'msmsm 
 
 KJ /^ 
 
 H
 
 C-' 
 
 I
 
 (;(!/,! / ■• /z 
 
 Fasting Communion— Non-communi- 
 cating Attendance— Auricular 
 Confession — The Doctrine of 
 Sacrifice — The Eucharistic 
 Sacrifice 
 
 TBeing an appenDir to tfte autfior^ie^ Comment 
 targ on ''Cfie ,£Dffice of tije l^olg Communion/^ 
 
 BY 
 
 EDWARD MEYRICK GOULBURN, D.C.L., D.D. 
 
 DEAN OF NORWICH 
 
 rivingtons 
 
 Hontion, SDjcforti, anti Q^ambriUfle 
 1874
 
 RIVINGTONS 
 
 JLonDott Waterloo Place 
 
 €)]cforli High Street 
 
 Camlitiliffe Trinity Street 
 
 [A-I62]
 
 TO THE REVEREND 
 
 EDWARD COOPER WOOLLCOMBE, M.A., 
 
 SENIOR FELLOW, AND LATE TUTOR, OF BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD, 
 
 A WARM AND CONSTANT FRIEND, 
 
 AND A MOST DUTIFUL SON OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH, 
 
 THESE PAGES ARE, BY HIS KIND PERMISSION, 
 
 INSCRIBED.
 
 , u!uc : 
 
 <tka'^
 
 PREFACE 
 
 To the Reverend Edioard Cooper Woollcomhe, M.A. 
 
 My dear old Friend, 
 
 It was a good fashion of old, now unhappily 
 dying out, for authors, in putting forth their publica- 
 cations, to "show cause" of some kind or other for 
 venturing into print. It was a good fashion ; for even 
 if there were no very tangible justification which could 
 be alleged, the attempt to set up one was an acknow- 
 ledgment of the principle that such an act needs justi- 
 fication, — that men have no right to add to the large 
 number of existing books out of mere whim, or personal 
 vanity, or by way of gratifying a cacoethes scrihendi. 
 My reasons for putting forth the following pages are 
 soon told, and will, I hope, be accounted by you, and 
 by any others who may care to read them, sufficient. 
 Another edition of a work of mine on " the English
 
 vi Preface 
 
 Office of the Holy Communion," published some ten 
 years ago, having been called for, it seemed only 
 reasonable carefully to revise it, under any lights which 
 more recent controversy might have thrown upon the 
 subject treated of, before presuming to give it once 
 again to the world. This might have been done with- 
 out any considerable addition to the original work. 
 But there seemed to be reasons which made such 
 additions almost necessary. Since the original publi- 
 cation of the work, two or three practices, which seem 
 to me wrong in principle, and to have a tendency to 
 undermine the true doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, 
 have shot up with an amazing rapidity, and are gaining 
 every day a greater foothold among the members of 
 our Communion. It would have been easy to ignore 
 these practices altogether, on the plea that a treatise on 
 " the Office of the Holy Communion" need not, except 
 indirectly, come across them. But I had to consider 
 that in the small circle of his readers a religious 
 author is in fact a preacher, and that a preacher's first 
 duty is faithfulness. Eeaders have a right to expect 
 from one who professes to expound " the Office of the 
 Holy Communion" some guidance on such subjects as 
 Fasting Communion, Non-communicating Attendance,
 
 Preface vii 
 
 and previous private Confession — practices which are 
 now freely discussed everywhere, and which very much 
 divide religious opinion among us. But there seemed 
 to me another reason, over and above that of faithful- 
 ness to the reader, for seizing the opportunity of avow- 
 ing my convictions on these really important subjects. 
 The agitation stirred up in the Church by the Public 
 Worship Eegulation Bill, and the movement made in 
 connexion with it for a revision of the Rubrics, are 
 sure to lead to a series of protests, memorials, declara- 
 tions of opinion, as well as to an abundant shoal of 
 letters in the Church press of the day. I suspect that 
 you are of the same mind with myself in not altogether 
 liking either of these vehicles of religious opinion. 
 Very rare are the declarations or protests, which exactly 
 fit persons who do not draw them up; and at best, 
 they are dry and meagre, exhibit the truth contended 
 for in its dogmatic (and therefore its most repelling) 
 form, and give no room for explanation or qualifica- 
 tion. And as for the Church press, though of course 
 there are occasions in which it may be very properly 
 resorted to and does good service, its utterances are 
 ephemeral and fugitive, and its columns are hardly 
 suited to the methodical discussion of subjects of con-
 
 viii Prefuce 
 
 troversy. And yet it is not the part of a brave man to 
 hide his colours, and wrap up his convictions in his 
 own mind, in times (like these) of difficulty and 
 conflict. We may be unable indeed to sympathize 
 entirely with either of the two great sections of re- 
 ligious opinion which divide our Church ; and yet 
 may have no sort of desire to trim. Eeligious 
 opinions may be very determined as well as very 
 definite, without being those of religious partisans. I 
 have accordingly embraced the opportunity, presented 
 by the call for another edition of my work, of saying 
 my say, and making my manifesto, on subjects of pre- 
 sent interest. I have not indeed treated of such minute 
 matters as the eastward posture of the celebrant, or the 
 correct vestments to be worn by him in his ministra- 
 tion, as feeling that these are questions of only facti- 
 tious importance, and that any decision of them made 
 by competent authority may be (and ought to be) 
 gladly accepted and adopted, so long as the true 
 doctrine of the Eucharist is maintained in its integrity 
 among us. 
 
 For the rest, if asked for a definite expression of 
 opinion upon this new Act, which excites so much 
 apprehension in some and so much exultation in others,
 
 Preface ix 
 
 though I have no wish to speak otherwise than 
 respectfully of any Act of the Legislature, I cannot say 
 that my expectations from it are great. Granted that 
 it does what its promoters aim at doing, that is, obli- 
 terates all the more obnoxious features of what is 
 called (somewhat vaguely) Eitualistic worship, without 
 depriving of their preferments the clergy called 
 Eitualists, or driving them into secession, or even 
 into lay-communion, (and this is the best result the 
 most sanguine can hope for from it,) how little will it 
 have effected ! No law can touch the more important 
 practices which bear upon Eucharistic doctrine; no 
 parliamentary enactment can prevent the attendance of 
 non-communicants (if so minded) at the whole Office ; 
 or force men to consider Fasting Communion or previous 
 Auricular Confession as not obligatory on their con- 
 sciences. I^or does it seem likely that even Mr. Eussell 
 Gurney, with the whole House of Commons at his back, 
 could (in the doctrinal Bill which he has pledged 
 himself to introduce) inhibit the clergy from urging, if 
 so minded, these practices upon the people; since 
 (notwithstanding what is advanced against them in 
 these pages) the Book of Common Prayer cannot be 
 said explicitly to forbid them.
 
 X Preface 
 
 Eut is it likely that the new Act will be carried into 
 operation without the loss of some considerable men, 
 whose learning and devotion we shall bewail when we 
 are .bereaved of it % It may be so. I will only say, 
 " Faxit Deus ! " For myself I have no great faith 
 (neither, I think, have you) in the policy of driving 
 people out. Depletion of course may be — is occasion- 
 ally — a necessary process ; but it is never a strength- 
 ening one. We have often speculated together as to 
 whether John Henry JN'ewman might not have been 
 saved to the English Church, if he had met with more 
 sympathy and consideration from our then rulers, in- 
 stead of being fulminated at in almost every Bishop's 
 charge, and made to feel in the very depths of his 
 sensitive and susceptible soul the hue and cry raised 
 against him by a coarse and somewhat unenlightened 
 Public Opinion. Our Eitualist brethren do not indeed 
 represent either Dr. !N"ewman's extraordinary mental 
 powers, or (possibly) his theological sentiments (may 
 it not be a question whether this so-called modem 
 Ritualism is a development of the movement set on 
 foot by him and Mr. Froude, or an independent out- 
 burst of kindred but historically unconnected senti- 
 ment *?) but it is quite possible that, if the extrusion
 
 Preface xi 
 
 of Mm were a mistake, tlieir extrusion may be not 
 altogether so much a point gained as some would 
 have us believe. 
 
 In concluding this lengthy epistle, I must thank 
 you very heartily, my dear friend, for so kindly 
 allowing your name to appear in connexion with 
 these pages. I do not presume to suppose that you 
 will agree with everything advanced even in this 
 letter, much less in the body of the work ; but I do 
 know that for many a long year our views have 
 coincided in their main outline; and I have to acknow- 
 ledge your advice, given from time to time on difficult 
 questions of the day, and still more your affectionate 
 sympathy and warm appreciation of "Auld lang 
 syne," as one of the best blessings of my life. How 
 much more lively, as age advances, does our apprecia- 
 tion of early friendships become ! 
 
 Eelieve me to be, in earnest reciprocation of all 
 your kindness. 
 
 Ever affectionately yours, 
 
 E. MEYEICK GOULBTJEIT. 
 
 Pitlochry, August 14, 1874.
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 ON FASTING COMMUNION 
 
 ■EoM. xiv. 3 
 
 PAGE 
 
 " Let not Mm that eateth despise Jiim that eateth not ; and 
 let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth : for 
 God hath received him " 1 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 ON NON-COMMUNICATING ATTENDANCE ' 
 
 ExoD. xvi. 18-20 
 
 " They gathered every mail according to his eating. And 
 Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning. 
 Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; hut 
 some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred 
 worms, and stank : and Moses was wroth with them " . 23 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 AURICULAK CONFESSION 
 
 2 Kings iv. 23 
 
 '* Wherefore wilt thou go to him to-day ? it is neither new 
 
 moon, nor sabbath " ... 42
 
 XIV Contents 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF SACRIFICE 
 
 Mal. i. 7 
 
 PAGB 
 
 Ye offer polluted tread upon mine altar ; and ye say, 
 Wherein have we polluted thee ? In that ye say, The 
 table of the Lord is contemptible " 72 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 the eucharistic sacrifice the christian peace-offering 
 for thanksgiving 
 
 Numb. x. 10 
 
 *' Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn daySj 
 and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with 
 the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacri- 
 fices of your peace offerings ; that they may be to you for 
 a memorial before your God : I am the Lord your God " 91

 
 The Author desires to acknowledge his heavy- 
 obligations (more or less referred to in the footnotes) 
 in Chapter I. to a Pamplilet entitled " Fasting Com- 
 munion : how binding in England by the Canons. 
 By the Eev. HoUing worth TuUy Kingdon, M.A. 
 Oxford and London: James Parker & Co. 1873;" 
 in Chapter II. to the Eeverend W. E. Scudamore's 
 " Notitia Eucharistica," probably the most learned 
 work on the Eucharistic Office hitherto published ; 
 and in Chapters lY. and Y. to the Eeverend Andrew 
 Jukes's " Law of the Offerings," from which his view 
 of the typical significance of the Levitical Offerings 
 is in the main borrowed, as also to the admirable papers 
 of Mr.* Le Mesurier and the late Dr. Biber in Part xii. 
 of "Anglo-Catholic Principles Yindicated." (Parker 
 & Co. 1871 to 1874.)
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 ON FASTING COMMUNION 
 
 ** Jitt not l^im tl&at eatet^ oc^pissie Ibim t^at eatctl^ not, ano 
 let not l^im iu^tc^ catetlb not juBffe Ijim t!)at catetlb : for 
 ©05 l()att) rccetuet t)im/'— Rom. xiv. 3 
 
 THE writer of these pages feels that he cannot 
 respond to the call for a new edition of his 
 " Office of the Holy Communion/* without at all 
 events attempting to adapt his work to the state of 
 recent controversy on the subject. While he shrinks 
 from putting forward his opinions, when they are 
 uncalled for, it seems as if he had no right to 
 withhold them, when an opportunity, not of his 
 own procuring, seems to challenge the expression 
 of them. To put forth a new edition of a work 
 (however humble its pretensions) on the English 
 Communion Office, without any explicit notice 
 of the beliefs and practices which are growing 
 up amongst us in connexion with the Eucharist, 
 and finding a ready acceptance with many devout 
 minds, seems to him to be in itself an act of 
 moral cowardice, and a withholding from his 
 readers of that guidance which, as readers, they 
 have some right to exj^ect from him. He feels 
 A
 
 On Fasting Commmiion 
 
 moreover tliat all questions of this kind are of 
 deepest interest and importance. In a most 
 instructive and valuable paper ^ on the subject, 
 written shortly before his death, Dr. Biber has 
 shown that " our spiritual life and communion in 
 Christ, by the power of His resurrection, in the 
 Sacrament of His last Supper, is the true bond 
 of Christian Unity, — the true 'Eirenicon.'" If 
 this be so, what a surpassing interest must attach 
 to the doctrine of the Eucharist, and to those 
 practices in connection with it, which are not 
 purely ceremonial or ritual, but (like the practices 
 to be commented upon in this and the following 
 Chapter) carry doctrine with them, and are its 
 outward exponents ! May it not indeed be said 
 generally, without exaggerating the importance 
 of the subject, that the doctrine of the Eucharist 
 which any man holds, is very much the key of 
 his theological position ? The profound Hooker 
 begins his consideration of the Sacraments by 
 a disquisition on the two natures and One Person 
 of the Son of God, — a clear indication this, that, 
 in the mind of that great thinker, these sacred 
 symbols were not (as some with the characteristic 
 shallowness of our time conceive of them) mere 
 appendages and adjuncts of Christianity, but had 
 their roots grappled into its most fundamental 
 
 1 In a Serial called " Anglo -Catholic Principles Vindicated, " 
 Part xii., Treatise iii. (1871 to 1874. Oxford and London : 
 James Parker & Co.)
 
 On Fastmg Communion 
 
 doctrines. This being the case, we cannot be too 
 jealous of the purity and integrity of Eucharistic 
 doctrine. And a very evident corollary follows. 
 We cannot be too jealous of the purity and integ- 
 rity of Eucharistic practice. Devotional habits 
 which seem on the surface plausible and attractive, 
 and which are doubtless adopted with the view 
 of doing reverence to Christ's ordinance, and 
 securing a higher estimation of it, may yet have 
 the seeds of corruption latent within them, and 
 be fraught with danger. So the writer believes 
 it to be with the two practices commented upon 
 in this and the two following Chapters. They are 
 practices known by him to be already widely 
 prevalent, and which it is sought by the warmer 
 advocates of them to erect into universal rules of 
 devotion. But whether he regards the grounds 
 on which they are rested, or the results to which 
 they may be expected to lead, he cannot but view 
 them with serious alarm. Let it be remembered 
 that the more precious any gift of Christ is, the 
 more certain it is (such is the evil in the heart of 
 man, and such is the jealousy of our choicest 
 treasures which the Devil shows) to be depraved, 
 or at least misused. It is matter of history that 
 this has been the case with the holy Eucharist. 
 This Sacrament, Christ's best and holiest legacy 
 to His Church, at once the epitome of the Gospel, 
 and the. means of applying its best .blessings to 
 our souls, has been erected by the doctrine of
 
 On Fasting Communion 
 
 Transubstantiation into an object of idolatrous 
 worship; one of its chief features has been 
 profanely struck out of it by the withholding of 
 the Cup from the laity, and the validity of the 
 ordinance has been thereby (if we cannot say, 
 annulled, yet) seriously imperilled ; and the whole 
 ordinance has been, by these deviations from true 
 doctrine and correct practice, unspiritualized, 
 materialized, carnalized, sensualized. Surely we 
 ought to profit by the experience of the Church. 
 The human mind having already in times past 
 gone so far astray on this great subject, we should 
 be very watchful over our minds for the future, 
 lest any teaching should insinuate itself into them 
 out of harmony with that of holy Scripture and 
 the Primitive Church. Such teaching should be 
 resisted in its earliest approaches ; for we may be 
 very sure that, however specious and plausible it 
 may be, it cannot fail to be mischievous. 
 
 The subject to which we propose to devote the 
 present Chapter, is that of Fasting Communion, — 
 the practice, adopted rigorously and strictly in the 
 Eoman Church, and rapidly creeping into our own, 
 of abstaining from all food, solid and liquid, before 
 our reception of the Sacrament. It is not how- 
 ever against the practice itself, but against the 
 erection of it into a law of conscience, obligatory 
 upon Christians, and indispensable to profitable 
 reception, that we would enter our protest. 
 
 As a voluntary act of devotion on the part of
 
 On Fasting Communion 
 
 individuals, who may find themselves quite cap- 
 able of it in point of bodily strength, and may 
 really feel that entire previous abstinence tends 
 to make the mind more unclouded and calm than 
 it can be after the reception of food, no right- 
 minded and unprejudiced person can entertain any 
 objection to it. Let such persons by all means be 
 allowed and encouraged to do that which their 
 own experience finds to be most edifying to them- 
 selves. Nay, I go further. I would say, Let the 
 feelings and wishes of such persons be consulted 
 in the arrangement of our Services. As very few 
 constitutions indeed can without inconvenience 
 and distress go without some slight refection until 
 mid-day, let there be in our Churches early Com- 
 munions for the accommodation of such persons 
 as I have described, as well as because others, 
 who set no particular value on the mere bodily 
 abstinence, find their minds fresher and less 
 worn at an early than at a late Communion. 
 God forbid that, in direct violation of what His 
 Apostle has taught us, we should despise or 
 look down on any fellow Christian, who may findSeeRom. 
 edification to himself in the observance of a ' ' ' 
 restriction, which does not approve itself in at all 
 the same way to our minds. Only then, as I will 
 be careful not to "despise" a Christian brother 
 — nay, as I will seek to please him for his good See Eom. 
 to edification, — so, on the other hand, I will 
 not allow him to "judge" me, nor indeed in a
 
 Oil Fasting Q 
 
 oinnnunoji 
 
 certain sense to "judge" himself. He must not 
 
 make a law of conscience of his rule, either for 
 
 me or for any one else. He must not teach 
 
 See St. for doctrines the commandments of men, and 
 
 J\Jatt. XV. ' 
 
 ?' ^",^ ^- ^^i^^'^by hazard the depraving and nullifying 
 7/" "of God's commandments. He must not "add 
 See Rev. mito the words of the book of this prophecy" 
 19. ' ' at the peril of having the plagues that are written 
 in this book added unto him. And this is what, 
 if hearsay may be trusted, corroborated as it is 
 by facts which have come to the actual knowledge 
 of many of us, is at present going on in our Com- 
 munion. Church people are being taught in some 
 quarters by their ordained pastors that it is a 
 deadly sin to communicate after the reception of 
 food, however slight, — that the elements of the 
 holy Supper must be the first food which j)asses 
 the lips of a day, or that they cannot lawfully be 
 partaken of at all. The writer is in possession of 
 good evidence that in some quarters this teaching- 
 is so thoroughly imbibed that it already operates 
 (as it is sure to operate sooner or later) to a disuse 
 of the Sacrament. Persons who have imbibed this 
 teaching, and at the same time do not find them- 
 selves strong enough to observe the rule imposed 
 upon their consciences, prefer absenting themselves 
 altogether from the Communion, and flying in the 
 face of our Lord's plain command, "Do this in 
 remembrance of nie," to violating a restriction 
 which has, if I may so say, no authority whatever
 
 On Fasting Communion 
 
 in its favour, either in holy Scripture, or in 
 Eeason, or in the standards of our own Church. 
 
 For what authority has this restriction, when 
 regarded not as a voluntary compliance wdth a 
 custom found by individuals to be edifying, but as 
 a law of conscience ? 
 
 I. It will be admitted that not a vestige of any 
 warrant for it is to be found in holy Scripture ; 
 pay, that what we do find there bearing on the 
 subject looks in a totally different direction. The 
 earliest, and infinitely the most solemn, of all cele- 
 brations took place when the communicants could 
 not have been fasting; for our Lord instituted 
 the Eucharist in the late afternoon,^ and in the 
 course of the Paschal Supper. It is true that the 
 custom which obtained in the Apostolic Church 
 of celebrating the Communion as part of a 
 supper, and in connexion with an ordinary meal, 
 was abrogated by St. Paul in the Corinthian See i 
 
 ° '^ , . , T Cor. xi. 
 
