet there shall 
 be no Communion, except four (or three at the least) 
 commu7iicate with the Priest.'^ 
 
 And now from the rubrics that regulate this service 
 let us turn to the prayers and other parts of the service 
 itself. No word is used denoting that this Divine 
 institution of the Eucharist is a Sacrifice ; but every- 
 where it is presented to us as a Communion. It is 
 particularly important to observe that the true charac- 
 ter of the dvafjLV7]ais prescribed to us in the institution 
 of this Sacrament is defined for us in our service. In 
 the first of the two forms for giving notice of the 
 celebration of the Holy Communion, we are told that 
 it is to be " received in remembrance of Christ's 
 meritorious cross and passion ; " in the second we read 
 with stronger emphasis, " It is your duty to receive 
 the Communion in remembrance of the sacrifice of 
 His death, as He Himself hath commanded." This is 
 the explanation authoritatively given to us of the 
 " perpetual memory " which is prominently named in 
 y the Consecration Prayer ; and in harmony with this 
 are the words of the administration, " Take, eat in re- 
 membrance," ^' Drink in remembrance." The idea of 
 reception runs like a thread through every part of the 
 Office. In every form of expression this is set before 
 us. Li the Eucharist we have " spiritual food and 
 
TEACHING OF OUR COMMUNION SERVICE. 119 
 
 sustenance : " it is a '' heavenly feast," a " rich feast," 
 a '' table decked with all kind of provision," " a 
 banquet of heavenly food." If we express our un- 
 worthiness of so great a benefit, it is in the touching 
 words of the Syrophenician woman concerning " the 
 crumbs under the table." And while there is so great 
 a wealth of words to indicate this aspect of the Lord's 
 Supper, there is absolutely not a syllable to present it in 
 the character of a sacrifice. The thought of the sacred 
 *' Table " is at every moment before us. The thought 
 of the " Altar " is not perceptible. No mention of 
 sacrifice occurs at all till we reach the prayers at the 
 close of the service, when the Communion is complete,^ 
 and then it is the sacrifice of " praise and thanks- 
 giving," the sacrifice of *' ourselves, our souls and our 
 bodies" — in strict harmony with what we read in 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews (after the mention of 
 Christ's great completed sacrifice) concerning the 
 ofiering of the "sacrifice of praise to God continually," 
 and those " sacrifices of doing good and communi- 
 cating," with which God is " well pleased."^ To all 
 which must be added this significant fact, that this 
 particular prayer, in which all the sacrificial expression 
 of our Eucharistic Service is concentrated, is itself an 
 optional prayer. 
 
 When I compare this presentation of the Lord's 
 Supper in our service with that difierent presenta- 
 tion of it in books and tracts all around us, for 
 which this service gives no sanction, I am utterly 
 astonished and made very conscious of the peril in 
 
 1 This ought to be very carefully noted. Even this presentation of 
 the Holy Eucharist in a sacrificial aspect does not occur in the Consecra- 
 tion Prayer. 
 
 2 Heb. xiii. 10, 15, 16. 
 
120 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 which we are placed. And here let us look carefully 
 at the Prayer of Consecration, in which the notion of 
 sacrifice, if it was characteristic of the service itself, 
 would surely be found. Let us see what this 
 prayer really is. In some of the arguments I am com- 
 bating it is assumed that it is an act of sacrifice to 
 Almighty God : that which requires to be proved is 
 taken for granted ; and then from this assumption the 
 writers reason backwards to the rubric. But there 
 is not a word in the prayer which expresses or implies 
 the offering of a sacrifice to God at this moment of 
 the service. At the beginning of the prayer the com- 
 pleted sacrifice of Christ is, with the strongest 
 emphasis of which language is capable, laid down as 
 the justification of the supplication which is to follow. 
 At the end of the prayer the historical recital of the 
 institution of this Sacrament is combined with the 
 Priest's manual acts. In the midst, thus framed by 
 two great historical statements, the supplication is 
 simply this, that our merciful Father will be *' pleased 
 to grant that we, receiving His creatures of Bread and 
 Wine according to His Son our Lord Jesus Christ's holy 
 Institution, m remembrance of His death and passion, 
 may be partakers of His most Blessed Body and 
 Blood." The minister, at this moment of the service, 
 is not making an offering to God on behalf of the con- 
 gregation, but invoking a blessing on that of which 
 the congregation are about to participate.^ 
 
 ^ Let it also be marked that, " if the consecrated Bread or Wine be all 
 spent before all have communicated, the Priest is to consecrate more 
 according to the form before prescribed ; beginning at [^Our Saviour Christ 
 in the, same night, &c.] for the blessing of the bread ; and at [Like^vise 
 after Supper, &c.] for the blessing of the cup." This then must be the 
 consecration ; and we see that it is simply a recital. This, too, is a rubric 
 of 1662. 
 
XIV. 
 
 TEACHING OF OUR OTHER FORMULARIES. 
 
 Language of the Ordination Service — Doctrine of the Church Catechism — 
 The Articles — The Homilies — The Canons. 
 
 But the Communion Service in our Prayer Book 
 is not the only instruction which is supplied to us 
 in the Church of England concerning this serious 
 question. We find the same subject set before us, and 
 with perfect consistency, in the commission given to 
 priests at Ordination, in our Catechism for the in- 
 struction of the young, in the Articles which are 
 signed by the Clergy, and in our authorized Homilies 
 for the people. We may with advantage glance at 
 each of these in order, before we turn to the con- 
 clusion of this " argument. 
 
 And first, the "Form and Manner of Ordering 
 Priests." In this part of the Prayer Book no dis- 
 honour is done to the Holy Eucharist. On the 
 contrary, the " Service for the Communion " is 
 interwoven and incorporated with the Ordination 
 Service. The Sacraments, too, are — as is fitting — 
 prominently mentioned in the commission given to 
 those who are admitted to the order of priesthood. 
 But what is the language used on this subject ? All 
 the stress is laid on ministration. Not a word is 
 said concerning sacrifice, or any allusion made, how- 
 ever remotely, to any sacrificial aspect of the Holy 
 
122 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Communion. In the course of his solemn questioning, 
 the Bishop asks : — " Will you give your faithful 
 diligence so to minister the Sacraments as the Lord 
 hath commanded, and as this Church and Eealm 
 hath received the same '? '' During the act of ordi- 
 nation these words are used, "Be thou a faithful 
 dispenser of God's Holy Sacraments ; " and when the 
 Bible is delivered into the hands of each one, it is 
 said, " Take thou authority to minister the Holy 
 Sacraments in the congregation." But this is not 
 all. If we compare the Roman Pontifical with the 
 Eno^lish Ordinal, we find that a most sio^nificant 
 change has been made, as regards this subject, 
 both in ceremonial and in words. In the ordaining 
 of a Eoman Catholic Priest, the Bishop delivers into 
 the hand of each '' the Chalice and the Paten, 
 with the Host," saying the words *' Eeceive power 
 to offer sacrifice to God, and to celebrate masses, 
 as well for the living as for the dead;"^ and the 
 final benediction is as follows, ''The blessing of God 
 Almighty, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, 
 descend upon you, that you may be blessed in the 
 priestly order, and offer propitiatory sacrifices for the 
 sins and offences of the people to Almighty God, to 
 whom be honour and glory for ever."^ It is needless 
 to add any commentary on this contrast, except just 
 to observe that the change is in remarkable harmony 
 with one of the Thirty-nine Articles to be mentioned 
 below, and expresses the same historical truth. How 
 
 1 Fontificale Bomanum (Par. 1664), p. 50. 
 
 2 We fiiid the same forms, with a slight verbal difference, in the Sarum 
 Ordinal. See Maskell's Monumenta Ritualia, iii. pp. 214, 222. We 
 should note, too, the form of blessing the hands " to offer sacrifice," 
 p. 212. 
 
TEACHING OF OXJR OTHER FORMULARIES. 123 
 
 can it be consistent to urge that a sacrificial office 
 of the Clergy should be expressed by a ceremony, 
 when in the whole Ordination Service there is no 
 reference to any sacrificial office at all ? 
 
 And now reference mu.st be made to the Church 
 Catechism. That which a Church holds in a matter 
 of grave and fundamental doctrine will surely be 
 seen by the teaching on the subject which that 
 Church directs to be given to the young. We do 
 not indeed expect complete teaching to be given on 
 any subject to the young ; but we do expect the 
 main points to be made clear to them. And we are 
 dealing here with a main point ; otherwise those are 
 inexcusable who have raised this controversy. Now the 
 latter part of our Catechism is looked upon even by 
 some Churchmen with suspicion, as tending to exalt 
 the Sacraments unduly, and to inculcate extreme views 
 of their efficacy. It is certain that those by whom 
 this part was compiled cannot be accused of under- 
 valuing the efficacy of the Sacraments. Hence their 
 questions and answers are the more important for 
 this argument. Now we are there directed to teach to 
 the young absolutely nothing concerning the Eucharist 
 viewed as a sacrifice. It is affectionately set forth 
 to our youthful Christians as a communion, as a 
 special blessing to the soul, as a help to the recol- 
 lection of Christ, as an incentive to charity. Every- 
 thing points to reception, as that by which "the 
 continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death 
 of Christ" is to be maintained. Everything in this 
 Catechism indicates in this ordinance a great gift to 
 man ; nothing suggests that we are to see in it an 
 offering to God. Let this be compared with the 
 
124 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 language of the Eonian Catholic Catechisms on the 
 same subject ; or, what is more to the point, let it 
 be compared with some recent manuals compiled 
 by those who, having accepted English doctrine, 
 employ much activity in teaching a doctrine very 
 different. 
 
 It is not worth while to spend many words on the 
 Thirty-nine Articles, partly because there can be no 
 doubt of their paramount authority, and partly 
 because, in the matter before us, they are very clear 
 and explicit, both positively and negatively. On the 
 one hand, '' the ministering of the Sacraments in the 
 congregation," "the receiving rightly and by faith 
 the Sacraments ministered,^' are set forth several times 
 as the characteristic features of these ordinances '} on 
 the other hand it is said, as though a commentary 
 were to be added to the above-mentioned omissions 
 from the old Ordination Service : " The Sacrifices of 
 Masses, in the which it was commonly said that the 
 Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, 
 to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous 
 fables and dangerous deceits."^ 
 
 The Homilies, however, deserve a special notice 
 apart from the Articles. No one, indeed, supposes 
 that every phrase of the Homilies is binding upon the 
 conscience of every member of the Church of England. 
 But they are stated in the Articles, which were con- 
 temporary, to contain a godly and wholesome doctrine 
 necessary for those times ; ^ and " those times " w^ere 
 specially occupied with the Eucharistic question. 
 Moreover the Books of Homilies were reckoned in the 
 Canons of 1603 among the " ornaments " appertaining 
 
 ^ Art. xxiii.— xxvi. ^ Art. xxxi. ^ Art. xxxv. 
 
TEACHING OF OUR OTHER FORMULARIES. 125 
 
 to Churches; ^ and thus the sanction of the seventeenth 
 century was given, in this respect, to the doctrinal 
 teaching of the sixteenth. 
 
 It is natural to turn here especially to the two parts 
 of the Homily " of the worthy receiving and reverent 
 esteeming of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of 
 Christ," where it is to be noted, in the first place, that 
 the very title lays upon reception the same stress 
 which we have seen elsewhere in the Prayer Book. In 
 this Homily it is said that " the great love of our 
 Saviour Christ doth not only appear in that dear-bought 
 benefit of our redemption and salvation by His death 
 and passion, but also in that He so kindly provided 
 that the same most merciful work might be had iii 
 continual remembrance, to take some place in us, and 
 
 not to be frustrate of its end and purpose Our 
 
 lovino: Saviour hath ordained and established the re- 
 memhrance of His great mercy in the institution of 
 
 His heavenly supper So then of necessity we 
 
 must be ourselves partakers of this table, and not 
 
 beholders of other This we must be sure of 
 
 especially, that this Supper be in such wise done and 
 ministered, as our Lord and Saviour did, and com- 
 manded to be done, as His Apostles used it, and the 
 good fathers in the Primitive Church frequented it. 
 .... Neither can he be devout that otherwise doth 
 presume that it was given by the Author. We must 
 then take heed lest of the memory it be made a sacri- 
 fice!^ .... It followeth to have with this knowledge 
 
 ^ Canon Ixxx. 
 
 2 Compare what we find in the Second Part of the " Homily for Whit- 
 sunday : " " Christ commended to His Church a sacrament of His Body 
 and Blood : they have changed it into a sacrifice for the quick and the 
 dead.'' There is in the 81st of the Tracts for the Times (pp. 43, 44), a 
 
126 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 a sure and constant /aiV A, that Christ hath made upon 
 His Cross a full and sufficient sacrifice for thee. . . 
 . . Herein thou needest no other man's help, no other 
 sacrifice or oblation, no sacrificing priest, no mass, no 
 
 means established by man's invention Seeing 
 
 that the name and thing itself doth admonish us of 
 thanks, let us (as St. Paul saith, Heb. xiii.) offer always 
 to God the host or sacrifice of praise by Christ." And 
 with this exact and careful teaching the language of the 
 otber Homilies on the same subject is quite consistent. 
 Thus when the topic is ** the Eight Use of the Church 
 or Temple of God, and of the Eeverence due unto the 
 same," it is declared that the Church is " the house of 
 the Lord, for that the service of the Lord (as teaching 
 and hearing of His holy Word, calling upon His holy 
 name, giving thanks to Him for His great and innumer- 
 able benefits, and due ministering of the sacraments) 
 is there used." ^ So, too, in regard to " repairing and 
 keeping clean, and comely adorning of Churches," we 
 have the following sentence : — " Like as men are well 
 refreshed and comforted, when they find their houses 
 having all things in good order, and all comers clean 
 and sweet ; so when God's house, the church, is well 
 adorned, with places convenient to sit in, with the 
 Pulpit for the preacher, with the Lord's Table for the 
 
 most curious comment on the passage quoted in the text. The writer of 
 the Homily is said to employ " popular " language, and to use the simple 
 word " sacrifice " in the Popish sense, while he uses " that of the memory" 
 for what was anciently designated by '* sacrifice : " and then he refers to 
 Courayer's free translation, which might more properly be termed an 
 ingenious alteration, " Cavendum, ne sacrificium commemorationis con- 
 vertat in sacrificium proprium et materiale." 
 
 ^ For these words see the end of the first part and the beginning of 
 the second part of this Homily ; and compare the similar words at the 
 beginning of the first part of the " Sermon against Peril of Idolatry." 
 
TEACHING OF OUR OTHER FORMULARIES. 127 
 
 ministration of His Holy Supper, with the Font to 
 christen in, and also is kept clean, comely, and sweetly, 
 the people are more desirous and the more comforted 
 to resort thither, and to tarry there the whole time 
 appointed them."^ 
 
 And to all this may be added, in conclusion, a 
 reference to the language of the Canons. The rule 
 regarding the Communion Table ^ has regard to 
 "ministration" or "administering," thrice repeated ; 
 and the phraseology is similar which deals with 
 Divine service on Holy Days and in College Chapels, 
 with the duties of Ministers, whether they be Lec- 
 turers or Preachers, and with the Communion in 
 Private Houses. In fact, wherever we question our 
 authorized formularies for' their teaching on this sub- 
 ject, the emphasis they lay on reception in the Holy 
 Eucharist, and their silence in regard to sacrijice in 
 this Sacrament, are alike remarkable.^ 
 
 ^ I am not aware of a single passage in the Homilies which gives any 
 countenance to our viewing the Eucharist as a sacrifice. As a precaution 
 indeed (knowing how some of our modern controversialists argue) I refer 
 to the quotation, in the Homily on " Common Prayer and Sacraments," of 
 a constitution of Justinian, in which bishops and priests are said to 
 " celebrate the holy oblation." This quotation, however, is not brought 
 forward for the purpose of any reference to " oblation," but to illustrate 
 the duty of using audible language in the Communion Service. In 
 Tract xc. neither this passage nor any other from the Homilies is adduced 
 in favour of a " Catholic " view of Eucharistic Sacrifice. See Appendix 
 M (The Perpetual Oblation in Heaven). 
 
 ^ Canon Ixxxii. See above, p. 27, note. 
 
 ^ Canons xiv., xvi., Ivi., Iviii., Ixxi. See also iv., xxii., xxiv., &c. The 
 reiterated allusion to the Holy Communion in the Canons is very observ- 
 able ; and it is incredible that it should not once be presented there in a 
 sacrificial aspect, if those who sanctioned these Canons intended this 
 view to be a doctrine of the Church of England. 
 
XV. 
 
 PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 
 
 The School of Jacobean and Caroline Divines — Freedom to hold an 
 opinion does not imply freedom to express it by a ceremony — Liberty 
 in this respect would disturb the balance of doctrinal expression in 
 the Church — This mode of introducing doctrinal change not fair — 
 Option, in this respect, contrary to the principles of the Prayer 
 Book— And full of peril for the future — Would foment religious 
 discord — Further results to be feared. 
 
 It follows from tlie preceding remarks that a perfect 
 consistency runs through the whole of our authorized 
 formularies in regard to this subject ; and it is a con- 
 sistency harmonious with that of the New Testament 
 in the same particular. In neither is there any 
 sanction for the opinion that the Holy Eucharist is 
 inherently and itself a sacrifice. 
 
 But it will be urged that English Divines have 
 held, with full toleration and allowance, the sacrificial 
 view of this ordinance, that there has always been 
 such a school of thought in the Church of England, 
 that the Eeformers would not have repudiated those 
 who maintained this opinion, and that it was strongly 
 maintained by theologians, who were in this country 
 the pride of the seventeenth century. It is contended, 
 further, that this aspect of the Eucharist was promi- 
 nent in the early ages of Christianity, and reflected 
 in the Primitive Liturgies. 
 
 I very willingly concede nearly all that the oppo- 
 nents of my argument will require under this head. As 
 
PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 129 
 
 regards Primitive Liturgies, however, I suspect that no 
 part of our early ecclesiastical literature requires more 
 careful criticism and revision. Moreover, those to whom 
 for the most part we owe our present editions of them, 
 have been concerned, in the interest of their opinions, 
 to make the most of the sacrificial aspect of these docu- 
 ments/ As regards the writings of the Fathers, it is 
 very difficult, whenever they deal with this subject, to 
 distinguish between rhetoric and sober statement of 
 doctrine. Moreover, we are not to expect, in a period 
 before the beginning of sacramental controversies, a 
 caution which to us is imperative. There is no doubt, 
 however, that the apprehension of the Holy Eucharist 
 as a sacrifice began at an early date. The question is, 
 whether such a view is a deviation from primitive 
 truth and the precursor of serious and gradually- 
 increasing error, or a standard of primitive truth which 
 is to override the obvious meaning of Scripture. Into 
 this question I will not enter; for I think that free 
 toleration ought to be given to this view of the 
 Eucharist, so long as it is maintained as a pious 
 opinion, and not asserted to be an express doctrine 
 of the Church of England. I was once asked, when 
 putting forward the view which I am here endeavour- 
 ing to justify, whether I would exclude such a man 
 as Bishop Andrewes from our Church ; to which I 
 
 1 I cannot help hoping that we may gain much in these respects 
 from the researches of the Old Catholics of Germany, who are engaged, I 
 believe, in the revision of existing Liturgies, with the view of producing 
 Books of Public Devotion for use in their own congregations. These men 
 have the possession of great learning and the habit of critical inquiry ; 
 they are free from the disturbing influence of our English contro- 
 versies ; and while they cling to the traditions of the past, they have 
 obtained a new starting- 2>oint, which is full of promise for the future of 
 Christendom. 
 
itBO BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 replied that I should regard the thought of such 
 exclusion as a sacrilege. I should never dream of 
 not tolerating within our communion a large range of 
 variety of opinion on a subject so mysterious as 
 the Holy Eucharist ; and I know how much weaker 
 the Church of England would have been than it 
 is, if such men as Bishop Andrewes had never be- 
 longed to it. 
 
 But then it is asked — If I am free to hold such doc- 
 trines within the Church of England, why may I not 
 be free to express them by a ceremony ? Why may not 
 liberty of opinion and liberty of ritual be co-ordinated 
 together and of equal extent 1 Here I join issue 
 at once. It is not at all the same thing to be free to 
 hold an opinion within the Church, and to be free 
 to express it by a ceremony. Nor indeed is the 
 ceremonial freedom at all necessary for the holding 
 of the opinion. Those who in past times cherished 
 the views in question, did not attain any correspond- 
 ing ceremonial freedom.^ " While we are taught in the 
 Prayer Book that the Eucharist is a communion, men 
 are quite at liberty, if their convictions impel them, to 
 hold that it is something more. As regards Bishop 
 Andrewes, I imagine that when he said the consecra- 
 tion prayer in the piirish churches of his diocese, he 
 did this with his face to the south, at a Holy Table 
 entirely disengaged from the east wall. Therefore his 
 doctrine, whatever it might be, did not require on his 
 
 ^ I do not mean to say that in 1662 there was any deliberate effort to 
 obtain license for the Eastward position. But, even if we assume that 
 there were those who earnestly desired this change for the purpose of 
 expressing their doctrine, still, though doctrinally free, they obtained no 
 corresponding ceremonial liberty. See above on the word "altar," p, 113, 
 note. 
 
PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 
 
 
 part the introduction of a new ceremony. But I conten( 
 further that there is the greatest difference between 
 the ceremonial expression of a theological opinion 
 and its expression by means of words. Nor is the 
 statement of this difference a mere random utter- 
 ance of a perverse opinion of my own. I will here 
 quote the words of one who, though silent, is still 
 eloquent. 
 
 This question was raised in the Upper House of the 
 Convocation of Canterbury in 1868, and the Bishop of 
 Oxford then said : " I do not hold that the liberty of 
 introducing unusual rites into the Church stands in the 
 least on the same footing as the liberty of preaching 
 doctrine. Now that is an important distinction, and 
 one which the persons concerned seem to me to forget. 
 When a ritual long established, and standing on the 
 mos pro lege^ principle, is altered in a church, it is not 
 only that the man who does it advances his views as 
 a teacher of the Church, but taking advantage of his 
 position to make actual manual alterations in the ser- 
 vices, he makes all the congregation of the church who 
 acquiesce in these alterations parties with him in his par- 
 ticular view f and there must be a distinction between 
 the larger licence given in preaching, and the smaller 
 
 1 In this essay very little has been said of the question of usage, as 
 modifying the question of mere statute law and rubrical law. But the 
 common sense of the English People has decided that, in case of diver- 
 gence between usage and statute, the former ought to have very great 
 weight. I may refer here to some remarks on this subject by Archdeacon 
 Sharp — On the Rubrics, pp. 53 — 56. 
 
 2 It should be added that those who, under such circumstances, do not 
 agree with the Clergyman will either take open action against him, in 
 which case the congregation will be scandalously divided, or will nurse 
 a smouldering discontent, to the impairing of their allegiance to the 
 Church and the injury of their religious life. 
 
 K 2 
 
182 ' BEFOIIE THE TABLE. 
 
 licence given in any alterations of an existing ritual."^ 
 I might have quoted other words of equal authority to 
 the same effect : but the sentences of Bishop Wilber- 
 force are likely to exercise persuasion in quarters 
 where the same argument from other lips would 
 receive little attention." Let me now illustrate, in 
 more particulars than one, the importance of this dis- 
 tinction in its reference to the topic before us.^ 
 
 Chronicle of the Convocation of Canterbunj, Feb. 1868, p. 1154. I 
 quote the passage from the Rev. W. G. Humphry's excellent essay on 
 " The Eevision of the Liturgy," in Principles at Stake, p. 266. 
 
 ^ I have given above the opinion of a distinguished Bishop. Let me 
 here add the utterance of a Judicial Court, to the same effect. In the 
 case of Sheppard v. Bennett, the Judges speak thus : — " If the Minister 
 be allowed to introduce at his own will variations in the rites and cere- 
 monies that seem to him to interpret the doctrine of the service in a 
 particular direction, the service ceases to be what it was meant to be — 
 common ground on which all Church people may meet, though they differ 
 about some doctrines. But the Church of England has wisely left a 
 certain latitude of opinion in matters of belief, and has not insisted on a 
 rigorous uniformity of thought which might reduce her communion to a 
 narrow compass." Brooke's Six Privy Council Judgments, pp. 231, 232. 
 
 3 The following remarks in the Bishop of Exeter's Charge of this year 
 seem to me to be at this crisis of high importance. I quote from the report 
 given in the Guardian of July 14th : — " I Avish very much indeed that my 
 brethren the clergy would lay to heart how very serious a responsibility rests 
 upon them if they give occasion for all this disagreement. I do not think 
 that they sufficiently consider this matter. I do not think that they suffi- 
 ciently consider how very much we are losing daily by the fact that those 
 controversies, which always have prevailed and always will prevail in 
 the Church of Christ, have during the last twenty years passed from the 
 printing press and the pulpit, to which they were formerly confined, into 
 that public worship which used to be at any rate the stronghold of our 
 unity. Forty years ago it was certainly the case that if any clergyman 
 went from one parish to another, if he went for a long time, or only 
 for a single day, go where he would, the service was practically the 
 same. That cannot now be said ; but, on the contrary, very often it is 
 quite difficult to recognise the fundamental unity in the great variety. 
 Now, variety, of coui-se, has its merits. There is good in variety itself ; 
 but I am quite sure that no merit which can be assigned to such variety 
 can be compared with the loss which we sustain when the variety has 
 gone so far as to separate us from one another. It is most deeply to be 
 
PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 133 
 
 The doctrine of sacrificial presentation in the Eucha- 
 rist not being hitherto an explicit part of the system 
 of the Church of England, a ceremony understood to 
 express this doctrine would make it explicit. The 
 doctrinal basis deliberately adopted in 1662 would be 
 disturbed. The lines, which are now clear, would at 
 least be made obscure. The change would not precisely 
 amount to the adding of a fortieth article to the Thirty- 
 nine ; but it would introduce a new element of obscurity 
 among the Thirty-nine. The proportions of our reli- 
 gious teaching would be altered. That which had 
 previously been merely a permitted private opinion of 
 individuals would now have found an official exponent. 
 Something would have been introduced amongst us, 
 which we had not before. The centre of gravity of the 
 Prayer Book would have been shifted ; and it is pro- 
 bably the consciousness that this result would be 
 secured which makes some so eager for the optional 
 use of the Eastward Position.-^ 
 
 regretted that what was onc3 the means of bringing us so close to- 
 gether has now been changed into the very means and occasion of our 
 disputes with one another. We can find unity in this matter only by 
 steadily endeavouring to the utmost of our power to come closer to the 
 law as we find it laid down in the Church's rubrics, and as we find it in- 
 terpreted by the courts to which the Church calls us to submit. I deeply 
 deplore that it should be necessary to speak on this matter, because I do 
 not think that the clergy feel the importance of it as they should. I do 
 not think that when a man adopts one practice or another which he thinks 
 edifying to the people, which he thinks will assist his own work, it is always 
 sufficiently considered whether it does not tend to bring in an amount of 
 disagreement between brother and brother, and whether we do not lose 
 far, far more by these miserable disagi'eements than we gain by the slight 
 increase of apparent edification." 
 
 ^ It is obvious likewise that those who have hitherto contended that 
 the Prayer Book Services (in harmony with the Articles and Homilies) 
 present to us the Eucharist as a Communion and not as a Sacrifice, would 
 be placed, for the first time, at a disadvantage. This change in the field 
 of argument is probably well understood. 
 
134 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 It will be ur^ed at this point that nothing more is 
 claimed than a merely optional use. It is contended 
 in the most ingenuous manner (and, I am sure, quite 
 honestly), that no notion is entertained of interfering 
 with others who desire still to consecrate at the north 
 end. No one proposes to make the other method, 
 whether it be new or old, compulsory. But here, as I 
 have said before, is one of the most dangerous and sus- 
 picious parts of the whole case. To claim only an 
 optional use seems to show that the claim of right is 
 weak. The rubric does not say to the Clergy '*may/' 
 but " shall." I should feel far less repugnance to what 
 is proposed, if it were to be made compulsory on all. 
 If it were the rule that we are to say the Prayer of 
 Consecration with our faces towards the east, I should 
 most cheerfully acquiesce. I should then fall back 
 upon the doctrine of the Prayer Book, which is un- 
 changed, and which I should assume to be consistent with 
 its authorized ceremonial. If the door is closed upon 
 all choice, I make no objection. What I so strongly 
 object to is this proposition to set the door ajar. If 
 a door is ajar, it is open. This door was opened very 
 quietly at first, but it is now creaking uneasily on its 
 hinges ; and attention is inevitably called to the 
 change and to the consequences it may involve. 
 
 But, further, this is a very unfair method of bringing 
 about a changed condition in our balance of Church 
 teaching. Such things ought not to be done by a 
 side-wind, but by open contention — not, to use Mr. 
 Gladstone's phrase, by the *' silent, steady suasion of 
 ceremonial/'^ but by the deliberate decision of the 
 
 ^ In the Article on " Ritualism," published in the Contemporary 
 Bevicw for October, 1874, p. 663. 
 
PERMISSIVE OEIENTATION. 135 
 
 Church, after full argument and discussion. The change 
 of ceremony ought to follow this change of doctrine, 
 not to precede it for the sake of introducing it. If a 
 religious opinion, which is not to be found in the words 
 of the Prayer Book, is to be forced upon us by help of 
 a ceremony, how can we be expected to submit with- 
 out resistance "? Something like indignation takes 
 possession of the mind, when, with such ends in view, 
 a point of ritual is first asserted, then persevered in, 
 notwithstanding remonstrance, and then claimed from 
 us under the plea of conciliation. 
 
 But now, further, I venture to argue that the adop^ 
 tion of an alternative ceremony, in a case like this, is 
 wrong in principle, and full of peril. 
 
 It is wrong in principle, because we have no instances 
 in the Prayer Book, hitherto, of this kind at all. The 
 instances which might, on merely looking at the surface 
 of the subject, be adduced from the Burial and Bap- 
 tismal Services, are not cases in point. They involve 
 no doctrine. Moreover an exception to a rule is not an 
 alternative rule. The liberty given to the " Priest and 
 Clerks,'' at a funeral, to precede the corpse " either into 
 the church or towards the grave," is granted, I presume, 
 through sanitary considerations. So at a christening, 
 the prescribed rule is immersion, the exception, how- 
 ever customary, is allowed for the safety of health. 
 Thus neither case affords any parallel for that which 
 is before us. Again, it is quite true that we have 
 the choice of alternative prayers, on two occasions, 
 in the Communion Service itself, and prayers too with 
 perceptible differences in their sentiment and tone. I 
 allude, of course, to the Collects for the Queen said 
 immediately after the Commandments, and the Collects 
 
136 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 which succeed the Lord's Prayer near the close of the 
 Office. But alternative prayers are not alternative 
 ceremonies ; and it may be said with some confidence 
 that an authorized choice of position at the saying of 
 the Prayer of Consecration in this office would intro- 
 duce a principle unknown hitherto in the Church of 
 England. 
 
 And to confirm this view, that the choice of alter- 
 native ceremonies is an expedient hitherto foreign 
 to the Church of England, I may refer once more 
 to the settlement of 1662.-^ The great characteristic 
 of that settlement was, that it imperatively decided 
 all questions of ritual observance and allowed of no 
 exceptions. This may have been both harsh and 
 inexpedient ; but of the fact there can be no doubt. 
 
 A friend, learned in the history of constitutional 
 law, puts the matter to me thus in a private letter : — 
 '' Throughout the whole of my reading on this subject 
 I have found no traces of the maximum and minimum 
 theory.^ The whole idea of Parliament and Convo- 
 cation was to fix the ritual and ceremonial of our 
 communion on a strictly uniform basis. For my 
 own part, I wish more concession had been made 
 in 1603 and 1662 ; but the very stiffness of the 
 opposition proves the fallacy of any such theories as 
 the above." This great constitutional fact ought not 
 to be forgotten by those who plead for choice in 
 
 ^ See above, p. 89. 
 
 2 I had put my question with special reference to this theory of 
 maximum and minimum, which finds much favour with some persons. I 
 presume that this theory, applied to the position of the " celebrant," would 
 give the Eastward position as the maximum and the Southward as the 
 minimum; and this distinction, as it appears to me, would be grotesque, 
 except on the liypothesis of a doctrinal distinction between the two 
 positions. 
 
, PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 137 
 
 the ''celebrant's" position, on the ground of what 
 took place soon after the Restoration. 
 
 But besides being wrong in principle, such a course 
 would be full of peril for the future. We are not 
 left in ignorance as to the purposes for which, and 
 the spirit in which, such a permission would be used 
 by unscrupulous partizans. We have to deal with 
 some men whose power of assertion is astounding : 
 and others, whose own sentiments are quite moderate, 
 have fallen into the habit of accepting persons of 
 the former class to be their spokesmen. As an illus- 
 tration of what I mean, I will refer to what caught 
 my eye when I was preparing to write this para- 
 graph. Seeing my name quoted in a letter printed 
 by a well-known paper, I was induced to read, and 
 I saw it stated that the Bennett Judgment had affirmed 
 Mr. Bennett's teaching on the Eucharist to be the 
 doctrine of the Church of England : whereas the 
 Judgment laid down a totally different doctrine, and 
 that gentleman was saved from penal consequences 
 merely because his words were possibly capable of 
 a satisfactory explanation.^ So in the case before us, 
 can we doubt that if the Eastward Position is made 
 authoritatively optional, this permission will be para- 
 ded as a triumph, and claimed as asserting the most 
 extravagant doctrine ? and have we any ground from 
 experience for expecting that moderate High Church- 
 men will protest against such inference from the 
 changed Moreover, is it not certain that those who 
 continue to say the Consecration Prayer on the north 
 
 * At the close of the Judgment it is stated that the Eespondent's 
 words had been " perilously near a violation of the law," and that — the 
 proceedings being " highly penal " — " every reasonable doubt " had been 
 " construed in his favour." Brooke, p. 248. 
 