 Church as having led to irreverent abuses 21,33.34. 
 and even to excesses. The Sacrament was disen- 
 tangled by his inspired authority from the ordinary 
 supper, which had been the swaddling-clothes of 
 its infancy, and made to stand alone. The object 
 of thus disentangling it was that the holy Sacra- 
 ment might be treated with greater reverence and 
 devotion than heretofore. But in prescribing this 
 greater reverence, the Apostle does not drop a 
 
 2 ""VVhen the even was come," St. Matt. xxvi. 20 ; "in the 
 evening," St. Mark xiv. 17.
 
 8 On Fastmg Communion 
 
 single word from which, it could be inferred that 
 previous fasting at home is the way in which it 
 is to be shown. Eather he implies that home is 
 the right place for taking a meal, if we need or 
 wish to take one. Put in common words, his rule 
 is ; "I forbid your making the Supper of the Lord 
 a meal. If you really need a meal, you can take it 
 in the house, before you come to Church." "What ! 
 1 Cor. have ye not houses to eat and to drink in ?" . . . 
 
 xi 22 34 
 
 * ' " If any man hunger, let him eat at home." 
 
 II. The Church of England, as a distinct Com- 
 munion, the Church from which we received our 
 Baptism and grafting into Christ, is absolutely 
 silent on the subject. In neither the Communion 
 Service, nor the Thirty-nine Articles, nor the 
 Canons, is there a single vestige of this restriction, 
 which is pretended to be so essential to a reverent 
 participation, that the non-observance puts a com- 
 municant out of a state of grace (for such is 
 the effect of mortal sin). Is not this rather start- 
 ling? If Fastino: Communion be of such vital 
 importance, as some pretend, would not our 
 Prayer Books have told us so ? Of the Constitu- 
 tions and Canons of the Church of England, which 
 might reasonably be pleaded, not as constituting an 
 obligation for the lay members of our Communion, 
 but as showing the mind of the Church of Euglaijd 
 on subjects of controversy, there are nine ^ which 
 deal with points of discipline in connexion with 
 
 3 From XX. to XXVIII., both inclusive.
 
 On Fasting Commtmion 
 
 the Holy Communion ; but in no one of them is 
 there the slightest allusion to any rule of fasting 
 previously to, and as qualifying for, the Sacra- 
 ment. Among the Homilies is one in two parts, 
 entitled " Of the worthy receiving and reverent 
 esteeming of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood 
 of Christ," where, if previous fasting had been 
 deemed necessary either for the worthy reception 
 or reverent estimation of the Sacrament, we might 
 surely expect to find it recommended ; but not so 
 much as a hint is dropped upon the subject. So 
 that, if any authority is sought for fasting Com- 
 munion, imposed as a law of conscience, it must 
 be sought outside the Scriptures and outside the 
 authorized standards of the English Church, nor 
 can it be said (to adopt a phrase from the Service 
 for the Ordering of Priests) to be any part of " the 
 Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, 
 and as this Church and Eealm hath received the 
 same." 
 
 I am not ignorant that there are certain Canons 
 and Constitutions of foreign ^ Churches, and even of 
 our^ own Church before the Preformation, which 
 
 ^ Mr. Kingdon in his pamphlet "Fasting Communion: how 
 binding in England by the Canons" (Parker & Co. 1873), pp. 
 20, 21, gives a list of them from Mr. Blunt's "Theological 
 Dictionary." They are all local, as he points out, and "cannot 
 be supposed to bind beyond their own limits." The earliest of 
 them is the Third Council of Carthage, a.d. 397. 
 
 ° Mr. Kingdon refers to them, p. 23, and argues that they 
 have been voided by long disuser.
 
 lo On Fasting Communion 
 
 made fasting Communion obligatory, or imposed 
 penance for " partaking of the Housel after eating." 
 But among the acts of the six General Councils (to 
 which the Statute of 1 Eliz. makes appeal as 
 criteria in judgments of heresy, and the last of 
 which was held as late as the latter half of the 
 seventh century) no rule on the subject was pro- 
 mulgated. But even supposing for argument's 
 sake that it had been so, it might suffice to remark 
 (even for those who would regard the decrees of a 
 really CKcumenical Council with great veneration) 
 that the 21st Article of our Church, to which 
 all her Ministers have subscribed, asserts that 
 " General Councils (forasmuch as they be an 
 assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with , 
 the Spirit and Word of God,) may err, and some- 
 times have erred, even in things pertaining unto 
 God. Wherefore things ordained by them as 
 necessary to salvation " (and an observance, which 
 cannot be violated without mortal sin, must be 
 necessary to salvation) " have neither strength nor 
 authority, unless it may be declared that they be 
 taken out of holy Scripture." 
 
 And if to any it should seem that this Article 
 attaches less weight than might have been expected 
 to the decrees of General Councils, they may be 
 reminded that, in dictatincj to the Churches of 
 Eome and Corinth the line Avhich they were to 
 take in reference to the great casuistical question 
 of those days, the partaking of meats offered in
 
 On Fasting Co^mmmion 1 1 
 
 sacrifice to idols, the inspired Apostle St. Paul 
 does not,*5 in a disciplinary matter of this kind, 
 impose upon them arbitrarily as the law of their 
 conscience the decree on that subject, which had 
 been made in his own presence by the first of all 
 councils, the Council of Jerusalem (as we might 
 have expected him to do), but argues and settles 
 the question chiefly on the ground of charity, urg- 
 ing upon those to whom he writes that, although 
 there ^ was in truth nothing unclean of itself, and 
 therefore the scruple about eating meats offered in 
 sacrifice to idols was a false and groundless scruple, 
 still it was to be respected in those weak brethren 
 who entertained it, and who had a claim to con- 
 sideration on the ground of their entertaining it 
 conscientiously. As for Canons of Councils later 
 than the four first centuries, it would be very easy 
 
 ^ This is Mr. Kingdon's argument (p. 7). Most interesting 
 and valuable are his remarks on the different mode in which St. 
 Paul dealt with questions of faith and questions of discipline ; 
 and his opinion will carry with it all the more weight, because 
 he stoutly maintains the Church's power to make rules, obli- 
 gatory upon the conscience, for the well-being and guidance of 
 her members. This power he holds to be conferred by the 
 words, " Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth," &c.; and it forms 
 the point of departure for his whole argument (p. 1). 
 
 '' See Eomans xiv,, and 1 Cor. x. 14 to the end. According 
 to the usually received chronology, the Council of Jerusalem 
 was held a.d. 53 ; the First Epistle to the Corinthians written 
 A.D. 59 ; the Epistle to the Romans, a.d. 60. When therefore 
 St. Paul wrote these Epistles, six or seven years had elapsed 
 since the decree of the Council was made. Yet in his mode of 
 resolving the question he makes no reference to it.
 
 1 2 On Fasting Communion 
 
 to find several of them forbidding many things 
 which we know to be either Scriptural and right, 
 or else indifferent, — forbidding,^ for example, the 
 administration of the Cup to the laity, the marriage 
 of priests, or even such trifles as the wearing of 
 beards by the clergy. 
 
 I am not ignorant that particular fathers and 
 doctors of the Church have spoken in such a 
 manner as to show that in their times fasting 
 Communion was the rule of the Church, from 
 which it was considered profane to depart; that 
 Chrysostom denies^ in language almost intem- 
 
 ^ This was done by the Council of Constance (a.d. 1415); 
 which prescribed at the same time (one might almost say, in 
 the same breath) Fasting Communion. Mr. Kingdon shows, 
 however, (perhaps with a somewhat superfluous elaboration of 
 the subject) that the prescription, after all, was only an ohiter 
 dictum. His Section on the Council of Constance (pp. 24-31) 
 will abundantly repay perusal. 
 
 * Chrysost. 0pp. Tom. iii. p. 668, D. E. In the passage 
 referred to Chrysostom writes in exile to another exiled bishop, 
 Cyriacus ; and it is clear that some of his strong (and almost 
 passionate) language is due to the smart which he felt at his ill- 
 treatment by the Empress Eudoxia and the Alexandrian Patri- 
 arch. Mr. Kingdon points out that something of the edge is 
 taken off" from his language by his reference to St. Paul's having 
 administered Baptism to the gaoler's family after they had 
 supped. No one would now-a-days maintain that there is any 
 obligation to fast before, Baptism. Yet Chrysostom seems 
 to have thought the administering Baptism to people not 
 fasting, was at least as shocking as the communicating people 
 juerd TO (^ayelv avrovs ("after they had eaten"). His repudiation 
 of the latter charge runs thus ; "They vamped up many charges 
 against me, and assert that I communicated certain persons 
 after they had eaten. If indeed I did so, may my name be
 
 On Fasting Communion 13 
 
 perate an accusation that lie had communicated 
 some persons who were not fasting, though the 
 strength of this language is considerably modified, 
 when in the context he invites his accusers to 
 censure our Lord Himself for giving the Commun- 
 ion to His Apostles after supper; and that our 
 own Jeremy Taylor, in his Ductor Duhitantiumj 
 
 blotted out of the roll of the bishops, and not be written in the 
 roll of the orthodox faith ; for, lo, if I did any such thing, 
 Christ will cast me away out of his kingdom." From Chrysos- 
 tom's "Homily before going into exile" Mr. Kingdon quotes 
 another passage, in which he defends himself in a similar pas- 
 sionate strain against the distinct charge of having administered 
 Baptism when he himself was not fasting. Here again he 
 adduces the case of St. Paul and the gaoler ; — not perhaps quite 
 as much to the point as when the same case was adduced to 
 defend communicating persons not fasting ; for we can hardly 
 suppose Paul and Silas to have had supper in the prison, though 
 the gaoler and his family probably supped as usual. But of 
 course the rule of Fasting Communion, if it binds communicants, 
 must a fortiori be obligatory on the celebrant. Chrysostom's 
 language is thoroughly discussed and disposed of by Mr. King- 
 don (p. 68 et sequent. ). 
 
 Probably the strongest Patristic passage in favour of Fasting 
 Communion (stronger much than the passage of Chrysostom, 
 whose language bears traces of irritation) is that in Augustine's 
 letter to Januarius (Ep. liv. Tom. ii. Col. 126, sec. 8, F. G. 
 Parisiis. 1689), and which in fairness should be quoted. " It is 
 very evident that when the disciples first received the Body and 
 Blood of the Lord, they did not receive it fasting. Are we 
 therefore on that account to find fault with the universal Church 
 because it is always received by persons fasting ? For it pleased 
 the Holy Ghost, for the honour of so great a Sacrament, that 
 the body of the Lord should enter into the mouth of a Christian 
 h*'f ore other meats ; for it is on that account that this custom is 
 observed throughout the whole world.'' The words even of St.
 
 14 On Fasting Communion 
 
 speaks ^^ of its being a Catholic custom to receive 
 fasting, which custom he that despises " gives 
 nothing but the testimony of an evil mind,'' 
 though he expressly adds that it is not a duty 
 commanded by God, and admits also that there 
 may in certain cases be a necessity of eating before 
 Communion. We need not " despise " the custom 
 itself, much less the persons who from a sentiment 
 
 Augustine Avill hardly be thought to carry as much weight as 
 the decree of the First Council of Jerusalem, which ran in the 
 formulary, part of which he adopts ; "ESo^e rd^ ayiu) Uveij/xaTL 
 Kal ijfuv ("It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us "). Yet 
 the abstaining from blood, and from things strangled, which 
 were prescribed by this decree, is hardly reckoned a law of con- 
 science among Christians of the present day. See, however, 
 how Mr. Kingdon deals with the passage (pp. x. 19 and 68). 
 
 ^^ Book iii., Chap, iv., Rule xv. 1. *'It is a Catholick 
 custom, that they who receiA^e the Holy Communion, should 
 receive it fasting. This is not a duty commanded by God : but 
 unless it be necessary to eat, he that despises this custom gives 
 nothing but the testimony of an evil mind." 
 
 For this reference also I am indebted to Mr. Kingdon ; who 
 however omits to observe that in an earlier section of the Ductor 
 Duhitantium (Book iii.. Chap, iv., Eule xii. 7), the author 
 puts fasting Communion on a level with the character of the 
 Bread used, the mixed Chalice, and the exact form of words 
 (precatory or recitative) used in Consecration, as a matter 
 wherein nothing is ruled either by Scripture or "sufficient 
 tradition." "That the Lord's Supper is sacredly and with 
 reverence to be received is taught us by the Apostles : but 
 whether this reverence ought to be expressed by taking it virgine 
 salivd, fasting, or not fasting, the Apostles left the Churches to 
 their choice.'" On the first quoted passage, it may be observed 
 that if persons find they cannot communicate fasting without a 
 distracting headache or faintness, it is "necessary" for them to 
 receive food previously.
 
 On Fasting Communion 1 5 
 
 of devotion think fit to observe it, and find the 
 observance edifying. But the opinions of ever so 
 many doctors and fathers cannot make a canon of 
 discipline, or in any sense bind the consciences of 
 the faithful ; — we may respect the opinion, and 
 those who hold by it, wdthout feeling bound to 
 surrender our conscience into their hands. 
 
 It is somewhat noticeable that, at the very time 
 when some ecclesiastics in our Church are seek- 
 ing to re-establish fasting Communion, and insist- 
 ing upon its observance, others of an opposite 
 school are introducing into their Churches Evening 
 celebrations, not indeed as at all essential or 
 obligatory, but as the only way, in their view, 
 of providing opportunities of communicating for 
 certain classes, whose engagements do not admit 
 of attendance in the forenoon. Perhaps this is 
 one of the numerous instances, in which one 
 extreme of sentiment and practice in the Church 
 begets another, — in which the pendulum of 
 thought, having swung in one direction, not only 
 comes back again to the perpendicular position, 
 but swings equally far in the direction opposite. 
 I must be doubly cautious what I say on this 
 subject of Evening Communions, as having person- 
 ally and for myself a strong instinct against them, 
 which can hardly, I fear, be justified on grounds 
 of reason. It must be admitted that no exception 
 whatever can be taken against Evening Commun- 
 ion, either from the holy Scriptures, or from the
 
 1 6 On Fasting Communion 
 
 Book of Common Prayer, or from the Constitutions 
 and Canons of the Church of England. Nothing, 
 as I believe, can be alleged against them but a 
 very ancient and prevailing custom of the Church/^ 
 such as is quoted in favour of fasting Communion, 
 worthy of respect, no doubt, as being very ancient 
 and prevailing, but by no means to be erected 
 into a law of conscience, and capable in its very 
 nature of modification or alteration, to meet new 
 circumstances of the Church and new phases of 
 Society. And if I personally happen to feel (as I 
 do, and many with me) that for myself Commun- 
 ion late in the evening, when the wear and worry 
 of the day has sensibly told upon the freshness 
 of my mind, is unedifying, I Avill not on any 
 account make my conscience a law for my brother's, 
 but will fully believe that he may and does find 
 edification in a different view of the subject, or 
 at all events that he thinks (surely a good and 
 noble sentiment) that his own private edification 
 is to be postponed to that of his flock. Only then, 
 
 ^^ The Eev. "W. E. Scudamore, in his very valuable and learned 
 treatise, ''Notitia Eucharistica " (Rivingtons, 1872), tells us 
 (p. 34) that nine o'clock a.m. is the Canonical hour for the 
 Celebration. I have somewhere seen an old Canon, though I 
 cannot now lay my hand upon it, which strictly forbids 
 (what now finds so much favour) the Celebration of the Com- 
 munion before Matins. The fact is that these and other points 
 of discipline vary, and must vary, with the varying exigencies 
 of social life. There must be a plastic power in the Church, by 
 which discipline may be adjusted to the habits and wants of 
 those who are subject to it.
 
 On Fasting Communion 1 7 
 
 if I entirely abstain from "judging" liim, I shall 
 expect that, in that reciprocity of charity which 
 the Apostle enjoins, he shall abstain from " despis- 
 ing" me, and not call me party-names, or think 
 me narrow and scrupulous, because his novel 
 practice does not approve itself to my feelings. 
 
 And now to sum up this argument by some 
 definite practical advice to the reader on the 
 subject which has been considered. 
 
 How shall we direct our course in this matter ? 
 
 The great point to be borne in mind throughout, 
 • — the great principle which should pervade and 
 regulate our action, — is no doubt reverence for 
 the Lord's ordinance. St. Paul in his eleventh 
 to the Corinthians enjoins this reverence upon 
 those to whom he writes, and places his ban upon 
 that profane treatment of the holy Supper, which 
 had drawn down God's judgments upon the 
 Corinthian Church in the shape of sickness and 
 death. But then it is very necessary to observe, 
 — what the whole history both of the Jewish and 
 Christian Churches teaches, — that there is such a 
 thing as false reverence ; and that false reverence, 
 like false modesty, is as antagonistic as possible to 
 the true. The Jews are guilty of false reverence, 
 when, because they are forbidden to take the name 
 of God in vain, they refuse to take it up into 
 their lips at all, and, when the sacred Name of 
 Jehovah occurs in reading the Hebrew Bible, substi-
 
 i8 On Fasting Communion 
 
 tute for it some lower equivalent, Adonai or Elohim. 
 If a man should have his Bible bound in cloth of 
 gold, with jewelled bosses at the corner, and should 
 assign it the most honourable position in his library, 
 and should carefully dust it every day and then 
 replace it, but never take it down to open and read 
 it, this w^ould not be true but false reverence. God 
 gives us the Bible to be read, — to be read upon 
 our knees with prayers and tears, — to be w^orked 
 into our minds by constant reading, and then to 
 be acted out in our lives; and we cannot show 
 greater real reverence to His holy Word than by 
 letting our copy of it be marked wdth our pencil 
 for easier reference, and worn in its leaves with 
 constant attrition of devout fingers. And in like 
 manner our Lord gives us the holy Supper to be 
 used, that we may receive it, and receive it very 
 often, not that we may stand at a distance from 
 it in misdirected awe and trembling, crying out, 
 '* What an awful thing it is ! and what a precious 
 thing it is ! and what a burning bush it is ! and 
 what a very Holy of holies it is ! " (all which is 
 true, no doubt, yet truth which must not be 
 misapplied) but that we should " take and eat this 
 in remembrance of Him," and, eating and drinking, 
 should have our souls strengthened and refreshed 
 " by the Body and Blood of Christ, as our bodies 
 are by the Bread and Wine." Be quite sure of 
 this, then, that any sentiment or practice which 
 has a tendency to lessen the frequency of Com-
 
 On Fasti7ig Communion 19 
 
 rnunion, and to deprive the Lord's Table (I do not 
 say of attendants, but) of communicants, whether 
 it be the ignorant superstition of a poor person, 
 out of which the clergyman tries to reason him, 
 or the more refined and cultivated superstition 
 of the educated, which loves to erect barriers 
 round the ordinance, which the Lord hath not 
 erected, and to say, " Touch not, taste not, handle 
 not," where He hath thrown open to us the tree 
 of life freely, — all this equally looks and leads in 
 a wrong direction. Our whole efforts should be 
 directed to a frequent use of the Lord's Supper, 
 with the greatest reverence and devotion, in the 
 interests of our own spiritual life. — But how shall 
 we show the greatest reverence and devotion ? It 
 is to be remembered that reverence, though it 
 does not lack its external symptoms, yet has its 
 seat in the heart and mind, and that the qualifica- 
 tions necessary to make the Lord's Supper avail- 
 able are qualifications of the heart and mind, — 
 Eepentance, Faith, and Love. Above all things, 
 it is necessary that we should pray earnestly, and 
 from the very depths of our heart, in communi- 
 cating; and prayer is a mental act. Then let 
 our object be to have our mind in such a frame 
 as may facilitate prayer and other mental exercises, 
 — to have it calm, quiet, fresh, and as vigorous 
 as may be. Very many people will feel that this 
 frame of mind is most readily attained in the 
 early morning, when the powers are newly
 
 20 On Fasting Commnnion 
 
 recruited by rest, when the temptations, worries, 
 and disquietudes of the day have not yet opened 
 fire upon them, and before they have looked at 
 their letters, those daily recurring pests of a high 
 civilisation. Such persons will prefer communi- 
 cating, wherever they can do so, in the morning. 
 Let them do so by all means, and let their 
 convenience and wishes be consulted; only let 
 them not presume to "judge" others who prefer 
 a later and longer celebration, perhaps from 
 thinking that Morning Prayer and Litany before- 
 hand are (as indeed they are) an excellent 
 preparative of the mind. — As for the body, that 
 should surely be treated in whatever way is found 
 by experience to be most conducive to the fresh- 
 ness and vigour of the mind. And this will vary 
 with different people. It m.ay be quite conceived 
 that there are many, who not only find themselves 
 quite able to support total abstinence before an 
 early celebration, but find their minds to be in 
 this manner more nimble, and less impeded in 
 tlieir free action. With others, on the other hand, 
 and these perhaps the greater number, the mind 
 will be found to be more calm, livelier, and 
 better suited to the work before it after a slight 
 refection, than when all food has been denied to 
 the body. In that case, let there not be one 
 moment's hesitation as to taking food previously. 
 Surely the mind is not to be hindered in its work 
 by . laying the body under austere conditions,
 
 On Fasting Communion 2 r 
 
 which God has nowhere imposed. The body 
 should be viewed in the matter as entirely instru- 
 mental and ancillary. This is not the place to 
 enter into an historical investigation ; but it may 
 be gravely questioned whether the previous 
 fasting, which was made such a point of in the 
 mediaeval Church, had not reference to a state of 
 things long since passed away, — the practice of 
 heavy breakfasts,"^^ accompanied with large pota- 
 tions of wine and intoxicating liquids. Certainly 
 the present light breakfasts are of comparatively 
 modern date. 
 