138 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 side of the Lord's Table will be led to view this 
 their position as a protest against error ? And can 
 such rivalries at this most holy ordinance be con- 
 ducive to the edification of the Church ? At present 
 the north side is a neutral position/ and this is one 
 of its great claims for permanent acceptance. But 
 under the change supposed it would cease to be 
 neutral. Thus, so far from tending to peace, such 
 intentionally-contrasted diversity of usage would be 
 the incitement and perpetuation of civil war within 
 the Church : one congregation would be at enmity 
 with another : idle gossip and uneasy suspicion would 
 permeate the community : families would be divided ; 
 and I should fear that our well-meant but futile effort 
 after conciliation would have prepared the way for 
 a definite schism at no very distant date.^ 
 
 And all this would be true, even if there were not 
 in the background that further peril, which was men- 
 tioned in the earlier pages of this volume.^ Choice 
 in regard to one ceremonial act immediately suggests 
 choice in other ceremonial acts. Party-spirit is not 
 limited to one side, when different sections of the eccle- 
 siastical community are arrayed in opposition to one 
 another. If the extreme men of one party insist on 
 
 ^ Some recent papers of great interest by the Eev. Dr. Hayman 
 suggest the question whether our Reformers, in fixing on the north side 
 of the Table, were not partly influenced by the fact that there is evidence 
 of authority for this side in very primitive times. The same papers 
 bring us into contact with the question of the Basilican position of the 
 " celebrant," a subject which seems to me to have been most inadequately 
 treated by Mr. Morton Shaw. See Appendix N. (The Basilican 
 Arrangement.) 
 
 2 Instead of dwelling further in my own words on this grave aspect 
 of the subject, I will refer at this point to the Supple uieiit which I am 
 allowed to place at the close of this volume. 
 
 3 See above, pp. 23—25. 
 
PERMISSIVE ORIENTATION. 139 
 
 the Eastward Position, in the face of both usao^e and 
 law, for the sake of a doctrinal victory, can it be sup- 
 posed that the extreme men of another party will not 
 employ the law, when it has been clearly expressed 
 both by rubric and by canon ? There may have been 
 great forbearance hitherto on the part of Evangelicals 
 and Low Churchmen. No widely spread wish exists 
 to disturb those arrangements of our chancels which for 
 many years have been customary. But if ''orientation " 
 during the Consecration Prayer were to become 
 authoritatively permissible,^ I fear this forbearance 
 might be at an end. I will not dwell on this alarming 
 prospect, but will simply repeat some words which 
 I have used elsewhere.^ "It is often said that no 
 one now wishes to disturb the customary position 
 of the Holy Table in any English church, at the 
 east end of its chancel ; and this is quite true, if 
 other things are allowed to remain as they were. But 
 it is not true, if the desuetude as regards one rubric 
 is to be made the shelter for acting on another rubric 
 in a manner contrary to its proper meaning. Already 
 we hear the mutterings of the storm. Some of the 
 Clergy are very seriously beginning to consider 
 
 ^ I must repeat that the whole of this argument is directed against what 
 I regard as the fatal gift of choice. If the Eastward Position were made 
 imperative, and not permissive, I should take a very different view of the 
 whole subject. By being made imperative, it would be denuded of 
 doctrinal significance ; for in such case it would not be possible to use it 
 for the purpose of declaring a doctrine not found in the words of the 
 Prayer Book. I do not regard the Eastward Position as having inherently 
 any doctrinal significance at all. Some have urged that the Southward 
 Position has more of a sacrificial meaning ; and this may be quite true. 
 But this is not a practical question. 
 
 ^ In a letter which was published in the Times of July 12th, and for 
 which occasion was given by Mr. Gladstone's recent article in the Contem- 
 porary Review, " Is the Church of England worth preserving ? " 
 
140 BEFOBE THE TABLE. 
 
 whether it may not be their duty to obey the 82nd 
 canon and the corresponding rubric in the Prayer 
 Book, as regards the placing of the Lord's Table. ^ 
 If this were done by one party, while another party 
 insists on ' orientation,' can we contemplate without 
 alarm the results that would follow to the Church 
 of England ? The permissive use would thus become, 
 not what is fondly hoped for, a peaceful platform 
 under which we might forget our differences under 
 a clear and cheerful sky, but the erection of hostile 
 batteries in every part of the country, with the smoke 
 of angry debate always hanging over them. Would 
 the Church of England be worth preserving on these 
 terms ? Could it be preserved at all ? " 
 
 * By a very friendly critic these words have been regarded as a threat. 
 Nothing could be further from their meaning. I deprecate extremely the 
 moving of the Lord's Table from time to time, though I believe our Church 
 law strictly requires it to be so moved ; and it is because I deprecate this, 
 that I think it necessary to indicate a real danger. The Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, in addressing his recent Conference of Clergy and Laity 
 (held at Maidstone on Jan. 27, 1875), pointed out that persistence in a 
 new interpretation of the Consecration Rubric might force others to do 
 what His Grace hoped his words would not encourage in the Diocese of 
 Canterbury — to act on the Rubric which prescribes the removal of the 
 Communion Table. The report in the Guardian states that these words 
 were received with " laughter." But would not the peril arising from 
 such increased divergences of practice be very serious 1 
 

 XVL 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Bearing of this subject on the question of the Reunion of Christendom- 
 Its connection with other parts of the Romeward movement of the 
 day — The Confessional— Party combinations — Changes in our re- 
 ligious phraseology, our devotional manuals, and the arrangements of 
 our churches — Appeal to Moderate High Churchmen — The lesson of 
 Whitsuntide — Duty of maintaining the right proportion of the Faith. 
 
 One most serious aspect of the subject which has 
 been under our consideration is this, that the question 
 of the Eastward Position at this part of the Com- 
 munion Service^ is inextricably mixed up with the 
 thought of the Church of Kome. 
 
 The circumstances of the time render this quite 
 unavoidable. Many persons, indeed, who have no 
 Eomeward tendency at all, cling with a strong pre- 
 
 ^ The assuming of the Eastward Position at other parts of our service 
 is quite a different matter. Into the question of general orientation I do 
 not enter. I will only say that I would far rather see the Eastward 
 Position generally assumed by our ministers and their congregations in all 
 the precatory parts of our service, than see the use of it concentrated on 
 the Consecration Prayer. I have referred above (p. 64, note) to the 
 difference between turning to the East daring the recitation of the Creed 
 and turning to the East during consecration in the Communion Service. 
 In the former case no rubric is touched, no doctrinal meaning is involved, 
 and no suggestion is given of any localized presence of the Deity at the 
 Holy Table. As to the words used by the Bishops at the Savoy Con- 
 ference (Card well's Hist, of Co7if., pp. 320, 353), it is to be remembered 
 that the question of the moment regarded, not the turning to the East, 
 but the turning to the Table, and that the Table then stood free from the 
 east wall — and, further, that, though they quoted a passage from Augus- 
 tine having reference to the East, which very probably expressed their 
 own preference, still they were far from obtaining in 1G62 all that they 
 desired. See above, p. 65, note. 
 
142 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 ference to this ceremonial act, because they view it as 
 a link between the English Church and the Church 
 Catholic ; and with such feelings I must confess I 
 have a very strong sympathy. It is quite true also 
 that in past times, for a long period, it was customary 
 that the consecrator in the Service of Communion 
 should during the Prayer of Consecration f^ice the 
 east, and that such is the custom now with the 
 Lutherans, both of Germany and Scandinavia. But is 
 there not an unreality in clinging very strongly to a 
 sentiment of this kind, especially when our Church has 
 decided for us otherwise ? The Oriental communions 
 are too remote, and their liturgical usages too different 
 from our own to touch us in this matter very closely in 
 the West. As to assimilation with the Protestants of the 
 Continent, the recommendation of it comes with a very 
 bad grace from those at least who execrate the very 
 name of Luther. And ought we altogether to forget 
 those other large Christian communities, by which we 
 are surrounded ? The drawing together of the English- 
 speaking Presley terians from various parts of the world 
 is becoming a remarkable feature of our times. Nor 
 ought we to forget the vast organisations and spreading 
 influence of the Methodists and Baptists in the New 
 World, or the large amount of spiritual life which sur- 
 rounds us in the Nonconformist bodies at home. On the 
 whole, if thoughts of ultimate reunion^ are in our minds, 
 (and surely such thoughts ought to be familiar and 
 dear), the adopting of Sacramental Orientation is more 
 likely to be a hindrance than a help. Practically and 
 popularly this ceremonial act will be viewed as an in- 
 tentional resemblance to the Modern Church of Rome. 
 
 ^ See Appendix (The Keuiiion Conferences at Bonn). 
 
CONCLUSION. 143 
 
 It must be carefully remembered that this matter 
 is inevitably complicated with other very grave ques- 
 tions. Though circumstances do tend just now to 
 isolate the ministering Priest's position at the Lord's 
 Table, and to single it out for separate consideration, 
 it is by no means in itself really an isolated subject. 
 There are certain collateral topics belonging to our 
 time, which we cannot reasonably forget, and which 
 colour this whole inquiry. A few years ago the position 
 of the minister at the Lord's Table might have been 
 view^ed, and would by most persons have been viewed, 
 as a matter of little consequence.^ Not so now. The 
 change that has recently been creeping in amongst 
 us is connected, not alone chronologically and by acci- 
 dent, but organically and by natural affinity, with a 
 great religious movement which has been productive of 
 very grave results. 
 
 The trumpets of the *' Catholic Eevival " are per- 
 petually sounding in our ears ; and I must be allowed 
 to say in passing that I question whether the habit of 
 boastfulness is a good symptom of any religious move- 
 ment. It seems to me that humility and thankfulness 
 are the proper states of mind to foster under the 
 consciousness of spiritual success. So far as my own 
 experience extends, I am continually shocked and 
 
 ^ And this I found to be the prevalent view when I was in America in 
 the year 1871. I well remember how, in a small congregation of coloured 
 people at Baltimore, two American Clergymen, with myself, knelt at 
 different parts of a small Communion Table (I think in shape it was oval) 
 made of white marble. In fact, doctrinal questions had not been con- 
 nected in the public mind with the form or material of the Lord's 
 Table, or the Priest's position in regard to it. Thus the references 
 which have been made to our Sister Church in America, as though the 
 permissive use of either the west or the north side of the table had 
 been fonnally granted, rest upon a mistake. 
 
144 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 pained by the harsh and intolerant language of the 
 partizans of the school, by their nnjust assumptions, 
 by their taking credit for what belongs to others, by 
 sarcasm or contumely according as the writer or 
 speaker may be refined or vulgar, and especially by 
 (what is perhaps more to be blamed than anything 
 else) an air of patronage and infinite superiority. I 
 make no grudging admission that much good has 
 resulted to the Church from the movement which we 
 commonly associate with the Oxford Tracts. Else- 
 where I have expressed this very freely and strongly.^ 
 But it is still true that much that has been good would 
 have been better, if it had not been hindered by the bad 
 features of the movement ; and that much too of its 
 good has been borrowed without due acknowledgment 
 of the source from whence it came. How many things 
 are done now with applause by extreme High Church- 
 men, which were sneered at when they were done by 
 Evangelicals ! This however is not the point towards 
 which my remarks were tending. I only felt it neces- 
 sary, in honesty, to say something to this effect by 
 the way. 
 
 One most serious fact is, that this movement, whether 
 it be called '' Tractarian " in its earlier phase, or 
 **Eitualist" in its later, or by whatever other designa- 
 tion it may be known, has led to many and deplorable 
 secessions to the Church of Rome. There is a close 
 resemblance, in some respects, in the position of Churcli 
 questions now with the state of things of which we 
 read in the middle of the seventeenth century. Then, 
 too, defections to Rome from the ranks of the Lau- 
 
 1 I may be allowed to refer to an essay on " Parties and Party Spirit," 
 in Principles at Stake. 
 
CONCLUSION. 145 
 
 dian divines became the cause of much uneasiness and 
 suspicion ; and these feelings were not altogether 
 allayed because Laud and others of his school wrote 
 strongly against the Church of Rome.' That is a 
 pathetic passage in Bishop Cosin's life, in which we 
 can trace his sorrow on account of his son s defection 
 to that Church, and in some degree, his change of tone, 
 after that time, in writing upon theological subjects.^ 
 We have the same state of things amongst us now, 
 with these differences, that the evil is on a larger 
 scale, and that the maintenance of Roman doctrine 
 and Roman practice within the Church of England 
 is bolder and more unreserved than it was then.^ 
 
 I Many of us must remember how strongly both Cardinal Manning 
 and Dr. Newman used to write and preach against the Church of Kome. 
 
 ^ See above, p. 83, and compare Dr. Droop's highly-important pamphlet 
 on The North Side of the Table, p. 33. 
 
 3 Two very serious facts must be carefully kept in mind in this con- 
 troversy. First we have to deal with a much closer and larger approxi- 
 mation to Romanism within the Church of England than any which was 
 found in the Jacobean and Caroline divines ; and secondly, Eomanism 
 itself is developed to a much higher level than was the case then. As 
 to the former point I will refer to a learned and candid Nonconformist, 
 who is free from our own party attitudes. Dr. Stoughton, in his Church 
 of the Commonwealth (1867), says that most of that work was printed 
 before the present controversy on Ritualism arose ; but he adds, '' Judg- 
 ing from ceremonial worship now performed in certain quarters, and 
 from the publications of persons who represent the party, we may say 
 that Archbishop Laud never attempted to go so far in the adoption of 
 Roman Catholic rites and vestments as his modern successors have done " 
 (p. 547). With this compare the Church of the Restoration (1870), where, 
 speaking of the architecture and ornaments of churches, he says that at 
 this period they " indicate a feeling totally at variance with mediaeval 
 Catholicism ; and nowhere does it appear that in those days the accom- 
 paniments of mediaeval Ritualism were in any case employed : on the 
 contrary, a keen jealousy of Romanism extensively prevailed " (ii. p. 183). 
 See, too, the Church of the Revolution (1874). " Nothing like what is now 
 called Ritualism had then any existence. No coloured vestments were 
 worn by Anglicans either within or without the Establishment, nor were 
 there any attempts at extraordinary ornamentation of either altars or 
 
 L 
 
146 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 The sorrow and discord in many families, in consequence 
 of conversions tliat have taken place, sometimes very 
 unexpectedly, are too familiar amongst us to re- 
 quire description. And as to the easy way in which 
 this is sometimes disposed of by saying that these are 
 simply the conversions of " Evangelicals," who have 
 been brought up without any training in " Church 
 principles," this is a very feeble and inaccurate ex- 
 planation. 
 
 Nor is it at all likely that these troubles are yet 
 at an end. One of the most serious facts of the 
 time is the silent preparation which is going on 
 within the Church of England for the adoption and 
 naturalization of views which are distinctively Roman. 
 Those who read this pamphlet are sure to have fresh in 
 their recollection the recent correspondence between 
 Monsignore Capel and Canon Liddon. How can we 
 wonder, when our eyes are opened to see what is going 
 on around us, that the fruit, on trees so cultivated, 
 gradually ripens and then falls ? Conversions which 
 we hear of, one by one, of clergymen here and there, or 
 members of aristocratic families, are like minute guns 
 in the night, warning us of our danger. It seems to 
 me madness at such a time not to be explicit in 
 matters of theology. When we know that we are on 
 the edge of a precipice, that is not the time when 
 we ought to desire to be in a mist. 
 
 In illustration of the combinations in which we are 
 forced, by the circumstances of the day, to take even 
 this question of the Eastward Position in consecrating 
 
 churches " (p. 323). As to the Non-jurors, " pomp, such as is now so 
 fashionable, was to them an impossibility ; not," adds the writer, "that I 
 find them manifesting any cravings in that direction " (p. 398). 
 
CONCLUSION. 147 
 
 at the Communion, I will make a slight reference to 
 the subject of the Confessional. It is quite true that in 
 the practice of what is commonly understood by that 
 term the attitude assumed by the Priest is not sacri- 
 ficial, but judicial :^ and the two ought carefully to be 
 distinguished. Still it is also true that the same 
 persons who are excessive in the one claim are ex- 
 cessive in the other. We cannot practically dis- 
 entangle the efforts of those who wish to introduce the 
 systematic confessional into the Church of England 
 from efforts to introduce by means of ceremony such 
 sacrificial views of the Eucharist as are inconsistent 
 with the Reformation. Whatever helps the one for- 
 ward helps the other also. Not only are the same 
 powers claimed for the English Clergy that are claimed 
 within the Church of Rome for the Roman :^ but 
 Roman methods of administering the practice of con- 
 fession and absolution are introduced : the Roman 
 phraseology on these subjects is made familiar : the 
 same modes adopted of preparing the Clergy, so far 
 as it can be secretly done, for their mysterious duty, 
 
 ^ I have endeavoured to state this popularly in a little book recently- 
 published under the title of Sacramental Confession. 
 
 2 This has been done with the strongest emphasis and in at least one 
 quarter deserving of the highest respect. Let us then look at the language 
 of the Council of Trent on this subject. " Since Bishops and Priests are, 
 as it were, God's authorised interpreters {interpretes et internuncii quidam)^ 
 who in His name teach men the Divine law and the precepts of life, and 
 represent (gerunt) on earth the person of God Himself, it is manifest that 
 their office is such that none greater can be conceived : wherefore they are 
 rightly called, not only angels, but also gods, because they hold among us 
 the Divine power {vim et numen) of the Immortal God.'' And then fol- 
 lows a co-ordinate sentence in regard to the Eucharist : " The power of 
 making (conjlciendi) and offering the body and blood of Christ, and also 
 of remitting sins, surpasses human reason and intelligence : nay, nothing 
 equal to it or like to it can be found in the world." — Catech. Concil. Trid. 
 de ordinis gacramento c. vii." 
 
 L 2 
 
148 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 which are provided by Eomaii manuals ; ^ and there is 
 beginning to result, in consequence, the same kind of 
 uneasiness and suspicion which in Roman Catholic 
 countries terribly separates the Clergy from the 
 Laity. 
 
 I know that I shall be blamed for introducing here 
 the mention of this subject. It will be said that it is 
 unjust to mix up together two things which are not 
 necessarily connected, and that this is done to create a 
 prejudice in the public mind against the Eastward 
 Position. I am quite innocent of any such intention. 
 The true injustice consists in refusing to see that things 
 w^iich are inextricably combined together must natur- 
 ally strengthen one another. Why do not those who 
 advocate the Eastward Position without any sympathy 
 with these grave and alarming tendencies, boldly sepa- 
 rate themselves, define their own ground, and enable 
 us to see w^herein they differ from others ? Why is a 
 common ceremony made the silent bond between 
 those who differ so wddely ? If this great Romeward 
 movement is repudiated in heart, why, instead of being 
 encouraged, is it not publicly rebuked ? Why are all 
 the hard words reserved for " Evangelicals," and for 
 the few independent men w^ho, without any connection 
 wath party, endeavour to call attention to the peril in 
 ■which we are placed ? The impression must inevitably 
 be created that large numbers of our Clergy care very 
 
 ^ I must especially refer to Part II. of The Priest in Absolution, which 
 is printed without any publisher's name, cannot be procured by any 
 ordinary clergyman, and is privately distributed among those who are in 
 confidential communication with one another. I am far from saying that 
 this book, which is now before me, is fit for general perusal. I only refer 
 to it as an exemplification of the clandestine difficulty with which we have 
 to deal. 
 
CONCLUSION. 149 
 
 little for the undoing of the Reformation, if only 
 they can remain under the vague general classification 
 of " High Churchmen." If men are combined together 
 in this way before the public eye, the most extreme 
 among them must gain the advantage of the momen- 
 tum derived from numbers. Illustrations without 
 number could be given of the harm which is resulting 
 from this cause on every side. I will content myself 
 with one, which came accidentally before my eye. It 
 may be taken as a samj)le of all the rest. 
 
 In a well-known organ^ of those whom we may, 
 without exaggeration, term "Ritualists," I read the 
 following words : — " If the Eucharist is really the great 
 Sacrifice that taketh away the sin of the ivorld, the due 
 celebration of a single Mass is of infinitely greater con- 
 sequence than a hundred general elections, or liquida- 
 tion of a hundred national debts. Priests say they do 
 not use the chasuble because it offends the well-meant 
 prejudices of some of their people. Why are these 
 people offended ? Simply as a matter of taste and fancy ? 
 Certainly not ; but because they do not believe in the 
 Sacrifice of the Mass." And then on another page of 
 the same paper I find the following : " A very import- 
 ant meeting was held at Oxford yesterday week : it was 
 attended by about sixty gentlemen, who represented 
 almost eve7^y shade of thought iii the High Church 
 School, and who remained in deliberation the live-long 
 day : " and the practical impression of the occasion is 
 said to have been this, that the party was united " in 
 a manner that it never could boost of heforeJ' It is 
 the juxtaposition of these things which illustrates 
 our present danger ; and examples of the same kind 
 
 ^ The C\urck Times of Oct. 23, 1874. 
 
150 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 miglit be gathered every day from materials in print 
 scattered over tlie country. 
 
 There is, I am persuaded, a crisis in our present 
 position, with risks hanging over the Church of England 
 of the future, quite unperceived by many excellent 
 Church -people, who float along the stream of the 
 current theology without being at all aware of the 
 direction in which it is moving. This state of things 
 might be elucidated at some length from various 
 symptoms, which are in truth both cause and effect, 
 arising out of these evils and extending them further, 
 — symptoms in our theological language, in the devo- 
 tional books of the day, and in the structural and decor- 
 ative arrangement of our churches. A very few words 
 may be permitted on each of these points. 
 
 As to language, there is growing up side by side 
 with the sober and sound phraseology of our Prayer 
 Book a religious vocabulary very different. As re- 
 gards the subject specially before us here, new modes 
 of speech, of various gradations, are beginning to be 
 more or less in vogue. The policy of familiarizing the 
 public mind with language formerly unaccustomed is 
 well understood ; and the less startling novelties lead 
 easily up to those which would at first cause a shock, 
 such as "the sacrifice of the Altar" and "the Mass." 
 The solemn Scriptural designation of the Eucharist — 
 ''the Lord's Supper" — is treated with contumely. To 
 speak of it as "a celebration " is more in favour, be- 
 cause we are thus reminded more of the priest and less 
 of the congregation. Even barbarous uses of language 
 are commended to us, if they are used by us in com- 
 mon with the rest of the Latin Church. The priest 
 is said by Anglicans as well as Koman Catholics to 
 
CONCLUSION. 151 
 
 " communicate " those who come to receive the con- 
 secrated elements at his hands. In themselves many 
 such things are extremely trivial : but in the aggre- 
 gate they may produce a considerable and serious 
 change. '' Minuta sunt, sed multa sunt/' as St. 
 Augustine says of repeated acts which result in habits. 
 A process of this kind is going on, which threatens to 
 alter the whole outward expression of the Church of 
 England, though its old internal structure remains the 
 same.' There is (if my memory is correct) a part of 
 Gloucester Cathedral, where the solid and simple 
 Norman architecture is reticulated, so to speak, with 
 elaborate panelling of the Perpendicular period, and 
 by this process an extraordinary change has been pro- 
 duced, while yet the old work remains. Not very 
 dissimilar is the transformation now in progress with 
 much of our theological vocabulary.^ 
 
 With this change is closely connected a similar 
 change in the character of many of our devotional 
 books, which are published and used side by side 
 
 ^ Another illustration comes before me casually, as I correct these 
 pages. At the public institution of a clergyman into a new parish, it was 
 recently said (according to the report of a local newspaper) that the office 
 of the Parish Priest in the Church of England is " to instruct the people 
 and to plead the Hoty Sacrifice." The language of the Ordination Service 
 is different. If phraseology drawn from thence were used, we should say 
 that his office is "to instruct the people and to administer the Holy 
 Sacraments." See above pp. 121 — 123. 
 
 ^ With the copying of Koman phraseology must be classed the copying 
 of Roman costume, which has caused so painful a sense of division among 
 us, without (so far as I can see) any religious advantage whatever. Mr. 
 Beresford Hope (p. 163) finds fault with " exchanging the old familiar 
 full and graceful surplice for the little scamped article in vogue in certain 
 churches." It may or may not be true, as some suppose, that the Roman 
 fashion, in this respect, grew out of the cutting off of lace from the 
 bottom of the surplice ; but great discomfort is caused to many minds by 
 such little imitations of the French sacristie. 
 
152 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 with our Prayer Book, but are very different from 
 it in tone and teaching. These are parasitical growths 
 which tend to stifle and kill that on which they grow, 
 and the danger of this result is very serious. The 
 contents of some of these publications are brought 
 before the public eye in the correspondence to which 
 allusion has been made ; but a large amount of this 
 evil is only privately known ; and, for my own part, 
 I am disposed to think that the greatest danger 
 lurks in some of those books which at first sight 
 deviate least from our common standards ; as, for 
 instance, when the instructions concerning confession 
 are printed from the book of 1549 along with those 
 which finally superseded them in 1662 ; or when 
 suggestions of sacrificial presentation in the Commu- 
 nion are interpolated among those prayers and rubrics 
 of our authorised manual which contain nothing of 
 the kind. 
 
 As to other suggestions of the same nature, which 
 result from changes in the structure and decoration 
 of our churches, I can enter on this subject with a 
 very clear conscience. When a man has been occupied 
 during a large part of some busy years in earnest 
 efforts to restore a dilapidated cathedral to its ancient 
 beauty and dignity, he can afford to be very indifferent 
 to ihaputations of disregarding propriety and solemnity 
 in the condition of our sacred fabrics. It is, however, 
 one thing to act in the spirit of our Homily for 
 "Keeping clean and repairing of Churches,'' and 
 quite another thing to promote the transformation of 
 their chancels into a condition not intended or con- 
 templated by the Prayer Book. Our architects, 
 following their instinct of taste and consistency, and 
 
CONCLUSION. 153 
 
 in some cases impelled by clergymen who have doc- 
 trinal ends in view, have done much towards effecting 
 this transformation/ I hope I am sensible of the 
 great obligations under which many distinguished 
 members of a noble profession have laid the Church 
 of these days. Nor is it fair that, while following 
 aesthetic aims, they should be held responsible for the 
 theological results of their efforts to bring back our 
 churches to the mediaeval pattern, and for the peril in 
 which we are consequently placed. It is most natural 
 that they should wish to secure harmony and com- 
 pleteness in the churches which they restore, or which 
 they build in the styles of the past. Still it is true 
 that those churches were originally erected, and that 
 those styles flourished, when the old Basilican method 
 of celebrating the Holy Eucharist had passed away, 
 and when those doctrines, against which the Reforma- 
 tion was directed, had begun to reach their position of 
 commanding power. The glorious era of our ecclesias- 
 tical architecture was the age of Innocent III. The 
 expression of the Eucharistic doctrine of that age 
 cannot be at home in the Church of England ; and no 
 one can for a moment believe that a Church can be in 
 a safe position, when its service-books and authorised 
 formularies, on the one hand, and the structural and 
 
 ^ There is, however, another side of the subject, which ought in fairness 
 to be stated ; and the statement shall here be made in the words of a 
 friend who has given close attention to the question. He thinks that 
 in many cases our modern architects have almost forced the Eastward 
 Position on the Clergy, by ordering altar-like Communion Tables of great 
 size, and by erecting " foot-paces " of such a form as to leave convenient 
 room for kneeling on the west side of the Tables only. He adds, that 
 such things are often not observed on the plan, and that thus churches 
 are consecrated before the evil is remedied. At the beginning of this 
 century the Communion Tables were small, and the "foot-pace" not 
 common. 
 
154 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 artistic arrangements of its houses of worship on the 
 other, are not in agreement and harmony together. 
 I press this subject, however, no further than to in- 
 vite attention to the inconsistency which now troubles 
 us in this respect, and to ask that it may be considered. 
 In concluding this essay, I venture to make 
 an appeal, respectfully but very earnestly, to those 
 of the Clergy whose place is among the Moderate 
 High Churchmen. They probably hold, more than 
 any other class of persons, the future destinies of 
 the Church of England in their hands. This party 
 (not that I have any wish to term it a "party") will 
 always be the most numerous among the parties of 
 the Church. The conservative spirit of the Universi- 
 ties, the traditional feelings of country gentlemen, the 
 love of quiet and order, the dread of vulgar fanaticism, 
 will combine to swell their numbers and to make 
 them strong; and, hitherto, it must be admitted with 
 regret, that, not actively, but by passive encourage- 
 ment, their strength has been largely used to shelter 
 those, of whom even these Moderate High Churchmen 
 would say that their Eomeward tendencies are dan- 
 gerous. The appeal is here made, not to those who 
 view the Eastward Position, because of its high 
 doctrinal and devotional significance, as a matter of 
 principle, but to those with whom it is only a matter 
 of preference, or who, not having this preference, 
 are unwilling to invade the liberty of those who have 
 it. To the clergy of this class who have adopted this 
 position, so that it now becomes a point of honour 
 to maintain it, surely it may be urged that to stand 
 on a point of honour, when the peace and comfort 
 of others are at stake, is no part of the Christian code. 
 
CONCLUSION. 155 
 
 There is, however, one part of the Christian code 
 strictly characteristic of our religion and most im- 
 perative : it is that which charges us to beware of 
 causing " offence,'' of giving needless pain, of exciting 
 groundless suspicions, of wounding the consciences 
 of those who are weaker than ourselves. From whom 
 ought the concession in a case like this to come ? Is 
 it not from those who are invited to resign a prefer- 
 ence, without the gratifying of w^hich they can live 
 religiously and serve God effectually, rather than 
 from those whose consciences must be disquieted by 
 a course of action which they cannot help viewing 
 as in the highest degree perilous to the Church V 
 
 But rather let us, each and all, irrespective of party 
 combinations, make an appeal to one another for 
 charity and candour, for mutual forbearance and the 
 love of truth. The writing of these pages, begun at 
 Christmas and continued afterwards at intervals, amid 
 many difficulties and with many anxious thoughts, 
 is brought to a close at Whitsuntide. It would be a 
 most irreligious forgetting of the sacred season, if, in 
 such a crisis of our Church history, there were no 
 desire for that teaching of the Holy Spirit which 
 alone can keep us free from prejudice and bitterness, 
 alone can enable us to see the revealed truths of 
 the Gospel in their true balance and proportion. In 
 the light of Whitsunday, we ought more clearly than at 
 any other time to see this true balance and proportion. 
 This festival is the perpetual testimony of the Catholic 
 Church against a merely ceremonial religion — the 
 perpetual opportunity of coming back to the right 
 
 1 See Mr. Kennion's paper, which I haye been allowed to print in the 
 Supplement to this volume. 
 
156 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 standard, when we have deviated from it ; of restoring 
 the symmetry of our Christianity, when through con- 
 troversy that symmetry has been marred. 
 
 It cannot be too carefully and constantly recollected 
 that our duty is not simply to be faithful to the 
 reliction which has been revealed, but to the rie^ht 
 analogy of all parts of that religion : and that right 
 analogy cannot be preserved except by keeping the 
 lower in subordination to the higher. The great topic, 
 too, of this festival sets forth a commanding feature of 
 this law of subordination. Can any one, who reads the 
 New Testament simply, fail to observe how far the 
 direct action of the Divine Spirit upon the soul is 
 placed above all positive outward observances, even 
 if those positive outward observances are Divinely- 
 appointed Sacraments ? Is it not most clearly revealed 
 that it is in and through the Holy Spirit that the soul 
 is united to Christ ? And is not some of our present 
 trouble due to this — that we have intruded the 
 Eucharist into the place which the Holy Spirit ought 
 to have occupied in our system ? ^ 
 
 And one other concluding thought is proper at this 
 season of Whitsuntide. In the Eucharist we call Christ 
 to i^ememhrance : but we are living in the dispensation 
 of the Spirit. While Christ is absent the Spirit is pre- 
 sent.^ We cannot make a mistake in using such words : 
 
 ^ Above (p. Ill) attention is invited to the consensus of the New Testa- 
 ment as respects the supremacy of the " Word " and the absence of any 
 such testimony to the supremacy of the Eucharist. The same line of 
 argument might be followed here. But instead of naming any texts I 
 will simply refer to a most edifying book by the Kev. E. H. Bickersteth, 
 entitled The Spirit of Life, pp. 23 — 35. See also pp. 155 and 182. 
 
 ^ Mr. Gladstone {Contemporary Bevieiv for 1875, p. 211) speaks, 
 apparently with strong disapproval, of some who view the Eucharist as ex- 
 pressing the Real Absence of Christ. I am not aware that this phrase has 
 
CONCLUSION. 157 
 
 for they are the Lord's own. His departing was the 
 condition of this abiding spiritual presence. St. 
 John makes no mention of the Holy Eucharist in con- 
 nection with the Last Supper ; but in our Bibles three 
 chapters are filled with the discourse which St. John re- 
 lates to have been addressed to the Apostles after that 
 Supper. Might it not be wise for us always to read 
 this discourse, before we speak or w^rite in controversy 
 concerning the Eucharist ? Our Lord says that He is 
 departing, but that He will give them " another Com- 
 forter that He may abide with them for ever, even the 
 Spirit of Truth." Again He says, "These things 
 have I spoken unto you, being yet present wdth you ; 
 but the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the 
 Father will send in My name. He shall bring all 
 things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said 
 unto you : " and again, still more strongly, *' It is ex- 
 pedient for you that I go away : for if I go not away, 
 the Comforter will not come unto you : but if I de- 
 part, I will send Him unto you ... . When He, the 
 
 obtained any theological currency. But, after all, would it not express 
 the teaching of our Blessed Lord in these passages ? It seems to me that 
 the introduction of the word " presence " into our controversies on the 
 Eucharist has led to much confusion of thought. There is no Scriptural 
 authority for the use of the word in this connection, and the phrase 
 " Eeal Presence " is ambiguous. Our Lord promised something more 
 than His presence to the believing recipient : He promised Himself. At 
 the same time I feel that we cannot make rules for one another as to our 
 apprehension of Christ's communicating of Himself in this ordinance. 
 There must be much mutual toleration in regard to so mysterious a sub- 
 ject. It is in combination with the doctrine of Sacrifice by a human 
 priest that the doctrine of the Beal Presence becomes so serious. Arch- 
 deacon Wilberforce said, in his work on the subject, that "the doctrine 
 of the Eucharistic Sacrifice has its root in the truth of the Eeal Presence," 
 p. 364. I will add that he said in the same work that the Communion 
 Service in our English Prayer Book had been " divested of its sacrificial 
 character," p. 440. 
 