 These counsels are commended to the reader, 
 that if they approve themselves to him, as in accord- 
 ance with Scripture, Eeason, and the teaching of 
 our own Church, he may adopt and act upon 
 them. While in the spirit of Christian liberty we 
 resent the imposition of any and every yoke upon 
 the neck of the disciples, which God and His 
 Church have not imposed, we believe that the 
 only successful mode of dealing with the question 
 before us, when not advocated as a Christian obli- 
 gation, but merely as a godly and ancient custom, 
 which may still be found profitable in many cases, 
 is the method which St. Paul applies to an earlier 
 
 ^2 See Mr. Kingdon's very pertinent remarks on this point 
 (pp. 38, 39, 43, 44, 98); and particularly his quotation from 
 Disraeli's "Curiosities of Literature" as to the period and the 
 effects of the introduction of tea, coffee, and chocolate as morn- 
 ing beverages (p. 85).
 
 22 071 Fastmg Communion 
 
 case of conscience. Let mutual respect, and con- 
 sideration, and love, be shown on both sides. Let 
 not those who find the stricter practice to be of 
 advantage to themselves, "judge" those who adopt 
 the laxer. Let not those who adopt the laxer 
 "despise" those who prefer abiding by the stricter. 
 Let each communicate in the manner which he 
 finds most profitable, without for a moment 
 presuming to censure those who prefer a different 
 manner. For " why dost thou judge thy brother ? 
 or why dost thou set at nought thy brother ? for 
 we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of 
 Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the 
 
 Rom. ' 
 
 xiv.^1^0, Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every 
 tongue shall confess to God. So then every one 
 of us shall give account of himself to God." 
 
 11.12.
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 ON NON-COMMUNICATING ATTENDANCE 
 
 " 'STfie^ gatlKreti ctierp matt accomiitg to ^fjs eating. 3[nlJ 
 ®o0c$ giaiti, iLct tto man kaie of it tfH tT)e morntnc?. 
 iBottolt^iEitanntnff tT;e^ liearfeencti not unto ^q^h, Imt 
 gome of t1)em kft of it until t^e morning, ann it lirco 
 toormiS, ann 0tanlfe: ann ^ogcgi toag IjorotI) lait^ tl^cm/' 
 — ExoD. xvi. i8, 19, 20 
 
 ¥E spoke in our last Chapter of Fasting Com- 
 munion. There is another practice con- 
 nected with the Eucharist, which has crept into 
 our Church of late, and at present prevails to a 
 great extent, which we cannot but regard with 
 serious alarm, as a departure from the true use of 
 the Sacrament, and as tending to corrupt and 
 undermine the true doctrine of it. This is the 
 practice of non-communicating attendance, that 
 is, remaining in the Church during the entire 
 celebration, as an inferior act of devotion having 
 a quasi-sacramental efficacy, without presenting 
 one's-self as a communicant. I say, as an inferior 
 act of devotion having a quasi-sacramental efficacy; 
 because, of course, if practised with other motives 
 and views, non-communicating attendance might 
 be quite harmless, perhaps in some cases desirable.
 
 24 Oil N on- communicating Attendance 
 
 It might very reasonably be thought that for 
 young people about to be confirmed, to witness 
 the celebration of the Lord's Supper once or twice, 
 before they are called upon to take part in it 
 themselves, might be advantageous and impres- 
 sive, might take off that gloss of novelty, which 
 is so apt to distract people in exercises of devo- 
 tion, and might help them to communicate, when 
 the time came for their doing so, more quietly 
 and calmly, and with less excitement. Again 
 there might arise a necessity (or what is next 
 door to a necessity) for the practice we are call- 
 ing in question. Children old enough to come 
 to Church with their parents, might yet be too 
 young to find their way home alone. Clergy who 
 have already communicated, and would find it 
 unedifying to repeat that action, and impossible 
 to do so with any freshness and liveliness of 
 devotional feeling, might yet be obliged to lend 
 their assistance at a second celebration, lest the 
 service should be unduly and inconveniently 
 prolonged. And I would add that in choral cele- 
 brations chorister boys might, in my judgment, 
 be properly enough kept through the whole Office, 
 on the ground of their function being a necessary 
 one, if only the service could be contracted within 
 such limits as not to weary and disgust the minds 
 of children; for unless this condition were secured, 
 it might be wiser and more charitable to the lambs 
 of the fold to dispense with the clioml celebration 
 
 1
 
 On No7t-co7nniunicatmg Attenda7tce 25 
 
 altogether. But all tliese cases, and others which 
 might be imagined, have a totally different colour 
 from that which non-communicating attendance 
 assumes, when adopted as a piece of devotion, and 
 as a normal practice of the spiritual life. Looked 
 at in this light, it has very strong attractions for 
 devout minds ; nor need we doubt, while most 
 solemnly and earnestly protesting against it, that 
 they who practise it do so under the belief that 
 they gain edilication from it. The idea that the 
 Lord Himself becomes, after and in virtue of the 
 consecration of the elements, externally present 
 in the Church, quite apart from His reception 
 by the penitent and believing communicant, and 
 quite independently of any action of the human 
 mind whereby His presence is recognised, — this 
 idea lays the mind under a certain spell, which is 
 found to make worship easier, and to excite a 
 sort of reverence, which seems to faint and flag, 
 as soon as Christ is thought of rather in connexion 
 with the minds of His people than with the 
 place in which they are gathered together. But 
 what if the idea be an effect of the imagina- 
 tion, and will not endure the scrutiny of holy 
 Scripture and reason ? and what if the reverence 
 founded upon it be a false and factitious reverence, 
 such as we gave some examples of in our last 
 Chapter ? 
 
 It ought certainly to make those who practise 
 non-communicating attendance very suspicious of
 
 26 On Non-communicating Attendance 
 
 the reverence engendered by it, that it does not 
 lead to the use of what God has offered; or rather, 
 that it does not lead to such use of it, as alone 
 God has prescribed and sanctioned. It was 
 pointed out in the last Chapter that it would be 
 false reverence, if a man were to bind his Bible 
 in a most costly manner, and give it the highest 
 place in his library, and keep it scrupulously free 
 from dust and soil, and yet never read it. And 
 why ? because the Bible is given us to be read. 
 Now there can be no manner of doubt that our 
 Lord gave His holy and precious Supper to be 
 received. The words of Institution enjoin recep- 
 tion in tlie first place, even before they specify 
 the character of the things received ; " Take, eat ; 
 
 this is my body Drink ye all of it ; for 
 
 this is my blood." If therefore a man makes of 
 this gift of Christ another use, never indicated by 
 the Giver, while declining that use which is 
 indicated, surely there is room for doubt whether 
 the devotional sentimeuts, which he excites in his 
 mind by this other use, are sound and good. Is 
 a man safe and right, however well-intentioned 
 he may be, if he persists in putting God's gifts 
 to uses for which it does not appear that God 
 intended them ? The manna, which was a type 
 of the holy Supper, or I should rather say of 
 Christ in the holy Supper, was given for the 
 nourishment of the people in their pilgrimage 
 through a barren land which vielded no sustenance
 
 On Non-communicating Attendance 27 
 
 for man. And the ordinance of the manna made 
 it imperative to nse it for sustenance. " They 
 gathered every man according to his eating. And 
 Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morn- 
 ing." And what was the consequence of violating 
 this precept ? The consequence was that what 
 was designed as nourishment, when treated other- 
 wise than as nourishment, became offensive. ** Not- 
 withstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; hut 
 some of them left of it until the morning, and it 
 bred worms, and stank : and " (for such misuse 
 of God's precious gift) " Moses was wroth with 
 them." I do not wish to indulge in fantastic 
 application of the typical parts of holy Scripture. 
 Yet I think that, without any undue and excessive 
 allegorizing, we may here find a lesson against 
 using God's gifts in a way and for an end for 
 which He has not appointed them to be used. 
 Gifts thus perverted from their right use become 
 a bane instead of a blessing. Be it remembered 
 that Idolatry had its beginning in such a perver- 
 sion. God gave the sun to shed light and warmth 
 throughout the universe, and the moon to yield 
 her placid silver light by night ; and the earliest 
 beginning of departure from. God was when men 
 began to detach these and other objects of nature 
 from the practical uses to which God designed 
 them to be put, and to contemplate them inde- 
 pendently both of their author and their end. 
 Thus contemplated, they became objects of re-
 
 2 8 On Noii-commtifii eating Attendance 
 
 ligious veneration, and did more to injure men 
 morally than to benefit them naturally. And a 
 fate somewhat similar has befallen the means of 
 grace, which are the ordinances of the spiritual 
 world, and especially the holy Communion, which 
 is the highest of them. Separated in men's 
 thoughts and ideas from its use as a means of 
 strengthening and refreshing the soul, the con- 
 secrated wafer has been turned into an idol and 
 worshipped. A priest lifts it in his hands above 
 a prostrate crowd of men and women, who fall 
 down and adore it. This dreadful corruption and 
 depravation of the Lord's ordinance is intimately 
 connected with the treating it devotionally in a 
 way which God has not prescribed — in short, with 
 non-communicating attendance. — Therefore ohsta 
 2')rriicipiis. Let not this practice, so closely con- 
 nected with the corruption of God's ordinance, 
 make further encroachments upon us. 
 
 But let us proceed to consider the practice some- 
 what more methodically. 
 
 1. And, first, let us observe what is the character- 
 istic and leading idea of the Sacrament of the Lord's 
 Supper. This characteristic idea, duly seized, will 
 serve to fence off many errors. We hear much talk 
 of the Eeal Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. 
 And beyond all question He is most really and 
 truly, though in no wise corporeally, present in the 
 holy Supper. It may be very much doubted, how- 
 ever, whether the Eeal Presence is the chief and
 
 On Noii-comimmicating A tte^idajice 2 9 
 most characteristic blessing of the ordinance. The See St. 
 
 Matt. 
 
 mere Presence of Christ is covenanted to the two or xviii,'i9, 
 three gathered together in His Name and for His 2^- 
 worship, even when there is no administration of 
 this highest ordinance. Union with Christ, which 
 of course involves, but at the same time goes far 
 beyond, the Presence of Christ, is the characteristic 
 feature of the Lord's Supper. The whole symbolism 
 of the ordinance teaches us this. As the bread and 
 wine passes into the living frame of the recipient, 
 and becomes by the natural process of digestion 
 assimilated to that frame, so, wherever there is in 
 the communicant repentance and faith, the Body 
 and Blood of Christ are received spiritually, — 
 the great difference between the natural and 
 spiritual process being this, that in the first 
 the food becomes assimilated to, and closely in- 
 corporated with, the frame which receives it, in 
 the other the spiritual and moral frame becomes 
 assimilated to the nourishment of which it par- 
 takes, which nourishment is Christ. Our Lord 
 foresaw the Eucharist, and spoke anticipatively of 
 its effects, when He said : " Verily, verily, I say st. John 
 unto you. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son ^^- ^^' 
 of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in 
 you." Observe, "Except ye eat the flesh and 
 drinh the blood,"— except the human nature, 
 which He assumed in His Incarnation, and which 
 in His death was sundered into its two component 
 elements, flesh, and blood which is the life thereof,
 
 30 On N on- communicating Attendance 
 
 is transfused into your souls by spiritual mandu- 
 cation, and thus made the means of quickening 
 the soul, and imparting to it true vigour, and 
 drawing it up into union with the Lord Himself, 
 " ye have no life in you." How, let me just ask, 
 does non-communicating attendance look, when 
 placed side by side with such a text as this, 
 *' Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood " ? — 
 When we seize the true idea of the ordinance, as 
 conveying not so much the Presence of Christ 
 (although that it does subordinately) as union 
 with Christ, do we not at once perceive that non- 
 communicating attendance is out of harmony 
 with it ? For in order to union with Christ in the 
 Supper, there must be reception. Without actual 
 reception, there is no more possibility of union 
 with Christ in the Supper, than there is of an 
 assimilation between our bodies and the elements 
 of bread and wine. 
 
 2. But now to come to the direct teaching of 
 holy Scripture on the subject. I have already 
 noticed the circumstance that, in the words of 
 Institution, the precept to partake of the Sacra- 
 ment takes precedence of the description of its 
 nature, as if it were only in connexion with the 
 recipient that the Bread and Wine become the 
 Body and Blood of Christ, — as if He had said, 
 " Pteceive it, and [in the reception] it shall become 
 to you my body and my blood." But take these 
 striking observations on the same circumstance
 
 On Non-communicating Attendance 3 1 
 
 from an eminent divine of the diocese of ISTor- 
 wich, whose piety and profound study of his 
 subject and of all collateral theology, give him 
 every right to be heard, and oh that he might be 
 listened to ! 
 
 "The holy Eucharist is a sacrificial rite, com- 
 memorative of the Sacrifice of the death of Christ. 
 By it we show and plead before God the atoning 
 merits of His Passion. But this representation 
 of His Sacrifice is in holy Scripture inseparably 
 connected with the consumption of the symbols, 
 which represent the Body that was broken and the 
 Blood that was shed upon the Cross. He did not 
 say, Offer this, my Body, and this, my Blood; and 
 then, if ready and desirous, partake of them. On 
 the contrary, the command to take, eat and drink 
 came first ; and then He told them that the bread 
 which they were eating was His Body, and the 
 wine which they were drinking was His Blood. 
 By the order of His words, He implies that the 
 commemoration of His Sacrifice by the recipient 
 is altogether dependent on his eating that Bread 
 
 and drinking of that Cup In other words, 
 
 if we do not communicate, we are not commem- 
 orating His Sacrifice; unless we partake we do 
 not offer." ^ 
 
 The advocates of non-communicating attend- 
 ance rest their arguments very mainly on the 
 
 ^ Rev. AV. E. Scudamore's ''Notitia Eucharistica " (Riving- 
 tons, 1872), page 398.
 
 32 On Non-communicating Attendance 
 
 assertion that the Eucharist is a sacrifice as well 
 as a sacrament. We need not deny, — rather we 
 would stoutly assert with them, — that it is (to use 
 again the words of the author just quoted) "a 
 sacrificial rite, commemorative of the Sacrifice of 
 the death of Christ." But to which of the several 
 species of sacrifice does the Eucharist belong ? 
 We, as faithful members of the Church of Eng- 
 land, who accept her formularies as for us the true 
 interpretation of holy Scripture, will seek an 
 answer to this question in our own Communion 
 Office. The eff'ective part of the rite having been 
 concluded, and the reception having taken place 
 (mark that circumstance ; for it is an important 
 feature of tlie case), and the Lord's Prayer having 
 been a second time recited, to inaugurate the Post- 
 Communion, — then is said as followeth ; " Lord 
 and heavenly Father, we thy humble servants 
 entirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully to 
 accept 2 this our sacrifice of praise and thanks- 
 giving." According to the teaching of our own 
 
 2 These words in King Edward the Sixth's First Prayer Book 
 (a.b. 1549), immediately succeeded the manual acts prescribed 
 in the Prayer of Consecration, and the Prayer from which they 
 are drawn constituted the latter part of the Prayer of Consecra- 
 tion, as our Prayer for the Church Militant constituted its 
 former part. In the Second Prayer Book (a.d. 1552), the 
 Prayer for the acceptance of the Sacrifice was relegated to the 
 Post-Communion, — not, we may be sure, without great signifi- 
 cance. The Sacrifice is not offered at all except by communi- 
 cants. "Unless we partake," says Mr. Scudamore, "we do 
 not offer."
 
 On Noil-communicating Attendance 33 
 
 Church, then, the Eucharist, in whatever otlur 
 sense it may be a sacrifice (and into this point, as 
 it would carry us too far from the subject now 
 before us, we do not propose at present to enter) is 
 most assuredly "a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiv- 
 ing." Now under the old Law there were three grand 
 species of sacrifice, which brought out respectively 
 three distinct features of the rite. There was the 
 offering w^hich betokened ^df -dedication, like the 
 Burnt- Offering ; the offering which betokened 
 Expiation, like the Sin-Offering ; and the offering 
 which betokened Thanksgiving, like the Peace- 
 Ofifering, of which the Thank-Offering was a 
 variety. According to the express assertion of our 
 Prayer Book, the holy Communion belongs to this 
 last class ; — it is, " this our sacrifice of praise and 
 thanksgiving," a thank-offering or peace-offering. 
 Now one great characteristic feature of all thank- 
 offerings and peace-offerings was, that it was to 
 be partaken of by the worshipper on the very 
 day it was offered ; " When ye will offer a sacrifice Lev. 
 of thanksgiving unto the Lord, offer it at your 30. * 
 own will. On the same day it shall be eaten up ; 
 ye shall leave ncjne of it until the morrow : I am 
 the Lord." "The law of a peace-offering," says 
 Bishop Andre wes,3 "is, he that offers it must take 
 his part of it, eat of it, or it doth, him no good," 
 And this was most especially the case with the 
 
 3 Sermon IV. of the Resurrection, vol. ii. p. 251, quoted by 
 Mr. Scudamore, p. 399. 
 
 C
 
 34 On Non-communicatiiig Attendance 
 
 most solemn aud dignified of all thank-offerings, 
 — that of the Passover. To ''keep" the Passover 
 was* to "eat" the Passover; it could not be 
 kept except it was eaten. If any person belong- 
 ing to a Passover company, failed to eat a piece 
 of the lamb (of at least the size of an olive), he 
 Avas considered as being excluded altogether from 
 the sacrifice, just as if he had not been at all 
 ill the mind of him who offered it. For him the 
 victim was not slain ; his interest in it was null 
 and void. 
 
 We conclude hence that though there be a sacri- 
 fice in the Eucharist, even a thank-offering and a 
 Christian Passover, it is a sacrifice so intimately 
 bound up with the Sacrament, that it cannot be 
 offered, nor can we have any the smallest benefit 
 from it, unless the Sacrament be partaken of. The 
 keeping separate the Sacrifice and the Sacrament 
 has no ground whatever in the Word of God. 
 