158 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Spirit of Truth is come, He will guide you into all 
 truth .... I came forth from the Father, and am 
 come into the world : again I leave the world and go 
 to the Father." And in harmony with this teaching 
 is the teaching of the whole body of the Epistles. 
 That which is supreme in the system of doctrine there 
 exhibited is not any sacramental presence, but the 
 indwelling of the Holy Spirit Himself, in the Christian 
 Church and the Christian soul. 
 
>*^ OP THE 
 
 ^UNIVBESITY^ 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 A. 
 
 {Page 8.) 
 THE BIIIGHTON CHURCH CONGRESS. 
 
 Canon Eawlinson occupies a position of considerable re- 
 sponsibility in regard to this present controversy ; and for his 
 wide historical learning, and the great service he has rendered 
 to Biblical Science, as respects the Old Testament, he deserves 
 to occupy such a position. Wlien men of inferior note insist 
 on connecting a high doctrinal meaning with the Eastward 
 Position, and use violent and exaggerated language on the 
 subject, this might be treated as a mere rivulet of controversy, 
 which, however noisy, is harmless. But when men of mark, 
 like Canon Eawlinson, and others who might easily be named, 
 insist, in the strongest terms, on this particular connection of 
 ceremony and doctrine, then we see that it is a powerful 
 stream of opinion with which we have to do, and that if the 
 stream is not stemmed or diverted, serious harm will result to 
 the Church. 
 
 Canon Swainson expressly says that it was a speech from 
 Canon Eawlinson in the Lower House of the Convocation of 
 Canterbury which changed his attitude in reference to this 
 controversy, so that, having previously been willing to con- 
 cede the use of the Eastward Position, he now feels bound to 
 resist this change. Professor Eawlinson had said " that Kttle 
 acts might involve the greatest doctrine ; and there was no 
 disguising the fact that the observances of the Eitualists were 
 
160 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 used for that very purpose ; they declared that they set 
 doctrines before the people by those external acts ; the whole 
 question was, in fact, that of the Real Presence ; there was 
 no use in blinking the matter." He proceeded to say that, as 
 regards the position of the priest, " relaxation " must be " in 
 favour of the non-ritualistic party." ^ At this language Pro- 
 fessor Swainson naturally took alarm. He found that mode 
 of " ministering the Sacraments," which had been the almost 
 universal tradition of the Clergy of the Church of England, 
 and which was adopted by the very bishops who assisted in 
 making the laws of 1662, treated as an action " now merely 
 allowed by the favour of the Eitualists," and this in the cause 
 of " a doctrine which is not the doctrine of the Church of 
 England ; " and part of the result we see in his excellent and 
 highly important pamphlet on ''the Rubrical Question of 
 1874." 
 
 Consistent with his course in Convocation was that which 
 Canon Rawlinson followed at the Brighton Church Congress. 
 The subject there on the third day was the "Fabrics and 
 Services of our Church," on which the two leading papers, 
 both containing excellent suggestions, but both tending 
 strongly in one direction, were read by Mr. Beresford Hope 
 and Mr. Street. So far as I remember (I was not present the 
 w^hole time), these papers were listened to with polite and 
 decorous attention ; and yet they both had this characteristic, 
 that they reiterated, again and again, with marked emphasis, 
 the word " altar," which has been excluded from the Prayer 
 Book, and of that word which is authorised there, made no use 
 at all, except in one sentence, where it was used in concession, 
 I might almost say in condescension.'^ But when Professor 
 Donaldson called attention to this remarkable fact, adding 
 that " every sensuous impression of the Lord's Table " is far 
 *' inferior to the innate sacredness of the solemn rite " which is 
 there celebrated, he was received with a rudeness, wliich I 
 cannot recollect without extreme pain, when I consider his 
 venerable years, his eminence, and his great services to a 
 
 ^ The quotation is given by Canon Swainson from the Guardian. 
 ^ Authoriud Report of the Church Congress held at Brighton., p. 282. 
 
APPENDIX. Id 
 
 noble art.i From this moment there was evident uneasiness 
 in the meeting; and the feeling was brought to a crisis when 
 Canon Eawlinson said, " The important thing in the Church 
 is the altar and the services in connection with it. I have 
 used that word, and I will just say that I have used it because 
 I found it to be the name given in the Bible. It is so termed 
 in every place but one, when it is called the table. That it is 
 the Lord's Table I am most willing not only to allow, but to 
 affirm most strongly ; but in the one place where it is called 
 the table, it is called so in contrast with the Table of Devils, 
 which was the heathen altar." Such criticism of the New 
 Testament appeared to many persons at the time as very 
 startling; but that occasion did not seem to me the proper 
 opportunity for discussing so serious a question. Feeling, 
 however the gTavity of the subject, I wrote afterwards, and 
 was allowed to publish in the Stando.rd of Oct. 26 and Nov. 16 
 two letters entitled " Altar or Table ? " These letters I hope 
 to republish, after the most careful consideration of all the 
 correspondence (so far as it is known to me) which resulted 
 from them. Many persons did me the favour to write to me 
 privately on the subject. I hope they will accept a very 
 busy life as an excuse for some delay. I will only add here 
 that St. Paul's avoidance of the word " altar " both in 1 Cor. 
 ix. 13, 14, and in 1 Cor. x. 18, 21, when it would have been 
 the natural word to use, if there had been in the Christian 
 system a literal " altar " correlative to the Jewish, seems to 
 me decisive against Canon Rawlinson's exegesis, especially 
 when consideration is given to the whole analogy of the 
 teaching of the New Testament on this subject. 
 
 * At the age of eiglity it is hardly likely that he is less wise than some of 
 the Clergy who were rude to him. It should be added that he is the founder 
 of the "Royal Institute of British Architects," of which Sir G. Gilbert Scott 
 is now the President. 
 
 M 
 
162 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 B. 
 
 {Page 34.) 
 ELEGY UPON AN ALTAR. 
 
 Appended to Ley's letter to Bishop Bridgeman is " a Post- 
 script to the precedent Letter, for further satisfaction to 
 the Reader touching the publication of it, and some other 
 points of moment that appertain to it." Among other contents 
 of the postscript is " an Ironical Elegy," bearing this title : 
 " A sad complaint of the late Altar newly erected, and pre- 
 pared for a new sacrifice, by the Lord Bishop of Chester, 
 in the upper end of the Chancell of the Cathedrall Church of 
 Chester, in the new intended Chapell there, newly pulled 
 downe (as it was high time)." Some of the lines in this 
 Elegy are as follows : — 
 
 ** I, who from those faire banks of Tyher came, 
 
 A stranger here by nature and by name, 
 
 I, whom the reverend Father here had placed 
 
 And with the name of Altar had me graced, 
 ♦ « » * ♦ 
 
 Am now become the object of all scorne. 
 
 My members and materials rent and torne. 
 
 Come, holy Fathers of the Convocation, 
 
 See and lament my wofiill desolation ; 
 
 Come, Deanes and Prebends, in your surplice clad, 
 
 From whose examples I much reverence had : 
 
 Loud Petty Canons, come, roare out your cryes, 
 
 Make up your Chorus in sad elegies 
 
 For my departure * * « * 
 
 Come, Conducts, Choristers." 
 
 1 quote these lines, not because I have any sympathy with this 
 mode of treating a grave subject, but because such documents, 
 preserved from the past, are a serious warning for us in the 
 present. I cannot but think that one peril involved in the 
 great movement of the day within the Church of England, if 
 it is recklessly urged on in disregard of both usage and law, is 
 the risk of a violent Puritan reaction. 
 
APPENDIX, 163 
 
 C. 
 
 {Page 36.) 
 THC PLACE OF THE LORD'S TABLE BETWEEN 1640 AND 1662. 
 
 I THINK I should have avoided the use of the word " whimsi- 
 cal," if, when I wrote the sentences on p. 36, 1 had known who 
 had maintained the unbroken continuity of the altarwise 
 position of the Lord's Table from 1640 onwards. Still some 
 very strong expression is necessary to denote my conviction of 
 the utter inconsistency of such a view with both the probabili- 
 ties and the facts of the case. The Dean of Bristol (Letter to 
 Eev. F. V. Mather on the Ornaments Rubrics, p. 30) quotes Dr. 
 Liddon as saying in a pamphlet entitled The Purchas Judg- 
 ment (p. 12), " Since the Eeformation, the Position of the Holy 
 Table has been what it is now. . . . the position which the 
 Holy Table has continuously occupied since the Primacy of 
 Laud ; " and Dr. Bright as saying in the same pamphlet (p. 13) 
 " The revisers of 1661, who framed this Eubric (the Consecra- 
 tion Eubric) were thinking of a table set, as was then the case, 
 altarwise, along or in front of the east wall. This arrangement 
 of Charles the First's time had made good its ground : it was 
 established in practice, though not enjoined by law." I 
 have not seen the pamphlet to which the Dean of Bristol 
 refers ; and it may contain sentences which modify the im- 
 pression produced by those which he quotes. If not, I 
 cannot help expressing my earnest hope that these state- 
 ments may be reconsidered. We look to our Theological 
 Professors for guidance in the reading of Church History, 
 and a sound argument cannot be erected on an erroneous 
 historical basis. 
 
 M 2 
 
164 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 {Page, 40.) 
 
 CATECHISM OF CHURCH DOCTRINE AND CHURCH PRACTICE 
 IN 1674. 
 
 The full title of this Catechism is " 'EviavTo^ ; or, a Course of 
 Catechising, being the mai^row of all orthodox and practical 
 expositions upon the Church Catechism, and of all controversies 
 upon Church Customs and Observances, digested into LIT. heads 
 for LII. Sundays in the year, useful for Ministers and their 
 People, Schoohnasters and their Scholars, Parents and their 
 Children, Masters and their Servants. Second edition, en- 
 larged and illustrated with forty-eight Copper-pieces, fitted to 
 the several occasions. London : Printed by F. C, for Fra. 
 Kirkman, and are to be sold at his shop over against the 
 Eobin Hood in Fenchurch Street, near the Aldgate. 1674."^ 
 The general character of the book is this — that it is a very 
 carefully prepared manual of catechetical instruction, based 
 in the earlier part on our authorised Catechism, and illustrated 
 throughout by engravings. It is to be observed, moreover, 
 that the book is no mere expression of Puritan opinion, but 
 very much the contrary. This is made evident by the 
 approving references throughout to such authors as Ham- 
 mond, Sanderson, Mede, Bilson, Morton and Sparrow. It is 
 further made evident by various incidental phrases, which 
 are full of meaning, as, for instance, " No form of good words 
 is dead to me if my heart be not dead ; " and again, " If we 
 cast off everything that Eome hath, we must throw away our 
 Bibles." The sacraments in this volume are spoken of as 
 
 1 This volume is the property of the Rev. G. T. Horn, Rector of Haverford- 
 west, who described it briefly in a letter published in the Guardian of 
 December 16th, 1874, and to whose courtesy I owe the opportunity of 
 examining it carefully. The book must be very rare, since no copy of it is 
 found in the University Library at Cambridge. I have, however, seen a 
 second copy in the library of the Master of Jesus' College in that University. 
 The first editioTi, as we learn from Mr. Fuller Russell, seems to have been 
 published in 1664. 
 
APPENDIX. 165 
 
 " conveyances " of the grace we pray for. Its advice to the 
 devout Christian is that, after his private prayers, he should 
 *' go, if he can, to Church, to receive absolution of the 
 Minister, who hath power to declare the will of God con- 
 cerning poor penitent sinners." But especially I am disposed 
 to lay stress on the prominence which, in harmony with the 
 plan of our Prayer Book, is given to Saints' Days. In the 
 questions on the Fourth Commandment, it is asked whether 
 there are " no other days to be set apart by Christians except 
 the Lord's Day ? " And at the end of the volume a large 
 space is given, with illustrative engravings, to the days thus 
 set apart, which are described as " the ornaments of Eeligion, 
 the witnesses of ancient Truth, motives to serious Devotion, 
 lasting Eecords on earth, and shadows of everlasting felicity 
 in Heaven." The substance of what is here written has been 
 published previously in the Guardian ; and I must adhere to 
 the opinion I have expressed of the book, notwithstanding a 
 criticism published by Mr. Fuller Eussell in the Church 
 Beview of May 29th. This being the general character of 
 the work, the following question and answer, having re- 
 ference to the position of the priest during the Prayer of 
 Consecration, assumes a very high importance, especially 
 when we consider the date of publication : " Q. Why doth 
 the Priest stand on the North side of the Table ? A. To avoid 
 the Popish sujperstition of standing towards the East!' 
 
 {Page 42.) 
 BISHOP NICOLSON'S VISITATION IN 1703. 
 
 The title of Bishop Nicolson's Manuscript Journal, preserved in 
 the Chapter Library at Carlisle, is as foUows : — " Miscellany 
 Accounts of the Present State of the Churches, Parsonage and 
 Vicarage Houses, Glehelands, <Scc., in the several Parishes within 
 the Diocese of Carlisle, as they appeared to me hy vievj m the 
 
 * See L'Estrange, a« (juoted in the Preface. 
 
166 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 credible information of witnesses hereafter mentioned, k J). 1703." 
 The volume is 8vo., and consists of 404 pages. The writing is 
 close but very legible. Besides the instances of the Lord's 
 Table being placed East and West, which are named above, 
 Orton, Bongate, and *' several other places " in the Deanery of 
 Westmoreland are mentioned as exhibiting the same arrange- 
 ment in their churches. In many cases rails are noted being 
 wanting; but it is to be observed that though directions 
 are repeatedly given by tlie Bishop for the providing of rails, 
 no order is found for the setting of the Table in what he him- 
 self doubtless viewed as the most suitable position. My in- 
 formation regarding the contents of this MS. volume is derived 
 from two of the Canons of Carlisle. 
 
 F. 
 
 {Page 44.) 
 
 FTTKTHER INSTANCES OF CHANCELS REMAININcJ IN THEIR OLD 
 
 CONDITION. 
 
 Since the earlier pages of this book were written I have re- 
 ceived most obliging communications from various Clergymen, 
 who mention several existing or recent illustrations of this 
 part of my argument. It would seem that the county of 
 Gloucester is peculiarly rich in examples. The most re- 
 markable is that of Deerhurst, which possesses " one of the 
 oldest and most interesting churches in the kingdom : Mr. 
 Parker calls it the earliest dated church." Here, in the 
 chancel, which is, proportionally, very large, is " a continuous 
 row of seats, running round on the North, South and East 
 sides ; on tlie West side comes a low railing with a gate : the 
 Holy Table stands, unattached to any wall, in the centre : the 
 communicants arrange themselves in the seats, and the 
 Minister goes to them with the elements, white cloths being 
 placed along the desks of the seats, all round — no doubt an 
 ancient practice." Till within the last thirty years the Table 
 seems to have stood " longitudinally." The same corre- 
 spondent states that a similar arrangement was recently found 
 
APPENDIX. 167 
 
 in the church of Winch combe, " a small country town among 
 the Cotswold Hills, giving its name to a Pairal Deanery." A 
 second correspondent states that at Hailes near Winchcombe 
 he " saw about thirty years ago a Communion Table, which 
 he was able to walk round, and which the Clergyman of the 
 place said had remained in that position since the days of 
 Cromwell : " a third, that in the parish church of Ogle worth 
 in the same county, he has " seen the Communion Table with 
 its end to the East wall of the Chancel ; " and a fourth gives 
 the instance of the parish of Toddington near Winchcombe as 
 " one in which the Communion Table has never, so far as can 
 be ascertained, stood against the East w^all of the Church," 
 adding the following remarks : — " When I came here in 1854 
 I found it placed nearly equidistant between the East wall and 
 the chancel rails, and it so continued until the church was 
 pulled down, and will probably be so placed again when the 
 building is completed." A Clergyman in Worcestersliire 
 names Eock Church near Bewdley, in that county, as one 
 where a monument, with an effigy of life-size, was placed 
 in 1554 against the East wall on the floor, and adds that he 
 believes that in the adjoining parish of Abberley, a pew used 
 to intervene between the East wall and the Communion Table. 
 I may conclude these notices by quoting what a friend writes 
 to me from Kent : " At HoUingbourne in this county there is 
 a very well-known and handsome cloth for the Holy Table. It 
 was elaborately embroidered by the Ladies Culpepper during 
 the exile of Charles II., and given by them to the church at 
 the Eestoration. The peculiarity of this cloth is that the 
 very rich embroidery is the same on all four sides; and the 
 dimensions prove that the table and cloth were made one 
 for the other, so that the cloth should hang down on each and 
 every side ahke." ^ 
 
 ^ Since this was written I have received further illustrations from the county 
 of Kent, the most important being the fact that till the beginning of this 
 century the Mayor and Corporation of Dover used to have their seats on the 
 East of the Conmmnioii Table. 
 
168 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 G. 
 
 {rage 47.) 
 
 THEOllY THAT THE NORTH SIDE IS THE NORTHERN PART 
 OF THE WEST SIDE. 
 
 Though I regard the debate on this subject as an extinct 
 controversy, I will mention (after referring, by the way, to the 
 " Directorium Anglicanum," p. 38, where the theory in ques- 
 tion is taken for granted) the following treatises, where the 
 arguments derived from Jewish ritual are effectually disposed 
 of :_"The North Side of tlie Table," by Canon C. J. Elliott, 
 pp. 3—10 ; the " Christian Observer" for July 1874, pp. 515 
 — 519 ; and the " Altar Question in the light of the Mosaic 
 Eitual," by Eev. E. W. Kennion. In the second article which 
 Canon Simmons published in the " Contemporary Eeview " 
 (Jan. 1867), it is stated (p. 3) that Dr. Littledale had an- 
 nounced a nev/ edition of his treatise on the " North Side of 
 the Altar," " revised and expanded, and containing answers 
 to the ingenious arguments of Mr. Droop and Mr. Elliott ; " 
 but though eight years have since elapsed, I have not heard 
 of the appearance of this new edition. 
 
 H. 
 
 {Page 67.) 
 THE BREAKING OF THE BREAD BEFORE 1662. 
 
 In Cosin's " Notes and Collections on the Book of Common 
 Prayer," he speaks of this subject in such a manner as to show 
 his own opinion very clearly, and also to make it probable 
 that the public breaking of the bread at consecration was 
 frequently practised before our present rubric was inserted in 
 the Prayer Book. " At the words He took the bread and He 
 brake it, and He took the cup, no direction is given to the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 priest (as in King Edward's service-book there was, and as in 
 most places it is still in use) to take the hread and cup into Ms 
 hands, nor to hreak the hread hefore the people, which is a 
 needful circumstance belonging to this Sacrament ; and there- 
 fore, for his better warrant therein, such a direction ought 
 here to be set in the margin of the book." Works in Anglo- 
 Catholic Library, vol. v. p. 516. In another part of the same 
 volume (p. 342) we find Cosin quoting with approval the 
 following passage from Calixtus : — " Voluit Dominus Corpus et 
 Sanguinem suum eo modo sumi, quin panem quoque et vinum, 
 cum quibus exhibentur, eo modo tractari, qui ad passionem 
 anirnis fidelium imprirnendam esset idoneus. Nempe voluit 
 Sanguinem seorsim et tanquam a Corpore separatum accipi, et 
 voluit benedictum panem, qui Kotvcovia est Corporis, frangi, 
 et vinum calici infusum eftundi, ut ita et passio et mors, ac 
 Corporis cruciatus et Sanguinis efifusio reprcesentaretur, et non 
 modo menti, sed ipsis quoque oculis per hujusmodi signa et 
 adiones efficaciter ingenerentur." 
 
 I. 
 
 {Page 72.) 
 BISHOP BEVERIDGE ON SEEING THE BKEAD BROKEN. 
 
 Near the end of his treatise on "The Necessity and Ad- 
 vantage of Frequent Communion," Beveridge points out how 
 " that incomparable office which our Church hath made for 
 the administration of th;s Holy Sacrament " is so contrived 
 that " from the beginning to the end of it there is matter and 
 occasion given us all along for the exercise of our faith in 
 Christ." Then he proceeds to show in detail throughout the 
 office " how we should act our faith all the while that we are 
 at the Lord's Table, so as to receive spiritual strength and 
 comfort from it ; " and when he reaches the Prayer of Con- 
 secration, he writes as follows : — " And now there is nothing 
 either seen, or said, or done, but what puts us in mind of 
 sometliing or other whereupon to employ and exercise our 
 faith in the highest manner that we can. When we see the 
 
170 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 bread and wine set apart for consecration, it reminds ns of 
 God's eternal purpose and determinate counsel to offer up 
 His Son as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. The minis- 
 ter's reading the Prayer of Consecration and performing that 
 whole work alone, none of the people speaking a word, or any- 
 way assisting him in it, may put us in mind how the whole 
 work of our salvation was accomplished by Christ alone, no 
 mere creature contributing anything at all towards it; and 
 therefore we should believe in Him as our only Mediator and 
 Advocate. When we hear those words, * Who in the same 
 night that He was betrayed took bread,' we are then by faith 
 to behold our Lord at His last supper, there instituting this 
 Sacrament which we are now to receive, and distributing it to 
 His apostles with His own most blessed hands. Wiien we see 
 the bread broken, we should then call to mind that grief and 
 pain, those bitter agonies and passions, which the eternal Son 
 of God suffered for our sins, and in our stead. How ' He was 
 wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniqui- 
 ties ; ' how His blessed body was broken, His hands and His 
 feet fastened to the cross, with nails drove through them, and 
 all for our sins — even for ours. And so when the minister 
 takes the cup into his hands, or pours out the wine, we are 
 then by faith to behold how fast the blood trickled down from 
 our dear Lord and Saviour's head when crowned with thorns, 
 from His hands and feet when nailed to the cross, from His 
 side when pierced with the spear, and from His whole body 
 when He was in His agony, and all to wash away our sins." ^ 
 
 1 Hartwell Home's ed. of Beveridge's Works, vol. i. p. 602. To the 
 evidence furnished under this head several additions might be made. I will 
 here only mention three devotional books, to which a friend refers me, contain- 
 ing passages of the same kind. The first is Jeremiah Dyke's Worthy Com- 
 municant (1645 and 1661). This book is dedicated to Thomas Earl of Win- 
 chilsea and Cecil Countess of Winchilsea, which fixes the date of the first 
 edition between March 1633, when he succeeded his mother, and November, 
 1634, when he died. The other book is A Familiar Guide to the Lord's 
 Supper, by Theophilus Dorrington (1695), and Reformed Devotions by the 
 same author (1704), the latter of which had, I believe, a preface by Dr. 
 Hickes. 
 
APPENDIX. 171 
 
 J. 
 
 {Page 76.) 
 THE CONSECRATION OF ABBEY DORE CHURCH. 
 
 Much stress has been recently laid upon a form for the Con- 
 secration of the Church of Abbey Dore in Herefordshire, 
 published from a MS. in the British Museum, collated with 
 another MS. at Lambeth.^ It is stated on the authority of a 
 Eector of Dore, who wrote in 1727, that this ceremony was 
 performed by Field, Bishop of St. David's, under a commis- 
 sion from Wren, Bishop of Hereford. On the form of the 
 Consecration ceremony, as thus published, I beg leave to offer 
 the following remarks. 
 
 This ceremony, inasmuch as it took place in 1634, can be 
 no illustration of the meaning of our present Consecration- 
 rubric, which did not then exist, but was introduced into th6 
 Prayer Book in 1662. Nor is there any proof that it repre- 
 sented the general custom of the time to which it belonged : 
 it may only indicate the kind of service which Field, an obscure 
 Bishop (or perhaps Wren, a very distinguished one), desired 
 to introduce. Moreover it prescribes various ceremonial acts 
 not authorised even by the Prayer Book as it stood in the 
 reign of Charles I.^ On the other hand, it is to be observed 
 that though the people are directed to turn eastwards at the 
 saying of the Apostles' Creed,^ the Chaplain and Priest 
 ofi&ciate during the Communion Service at the North end and 
 South end of the Lord's Table, which are also termed the 
 
 1 The eagerness with which Mr. Beresford Hope and Mr. Malcolm MacColl 
 have seized on this publication is as remarkable as their omitting to notice 
 some other publications which have a far more important bearing on the 
 question before us. The pamphlet was published last year by the Rev. J. 
 Fuller Russell, 
 
 ^ Thus the direction that the Table is to stand at the East end of the 
 chancel (p. 15) in in violation of a rubric and a canon, both of which were 
 extant in 1634. 
 
 3 P. 19. 
 
172 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 North part and South part.^ Even as regards the Bishops' 
 position in the Consecration Prayer, there seems to me to be 
 a certain haziness in the instructions for his position : for he 
 is directed to stand not " before the Table, with his face east- 
 wards," but " with his face to the Table, about the midst ot 
 it."^ And finally I must observe, that not only are the 
 " oblations " in this service distinguished from the placing^ of 
 the Bread and Wine on the Holy Table, but that the word 
 " altar " is not used once in the service, though the word 
 "table" occurs nineteen times.* This fact, considering the 
 general spirit of the service, and the motives for its present 
 publication, appears to me of no light importance. If the 
 two terms had been then viewed as ecclesiastically synony- 
 mous, it seems incredible^ that, at least, some modest alterna- 
 tion in the use of them should not have occurred in a service 
 for the Consecration of a Church.^ 
 
 1 Compare p. 27 with pp. 25, 28, and 30. 
 
 2 P. 30. The words in the note "he himself staying at the end of the 
 Table " should be remarked. 
 
 3 This act is described here by the word '* offer," the introduction of which 
 Bancroft and others in vain endeavoured to secure, at this point of the service, 
 in 1662. It should be added that a distinction is drawm (p. 27) between those 
 offertory sentences which are applicable to **Alms," and those which are 
 applicable to " Oblations." This is in harmony with what we find in Bishop 
 "Wren's Notes, as recently published by the Bishop of Chester. 
 
 * It ought to be noted that in the most emphatic place it is termed ** com- 
 munion-table " (p. 15), and surely it might be fairly argued that if this book 
 is of authority in regard to ceremony it is of authority in regard to the use 
 of words. 
 
 * I observe a very strange circumstance on the page which follows the Pre- 
 face in Mr. Fuller Russell's pamphlet. Certain rubrics of the Prayer Books 
 of 1549 and 1662 are there co-ordinated, with the view of proving that *' be- 
 fore the Table " in the latter is synonymous with "afore the midst of the 
 Altar " in the former. To this end the Consecration Rubric in the Communion 
 Service of 1662 is co-ordinated with the last initial rubric of 1549. But the 
 author has overlooked the fact that in the last initial rubric of 1662, which 
 furnishes the tnie parallel, the old words have been changed into " at the 
 North side of the Table." 
 
APPENDIX, 173 
 
 K. 
 
 {Page 92.) 
 EVIDENCE FROM ENGRAVINGS. 
 
 The evidence from pictures is a very interesting and by no 
 means unimportant part of this inquiry. Many engravings, 
 especially frontispieces to books of devotion, have been brought 
 into notice in the course of the discussions which have taken 
 place on the general subject. I will refer only to some which 
 I have myself seen. 
 
 Certain abatements must in candour be made in estimating 
 the weight of testimony of this kind. Engravers may be 
 very careless and inaccurate in points of detail. Pictures 
 belonging to one period of Church history may, for the sake 
 of economy, be bound up in books belonging to another 
 period ; so that the former do not strictly illustrate the latter. 
 We must remember, too, that the latter part of the seven- 
 teenth century with the early part of the eighteenth, notwith- 
 standing the peremptory legislation of 1662, was a period of 
 transition. The usage of one diocese or district might not be 
 absolutely identical with the usage of another. Moreover 
 there were difficulties then, which do not now exist, impeding 
 communication among different parts of the country. 
 
 Great stress has been laid upon the well-known frontispiece 
 to Sparrow's Rationale upon the Booh of Common Prayer. 
 The picture indeed represents, not any part of the celebra- 
 tion or administration of the Communion, but the saying 
 of the Litany. It is argued, however, that because the Lord's 
 Table in this engraving has a white cloth upon it, and a book 
 in the midst, open to the west, the Communion is about to 
 take place and the Priest about to consecrate in the Eastward 
 Position. Now, as to this, I have to observe that no flagon or 
 chalice or paten appears on the Table, the northern part of 
 which is not shown at alV and that no kneeling cushion is 
 
 ^ Dr. Blakeney remarks very truly that this engraving does not show the 
 ** north side " in either sense, p. 451. 
 
174 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 shown such as that wliicli indicates the position of the Priest 
 in the plan of Archbishop Laud's Chapel.^ But further, this 
 picture cannot be adduced as an illustration of the Consecra- 
 tion Eubric of 1662 ; for that rubric did not exist when it was 
 engraved. Sparrow's Rationale was first published in 1622,'^ 
 and this frontispiece was prefixed to various subsequent edi- 
 tions. My copy is the Oxford reprint (1840) from the edition 
 of 1684, with a preface bearing the initials "i. H. N." But I 
 have a curious circumstance to add, which seems to me worthy 
 of attention. In a copy (dated 1676) of that volume of 
 Comber's Companion to the Temjple, which contains a Com- 
 mentary on the Litany, is a frontispiece, exhibiting the saying 
 of that part of the service, and extremely similar to the other, 
 but with this marked difference, that, though the Holy Table 
 in this case also has a white cloth, the north side is shown, 
 and the book is there, open to the north. If the cloth and 
 the open book are sufficient grounds for assuming eastward 
 consecration in the former, then they are sufficient for assum- 
 ing southward consecration in the latter. Are we then to 
 conclude that the new rubric of 1662 had, in the interval 
 between 1657 and 1676, settled this point in favour of the 
 north end ? 
 
 Another picture, from which a photograph has been taken 
 and circulated in certain quarters, is prefixed to a very rare 
 book, entitled The Whole Duty of Receiving the Blessed Sacra- 
 ment, by the author of The Whole Duty of Man. I have been 
 told that only one copy of this book is known to exist ; and this 
 copy (the fifth edition, published in 1717) is at this moment, 
 through the great kindness of the owner, in my keeping. 
 Here are two flagons and a paten on the Table, and an open 
 book on a cushion in the middle of the west side, giving the 
 impression that consecration had taken place there in the 
 Eastward Position. The Priest is administering the cup, 
 moving northwards. I will not attempt to dihite the value 
 of the picture, as an argument for "orientation." I will 
 simply add the following extract from The Whole Duty of Man, 
 
 1 See above (p. 79). 
 
 2 See Mr. MacColl's Lawlessness, &c., p. 203. 
 
APPENDIX. 175 
 
 which seems to show that the author, whatever pictures might 
 be bound up in his books, contemplated visibility to the con- 
 gregation in the Priest's act of breaking the bread during con- 
 secration : — " When thou art at the Holy Table, first humble 
 thyself. . . . Then meditate on the bitter sufferings of Christ, 
 which are set out to us in that Sacrament ; when thou seest the 
 Bread broken, remember how His Blessed Body was torn with 
 nails upon the Cross ; when thou seest the Wine poured out, 
 remember how His precious blood was spilt there ; and then 
 consider that it was thy sins that caused both." ^ 
 
 ^ A friend who has paid careful attention to the literary history of 77ie 
 Whole Duty of Man, expresses a doubt whether this Companion to the Lord's 
 Supper is really by the same author. The evidence is of two kinds. 
 
 The Preface to the works of the author of The Whole Duty of Man (Oxford 
 and liondon, 1684), after referring to various attempts to pass off other works 
 as by the same author, says: "To avoid like attempts and impostures for 
 the future, it is here solemnly declared, that these tracts which we here 
 exhibit are the genuine and only writings of our author." The next sentence, 
 "Indeed had Almighty God lent longer life to this eminent person," &c., 
 implies that the author was then already dead. The Wliole Duty of Receiving 
 Worthily the Blessed Sacrament is not in the volume to which this preface is 
 added, and which consists of tracts printed in 1683 and 1684, and shown to 
 be complete by lists of errata and of texts for the whole at the end of the 
 volume. 
 
 Again, there are in these two volumes discrepancies of language and of 
 doctrinal view, such as the following. The former devotes several pages to 
 direction for self-examination and only at p. 33 suggests an "advice," that 
 *'if any person cannot satisfy his own soul in sincerity " he should "make 
 known his case to some discreet and learned minister ; " and says nothing 
 whatever about "absolution," while the latter (p. 14) directs us "for better 
 preparation, as occasion is, to disburthen and quit our consciences of those 
 sins that may grieve us, or scruples that may trouble us, to a learned and 
 discreet Priest, and from him to receive advice and the benefit of Absolution." 
 And, to take another instance, The Whole Duty of Man says (p. 34) " When 
 thou art at the Holy Table," The Whole Duty of Receiving, &c. (p. 155), 
 says " When you are come to the Altar." 
 
176 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 L. 
 
 (Page 96.) 
 NOVELTY OF THE EASTWARD POSITION. 
 