 3. Nor does this separation of what God has 
 joined together find any warrant whatever in the 
 practice of the Primitive Church. Nay, that 
 practice contains implicitly a strong protest 
 against non-communicating attendance. Such 
 attendance was indeed recognised in the Church 
 of the third and fourth centuries, — but, so far 
 from being recognised as a privilege, it was im- 
 posed as a penance. The penitents of those days 
 
 •* Again I am indebted to Mr. Scudamore for this remark, 
 pp. 399, 400.
 
 On Non-comimmicating Attendance 35 
 
 were divided into four orders, who had different 
 places assigned to them in the Church, and differ- 
 ent privileges allowed them. The furthest ad- 
 vanced of these orders were called Consistentes (or, 
 standers together), from their being allowed to 
 stand with the faithful near the altar, and see 
 the oblation (of the Eucharist) offered, but yet 
 they might neither make their own oblations, nor 
 partake of the Eucharist with the congregation. 
 That even this was considered a heavy censure, 
 may be gathered from a canon of the council of 
 Mce,^ which prescribes two years of this penance 
 . for the crime of idolatry (after ten years in lower 
 stages), and speaks of the persons subjected to it, 
 as communicating with the people in prayers only, 
 
 ^ Canon XL It runs thus : — "As to those who have ti"ans- 
 gressed without necessity, or without loss of their substance, or 
 without peril or any thing of that sort, — a thing which hath 
 happened under the tyi'anny of Licinius, — the Synod hath 
 decreed, albeit they are imworthy of clemency, nevertheless to 
 deal indulgently with them. As many of them therefore as 
 sincerely repent, shall spend three years (assuming them to have 
 been formerly in communion) among the hearers : and for seven 
 years [more] they shall be prostrators : and then for two years 
 they shall communicate with the people in prayers only, with- 
 out [being admitted to] the oblation." 
 
 Mr. Scudamore tells us (p. 394), with a reference to Bona, 
 that "there is an almost universal consensus of the better 
 Divines, Ritualists, and Canonists of the Church of Rome in 
 favour of the historical statement that has been now made, viz. , 
 that, with the above-named exception of the Consistentes, ' no 
 one was permitted to be present at the Sacred Mysteries but 
 those who were able to offer and to partake of the things 
 offered.'"
 
 36 On Non-communicating Attendance 
 
 without the oblation. The use which we wish to 
 make of this disciplinary canon is to show from 
 it what was the view taken by the early Cliurch 
 of the subject under consideration. If non-com- 
 municating attendance had been in those days 
 regarded as a privilege, and held to be a legitimate 
 source of edification and comfort (which is the 
 view now sought to be inculcated in our Church), 
 it never could have been inflicted as a penance. 
 The penalty to which the Consistentes had to sub- 
 mit was, " Show his eyes and grieve his heart ; '' 
 let him be tantalized with the mere spectacle of 
 a privilege open to others, but which in his present 
 state cannot be his ; let him be like the cripple at 
 See Act3 ^^^ Beautiful gate of the Temple placed in sight 
 iii- 2. of a glorious and soul-inspiring worship in which 
 he himself is shut out from joining. It must 
 be admitted that this estimate of the position of 
 a non-communicating attendant is totally different 
 from that which finds in such a position a stimulus 
 to reverence and devotional sentiment, and a help 
 of no mean value to communion with Christ. And 
 what shall we say of the recognised impossibility, 
 implied in the terms of the canon, of participating 
 in the oUation without .communicating ? Does it 
 not run in the very teeth of this new-fangled 
 notion, that we may join in the sacrificial part 
 of the ordinance, while holding entirely aloof from 
 its sacramental part ? 
 
 4. As regards, lastly, the mind of those wha
 
 Ofi N on-communicating Attendance 37 
 
 drew up our own Office of the Holy Communion 
 and of those who brought it into its present state, 
 it is often pleaded by the advocates of non-com- 
 municatingjattendance that nowhere in that Office 
 do we find any direction for non-communicants to 
 withdraw. This is no doubt a matter of fact; 
 but it is a matter of fact which does not stand by 
 itself; and which, when quoted as if it did, con- 
 veys an impression very wide of the truth. Our 
 Communion Office was not all at once brought 
 into its present shape. It passed through several 
 revisions, before it reached the exact form in which 
 it now stands. The First Prayer Book of King 
 Edward the Sixth, put forth in 1549, contained a 
 rubric after the Offertory Sentences, and hefore, the 
 direction to set the bread and wine upon the Altar, 
 to this effect ; " Then so many as shall be par- 
 takers of the holy Communion, shall tarry still in the 
 quire, or in some convenient place nigh the quire. 
 .... All other (that mind not to receive the said 
 holy Communion) shall depart out of the quire, 
 except the ministers and clerks " (whose functions 
 might be necessary as assistants, though they them- 
 selves might have communicated at an earlier hour). 
 Such was the first rule of the Eeformed Church on 
 the subject, and it certainly does liot favour non- 
 communicating attendance. The second Eeformed 
 Prayer Book, put forth three years afterwards (in 
 1552), made a step in advance. An address was 
 then introduced, great part of which we still retain
 
 2,S On Non-co7n7nunicati7ig Attendance 
 
 in the Exhortation which is to be used, in case the 
 Minister "shall see the people negligent to come to 
 the holy Communion." In this address, as then 
 put forth, were contained these words ; " And 
 whereas ye offend God so sore in refusing this 
 holy Banquet, I admonish, exhort, and beseech 
 you, that unto this unkindness ye will not add 
 any more. Which thing ye shall do, if ye stand 
 by as gazers and lookers on them that do com- 
 municate, and be no partakers of the same your- 
 selves. For what thing can this be accounted 
 else, than a further contempt and unkindness 
 unto God ? Truly it is a great unthankfulness to 
 say nay when ye be called ; but the fault is much 
 greater, when men stand by, and yet will neither 
 eat nor drink this holy Communion with other. I 
 pray you what can this be else, but even to have 
 
 the mysteries of Christ in derision ? 
 
 Wherefore, rather than you should so do, depart 
 you hence, and give place to them that be godly 
 disposed." 
 
 This severe discouragement of non-communi- 
 cating attendance in the Eeformed Church had 
 its effect. The practice of hearing Mass without 
 communicating (as a sort of compensatory act for 
 communicating rarely or never) had its neck 
 broken. In the time of the great Eevision of 
 1662, the practice no longer existed ;'^ and accord- 
 
 6 See " Notitia Eiicliaristica " (pp. 395, 396), from whicli this 
 account is drawn.
 
 Oil Noii-co7nmunicating Attendance 39 
 
 ingly, on the assumption doubtless that it would 
 never be revived, the protest against gazing and 
 looking on, having lost its point, was quietly 
 expunged from the address in which it occurred. 
 Such is the reason why our present Office lacks 
 any definite protest against non-communicating 
 attendance. But in view of these plain facts of 
 history, it can never be said that the Eeformed 
 Church approves of the practice, or indeed does 
 otherwise than most seriously disapprove of it. 
 
 We have argued the question, as in the last 
 resort it must be argued, on the grounds of Eeason, 
 Scripture, the Book of Common Prayer, and the 
 views of the Primitive Church. But if any practice 
 could be put out of court by its manifest tendency, 
 and by the effect which it is likely to have upon 
 the general run of the people who compose our con- 
 gregations, this would surely be so excluded. It 
 cannot indeed be denied that there is a consider- 
 able number of very devout persons, chiefly be- 
 longing to one particular school, who do communi- 
 cate very frequently, and thus habitually use the 
 Lord's ordinance for the purpose it was given for, 
 who yet mix with it occasionally the practice of 
 non-communicating attendance, warmly advocate 
 that practice as correct in theory, and wish to see 
 it universally adopted. We do not wish to say a 
 single word which could be construed as disparag- 
 ing the devotion and simple-hearted piety of these 
 persons, or as manifesting a want of appreciation
 
 40 On No7i-communicating Attendance 
 
 of tlie graces of Cliristian cliaracter, wliicli many 
 of them display. But we ask them to consider 
 what must infallibly be the effect of their teaching 
 and example upon people, who do not rise above 
 the ordinary level of Christian character and the 
 ordinary standard of Christian attainment. We 
 all know how many scruples the hard-worked 
 man of the world either has, or invents, against 
 the duty of communicating ; how partly a genuine 
 and commendable feeling of his own unworthiness, 
 partly a fear of being upon too close quarters with 
 God, and being driven to pursue a standard of 
 piety for which his will has not yet mustered up 
 courage, partly an apprehension that familiarity 
 with the ordinance may lead him to hold it cheap, 
 operate to make him a very infrequent attendant 
 at the Table of the Lord. What must (sooner or 
 later) be the effect of instilling into his mind by pre- 
 cept and example, and by the putting in his hand 
 pious little books, which have a strong distillation 
 of Eomanism in them, that the Lord may be wor- 
 shipped acceptably, and the Sacrifice once offered 
 on Calvary pleaded effectually with God, by mere 
 attendance at the holy Table, while only a sorry 
 handful of people present themselves to communi- 
 cate ? The effect must certainly be to diminish 
 the number of communicants, even if the number 
 of attendants should be increased. — And can such 
 an effect be contemplated without dismay, whether 
 we consider the precept, which makes the obser-
 
 On N on-communicating Attendance 41 
 
 vance of the Eucharist binding on us ; " Drink ye St. Matt. 
 all of it," or the nature of the blessing received in ^ ^ * 
 it ; " The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not 1 Cor. x. 
 the communion of" (the means of partaking in) " 
 '' the blood of Christ ? The bread which we break, 
 is it not the communion of the body of Christ ? " 
 *' Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and St. John 
 drinh Ms blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso 
 eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath 
 ■eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last 
 day."
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 AURICULAR CONFESSION 
 
 " JjKi^erefore ioilt t|)ou go to '^im to=^aap f it tg( nettljcc itclu 
 moon, nor {SaliXiatTj." — 2 Kings iv. 23 
 
 THE practice of Auricular Confession may not 
 seem in the nature of things to have any 
 connection with our subject, which is the Sacra- 
 ment of the Eucharist. It is quite conceivable 
 that this practice might obtain in a Church, as a 
 supposed means of grace and edification, without 
 any special reference to the highest ordinance of 
 our Eeligion. But, as a matter of fact, this is not 
 the course which things have taken. The Eoman 
 Church not only recognises the necessity of Auri- 
 cular Confession ^ to the remission of sins, as being 
 
 ^ Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Session XIV., 
 Canons VI. and VII. 
 
 "Si f[uis negaverit, confessionem sacramentalemvel institutam, 
 vel ad salutem necessariam esse jure divino ; aut dixerit, modum 
 secrete confitendi soli sacerdoti, quem Ecclesia catholica ab 
 initio semper observavit, et observat, alienum esse ab institu- 
 tione et raandato Christi, et inventum esse humanum : ana- 
 thema sit. 
 
 " Si quis dixerit, in sacramento poenitentitB ad remissionmi pec- 
 catorum nccessarium non esse jure divino, confiteri omnia et 
 singula peccata mortalia, quorum memoria cum debita et dili- 
 genti projmeditatione habeatur, etiam occulta, et quae sunt
 
 Atiricular Confession 43 
 
 of Divine institution, but also binds the practice 
 upon men's consciences by declaring it to be, 
 wherever it may be had, an essential^ prerequisite 
 to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, without having 
 gone through which we eat that bread, and drink 
 that cup of the Lord unworthily, and are " guilty 
 of the body and blood of the Lord." And a trace 
 of this connexion lingers still in our own Com- 
 munion Office, though the confession there recom- 
 mended is not made obligatory upon the conscience, 
 and is distinctly recognised as not being univer- 
 sally necessary. Still the subject is introduced in 
 connexion with the Eucharist. " Because it is re- 
 quisite that no man should come to the holy Com- 
 
 contra duo ultima decalogi prsecepta, et circumstantias, qufe 
 peccati speciem mutant .... anathema sit. " 
 
 2 Session XIII. Cap. 7, and Can. XI. 
 
 . . . . " Quare communicare volenti revocandum est in me- 
 moriam ejus prpeceptum : Probet seipsum homo. Ecclesiastica 
 autem consuetudo declarat, earn probationem necessariam esse, 
 ut nullus sibi conscius mortalis peccati, quantumvis sibi con- 
 tritns videatur, absque 2}fCG'>nissd sacramentali confessione ad 
 sacram eucJiaristiam accedere debeat, quod a Christianis omni- 
 bus, etiam ab iis sacerdotibus, quibus ex oiBcio incubuerit cele- 
 brare, htec sancta synodus perpetuo servandum esse decrevit, 
 modo non desit illis copia confcssoris : quod si, necessitate 
 urgente, sacerdos absque praevia confessione celebraverit, quam- 
 primum confiteatur. 
 
 .... " Et, lie tantum saeramcntum indignd, atque ideo in 
 niwtem et condemnationem sumatur, statuit atque declarat ipsa 
 sancta synodus, illis quos conscientia 2^eccati mortalis gravaf, 
 quantumcunque etiam se contritos existiment, habitd cojnd con- 
 fessoris, necessarib 2}r(e'>n'^itenda7n esse confessionevi sacramen- 
 talem."
 
 44 Auricular Confession 
 
 munion, but with a full trust in God's mercy, and 
 with a quiet conscience ; therefore if there be any," 
 who is unable to quiet his own conscience in the 
 manner before described, and requires " further 
 comfort or counsel," he is exhorted to come " to 
 some .... discreet and learned Minister of God's 
 Word, and open his grief ; that by the ministry of 
 God's holy Word he may receive the benefit of 
 absolution, together with ghostly counsel and 
 advice, to the quieting of his conscience, and avoid- 
 ing of all scruple and doubtfulness." Private Con- 
 fession then rightfully challenges a place among 
 those practices which have grown up around, and 
 in connexion with, the Eucharist. Of all those 
 practices there is probably none which has graver 
 moral or spiritual bearings. And it is one of pre- 
 sent interest; for on all sides of us it is being 
 attempted to make the passage of the Communion 
 Office above quoted the ground for introducing 
 into our own Church a species of Confession, with 
 which she has no sort of sympathy, and which is 
 not borne out by any of her formularies fairly 
 understood and interpreted. 
 
 Let us examine, then, into the truth on this 
 much agitated subject. And, in ascertaining it, 
 let us resolve to be guided exclusively by holy 
 Scripture, as it is interpreted for us by the Book 
 of Common Prayer, which represents the sense in 
 which Scripture was understood by those Christians 
 who lived nearest to the times of the Apostles.
 
 Aurictdar Confession 45 
 
 The only kind of Confession which is or can be 
 objected to by serious and devout persons, and 
 which thus really comes into controversy at all, 
 is that called in the Eoman Church auricular, 
 this word meaning that it is whispered into the 
 ear of the priest. As the first point in any dis- 
 cussion is to be well acquainted with the subject 
 we are talking about, it is well to note that there 
 are three marks or features, which characterise this 
 kind of Confession, — universality, periodicity, and 
 formality. Universality, It is held to be binding 
 upon all persons, in whatever condition of life, and 
 indispensable, if not actually to salvation, yet to 
 the health and vigour of the spiritual life, — just as 
 we ourselves hold the two Sacraments of the Gospel 
 to be generally {ib.e. universally) necessary to Sal- 
 vation. Periodicity. It is to be practised, not once 
 for all, ibut constantly at stated periods during the 
 spiritual life, and more especially as a necessary 
 preliminary to, and preparation for, the Holy Com- 
 munion. Formality, Which word is not here used 
 in an-y bad or derogatory sense, but in the sense 
 in which all the ordinances of our own or any other 
 Church are and must be formal, that is, there is a 
 certain previously arranged method or rule of pro- 
 ceeding in them, necessary (or at least conducive) 
 to that decency and order, with which the Apostle 
 prescribes that all things in the Church shall be 
 done. The person making confession kneels down 
 by the side of the clergyman, who, dressed in his
 
 46 Auricular Confession 
 
 robes of office, sits while he receives it, — and uses 
 a short formulary to the effect that he makes con- 
 fession to God, and to our Lord Jesus Christ, and 
 to the priest there present, that since his last con- 
 fession he has done so or so, or left undone so and 
 so. When the Confession has all these features 
 about it, i.e. when it is recognised by the i^arties 
 practising it as universally necessary to salvation 
 (or, at least, to the soul's well-being) ; when it is 
 offered and received regularly at stated periods; 
 and when it is practised after a certain prescribed 
 rule and method, and with ecclesiastical formali- 
 ties, it is then Auricular Confession in full blossom. 
 And in cases where it has the two latter features 
 without the first, — where it is not distinctly recog- 
 nised as necessary to salvation or spiritual health 
 (in which case of course the priest himself would 
 have to practise it, as well as the penitent), but at 
 the same time is carried on periodically and habi- 
 tually as a normal practice of the spiritual life, and 
 offered and received in set form and with the cir- 
 cumstantials of a religious ordinance, — it is easy to 
 see that in such cases it is tending in the direction 
 of full-blown Auricular Confession, and only wants 
 a little more development to become that. If it is 
 once admitted that there is a very large number 
 of persons who find stated periodic confession to a 
 priest, made in due form, to be extremely helpful 
 to their souls and very conducive to their growth 
 in grace, — we may be sure that the erection of
 
 Auricular Confessio7i 47 
 
 such a practice into an ordinance more or less 
 indispensable is not very far off. 
 
 And this we must not disguise from ourselves is 
 the condition of affairs, at which we in the Church 
 of England have now arrived. Possibly the prac- 
 tice adverted to may not be carried on in the circle 
 to which we belong, and for that reason we may 
 have little cognizance of it at present; but one 
 cannot take up a Church newspaper, or even a 
 secular newspaper, which gives any Church intel- 
 ligence, without seeing that it is a practice at pre- 
 sent extensively and fast establishing itself in the 
 convictions of many young persons who think 
 seriously about religion, and of many of our devout- 
 est clergy. It is no reason for dismissing the sub- 
 ject lightly that most of the persons who offer 
 themselves to confess are young, or again that the 
 majority of them are girls and young women (which 
 no doubt is the case). Young people are to become 
 old, and their moral and religious character will be 
 stereotyped in youth. The girls of this generation 
 are to be the mothers of the next ; and who knows 
 not the influence which a mother, if she jDleases, 
 can exercise in the formation of the religious char- 
 acter of her children ? But even supposing that 
 the class from which the recruits of the English 
 Confessional are drawn, were not in itself an 
 influential class, or a class which could ever be 
 expected 'to leaven public sentiment, is it not a 
 serious feature of the case that some of our
 
 48 Auricular Confession 
 
 devoutest clergy, men of learning, ability, and the 
 highest possible character, do openly and avowedly 
 inculcate this sort of Confession, if not as abso- 
 lutely indispensable to the forgiveness of sin (which 
 for the present, at least, they disavow), yet certainly 
 as very conducive to the health and well-being of 
 the soul, and devote a considerable portion of their 
 time to the hearing of it ? That the practice recom- 
 mended and enforced by them has already gained 
 a good foothold in our Church is clear from the 
 books of devotion which are circulated freely among 
 us, books which undoubtedly contain passages of 
 great beauty, and parts of which are very condu- 
 cive to edification, while in other parts an attempt 
 seems to be made to venture as near as possible to 
 the margin of Eomish error, and sometimes the 
 barrier, which separates us from the Eoman Church 
 and its corruptions, seems to be overleapt alto- 
 gether. That I may not seem to be speaking at 
 random, I extract from a little illustrated manual 
 of devotion entitled " The Path of Holiness, a first 
 Book of Prayers for the Young, compiled by a 
 Priest," the following passage, which immediately 
 precedes the Office of the Holy Communion : — 
 
 FORM FOR SACRAMENTAL CONFESSION. 
 
 Kned down, and saij : 
 Father, give me your blessing, for I have sinned. 
 
 When the Priest has given you the blessing, say : 
 In the Name ►J^ of the Father, and of the Son,* and of the 
 Holy Ghost.
 