 I HAVE been accused of exaggeration in what I said last year 
 at the Chester Diocesan Conference concerning the novelty of 
 the Eastward Position. I had used the phrase " ecclesiastical 
 microscope " to describe the difficulty of discovering any suffi- 
 cient number of instances to justify the claim of a continuous 
 practice co-ordinate with the practice of the Southward Posi- 
 tion ; and I am quite willing to withdraw this phrase, if it 
 causes offence, though I cannot see how any blame attaches to 
 me for the use of it, when due allowance is made for the free- 
 dom of extemporaneous speaking.^ 
 
 Instances of this ceremonial act, previous to the changes of 
 the last thirty years, have been sought out with the utmost 
 diligence ; but all of them put together, as it seems to me, are 
 of no argumentative value. The Dean of St. Paul's, in a 
 letter addressed to the Times about fifteen months ago, spoke 
 of this position as a novelty within his recollection. The 
 Bishop of Manchester, speaking in Convocation at York of 
 his reminiscences of Oxford, said that Dr. Newman, when at 
 the height of his University influence, did not consecrate in 
 this way at St. Mary's. As to the instances of the practice 
 which have been very confidently brought forward, many of 
 them break down on close inquiry. Mr. Morton Shaw (pp. 
 8-9) adduced the example of Mr. Simeon ; but I was able to 
 furnish the express testimony of a clergyman who regularly 
 attended Trinity Church, Cambridge, and frequently gave help 
 in the service there, from 1823 till Mr. Simeon's death in 
 1836, and of another clergyman who was Mr. Simeon's curate 
 there from 1829 to 1836, to the effect that this venerable man 
 always "ordered the elements" at the front of the Lord's 
 Table, and then returned for the Prayer of Consecration to the 
 
 1 See p. 56 of the official Report of tins Conference. 
 
APPENDIX. 177 
 
 north side.* Another case is that of Bishop Law, who occu- 
 pied the see of Chester from 1812 to 1824. It was first 
 stated in a letter to the Guardian (published July 16, 1873), 
 that on Easter Day in 1814, at an ordination in St. James's, 
 Piccadilly, this prelate consecrated " standing before the midst 
 of the altar," and the same testimony was recently brought 
 forward by Canon Gregory in a speech before the Lower 
 House of the Convocation of Canterbury. On being asked 
 to try to ascertain Bishop Law's practice, and after using my 
 best endeavours, I was able to produce the following evidence 
 which cannot be questioned : — " I was Bishop Law's chaplain 
 from the day of my ordination. I was constantly by his side 
 during his episcopate at Chester and Wells. On countless 
 occasions I have seen him officiate at the Lord's Supper. He 
 invariably stood on the North side of the Table. I never 
 witnessed a single deviation. I am ignorant of the incident, 
 which is said to have occurred in 1814. If it occurred at all, 
 it must have been exceptional in reference to the position of 
 the Table." Another name which has been brought forward 
 in the same way is that of Dr. Eouth ; but I have letters now 
 before me, written by those who were resident in Magdalene 
 College, Oxford, during his life, which refute the allegation. 
 Even with regard to Bishop Maltby there seems to be some 
 doubt, though I have, on more than one occasion, heard his 
 practice very confidently urged. However this may be, I 
 cannot think that even extreme High Churchmen would be 
 disposed to lay great stress on that prelate's authority in 
 matters of doctrine and ritual. 
 
 I may be allowed here to quote some words (printed in the 
 Ouardian of May 12) by Canon Harvey, whose evidence is 
 of peculiar value. '' The speech of Canon Gregory," he says, 
 " was generally felt to be able and effective. But as a clergy- 
 man more than twenty years his senior, and connected from 
 the first with well-known High Churchmen, I can say, from 
 my own experience, and after the fullest inquiry, that the 
 Canon has not been correctly informed." He then refers es- 
 pecially to his first rector, Archdeacon Watson, the brother of 
 
 1 See the Ouardian of Jan. 6, 1875, p. 19. 
 
 N 
 
178 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Joshua Watson, and to Bishop Blomfield ; and adds in a post- 
 script : — " / should he glad to see a list of those clergymen who 
 used the Eastwai'd Position at the commencement of their minis- 
 terial career, if ordained hefore 1832."^ To this T am allowed 
 to append the testimony of my honoured friend Canon Blom- 
 field, who tells me that, though he has been present at discus- 
 sions of all kinds on Church questions in his brother's house, 
 he never heard the Eastward Position referred to, or ever saw 
 it adopted till recent times. I will conclude this note with 
 an extract from a private letter addressed to Canon Harvey, 
 which he kindly permits me to use : " I have been in Holy 
 Orders fifty-three years — was brought up in a Cathedral 
 Church, of which my late father was a member — was edu- 
 cated at a College in Oxford, the head of which was a Bishop 
 of no mean repute — and have been blessed with various 
 opportunities of attending Divine Service at several Cathe- 
 drals — and yet I never saw the practice of the Eastward 
 Position adopted." 
 
 M. 
 
 {Page 127.) 
 THE PERPETUAL OBLATION IN HEAVEN. 
 
 Partly for the sake of escaping, for a moment, from the 
 personalities of our present conflict in England, and partly 
 for the satisfaction of quoting the well-considered words of 
 one, who, besides being a Bishop, is a distinguished theo- 
 logian, it may be useful to recall the troubles which disturbed 
 the Episcopal Church of Scotland in 1859 and 1860. I 
 do not refer to the case of Mr. Cheyne, which is handled in 
 Bishop Charles Wordsworth's Charge of 1859 i^ though for 
 
 ^ This and some other questions were very pointedly put by Canon Harvey, 
 in a letter to the same paper, at least a year ago. 
 
 ^ The doctrines condemned in this case were — (1), that the Sacrifice of the 
 Eucharist is substantially the same as the Sacrifice of the Cross ; (2), that in 
 the Lord's Supper we kneel to the Lord Himself, invisibly present under the 
 form, or the veils, of bread and wine : (3), that the only thing necessary to 
 the completion of the sacrifice is the Communion of the Priest. — Charge, p. 11 . 
 
APPENDIX. 179 
 
 another reason that Charge ought here to be specially men- 
 tioned. In the course of it he states that, Y/hereas previously 
 he had been in the habit of saying the Consecration Prayer 
 in the Eucharistic Service with his face towards the East/ 
 believing it to be prescribed by the Eubric in the 
 English, and allowed by the Rubric in the Scotch,^ Prayer 
 Book, he should thenceforward, having been convinced by 
 Professor Blunt's arguments, discontinue the practice, more 
 especially as he feared this position was encouraging wrong 
 doctrines concerning the Sacrifice in the Eucharist, as well as 
 the practice of non-recipient attendance, which is connected 
 with those views. Such a change of opinion and action, in 
 one so eminent, learned, and thoughtful, appears to me a fact 
 of no slight importance, more especially as the Bishop's 
 career can by no possibility be identified with any " Evan- 
 gelical " or " Low Church " partizanship. 
 
 The chief purpose, however, of this note, is to refer to the 
 case of the Bishop of Brechin, and to the " Opinion " which 
 was delivered by the Bishop of St. Andrews in the Episcopal 
 Synod held in Edinburgh in 1860, and which was published 
 in the following year. Among the points at issue in this 
 controversy were the identification of the Sacrifice in the 
 Eucharist with the Sacrifice on the Cross, and the argument 
 in support of this view derived from the belief that there is 
 a perpetual Sacrifice of Christ in Heaven. The Bishop of 
 Brechin had said that " no words of man can strengthen the 
 tremendous and absolute identity of the two sacrifices," or 
 "of the one sacrifice " in its two aspects.^ Now, in order to 
 establish this identity, it has long been a commonplace in 
 Eoman Catholic theology (and the same mode of arguing has 
 been, during the last thirty years, used by some Anglican 
 
 ^ The Bishop had gone so far in concession and conciliation at St. Ifinian's, 
 as to say there in the Eastward Position the whole of the devotional parts of 
 the Communion Service, commencing with the first Lord's Prayer, though the 
 Eubric of the Scotch Prayer Book is as follows : —The Presbyter standing at the 
 north side or end shall say the Lord's Prayer, &c., p. 21. 
 
 ' The Scotch Eubric runs thus : — The Presbyter y during the time of Conse- 
 cration, shall stand at such a part of the Holy Table where he may with jnore 
 ease and decency use his hands. 
 
 • Opinion, &c., p. iv. in the Supplementary Note. 
 
 N 2 
 
130 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 theologians) to employ the priesthood of Melchizedek as the 
 link of connection. Christ is " a priest for ever after the 
 order of Melchizedek : " hence He must have a sacrifice 
 to offer ; and that sacrifice must be the sacrifice of Him- 
 self. To this a most carefully-reasoned reply is furnished 
 by Bishop Charles Wordsworth ; and, using his materials, I 
 may put the matter briefly thus : — Neither in the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews, nor in the Book of Genesis, nor in the 110th 
 Psalm, is any mention made of any offering by Melchizedek. 
 Bishop Andrewes says of Melchizedek, sacrificium nullum, 
 oUulit} It was in fulfilment of the type of the Aaronic 
 priesthood, that Christ offered the sacrifice of Himself. 
 Melchizedek, as King and Priest, receives tithes and dis 
 penses blessing.^ Thus the link which it is sought to find 
 in the Melchizedek-priesthood of Christ entirely disappears. 
 How far, even if it were otherwise, it would be possible to 
 identify, except by an assumption, a sacrifice in the Lord's 
 Supper with a perpetual oblation in Heaven, I do not stay to 
 inquire. 
 
 I must further ask attention to the reference made in 
 this argument by the Bishop of St. Andrews (an accom- 
 plished Greek scholar, as well as a learned theologian) to 
 the exact meaning of the Greek words in the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews. Our Lord is not said to have ascended into 
 the true Holy of Holies, Heaven itself, with His own blood, 
 but hy His own blood. The preposition is Sta (Heb. ix. 12). 
 Christ hath perfected for ever (not is 'perfecting) them that are 
 being sanctified. The word is rereXelcoKev (Heb. x. 14). 
 Christ does not stand at the right hand of God, but sat 
 down, and continues to sit. The word is iKudicrev (v. 12). 
 The Bishop adds that he thinks the elq to SiTyve/te? (v. 12) 
 
 1 From Bishop Pearson's Treatise on the. Creed, which is here quoted at 
 length, it is sufficiftnt to give these sentences : — '* When Jesus had given Him- 
 self a propitiatory sacrifice for sin, He ascended up on high. . . . Nor is He 
 prevalent only in His own oblation once offered, but in His constant intercession. 
 .... "We read of no other sacerdotal act performed by Melchizedek, the 
 Priest of the Most High God, but only that of Messing.'^ 
 
 ^ If we regard Christ, in His Melchizedek-priesthood, as " blessing God " 
 in our name, and offering our sacrifices, we see in Heb. xiii. 15, 16, what those 
 sacrifices are. 
 
APPENDIX. 181 
 
 belongs rather to the " Session for everlasting," than to "the 
 one Sacrifice for everlasting," more especially as the phrase is 
 repeated presently afterwards (v. 14). " The Session is et? 
 TO 8ir]V€K€<i, because by one Sacrifice Christ hath perfected 
 ek TO Si7]V€K^<: them that are being sanctified." ^ 
 
 K. 
 
 {Page 138.) 
 THE BASILICAN ARRANGEMENT. 
 
 I AM perplexed by a passage quoted above (pp. 105, 106) 
 from Mr. Beresford Hope's Book. He seems to say there 
 that the use of the Eastward Position is " the order in which 
 the Holy Catholic Church has, fi^oni the first, been wont to 
 show forth the Lord's death." But surely it is a well- 
 authenticated fact of history that on the Basilican method, 
 when public buildings for Christian worship took their place 
 among the established institutions of the Empire, consecration 
 at the Eucharist took place in the Westward position, and an 
 equally well-authenticated fact that the inversion of the mode 
 of consecration became customary afterwards, co-ordinately 
 with the development of Eoman doctrine. Mr. Morton Shaw, 
 admitting the Basilican custom as a fact, harmonises it, in a 
 manner which to me is astounding, with the view which he 
 advocates. He says that " this position of the celebrant was 
 
 1 I had intended to refer to the Bishop of Brechin's treatment of our Slat 
 Article ; but in the near presence of death disputation must become silent. 
 This Appendix was written before the decease of that eminent theologian. 
 The note, however, may be used for a (j^uotation from a letter written in 
 1866 by the late Bishop of Argyll and the Isles, and just published (Oct. 16) 
 in the Buteman and Advertiser for the Western Isles. ' ' 1 have been much pained 
 in my journeys to find the increasing prevalence of a practice which is as foreign 
 to the experience of our elder Clergy as it is opposed to the laws and prin- 
 ciples of our Church. 1 mean the practice of the officiating clergjnnan per- 
 forming portions of the Divine Service having his back turned towards the 
 people, and accompanying this posture with actions which can have no 
 intelligible meaning but the conception of a Creative Priestly Act, whereby a 
 Presence and Offering are supposed to be made of our Lord's body, and to 
 which adoration is paid." 
 
182 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 not at the back of the Holy Table, but at what was then 
 believed to be the front ; and although in one sense, he faced 
 the people in that position, yet he was in truth jpractically 
 ignoring them as a 'part of the congregation, and his position at 
 that side of the Holy Table was adopted simply with a regard 
 to the clergy who were behind him, and not with any regard 
 to the laity who were before him" (p. 107).^ But the whole 
 question with which we are concerned is that of the relation 
 between the priest and the congregation. We certainly can 
 get over many difficulties in such matters by " ignoring " the 
 congregation : ^ but in this case the point at issue appears to 
 me to be conceded. I must be allowed to add that the part 
 of Mr. Morton Shaw's argument, which relates to the Cata- 
 combs, is to my apprehension altogether cloudy and un- 
 convincing. 
 
 The papers by Dr. Hayman, to which reference is made in 
 the text, appeared in the April, May, and June numbers of 
 the St. James's Magazine in the present year, under the title 
 of " Altar or Table ? and the Eastward Position." To his 
 argument in favour of choice in position, which is stated with 
 much seriousness and ability, I vrill not offer any further 
 answer than that which is contained in the pages of this 
 volume. But I desire to call attention to the use he makes 
 (pp. 198 — 201) of the description given by Eusebius {Hist. 
 Eccl. X. 4) of the Church of Paulinus (probably in its main 
 features a rej)roduction of an earlier Church) at Tyre. This 
 church did not " orientate," but its great porch " fronted the 
 rising sun : " its " altar " was not against the wall, but stood 
 " in the midst ; " and the officiating priest " stood beside the 
 altar on the right." I may also refer to a passage quoted 
 
 ^ The same answer is sometimes given when the present practice of the 
 Pope on great occasions is brought forward as a surviving proof of the early 
 
 silican method. Are we not sometimes apt to patronize Eoman Catholics 
 by explaining their practices for them, when they could explain them better 
 themselves ? I find the Tablet of June 3rd saying, quite simply, "When the 
 Pope himself officiates at one of the great Papal altars he celebrates with his 
 face to the congregation." 
 
 ' Is it not a serious charge against the clergy of the Church, during the 
 period between Constantine and Charlemagne, that in the celebration of the 
 Eucharist they ignored the congregation ? 
 
APPENDIX. 183 
 
 from Augustine (p. 325), which seems to show that in his 
 time the " altar " or " table " stood detached from the wall 
 {Serm. cccx. 2). As to the two terms, Augustine appears to 
 have employed them indifferently. Dr. Hayman confirms 
 Bingham in his statement that Chrysostom's usual word is 
 " table " (p. 327). 
 
 It is hardly necessary to say that throughout what I have 
 written I have used " Eastward " in its conventional sense, 
 i.e., "in the direction of the Lord's Table," whether the 
 church in which the table is placed orientates or not. There 
 is the greatest difference between the " orientation " of a 
 church, according to our common use of the word, and the 
 " orientation " of the priest within the church, according to 
 the use of the word which has recently been suggested by 
 Mr. Gladstone,-^ and which I have adopted in my fourteenth 
 section. By attending to this distinction we dispose at once 
 of any difficulty caused by the answer of the Bishops at the 
 Savoy Conference, who quoted a passage from Augustine 
 which recommends, on a somewhat fanciful ground, standing 
 in prayer towards the literal East (see p. 65, Note). These 
 Bishops probably shared the common English feeling in 
 favour of the orientation of churches. It is worth while, 
 however, to show that this custom represents no general law 
 of Christendom. I have now before me the letter of an 
 accomplished architect, who says that " the whole of Eome 
 repudiates the custom : the front of St. Peter's is nearly due 
 East, and consequently the altar is to the west of the church 
 generally : nevertheless the priests in the Goto have it on the 
 east of them ; but in the Sistine Chapel, where there was 
 perfect liberty to choose either end, and where the altar is 
 quite at one end, that end is the West." He adds that St. 
 John Lateran is placed just like St. Peter's, and that Santa 
 Maria Maggiore and Santa Croce in Gerusalemme turn their 
 backs exactly on one another, one looking N.W. and the other 
 S.E., and that the Corso, running almost N. and S., has several 
 churches on each side of it, those on the west having their 
 altars to the west, and those on the east being reversed in 
 
 1 Contemporary Review (July 1875), p. lOo. 
 
184 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 this respect. I may observe that at Caen, a city famous for 
 its churches, I lately remarked that the Abbaye Aux Hommes, 
 which contains the tomb of William the Conqueror, is nearly 
 at right angles to the Abbaye Aux Dames, which contains 
 that of his queen. 
 
 0. 
 {Page 142.) 
 THE REUNION CONFERENCES AT BONN. 
 
 That recent and important article in the Contemporary Review, 
 to which reference has been made more than once in these 
 pages, contains the following passage : — " One of the strongest 
 freaks of human inconsistency I have ever witnessed is 
 certainly this — we are much (and justly) reminded with re- 
 ference to those beyond our pale, to think little of our differ- 
 ences and much of our agreements ; but at the same time, 
 and often from the same quarters, we are taught and tempted 
 by example, if not by precept, within our own immediate 
 'household of faith,' to think incessantly of our differences 
 and not at all of our more substantial and weighty agree- 
 ments." ^ I do not know whether these words have any in- 
 tentional reference to recents events or particular persons; 
 but they clearly might be viewed as applicable to some of 
 those who, in the recent Eeunion Conferences at Bonn, went 
 very far in endeavouring to find provisional forms of theological 
 agreement with those who have been long separated from us, 
 while yet at home they have been firm in adhering to what 
 they believe to be the true legal sense of our own formularies, 
 and have deprecated the introduction of new interpretations 
 by means of ceremonial. Mr. Beresford Hope has made a 
 distinct reference to this subject, which I am bound to notice. 
 He says : " It is a curious coincidence that amongst those 
 
 * P. 212. I hope I have never seemed, in my frequent reference to this 
 article, to forget the respect which is due from the Clergy to all Mr. Glad- 
 stone's utterances on theological subjects. 
 
APPENDIX. 185 
 
 who have made themselves prominent in claiming both by- 
 declaration and otherwise the distinctive Eucharistic dress 
 and the Eastward position, Canon Liddon holds a foremost 
 place, while the Dean of Chester is one of the most promi- 
 nent signers of the declaration on wliich I have just been 
 commenting against both these incidents of sacramental cere- 
 monial. In the name of Christian charity and of common 
 sense, why cannot the parties in the Church of England agree 
 to differ in their Eucharistic ritual ? Dr. Liddon has ex- 
 pressed no desire to interfere with Dr. Howson's practice; 
 why need Dr. Howson interfere with that of Dr. Liddon ? 
 Dr. Liddon may prefer the west side and the distinctive dress, 
 Dr. Howson the north end and the simple surplice, but as 
 both could combine in framing a document to embody the 
 doctrine which the Church of England holds upon the ' sacri- 
 fice ' and the ' sacrificial character ' of the Eucharist, each may 
 well leave the other to adopt the rites which most tend 
 in his own eyes to carry out views on which they both 
 agree." ^ 
 
 Now I am bold enough to say very confidently that the two 
 cases are very different. In the one we are working down from 
 a fixed point ; in the other we are w^orking up to a point not 
 yet ascertained. Here, in England, we are living together in 
 the same house on certain understood and recognized princi- 
 ples ; at Bonn we w^ere, as Dr. Dollinger said, merely building 
 a bridge, so that those who had dwelt far apart might make 
 acquaintance with one another. Ambiguous phrases, used by 
 members of the same Church, may hide a discord which is 
 sure to break out hereafter ; whereas ambiguous phrases, used 
 by members of separated Churches, may be the shelter under 
 which they creep on to a gradual agreement.^ But instead of 
 defending myself I will refer to a defence which was made 
 for me by a friendly hand early this year, in the course of 
 some criticisms on Mr. Beresford Hope's book : — " We never 
 
 1 Worship in the Church of England, pp. 88, 89. 
 
 2 Hence I have absolutely refused to mix up our home controversies with 
 these international, or rather inter-ecclesiastical, discussions. English battles 
 must be fought on English, not on German ground ; and among ourselves, 
 not in combination with Old Catholics and Greeks. 
 
186 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 have attached, as our readers are aware, much importance to 
 the carefully-balanced compromises of the theologians of 
 Bonn. If they have any value, it is as articles of peace be- 
 tween distinct communions. Mr. Hope talks as if the parties 
 in the Church of England had as little need to interfere with 
 each other as have the Churches whose representatives met 
 at Bonn. All might be well if we could divide England as 
 King Knut and Edmund Ironsides divided it. But in the 
 single church of a parish, how can both parties agree to differ 
 in their Eucharistic ritual ? Mr. Hope's appeal is practically 
 confined to Dean Howson, who has to concede everything, 
 and whose common sense is insulted by supposing that he 
 was inconsistent in signing both the articles of Bonn and the 
 memorial against the Eucharistic Vestments and the East- 
 ward Position. It is, of course, from the other party that con- 
 cession ought to be asked. A genuine desire for peace would 
 command the relinquishment of everything except what is 
 essential to the validity of the Sacraments." ^ 
 
 As to the specific question which gave occasion to the 
 remarks both of Mr. Beresford Hope and of his critic, it was 
 closely connected with the subject of these pages of my own. 
 We came in 1874 to a provisional agreement on an article 
 regarding Eucharistic sacrifice, and in the framing of this 
 article I was permitted to take a part. In the published report 
 the sense in Avhich some Greek Churchmen understood it was 
 stated, and it seemed to me very important to state, this year, 
 the sense in which it is understood by some English Church- 
 men, a course to which two of our Bishops have given their 
 approval.^ But as I hope in due time to publish some 
 thoughts on these Conferences, I need not at present say more 
 on the subject. 
 
 1 The Spectator (Jan. 16, 1875), p. 86. 
 
 2 See the Guardian of Sept. 22, 1875. 
 
SUPPLEMENT 
 
 T. 
 
 The Eastavaed Position : A Letter addressed to the Editor 
 of the Times by the Bishop of St. Andrews.^ 
 
 Sir, — As we have been told upon very high authority, both 
 Lay and Clerical, that it is wrong to import into the East- 
 ward Position any " doctrinal significance," I am inclined to 
 ask — Can any one of your many thousand readers inform me 
 why it is that so much stress — involving, in many instances, 
 disobedience to the law — is laid upon this usage in regard to 
 the administration of Holy Communion, and not to any other 
 portion of our Church Services ? 
 
 In a letter which you did me the favour to publish some 
 three months ago upon the debate on the same subject in the 
 Convocation of York, I ventured to put this question, and I 
 have looked in vain for any answer to it in any quarter. 
 The Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury have 
 indeed assured us in their Eesolution, proposing to legalize 
 the position, that no alteration of Doctrine is intended by it ; 
 but they have not informed us what is intended. It w^ould 
 seem to be obvious that every reason not doctrinal for placing 
 the Minister with his back to the congregation at the altar, 
 applies with still greater force to liis occupying a similar 
 position in the Prayer Desk, because the latter is not so far 
 removed from the people. And yet I know of only one 
 
 ^ Many readers will join with me in thanking the Bishop of St. Andrews 
 for complying with my re(j[uest for permission to publish this letter. It was 
 written, without any understanding or communication between us, at a dis- 
 tance of 500 miles from London, on the very morning (July 12, 1875), when 
 a letter of mine on the same general subject appeared in the Times. 
 
188 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 clergyman who has been consistent in this respect. Mr. Keble, 
 during the latter part of his ministry at Hursley, was accus- 
 tomed, I believe, to use the Eastward Position in the Desk, for 
 Morning and Evening Prayer, as well as at the altar for the 
 Communion Service. But any general attempt to follow his 
 example would, we may be sure, be at once resisted, though 
 there is no Bubric to forbid it ; and would, I have little doubt, 
 be disapproved by many who have adopted the usage for the 
 Consecration Prayer. 
 
 I may be reminded of the position of the Minister at the 
 Faldstool in the use of the Litany. But this is scarcely a 
 case in point. The proper place for the Litany Ealdstool is 
 " between the porch and the altar ;" or, in other words, " in the 
 midst of the church ; " ^ and in cathedrals it commonly stands 
 nearer to the west than to the east end of the choir, while 
 the congregation, instead of kneeling eastwards, generally face 
 each other from the opposite sides. 
 
 I am quite as much averse as Mr. Gladstone himself can 
 be, from importing into this vexed question anything which 
 does not properly belong to it ; and I no less willingly admit 
 that a large proportion of the clergy who have adopted the 
 Eastward Position have done so srithout any consciousness of 
 a doctrinal intention which is not perfectly legitimate, accord- 
 ing to a just interpretation of the teaching of our Reformed 
 Church; but nevertheless, I am quite unable, from mere 
 cesthetical considerations, to account for the fact that, whereas, 
 before the Reformation, in every cathedral, and in every 
 parish church throughout the land, the Eastward Position, 
 and no other, was unquestionably used, ever since the Refor- 
 mation that position has not been used in any one cathedral 
 till within the the last thirty years, or less, and in very few, 
 if any, parish churches. 
 
 How, then, is this fact to be accounted for ? If we are to 
 exclude all doctrinal significance, I can only account for it in 
 one of two w^ays. Either it was thought, when Latin was 
 given up and the service as reformed began to be said in the 
 vulgar tongue, that ivhat the priest said could not be sufficiently 
 heard, or that what he did could not be sufficiently seen if he 
 
 1 See the Frontisi)iece to Sparrow's Rationale. 
 
SUPPLEMENT. 189 
 
 were to continue to stand at the altar with his back to the 
 people. Our predecessors ever since the Eeformation have 
 been influenced by both these considerations (whether they 
 have not been also influenced, and perhaps in a still greater 
 degree by doctrinal considerations is a point which I am now 
 waiving) ; and, for my own part, I am not prepared to main- 
 tain that they acted upon improper or insufficient grounds. 
 This however must he maintained, I conclude, by the non- 
 doctrinal advocates of the Eastward Position ; and further, 
 they must maintain, if they are to he consistent, that the 
 minister in the Prayer Desk ought to adopt the same position 
 which he has already adopted (we suppose) at the Altar. 
 
 It is manifest^ that a drifting to some extent hoth doctrinal 
 and practical, from the moorings taken up by our Church 
 at the Eeformation, is being pressed upon us by a mixed 
 multitude — some of them influenced by doctrinal, others by 
 aesthetical considerations, and some by the mere love of novelty 
 and excitement ; and all I plead for in this letter is that we 
 veigh well the nature of the change we are urged to make ; the 
 grounds upon which — if it is to be made — we are prepared 
 to make it ; and the effect which it is likely to produce upon 
 those without — I mean, more particularly, our ^Nonconformist 
 brethren. 
 
 The Bishops on the English Bench have been selected 
 more or less, from all parties in the Church, and may fairly 
 be supposed to represent all parties. Very few of them, I 
 believe, are even now in the habit of using the Eastward 
 Position on any occasion ; and it may be doubted whether 
 any one of them was in the habit of using it when he was 
 first ordained priest. This fact, if it be so, added to the fact 
 before mentioned, of the universal practice of our cathedrals 
 since the Eeformation, would indicate still further that the 
 advocates of the position are advocate^for Innovation, and that 
 we ought to know from them more distin^ly than we yet do 
 what their motives are and what the ends they desire to gain. 
 As at present informed, I can imagine several motives against 
 the usage, such as the supposed reasons of our Eeformers for 
 giving it up ; and, in addition to those, the danger of giving 
 ^ See the recent proceedings of the Church Union, and of the C.B.S. 
 
190 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 encouragement to the superstitious notion of vicarious worship 
 (that is, of the Priest worshipping not only with, but instead 
 of the congregation), and, again, the danger of leading men to 
 substitute a materialistic localization of the Divine Presence 
 for the true spiritual belief which the Scripture teaches : 
 but I can imagine no motive for going hack to the usage 
 which would not logically involve a complete change in the 
 relations of the clergyman to the congregation throughout all 
 the devotional parts of our Public Worship ; unless, indeed, it 
 he the doctrinal, or semi-doctrinal one, which many of its advo- 
 cates, as we know, do not scruple to avow. That is, they 
 wish to shift the existing balance of our Church teaching — a 
 procedure which Mr. Gladstone so strongly, and so justly 
 deprecates — by giving greater prominence to the notion of a 
 Sacrifice, and consequently less, in comparison, to the notion 
 of a Communion, in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist. 
 That there is something, not altogether immaterial, to be said 
 in favour of such a change, I am well aware ; but there is, in 
 my opinion, more — ^very much more — and of greater weight 
 to be said against it. 
 
 If, however, it shall be decided by competent authority, 
 reversing the Purchas Judgment, that the usage all but 
 universally prevalent amongst us since the Eeformation till 
 within the last fifteen or twenty years, has been the result of 
 ignorance, or carelessness and irreverence, and not of a right 
 understanding and due observance of the Church's mind and 
 law upon the point — ^however much I must regret the virtual 
 condemnation, which such a decision would involve, of the 
 great and good of all parties in our Church who have gone 
 before us for three centuries — I shall be prepared to acquiesce 
 in it, both as a Scotch Bishop (though in that capacity it will 
 not be directly binding upon me), and as a clergyman still 
 holding place, through my connection with Winchester Col- 
 lege, in the Church, of England. 
 
 I am. Sir, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 Charles Wordswokth, 
 
 Bishop of St. Andrews, 
 Forfar, Jrily 12, 1875. 
 
SUPPLEMENT 191 
 
 11. 
 
 The Eastward Position: Whether it would be right to 
 permit it ; and what would be the consequences of its 
 being permitted. By the Eev. E. W. Kennion, M.A. 
 
 The permission of this ceremonial act, not its enforcement, is 
 now proposed. But as to the way in which this permission 
 is to be given, its proposers differ. Some hope it may be 
 effected by a reversal of the Purchas Judgment ; though it is 
 not easy to understand how a permissive rule can result from 
 any true interpretation of a stringent Act of Uniformity 
 Others propose an alteration of the Eubric, or an explanatory 
 note appended to the Office ; though it may be observed that 
 the legislative enactment of an alternative, in a matter on 
 which opinions differ and strong party-feeling exists, is a new 
 thing to our Church, and seems to require very great con- 
 sideration, as to the persons to whom the license should be 
 given, and the way in which it should be exercised. But 
 these questions of form I pass by, and proceed to ask whether 
 it would be right for the Church to grant this license ? 
 
 First, I remark that the Eastward Position is not a new 
 matter of controversy. It is an old custom of the Church of 
 Eome ; and, though used also in other Churches, it is in Eng- 
 land chiefly known as belonging to Eome. As connected 
 with Eomish doctrine, it was rejected by our Eeformers. As 
 connected with Eomish doctrine, it was resisted by the 
 Puritans in the time of Charles I., and discarded by some at 
 least of the High Church party under Charles 11.^ Disused 
 for many generations, or only used in some obscure places, it 
 was revived a few years ago by a party of men who were 
 (many of them at least) confessedly approximating to Eomish 
 doctrine ; and its doctrinal significance has been publicly pro- 
 claimed by Dr. Pusey, Canon Eawlinson, and others. 
 
 ^ See Swainson's Rubrical Qu^ion, p. 117. 
 
192 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 Thus, however unmeaning in itself, it has in common 
 repute acquired a doctrinal significance. It is so regarded, 
 not only by a large number of men of various parties in the 
 Church, but also by all the Methodists and Nonconformists. 
 
 It is true that some who advocate the Eastward Position 
 deny that there is any doctrinal significance in it ; and they 
 propose that the Church shall make a declaration to that 
 effect. But the meaning, whether of words or actions, de- 
 pends, not on authority, but on use and custom and popular 
 acceptance. And a doctrinal meaning has been so long and 
 so widely attached to this position, that no disclaimer of it 
 has now any more chance of being believed and accepted, 
 than if the Legitimists in France were to say that the white 
 flag had no political meaning. Whatever we may mean, our 
 permission of the Eastward Position will be taken for a retro- 
 grade step towards Eome. 
 
 And this imputation will be all the more widely spread 
 and more deeply felt, because of the principle of reserve, 
 which is thought to be held by some of the advocates of the 
 Eastward Position, and which gives rise to the impression 
 that men mean more than they say. 
 
 Indeed we are distinctly told that the innovation desired is 
 not confined to the Prayer of Consecration. Mr. Morton 
 Shaw's pamphlet begins with that, but he does not end with 
 that alone. He is dissatisfied with the old arrangement of 
 our choirs, as well as with the old position of our reading- 
 desks : and it is evident that nothing will satisfy him except 
 such an adoption of the Eastward Position in aU our prayers, 
 as would, I fear, give people the notion that they were pray- 
 ing to a localized Deity. 
 
 Is this extension of the license generally understood by 
 those who propose it ? 
 
 Be this as it may, the Eastward Position gives great offence 
 to many, who think the doctrine symbolized by it erroneous, 
 and feel bound to offer to it the most strenuous opposition. 
 
 What then ought to be done ? Ought the one party to 
 give up their wishes, or the other their objections ? 
 
 I think the Word of God gives us the principle by which 
 
SUPPLEMENT. 193 
 
 our answer should be determined. " Let all your things be 
 done with charity." " If thy brother be grieved with thy 
 meat \or position'] now walkest thou not charitably " (1 Cor. 
 xvi. 14 ; Eom. xiv. 15). We are so constituted that it is as a 
 general rule easier for us to do loithout something which we 
 wish for, (not being necessary) than to hear a positive offence 
 or pain. We have all our lives to do without many things 
 which we much wish for, and the want does not materially 
 curtail our powers either of enjoyment or usefulness. But 
 to bear an actual offence or pain is a much more serious trial. 
 Hence the rule is that a man who wishes for a thing which 
 offends his neighbour ought to give it up. If my wife's 
 piano gives me a headache, and my pipe makes her ill, the 
 pipe and the piano ought both to be put down. By the same 
 rule of Charity, the Eastward Position ought to be given up 
 by those who wish for it, for the sake of those who would 
 be offended by it. 
 
 But this is not the whole case. The offence is not a mere 
 personal feeling, which a strong effort or a long habit might 
 overcome. Those who oppose the Eastward Position do so 
 on the ground, that as it is understood to represent a doctrine 
 which they consider false, they must oppose it, and must all 
 their lives continue to oppose it. And they feel that as the 
 giving of the license would be the act of the whole Church, 
 the whole Church would be compromised by it, and not 
 merely the individual parishes in which it might actually be 
 used. On this point, therefore, they cannot consent to any 
 compromise. 
 