 Auricular Confession 49 
 
 . I confess to God Almiglity, before the whole Company of 
 Heaven, and to you my father, that I have sinned exceed- 
 ingly in thought, word, and deed, by my fault, by my own 
 most grievous fault. Especially I accuse myself that (since 
 my last Confession, which was .... ago, when the penance 
 that was given to me was . . . . ) I have sinned. 
 
 AjUr your Confession, say : 
 For these and all other my sins which I cannot now 
 remember, I am heartily sorry, firmly purpose amendment, 
 most humbly ask pardon of God ; and of you, my spiritual 
 father, penance, counsel, and absolution. 
 
 Listen to the advice and the penance that the Priest gives 
 you. When the Priest gives you Absolution, boiv your head,, 
 and pray God to absolve you in Heaven while His Minister 
 absolves you upon earth. 
 
 These forms would not be inserted in popular 
 and attractive books of devotion, if they did not 
 find persons to use them. And that they are very 
 widely used is beyond all question. Many of our 
 clergy devote large portions of their time to hear- 
 ing confession. ISTot on new moons and sabbaths- 
 only, i.e. not only at the periods when the public 
 ordinances of the Church are administered, but 
 every day the people flock to the priest, to tender 
 their private confessions, previously to, and as a 
 necessary preliminary of, the receiving the holy 
 Communion. We must not disguise from ourselves 
 that Auricular Confession is becoming an estab- 
 lished practice in the English Church. 
 
 Now I must remark that the Book of Common 
 Prayer, which is for us the interpretation of the 
 
 D
 
 5o Auricular Confession 
 
 holy Scriptures, and represents the opinions and 
 practices of the purest and most primitive age, not 
 only preserves a strict and significant silence on 
 such Confession as has the characteristics I have 
 described, but even seems to discourage it. The 
 only parts of the Prayer Book, to which appeal is 
 or can be made in the matter, are the Exhortation 
 to the Communion to be delivered on the Sunday or 
 Holy-day immediately preceding the Celebration, 
 and the Order for the Visitation of the Sick. These 
 are the places on which advocates of the practice 
 in question rely as giving support to their views. 
 But surely they break down under them, when 
 candidly examined. 
 
 (1.) First, as to the imiversality of the practice, 
 which is the first feature of the fuU-blown system. 
 The Exhortation in the Communion Office bids 
 persons examine their lives and conversations by 
 the rule of God's commandments, and, having by 
 this examination ascertained their offences, to be- 
 wail the sinfulness of them, and to confess them- 
 selves to Almighty God, with full purpose of 
 amendment of life. And then, after some advices 
 as to the necessity to a profitable Communion, of 
 restitution and satisfaction, where the offence has 
 been against our neighbours, of forgiveness of in- 
 juries, and generally of the breaking off of all sins by 
 repentance, follow the words from which the prac- 
 tice of Auricular Confession is inferred to have the 
 sanction of the Church. "And because it is requisite,
 
 Auricular Confession 51 
 
 that no man should come to the holy Communion 
 but with a full trust in God's mercy, and with a quiet 
 conscience ; therefore if there be any of you, who 
 by this means cannot quiet his own conscience 
 herein, but requireth further comfort or counsel, 
 let him come to me, or to some other discreet and 
 learned Minister of God's Word, and open his 
 grief ; that by the ministry of God's holy Word he 
 may receive the benefit of absolution, together with 
 ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of his 
 conscience, and avoiding of all scruple and doubt- 
 fulness." If words have any meaning, surely these 
 words imply that the coming privately to the Parish 
 Priest, or to the discreet and learned Minister, is 
 not the best thing to be done, but the second best. 
 So far then from being urged by the Prayer Book 
 as universal, Private Confession is merely conceded 
 as exceptional. There may be scrupulous or 
 timorous consciences for which such a specific is 
 needed, and to whom therefore it is recommended ; 
 but the very point of the passage seems to be that 
 it is not recommended to persons in general ; tluy 
 will do best, with the assistances of God's grace, to 
 resort to no confessional but His. — Similarly, in 
 the Order for the Visitation of the Sick, the case 
 in which special confession is to be recommended, 
 and a special absolution bestowed upon the patient, 
 is indicated as exceptional by the significant par- 
 ticle " if." The sick person is at a certain point 
 of the Office to " be moved to make a special Con-
 
 52 Auricular Confession 
 
 fession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled 
 with any weighty matter." And his Confession 
 having been made, the Priest is to absolve him, if 
 he humbly and heartily desire it, in a certain pre- 
 scribed form. But surely it is not every one whose 
 conscience in dying is troubled with some weighty 
 matter. The Prayer Book would never contem- 
 plate this as the normal state of things. Our ser- 
 vices are all constructed on the hypothesis that the 
 persons using them are in a right state of mind; 
 that, for example, the Parents and Sponsors who 
 bring children to Baptism are serious and religious 
 persons, interested in the child's spiritual welfare ; 
 that parties who offer themselves for marriage are 
 sincerely desirous of God's blessing upon their 
 union ; that the corpse brought for burial is that 
 of a person who has departed this life in God's faith 
 and fear. And so in the service for Visitation of 
 the Sick. The patient is assumed, in the judgment 
 of charity, to be in the main a servant of God, one 
 who has lived in His faith and fear. Still, as there 
 may be, and doubtless often are, cases, in which 
 some grave sin, hidden from the eyes of all but 
 God, is rankling in the conscience of a dying man, 
 and since this would effectually preclude that quiet- 
 ness of conscience, with which it is so desirable 
 that the soul should pass into the presence of its 
 Judge, the patient is to be exhorted, if he be con- 
 scious of any such thing, to be at one with Truth 
 in respect to it, in order that he may be at one
 
 Atcricular Confession 53 
 
 with God, — not to go out of life a hypocrite, cloak- 
 ing under a respectable exterior some hidden ini- 
 quity. And that being done, in case it should be 
 a relief to him to hear once again before his death 
 the sentence of God's absolution of all penitent 
 and believing souls from the mouth of His minister 
 (for it seems to be assumed that some minds will 
 attach a greater, others a less value, to a formal 
 ministerial absolution), a special form is x^rovided, 
 stronger and more emphatic than that employed in 
 the daily Office and the Communion Office, in 
 which the Priest is to absolve him. But surely 
 there is here no sort of warrant for the universal 
 practice of special Confession, even upon a death- 
 bed, much less in time of health. 
 
 (2.) Then as to the periodical recurrence of 
 Auricular Confession, which is a very dangerous 
 feature of the system, perhaps its most dangerous 
 feature, because such a recurrence must in some 
 measure keep the soul in its inmost resorts and 
 confidences hanging upon man instead of God, and 
 make its piety a hot-house plant, weak and sickly, 
 not manly and vigorous, — where is such a practice 
 even hinted at in the Prayer Book ? There is not 
 the faintest indication in the Order for the Visita- 
 tion of the Sick that the special Confession, which 
 the patient is to be moved to make, has been, or 
 ought to have been, the regular practice of his 
 life hitherto. And in the Communion Service we 
 find no sort of intimation that the comin^j to the
 
 54 Auricular Confession 
 
 discreet and learned Minister is to be resorted to 
 as a normal practice of the spiritual life. It is 
 merely a remedial measure, recommended by way 
 of meeting a temporary emergency. And let me 
 add that this temporary emergency is not stated 
 to be sin (though of course it may involve more or 
 less of that), but the incapacity of a person, assumed 
 to be well-disposed in the main, to quiet his own 
 conscience. Scruples and doubtfulness of con- 
 science are spiritual weaknesses and infirmities 
 rather than sins. And cases are not unfrequent 
 of sensitive and susceptible minds, which are very 
 much harassed by them in early life, but which, 
 when the mental constitution becomes more robust, 
 succeed in throwing them off. 
 
 (3.) Lastly, as to formality. A form of Absolu- 
 tion is provided in the Order for the Visitation of 
 the Sick, and it is prescribed that "the Priest 
 shall absolve " the sick person " after this sort,'* 
 which, if we look to the Latin original of that 
 Rubric, ''lioc modo dicens" probably means in 
 those words, — after that particular form. But it 
 is material to observe that, while a Form is pro- 
 vided for Absolution, none is provided for the 
 special Confession. The penitent is left to make 
 it in his own words, and as his own mind on the 
 spur of the moment suggests. I have never seen 
 this circumstance noticed as indicative of the 
 Church's mind ; but to me it seems that there is 
 great significance in it. Absolution is doubtless
 
 Auricular Confession 55 
 
 an ordinance of God. It is nnqnestionable that 
 our Blessed Lord did lodge in the hands of His See St. 
 Apostles a power (explain it how you like, — the 23. 
 explanation is no part of my present subject) of 
 remitting sins ; unquestionable also that St. Paul 
 exerted this power toward the incestuous Corin- See2Cor, 
 thian, on the smcere repentance of that offender ; 
 and, as the exercise of this power is certainly not 
 less needed in the present circumstances of the 
 Church than it was under the administration of the 
 Apostles, we may safely conclude that this power 
 has descended to the modern Church, floating down 
 the stream of time in the safe ark of the original 
 ministerial Commission ; " Go ye and teach all St. Matt, 
 nations, baptizing them . . . teaching them ... 20. 
 and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end 
 of the world." Our Church of England, in common, 
 I believe, with all orthodox Churches throughout 
 the world, most distinctly recognises the existence 
 of such a power. Whatever its exact nature^ and 
 limits may be, it is a power communicated at the 
 Ordination of Priests, and exercised as often as the 
 Priest says Morning and Evening Prayer, or cele- 
 brates the holy Communion. And in order to its 
 
 3 The writer has endeavoured to exhibit its nature and|limits 
 in a popular form in Chapters IV. and V. of Part III. of his 
 "Office of the Holy Communion," to which the present Chapters 
 are designed as an Appendix. It is his desire, when time can 
 he found for it, to put forth a translation of Barrow's treatise 
 "Depotestate clavium," — a noble dissertation, exhaustive of its 
 subject.
 
 56 Atiricular Confession 
 
 various exercises, forms of Absolution are provided, 
 the form betokening Absolution to be an ordin- 
 ance of God, and to be recognised by the Church 
 as such. — But while Absolution is an ordinance of 
 God, there is not a word in holy Scripture to in- 
 dicate that private Confession is. It is enjoined 
 certainly by St. James that the sick Christian shall 
 
 v.^ ] 4. ^^' s^^cl for the elders of the Church, and that they 
 shall pray over him, anointing him with oil in the 
 Name of the Lord; and it is promised that the 
 prayer of faith shall be to him the instrument both 
 of natural and spiritual healing ; " and the prayer 
 
 r. 15. of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall 
 raise him up ; and if he have committed sins, they 
 shall be forgiven him;" from all which we are 
 doubtless at liberty to say that the pastoral visita- 
 tion of the sick is an Apostolic ordinance, and 
 should be recognised and practised in the modern 
 Church, (dropping only that part of it, which had 
 reference to a state of things now no longer exist- 
 ing, when the miraculous gift of healing existed in 
 the Church). And it is true also that the notice 
 of this ordinance is immediately followed by the 
 
 V. 16. words ; " Confess your faults one to another, and 
 pray one for another, that ye may -be healed." 
 And it is prohaUe that the connexion of thought 
 between these words and the preceding is, that the 
 sick person would very naturally, if he felt his 
 conscience burdened with any weighty matter, take 
 the opportunity of disclosing it to those sympathis-
 
 Auricular Confession 57 
 
 ing friends who stood around Ms bed (particularly 
 to the elders, as representing the Church), and of 
 soliciting their prayers on his behalf. But surely 
 by no means, short of extremely unfair violence 
 done to the passage, can it be made out that here 
 Confession of sins to a priest is recognised as an 
 ordinance of God, or made an institution in the 
 Church of Christ. St. James does not even men- 
 tion Confession, before he has (if I may so say) 
 done with the ordinance of the Visitation of the 
 Sick ; and, when he does mention it, he almost 
 •pointedly refuses to recognise anything of an 
 official or formal character in it; "Confess your 
 faults," says he, — not to the presbyters, though it 
 was quite obvious to say so, if he had meant that, 
 but — " one to another." 
 
 The same absolute silence as to the form in 
 which a special Confession is to be made, which 
 we observe in the Visitation Service, is observable 
 also in the Communion Service. No form Avhat- 
 ever is provided, in which the grief of the soul 
 that is troubled with scruple and doabtfulness is 
 to be opened to the discreet and learned minister 
 ^f God's Word, nor is it intimated that any form 
 at all shall be used. The benefit of Absolution is 
 indeed spoken of as that which, in addition to 
 ghostly counsel and advice, the troubled and per- 
 plexed conscience may hope to carry away; but 
 there is no direction for, nor even any suggestion 
 /of, a form in which the Absolution is to be given.
 
 58 Auricular Confession 
 
 If I may venture an opinion, at issue with that of 
 authorities which I greatly respect,^ I should ima- 
 gine that the Absolution in question is not mces- 
 
 * My friend, Mr. Scudamore, whose profound learning on. 
 this particular subject, as well as his sincere attachment to the 
 Reformed Church of England, gives him every right to be 
 listened to, demurs to my position that Absolution (proper) 
 can be ministered except in a set form, and has favoured me 
 with an interesting letter on the subject. He i-efers to 
 Bingham's opinion in the Sermons on Absolution appended to 
 Book XIX. of his "Antiquities," as supporting his view. But 
 Bingham, it appears to me, does not put oiit of court an informal 
 private Absolution by means of preaching to the individual. 
 He says that "the declaratory absolution of the word and doc- 
 trine . . . consists in publishing the terms and conditions upon 
 which the Gospel promises pardon and remission of sins." This 
 is its constituent, its essence. Might not this be done informally? 
 He does not however dwell at all upon the informal doing of it, 
 but goes on to say that this species of Absolution is ' ' either 
 general or particular : the general absolution is such as our 
 church appoints every minister to pronounce after the general 
 confession of sins in her daily service. . . . But besides this 
 , . . there is a more particular absolution appointed to be given 
 to single persons in some special cases ; that is, when men labour 
 under troubles of mind and disq[uiet of conscience for any par- 
 ticular sins, which they make confession of to a minister, with 
 j)roper signs of a genuine repentance. In that case the minister 
 is authorized, not only to give them ghostly counsel and advice, 
 but also the benefit of absolution ; that is, if, upon a just exa- 
 mination of their case, he judges them to be real penitents be- 
 fore God, then he may not only declare to them the general 
 promises of pardon, but assure them in particular, that, as far 
 as he can judge of their case by the visible tokens and indica- 
 tions of their repentance, he esteems them absolved before God, 
 and accordingly declares and pronounces to them their absolu- 
 tion." But (not at all questioning that this might be done 
 formally) might it not also be done informally ? To the writer 
 it seems that both the informal and formal annouiicemeiit of the
 
 Atiricular Confession 59 
 
 sarily to be given in set form at all. Let it be con^ 
 sidered that it is called not absolution simply, but 
 *' absolution by the ministry of God's holy Word," 
 
 minister's judgment are intended to be embraced in the words 
 of the Exhortation above quoted. The penitent "requireth 
 , , . (1) comfort or (2) counsel " (two things, I admit, not one) 
 more than his own mind can supply him with. He is exhorted 
 to come to the Minister, "that by the ministry of God's holy 
 "Word he may receive the benefit of absolution " (and thereby 
 *' comfort" and ''quietiugof his conscience"), " together with " 
 —the other thing he may stand in need of — " ghostly counsel and 
 advice," and thereby, "the avoiding of all scruple and doubt- 
 fulness." — But cannot "comfort" and "quieting of the con- 
 science " be had by an informal announcement of pardon, which 
 the heart is opened by God's Spirit to receive ? Are, they never 
 had from a 2niblic Sermon 1 And if so, why may they not he 
 had from a private one ? If the composer of the Exhortation 
 intended nothing but a formal Absolution, does it not require 
 to be accounted for that he has indicated no form in which it is 
 to be given ? It is not necessary to suppose that he intended to 
 exclude a form, where such might be humbly and heartily 
 desired, and made matter of special request by the penitent.. 
 The words of the Prayer Book, like those of Holy Scripture, are 
 most correctly understood, when understood in their broadest 
 sense. I am not ignorant that the recital of a formula in ac- 
 cordance with God's holy Word maybe called "the ministry 
 of God's holy Word," as the Baptismal formula is very probably 
 called so in Ephesians v. 26 and in 1 Peter i, 23 (though surely 
 here we should not be right in excluding the effect of the preached 
 Word upon the heart and conscience of an adult catechumen). 
 But, in view of the composer's having indicated no form, is it 
 fair or reasonable to say that he recognises no informal Absolu- 
 tion, but prescribes exclusively a formal one ? 
 
 Such is my apology for not subscribing entirely to the view 
 of one, whose researches on such a subject must necessarily 
 give to bis opinion a far greater weight than can attach ta 
 my own.
 
 6o Auricular Confession 
 
 and that the absolution of the Word and of doc- 
 trine was one of the five species of Absolution re- 
 cognised by the old Fathers as dispensed by the 
 Church.^ The first of these, was the great forgive- 
 ness of sins dispensed in Baptism to those who 
 receive that Sacrament in penitence and faith, and 
 never, where Baptism may be had, dispensed with- 
 out it, according to that word of Ananias to St. 
 Paul; "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away 
 thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." 
 The second was the absolution of the Eucharist, in 
 which remission of sins and all other benefits of 
 Christ's passion are conveyed to those who com- 
 municate with penitence, faith, and love. The 
 third was Absolution by imposition of hands (a 
 very ancient form of giving it) and prayer or inter- 
 cession. Our own Church in the Communion Ser- 
 vice recognises this Absolution by means of inter- 
 cession, a beautiful precatory form of Absolution 
 occurring after the general Confession. The fourth 
 was that of the relaxation of Church censures. It 
 had reference to the system of discipline alluded 
 to in the opening address of the Commination Ser- 
 vice, by which such persons as stood convicted of 
 notorious sin were put to open penance and 
 punished in this world. When they had duly 
 completed their penance, they were solemnly re- 
 
 5 See these enumerated and fully explained by Bingham 
 ("Antiquities of the Christian Church," Book xix. chap. i. 
 and ii.).
 
 Auriadar Confessio7i 6i 
 
 stored by this kind of Absolution to the peace and 
 full communion of the Church. The fifth was the 
 absolution of the Word and doctrine, — a declaration 
 in God's Name of the terms on which He will for- 
 give and accept sinners for Christ's sake, — a de- 
 claration which of course may be compressed into 
 a very short formulary, as is done in the Absolu- 
 tion of our daily Service, but which may also be 
 expanded into a short sermon, making reference 
 to the gracious invitations so abundantly issued to 
 repentant sinners in the Gospel. Many and many 
 a time has a sermon on the fulness and freeness of 
 Gospel offers, and the rich abundance of mercy 
 and grace bestowed upon every sinner on the in- 
 stant of his coming to Christ, quickened and 
 brightened, as with a ray of warm golden sun- 
 light, the overcast, overclouded, desponding con- 
 science. And of course it is open to a minister to 
 urge in his study upon a single soul, with a special 
 reference to that soul's special needs, the same 
 things which he habitually urges from the pulpit. 
 And I respectfully submit that this, equally well 
 with the reading of a stated form over a kneeling 
 penitent, would meet the requirements of the 
 phrase " absolution by the ministry of God's holy 
 Word." The minister is to point the troubled and 
 disquieted conscience to the blood of Christ and 
 the promises of the Gospel, and to say with John 
 the Baptist, " Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh 
 away the sins of the world." And the peni-
 
 62 Auricular Confession 
 
 tent, catching a glimpse of this Lamb of God by- 
 faith, will take heart again, and (like the Ethio- 
 pian after his interview with St. Philip) go 
 on his way rejoicing, having received "the bene- 
 fit of absolution by the ministry of God's holy 
 Word." 
 
 And most wise, considerate, and loving is this 
 provision, which our Church has made for con- 
 sciences either burdened or perplexed, or both, — a 
 provision which we rejoice to have in our Prayer 
 Book, and the withdrawal of which we should feel 
 to be a very serious flaw, — a provision which it 
 is much to be wished that many more persons 
 would avail themselves of, as we are assured that 
 it would greatly conduce to edification.*^ 
 
 « We extract from Jeremy Taylor's masterly Section on "the 
 imposing Auricular Confession upon Consciences, without autho- 
 rity fi'om God " (Dissuasive from Popery, Part II. pp. 249-295, 
 4to, London, 1667) the following passage in favour of private 
 Confession, when not made obligatory upon consciences : — 
 
 "Whether to confess to a Priest be an advisable discipline, and 
 a good instance, instrument, and ministry of repentance, and 
 may serve many good ends in the Church, and to the souls of 
 needing persons, is no part of the question. We find that in 
 the Acts of the Apostles, divers converted persons came to St. 
 Paul, either publicly or privately, and confessed their deeds ; 
 and burnt their books of exorcism, that is, did what became 
 severe and hearty penitents who needed counsel and comfort, 
 and that their repentance should be conducted by wise guides. 
 And when St. James exhorts all Christians *to confess their 
 sins to one another,' certainly it is more agreeable to all spiri* 
 tual ends, that this be done rather to the curates of souls, than 
 to the ordinary brethren. The Church of England is no way 
 engaged against it, but advises it, and practises it. Tlie Cal-
 
 Auricular Confession 6 2) 
 
 But to regard secret Confession to a Priest as a 
 Divine Institution, obligatory upon men's con- 
 sciences, or even to make it a chronic devotional 
 exercise, under the impression that it is very 
 healthful to the soul, and a condition of profitable 
 •communion, this is a thing so totally different in. 
 kind from what the Prayer Book and our best 
 divines do recommend, that it is hard to see how 
 the attempt to confound the two things is other- 
 wise than disingenuous and dishonest. 
 
 It is not very difficult to trace the mental pro- 
 
 vinist Churches do not practise it much, because they know not 
 well how to divest it from its evil appendages which are put to 
 it by the customs of the world, and to which it is too much ex- 
 posed by the interests, weaknesses, and partialities of men. But 
 they commending it, show they would use it willingly, if they 
 could order it unto edification. Interim quin sistant se pastori 
 oves, quoties sacram Ccenam particijjare volunt, acleo non reclamOy 
 ut maxime velim hoc ubique ohservari.^ And for the Lutheran 
 Churches, that it is their practice, we may see it in Chemnitius, 
 who was one of the greatest fame amongst them, and he is 
 noted to this purpose by Bellarmine ; only they all consent, that 
 it is not necessary nor of divine institution ; and being but of 
 man's invention, it ought not to pass into a doctrine ; and, as 
 the Apostles said in the matter of circumcision, 'a burden 
 ought not to be put upon the necks of the disciples ; ' and that, 
 in lege gratioe, longe difficillimuvi too, as Major observes truly, 
 by far greater than any bui'den in the law of grace, the time of 
 the Gospel. Let it be commended to all, to whom it is needful 
 or profitable ; but let it be free, as to the conscience precisely, 
 and bound but by the cords of a man, and as other Ecclesiastical 
 Laws ai-e, which are capable of exceptions, restrictions, cautions, 
 dispensations, rescindings, and abolitions by the same authority, 
 «r upon greater reasons," 
 
 1 Calvin's Institutes, Lib. iii. cap. 4, sect, 12, 13, b. 2.
 
 64 AuricMlar Confession 
 
 cess by which Auricular Confession found accep- 
 tance with Christians, gradually crept into their 
 practice, and was at length made obligatory in the 
 thirteenth century by the fourth Lateran Council. 
 The same mental process no doubt (for the line of 
 reasoning taken by the human mind is much the 
 same in all ages) is operating to revive in our own 
 Church a practice which our Keformers studiously 
 eschewed, and to which, as has been shown, the 
 Prayer Book lends no sort of sanction. Though 
 the conclusion is most erroneous and most mis- 
 chievous, some of the sentiments and instincts 
 which lead to it are true, and good, and deserving 
 of all respect and sympathy. First, it is felt that 
 sin in professing Christians is (as indeed it is) a 
 very grave and serious thing, pregnant with the 
 most awful consequences. Time was when thia 
 was fully recognised in the Church ; and it is the 
 time alluded to in the opening of the Commination 
 Service, when there existed a public penitential 
 discipline, and "such, persons as stood convicted 
 of notorious sin were put to open penance, and 
 punished in this world, that their souls might be 
 saved in the day of the Lord." When this system 
 of public penance was, from certain abuses and 
 disorders consequent upon it, broken up, it was 
 felt that something compensating was required 
 " — that the strait gate would be made wider, and 
 the narrow way broader, than holy Scripture re- 
 presents it, unless some very stern and stringent
 
 Auricular Confession 65 
 
 protest was made by the Church against allowed 
 sin within her own pale. It was thought that she 
 would hold out her privileges and blessings at too 
 cheap a rate, unless something of this sort were 
 done ; and it was under this feeling that the Com- 
 mination Service was drawn up, and inserted in 
 the Eeformed Prayer Book, as a sort of substitute, 
 feeble indeed, but such as the times and the state 
 of society admitted of, for the ancient discipline. — 
 Then again, operating in the same direction, there 
 is that true and unquenchable instinct of man's 
 heart, which may almost be called the voice of the 
 Holy Ghost in our fallen nature, that a hypocrite 
 can never be accepted with God till he ceases to 
 be a hypocrite, that one who wears the sheep's 
 clothing of a Christian profession, while conscious 
 of some hidden iniquity which makes him really a 
 wolf, can never be at one with Him who is the 
 Truth, until he finds the moral courage to throw 
 off the fleece, and let himself be seen by men in 
 his true colours. — And then, thirdly, it is felt, and 
 felt most justly, that all real Christians must be 
 living by rule, with self-discipline and self-restraint, 
 and that the easy-going self-indulgent life of the 
 great mass of those who profess and call themselves 
 Christians, who do not make a conscience of using 
 their time profitably, or of governing their tongues 
 and their tempers, is not the life of Christ's faith- 
 ful soldiers and servants, who fight manfully under 
 His banner against sin, the world, and the devil.
 
 66 Auricular Confession 
 
 All the above sentiments are perfectly wholesome 
 and just. But then comes the leap from these to the 
 mischievous and erroneous conclusion. As Chris- 
 tians ought to be living by rule and under discipline, 
 — as the ancient discipline of public penance is 
 dropped, and the state of the Church and the times 
 makes it impossible of revival, — can we not invent 
 a wholesome system of discipline of our own, and 
 bring every soul into subjection to it, and make it 
 obligatory upon every conscience ? The command 
 to approach the Lord's Table habitually, and to 
 make there the solemn memorial of His death, to- 
 gether with the power of Absolution vested in the 
 Christian Ministry, furnish us with an excellent 
 platform on which to construct such a system. 
 Let us arise and build. Let us rule that, in order 
 to carry away any blessing from the holy Com- 
 munion, private Absolution bestowed upon the 
 individual must be first had from a Priest. Let 
 us rule further that, in order to a private Absolu- 
 tion, there must be (what certainly "matches" 
 to perfection) a private Confession. Let us decree 
 that this Confession, in order to be valid {i.e. in 
 order to secure Absolution), must be full and per- 
 fect — that the penitent must confess every sin, 
 with all its ao^s^ravations, so far as he can remember, 
 and must not omit to ransack every hole and 
 corner of his memory ; for that omission shall in- 
 validate the Confession, and nullify the Absolution. 
 And where the Priest doubts whether the peni-
 
 Auricular Confession 6"] 
 
 tent is explicit enough, or suspects that he is 
 evasive, he shall be directed by questioning — and 
 that even on such subjects as the Apostle says "it 
 is a shame even to speak of " — to drag forth into v. 12. 
 the light of day the lurking iniquity. And having 
 done this, the Priest shall appoint to the penitent 
 such penance as he shall think fit, — that is, shall 
 bind him to use certain extra devotions, very much 
 as a schoolmaster sets a boy an imposition for some 
 fault of conduct. And then the Priest shall ab- 
 solve him, not in that vague and general style in 
 which Absolution is continually ministered in our 
 Churches, but in the singular number — absolve 
 him before the penance is done (lest he should die 
 meanwhile), but yet always on the condition and 
 understanding that it must be done, if the peni- 
 tent lives, and that, if it is not done, the absolu- 
 tion does not take effect. Does not all this look 
 wholesome and profitable, on the first blush, and 
 just as if it would bring ordinary Christians, as 
 they so much require to be brought, under rule 
 and discipline, and thus supply a great desidera- 
 tum in the system of the modern Church ? It may 
 perhaps seem so. But for all its seeming it is 
 wrong in principle, and for that reason, when 
 worked out, has been found to be fatally mis- 
 chievous in results. It is wrong in principle, and 
 has a fundamental flaw in it, because it is solemnly 
 said in God's Law; "AVhat thing soever I com- 
 mand you, observe to do it : thou shalt not add
 
 68 AtuHczdar Confessioii 
 
 THERETO, nor diminish from it ; " and this whole 
 system of Auricular Confession and Penance is 
 plainly an addition to God's Word ; it is a teaching 
 for doctrines the commandments of men. The 
 utter and absolute silence of God's Word upon any 
 such system as that now described is itself the most 
 eloquent condemnation of it. We need say no more 
 than this in rej)udiating it; — "I look into my 
 Bible, and I do not find it there." For, powerful 
 as must be the leverage of such a system upon the 
 human conscience, — affecting deeply the condition 
 of the souls submitted to it, as it must affect them 
 (for such a practice never can be morally in- 
 different), — ivoidcl it not he found in the Bible, if the 
 leverage iverefor good, if the system luere really salu- 
 tary ? What ! shall Auricular Confession be (as 
 some, even in our own Church, pretend) a practice 
 essential to our spiritual health and well-being, a 
 practice without which we cannot long keep 
 straight or go on right, — and shall we suppose that 
 the wise and tender Father, who loved us so affec- 
 tionately as to give His Son for us, the Good Shep- 
 herd who gave His life and shed His blood for the 
 sheep, and watches over them with a solicitude of 
 which the strongest parental anxiety for a child is 
 very dim and poor figure, — the holy Comforter, 
 who in the sacred Word hath revealed to us all 
 things that pertain unto life and godliness, and 
 surely hath kept back nothing that was profitable 
 to us, — have not made it known to us for our gui-
 
 Auricular Confession 69 
 
 dance and our good, have left for the discovery of 
 man a beneficial and salutary practice of devotion, 
 and which was certainly never recognised as obli- 
 gatory by the Christian Church for the first ten 
 centuries of her existence ? It is inconceivable. 
 The very supposition is an impea(ihment of God's 
 care, of Christ's love, of the Spirit's wisdom. 
 
 Young men and young women, beware of this 
 yoke which it is sought to impose upon you, how- 
 ever specious the arguments by which it is recom- 
 mended, and however devout, able, and learned 
 the advocates may be, who would persuade you to 
 submit to it. It is one thing, when in any special 
 trouble or entanglement of conscience, when want- 
 ing sympathy and counsel to aid and animate you 
 in your struggle against warring lusts, to resort to 
 some discreet and learned minister, and to solicit 
 at his hands advice, consolation, prayers for you 
 and with you, and the relief of your conscience by 
 the absolution of the Word and doctrine. Act thus 
 by all means ; I do thoroughly believe that by act- 
 ing thus (and specially by young men acting 
 thus) many a temptation might be avoided, many 
 a sin nipped in the bud, many a sore healed, many 
 a heartache saved. But when private formal Con- 
 fession to the priest is pressed upon you as a 
 divine ordinance, as a normal practice of the spiri- 
 tual life, and an essential preliminary to a profit- 
 able Communion, then say with the Shunammite's 
 husband ; " Wherefore should I go to him to-day,"
 
 Auricular Confession 
 
 when there is no ordinance to be administered by 
 him, no ecclesiastical function to be discharged, 
 when " it is neither new moon nor sabbath ? " 
 Ah ! wherefore indeed ? Is not the High Priest, 
 who can be touched with the feeling of our in- 
 firmities, tenderer, wiser, more loving than any 
 Imman priest can be ? If by His constantly accru- 
 ing mercy and grace you are enabled in some good 
 measure to discipline yourself, and are gaining a 
 growing control over evil tempers and appetites, is 
 not this walking alone better ten thousand times 
 than walking on crutches ? " Wherefore wouldst 
 thou go to him to-day " then ? Is it because thou 
 wouldst have the benefit and relief of ministerial 
 Absolution ? Verily, your Church does not stint 
 you of it ; it is to be had every " new moon and 
 sabbath," nay, every day of the year in Churches 
 where the daily Office is said. Do not morbidly 
 crave for any more individual absolution than is 
 there offered. Eemember 'that the Gospel is 
 preached by the Lord's ordinance in general terms 
 — to " all nations " — " to every creature," — and that 
 it is the part of faith to take to itself those general 
 offers, and to say, " God makes them to me." So 
 with the message of mercy through Christ, on the 
 terms of repentance and faith, which is sum- 
 marized in the Absolution of the daily Service. 
 So with the Absolution of prayer in the Com- 
 munion Service. It is dispensed generally, and 
 our part is to claim our share in it by faith. Like
 
 Auriadar Confession 7 1 
 
 new minted gold pieces, thrown abroad among the 
 people as a royal largess at a Coronation, of which 
 a man eagerly catches one, and folds it in his robe, 
 and treasures it up as a memorial of the Sovereign's 
 bounty, so the absolutions and blessings of the 
 Church are scattered abroad in God's ordinances 
 promiscuously, and a fervent faith reaches forth 
 its hand with joy, and appropriates what it needs. 
 If then thou art conscious of sin, and wouldst have 
 Absolution, come into the Church. Confess your- 
 self as to that particular in the general Confession 
 to Almighty God, with full purpose of amendment 
 of life. Eemember that the true Scapegoat, the 
 Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the 
 world, is in the midst of the two or three gathered 
 together in His Name. Confess thy sins, as it 
 were, over Him, laying the sin upon His devoted 
 head, that He may bear it away. Then listen 
 intently, devoutly, believingly, to the announce- 
 ment of pardon, or to the prayer for pardon, which 
 His authorized minister makes over thee in His 
 Name. Take it to thy bosom, hide it in the folds 
 of thy heart — that pardon — it is tliinc ; as much 
 designed for thee, as if there ivere none others 
 hieeling at thy side to share it toith thee. And 
 thou shalt arise with a bri^'htened conscience and 
 a relieved heart, as an overcast sky is brightened, 
 and a leaden landscape relieved, by " clear shining 
 after rain."
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF SACRIFICE 
 
 *'^e offer poHutcli breau upon mine altar 3 anu pe 0ap, 
 CjHTierein liaie toe poUutcli tljee -i 3|n tijat pe jiap, €T)e taible 
 of tljc ILom iiS contempttblc."— Mal. i. 7 
 
 r 
 
 T is often asked by those who deny altogether 
 the sacrificial character of the holy Com- 
 munion, whether the holy Table, at which the 
 Supper of the Lord is celebrated, is ever called an 
 altar in hol}^ Scripture. Many eminent divines of 
 the Reformed Church believe that it is so called in 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the writer says ; 
 Heb. xiii. « We have an altar, whereof they have no right 
 to eat which serve the tabernacle." Eichard 
 Baxter^ will hardly be charged with Popery. Yet 
 
 ^ It is well known that Baxter objected to subscription, to the 
 use of the cross in Baptism, and the promiscuous giving of the 
 Lord's Supper ; that he was chaplain to Colonel Whalley's regi- 
 ment in the Parliamentary army ; that at the Savoy Conference 
 he drew up a reformed Liturgy, to supersede the existing one ; 
 and that on the passing of the Uniformity Act he left the min- 
 istry of the Church of England. All the tendencies of his mind 
 were against the theology represented by the Church of Rome ; 
 but he was a man of eminent candour, as well as of the highest 
 character, and nothing would ever induce him to strain a passage 
 of holy Scripture on a Procrustean bed of preconceived views. 
 The passage here referred to will be found in his "Christian In- 
 stitutes," i. p. 304.
 
 The Doctrme of Sacrifice 73 
 
 he tells us in his " Christian Institutes" that '' as 
 the bread" [of the Communion] " is justly called 
 Christ's hocly, as signifying it, so the action de- 
 scribed" [meaning the Eucharistic action] " was of 
 old called a sacrifice^ as representing and comme- 
 morating it. . . . And the naming of tlie table an 
 altar, as related to this representative sacrifice, is 
 no more improper than the other. ' We have an 
 altar, whereof they have no right to eat' (Heb. xiii. 
 10), seems plainly to mean the sacramental com- 
 munion!' 
 
 But even waiving this interpretation of the 
 j)assage in the Hebrews, as being one which all 
 commentators do not accept, and allowing for argu- 
 ment's sake that no passage of holy Scripture can 
 be produced in which the Lord's Table is unequi- 
 vocally called an altar, there can be no manner of 
 doubt that the converse is the case, — that the Altar 
 of Burnt- Offering of the Jewish ritual is called 
 " the table of the Lord." It is so in the passage 
 which stands at the head of this Chapter. Almighty 
 God in that passage is reproaching the priests of 
 the second temple for their unworthy conduct in 
 presenting on His altar for sacrifice refuse animals : 
 " If ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil ? Mai. i. 
 and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil ? 
 offer it now unto thy governor ; will he be pleased 
 with thee, or accept thy person ? saith the Lord of 
 hosts." These blind, lame, and weakly victims are 
 the " polluted bread" of verse 7. " Bread," though
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 a very literal, is not altogether a happy translation. 
 " Food" is the correct word, and the word which 
 is actually employed to render this same Hebrew 
 word in Leviticus iii. 11, where the parts of the 
 peace-offering which are dii-ected to be burned upon 
 the altar, — the fat and the kidneys and the caul, — 
 are called " the food of the offering" (Literally, the 
 bread of the offering) " made by fire unto the Lord." 
 So here in Malachi the word should be, " Ye offer 
 polluted food upon my altar," the food being animal 
 sacrifices, which had some blemish in them. The 
 idea involved in the passage is one common to 
 heathenism, as well as Judaism, that the God, who 
 is the object of men's worship, himself partakes of 
 the food which is offered upon his altar, and con- 
 sumed by the sacred fire that burns thereon. In 
 accordance with this idea, the word " altar" is 
 exchanged for a phrase, which more clearly indi- 
 cates Jehovah's participation in what is oftered to 
 Him; it is caUed the "table of the Lord." St. 
 Paul did not originate that expression. He found 
 it in the inspired Scriptures of the Old Testament. 
 The altar of biu-nt-offering^ had been called " the 
 table of the Lord" by ]\Ialachi, just as by Ezekiel 
 (ch. xli. 22) the altar of incense had been called 
 " the table that is before the Lord." And himself 
 speaking by the Spirit of God, he applied it to the 
 table at which among Christians the holy Supper 
 lCor.x.2i. is celebrated. " Ye cannot," he says, " be partaker 
 of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils."
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 75 
 
 Thus a name, originally belonging to the Jewish 
 altar, is WjirowfA hy the AjKjstle to designate a 
 Christian board of Communion. This would be 
 STirely rather a hazardoas mode of proceeding, and 
 one which might lead to erroneous inferences, if in 
 no sense whatever the board of Communion were 
 an altar. If the whole Jewish sacrificial system 
 was intended by the Apostles to be swept away, 
 and a system of worship wholly and utterly new, 
 having no roots in the past, and with the sacrificial 
 element eliminated from it altogether, was to be 
 substituted (as some pretend), one fails to under- 
 stand this borrowing of phraseology from one 
 system and applying it freely to another. It would 
 surely hazard a mistake. The sameness of phrase- 
 ology would be taken to indicate a subsisting 
 thread of connexion between the old and the new 
 system, for which there was no ground in truth 
 and fact. 
 