 Whereas the case of those who wish for it is quite different. 
 Even those who hold the doctrine symbolized by it cannot 
 say that this particular way of symbolizing it is necessary, or 
 that they would be committing a sin by standing with their 
 faces southward. And certainly those who disclaim its doc- 
 trinal significance, can have no reason for it sufficient to 
 justify their giving offence to their brethren. 
 
 There is no doubt in our times a prejudice against any 
 restriction on individual Liberty. But what we are contend- 
 ing against is not men's liberty to act as they please in their 
 own private capacity, but their being allowed to compromise 
 
 o 
 
194 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 the whole Church by their way of conducting its public 
 services. In this case the liberty granted to the few is an 
 oppression over the many. 
 
 I now ask what consequences would be likely to ensue if 
 the license were granted ? 
 
 There would be an end to all the hopes which some of us^ 
 have entertained of a reunion between ourselves and the 
 Methodists and N"onconformists. Whatever we may say, they 
 would see in it a fresh proof of what they are always ready 
 to suspect, a leaning of the Church towards Eome : and in- 
 stead of joining us, they would become more and more hostile 
 to us. The Liberation Society would rejoice over our fall ; 
 and the Church of Eome would be filled with new hopes of a 
 successful issue to the effort she is making for our sub- 
 jugation. 
 
 Then we must also be prepared to see a secession of large 
 numbers from our Church, if not a complete division of it 
 into two or more sections. There are some of her members 
 whose attachment is now only weak, who have thought that 
 there are now in our Prayer Book some remains of Komish 
 error, and who would then probably leave us at once. Others, 
 who are now thorough Churchmen, would have their loyalty 
 shaken, and their fears aroused lest this step should prove 
 the precursor of many more. 
 
 But what would be the effect on those who remained in 
 the Church — assuming that the secession was not such as to 
 break her up altogether ? 
 
 Those who are now opposed to the Eastward Position 
 would not cease to be so. Their opposition would be all the 
 more resolute, because the evil would be aggravated. 
 
 As things are now, there are many who feel that the mis- 
 chief is only a local or temporary one ; that the expense of a 
 legal prosecution is great, and the issue uncertain; that a 
 new Incumbent or a new Bishop may restore the old custom, 
 or that a new decision of the Privy Council or a new Act of 
 Parliament may set things straight. And thus it is, that, 
 though we are under an Act of most stringent Uniformity, 
 local varieties have been tolerated. 
 
SUPPLEMENT. 195 
 
 And till lately this easing off of the hard and fast lines of 
 Eubrical precision has been a great boon to the Church. 
 But this toleration must be regulated by moderation on the 
 one hand, and by forbearance on the other. It cannot he pre- 
 scribed. If it is attempted to stretch it beyond the limits of 
 moderation and forbearance, it must come to an end. And 
 this, in the opinion of a large portion of the Church, has now 
 been done. And if the license now proposed were actually 
 given, either by judicial sentence or by legislation, we might 
 bid farewell to all hopes of a restoration of peace in the 
 Church. 
 
 There would be agitation through the country to procure 
 a revocation of the license ; and in this there would be great 
 danger of a collision between Clergy and Laity, Convocation 
 and Parliament. 
 
 There would be agitation in all, or almost all, parishes in 
 which the Eastward Position was used or proposed to be 
 used. There would be deputations to the Bishop, petitions 
 to Convocation, petitions to Parliament, contested elections 
 for the office of Churchwarden, party spirit discord and 
 heart-burnings, all concentring round that Holy Feast which 
 ought to bring all Christians into harmony together. 
 
 It is needless to say that the natural result of this con- 
 tinual controversy would, at least in many cases, be a growing 
 deadness to all religious truth, if not absolute infidelity, as 
 has often been the case in other controversies. 
 
 If, then, I am right in thinking that those who wish most 
 for the Eastward Position have no such reason for it as abso- 
 lutely to prevent their giving it up, while its opponents feel 
 hound to continue their opposition, have we not ground for 
 appealing to the former to be satisfied in this thing with the 
 old custom of the Church of England, to be satisfied with 
 that " position " which all can accept, and which alone can 
 preserve in the Church that peace which we have, and restore 
 that which we have lost ? 
 
 And have we not ground for appealing to that great body 
 of Churchmen who have taken no part in this controversy, 
 who by their position are best fitted to be mediators between 
 
196 BEFORE THE TABLE. 
 
 the two extremes, entreating them not to give their counte- 
 nance to a proposal, which will in the eyes of the world 
 remove the old landmarks of the Church, and bring her 
 nearer to Kome, which will destroy, or at least weaken, her 
 parochial character, by sanctioning one use in one church and 
 another use in another church, which will tolerate party 
 symbols in the Administration of the Lord's Supper, and 
 divide the Church into two hostile camps ? 
 
 In the name of our common Master, let us preserve our 
 unity as far as we can. At all events, let us not have our 
 present diversity stereotyped and perpetuated. 
 
 If it is said to be a weakness in us to be offended at these 
 things, let our stronger brethren bear with our infirmities. 
 
 These unhappy conflicts have been going on too long already. 
 I trust that the spirit of wisdom and truth and righteousness 
 and peace may guide the minds of our rulers, and of all who 
 have any influence among us, that there may be such a settle- 
 ment of the question at issue, as will allow the tempest of 
 controversy, at least of angry controversy, to subside, and 
 that we may henceforth be united in the bonds of peace, with 
 one mind and one mouth glorifying our God and Father, and 
 earnestly contending for the Faith once delivered to the 
 Saints. 
 
 Egbert W. Kennion. 
 
 The Rectory, Acle, March 29, 1875. 
 
 
 
 LONDON : R. CLAY, SONS, AND T.VYLOR, POINTERS, BREAD STREET HILL. 
 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR 
 
 Preparing for Publication. 
 
 THE HISTORY AND MEANING 
 
 OF THE 
 
 REUNION CONFERENCES AT BONN. 
 
 ALSO 
 
 CHEST^ER CATHEDRAL SERMONS, 
 
 IN THREE PARTS. 
 
 (1) EVENING SERIES. 
 
 (2) MORNING SERIES. 
 
 (3) AFTERNOON SERIES. 
 
May 1875. 
 
 A Catalogue of Theological Books, 
 with a Short Account of their 
 Character and Aim^ 
 
 Published by 
 
 MACMILLAJlSr AE"D CO. 
 
 Bedford Street ^ Strand, London, W.C. 
 
 Abbott (Rev. E. A.)— Works by the Rev. E. A. Abbott, 
 D.D., Head Master of the City of London Schooh 
 
 BIBLE LESSONS. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 4s.6d. 
 
 *' Wise, suggestive, and really profound initiation into religious thought.^'' 
 — Guardian. The Bishop of St. David's, in his speech at the Education 
 Conference at Abergwilly, says he thinks " nobody could read them without 
 being the better for them himself, and being also able to see how this difficult 
 duty of imparting a sound religious education may be effected^ 
 
 THE GOOD VOICES: A Child's Guide to the Bible. 
 With upwards of 50 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. cloth gilt. ^s. 
 
 ^^ It would not be easy to copibine simplicity with fulness and depth of 
 meaning more successfully than Mr. Abbott has done.'^ — Spectator. The 
 Times says — "J/r. Abbott writes tuith clearness, simplicity, and the deepest 
 religious feeling. " 
 
 PARABLES FOR CHILDREN. Crown 8vo. cloth gilt. 
 
 is.dd. 
 *' They are simple and direct in meaning and told in plain language, 
 and are therefore well adapted to their purpose. ""^ — Guardian. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Abbott (Rev. E. K.)— continued. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE SERMONS PREACHED BEFORE THE 
 UNIVERSITY. 8vo. ^s. 
 
 Ainger (Rev. Alfred).— SERMONS PREACHED IN 
 
 THE TEMPLE CHURCH. By the Rev. Alfred Ainger, 
 
 ' M. A of Trinity Hall, Cambridge, Reader at the Temple Church. 
 
 Extra fcap. 8vo. ds. 
 This volume contains tzuenty-four Sernions preached at various times 
 during the last few years in the Temple Church. ^^ It is,'''' the British 
 Quarterly says, ^'' the fresh unconventional talk of a clear independent 
 thinker, addressed to a congregation of thinkers .... Thoughtful men ivill 
 be greatly charmed by this little volume.'''' 
 
 Alexander.— THE LEADING IDEAS of the GOSPELS. 
 
 Five Sermons preached before the University of Oxford in 1870 — 
 
 71. By William Alexander, D.D,, Brasenose College ; Lord 
 
 Bishop of Derry and Raphao ; Select Preacher. Cr, 8vo. 4J. dd. 
 
 ''^Eloquence and force of language, clearness of statement, and a hearty 
 
 appreciation of the grandeur and impoi-tance of the topics upon which he 
 
 writes characterize his sermons. " — Record. 
 
 Arnold.— A BIBLE READING BOOK FOR SCHOOLS. 
 
 The Great Prophecy of Israel's Restoration (Isaiah, 
 
 Chapters 40 — 66). Arranged and Edited for Young Learners. By 
 
 Matthew Arnold, D.C.L., formerly Professor of Poetry in the 
 
 University of Oxford, and Fellow of Oriel. Third Edition. i8mo. 
 
 cloth. IS. 
 
 The Times says — ^^ Whatever may be the fate of this little book in 
 
 Government Schools, there can be no doubt that it will be found excellently 
 
 calculated to further inst^mction in Biblical literature in any school into 
 
 which it may be introduced. . . . We can safely say that whatever school uses 
 
 this book, it will enable its pupils to- understand Isaiah, a great advantage 
 
 compared with other establishments which do not avail themselves of it. " 
 
 Baring-Gould.— LEGENDS OF OLD TESTAMENT 
 CHARACTERS, from the Talmud and other sources. By the 
 Rev. S. Baring-Gould, M.A., Author of "Curious Myths of 
 the Middle Ages," "The Origin and Development of Religious 
 Belief," "In Exitu Israel," etc. In two vols, crown 8vo. 16^-. 
 Vol. I. Adam to Abraham. Vol. 11. Melchizidek to Zechariah. 
 ^^ These volu7nes contain much that is strange, and to the 07'dinary 
 
 English reader, very novel.'''' — Daily News. 
 
 Barry, Alfred, D.D.— The ATONEMENT of CHRIST. 
 
 Six Lectures delivered in Hereford Cathedral during Holy Week, 
 1871. By Alfred Barry, D.D., D.C.L., Canon of Worcester, 
 Principal of King's College, London. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d, 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 In writing these Sei'mons, it has been the object of Canon Barry to set 
 forth the deep practical importance of the doctrinal truths of the Atone- 
 ment. The Guardian calls them ''^striking and eloquent lectures. " 
 
 B«nham.— A COMPANION TO THE LECTIONARY, 
 
 being a Commentary on the. Proper Lessons for Smidays and 
 Holydays. By the Rev. W. Benham, B.D., Vicar of Margate. 
 Cheaper Edition. Crown 8vo. 6^-. 
 The Author's object is to give the reader a clear undej'standing of the 
 Lessons of the Chu7'ch, which he does by means of general and special in- 
 troductions, and critical and explanatoiy notes on all words and passages 
 presenting the least difficulty. ' ' A veiy iiseful book. Mr. Benham has 
 produced a good and welcome companion to our revised Lectionary. Its 
 contents will., if not very original or profound, prove to be sensible and 
 practical, and often suggestive to the preacher and the Sunday School 
 teacher. They will also furnish some excellent Sunday reading for private 
 hours. " — Guardian. 
 
 Benson. — BOY-LIFE ; Its Trial, Its Strength, Its 
 Fulness. Sundays in Wellington College 1859 — 73. By E. W. 
 Benson, Mastei-. Crown Svo. 7^. 6d. 
 
 Bernard.— THE PROGRESS OF DOCTRINE IN THE 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT, considered in Eight Lectures before the 
 University of Oxford in 1864. By Thomas D. Bernard, M.A., 
 Rector of Walcot and Canon of Wells. Third and Cheaper Edit- 
 ion. Crown Svo. 5^-. (Bampton llectures for 1864.) 
 '•^ We lay down these lectures with a sense not only of being edified by 
 sound teaching and careful thojight, but also of being gratified by con- 
 ciseness and clearness of expression and elegance of style. ^'' — Churchman. 
 
 Binney.— SERMONS PREACHED IN THE KING'S 
 WEIGH HOUSE CHAPEL, 1829—69. By Thomas Binney, 
 D. D. New and Cheaper Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. 4J. dd. 
 ^^Full of robust intelligence, of reverent but independent thinking on the 
 
 most profound and holy themes, and of earnest practical purpose.^'' — 
 
 London Quarterly Review. 
 
 A SECOND SERIES OF SERMONS. Edited by the Rev. 
 Henry Allon, D.D. With Portrait of Dr. Binney engraved by 
 Jeens. 8vo. • {^Shortly. 
 
 Bradby.— SERMONS PREACHED AT HAILEYBURY. 
 By E. H. Bradby, M.A., Master. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 ''He who claims a public hearing now, speaks to an audience accustomed 
 
 to Cotton, Temple, Vaughan, Bradley, Butler, Farrar, and others 
 
 Each has given us good work, several work of rare beauty, force, or 
 originality ; but we doubt zuhether any one of them has touched deeper 
 chords, or brought more freshness and strength into his sermons, than the 
 last ofthfir number, the present Head Master of Hailey bury." — Spectator. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 'Burgon.— A TREATISE on the PASTORAL OFFICE. 
 
 Addressed chiefly to Candidates for Holy Orders, or to those who 
 have recently undertaken the cure of souls. By the Rev. John 
 W. Burgon, M.A., Oxford. 8vo. I2j. 
 The object of this work is to expound the great ends to be accomplished by 
 the Pastoral office, and to investigate the various means by which these ends 
 may best be gained. Full directions are given as to preaching and sermon- 
 writing, pastoral visitation, village education and catechising, and con- 
 firmation. — Spectator. 
 
 Butler (G.) — Works by the Rev. George Butler, M.A., 
 Principal of Liverpool College : ^ 
 
 FAMILY PRAYERS. Crown 8vo. 5^. 
 
 The prayers in this volume are all based on passages of Scripture — the 
 morning prayers on Select Psalms, those for the evening on portions of the 
 Nezo Testament. 
 
 SERMONS PREACHED in CHELTENHAM COLLEGE 
 CHAPEL. Crown 8vo. 7^. 6^. 
 
 Butler (Rev. H. M.)— SERMONS PREACHED in the 
 CHAPEL OF HARROW SCHOOL. By H. Montagu 
 Butler, Head Master, Crown 8vo. 7^-. 6</. 
 ** These sermons are adapted for every household. There is nothing 
 
 more striking than the excellent good sense with which they are imbued.''^ 
 
 — Spectator. , 
 
 A SECOND SERIES. Crown 8vo. ^s.dd. 
 
 '"'■ Excellent specimens of what sermons should be, — plain, direct, prac- 
 tical, periJaded by the true spirit of the Gospel, and holding up lofty aims 
 before the minds of the youizg.'^ — Athenseum. 
 
 Butler (Rev. W. Archer). — Works by the Rev. William 
 Archer Butler, M.A,, late Professor of Moral Philosophy in 
 the University of Dublin : — 
 SERMONS, DOCTRINAL AND PRACTICAL. Edited, 
 with a Memoir of the Author's Life, by Thomas Woodward, 
 Dean of Down. With Portrait, Ninth Edition. 8vo. 2>s. 
 The Introductory Memoir narj-afes in considerable detail and with much 
 interest, the events of Butler*^ brief life; ajtd contains a few specimens of 
 his poetry, and a few extracts froin his addresses and essays, including a 
 long and eloquent passage on the Province and Duty of the Preachei'. 
 
 A SECOND SERIES OF SERMONS. Edited by J. A. 
 Jeremie, D.D. , Dean of Lincoln. Seventh Edition. 8vo. 7^. 
 
 Y'h^ North British Review says, " Eew sermons in our language exhibit 
 the same rare combination of excellencies ; imagery almost as rich as 
 Taylor'' s; oratory as vigorous often as South' s; judgment as sound as 
 
THEOLO'GICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Butler (Rev. W. Archer.) — continued. 
 
 Barrow's; a style as attractive but more copious y original, and forcible 
 than Atterbury's; piety as elevated as Howe's, and a fervour as intense at 
 times as Baxter's. Mr. Butler's are the sermons of a true poet. ^^ 
 
 LETTERS ON ROMANISM, in reply to Dr. Newman's 
 
 Essay on Development. Edited by the Dean of Down. Second 
 
 Edition, revised by Archdeacon Hardwick. 8vo. \os. 6d. 
 
 These Letters contain an exhaustive criticism of Dr. Newman^ s famous 
 
 ^^ Essay on the Developnnent of Christian Boctrihe." "A work %vhich 
 
 ought to be in the Library of every student of Divinity. " — Bp. St. David's. 
 
 Cambridge Lent Sermons. — SERMONS preached 
 
 during Lent, 1864, in Great St. Mary's Church, Cambridge. By 
 the Bishop of Oxford, Revs. H. P. Liddon, T, L. Claughton, 
 J. R. Woodford, Dr. Goulburn, J. .W. Burgon, T. T. 
 Carter, Dr. Pusey, Dean Hook, W. J. Butler, Dean Good- 
 yviN. Crown Svo. 7^-. dd. 
 
 Campbell. — Works by John M'Leod Campbell : — 
 
 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT AND ITS 
 RELATION TO REMISSION OF SINS AND ETERNAL 
 LIFE. Fourth and Cheaper Edition, crown Svo. ds. 
 '■^ Among the first theological treatises of this generation.''^ — Guardian. 
 '■^ One of the most remarkable theological books ever written.^'' — Times. 
 
 CHRIST THE BREAD OF LIFE. An Attempt to give 
 
 a profitable direction to the present occupation of Thought with 
 
 Romanism. Second Edition, greatly enlarged. Crown Svo. 45-. dd. 
 
 ^* Deserves the most attentive study by all zaho interest themselves in the 
 
 predominatit religious controversy of the day.'" — Spectator. 
 
 RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE GIFT OF ETERNAL 
 LIFE. Compiled by permission of the late J. M'Leod Campbell, 
 D.D., from Sermons preached chiefly at Row in 1829 — 31. 
 Crown Svo. 5^'. 
 ** There is a healthy tone as well as a deep pathos not often seen in 
 sermons. His words are weighty and the ideas they express tend to per- 
 fection of life.'" — Westminster Review. 
 
 REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS, referring to 
 
 his Early Ministry in the Parish of Row, 1S25 — 31. Edited with 
 
 an Introductoiy Narrative by his Son, Donald Campbell, M.A., 
 
 Chaplain of King's College, London. Crown Svo. 7^. dd. 
 
 These ^ Re?niniscences and Refections,^ wntten during the last year of 
 
 his life, were mainly intended to place on record thoughts which might 
 
 prove helpful to others. " We recommend this book cordially to all who 
 
 are interested in the great cause of religious reformation.''^ — Times. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS, 
 
 Campbell (J. M^Le^od) — continued. 
 
 *' Thej-e is a thoroughness and depth, as well as a practical earnestness, 
 in his grasp of each truth on zuhich he dilates, which make his reflections 
 veiy valuable. " — Literary Churchman. 
 
 THOUGHTS ON REVELATION, with Special Reference 
 to the Present Time. Second Edition. Grown 8vo. <)S. 
 
 Canterbury.— THE PRESENT POSITION OF THE 
 CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Seven Addresses delivered to the 
 Clergy and Churchwardens of his Diocese, as his Charge, at his 
 Primary Visitation, 1872. By Archibald Campbell, Archbishop 
 of Canterbury. Third Edition. Svo. cloth, jj'. 6^. 
 
 The subjects of these Addresses are, I. Lay Co-operation. II. Cathedral 
 Reform. Ill and IV. Ecclesiastical Judicature. V. Ecclesiastical 
 Legislation. VI. Missionary Work of the Church. VII Ilie Church 
 of England in its relation to the Rest of Christendom. There are besides, 
 a number of statistical and illustrative appendices. 
 
 Cheyne. — Works by T. K. Cheyne, M.A., Fellow of Balliol 
 College,_ Oxford : — 
 
 THE BOOK OF ISAIAH CHRONOLOGICALLY AR- 
 RANGED. An Amended Version, with Historical and Critical 
 Introductions and Explanatory Notes. Crown Svo. 7^-. dd. 
 
 The object of this edition is to restore the probable meaning of Isaiah, so 
 far as can be expressed in appropriate English. The basis of the vei'sion 
 is the revised translation of 161 1, but alterations have been introduced 
 wherever the true sense of the prophecies appeared to require it. The West- 
 minster Review speaks of it as "a piece of scholarly work, very carefully - 
 and co7isiderately done. " The Academy calls it '■'■a successful attempt to 
 extend a right undei' standing of this ijnportant Old Testament writing.''^ 
 
 NOTES AND CRITICISMS on the HEBREW TEXT 
 OF ISAIAPI. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 This work is offered as a slight contribution to a more scientific study of 
 the Old Testament Scriptures. The author aims at coinpleteness, inde- 
 pendence, and oi'iginality, and constantly endeavours to keep philology 
 distinct from exegesis, to explain the form without pronouncing on the 
 matter. 
 
 Choice Notes on the Four Gospels, drawn from 
 
 Old and New Sources. Crown Svo. 4^. dd. each Vol. (St. 
 Matthew and St. Mark in one Vol. price 9^.). 
 
 These Notes are selected from the Rev. Prebendary Foi'd''s Illustrations 
 of the Four Gospels, the choice being chiefly conflned to those of a 7nore 
 simple and practical character. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Church. — Works by the Very Rev. R. W. Church, M.A., 
 Dean of St. Paul's. 
 SERMONS PREACHED BEFORE the UNIVERSITY 
 OF OXFORD. By the Very Rev. R. W. Church, M.A., Dean 
 of St. Paul's. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 4^-. dd. 
 Sermons on the relations between Christianity and the ideas and facts of 
 modern civilized society. The subjects of the various discourses are: — 
 '■'■The Gifts of Civilization^^'' ''Chi'isfs Words and Christian Society, ^^ 
 '^Chrisfs Exa7nple" and ''Civilization and Religion. ^^ "Thoughtful 
 and masterly . . . IVe regard these serinons as a landmark in religious 
 thought. They help us to zmder stand the latent strength of a Christianity 
 that is assailed on all sides. ''^ — Spectator. 
 
 ON SOME INFLUENCES OF CHRISTIANITY UPON 
 NATIONAL CHARACT£R. Three Lectures delivered in St. 
 Paul's Cathedral, Feb. 1873. Crown 8vo. 4^. dd. 
 '"'Few books that we have met with have given us keener pleasure than 
 
 this // would be a real pleasure to quote extensively, so wise and so 
 
 true, so tender and so discriminating are Dean Church's judgments, but 
 the limits of our space are inexorable. We hope the book will be bought. " 
 — Literary Churchman. 
 
 THE SACRED POETRY OF EARLY RELIGIONS. 
 Two Lectures in St. Paul's Cathedral. i8mo. \s. I. The Vedas. 
 II. The Psalms. 
 
 Clay.— THE POWER OF THE KEYS. Sermons preached 
 in Coventry. By the Rev. W. L. Clay, M. A. Fcap. 8vo. 3^. dd. 
 
 Clergyman's Self-Examination concerning the 
 
 APOSTLES' CREED. Extra fcap. 8vo. i^. dd. 
 
 Colenso.— THE COMMUNION SERVICE FROM THE 
 BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER; with Select Readings from 
 the Writings of the Rev. F. D. Maurice, M.A. Edited by the 
 Right Rev. J. W. Colenso, D.D., Lord Bishop of Natal. New 
 Edition. i6mo. is. 6d. 
 
 Collects of the Church of England. With a beauti- 
 fully Coloured Floral Design to each Collect, and Illuminated 
 Cover. Crown 8vo. 12s. Also kept in various styles of morocco. 
 The distinctive characteristic of this edition is the coloured floral design 
 which accompanies each Collect, and which is generally emblematical of 
 the character of the day or saint to which it is assigned; the flowers 
 which have been selected are such as are likely to be in bloom on the day to 
 which the Collect belongs. The Guardian thinks it "a successful attempt 
 to associate in a natural and unforced manner the floivers of our fields 
 and gardens with the course of the Christian year. '^ 
 
THEOLbGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Cotton. — ^Works by the late George Edward Lynch 
 Cotton, D.D., Bishop of Calcutta : — 
 
 SERMONS PREACHED TO ENGLISH CONGREGA- 
 TIONS IN INDIA. Crown 8vo. *js. ed. 
 
 * * 77ie sermons are models of what sermons should be, not only on ac- 
 count of their practical teachings, but also with regard to the singular 
 felicity tvith which they are adapted to times, places, and circumstances. " 
 — Spectator. 
 
 EXPOSITORY SERMONS ON THE EPISTLES FOR 
 THE SUNDAYS OF THE CHRISTIAN YEAR. Two 
 
 Vols. Crown 8vo. \^s. 
 These two volumes contain in all fifty-seven Sermons. They were all 
 preached at various stations throughout India. 
 
 Cure.— THE SEVEN WORDS OF CHRIST ON THE 
 . CROSS. Sermons preached at St. George's, Bloomsbury. By 
 
 the Rev. E. Capel Cure, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 3^. 6d. 
 Of these Sermons //^^ John Bull says, *' They are earnest and practical f 
 the Nonconformist, " The Sermons are beatUiful, tender, and instruc- 
 tive f^ and the Spectator calls the77i "A set of really good Sermons.''^ 
 
 Curteis.— DISSENT in its RELATION to the CHURCH 
 OF ENGLAND. Eight Lectures preached before the University 
 of Oxford, in the year 1871, on the foundation of the late Rev. 
 John Bampton, M. A. , Canon of Salisbury. By George Herbert 
 Curteis, M.A., late Fellow and Sub-Rector of Exeter College; 
 Principal of the Lichfield Theological College, and Prebendary of 
 Lichfield Cathedral ; Rector of Turweston, Bucks. Third and 
 Cheaper Edition, crown 8vo. 7^. 6d. 
 
 ^^ Mr. Curteis has done good service by maintaining in an eloquent, 
 temperate, and practical manner, that discussion among Christians is 
 recdly an evil, and that an intelligent basis can be found for at least a 
 proximate union.'''' — Saturday Review "^ well timed, learned, and 
 thoughtful book. " 
 
 Davies. — Works by the Rev. J. Llewelyn Davies, M.A., 
 Rector of Christ Church, St. Marylebone, etc. : — 
 THE WORK OF CHRIST ; or, the World Reconciled to 
 God. With a Preface on the Atonement Controversy. Fcap. 
 8vo. 6^. 
 
 SERMONS on the MANIFESTATION OF THE SON 
 OY GOD. With a Preface addressed to Laymen on the present 
 Position of the Clergy of the Church of England ; and an Ap- 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Davies (Rev. J. Llewelyn) — continued. 
 
 pendix on the Testimony of Scripture and the Church as to the 
 possibility of Pardon in the Future State. Fcap. 8vo. 6^, 6d. 
 ^' This volume, both in its substance, prefix, and suffix, represents the 
 noblest type of theology f tow preached in the English ChurchJ''' — Spectator. 
 
 BAPTISM, CONFIRMATION, AND THE LORD'S 
 SUPPER, as Interpreted by their Outward Signs. Three Ex- 
 pository Addresses for Parochial use. Fcap. 8vo. , limp cloth. 
 I J. dd. 
 
 The method adopted in these addresses is to set forth the natural and 
 historical meaning of the signs of the two Sacraments and of Confirma- 
 tion, and thus to ai-rive at the spiritual realities which they symbolize. 
 The work touches on all the principal elements of a Christian man's faith. 
 
 THE EPISTLES of ST. PAUL TO THE EPHESIANS, 
 THE COLOSSIANS, and PHILEMON. With Introductions 
 and Notes, and an Essay on the Traces of Foreign Elements in 
 the Theology of these Epistles. 8vo. "js. 6d. 
 
 THE GOSPEL AND MODERN LIFE ; with a Preface 
 on a Recent Phase of Deism. Second Edition. To which is 
 added Morality according to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, 
 or Three Discourses on the Names Eucharist, Sacrifice, and Com- 
 munion. Extra fcap. Svo. 6s. 
 
 WARNINGS AGAINST SUPERSTITION IN FOUR 
 SERMONS FOR THE DAY. fixtra fcap. Svo. 2s. 6d 
 
 •^'IVe have seldom read a wiser little book. The Sermons are short, 
 terse, and fill of true sph-itual wisdom, exp>ressed with a lucidity and a 
 moderation that must give them weight even with those who agree least 
 
 with their author. Of the volume as a whole it is hardly possible to 
 
 speak Tvith too cordial an appreciation.'^ — Spectator. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN CALLING. Sermons. Extra fcap. 
 Svo. 6^. , 
 
 De, Teissier. — Works by G. F. De Teissier, B.D.:— 
 
 VILLAGE SERMONS, First Series. Crown Svo. 9^. 
 
 This volume contains fifty fotir short Sermons, embracijtg many subjects 
 of practical importance to all Christians. The Guardian says they are 
 **a little too scholarlike in style for a country village, but sound and 
 practical.'' 
 
 VILLAGE SERMONS, Second Series. Crown Svo. Sj.6^. 
 
 ^^ This second vohwie of Parochial Sermons is given to the public in. 
 the humble hope that it may afford many seasonable thoughts for such as 
 are Mourners in Zion." - There are in all fifty-two Sermons embracing a 
 "wide variety of subjects connected with Chiistian faith and practice. 
 
lo THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Donaldson — THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS: a Critical 
 Account of their Genuine Writings and of their Doctrines. By 
 James Donaldson, LL.D. Crown 8vo. "js. 6d. 
 This book was published in 1864 as the fii'st volume of a '^ Critical 
 History of Christian Literature and Doctrine from the death of the 
 Apostles to the Nicene Cou7iciL' The intention was to carry down the 
 history continuously to the time of Eusebius, and this intention has not 
 been abandoned. But as the writers can be sometimes grouped more easily 
 acco7'ding to subject or locality than acco7'ding to time, it is deemed ad- 
 visable to publish the history of each group separately. The Introduction 
 to the present volume sei-ves as an introduction to the whole period. 
 
 Drake.— THE TEACHING of the CHURCH DURING 
 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES ON THE DOCTRINES 
 OF THE CHRISTIAN PRIESTHOOD AND SACRIFICE. 
 By the Rev, C. B. Drake, M.A., Warden of the Church of Eng- 
 land Hall, Manchester. Crown Svo. \s. 6d. 
 
 Ecce Homo. A Survey of the Life and Work of 
 Jesus Christ. Eleventh Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 
 "A very original and remarkable book, full of striking thought and 
 delicate perception ; a book which has realised with wonderful vigour and 
 freshness the historical magnitude of Christ's work, and which here and 
 there gives us readings of the finest kind of the probable motive of His itidi- 
 vidual words and actions.'''' — Spectator. " The best and most established 
 believer will find it adding some fresh buttresses to his faith."— lAt&rQxy 
 Churchman. "7/" 7oe have not mistinderstood him, we have before us a 
 writer who has a right to claim defei'ence from those who think deepest 
 and know most.''^ — Guardian. 
 
 Faber.— SERMONS AT A NEW SCHOOL. By the Rev. 
 Arthur Faber, M.A., Head Master of Malvern College. Cr. 
 Svo. ds. 
 *' These are high-toned, earnest Sei'mons, oi'thodox and scholarlike, and 
 laden with encouragement and warning, wisely adapted to the needs 0/ 
 school-life.'*^ — Literary Churchman. ^'Adr?iirably realizing that com- 
 bination of fresh vigorous thought and simple expression of wise parental 
 counsel, with brotherly sympathy and respect, zvhich are essential to Ihe 
 success of such sermons, and to which so few attain.*^ — British Quarterly 
 Review. 
 
 Farrar. — Works by the Rev. F. W. Farrar, M.A., F.R.S., 
 Head Master of Marlborough College, and Hon. Chaplain to the 
 Queen : — 
 
 THE FALL OF MAN, AND OTHER SERMONS. 
 Third Edition. Extra fcap. Svo. 4-5-. 6d. 
 
 This volume contains twenty Sermons. No attempt is made in these 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 'ii 
 
 Farrar (Rev. F. W.) — continued. 
 
 Sermons to develope a system of doctrine. In each discourse some one 
 aspect of truth is taken up, the chief object being to point out its bearings on 
 practical religious life. The Nonconformist says of these Sei'mons, — 
 * ' Air. Farrar' s Sermons are almost perfect specimens of ofie type of Ser- 
 mons, which we may concisely call beautiful. The style of expression is 
 beautiful — there is beauty in the thoughts, the illustrations, the allusions — 
 they are expressive of genuinely beautiful perceptions and feelings.^'' The 
 -British Quarterly says, — ^^ Ability, eloquence, scholarship, and practical 
 usefulness, are itt these Sermons conibined in a very unusual degree. " 
 
 THE WITNESS OF HISTORY TO CHRIST. Being 
 
 the Hulsean Lectures for 1870. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 5j. 
 The folloiving are the. subjects of the Five Lectures : — /. " The Ante- 
 cedent Credibility of the Miraculous.^'' II. ^ The Adequacy of the Gospel 
 Records." III. ^^ The Victories of Christianity." IV. ^^Christianity and 
 the Individual." V. ^^Christianity and the Race." The subjects of the 
 four Appendices are: — A. " 77// Diversity of Christian Evidences." 
 B. ''Confucius." C. ''Buddha." D. " Comte." 
 
 SEEKERS AFTER GOD. The Lives of Seneca, Epictetus, 
 and Marcus AureHus. See Sunday Library at end of Catalogue. 
 
 THE SILENCE AND VOICES OF GOD: University 
 and other Sermons. Second Edition. Crown Svo. ds. 
 
 "We can most cordially recommend Dr. Farrar's singidarly beautiful 
 
 volume of Sermons For beauty of diction, felicity of style, aptness of 
 
 illustration and earnest loving exhortation, the volume is without its 
 parallel. " — ^John Bull. " They are marked by great ability, by an honesty 
 which does not hesitate to acknozuledge dijfficulties and by an earnestness 
 which co7nmands respect." — Pall Mall Gazette. 
 