 K it be maintained that at all events the term 
 ** altar" is nowhere in the l3ook of Common Prayer 
 api>lied to the Lord's table, that is no doubt a fact, 
 but like other facts of the Prayer Book, on one 
 of which some obser\'ations were offered in the 
 second Chapter of this Appendix, it is a fact which 
 can be rightly understood only in connexion with 
 the whole history of the Book. The Book was 
 originally drawn up to guide the public devotions 
 of English Churchmen, at a period when the Church 
 was just emerging from the superstitions and cor-
 
 76 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 ruptions of Eomanism. The intention of the 
 lieforiners, and it is an intention for which their 
 memory is to be blessed and venerated, was to cut 
 the Church entirely clear from these superstitions 
 and corruptions. In perfect consistency with Scrip- 
 ture and Primitive Antiquity they might have left 
 many things standing, which yet it was judicious 
 and politic, — aye, and essential to the safety of the 
 Church, — to remove. There were many things 
 lawful, which yet were not expedient. More i)ar- 
 ticularly such horrible perversions of the Sacrament 
 of the Lord's Supper had grown up around the 
 ordinance in the course of centuries, that it was 
 necessary to proceed with the extremest caution in 
 every item of the arrangements and the phraseology 
 connected with it. The minds of the people had 
 Art. xxxi. grown to the idea that in the Mass " the Priest did 
 offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have 
 remission of pain or guilt." From this idea they 
 had to be entirely wrenched away. This could not 
 be done effectually without some little violence; 
 a crooked stick can only be made straight by giv- 
 ing it a strong bend in another direction. The 
 Reformers were afraid, — most justly afraid, under 
 their circumstances, — of the word " altar." For 
 the word "Lord's table" they had express New 
 Testament sanction; for the word " altar," as applied 
 to the Communion Table, they had only one (or at 
 most two) New Testament passages, which could 
 be quoted as sanctioning it, and both these were
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 7 7 
 
 capable of different explanations. It was deemed 
 safe therefore, in the then exigencies of the Church, 
 to waive the term, though it never can be fairly 
 gathered from hence that there is not a true, and 
 Scriptural, and orthodox sense, in which the Lord's 
 table may be called an altar, and is so called by 
 many of the early Fathers. But the Church is no 
 more in the condition in which the Eeformers had 
 to deal with and guide her, — no longer engaged in 
 the hard struggle to extricate herself from an old 
 bondage, or passing through the critical birth-throes 
 of a new life. And accordingly we are now at 
 liberty to vindicate, as Scriptural and primitive, 
 terms and modes of expression, which the Eeformers 
 may have thought it safe and wise to drop for a 
 while. The question about images in Churches 
 offers a parallel to that which we are discussing. 
 When the people had to be broken of the habit 
 of worshipping images, and regarding them with 
 religious veneration, it was necessary to decree 
 with great sternness the destruction of those which 
 existed, and to prohibit under very stringent pen- 
 alties the erection of others. But at a period, when 
 image-worship has (at all events in our Com- 
 munion) lost its hold upon the minds of men, and 
 statuary in our Churches is regarded merely as one 
 of several forms of Art, which men seek to lay as 
 a tribute at the feet of the Ptedeemer, for the 
 decoration of His house of prayer, just then to 
 seek to revive a penal statute against images, which
 
 78 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 had great significance and value at tlie period of 
 its enactment, this savours of an acrid and narrow 
 Puritanism, rather than of that lofty zeal for right- 
 eousness and truth, which doubtless animated the 
 original framers of such enactments. 
 
 But, although the Book of Common Prayer does 
 not admit the word " altar," it does expressly and 
 unequivocally apply the word " sacrifice " to the 
 Eucharistic action. The administration and re- 
 ception of the holy Supper being over, certain 
 concluding devotions are recited, consisting of the 
 Lord's Prayer, one of two Post-Communion Prayers 
 (the option between which is given), the Hymn 
 Gloria in Excelsis, and the Benediction. The first 
 of these Post-Communion Prayers begins thus; "0 
 Lord and heavenly Father, we thy humble servants 
 entirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully to 
 accept this our sacrifice of jpraise and thanksgiving'' 
 And immediately after these words another men- 
 tion is made of " sacrifice " as being then and there 
 offered. "And here we offer and present unto 
 thee, Lord, ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be 
 a reasonable^ holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee!' It 
 will, I think, be useful, — and certainly will fall in 
 with the line of thought, which we have just 
 opened, if in this and the following Chapter we 
 give a very short summary, first, of the true 
 doctrine of Sacrifice, and then of the senses in 
 which there is a sacrifice in the Eucharist, and in 
 which the Eucharist is a sacrifice.
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 79 
 
 I. What then, in the first place, is the true idea 
 of Sacrifice? T answer, — "Man rendering imto 
 God something which is well-pleasing unto Him," 
 — no definition narrower than that will exhaust 
 the idea. It is a very common (but very crude) 
 notion, that all sacrifice is of a propitiatory cliar- 
 acter, and directed to the expiation of sin. Those 
 who have studied the various offerings prescribed 
 by the Levitical law will take a larger view of the 
 subject. They know that, although the law pre- 
 scribed sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, the 
 characteristic idea of which was expiation, yet that 
 it prescribed also other varieties, burnt-offerings, 
 meat-offerings, peace-offerings. In short, as we have 
 already seen in Chapter II. of this Appendix, there 
 were three distinct ideas attaching to the three great 
 classes of offerings, the Burnt-Offering, the Peace- 
 Offering, and the Sin-Offering. The first was that of 
 self-dedication ; — man offering to God the accept- 
 able sacrifice of himself, his soul, his body, and all 
 that is his. This was the idea of the Burnt- Offerincr. 
 The second was the idea of thanksgiving ; — man 
 offering to God the acceptable sacrifice of a grate- 
 ful acknowledgment, in return for His mercies. 
 This was the idea of the Peace-Offering. The third 
 was the idea of expiation ; — man offering to God 
 an atonement for sin, an acceptable sacrifice to 
 the justice and holiness of God, as the two former 
 were acceptable to His love in Creation and His 
 love in Providence.
 
 8o The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 The summary idea of Sacrifice, then, is man 
 offering to God something acceptable to Him, in 
 the way either of self-dedication, or grateful ac- 
 knowledgment, or finally of expiation. 
 
 But now arises the all-important question, 
 " How can man do perfectly, and in an acceptable 
 manner, any one of these three things ? " God's 
 demand of them, since He is our Creator, constant 
 Benefactor, Lawgiver, and Moral Governor, is, and 
 must be admitted by every conscience to be, most 
 reasonable. But was ever one found among the 
 sons of men, who did or could comply with the 
 demand ? Never among those born under the 
 ruins of the Fall. The Fall brought into our 
 nature a great flaw, which utterly invalidates all 
 that man can do in endeavouring to comply with 
 any one of God's demands. It makes his self- 
 dedication wanting in heartiness, in thoroughness, 
 in fervour ; it is not, as it must be, to be acceptable 
 on its own ground, " with all the heart, with all 
 the mind, with all the soul, and with all the 
 strength." It makes his acknowledgments languid 
 and tepid, — who can throw into his thanksgivings 
 to God all the warmth and glow of gratitude which 
 the case deserves ? It makes his attempts to 
 atone for past transgressions utterly vain and 
 fruitless, where they are not profane, partly be- 
 cause the man, being still inherently a sinner, is 
 always contracting a fresh debt while he seeks to 
 pay off the old one, partly because there is not
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 8 i 
 
 value enough iu a vitiated victim to make a 
 worthy expiation, and because to suppose that God 
 can be bought off by gifts and bribes (like an un- 
 just judge) to let sin go unpunished, is, in the very 
 offering we make to Him, to insult Him to His 
 face. In short, the Fall, incapacitating man as it 
 does for perfection, has made every offering, which 
 he lays upon God's altar, if judged in itself and by 
 itself, " polluted bread." God, in virtue of the 
 purity of His nature, cannot accept that which 
 is polluted; ap:d man is polluted through and 
 through, in every department of his complex being 
 — in spirit, soul, and body — by sin. 
 
 What needs to be done, then, on man's behalf ? 
 We all of us know what lias been done. God sent 
 His Son into the world, to be born of a pure 
 Virgin, and so to take upon Him a pure and un- 
 tainted human nature, in which, as the sun is 
 reflected in the pure dewdrop, and all the glories 
 of the prismatic colours displayed, might be mani- 
 fested all the perfections of the Only Begotten of 
 the Father. He, and He alone, of all that ever 
 lived, rendered to God every sacrifice which can 
 be demanded from man. His self-dedication was 
 absolutely perfect, and therefore absolutely ac- 
 ceptable. Hear Him making the vow of self- 
 dedication, when He says, on coming into the world ; 
 " Lo, I come to do thy will, God." He gave Heb. x. 5, 
 Himself up to God, — His heart all aflame with ^^J ^^^ 
 love and zeal, — and thus offered the Burnt-Offer- xi. 6, 7, 8. 
 F
 
 82 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 ing. He gave Himself up to men, to teach them, 
 to labour for them, to bleed, to agonize on their 
 behalf, and thus offered the^ Meat-Offering. Amid 
 all His labours for man, and His buftetings and 
 contradictions from man. He was continually 
 lifting His eyes to Heaven, and blessing His 
 Heh.ii. 12, Father for all His dispensations. "In the midst 
 xx.'22J'25, of the church will I sing praise unto thee," was 
 one of His purposes, foreannounced before His In- 
 carnation, fulfilled in His life on earth, and even 
 now in course of fulfilment. And thus He 
 offered the Peace-Offerino-s for thankscrivingf. 
 
 '^ The Eev. Andrew Jukes, commenting on the difference be- 
 tween the Burnt-Offering (in which a life was offered) and the 
 Meat-0'fering, which consisted of vegetable substances (flour, 
 oil, frankincense), says; "Life is that which from the be- 
 ginning God claimed as His part in creation ; as an emblem, 
 therefore, it represents what the creature owes to God, Corn, 
 the fruit of the earth, on the other hand, is man's part in crea- 
 tion ; as such, it stands the emblem of man's claim, or of what 
 we owe to man. What we owe to God or to man is respectively 
 our duty to either. Thus in the Burnt-Offering the surrender 
 of life to God represents the fulfilment of man's duty to God ; 
 man yielding to God His portion to satisfy all His claim. In 
 the Meat-Offering the gift of corn and oil represents the fulfil- 
 ment of man's duty to his neighbour ; man in his offering sur- 
 rendering himself to God, but doing so that he may give to man 
 his portion. Thus the Burnt-Offering is the perfect fulfilment 
 of the laws of the first table ; the Meat-Offering the perfect fulfil- 
 ment of the second,' etc. etc. ("The Law of the Offerings, con- 
 sidered as the appointed figure of the various aspects of the 
 offering of the Body of Jesus Christ," Nisbet & Co. 1848, 2d ed. 
 p. 91.) 
 
 ^ The Thank-Offering was a variety of the Peace-Offering (see 
 Lev. vii. 11, 22). But the Peace-Offering in its every variety
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 83 
 
 Finally, He was implicated, as having made 
 Himself one with us (not indeed in sin, but) in 
 sin's worst and heaviest penal consequences. The 
 second Man, the Lord from Heaven, died under a 
 cloud, to expiate the sins and shortcomings of the 
 first. [NTot only was the form of physical death, 
 which He underwent, most cruel and most 
 ignominious, but some mysterious anguish, which, 
 partly from that familiarity with sin which so 
 blunts our sensibilities to it, partly from the 
 ■circumstance that the relations of sin are beyond 
 the reach of our faculties, pressed down His 
 human soul in the last hour, and seemed to shut 
 out, what was to Him the last ray of comfort and 
 hope, the light of His Father's countenance. And 
 thus He offered the sin and trespass^ offerings. All 
 
 had the thought of grateful acknowledgment in it. It might 
 be "a vow," fulfilled upon certain blessings being conferred, 
 which had been urgently solicited. Here there is the additional 
 idea of the fulfilment of a sacred promise ; but still the thought 
 of grateful acknowledgment is not merged. Or it might be a 
 "voluntary offering." The prominent idea here would be that 
 of willingness, — the giving "cheerfully," and "according as" 
 the offerer "is disposed in his heart." But the ground in the 
 heart, from which such "a willing offering'' springs, must 
 surely be a feeling of gratitude (see Lev. vii. 12, 16; and 
 2 Cor. viii. 12 ; ix. 7). 
 
 4 Most interesting and instructive is Mr. Jukes's Chapter on 
 the Sin-Offering ("Law of the Offerings," pp. 161-202). He 
 points out "the reason why before the Law there were neither 
 Sin nor Trespass Offerings. We read indeed of Burnt- Offerings 
 and Meat- Offerings being offered by many of the early patriarchs ; 
 but they are never recorded to have offered Sin-Offerings, for
 
 viii. 2. 
 
 84 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 this He hath done already. — And now what does 
 He ? He has passed upwards into the heavenly 
 temple, not made with hands, and has become, as 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews expresses it, "a 
 Heb. minister of the sanctuary, and of the true taber- 
 nacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man." H 
 He be " a minister of the sanctuary, and of the 
 true tabernacle," He must have a ministration to 
 fulfil, priestly functions to discharge. What are 
 
 ' where there is no law there is no transgression.' ' By the law,' 
 says the Apostle, ' is the knowledge of sin, ' and again, * sin is 
 not imimted where there is no law, ' It was the Law which con- 
 victed man of sin, and made it necessary that he should have a 
 Sin-Offering." Again he points out the significance of the Sin- 
 Offering being not "of a sweet savour," as the Burnt-Offering 
 was. "The sweet savour Offerings were for acceptance; the 
 others /or expiation. ... In the one case the Offering was accepted 
 to show that the offerer was accepted of the Lord ; and the total 
 consumption of the Offering on the altar showed God's ac- 
 ceptance of, and satisfaction in, the offerer. In the other case 
 the Offering was cast out, and burnt, not on God's table, the 
 altar, but in the wilderness without the camp ; to show that the 
 offerer in bis offering endures the judgment of God, and is cast 
 out of His presence as accursed. . . . The one is, — 'He gave 
 himself for us, as an offering to God of a sweet smelling savour.*" 
 The other, — ' He gave himself for our sins ;' ' He was made sin 
 for us who knew no sin. ' " And as to the distinction (merely 
 specific, not generic) between the Sin and the Trespass Offering ;. 
 " The one is for sin in our nature, the other for the fruits of it, 
 ... In the Sin-Offering no particular act of sin is mentioned, 
 but a certain person is seen standing confessedly as a sinner ; in 
 the Trespass-Offering certain acts are enumerated, and the person 
 never appears." But the whole Chapter is replete with interest- 
 ing and edifying suggestions ; and indeed the whole work should 
 be studied carefully by those who wish to seize the rationale of 
 the Lcvitical Offerings.
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 85 
 
 they ? It is absolutely necessary to right appre- 
 hensions of the subject that we should seize this 
 point. 
 
 What does He, as regards His Sin-Offering ? 
 It was completed and over, when He cried upon 
 the Cross ; " It is finished." Even He cannot St. John 
 
 xix SO 
 
 make the offering over again, cannot repeat it ; for 
 it is written that He "offered one sacrifice for sins Heb.x.12, 
 for ever." But though it cannot be made a second 23*^ ^^^ ^^' 
 time, it can be pleaded. And this is what He 
 does with it now ; having made it. He pleads it. 
 In gracious accents He appeals to it on behalf of 
 transgressors, and implores, asks, claims as of 
 right, that the great appeal may be heard for 
 •every penitent and believing soul. And this in- 
 tercession is ever going on. Like the sweet bells 
 on the high priest's garment, which he was bidden, 
 on pain of his life, to cause to tinkle when he 
 went into the holy place, it is never, never silent. See Exod. 
 *' He ever liveth to make intercession for them." HebrvH^' 
 
 What does He next, as regards His Burnt- Offer- ^^• 
 iog and His Meat-Offering ? These too are not to 
 be repeated, do not admit of being made a second 
 time. Christ's self-devotion, both to the cause of 
 God upon earth, and to the interests of men, was 
 complete as soon as He expired. His life was a 
 grand monument of human obedience and submis- 
 sion, which received its last finishing stroke as He 
 €ried, " Father, into thy hands I commend my st. Luke 
 spirit." But this offering, like the former, though ^^"^' ^^^'
 
 86 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 made once for all, may be, and is, pleaded by Him 
 now. He asks that it may be remembered on 
 behalf of, and imputed to. His people — that God, 
 regarding them through the medium of Christ, 
 may see Christ's righteousness in them, as one 
 who looks at an object through coloured glass sees 
 it of the colour of the glass through which the 
 light passes to his eye. 
 
 And now, thirdly, what does He at present, as 
 regards His Thank-Offering ? I doubt not that, 
 before it is stated, the thoughtful reader will per- 
 ceive a difference here. Neither the Sin-Offering 
 nor the Burnt- Offering can be made more than 
 once ; but the Thank-Offering admits, by its very 
 nature, of being offered continually — of being pro- 
 tracted through the ages of eternity. The lan- 
 guage in which this Peace-Offering, or Thank- 
 Offering, was vowed beforehand, is that already 
 Heb. ii. q.uoted, " In the midst of the church will I sing 
 ^^' praise unto thee ; " and again, " My praise shall be 
 
 25,* ^!" of thee in the great congregation : I will pay my 
 vows before them that fear him. The meek shall 
 eat " (eat what ? eat the " sacrifice of his peace- 
 offerings for thanksgiving," as such sacrifices were 
 See Lev. prescribed in the law to be eaten, " the same day 
 that it is offered,") " and be satisfied : they shall 
 praise the Lord that seek him : your heart shall 
 live for ever." The words come from the great 
 Psalm of the Crucifixion, the 22nd, and they re- 
 present the vows which Christ made upon the
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 8 7 
 
 cross as to the sacrifice of praise which He would 
 offer in the midst of His brethren, " in the midst 
 of the church " or congregation, if he were saved See Heb. 
 (as He was) from the lion's mouth, and heard from ^' '' 
 among the horns of the unicorns. But it must be 
 manifest to every one that the fulfilment of this 
 vow was not confined to the forty days, during 
 which He lingered upon earth after the Resurrec- 
 tion; nay, that it did not then receive its most 
 emphatic and complete fulfilment. No ! when 
 the Holy Ghost descended on the day of Pentecost, 
 and constituted the Christian Church, communi- 
 cating to them Christ's own Presence (for it will , 
 be remembered that He had said ; " I will not St. Joim 
 leave you comfortless : I will come to you "), and * 
 establishing in His own Person a living thread of 
 connexion between the Head of the body in 
 heaven and His members upon earth, then were 
 things in a condition for the great "sacrifice of 
 peace-offerings for thanksgiving," — a sacrifice to be 
 made in the sanctuary of Heaven by the great 
 Minister of the Sanctuary, the echoes of it being 
 caught up in every Communion Feast (" this our 
 sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving") which is 
 celebrated in the Church upon earth. But let us 
 not forestall, as to the senses in which the Eucha- 
 rist is a sacrifice, and in which (not the same, but 
 a distinct assertion) there is a sacrifice in the 
 Eucharist. These require for their full develop- 
 ment another Chapter. Suffice it that in the
 
 88 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 present Chapter one glimpse of the truth on that 
 subject has been opened to the reader. 
 