 Fellowship : Letters Addressed to my Sister 
 Mourners. Fcap. Svo. cloth gilt. 3^. dd. 
 "A beautiful little volume, written with genuine feeling, good taste, and 
 a nght appreciation of the teaching of Scripture relative to sorrozv and 
 suffering." — Nonconformist. "A very touching, and at the same time a 
 very sensible book. It breathes throughout the truest Christian spiHt. " — 
 Contemporary Review. 
 
 Forbes.— THE VOICE OF GOD IN THE PSALMS. 
 By Granville Forbes, Rector of Broughton. Cr, Svo. 6s. 6d. 
 
 Gifford.— THE GLORY OF GOD IN MAN. By E. H. 
 GiFFORD, D.D. Fcap. Svo., cloth. 3^-, 6d. 
 
 Golden Treasury Psalter. Seep. 27. 
 
12 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS, 
 
 Hardwick.. — Works by the Ven. Archdeacon Hardwick : 
 CHRIST ANQ OTHER MASTERS. A Historical Inquiry 
 into some of the Chief ParalleHsms and Contrasts between Christ- 
 ianity and the Religious Systems of the Ancient World. New- 
 Edition, revised, and a Prefatory Memoir by the Rev. Francis 
 Procter, M.A. Third and Cheaper Edition. Cr. 8vo. \os. 6d. 
 
 The plan of the work is boldly and almost nobly conceived. . . . We cotfi- 
 mend it to the perusal of all those who take interest in the study of ancient 
 mythology, without losing thei'*' revereitce for the supreme authority of the 
 07'acles of the living God." — Christian Observer. 
 
 A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Middle 
 Age. From Gregory the Great to the Excommunication of Luther, 
 Edited by William Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern 
 History in the University of Oxford. With Four Maps constructed 
 for this work by A. Keith Johnston. New Edition. Crown 
 8vo. los. 6d. 
 
 Tor this edition Trofessor Stubbs has carefully revised both text and 
 notes, making such corrections of facts, dates, and the like as the results of 
 recent research warrant. The doctrinal, historical, and generally specula- 
 tive vieivs of the late author have beejt preserved intact. "As a Manual 
 for the student of ecclesiastical history in the Aliddle Ages, we knotv no Eng- 
 lish work which can be compared to Mr. Hardwick^ s book. " — Guardian. 
 
 A HISTORY of the CHRISTIAN CHURCH DURING 
 THE REFORMATION. New Edition, revised by Professor 
 Stubbs. Crown 8vo, \os. 6d. 
 
 This volume is intended as a sequel and companion to the "History 
 of the Christian Church during the Middle Age.'' ^ 
 
 Hare.— THE VICTORY OF FAITH. By Julius Charles 
 Hare, M.A., Archdeacon of Lewes. Edited by Prof. Plumptre. 
 With Introductory Notices by the late Prof. Maurice and Dean 
 Stanley. Third Edition, Crown Svo. ()s. 6d. 
 
 Harris. — SERMONS. By the late George Collyer 
 
 Harris, Prebendary of Exeter, and Vicar of St. Luke's, Torquay. 
 With Menioir by Charlotte M. Yonge, and Portrait. Extra 
 fcap. Svo. 6s. 
 
 Hervey.— THE GENEALOGIES OF OUR LORD AND 
 SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST, as contained in the Gospels of 
 St. Matthew and St. Luke, reconciled with each other, and shown 
 to be in harmony with the true Chronology of the Times. By Lord 
 Arthur Hervey, Bishop of Bath and Wells. Svo. ioj-. 6d. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 13 
 
 Hymni Ecclesise. — Fcap. 8vo. 7^. 6d. 
 
 This collection was edited by Dr. N'ewman while he lived at Oxford. 
 
 Hyacinthe.— CATHOLIC REFORM. By Father 
 
 Hyacinthe. Letters, Fragments, Discourses. Translated by 
 Madame Kyacinthe-Loyson. With a Preface by the Very Rev. 
 A. P. Stanley, D.D., Dean of Westminster. Cr. 8vo. 7^. (>d. 
 ''A valnable contribution to the religious litei'ature of the day, and is 
 especially opportune at a ti??ie zohen a controversy of no ordinary import- 
 ance upon the very subject it deals with is engaged in all over Europe. " — 
 Daily Telegraph. 
 
 Imitation^of Christ. — Four Books. Translated from the 
 Latin. With Preface by the Rev. W. Benham, B.D., Vicar of 
 Margate. Printed with Borders in the Ancient Style after Holbein, 
 Durer, and other Old Masters. Containing Dances of Death, Acts 
 of Mercy, Emblems, and a variety of curious ornamentation. Cr. 
 8vo. gilt edges. ']s. 6d. 
 
 Jennings and Lowe. — THE PSALMS, with Introduc- 
 tions and Critical Notes. By A. C. Jennings, B.A., Jesus Col- 
 lege, Cambridge, Tyrwhitt Scholar, Crosse Scholar, Hebrew- 
 University Scholar, and Fry Scholar of St. John's College ; and 
 W. H. Lowe, M.A., Hebrew Lecturer and late Scholar of Christ's 
 College, Cambridge, and Tyrwhitt Scholar. Books III. and IV. 
 (Psalm Ixxiii. to cvi.) Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Kempis, Thos. A. -DE IMITATIONE CHRISTI. 
 LiBRi IV. Borders in the Ancient Style, after Holbein, Durer, 
 and other Old Masters, containing Dances of Death, Acts of 
 Mercy, Emblems, and a variety of curious ornamentation. , In 
 white cloth, extra gilt. "js. 6d. ' 
 
 Kingsley. — Works by the late Rev. Charles Kingsley, 
 M. A. , Rector of Eversley, and Canon of Westminster. 
 
 THE V^ATER OF LIFE, AND OTHER SERMONS. 
 
 Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo. y. 6d. 
 
 VILLAGE SERMONS. Seventh Edition. Fcap. 8vo. y.6d. 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF THE PENTATEUCH. Second 
 
 Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3>y. 6d. 
 
 GOOD NEWS OF GOD. Fourth Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 
 
 Zs. (yd. 
 This volume contains thirty-nine short Sermons, preached in the 
 ordinary course of the author's parochial ministrations. 
 
14 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS, 
 
 Kingsley (Rev. C.) — cotitinued. 
 
 SERMONS FOR THE TIMES. Third Edition. Fcap. 
 8vo. 3^. dd. 
 
 Here are twenty-hvo Serjuons, all bearing more or less on the every-day 
 life of the pj-esent day, including such subjects as these: — ^'■Fathers and 
 Children f^ "^ Good Conscience f ^^Naines ;" ^^Sponso7'ship ;" '"'■Duty 
 and Superstition f^ '■'■ England'' s Strength ;'' ^^ The Lord^s Prayer ;^^ 
 ^^ Shame;''' ^''Forgiveness;" '■' The True Gentlematt;" ''Public Spirit." 
 
 TOWN AND COUNTRY SERMONS. Second Edition. 
 Extra fcap. 8vo. 3J-. 6a!'. 
 
 Soffie of these Sermons were preached before the Queen, ajid some iji the 
 perfo7'mance of the writer's ordinary parochial duty. Of these Sermons 
 the Nonconformist says, ' ' They are %varm with the fervour of the preacher' s 
 own heart, and strong f^om the force of his ozun convictions. 77ie)'e is 
 nowhere an attempt at display, and the clearness and sij7iplicity of the 
 style make thetn suitable for the youngest or most unintelligent of his 
 heaj-ers.''' 
 
 SERMONS on NATIONAL SUBJECTS. Second Edition. 
 Fcap. 8vo. TyS.dd, 
 
 THE KING OF THE EARTH, and other Sermons, 
 a Second Series of Sermons on National Subjects. Second 
 Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3^'. 6d. 
 
 The following extract from the Preface to the 2nd Series zuill explain 
 
 the preacher's aim in these Sermons: — '' I have tried to proclaim the 
 
 Lord Jesus Christ, as the Scriptures, both in their strictest letter and in 
 their general method, fi'om Genesis to Revelation, seem to me to proclaim 
 Him; not merely as the Saviour of a few elect souls, but as the light and 
 life of every human being who enters into the world; as the source of 
 all reason, strength, and virtue in heatheji or in Christian ; as the King 
 and Ruler of the tvhole universe, a^id of eveiy nation, family, and man on 
 earth; as the Redeemer of the whole earth and the whole human race... 
 Hisjdeath, as a fidl, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satis- 
 faction for the sins of the whole world, by which God is reconciled to the 
 whole humaft race." 
 
 DISCIPLINE, AND OTHER SERMONS. Fcp. 8vo. 3^.6^. 
 
 The Guardian says, — "There is much thought, tenderness, and devout- 
 ness of spiHt in these Sermons, and some of them are models both in 
 matter and expression.'''' 
 
 DAVID. Five Sermons. Second Edition, enlarged. Fcap. 
 8vo. 2.5. 6d. 
 
 These Sermons were preached before the University of Cambridge, 
 and are specially addressed to young men. Their titles are, — ''David's 
 Weakness ;" ' 'David's Strength ;" ' 'David's A nger; ' ' * 'David's Deserts. ' ' 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 1 5 
 
 Kingsley (Rev. C.) — continued. 
 WESTMINSTER SERMONS. 8vo. los.dd. 
 
 These Sermons .were preached at Westminster Abbey or at one of the 
 Chapels Royal. Their subjects are : — The Mystery of the Cross : The Per- 
 fect Love : The Spirit of Whitsuntide : Prayer : The Deaf and Dumb : 
 The Fruits of the Spirit : Confusion : The Shaking of the Heavens and 
 the Earth: The Kingdom of God: The Law of the Lord: God the 
 Teacher : The Reasonable Prayer : The One Escape : The Word of God: 
 J: The Cedars of Lebanon : Life: Death: Signs and Wonders : The 
 Judgments of God : The War in Heaven: Noble Co7npany : De Pro- 
 fundis : The Blessing and the Curse: The Silence of Faith : God and 
 Mammon : The Beatific Vision. 
 
 Lightfoot. — Works by J. B. LiGHTFOOT, D.D., Hulsean 
 Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge ; Canon of 
 
 St. Paul's. 
 ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. A Re- 
 vised Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. Fourth 
 Edition, revised. 8vo. cloth. \2s. 
 While the Author'' s object has been to make this commentary generally 
 complete, he has paid special attention to everything relating to St. Paul's 
 personal history and his intercourse with the Apostles and Church of the 
 Circumcision, as it is this feature in the Epistle to the Galatians which 
 has given it an ovenuhelming interest in recent theological controversy 
 The Spectator says ''^ there is no commentator, at once of sounder judg- 
 ?nent and niore liberal than Dr. Lightfoot. '' 
 
 ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. A 
 
 Revised Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. Third 
 
 Edition. Svo. 12s. 
 
 "JVo commentary in the English language can be compared with it in 
 
 regard to fulness of information, exact scholarship, and laboured attempt: 
 
 to settle everything about the epistle on a solid foundation. " — Athenaeum. 
 
 ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES TO THE COLOSSIANS AND 
 PHILEMON. A Revised Text with Introduction, Notes, etc 
 Svo. I2J-. 
 
 ST. CLEMENT OF ROME, THE TWO EPISTLES TO 
 
 THE CORINTHIANS. A Revised Text, with Introduction 
 
 and Notes. Svo. Zs. 6d. 
 
 This volume is the first part of a complete edition of the Apostolic 
 
 Fathers. The Introductions deal zuith the questions of the genuineness and 
 
 authenticity of the Epistles, discuss their date and character, and analyse 
 
 their contents. An account is also given of all the different epistles which 
 
 hear the name of Clement of Rome. ^^ By far the most copiously annotated 
 
i6 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Lightfoot (Dr. J. B.) — continued. ""' 
 
 edition of St. Clement which we yet possess, and the ?nost convenie7tt in 
 every way for the English reader. ^^ — Guardian. 
 
 ON A FRESH REVISION OF THE ENGLISH NEW 
 TESTAMENT. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. ds. 
 
 The Authvr shews in detail the necessity for a fresh revision of the 
 authorized version on the following grounds: — I. False Readings. 2. 
 Artificial distinctions created. 3. Real distinctions oblito'ated. 4, Faults 
 of Grammar. 5. Faults of Lexicography. 6. Treatment of Proper 
 Na7nes, official titles, etc. 7. Archaisjns, .defects in the English, errors 
 of the press, etc. " The book is marked by careful scholarship, familiarity 
 with the subject, sobriety, and circumspection.^'' — Athenaeum. 
 
 Luckock.— THE TABLES OF STONE. A Course of 
 Sermons preached in All Saints' Church, Cambridge, by H. M. 
 Luckock, M.A., Vicar, Canon of Ely. Fcap. 8vo. 3^-. dd. 
 
 Maclaren.— SERMONS PREACHED at MANCHESTER. 
 
 By Alexander Maclaren. Fifth Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 4J. 6^. 
 These Sermons represent no special school, but deal with the broad prin- 
 ciples of Christian truth, especially in their bearing on practical, eiiery day 
 life. A few of the titles are: — **77z(? Stone of Stumbling,^^ ^^ Love and 
 Forgiveness,^'' ''^ The Living Dead,^' ^^ Memory in Another World, ''^ 
 Faith in Christ,'' '' Lave and Fear,'' ''The Choice of Wisdom," ''The 
 Food of the World." 
 
 A SECOND SERIES OF SERMONS. Third Edition. 
 
 Fcap. Svo. 4^". 6d. 
 The Spectator characterises them as "vigorous in style, fidl of thought, 
 rich in illustration, and in an unusual degree interesting." 
 
 A THIRD SERIES OF SERMONS. Second Edition. 
 
 Fcap. Svo. ^s. 6d. 
 Sermons more sober and yet more forcible, and with a certain wise and 
 prcutical spirituality about them it would not be easy to find." — Spectator. 
 
 Maclear. — Works by the Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D., Head 
 Master of King's College School : — 
 
 A CLASS-BOOK OF OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY.. 
 With Four Maps. Eighth Edition. iSmo. 4^. 6^. 
 
 " The present volume," says the Preface, "fo7'ms a Class-Book of Old 
 Testament History fi'om the Ea^diest Times to those of Ezra and Nehe- 
 miah. In its prepai^ation the inost recent authorities have been co7isulted, 
 aud wherever it has appeared useful. Notes have been sitbjoined illustra- 
 tive of the Text, and, for the sake of more advanced students, references 
 added to larger works. The Index has been so arranged as to forni a 
 concise Dictioyiary of the Persons and Places mentioned in the course of the 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Maclear (G. F.) — continued. 
 
 Narrative.'''' The Maps, prepared by Stanford, materially add to the 
 value and usefulness of the book. The British Quarterly Review calls it 
 "A careful and elaborate, though brief compendium of all that modern 
 research has done for the illustration of the Old Testament. We know of 
 no work which contains so much important information in so small a 
 compass. " 
 
 A CLASS-BOOK OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. 
 
 Including the Connexion of the Old and New Testament. Fifth 
 
 Edition. iSino. $s. 6d. 
 The present volume forms a sequel to the Author^s Class-Book of Old 
 Testa^nent History, and continues the narrative to the close of St. PauVs 
 second imprison?)iejit at Rome. The xvork is divided into three Books — 
 /. The Connection between the Old and New Testaments. II. The 
 Gospel History. III. The Apostolic History. In the Appendix are given 
 Chronological Tables The Clerical lowxn'aX says, ^' It is not often that 
 such an amount of useful and interesting matter on biblical subjects, is 
 fotind in so convenient and small a- compass, as in this well-arranged 
 volume. " 
 
 A CLASS-BOOK OF THE CATECHISM OF THE 
 CHURCH OF ENGLAND: New and Cheaper Edition. 
 i8mo. \s. 6d. 
 
 The present work is intended as a sequel to the two preceding books. 
 * ' Like them, it is firnished with notes and references to larger works, 
 and it is hoped that it may be found, especially in the higher forms of our 
 Public Schools, to supply a suitable manual of instruction in the chief 
 doctrines of our Church, and a useful help in the preparation of Can- 
 didates for Confirmation.^^ The Literary Churchman says, ^^ It is indeed 
 the work of a scholar and divine, and as such, though exti'emely sii7iple, it 
 is also extremely instructive. There are few clergy who would not find 
 it useful in preparing candidates for Confirmation ; and there a7'e not a 
 feiv who zuouldfind it useful to themselves as well. " 
 
 A FIRST CLASS-BOOK OF THE CATECHISM OF 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, with Scripture Proofs for 
 
 Junior Classes and Schools. New Edition. i8mo. 6d. 
 
 This is an epitome of the larger Class-book, meant for junior students 
 
 and elementary classes. The book has been carefully condensed, so as to 
 
 contain clearly and fully, the most important part of the contents of the 
 
 larger book. 
 
 A SHILLING-BOOK of OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY. 
 
 New Edition. i8mo. cloth limp. is. 
 This Manual bears the same relation to the larger Old Testament Hist- 
 ory, that the book just mentioned does to the larger work on the Catechism. 
 It consists of Ten Books, divided into short chapters, and subdivided into 
 
 2 
 
1 8 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Maclear (G. F.) — continued. 
 
 sections f each section treating of a single episode in the history^ the title of 
 which is given in bold type. 
 
 A SHILLING-BOOK of NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. 
 
 New Edition. i8mo. cloth limp. is. 
 
 A MANUAL OF INSTRUCTION FOR CONFIRMA- 
 TION AND FIRST COMMUNION, with Prayers and Devo- 
 tions. 32mo. cloth extra, red edges. 2s. 
 This is an enlarged and ii7tproved edition of ' The Order of Confirma- 
 tion.'^ To it have been added the Communion Office, with N'otes and 
 Explanations, together with a brief form of Self Examination and De- 
 votions selected from the works of Cosin, E'en, Wilson, and others. 
 
 THE ORDER OF CONFIRMATION, with Prayers and 
 Devotions. 32mo. cloth. 6d. 
 
 THE FIRST COMMUNION, with Prayers and Devotions 
 for the Newly Confirmed. 32mo. (>d. 
 
 THE HOUR OF SORROW ; or, The Order for the Burial 
 of the Dead. With Prayers and Hymns. 32mo. cloth extra. 2s. 
 
 Macmillan. — Works by the Rev. Hugh Macmillan, LL.D., 
 F. R. S. E. (For other Works by the same Author, see Catalogue 
 OF Travels and Scientific Catalogue). 
 
 THE TRUE VINE; or, the Analogies of our Lord's 
 Allegory. Third Edition. Globe Svo. 6s. 
 
 This work is not merely an exposition of the fifteenth chapter of St. 
 John^s Gospel, but also a general parable of spiritual trtith from the world 
 of plants. It describes a few of the points in which the varied realm of 
 vegetable life comes into contact with the higher spiritual realm, and shews 
 hoiv rich afield of promise lies before the analogical mind in this direction. 
 The Nonconformist says, ^^ It abounds in exquisite bits of description, and 
 in striking facts clearly stated.''^ The British Quarterly says, '■'■Readers 
 and preachers who are unscientific will find many of his illustrations as 
 valuable as they are beautiful. " 
 
 BIBLE TEACHINGS IN NATURE. Ninth Edition. 
 Globe Svo. 6j. 
 
 In this volume the author has endeavoured to sheiv that the teaching of 
 nature and the teaching of the Bible are directed to the same great end; 
 that the Bible contains the spiritual truths which are necessary to make us 
 wise unto salvation, and the objects and scenes of nature are the pictures 
 by which these truths are illustrated. '^ He has made the world more 
 beautiful to us, and unsealed our ears to voices of prraise and messages of 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 19 
 
 Macmillan (H.) — contmued. 
 
 love that might othei'wise have been unheard.''^ — British Quarterly Review, 
 "y^fr. Macmilian has produced a book which may be fitly described as one 
 of the happiest efforts for enlisting physical science in the direct service of 
 religion. " — Guai'dian, 
 
 THE MINISTRY OF NATURE. Third Edition. Globe 
 8vo. 6s. 
 
 In this vohc?ne the Author attempts to interpret Mature on her religious 
 side in accordance with the most recent discovei'ies of physical science, and 
 to shew how much greater significance is ijuparted to many passages oj 
 Scripture and many doctrines of Christianity whM looked at in the light 
 of these discoveries. Instead of regarding Physical Science as antagonistic 
 to Christianity, the Author believes and seeks to shew that every new dis- 
 covery tejzds more strongly to prove that Nature and the Bible have One 
 Author. " Whether the reader agree or not with his conclusions, he will 
 acknozvledge he is in the presence of an original and thoughtful writer." — 
 Pall Mall Gazette. ** Thei-e is no class of educated men and women that 
 will not profit by these essays." — Standard. 
 
 M'Clellan.— THE NEW TESTAMENT OF OUR LORD 
 AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST, a New Translation on the 
 Basis of the Authorised Version, from a Critically revised Greek Text. 
 Newly arranged in Paragraphs with Analyses, copious References 
 and Illustrations from original authorities. New Chronological and 
 Analytical Harmony of the Four Gospels, Notes and Dissertations. 
 A contribution to Christian Evidence. By John Brow^n M'Clel- 
 LAN, M.A., Vicar of Bottisham, Rural Dean of North Camps, and 
 late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. In Two Vols, 
 ^ol. I. The Four Gospels with the Chronological and Analytical 
 Harmony, 8vo. 30J. 
 
 Maurice. — Works by the late Rev. F. Denison Maurice, 
 M.A., Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Cam- 
 bridge. 
 The Spectator says — "Teia of those of our own generation 7vhose names 
 will live in English history or literature have exerted so profound and so 
 permanent an infiuence as Mr. Maurice." 
 
 THE PATRIARCHS AND LAWGIVERS OF THE 
 OLD , TESTAMENT. Third and Cheaper Edition. Crown 
 8vo. 5^. 
 
 The Nineteen Discourses contained in this volume were preached in the 
 chapel of Lincoln^ s Inn dicring the year 1 85 1. The texts a7'e taken from 
 the4)ooks of Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, foshua, Judges, 
 and Samuel, and involve some of the most interesting biblical topics dis- 
 cussed in recent times. 
 
20 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Maurice (F. D.) — continued. 
 
 THE PROPHETS AND KINGS OF THE OLD TES- 
 TAMENT. Third Edition, with new Preface. Crown 8vo. 
 
 Mr. Maurice, in the spirit which animated the compilei's of the- Church 
 Lessons, has in these Sermons regarded the Prophets more as preachers of 
 righteousness than as fuere predictors — an aspect of their lives which, he 
 thinks, has been greatly overlooked in our day, and than wh'ich, there is 
 none we have more need to contemplate. He has found that the Old 
 Testament Prophets, takeji in their simple natural sense, clear up many 
 of the difficulties zvhich beset us in the daily zuork of lije ; make the past 
 intelligible, the present endurable, and the future real and hopeful. 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. 
 A Series of Lectures on the Gospel of St. Luke. Crowji 8vo. 9^. 
 
 Mr. Maurice, in his Preface to these Tzventy-eight Lectures, says, — 
 '*//2 these Lectures I have endeavoured to ascertain what is told tis respect- 
 ing the life of Jesus by one of those Evangelists who proclaifn Him to be 
 the Christ, who says that He did comefrojn a Father, that He did baptize 
 with the Holy Spirit, that He did rise from the dead. , / have chosen tJie 
 one who is most directly connected with the later history of the Church, 
 who was not an Apostle, who professedly wrote for the use of a man 
 already instructed in thefait/i of the Apostles. I have followed the course 
 of the writer'' s narrative, not changing it under any pretext. I have 
 adhered to his phraseology, striving to avoid the substitution of any other 
 for his.'" 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. A Series of Discourses. 
 Third and Cheaper Edition. Crown 8vo. 6j. 
 
 These Discourses, twenty-eight in number, are of a nature similar to 
 those on the Gospel of St. Luke, and will be found to render valuable 
 assistance to any one anxious to understand the Gospel of the beloz'ed dis- 
 ciple, so different in many respects from those of the other three Evangelists. 
 Appended are eleven notes illustrating various points zvhich occur through- 
 out the discourses. The Literary Churchman thus speaks of this volume: 
 — '■'•Thorough honesty, reverence, and deep thought pervade the zvork, 
 zvhich is eveiy way solid and philosophical, as well as theological, and 
 abounding with suggestions which the patient student may draw out more 
 at length for him self. ^^ 
 
 THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. A Series of Lectures 
 on Christian Ethics. Second and Cheaper Edition. Cr. Svo. 6j. 
 
 These Lectures on Christian Ethics zvere delivered to the students of the 
 Working Men^s College, Great Ormond Street, Londo7i, on a seHes of 
 Sunday moj'nings. Mr. Maurice believes that the question in which we 
 are most interested, the question which most affects our studies and our daily 
 lives, is the question, whether thei-e is a foundation for human morality. 
 
'THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 21 
 
 Maurice (F. D.) — continued. 
 
 or tvhether it is dependent upon the opinions and fashions of different ages 
 and countries. This important question will be found amply and fairly 
 discussed in this volume, which the National Review calls ^^ Mr. 
 Maurice's most effective and instructive work. He is pectiliarly fitted 
 by the constitution of his mind, to throw light on St. John's writings. " 
 Appended is a note on ^^ Positivism and its Teacher." 
 
 EXPOSITORY SERMONS ON THE PRAYER-BOOK. 
 
 The Prayer-book considered especially in reference to the Romish 
 
 System. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo. $s. 6d. 
 After an Introductory Sermon, Mr. Maurice goes over the various parts 
 of the Church Sei'vice, expounds in eighteen Sermons y their intention and 
 significance, and shews how appropriate they are as expressions of the 
 deepest longings and wants of all classes of men. 
 
 LECTURES ON THE APOCALYPSE, or Book of the 
 
 Revelation of St. John the Divine. Crown 8vo. 10^. 6d. * 
 
 Mr. Matirice, instead of trying to find far-fetched allusions to great 
 historical evejtts in the distant future, endeavours to discozier the plain, 
 literal, obvious meaning of the words of the zvriter, and shews that as 
 a rule these refer to events contemporaneous with or immediately succeeding 
 the time when the book was written. At the same time he shezus the 
 applicability of the contents of the book to the circtimstances of the present 
 day and of all times. ^^ Never,'' says the Nonconformist, ^^ has Mr. 
 Maurice been more reverent, niore careful for the letter of the Scripture, 
 more discerning of the purpose of the Spirit, or 77101'e sober and practical 
 in his teaching, than in this volunie on the Apocalypse. " 
 
 WHAT IS REVELATION? A Series of Sermons on the 
 
 'Epiphany ; to which are added, Letters to a Theological Student 
 on the Bampton Lectures of Mr. Mansel. Crown 8vo. \os. 6d. 
 Both Sermons and letters were called forth by the doctrine maintained 
 by Mr. Mansel in his Bampton lectures, that Revelation cannot be a direct 
 Manifestation of the Infinite Nature of God. Mr. Maurice maintains 
 the opposite doctrine, and in his Sermons explains why, in spite of the high 
 authorities on the other side, he must still assert the principle which he 
 discovers in the Services of the Church and throughout the Bible. 
 
 SEQUEL TO THE INQUIRY, "WHAT IS REVELA- 
 TION?" Letters in Reply to Mr. lylansel's Examination of 
 " Strictures on the Bampton Lectures." Crown 8vo. ds. 
 
 This, as the title indicates, was called forth by Mr. ManseVs Examina- 
 tion of Mr. Maurice's Strictures on his doctrine of the Infinite. 
 
 THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 
 los. 6d. 
 
 ^^ The book," says Mr. Maurice, '^expresses thotights zvhich have been 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Maurice (F. D.) — continued. 
 
 working in my mind for years ; the method of it has not been adopted 
 carelessly ; ruen the composition has tmdergone frequent revision.^'' There 
 are seventeeti Essays in all, and although meant primarily for Unitarians, 
 to quote the words of the Clerical Journal, " z'/ leaves untouched scarcely 
 any topic which is in ablation in the religious world ; scarcely a moot 
 point between our various sects ; scarcely a plot of debateable ground be- 
 tiueen Christians and Infidels, between Romanists and Protestants, bettveen 
 Socinians and other Christians, betiveen English Churchijien and Dis- 
 senters on both sides. Scarce is there a 7?iisgiving, a difficulty, an aspira- 
 tion stirring amongst us notu, — nozv, when men seem in earnest as hardly 
 ever before about religion, and ask and demand satisfaction with a fear- 
 lessness which seems almost awful zvhen one thinks what is at stake — which 
 is not recognised and grappled with by Mr. Maurice.^^ 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF SACRIFICE DEDUCED FROM 
 THE SCRIPTURES. Crown 8vo. ^s. 6d. 
 
 Throughout the Nineteen Sermons contained in this volume, Mr. 
 Maurice expounds the ideas which he has formed of the Doctrine of 
 Sacrifice, as it is set forth in various parts of the Bibl^. 
 
 THE RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD, AND THEIR 
 RELATIONS TO CHRISTIANITY. Fourth Edition. Fcap. 
 8vo. 5j. 
 These Eight Boyle Lectures are divided into ttvo parts, of four Lectures 
 each. In the first part Mr. Maurice examines the gi'eat Religious systems 
 which present themselves in the history of the world, with the puipose of 
 inqturing what is their main characteristic principle. The seco?id four 
 Lectures are occupied with a discussion of the questions, ^' In what relation 
 does Christianity stand to these different faiths ? If there be a faith which 
 is meant for mankind, is this the one, or must we look for another .?" 
 
 ON THE LORD'S PRAYER. Fourth Edition. Fcap. 
 8vo. IS. 6d. 
 
 In these Nine Sermons the successive petitions of the Lord^s Prayei' are 
 taken up by Mr. Alaurice, their significance expounded, and, as was usual 
 with him, connected with the every-day lives, feelings, and aspirations of 
 the men of the present time. 
 
 ON THE SABBATH DAY ; the Character of the Warrior, 
 and on the Interpretation of History. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 THE GROUND AND OBJECT OF HOPE FOR 
 
 MANKIND. Four Sermons preached before the University of 
 
 Cambridge. Crown Svo. 3^. 6d. ^ 
 
 In these Four Sermons Mr. Maurice views the subject in four aspects : 
 
 —I. The Hope of the Missionary. II. The Hope of the Patriots III. 
 
 The Hope of the Churchman. IV. The Hope of Man. 7%^ Spectator 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 23 
 
 Maurice (F. D.) — continued. 
 
 says^ '''■It is impossible to find anyivhere deeper teaching than this f^ and 
 the Nonconformist, ''''We thank hiinfor the manly, noble, stirring words 
 if I these Sermons — words fitted to quicken thoughts, to awaken high aspira- 
 tion, to stimulate to lives of goodness.'''' 
 
 THE LORD'S PRAYER, THE CREED, AND THE 
 COMMANDMENTS. A Manual for Parents and Schoolmasters. 
 To which is added the Order of the Scriptures. i8mo. cloth 
 limp. \s. 
 This book is not written for clergymen, as such, but for parents and 
 teachers, who are often either prejudiced against the contents of the Cate- 
 chism, or regard it pectdiarly as the clergyman's book, but, at the same 
 time, have a general notion that a habit of prayer ought to be cultivated, 
 that there are some things tvhich ought to be believed, and some things 
 which ought to be done. It will be found to be peculiarly valuable at the 
 present time, when the question of religious education is occupying so much 
 attention. 
 
 THE CLAIMS OF THE BIBLE AND OF SCIENCE. 
 
 A Correspondence on some Questions respecting the Pentateuch. 
 Crown 8vo. 45-. dd. 
 This volume consists of a series of Fifteen Letters, the first and last 
 addressed by a ' Layjnan ' to Mr. Maurice, the intervening thirteen written 
 by Mr. Maurice hit7iself 
 
 DIALOGUES ON FAMILY WORSHIP. Crown 8vo. 6j-. 
 
 ** The parties in these Dialogues,'" says the Preface, '^ are a Clergyman 
 who accepts the doctrines of the Church, and a layman whose faith in 
 them is nearly gone. The object of the Dialogues is not confutation, but 
 the discovery of a ground on which two Englishinen and two fathers may 
 stand, and on which their country and their children may stand when 
 the'ir places know them no more." 
 
 THE COMMANDMENTS CONSIDERED AS IN- 
 STRUMENTS OF NATIONAL REFORMATION. Crown 
 8vo. 4J. dd. 
 The author endeavours to shew that the Commandments are now, and 
 ever have been, the great protesters against Presbyteral and Frelatical 
 assumptions, and that if we do not receive them as Comrnandments of the 
 Lord God spoken to Israel, and spoken to evay people under heaven now, 
 we lose the greatest witnesses we possess for national morality and civil 
 freedom. 
 
 MORAL AND^METAPHYSICAL PHILOSOPHY. Vol. 
 
 I. Ancient Philosophy from the First to the Thirteenth Centuries. 
 Vol. II. Fourteenth Century and the French Revolution, with a 
 Glimpse into the Nineteenth Century. Two Vols. 8vo. 25^. 
 This is an edition in two volumes of Professor Maurice's History of 
 
24 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Maurice (F. D.) — continued. 
 
 Philosophy from the earliest pei'iod to the present time. It was formerly 
 issued in a number of separate volumes, and it is believed that all admirers 
 of the author and all students of philosophy will ivelcome this compact 
 edition. In a long introduction to this edition, in the form of a dialogue^ 
 Professor Maurice justifies his own views, arid touches upon sotne of the 
 most important topics of the time. 
 
 SOCIAL MORALITY. Twenty-one Lectures delivered in 
 the University of Cambridge. New and Cheaper Edition. Cr. 
 8vo. los. 6d. 
 
 *''' Whilst, reading it we are charmed by the freedom from exclusiveness 
 and prejudice, the large charity, the loftiness of thought, the eagerness to 
 recognise and appreciate zvhatever there is of real zvorth extant in the 
 world, which ani^nates it from one end to the other. We gain new 
 thoughts and new ways of viewing things, even more, perhaps, from being 
 brought for a time under the influence of so noble and spiritual a mind." 
 — Athenseum. 
 
 THE CONSCIENCE : Lectures on Casuistry, delivered in 
 the University of Cambridge. Second and Cheaper Edition. 
 Crown 8vo. 5^. 
 
 In this series of nine Lectures, Professor Maurice, endeavours to settle 
 what is tneant by the word " Conscience," and discusses the most important 
 questions itnmediately connected with the subject. Taking ^^ Casuistry" 
 in its old sense as being the ^^ study of cases of Conscience," he endeavours 
 to show in what way it may be brought to bear at the present day upon 
 the acts and thoughts of our ordinary existence. He shows that Con- 
 science asks for lazvs, not rules ; for freedom, not chains ; for education, 
 not suppression. He has abstained from the use of philosophical terms, 
 and has touched on philosophical systems only zvhen he fancied ^' they 
 were interfering with the rights and duties of wayfarers." The Saturday 
 Review says : ' ' We rise from the pei'ttsal of these lectures with a detesta- 
 tion of all that is selfish and mean, and with a living impressiort that there 
 is such a thing as goodness after all. " 
 
 LECTURES ON THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 
 OF THE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES. 8vo. los. dd. 
 
 In the first chapter on ^^The Jewish Calling," besides expounding his 
 idea of the true nature of a " Church," the author gives a brief sketch of 
 the position and economy of the Jews ; while in the secotid he points out 
 their relation to * ' the other Nations. " Chapter Third contains a succint 
 account of the various Jewish Sects, zuhile in Chapter Fourth are briefly 
 Set forth Mr. Maurice's ideas of the character of Christ and the nature of 
 His mission, and a sketch of events is given up to the Day of Pentecost. 
 The remaining Chapters, extending from the Apostles' personal Ministry 
 to the end of the Second Century, contain sketches of the character and 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 25 
 
 Maurice (F. D.) — continued. 
 
 work of all the prominent men in any way connected with the Early 
 Church, accounts of the origin and natwe of the various doctrines ortho- 
 dox and heretical which had their birth during the pei'iod, as well as of 
 the planting and early history of the Chief Churches in Asia, Africa and 
 Europe. 
 
 LEARNING AND WORKING. Six Lectures delivered 
 in Willis's Rooms, London, in June and July, 1854. — THE 
 RELIGION OF ROME, and its Influence on Modem Civilisa- 
 tion. Four Lectures delivered in the Philosophical Institution of 
 Edinburgh, in December, 1854, Crown 8vo. 5^-. 
 
 SERMONS PREACHED IN COUNTRY CHURCHES. 
 Crown 8vo. \os. 6d. 
 
 ^^ Earnest, practical, and extremely simple." — Literary Churchman. 
 '■^ Good specijuens of his simple and earliest eloquence. The Gospel inci- 
 dents are realized with a vividness which we can well believe made the 
 co??mion people hear him gladly. Moreover they are sermons which must 
 have done the hearei'S good. " — ^John Bull. 
 
 Moorhouse. — Works by James Moorhouse, M.A., Vicar 
 
 of Paddington : — 
 SOME MODERN DIFFICULTIES RESPECTING the 
 
 FACTS OF NATURE AND REVELATION. Fcap. 8v6. 
 
 2s. 6d. 
 The first of these Four Discourses is a systematic reply to the Essay of 
 the Rev. Baden Powell on Christian Evidences in ^^ Essays and Reviews.'''' 
 The fourth Sermon, on " The Resurrection,'" is in some measure com- 
 plejnentary to this, and the two together are intended to furnish a tolerably 
 complete vircv of modern objections to Revelation. In the second and third 
 Sermons, on the '"'• Temptation'''' attd ''^Passion,''' the author has en- 
 deavoured ' ' to exhibit the power and tuonder of those great facts within 
 the spiritual sphere, which modern theorists have especially sought to dis- 
 credit.'" 
 
 JACOB. Three Sermons preached before the University of 
 Cambridge in Lent 1870. Extra fcap. 8vo. 3J. dd. 
 
 THE HULSEAN LECTURES FOR 1865. Cr. 8vo. 5^. 
 
 **Eew more valuable works have come into our hands for many years. . . 
 a most fruitful and welcome volume." — Church Review. 
 
 O'Brien.— AN ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN and ESTAB- 
 LISH THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION by FAITH 
 ONLY. By James Thomas O'Brien, D.D., Bishop of Ossory. 
 Third Edition. 8vo. \2s. 
 This luork consists of Ten Sermons. The first four treat of the nature 
 
26 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 and mutual relations of Faith and Justification ; the fifth and sixth 
 examine the corruptions of the doctrine of Justification by Faith only, and 
 tlie objections which have been urged against it. Thefouf concluding ser- 
 mons deal with the moj-al effects of Faith. Various Notes are added 
 explanatory of the Author's reasoning. 
 
 Palgrave. — HYMNS. By Francis Turner Palgrave. 
 
 Third Edition, enlarged. i8mo. \s. dd. 
 This is a collection of twenty original Hymns, which the Literary 
 Churchman speaks of as ^^ so choice, so perfect, and so refined, — so tender 
 in feeling, and so scholarly in expressionJ'^ 
 
 Paul of Tarsus. An Inquiry into the Times and the 
 
 Gospel of the Apostle of the Gentiles. By a Graduate. 8vo. 
 
 \os. 6d. 
 
 The Author of this work has atte?}ipted, out of the materials which 
 
 wei'e at his disposal, to construct for himself a sketch of the time in which 
 
 St. Paul lived, of the religious systems zvith tvhich he was brought in 
 
 contact, of the doctrine which he taught, and of the work which he tilti- 
 
 m-ately achieved. " Turn where we will throughout the volume, we find 
 
 the best fruit of patient inquiry, sound scholarship, logical argument, and 
 
 fairness of conclusion. No thoughtful reader will rise from its perusal 
 
 without a 7'eal and lasting profit to himself, and a sense of pervianent 
 
 addition to the cause of truth.'''' — Standard. 
 
 Picton.— THE MYSTERY OF MATTER; and other 
 Essays. By J. Allanson Picton, Author of "New Theories 
 and the Old Faith," Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 
 Contents — The Mystery of Matter : The Philosophy of Ignordiue : The 
 
 Antithesis of Faith and Sight: The Essential Nature of Religion: 
 
 Christian Pantheisi7i. 
 
 Prescott — THE THREEFOLD CORD. Sermons preached 
 before the University of Cambridge. By J. E. Prescott, B.D. 
 Fcap. 8vo. 3J". dd. 
 
 Procter.— A HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF COMMON 
 PRAYER: With a Rationale of its Offices. By Francis 
 Procter, M.A. Twelfth Edition, revised and enlarged. Crown 
 8vo. lOJ. dd. 
 The Athenaeum says : — '* The origin of every part of the Prayer-book 
 has been diligefitly investigated, — and tho-e are few questions or facts con- 
 nected with it which are not either sufiiciently explained, or so refei^red to, 
 that persons interested niay work out the truth for themselves.^' 
 
 Procter and Maclear.— AN ELEMENTARY INTRO- 
 DUCTION TO THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. 
 Re-arranged and Supplemented by an Explanation of the Morning 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 27 
 
 and Evening Prayer and the Litany. By F. Procter, M.A. and 
 G. F. Maclear, D.D. New Edition. i8mo. 2s. 6d. 
 This book has the same object and follows the* same plan as the Mamials 
 already noticed under Mr. Maclear's name. Each book is subdivided 
 into chapters and sections. In Book I. is given a detailed Histoiy of the 
 Book of Common Prayer down to the Attempted Revision in the Reign of 
 William III. Book II., consisting of four Parts, treats in order the 
 various parts of the Prayer Book. Notes, etymological, histoi'ical, and 
 critical, are given throughout the book, while the Appendix contains several 
 articles of much interest and importance. Appended is a General Index 
 and ajt Index of Words explained in the Notes. The Literary Church- 
 man characterizes it as *' by far the completest and most satisfactory book 
 of its kind xue knozv. We wish it were in the hands of evay schoolboy 
 and every schoolmaster in the kingdom.^'' 
 
 Psalms of David CHRONOLOGICALLY ARRANGED. 
 
 An Amended Version, with Historical Introductions and Ex- 
 planatory Notes. By Four Friends. Second and Cheaper 
 Edition, much enlarged. Crown 8vo. 8j. dd. 
 One of the chief designs of the Editors, in preparing this volume, was 
 to restore the Psalter as far as possible to the order in which the Psalms 
 were written. They give the division of each Psalm into strophes, and 
 of each strophe into the lines which composed it, and amend the errors of 
 translcrtion. The Spectator calls it ^^One of the most instructive and 
 valuable books that have been published for many years. " 
 
 Golden Treasury Psalter. — The Student's Edition. 
 
 Being an Edition with briefer Notes of the above, iSmo. 3^. ^d. 
 This volume will be found to meet the requirements of those who wish 
 for a smaller edition of the larger work, at a lozvd'r price for family use, 
 and for the use of younger pupils in Public Schools. The short notes 
 zvhich are appended to the volume will, it is hoped, suffice to make the 
 meaning intelligible throughout. The aim of this editiojt is simply to put 
 the reader as far as possible in possession of the plain tneaning of the 
 writer. ^' It is a gem," the Nonconformist says. 
 
 Ramsay.— THE CATECHISER'S MANUAL; or, the 
 Church Catechism Illustrated and Explained, for the Use of 
 Clergymen, Schoolmasters, and Teachers. By Arthur Ramsay, 
 M.A. Second Edition. iSmo. \s. 6d. 
 
 Rays of Sunlight for Dark Days. A Book of Selec- 
 tions for the Suffering. With a Preface by C. J. Vaughan, D.D. 
 i8mo. New Edition. 3^-. 6d. Also in morocco, old style. 
 Dr. Vaughan says in the Preface, after speaking of the general run of 
 Books of Co7nfort for Mourners, *'It is because I think that the little 
 volume nozv offered to the Christian sufferer is one of greater wisdom and 
 of deeper experience, that I have readily consented to the request that I 
 
28 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 would introdtice it by a few words of Preface. ^^ The book consists of a 
 series of very brief extracts frotn a great vai'iety of authors., in prose and 
 poetry, suited to the inany moods of a mourning or suffering mind. 
 *'' Mostly gems of the first water.'''' — Clerical Journal, 
 
 Reynolds.— NOTES OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFE. A 
 
 Selection of Sermons by Henry Robert Reynolds, B,A., 
 
 President of Cheshunt College, and Fellow of University College, 
 
 London. Crown 8vo. *js. 6d. 
 
 This work may be taken as representative of the mode of thought and 
 
 feeling which is most popular amongst the fi'eer and more cultivated Non- 
 
 conformists. ^^It is lo7tg," says the Nonconformist, ''^ since we have 
 
 met with any published serinons better calculated than these to stimulate 
 
 devout thought, and to bnnghome to the soul the reality of a spiritual life." 
 
 Roberts.— DISCUSSIONS ON THE GOSPELS. By the 
 Rev. Alexander Roberts, D.D. Second Edition, revised and 
 enlarged. 8vo. i6s. 
 " The author brings the valuable qualifications of learning, temper, and 
 an independent judgment.''^ — Daily News. 
 
 Robertson.— PASTORAL COUNSELS. Being Chapters 
 on Practical and Devotional Subjects. By the late John Robert- 
 son, D.D. ' Third Edition, with a Preface by the Author of 
 "The Recreations of a Country Parson." Extra fcap. 8vo. 6^-. 
 These Sermons are the free utterances of a strong and independent 
 thinker. He does not depart from the essential doctrines of his Church, 
 but he expounds them in a sph'it of the widest chanty, and always having 
 fnost prominently in view the requirements of practical life. * ' The sermons 
 are admirable speci?7iens of a practical, earnest, and instructive style of 
 pulpit teaching. " — Nonconformist. 
 
 Romanes.— CHRISTIAN PRAYER AND GENERAL 
 LAWS, being the Burney Prize Essay for 1873. With an Ap- 
 pendix, examining the views of Messrs. Knight, Robertson, Brooke, 
 Tyndall, and Gakon. By George J. Romanes, M.A. Crown 
 8vo. 5^. 
 
 RowselL— MAN'S LABOUR AND GOD'S HARVEST. 
 
 Sermons preached before the University of Cambridge in Lent, 
 
 1 86 1. Fcap. 8vo. 3^. 
 ' ' We strongly recommend this little volume to youJig men, and especially 
 to those who are contemplating working for Christ in Holy Orders.'^ — 
 Literary Churchman. 
 
 Salmon.— THE REIGN OF LAW, and other Sermons, 
 preached in the Chapel of Trinity College, Dublin. By the Rev. 
 George Salmon, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity in the 
 University of Dublin. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 ''IVell considered, learned, and powerful discourses. " — Spectator. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 29 
 
 Sanday.— THE AUTHORSHIP AND HISTORICAL 
 CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL, considered in 
 reference to the Contents of the Gospel itself, A Critical Essay. 
 By William Sanday, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. 
 Crown 8vo. 8j. dd. 
 
 " The Essay is not only most valuable in itself^ hut full of promise for 
 the future^ — Canon Westcott in the Academy. 
 
 Selborne.— THE BOOK OF PRAISE: From the Best 
 English Hymn Writers. Selected and arranged by Lord Selborne. 
 \Vi\h Vignette by Woolner. i8mo. 4$-. 6d. 
 
 It has been the Editoi^s desire and aim to adhere strictly, in all cases in 
 which it coidd be ascertained, to the genuine uncorrupted text of the authors 
 themselves. The names of the authors and date of composition of the . 
 hymns, zuhen knoivn, are affixed, while notes are added to the volume, 
 giving further details. The Hymns are arranged according to subjects. 
 '* There is not room for two opinions as to the value of the ^Book of Praise. ' " 
 — Guardian, '•'' Approaches as nearly as one can conceive to peifectionj*^ 
 —Nonconformist. 
 
 BOOK OF PRAISE HYMNAL. See end of this Catalogue. 
 Sergeant.— SERMONS. By the Rev. E. W. Sergeant, 
 
 M.A., Balliol College, Oxford; Assistant Master at Westminster 
 College. Fcap, 8vo, 2s. 6d. 
 
 Shipley.— A THEORY ABOUT SIN, in relation to some 
 Facts of Daily Life. Lent Lectures on the Seven Deadly Sins, 
 By the Rev. Orby Shipley, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7^-. 6d. 
 
 ^^Two things Mr. Shipley has done, and each of them is of considerable 
 
 woHh. He has grouped these sins afresh on a philosophic principle 
 
 and he has applied the touchstone to the facts of our moral life. . . so wisely 
 and so searchingly as to constitute his treatise a powerful antidote to self- 
 deception." — Literary Churchman. 
 
 Smith.— PROPHECY A PREPARATION FOR CHRIST. 
 
 Eight Lectures preached before the University of Oxford, being the 
 Bampton Lectures for 1869. By R. Payne Smith, D.D., Dean 
 of Canterbury. Second and Cheaper Edition. Crown 8vo. 6j. 
 
 The author's object in these Lectures is to shew that there exists in the 
 Old Testament an element, 7vhich no criticism on naturalistic principles 
 can either account for or explain away: that element is Prophecy. The 
 author endeavours to prove that its force does not consist merely in its 
 predictions. * * These Lectures overfio^iv with solid learning. " — Record. 
 
30 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Smith.— CHRISTIAN FAITH. Sermons preached before 
 
 the University of Cambridge. By W. S^umarez Smith, M.A., 
 
 Principal of St. Aidan's College, Birkenhead. Fcap. 8vo. 3^. (yd. 
 
 ^^Appropriate and earnest sermons, suited to the practical exhortation of 
 
 an ediccated congregation." — Guardian. 
 
 Stanley. — Works by the Very Rev. A. P. Stanley, D.D., 
 Dean of Westminster. 
 
 THE ATHANASIAN CREED, with a Preface on the 
 General Recommendations of the RiTUAL Commission. Cr. 
 8vo. 2S. 
 
 The object of the work is not so mtich to urge the omission or change of 
 the Athanasian Creed, as to shew that such a relaxation ought to give 
 offence to no reasonable or religious mind. With this view, the Dean of 
 Westminster discusses in succession — (i) the Authorship of the Creed, 
 (2) its Internal Characteristics, (3) the Peculiarities of its Use in the 
 Church of England, (4) its Advantages and Disadvantages, (5) its 
 various Interpretations, and (6) the Judgjnent passed upon it by the Ritual 
 Commission. In conclusion. Dr. Stanley maintains that the use of the 
 Athanasian Creed should no longer be made compulsory. ^^Dr. Stanley 
 puts with adtnirable force the objections which may be made to the Creed ; 
 equally admirable, we think, in his statement of its advantages. " — Spectator. 
 
 THE NATIONAL THANKSGIVING. Sermons preached 
 in Westminster Abbey. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 These Sermons are (i) ^^ Death and Life," pj'eached December 10, 
 1871 ; (2) " The Trumpet of Patmos," Deceinber 17, 1871 ; (3) *' The 
 Day of Thanksgiving," March 3, 1872. ^' In point of fervour and 
 polish by far the best speci??iens in print of Dean Stanley's eloquent style. " — 
 Standard. 
 
 Sunday Library. See end of this Catalogue. 
 
 Swainson. — Works by C. A. Swainson, D.D., Canon of 
 
 Chichester : — 
 
 THE CREEDS OF THE CHURCH IN THEIR RE- 
 LATIONS TO HOLY SCRIPTURE and the CONSCIENCE 
 OF THE CHRISTIAN. 8vo. cloth, gj. 
 The Lectures which compose this volume discuss, amongst others, the 
 following subjects : ' ' Faith in God," ' * Exercise of our Reason, " ' ' Origin 
 and Authority of Creeds," and ''''Private Judgmetit, its use and exercise." 
 " Treating of abstruse poi7its of Scripture, he applies them so forcibly to 
 Christian duty and practice as to prove eminently serviceable to the 
 Church."— John Bull. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 31 
 
 Swainson (C. A.) — cojitinued. 
 
 THE AUTHORITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, 
 and other LECTURES, delivered before the University of Cam- 
 bridge. 8vo. cloth. I2J-. 
 
 The first series of Lectures in this work is on * ' The Words spoken by 
 the Apostles of Jesus" " The Inspiration of God's Servants^''' *' The 
 Human Character of the Inspired Writers," and " The Divine Character 
 of the Word written" The second embraces Lectures on ^^ Sin as Im-' 
 perfection" ^'' Sin as Self-will" ^''Whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin" 
 ** Christ the Saviour" and *' The Blood of the Nruo Covenant" The 
 third is on ^^ Christians One Body in Christ" " The One Body the Spouse 
 of Christ " ^^ Christ's Prayer for Unity," ''^ Otir Reconciliation should be 
 manifested in common Woj'ship," and ^^ Ambassadors for Christ." 
 
 Taylor.— THE RESTORATION OF BELIEF. New and 
 Revised Edition. By Isaac Taylor, Esq. Crown 8vo. 8j. 6d. 
 The earlier chapters are occupied with an examination of the primitive 
 history of the Christian Religion, and its relation to the Roman govern- 
 ment; and here, as well as in the remainder of the work, the^uthor shews 
 the bearing of that history on some of the diffictdt and interesting questions 
 which have recently been claiming the attentiojt of all earnest men. The 
 last chapter of this Nezo Edition treats of " The Present Position of the 
 Argu7Jient concerning Christianity" with special reference to M. Renan's 
 Vie de Jesus. 
 
 Temple.— SERMONS PREACHED IN THE CHAPEL 
 of RUGBY SCHOOL. By F. Temple, D.D., Bishop of Exeter. 
 New and Cheaper Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. 4J-. 6d. 
 This volume contains Thirty-five Sermons on topics more or less inti- 
 mately connected zvith eveiy-day life. The follorving are a few of the 
 subjects discoursed upon: — ''''Love and Duty:" '■^Coming to Christ;" 
 "Great Men;" 'Eaith;" "Doubts;" "Scruples;" "Original Sin;" 
 "Friendship;" "Helping Others;" "The Discipline of Temptation;" 
 "Strength a Duty;" " Worldliness ;" "III Temper;" "The Burial of 
 the Past." 
 
 A SECOND SERIES OF SERMONS PREACHED IN 
 
 THE CHAPEL OF RUGBY SCHOOL. Second Edition. 
 
 Extra fcap. 8vo. 6s. 
 
 This Second Series of Forty-two brief, pointed, practical Sermons, on 
 
 topics hitimately connected with the evejy-day life of young and old, imll be 
 
 acceptable to all who are acquainted ivith the First Series. The following 
 
 are a few of the subjects treated of: — "Disobedience," '^'' Almsgiving," 
 
 " Th^ Unknown Guidance of God," "Apathy one of our Trials," "High 
 
 Aims in Leaders," "Doing our Best," " The Use of Knowledge," "Use 
 
 of Observances," "Martha and Mary," "John the Baptist," "Severity 
 
32 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Temple (F., D.D.) — continued. 
 
 before Mercy, ^^ *^Even Mistakes Punished,^' ^^ Morality and Religion,''* 
 ''Children," ''Action the Test of Spiritual Life,'' "Self Respect," "Too 
 Late," " The Tercentenary." 
 
 A THIRD SERIES OF SERMONS PREACHED IN 
 
 RUGBY SCHOOL CHAPEL IN 1867— 1869. Extra fcap. 
 
 8vo. 6s. 
 
 This third series of Bishop Temple's Rugby Sermons, contams thirty-six 
 
 brief discourses, including the " Good-bye" sermon preached on his leaving 
 
 Rugby to enter on the office he now holds. 
 
 Thring. — Works by Rev. Edward Thring, M.A. 
 
 SERMONS DELIVERED AT UPPINGHAM SCHOOL. 
 Crown 8vo. '^s. 
 
 In this volu77ie are contained Forty-seven brief Sermons, all on subjects 
 more or less intimately connected with Public-school life. ' ' We desire very 
 highly to cotnmend these capital Sermons which treat of a boy's life and 
 trials in a thoroughly practical way and zuith gi-eat simplicity and im- 
 pressiveness. They deserve to be classed with the best of their kind. " — 
 Litefary Churchman. 
 
 THOUGHTS ON LIFE-SCIENCE. New Edition, en- 
 larged and revised. Crown 8vo. yj-. dd. 
 In this volume are discussed in a fa?7iiliar manner some of the most 
 interesting probleins betzucen Science and Religion, Reason and Feeling. 
 
 Tracts for Priests and People. By Various 
 Writers. 
 
 The First Series. Crown 8vo, %s. 
 The Second Series. Crown 8vo. Zs. 
 The whole Series of Fifteen Tracts may be had separately, price 
 One Shilling each. 
 
 Trench. — Works by R. Chenevix Trench, D.D., Arch- 
 bishop of Dublin. (For other Works by the same author, see 
 Biographical, Belles Lettres, and Linguistic Cata- 
 logues). 
 NOTES ON THE PARABLES OF OUR LORD. 
 
 Twelfth Edition. 8vo. 12s. 
 This work has taken its place as a standard exposition and interpreta- 
 tion of Christ's Parables. The book is prefaced by an Ihtroductory Essay 
 in four chapters : — /. On the defnition of the Parable. II. On Teach- 
 ing by Parables. III. On the Inte}p7-etation of the Parables. IV. On 
 other Parables besides those in the Scriptures. The author then proceeds 
 to take up the Parables one by one, and by the aid of philology, history. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 33 
 
 Tre n ch — cont'mued. 
 
 antiquities, and the researches of travellers, shews forth the significance, 
 ■beauty, and applicability of each, concluding with what he deetns its true 
 moral interpretation. In the numerous Notes are many valuable references, 
 illustrative quotations, critical and philological annotations, etc., and ap- 
 pended to the volume is a classified list of fifty-six works on the Parables. 
 
 NOTES ON THE MIRACLES OF OUR LORD. 
 Tenth Edition. 8vo. \2s. 
 
 In the ''Preliminary Essay'' to this work, all the momentous and in- 
 teresting questions that have been raised in connection with Miracles, are 
 discussed with considerable fulness. The Essay consists of six chapters : — 
 /. On the Alames of Miracles, i. e. the Greek words by which they are 
 designated in the New Testarnent. II. The Miracles and Nature — What 
 is the difference bctiveen a Miracle and any event in the ordinary course 
 of Nature? III. The Authority of Miracles — Is the Miracle to conwiand 
 absolute obedience ? IV. The Evangelical, compared with the other cycles 
 of Miracles. V. The Assaults on the Miracles — I. Thejrivish. 2. The 
 Heathen ( Celsus etc.). 3, The Pantheistic (Spinosa etc.). 4. The 
 Sceptical (Htime). 5. The Miracles only relatively miraculous (Schleier- 
 macher). 6. The Rationalistic (Paulus). 7. The HistoHco- Critical 
 ( Woolston, Strauss). VI. The Apologetic Worth of the Miracles. The 
 author then treats the separate Miracles as he does the Parables. 
 
 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. New 
 
 Edition, enlarged. 8vo. cloth. \2s. 
 The study of synonyms in any language is valuable as a discipline for 
 training the mind to close and accurate habits of thought ; more especially 
 is this the case in Greek — " a language spoken by a people of the finest and 
 subtlest intellect ; who saw distinctions where others saw none ; who di- 
 vided out to different words what otho's often were content to huddle con- 
 fusedly under a (^ommon term. . . . Where is it so desirable that we should 
 miss nothing, that we should lose no finer intention, of the wpter, as in 
 those words which are the vehicles of the very mind of God Hi?nself?" 
 This Edition has been carefully revised, and a considerable number of new 
 synonyms added. Appended is an Index to the Synonyms, and an 
 Index to many othe?' words alluded to or explained throughout the work. 
 "Heis,^^ the Athenaeum says, ^^ a guide in this department of knowledge 
 to whom his readers may intrust themselves with confidence. His sober 
 judgment and sound sense are barriers against the 7?iisleading influence of 
 arbitrary hypotheses. " 
 
 ON THE AUTHORIZED VERSION OF THE NEW 
 TESTAMENT. Second Edition. 8vo. 7^. 
 
 After some Introductory Remarks, in which the propnety of a revision 
 is briefly discussed, the whole question of the merits of the present version 
 is gone into in detail, in eleven chapters. Appended is a chronological list 
 
 3 
 
34 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Tr e n ch — continued. 
 
 of works bearing on the sul^ject, an Index of the principal Texts con- 
 sidered, an Index of Greek Words, and an Index of other Words re- 
 ferred to thj'oughout the book. 
 
 STUDIES IN THE GOSPELS. " Third Edition. 8vo. 
 IOJ-. dd. 
 
 This book is published under the conviction that the assertion often 
 made is untrue, — viz. that the Gospels are in the main plain and easy, 
 and that all the chief difficulties of the New Testament are to be found 
 in the Epistles. These ^^ Studies,^'' sixteen in number, are the fruit of a 
 m,uch larger scheme, and each Study deals with some important episode 
 mentioned in the Gospels, in a critical, philosophical, and practical man- 
 ne)'. Many references and quotations are added to the Notes. Among 
 the subjects treated are: — The Temptation ; Christ and the Samaritan 
 Woman; The Three Aspdrants ; The Transfiguration; Zacchceus ; The 
 True Vine; The Penitent Malefactor ; Christ and the Txvo Disciples on 
 the way to Efnf7iaus. 
 
 COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLES to the SEVEN 
 CHURCHES IN ASIA. Third Edition, revised. 8vo. 2>s. dd. 
 
 The present work consists of an Introduction, being a commentary on 
 Rev. i. 4 — 20, a detailed examination oj each of the Seven Epistles, in all 
 its bearings, and an Excursus on the Historic 0- Prophetical Interpreta- 
 tion of the Epistles. 
 
 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT. An Exposition 
 drawn from the writings of St. Augustine, with an Essay on his 
 merits as an Interpreter of Holy Scripture. Third Edition, en- 
 larged. 8vo. loj. (id. 
 The first half of the present work consists of a dissertation in eight 
 chapters on *^ Augustine as an Interpreter of ScHpture,^^ the titles of the 
 several chaptei's being as follow : — /. Augtistinis General Views of Scrip- 
 ture and its Interpretation. II. The External Helps for the Interpreta- 
 tion of Scripture possessed by Augustine. III. Augustine's Principles 
 and Canons of Interpretation. IV. Augustin^ s Allegorical Interpretation 
 of Scripture. V. Illustrations of Augustine's Skill as an Interpreter of 
 Scripture. VI. Augustine on John the Baptist and on St. Stephen. 
 VII. Augustine on the Epistle to the Romans. VIII. Miscellaneous 
 Examples of Augustine' s Inteipretation tff Scripture. The latter half of 
 the work consists of Augustine's Exposition of the Sermon on the Motcnt, 
 not however a mere series of quotations from Augustine, but a connected 
 account of his sentiments on the various passages of that Sermon, inte)'- 
 spersed with criticisms by Archbishop Trench. 
 
 SERMONS PREACHED in WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
 
 Second Edition, 8vo. ioj. ^d. 
 These Sermons embrace a 'wide variety of topics, and are thoroughly 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 35 
 
 Trench — continued. 
 
 practical, earnest, and evangelical, and simple in style. The follotving 
 are a few of the subjects: — ^^Tercentenary Celebration of Queen Eliza- 
 beth's Accession;'''' ^'■Conviction and Conversion f ^^ The Incredulity of 
 Thomas;'" '' The Angels' Hymnf ''Counting the Cost-" ''The Holy 
 Trinity in Relation to our Prayers f "On the Death of General Have- 
 lock ;'' "Christ Weeping over Jerusalem;'' "Walking with Christ in 
 White.'" 
 
 SHIPWRECKS OF FAITH. Three Semions preached 
 before the University of Cambridge in May, 1867. Fcap. 8vo. 
 2s. 6d. 
 These Sermons are especially addressed to young men. The subjects 
 are "Balaam,''' "Saul," and "Judas Iscariot" These lives are set 
 forth as beacon-lights, ' ' to warn us off frotn perilous reefs and quick- 
 sands, which have been the destruction of many, and which might only too 
 easily be ours." 77^<?John Bull says, "they are, like all he writes, af- 
 fectionate and earnest discourses. " « 
 
 SERMONS Preached for the most part in Ireland. 8vo. 
 \os. 6d. 
 
 This volume consists of Thirty-two Sermons, the greater part of which 
 were preached i7t Ireland ; the subjects are as follozas : — Jacob, a Prince 
 with God and ivith Men — Agrippa — The Woman that was a Sijiner — 
 Secret Faults — The Seven Worse Spii'its — Freedom in the Truth — Joseph 
 and his Brethren — Bearing one another's Burdens — Christ's Challenge to 
 the World — The Love of Money — The Salt of the Earth — The Armour of 
 God — Light in the Lord — The Jailer of Philippi — The Thorn in the Flesh 
 — Isaiah's Vision — Selfishness — Abrahaj?i interceding for Sodom — Vain 
 Thoughts — Pontius Pilate — The Brazen Serpent — The Death and Burial 
 of Moses — A Word fi'om the Cross — The Chur(^h's Worship in the 
 Beauty of Holiness — Every Good Gift from Above — On ihe Hearing of 
 Prayer — The Kingdom which cometh not zuith Observation — Pressing 
 fozuards the Alar k — Saul — The Good Shepherd — The Valley of Dry Bones 
 — All Saints. 
 
 Tudor.— The DECALOGUE VIEWED as the CHRIST- 
 IAN'S LAW. With Special Reference to the Questions and 
 Wants of the Times. By the Rev. Rich. Tudor, B. A. Crown 
 8vo. los. 6d. 
 The author's aim is to bt'ing out the Christian sense of the Decalogue 
 in its applicatioti to existing needs and questions. The work will be found 
 to occupy ground which no other single work has hitherto filled. It is di- 
 vided into Two Parts, the First Part consisting of thi'ee lectures on 
 "Duty," and the Secontd Part of twelve lectures on the Ten Comt^and- 
 ments. The Guardian says of it, "His volume throughout is an outspoken 
 and sound exposition of Christian morality, based deeply tipon truefotmda- 
 tions, set forth systetnatically, and forcibly and plainly expi'essed — as good 
 a specimen of what pulpit lectures ought to be as is often to be found." 
 
36 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Tulloch.— THE CHRIST OF THE GOSPELS AND 
 
 . THE CHRIST OF MODERN CRITICISM. Lectures on 
 
 M. Renan's "Vie de Jesus." By John Tulloch, D.D., 
 
 Principal of the College of St. Mary, in the University of St. 
 
 Andrew's. Extra fcap. 8vo. 4J. dd. 
 
 Unseen Universe (The) : or, Physical Speculations 
 
 on Immortality, 8vo. \os. 6d. 
 
 Vaughan. — Works by Charles J. Vaughan, D.D., Master 
 of the Temple : — 
 CHRIST SATISFYING THE INSTINCTS OF HU- 
 MANITY. Eight Lectures delivered in the Temple Church. 
 New Edition. Extra fcp. 8vo. y. ^d. 
 ^*lVe are convinced that there are congregations^ in number unmista-keably 
 increasing, to 'who7n such Essays as these, full of thought and learning, 
 are infinitely more beneficial, for they are more acceptable, than the recog- 
 nised type of ser77ions," — John Bull. 
 
 MEMORIALS OF HARROW SUNDAYS. A Selection 
 
 of Sermons preached in Harrow School Chapel. With a View 
 
 of the Chapel. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. \os. (id. 
 
 ' '■Discussing,'''' says the John Bull, ' ' those forins of evil and impediments 
 
 to duty which pectdiarly beset the young. Dr. Vaughan has, with singular 
 
 tact, blended deep thought and aitalytical investigation of principles with 
 
 interesting earnestness and eloquent simplicity.''^ The Nonconformist 
 
 says ' ' the volume is a precious one for family reading, and for the hand 
 
 of the thoughtful boy or young man entering life^ 
 
 THE BOOK AND THE LIFE, and other Sermons, 
 preached before the University of Cambridge. New Edition. 
 Fcap. 8vo. 4J". 6^. 
 
 These Sermons are all of a thoroughly practical nature, and some of 
 them are especially adapted to those who are in a state of anxious doubt. 
 
 TWELVE DISCOURSES on SUBJECTS CONNECTED 
 WITH THE LITURGY and WORSHIP of the CHURCH 
 OF ENGLAND. Fcap. 8vo. 6^. 
 