 For the present let us settle it in our minds that 
 there is and can be no true priest, in the highest 
 sense of that word, but Christ ; and that there is 
 and can be no other offering but His, (whether of 
 self-dedication, or of expiation, or of thanksgiving,) 
 which is in the least degree acceptable to God 
 independently and on its own ground. None, — 
 whether in Gospel times, or in the times of the 
 Law. We will not run away with the very com- 
 mon, but very shallow and mistaken notion, that 
 See II eh. the blood of buUs and goats really did something 
 ^' ^" effective towards the putting away of sin, and 
 that the descendants of Aaron offered sacrifices 
 more real and more availing than the Christian 
 Church offers at the present day. This, besides 
 being itself a great mistake, will introduce into 
 the whole subject such confusion of thought, that 
 we shall be quite unable to see our way through it. 
 A Levitical sacrifice was a divine institution, as 
 being prescribed in God's Law ; and doubtless, to 
 those who took part in it merely on the ground of 
 its being a divine institution, much more to those 
 whose eyes were opened by the Holy Spirit to 
 catch a glimpse of its true significance, (and pro- 
 bably they were more than we think for), it must 
 have been in its measure a means of grace ; but in 
 itself it was absolutely without efficacy and worth- 
 less ; it borrowed all its virtue and value from the
 
 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 89 
 
 Sacrifice of Christ, to which it made, by the 
 manner of its construction, a prospective refeijence. 
 It was one of the instruments, which it pleased 
 God to make use of, for applying to His people 
 under the Old Covenant the merits of the Sacrifice 
 of Christ. The sacrifices made by the Christian 
 Church under the New Law, though offered under 
 clearer light, and instruments of a much larger 
 grace, are in themselves equally impotent. Make 
 what you will of them, they can never rise 
 higher than divinely-instituted means, whereby 
 the virtue and merit of what Christ did and suffered 
 for us is communicated to the faithful soul. Sac- 
 rifices were this in a lower and feebler degree; 
 Sacraments are this in a higher and fuller degree. 
 The most fundamental difference between the two, 
 (putting aside the difference of their outward form, 
 which after all is not fundamental,) is merely 
 this, that the Levitical sacrifice is prospective, the 
 Christian Sacrament retrospective. The one spoke 
 to Hope ; the other spealcs to Memory. The slain 
 victim stimulated and nourished devout antici- 
 pations ; the broken bread and outpoured wine 
 stimulate and nourish devout recollections. Are 
 not hope and memory great powers ? does not man 
 live by them in the future and in the past ? Well, 
 it pleased God, in constructing ordinances for His 
 Church at various stages of her existence, to lay 
 His consecrating hand upon these powers, and 
 quicken them into active operation. The sacri-
 
 90 The Doctrine of Sacrifice 
 
 fices of the Law were to make the one only Sacri- 
 fice live in the hopes and desires of the faithful 
 in bygone generations. The Sacraments of the 
 Gospel are to make the same Sacrifice live in the 
 memories of the faithful in the present generation. 
 Both are no doubt much more than this. They 
 are respectively anticipations and commemorations 
 made in the presence, and under the immediate 
 sanction, of the Most High. They have a God- 
 ward and higher aspect of worship, no less than a 
 man- ward and inferior aspect of edification. They 
 do not preach merely ; they are instruments of 
 impetration, adoration, praise, communion. But 
 the only basis of both is what we have described, 
 the one Offering of Christ in its several aspects. 
 And it is a basis which establishes a real con- 
 nexion and identity of principle between worship 
 under the Law and worship under the Gospel, 
 between the altar of the old Levitical ritual and 
 the table of the Lord under the new and better 
 Covenant.
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 THE EUCHARISTIC SACRIFICE, THE CHRISTIAN 
 PEACE-OFFERING FOR THANKSGIVING 
 
 *' 91100 in t\z Dap of pour glatme^is, ano in pour fiokmn liap0, 
 ano in t\)t lieginning^ of pour mont?)0, pe jsl^aH btoto 
 ioit^ tlje trumpets . . . . » oiier t\t jsacrificcji of pour 
 peace offerings 3 tl^at tl^ep map !)e to pou for a memorial 
 !>efore pour ®on." — Numbers x. 10 
 
 IT is worthy of observation that the Greek word 
 used in St. Luke's Gospel, when that evan- st. Luke 
 gelist rehearses the institution of the Eucharist, ^^"' ^^' 
 and by St. Paul also, when he rehearses the reve- ^ cor. xi. 
 lation from the Lord with which he had been ^4. 25. 
 favoured on the subject, is the same, which in 
 the Greek version of the Old Testament Scrip- 
 tures, called the Septuagint, is used to denote the 
 " memorial " made " before God," by blowing the 
 silver trumpets over the sacrifices of peace-offer- ^^^^^ ^ 
 ings. This circumstance suggests a better transla- lo- 
 tion of the words used by our Lord in instituting 
 the Eucharist. " Do this for the memorial (or 
 commemoration) of me " would be a better 
 rendering than, " Do this in remembrance," that 
 is, for a remembrance, " of me." There is a not 
 unimportant difference of meaning between, " Do
 
 92 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 
 this for a remembrance," and " Do this for the 
 commemoration." While every commemoration 
 is a remembrance, every remembrance is not a 
 commemoration. A commemoration is a solemn 
 and formal act of remembrance, designed not only 
 to keep alive in the individual mind, but to hand 
 down, and preserve to future generations, the 
 memory of an individual or a transaction. It is 
 not a commemoration, but simply a remembrance, 
 when a son, looking upon some token of affection 
 given or bequeathed to him by his father, bethinks 
 him of that father's loving solicitude for him in 
 the period of his childhood. But when it is felt 
 that the founders and benefactors of some great 
 institution ought, as long as it continues, to be 
 enshrined in the memories of those who have an 
 interest in it, and a day and hour is set apart for 
 this purpose, and at the appointed time in the 
 hall of the institution the names of these founders 
 and benefactors are read out, and their services 
 to the institution publicly recited, and then an 
 oration made in their praise, — this is a commem- 
 oration, — a solemn formal act, involving no doubt 
 a remembrance, but going much beyond it.^ The 
 
 ^ It may be added that, " Do this for the commemoration of 
 me," or "for my commemoration" (et's riqv ifjLrjv avdixv-qaiv), goes 
 beyond " Do this in remembrance of me." The latter is simply 
 equivalent to "Do this as a remembrance,'" — as one out of 
 several (conceivable) methods of calling me to mind. The other 
 indicates that the method designated is the appointed method. 
 " Do this for the" (established) "memorial," "for 7>i2/ memo- 
 rial," (which I instituted, and commanded to be observed).
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 93 
 
 holy Supper of the Lord, while, as one of its 
 effects, it awakens a remembrance of Him in the 
 mind of each of His faithful people, has a wider 
 scope than this ; — it is a solemn formal commem- 
 oration of His dying love, which hands down the 
 memory of it to the latest generations of the 
 Church, — nay, and more than this, it is a com- 
 memoration which appeals effectually to Him, 
 who has said, " Put me in remembrance," no less isa. xiiii. 
 than to man ; it is a memorial before God, no less ^^* 
 than in the face of the Church, of the once offered, 
 never to be repeated. Sacrifice of Christ. 
 
 In our last Chapter the doctrine of Sacrifice, as 
 it is exhibited in the Levitical Law, was briefly 
 explained; and it was shown how Christ, while 
 He was upon earth, offered for us the burnt- 
 offering and meat-offering of a devoted life, and 
 then the sin and trespass offering of an expiatory 
 death, — and how He is now (not indeed making 
 these offerings again, but) pleading them before 
 God in our behalf. This is what our High Priest 
 now does in Heaven, the sanctuary above, which, 
 as the Holy of Holies was separated from the 
 Holy Place by a veil, is screened off from us, 
 and indeed from all mere creatures of God, beincr 
 inaccessible doubtless to the highest archangel. 
 He is exalted " far above all principality and See Eph. 
 power." " Angels and authorities and powers " ' ' " 
 are " made subject unto him." It was also stated Seel Pet. 
 
 iii 22 
 
 that there is one offering which, by the very nature
 
 94 ^^^^ Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 
 of it, could not be completed while He was upon 
 earth, but admitted, as the burnt-offering and sin- 
 offering did not, of repetition, — and that this was 
 the thank-offering; the sacrifice of praise and 
 thanksgiving. " In the midst of the church will 
 I sing praise unto thee," says He in Psalm xxii. 22 
 (comp. Hebrews ii. 12), and again (Psalm 
 xxii. 25) ; " My praise shall be of thee in the 
 great congregation: I will pay my vows before 
 them that fear him." This is the offering which 
 is at present being offered. Over and above the 
 pleading, in the way of intercession, of the past 
 and finished Burnt-Offering and Sin-Offering, the 
 Intercessor, in His character of risen and glorified 
 Son of Man, is at present giving thanks in the 
 midst of the Church, praising God in the great 
 congregation, paying His vows before them that 
 fear God. Christ, it is to be remembered, is not 
 only High Priest of the sanctaary of Heaven, but 
 also, as He is called by the Apostle to the 
 Hebrews, '* a minister of holy things and of the 
 true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not 
 man," — this tabernacle being the Church Uni- 
 versal, which is divided into two great sections, 
 the Church militant here on earth, and the Church 
 triumphant in Paradise. It is as Minister of the 
 Church,^ and not as High Priest of the screened 
 
 ^ See this tliouglit nobly developed in a Sermon by the late 
 Rev. Canon Melvill ( " Melvill's Sermons," Vol. I. Sermon II. 
 Rivingtons, 1870).
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 95 
 
 sanctuary, that He offers His Peace-Offering for 
 thanksgiving and for the payment of His vows. 
 
 But now, having sufficiently studied the prin- 
 ciples which underlie the question, let us address 
 ourselves to the solution of it. " In what senses is 
 there a sacrifice in the Eucharist, and in what 
 sense is the Eucharist itself a sacrifice V 
 
 The answer will be best elicited by treating the 
 subject according to those divisions of it, which 
 have been already traced out, and by inquiring 
 — 1st, What is done in the Eucharist as regards 
 Christ's Sin-Offering; 2dly, What is done as regards 
 His Burnt-Offering ; and ?>dly, What is done as 
 regards His Peace-Offering for thanksgiving and 
 the fulfilment of His vows. 
 
 I. What is done in the Eucharist as regards 
 Christ's Sin-Offering? That is done in regard to 
 it, which Christ Himself does in heaven, — it is 
 pleaded before God, and pleaded efficaciously. 
 And observe the method of this Eucharistic plead- 
 ing. We may plead the Sin-Offering in simple 
 prayer ; we do so, as often as we say at the close of 
 our prayers, " through Jesus Christ our Lord." Put 
 into a large paraphrase, this is equivalent to saying, 
 " God, we are not worthy in ourselves to draw 
 nigh unto thee ; much less to solicit any blessing 
 at thy hand; for we are miserable sinners, who 
 have broken thy law; but we look to thee for 
 pardon, acceptance and grace, through him, who not
 
 96 The Eticharistic Sacrifice 
 
 only fulfilled the righteousness of the law- for us,, 
 but also endured its curse upon the tree." Now 
 this same pleading of Christ's Sin-Offering which 
 we make in prayer, we make in the holy Supper, 
 according to His own appointment, by a repre- 
 sentative and commemorative action, constructed 
 purposely in such a manner as to show forth His 
 death before God and man. The bread formed- 
 of wheat, bruised in the mill in order to be con- 
 verted into human sustenance (compare the texts, 
 Isa.xxviii. " Bread corn is bruised ;" '' He was bruised for our 
 
 28 
 
 isa. liii. 5. iniquities"), is solemnly broken under the eyes of 
 
 God and man, to represent the fracture of the 
 
 body of Christ for our sins by the impact of the 
 
 nails, lance, and thorny crown. The wine, formed 
 
 of grapes which are trodden in the wine-press 
 
 Isa. ixiii. (compare, ''I have trodden the wine -press 
 
 Eev. xix. alone;" "he treadeth the winepress of the fierce- 
 
 ^^' ness and wrath of Almighty God"), is solemnly 
 
 poured out to represent that shedding of Christ's 
 
 blood, without which there could have been no 
 
 See Heb. remission. This action, when performed in faith, 
 
 ix 22 ^ 
 
 pleads with God for forgiveness and acceptance, 
 just as, in a lower degree, prayer offered in the 
 faith of Christ's Name pleads with Him. Before 
 dealing with the symbols of bread and wine in 
 the prescribed manner, we rehearse before God, 
 and so put Him in remembrance of the fact that 
 Christ, the gift of His tender mercy to man, 
 " made " upon the cross, " by his one oblation of
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 9 7 
 
 himself once offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient 
 sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of 
 the whole world." Thus we plead in the Eucharist 
 the Sin-Offering of Christ, offered once for all. 
 And we plead it effectually, \st, because the way 
 in which we plead is the way of His own appoint- 
 ment; 2dly, because His heavenly Intercession, 
 when He observes us keeping His appointment, 
 lends virtue and gives weight to our pleading. 
 But if it be asked whether in this sense the 
 Eucharist be a sacrifice, it must be answered in 
 strictness of speech, " ISTo. It is not a Sin-Offer- 
 ing itself ; but only the commemoration of a Sin- 
 Offering, effective through faith and the virtue of 
 Christ's Intercession." 
 
 If it should be asked how God can forget or 
 need to be reminded of anything, seeing His mind 
 is infinite, and consequently there can be with 
 Him no mental perspective, — the remote past and 
 the remote future must be as present to Him as 
 the present, — the only answer is that holy Scrip- 
 ture, which is His written Word, thus speaks 
 of Him ; and that it is a far safer, wiser, and more 
 reverent course to shape our views on the phrase- 
 ology of His Word, than in the conceit of our 
 natural minds to speculate upon a subject which 
 must be high above out of our reach. What 
 progress towards understanding the thoughts, 
 plans, and reasonings of the human mind could 
 be made, think you, by the most sagacious and 
 
 G
 
 98 The Eucharisiic Sacrifice 
 
 intelligent of animals ? And must there not be a 
 much wider interval between the highest created 
 mind and the infinite mind of God, than between 
 the intelligence of one creature than another ? 
 Suffice it to say that, albeit we cannot conceive 
 in God any sort of mental imperfection, yet that 
 there must be something in Him, — we cannot say 
 what it is, — analogous to memory in our minds, 
 and which, viewed through the medium of human 
 nature, is memory. For when He would have 
 His people plead with Him for those blessings, 
 which He is always more ready to give, than they 
 
 isa. xiiii. to ask. He says : " Put me in remembrance: let us 
 plead together." — And we read that He appointed 
 the rainbow as an outward visible sign, that He 
 might thereby remind Himself of His covenant 
 
 Gen. ix, with the earth ; " And the bow shall be in the 
 
 ^^' cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remem- 
 ber the everlasting covenant between God and 
 every living creature of all flesh that is upon the 
 earth." And in the passage which stands at the 
 head of this Chapter, as well as in other pas- 
 sages of the Levitical Law, God is expressly said 
 to be memorialized, and precepts are given for 
 the purpose of making the memorial come up 
 before Him. Thus the silver trumpets are to be 
 blown over the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. 
 
 Num. X. *'that they may be to you for a memorial before your 
 God;" and in time of foreign invasion an alarm is 
 directed to be blown with them, the effect of which
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 99 
 
 should be this, " And if ye go to war in your land Num. i. 
 against the enemy that oppresseth you, then ye 
 shall blow an alarm with the trumpets; and ye 
 shall be remembered before the Lord your God, 
 and ye shall be saved from your enemies." 
 Similar language is maintained in the New Testa- 
 ment. The prayers and alms of Cornelius, we are 
 told, represented him in the sanctuary of Heaven ; 
 " thy prayers and thine alms are come up for aActsx.l 
 memorial before God;" " thy prayer is heard, and Acts x. 
 thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of ^^' 
 God." And indeed the great prayer-precepts of our 
 Lord and His Apostles are all founded on the idea 
 that God must be made acquainted with our wants, 
 before He will supply them. " Ask, and it shall St. Matt, 
 be given you ; seek, and ye shall find ; knock, and ^^' 
 it shall be opened unto you." "■ By prayer and phii.iv.6. 
 supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be 
 made known unto God." In exact conformity 
 with all this, the great precept for the highest act 
 of Christian worship runs : " This do in remem- St. Luke 
 brance " — for the commemoration — " of me," — a ^^"* 
 commemoration, not primarily or principally before 
 man, but rather before God, that He may be 
 moved by this pleading of Christ's Atonement to 
 forgive, accept, and bless you. 
 ' II. But, secondly, what is done in the Eucharist as 
 regards Christ's Burnt- Offering and Meat-Offering, 
 — the self-devotion to the glory of God and the 
 interests of man, which characterised His life upon
 
 loo The Eticharistic Sacrifice 
 
 earth ? This offering, like the preceding, cannot 
 be repeated ; it can only be pleaded. And it is 
 pleaded, when in the Prayer of Consecration we 
 make mention of Christ's " one oblation of him- 
 self once offered," as being " a full, perfect, and 
 sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for 
 the sins of the whole world." For had not His 
 self-dedication been thorough, hearty, entire — had 
 not the devotion of His life come up to the 
 extreme of God's requirements, — His oblation of 
 Himself could not have been " full, perfect, and 
 sufficient," the victim offered for the sins of men 
 would not have been without blemish aud without 
 spot, and so could not have endured the strict 
 scrutiny of God's judgment. 
 
 But though the perfect devotion of Christ's life, 
 whereby He offered both the Burnt-Offering and 
 Meat-Offering, cannot possibly be made a second 
 time, and nothing remains either for Him or for us 
 but only to plead the merits of it, yet in respect 
 of this devotion, it is open to us to do, what we 
 cannot do in respect of the Sin-Offering, — that is, 
 to imitate it in our humble measure — to devote 
 our lives, as far as the honest intention and pur- 
 pose of them is concerned, to the same great ends 
 of God's glory and man's welfare. And this devo- 
 tion will be most acceptable to God, not indepen- 
 dently or on its own ground (for it must always be 
 flawed by the corruption of our nature), but on the 
 ground of Christ's meritorious oblation of Himself,
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice loi 
 
 if it be made from loving gratitude for the mercies 
 of redemption, that gratitude, which only the Holy 
 Spirit, the living thread of connexion between 
 Christ's Spirit and ours, can enable us to yield- 
 Most beautifully is the imperfection of this offer- 
 ing in itself, and the supply of its imperfections in 
 Christ, set forth in one of Dr. Daniel Brevint's 
 Eucharistic^ Prayers ; " my God, accept of a 
 heart that sheds now before thee its tears, as a 
 poor victim doth its blood, and that raises up unto 
 thee all its desires, its thoughts, its zeal, as a burnt- 
 offering doth its flames. And since my sacrifice 
 can neither be holy nor accepted being alone, 
 accept of it, Father, as it is an oblation supported 
 by that sacrifice which alone is able to please thee. 
 Keceive it, clothed with the righteousness of thy 
 Son, and made acceptable with that holy perfume 
 which rises from off his altar ; and grant that he 
 who sanctifies and they who are by him sanctified, 
 may be joined in one passion, and may enjoy here- 
 after with thee the same glory. Amen." This is 
 the sacrifice to which St. Paul exhorts us in the 
 beginning of his twelfth chapter to the Eomans ; 
 " I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies iioin.3ii. 
 of God," (those mercies which must be embraced 
 by faith in the first instance, before God will accept 
 from us any sacrifice,) "that ye present your 
 
 3 The prayer is given at length in the late Bishop Wilber- 
 force's " Eucharistica, " one of the most valuable manuals of 
 Euoharistic preparation which our Church possesses.
 
 I02 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 
 bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, 
 which is your reasonable service." And the words, 
 in which our own Communion Service instructs us 
 to present this offering, are drawn from the above 
 passage of the Epistle to the Eomans, with only 
 a slight enlargement of its phraseology, — "And 
 here we offer and present unto thee, Lord, our- 
 selves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, 
 holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee." Here then, 
 there is a sacrifice in the Eucharist, though it is 
 not a sacrifice of Christ, nor of the Body and Blood 
 of Christ. And yet it is a sacrifice ; for both St. 
 Paul and the Book of Common Prayer call it so ; 
 even a sacrifice of burnt-offering under the I^ew 
 Law of the Gospel. Under the Old Law burnt- 
 offerings consisted of cattle without blemish, wholly 
 consumed upon the altar. The New Law has sub- 
 stituted for these the living bodies of Christians, 
 yielded in all their members, by an act of self- 
 dedication, to the glory of God and the service of 
 men. Such an