 Four of these discourses were published in i860, in a work entitled 
 Revision of the Liturgy ; four others have appeared in the form of separate 
 sermons, delivo'ed on vaHous occasions, and published at the time by re- 
 quest ; and four are new. The Appendix contains two articles, — one on 
 *■'■ Subscription and Scruples," the other on the ^'■Rubric and the Burial 
 Service.^'' The Press characterises the volume as '■'■ eminently wise and 
 temperate.''^ 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 37 
 
 Vaughan (Dr. C. J.) — continued. 
 
 LESSONS OF LIFE AND GODLINESS. A Selection 
 of Sermons preached in the Parish Church of Doncaster. Fourth 
 and Cheaper Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3J-. (>d. 
 
 This volume consists of Nineteen Sermons^ mostly on subjects connected 
 with the every-day zualk and conversation of Christians. They bear such 
 titles as '•''The Talebearer,'''' ^'■Features of Charity,''' '■'■ The Danger of Re- 
 lapse,'" ''^ The Secret Life and the Outzvard,''' '"'' Family Prayer,'" '•'■Zeal 
 zvithout Consistency," " The Gospel an Incentive to Industry in Business,''' 
 '■'■Use and Abuse of the World." The Spectator styles them '■'■earnest 
 and human. They are adapted to every class and order in the social 
 system, and will be read with wakeful interest by all who seek to amend 
 whatever may be amiss in their natural disposition or in their acquired 
 habits. " 
 
 WORDS FROM THE GOSPELS. A Second Selection 
 of Sermons preached in the Parish Church of Doncaster. Second 
 Edition, Fcap. 8vo. 4^. dd. 
 
 The Nonconfonnist characterises these Sermons as ' * of practical earnest- 
 ness, of a thoughtfulness that penetrates the common conditions and ex- 
 pei'iences of life, and brings the truths and examples of Scripture to bear 
 on the7Ji with singular force, and of a style that owes its real elegance to 
 the simplicity and directness which have fine culture for their roots. " 
 
 LESSONS OF THE CROSS AND PASSION. Six 
 
 Lectures delivered in Hereford Cathedral during the Week before 
 
 Easter, 1869. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 The titles of the Sermons are: — /. ^^Too Late" (Matt. xxvi. 45^. //. 
 ' * The Divine Sacrifice and the Human Priesthood. " ///. * ^Love not the 
 World. " IV. ' ' The Moral Glory of Christ. " V. "■ Christ made perfect 
 through Suffering." VI. '''■Death the Remedy of Chi'ist^s Loneliness." 
 " This little volume," the Nonconformist says, ""exhibits all his best cha- 
 racteristics. Elevated, calm, and clear, the Sermons owe much to their 
 force, and yet they seent literally to 07ue nothing to it. They are studied^ 
 but their grace is the grace of perfect simplicity. " 
 
 LIFE'S WORK AND GOD'S DISCIPLINE. Three 
 
 Sermons. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 The Three Sermons are on the following subjects: — /. ^^ The Work 
 burned and the Workmen saved." II. '■'■ The Individual Hiring." III. 
 *' The Remedial Discipline of Disease and Death. " 
 
 THE WHOLESOME WORDS OF JESUS CHRIST. 
 
 Four Sermons preached before the University of Cambridge in 
 
 November 1866. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo. cloth. 3^-. (>d. 
 
 Dr. Vaughan uses the word "Wholesome'" here in its literal and 
 
 original sense, the sense in which St. Paul uses it, as meaning healthy, 
 
38 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Vaughan (Dr. C. J.) — coiitinued, 
 
 sound, conducing to right living ; and in these Sermons he points out 
 and illustrates several of the ',' wholesome''^ characteristics of the Gospel, 
 — the Words of Christ. The John Bull says this' volume is '■^replete with 
 all the author^ s well-known vigotir of thought and richness of expression.''^ 
 
 FOES OF FAITH. Sermons preached before the Uni- 
 versity of Cambridge in November 1868, Fcap. 8vo. y. 6d. 
 ^ The '■^ Foes of Faith'' ^ preached against in these Four Sertnons are: — 
 /. *^ Unreality. ^^ II. ^* Indolence." III. ^^ Irreverence.''^ IV. '■''Incon- 
 sistency. '* " They are zvritten" the London Review says, '■'with culture 
 and elegance, and exhibit the thoughtful earnestness, piety, and good sense 
 of their author.'''' 
 
 LECTURES ON THE EPISTLE to the PHILIPPIANS. 
 Third and Cheaper Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. 5^. 
 
 Each Lecture is prefaced by a literal translation from the Greek of 
 the paragraph which forms its subject, contains first a minute explanation 
 of the passage on zvhich it is based, and then a practical application of 
 the verse or clause selected as its text. 
 
 LECTURES ON THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN. 
 Fourth Edition. Two Vols. Extra fcap. 8vo. 9^-. 
 
 In this Edition of these Lectures, the literal translations of the passages 
 expounded will be found interwoven in the body of the Lectttres themselves. 
 In attemptingto expound this most-hard-to-under stand Book, Dr. Vatighan, 
 while taking from others what assistance he required, has not adhered to 
 any particular school of interpretation, but has endeavoured to shew fortJi 
 the significance of this Revelation by the help of his stroiig common sense, 
 critical acumen, scholarship, and revei-ent spirit. "'Dr. Vaughan' s Ser- 
 mons," the Spectator says, "are the most practical discourses on the 
 Apocalypse with which tve are acquainted." Prefixed is a Synopsis of the 
 Book of Revelation, and appended is an Index of passages illustrating 
 the language of the Book. 
 
 EPIPHANY, LENT, AND EASTER. A Selection of 
 Expository Sermons. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. loj. dd. 
 
 The first eighteen of these Sermons' were preached during the seasons of 
 i860, indicated in the title, and are practical expositions of passages taken 
 from the lessons of the days on which they were delivered. Each Lecture is 
 prefaced with a careful and literal rendering of the original of the passage 
 of which the Lecture is an exposition. The Nonconformist says that 
 ' ' in simplicity, dignity, close adherence to the words of Scripture, insight 
 into ' the mind of the Spirit,' and practical thoughtfulness, they are models 
 of that species of pulpit instruction to zvhich they belong." 
 
 THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL. For English Readers. 
 Part I., containing the First Epistle to the Thessalonians. 
 Second Edition. 8vo, \s. 6d. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 39 
 
 Vaughan (Dr. C. J.) — co?itinued. > 
 
 It is the object of this work to enable English readers, unacquainted 
 with Greek, to enter with intelligence into the meaning, connection, and 
 phraseology of the writings ofthegi'eat Apostle. 
 
 ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. The Greek 
 
 Text, with EngHsh Notes. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 7^-. (>d. 
 This volume contains the Greek Text of the Epistle to the Romans as 
 settled by the Rev. B. F. Westcott, D. D. , for his complete recension of the 
 Text of the New Testament. Appended to the text are copnous critical and 
 exegetical Notes, the result of almost eighteen years' study on the part of 
 the author. The ^^ Index of Words illustrated or explained in the Notes'''' 
 will be found, in some considerable degree, an Index to the Epistles as a 
 whole. Prefixed to the volume is a discourse on '^St. Raul's Conversion 
 and Doctrine, " suggested by some recent publications on St. PauVs theo- 
 logical standing. The Guardian says of the work, — '■''For educated young 
 men his commentary seems to fill a gap hitherto unfilled. ... As a whole. 
 Dr. Vaughan appears to tis to have given to the world a valuable book of 
 original and careful and earnest thought bestowed on the accomplishment 
 of a work tuhich zuill be of much service and which is much needed.'" 
 
 THE CHURCH OF THE FIRST DAYS. 
 Series I. The Church of Jerusalem. Third Edition. 
 " XL The Church of the Gentiles. Third Edition. 
 " III. The Church of the World. Second Edition. 
 Fcap. 8vo. cloth. 4^. 6d. each. 
 Where necessary, the Authorized Version has been departed from, and 
 a neiv litei'al translation taken as the basis of exposition. All possible 
 topographical and histoHcal light has been brought to bear on the subject ; 
 and while thoroughly practical in their aim, these Lectures will be found 
 to afford a fair notion of the history and condition of the Primitive 
 Church. The British Quarterly says, — ^^ These Sermons are worthy of 
 all praise, and are models of pulpit teaching. " 
 
 COUNSELS for YOUNG STUDENTS. Three Sermons 
 
 preached before the University of Cambridge at the Opening of 
 
 the Academical Year 1870-71. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 The titles of the Three Sermons contained in this volume are: — /. 
 
 *' The Great Decision.'" II ''The House and the Builder." III. ''The 
 
 Prayer and the Counter- Pj'ayer." They all bear pointedly, earnestly, and 
 
 sympathisingly upon the conduct and pursuits of young students and 
 
 young men generally. 
 
 NOTES FOR LECTURES ON CONFIRMATION, 
 
 with suitable Prayers. Eighth Edition. Fcap. 8vo. is. 6d. 
 In pj'eparation for the Confir?nation held in Harrow School Chapel, 
 Dr. Vatighan was in the habit of printing week by week, and distributing 
 among the Candidates, somewhat full notes of the Lecture he purposed to 
 
40 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Vaughan (Dr. C. J.) — continued. . 
 
 deliver to them, together with a form of Prayer adapted to the particular 
 subject. He has collected these weekly Notes and Prayers into this little 
 volume, in the hope that it may assist the labours of those who are engaged 
 in preparing Candidates for Confirmation, and who find it difficult to lay 
 their hand upon any one book of suitable instruction. 
 
 THE TWO GREAT TEMPTATIONS. The Tempta- 
 tion of Man, and the Temptation of Christ. Lectures dehvered in 
 the Temple Church, Lent 1872, Extra fcap. 8vo. 35-. dd. 
 
 Vaughan. — Works by David J. Vaughan, M.A., Vicar of 
 St. Martin's, Leicester : — 
 SERMONS PREACHED IN ST. JOHN'S CHURCH, 
 LEICESTER, during the Years 1855 and 1856. Cr. 8vo. 5^. 6^. 
 
 CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES AND THE BIBLE. New 
 
 Edition, revised and enlarged. Fcap. 8vo. cloth. 5^-. dd. 
 '■'■This little volume,^'' the Spectator says, 'Hs a model of that hottest 
 and reverent cj'iticism of the Bible which is not only right, but the duty of 
 English clergymen in such times as these to put forth from the pulpit.''^ 
 
 Venn.— ON SOME OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF 
 BELIEF, Scientific and Religious." Being the Hulsean Lectures 
 for 1869. By the Rev. J. Venn, M. A. 8vo. ds. 6d. 
 These discourses are intended to illustrate, explain, and work out into 
 
 some of their consequences, certain characteristics by which the attainment of 
 
 religious belief is prominently distinguished from the attainment of belief 
 
 upon most other subjects. 
 
 Warington.— THE WEEK OF CREATION ; or, THE 
 COSMOGONY OF GENESIS CONSIDERED IN ITS 
 RELATION TO MODERN SCIENCE. By George War- 
 ington, Author of "The Historic Character of the Pentateuch 
 Vindicated." Crown 8vo. 45-. dd. 
 The greater part of this work is taken up with the teaching of the 
 Cosmogony. Its purpose is also investigated, and a chapter is devoted to 
 the considei'ation of the passage in which the difficulties occur. ''A very 
 able vindication of the Mosaic Cosmogony by a writer zvho unites the ad- 
 vantages of a critical knowledge of the Hebrew tej^t and of distinguished 
 scientific attainments." — Spectator. 
 
 Westcott. — Works by BROOKE Foss Westcott, D.D., 
 Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge ; 
 Canon of Peterborough : — 
 The London Quarterly, speaking of Mr. Westcott, says, — " To a learn- 
 ing and accuracy which command respect and confidence, he unites what 
 are not always to befoimd in union with these qualities, the no less valuable 
 faculties of lucid arrange7nent and graceful and facile expression." 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 41 
 
 Westcott (Dr. B. Y .)— continued. 
 
 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE 
 GOSPELS, Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. \os. 6d. 
 
 The author's chief object in this zuoj'k has been fo shew that there is 
 a true mean between the idea of a formal har?nonization of the Gospels 
 and the abandonment of their absolute truth. After an Introductioit on 
 the General Effects of the course of Modern Philosophy on the popular 
 vie%vs of Christianity, he proceeds to deterjnine in zuhat way the principles 
 therein indicated may be applied to the study of the Gospels. The treatise 
 is divided into eight Chapters : — /. The Preparation for the Gospel. II. 
 The Jewish Doctrine of the Messiah. III. The Origin of the Gospels. 
 IV. The Characteristics of the Gospels. V. The Gospel of St. John. 
 VI. and VII. The Differences in detail and of arrangement in the 
 Synoptic Evangelists. VIII. The Difficulties of the Gospels. The Ap- 
 pendices contain much valuable subsidiary matter. 
 
 A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE HISTORY OF THE 
 CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT DURING THE 
 FIRST FOUR CENTURIES. Fourth Edition, revised, with 
 a Preface on "Supernatural Religion," Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 
 The object of this treatise is to deal zvith the New Testament as a whole^ 
 and that on purely historical grounds. The separate books of which it is 
 composed are considered not individually, but as claiming to be parts of the 
 apostolic heritage of Christians. The Author has thus endeavoured to con- 
 nect the history of the New Testament Canon with the growth and con- 
 solidation of the Catholic Church, and to point out the relation existing 
 between the amount of evidence for the authenticity' of its component parts 
 and the whole mass of Christian literature. ^'' The treatise,'''' says the 
 British Quarterly, "w a scholarly perfor77iance, learned, dispassionate, 
 discriminating, worthy of his subject and of the present state 0} Christian 
 literature in relation to it. " 
 
 THE BIBLE IN THE CHURCH. A Popular Account 
 of the Collection and Reception of the Holy Scriptures in the 
 Christian Churches. New Edition, i8mo. a^s. 6d. 
 
 The present volume has been written under the impression that a 
 History of the whole Bible, and not of the New Testament only, would 
 be required, if those unfamiliar with the subject were to be enabled to learn 
 in what manner and tuith what consent the collection of Holy Sc?-iptures 
 was first ?nade and then enlarged and finally closed by the Church. 
 Though the zvork is intended to be simple and popular in its method, the 
 author, for this very reason, has aimed at the strictest accuracy. 
 
 A GENERAL VIEW OF THE HISTORY OF THE 
 . ENGLISH BIBLE. Second Edition. Crown Svo, 10s. 6d. 
 In the Introduction the atithor notices briefly the earliest vernacular 
 vej'sions of the Bible, especially those in Anglo-Saxon. Chapter I. is oc- 
 
42 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Westcott (Dr. B. F.) — continued. 
 
 cupied with an account of the Manuscript English Bible from the l^h 
 century dorvnwards ; and in Chapter II. is narrated^ ivith many interest- 
 ing personal and other details^ the External History of the Printed Bible. 
 In Chapter III is set forth the Internal History of the English Bible^ 
 shelving to what extent the various English Translations were independent^ 
 and to what extent the translators were indebted to earlier English and 
 foreign versions. In the Appendices^ among other interesting and valuable 
 matter, will be found ^'■Speci?nens of the Earlier, and Later Wycliffite 
 Versions f^ ^^Chronological list of Bibles f' ^^An Examination of Mr. 
 Froude's History of the English Bible." The Pall Mall Gazette calls 
 the work ^'A brief, scholarly, and, to a great extent, an original contribu- 
 tion to theological literature.'''' 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN LIFE, MANIFOLD AND ONE. 
 
 Six Sermons preached in Peterborough Cathedral, Crown 8vo. 
 
 7.S. 6d. 
 The Six Sermons contained in this volume are the first preached by 
 the author as a Canon of Peterborough Cathedral. The subjects are: — 
 /. '•'■Life consecrated by the Ascension.'" II. '■'■Many Gifts, One Spirit.''^ 
 III. '■'■ The Gospel of the Resurrection.'''' IV. ^''Sufficiency of God." V. 
 ^^ Action the Test of Faith." VI. ^Progress frojti the Confession of God." 
 The Nonconformist calls the??t '■'■ Beautiful discourses, singularly devout 
 and tender." 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF THE RESURRECTION. Thoughts 
 on its Relation to Reason and History. Fourth Edition. Crown 
 8vo. ds. 
 
 The present Essay is an endeavour to consider some of the elementary 
 truths of Christianity, as a miraculous Revelation, from the side of History 
 and Reason. The author endeavours to sheiu that a devout belief in the 
 Life of Christ is quite compatible with a broad view of the course of human 
 progress and a frank trust in the la%vs of our own minds. In the third 
 edition the author has carefully reconsidered the whole argument, and py 
 the help of several kind critics has been enabled to correct some faults and 
 to remove some ambiguities, which had been overlooked before. He has 
 not however made any attempt to alter the general character of the book. 
 
 ON THE RELIGIOUS OFFICE OF THE UNIVER- 
 SITIES. Crown 8vo. 4-r. dd. 
 
 " There is certainly, no man of our time — no man at least who has ob- 
 tained the command of the public ear — whose utterances can compare with 
 those of Professor Westcott for largeness of views and comprehensiveness of 
 
 grasp There is wisdom, and truth, and thought enough, and a 
 
 harmony and mutual connection running through them all, which makes 
 the collection of more real value than many an ambitious treatise." — 
 Literary Churchman. 
 
THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 43 
 
 Wilkins.— THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD. An Essay, 
 by A,S. Wilkins, M.A., Professor of Latin in Owens College, 
 Manchester. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 3J-. 6^. 
 
 This is the Hulsean Prize Essay for 1869. The subject proposed by 
 the Trustees was, ' ' The Distinctive Features of Christian as compared 
 with Pagan Ethics." The author has tried to show that the Christian 
 ethics so far transcend the ethics of any or all of the Pagan systems in 
 method, in purity and in pozuer, as to compel us to assume for them an 
 oiHgin, differing in kind from the origin of any purely human system. 
 *^It wottld be difficult to pi-aise too highly the spirit, the burden, the con- 
 clusions, or the scholarly finish of this beautiful Essay." — British Quarterly 
 Review, 
 
 Wilson.— RELIGIO CHEMICL With a Vignette beauti- 
 fully engraved after a Design by Sir Noel Paton. By George 
 Wilson, M.D. Crown 8vo. 8j. dd. \ 
 
 ^'■George Wilson," says the Preface to this volume, '■^ had it in his heart 
 for many years to write a book corresponding to the Religio Medici of Sir 
 Thomas Brotune, 7vith the title Religio Chemici. Several of the Essays in 
 this volume were intended to form chapters of it, but the health and leisure 
 necessary to carry out his plans %uere never attainable, and thus fragments 
 only of the designed tvork exist. These fragments, hoivever, being in ??tost 
 cases like finished gems ivaiting to be set, some of them are nozu given in 
 a collected form to his friends and the public." — "^ more fascinating 
 volume," the Spectator says, ^^ has seldom fallen into our hands." 
 
 Wilson.— THE BIBLE STUDENT'S GUIDE TO THE 
 MORE CORRECT UNDERSTANDING of the ENGLISH 
 TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, BY RE- 
 FERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL HEBREW. By William 
 Wilson, D.D., Canon of Winchester. Second Edition, carefully 
 revised. 4to. 2^s. 
 
 ** The author believes that the prresent work is the nearest approach to 
 a complete Concordance of every word in the original that has yet been 
 made: and as a Concordance, it may be found of great use to the J3ible 
 student, while at the same time it serves the important object of furnishing 
 the means of comparing synony??ious ivords, and of eliciting their precise 
 and distinctive meaning. The knowledge of the Hebrew language is not 
 absolutely necessary to the profitable use of the work. The plan of the 
 work is simple : every word occurring in the English Version is arranged 
 alphabetically, and under it is given the Hebrexv word or words, with a 
 full explanation of their meaning, of which it is meant to be a translation, 
 and a complete list of the passages where it occurs. Following the general 
 tuork is a complete Hebrew and English Index, which is, in effect, a 
 Hebrew- English Dictionary. 
 
44 THEOLOGICAL BOOKS. 
 
 Worship (The) of God and Fellowship among 
 
 Men. Sermons on Public Worship. By Professor Maurice, 
 
 and others. Fcap. 8vo. 3^. dd. 
 This volume consists of Six Sermons preached by various clergymen^ 
 and although not addressed specially to any class, were suggested by recent 
 efforts to bring the members of the Working Class to our Churches. The 
 preachers zvere — Professor AIau7'ice, Rev. T. y. Rowsell, Rev. J. LI. 
 Davies, Rev. D. J. Vaughan. 
 
 Yonge (Charlotte M.)— SCRIPTURE READINt^S for 
 
 SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES. By Charlotte M. Yonge, 
 
 Author of " The Heir of Redclyffe." Globe 8vo. \s. 6d. With 
 
 Comments, y. 6d. 
 
 Second Series. From Joshua to Solomon. Extra fcap, 8vo. 
 
 IS. 6d. With Comments. 3^. 6d. 
 
 Third Series. The Kings and Prophets. Extra fcap. 8vo., 
 
 is.6d., with Comments, 2)^.6d. 
 Actual need has led the author to endeavour to prepare a reading book 
 convenient for study with children, containing the very words of the 
 Bible, with only a few expedient omissions, and arranged in Lessons of 
 such length as by experietice she has found to suit with children's ordinary 
 power of accurate attentive interest. The verse form has been retained be- 
 cause of its convejtience for children reading in class, and as more re- 
 sembling their Bibles ; but the poetical portions have been given in their 
 lines. Professor Huxley at a meeting of the London School-board, par- 
 ticularly mentioned the Selection made by Afiss Yonge, as an example of 
 how selections might be made for School reading. ''^ Her Comments are 
 models of their kind.'''' — Literary Churchman. 
 
 In crown 8vo. cloth extra, Illustrated, price 4J. dd. each Volume ; also 
 
 kept in morocco and calf bindings at moderate prices, and in 
 
 Ornamental Boxes containing Four Vols., 2.\s. each. 
 
 MACMILLAN'S SUNDAY LIBRARY." 
 
 A Series of Original Works by Eminent Authors. 
 
 The Guardian says — ^^All Christian households ozve a debt of gratitude 
 to Mr. Macmillan for that useful ' Sunday Library.'^' 
 
 THE FOLLOWING VOLUMES ARE NOW READY:— 
 
 The Pupils of St. John the Divine. — By Charlotte 
 
 M. Yonge, Author of "The Heir of Redclyffe. " 
 
 The author fii'st gives a full sketch of the life and zvork of the Apostle 
 
 himself, drawing the material from all the most trustivorthy authorities, 
 
 sacred and profane ; then follow thelives of his immediate disciples, Ignatius, 
 
MACMILLAN'S SUNDAY LIBRARY. 45 
 
 Quadratus, Polycarp, and others ; zvhich are succeeded by the lives of many 
 of their pupils. She then proceeds to sketch from their foundation the 
 history of the many churches planted or superintended by St. John and 
 his pupils, both in the East and West. In the last chapter is given an 
 account of the present aspect of the Churches of St. John, — the Seven ■ 
 Churches of Asia mentioned in Revelations ; also those of Athens, of 
 Nimes, of Lyons, and others in the West. '■^ Young and old will be 
 equally refreshed and taught by these pages, in which nothing is dull, and 
 nothing is far-fetched. " — Churchman. 
 
 The Hermits.— By Canon Kingsley. 
 
 The volume contains the lives of sot?ie of the most remarkable early 
 Egyptian, Syrian, Persian, and Western hermits. The lives are mostly 
 translations from the original biographies. ^^It is fro77i first to last a 
 p-oduction full of interest, %vritten with a libei'al appreciation of what is 
 memorable for good in the lives of the Hermits, and zuith a wise forbear- 
 ance towards legends which may be due to the ignorance, and, no doubt, 
 also to the strong faith of the early chroniclers." — London Review. 
 
 Seekers after God. — Lives of Seneca, Epictetus, and 
 Marcus Aurelius. By the Rev, F. W. Farrar, M.A., F.R.S., 
 Head Master of Marlborough College. 
 In this volume the author seeks to record the lives, and gives copious 
 samples of the almost Christ-like utterances of, with perhaps the exception 
 of Socrates, ''''the best and holiest characters presented to us in the records 
 of antiquity.'''' The volume contains portraits of Aurelius, Seneca, and 
 Antoninus Pius. ''''We can heartily recoijimend it as healthy in tone, 
 instructive, interesting, mentally and spiritually stimulating and nu- 
 tritious. " — Nonconformist. 
 
 England's Antiphon.— By George Macdonald. 
 
 This volume deals chiefly with the lyric or song-foi-m of English re- 
 ligious poetry, other kinds, however, being not ittfrequently introduced. 
 The author has sought to trace the course of our religious poetry from the 
 ly^h to the i()th centuries, from before Chaucer to Tennyson. He en- 
 deavours to accomplish his object by selecting the m,en who kave produced 
 the finest religious poetry, setting forth the circumstances in zvhich they 
 were placed, characterising the men themselves, critically estimating their 
 productions, and giving ample specimens of their best religious lyrics, and 
 quotations from larger poems, illustrating the religious feeling of the poets 
 or their times. '■''Dr. Macdonald has veiy successfully endeavoured to 
 bring together in his little book a zvhole series of the sweet singers of Eng- 
 land, and makes them raise, one after the other, their voices in praise of 
 God. " — Guardian. 
 
 Great Christians of France : St. Louis and Calvin. 
 
 By M. GuizoT. 
 From among French Catholics, M. Guizot has, in this volume, selected 
 
46 MACMILLAN'S SUNDAY LIBRARY. 
 
 Louis, King of France in the 13M century, and among Protestants, Calvin 
 the Reformer in the i6th century, ^^ as two earnest and illustHous repre- 
 sentatives of the Christian faith and life, as well as of the loftiest thought 
 and purest morality of their count}y and generation.^' In setting forth 
 with considerable fulness the lives of these prominent and representative 
 Christian men, AI. Guizot necessarily introduces much of the political and 
 religious history of the periods during which they lived. "^ very interest- 
 ing book,'''' says the Guafdian. 
 
 Christian Singers of Germany. — By Catherine 
 
 WiNKWORTH. 
 
 In this volume the authoress gives an account of the principal hymn- 
 writers of Germany fro7n the gth to the \<^th century, introducing ample 
 specimens from their best productions. In the translations, while the 
 English is perfectly idiomatic and harmonious, the characteristic differ- 
 ences ofthefoems have been carefully imitated, and the general style and 
 m.etre retained. ''''Miss Winkworth' s vohime of this series is, according to 
 our vieiv, the choicest production of her pen.'' — British Quarterly Review. 
 
 Apostles of Mediaeval Europe. — By the Rev. G. F. 
 
 Maclear, D.D., Head Master of King's College School, London. 
 In two Introductory Chapters the author notices some of the chief cha- 
 ractenstics of the mediceval pei'iod itself; gives a graphic sketch of the de- 
 vastated state of Europe at the beginning of that period, and an interesting 
 account of the religions of the three great groups of vigorous barbarians — , 
 the Celts, the Teutons, and the Sclaves — who had, wave after wave, over- 
 flowed its surface. He then proceeds to sketch the lives and work of the 
 chief of the courageous men who devoted themselves to the stupendous task 
 of their conversion and civilization, during a period extending from the 
 $th to the \2fh century ; such as St. Fati-ick, St. Columba, St. Colum- 
 banus, St. Augustine of Canterbury, St. Boniface, St. Olaf, St. Cyril, 
 Raymond Sull, and others. "Mr. Maclear will have done a great work 
 if his adtnirable little volume shall help to break up the dense ignorance 
 which is still prevailing among people at large." — Literary Churchman. 
 
 Alfred the Great.-^By Thomas Hughes, Author of "Tom 
 
 Brown's School Days." Third Edition. 
 ' ' The time is come when we English can no longer stand by as in- 
 terested spectators only, hit in which every one of our institutions will be 
 sifted with rigour, and will have to shezv cause for its existence. .... 
 As a help in this search, this life of the typical English King is here 
 offered." Besides other illustrations in the volume, a Map of England is 
 prefixed, shewing its divisions about 1 000 A.D., as zvell as at the present 
 time. "Mr. Hughes has indeed written a good book, bright and readable 
 we need hardly say, and of a very considerable historical value." — 
 Spectator. 
 
 Nations Around. — By Miss A. Keary. 
 
 This vohime contains many details concerning the social and political 
 
MACMILLAN'S SUNDAY LIBRARY. 47 
 
 life, the religion, the superstitions, the litei-ature, the architecture, the com- 
 merce, the industry, of the Nations around Palestine, an acquaintance with 
 which is necessary in order to a clear attdfull understanding of the history 
 of the Hebrew people. The authoress has brought to her aid all the most 
 recent investigations into the early history of these nations, referring fre- 
 quently to the fruitful excavations which have brought to light the ruins 
 and hieroglyphic writings of many of their buried cities. "Aliss Keary 
 has skilfully availed herself of the opportunity to write a pleasing and in- 
 structive book." — Guardian. ^^A valuable and interesting volume." — 
 Illustrated Times. 
 
 St. Anselm. — By the Very Rev. R. W. CHURCH, M.A., Dean 
 of' St. Paul's. Second Edition. 
 In this biography of St. Anselm, luhile the story of his life as a man, a 
 Christian, a clei'gyman, and a politician, is told impartially and fully ^ 
 much light is shed on the ecclesiastical and political history of the time 
 during zuhich he lived, and on the internal economy of the monastic estab- 
 lishments of the period. The author has drawn his materials from con- 
 temporary biographers and chroniclers, while at the same time he has 
 consulted the best j-ecent atithors who have treated of the man and his 
 time. ^'' It is a sketch by the hand of a master, with every litte marked 
 by taste, learning, and real apprehension of the subject." — Pall Mall 
 Gazette. 
 
 Francis of Assisi. — By Mrs. Oliphant. 
 
 The life of this saint, the founder of the Franciscan order, and one of 
 the most remarkable men of his time, illustrates some of the chief cha- 
 racteristics of the religious life of the Middle Ages. Much infor?9tation is 
 given concerning the missionary labours of the saint and his companions ^ 
 as well as concerning the religious and monastic life of the time. Many 
 graphic details are introduced from the sainfs contemporary biographers^ 
 xuhich shezu forth the prevalent beliefs of the period ; and abundant samples 
 are given of St. Francis's otun sayings, as well as a fei.v speci7nens of his 
 simple tender hy7nns. "We are grateful to Mrs. Oliphant for a book of 
 much interest and pathetic beauty, a book which none can read without 
 being the better for it." — John Bull. 
 
 Pioneers and Founders ; or, Recent Workers in the 
 Mission Field. By Charlotte M. Yonge, Author of "The 
 Heir of Redclyffe." With Frontispiece, and Vignette Portrait of 
 Bishop Heber. 
 The missionaries whose biographies are .here given, are — John Eliot, 
 the Apostle of the Red Indians ; David Brainerd, the Enthusiast ; Christ- 
 ian F. Schwartz, the Councillor of Tanjore; Henry Martyn, the Scholar- 
 Missionary ; William Carey and Joshua Marshtnan, the Serampore Mis- 
 sionaries ; the Jtidson Family; the Bishops of Calcutta, — Thomas 
 Middleton, Reginald Heber, Daniel Wilson; Samuel Mar sden, the Aus- 
 tralian Chaplain and FHend of the Maori ; John Williams, the Martyr 
 
48 MACMILLAN'S SUNDAY LIBRARY. 
 
 of Erromango; Allen Gardener, the Sailor Martyr; Charles Frederick 
 Mackenzie, the Martyr of Zambesi. ^^ Likely to be one of the most popular 
 of the '■ Simday Libra7y^ vohimes.^^ — Literary Churchman. 
 
 Angelique Arnauld, Abbess of Port Royal. By 
 
 Frances Martin. Crown 8vo. 45-. 6d. 
 This new volume of the ^Sunday Library contains the life of a very 
 remarkable woman founded on the best authorities. She zvas a Roman 
 Catholic Abbess who lived more than 200 yea7's ago, whose life contained 
 much struggle and suffering. But if we look beneath the smface, we find 
 that sublime virtues are associated with her errors, the?'e is something 
 admirable in evaything she does, and the study of her history leads to a 
 continual enlargement of our own range of thought and sympathy. 
 
 THE "BOOK OF PRAISE" HYMNAL, 
 
 COMPILED AND ARRANGED BY 
 
 LORD SELBORNE. 
 
 In the following four forms : — 
 
 A. Beautifully printed in Royal 32nio., limp cloth, price 6d. 
 
 B. ,, ,, SmalllSmo., largrer type, cloth limp. Is. 
 
 C. Same edition on fine paper, cloth, Is. 6d. 
 
 Also an edition -with Music, selected, harmonized, and composed 
 by JOHN HULL AH, in square 18mo., cloth, 3s. Bd. 
 
 The large acceptance which has been given to " The Book of Praise''^ 
 by all classes of Christian people encourages the Publishers in entertaining 
 the hope that this Hymnal, which is mainly selected from it, may be ex- 
 tensively used in Congregations, and in some degree at least meet the 
 desires of those who seek uniformity in common worship as a means 
 towards that unity which pious souls yearn aftei', and which our Lord 
 prayed for in behalf of his Church. '■''The office of a hymn is not to 
 teach controversial Theology, but to give the voice of song to practical 
 religion. No doubt, to do this, it must embody sound doctrine ; but it 
 ought to do so, not after the mariner of the schools, but with the breadth, 
 freedo7n, and simplicity of the Fountain-head. " On this pHnciple has 
 Sir R. Palmer proceeded in the preparation of this book. 
 
 The arrangement adopted is the following : — 
 
 Part I. consists of Hymns arranged according to the subjects of the 
 Creed— "God the Creator," "Christ Incarnate,'' "Christ Crucified,'' 
 "Christ Risen," "Christ Ascended," "Christ's Kingdom and Judg- 
 ment," etc. 
 
 Part II. comprises Hymns arranged according to the subjects of the 
 Lords Prayer. 
 
 Part III. Hymns for natural and sacred seasons. 
 There are 320 Hymns in all. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE :— PRINTED BY J. PALMER. 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 JUL 11 
 
 m^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 $^^ 
 
 •n^rp- 
 
 RgC'D L P 
 
 J0H9 'SA-l -pUt 
 
 Mg 61935 
 
 RECEIVED 
 
 Bi 
 
 ^jyt^_5J2b 
 
 CIRCULATION 
 
 DEPT; 
 
 LD 21-100m-7,'33 
 
n 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY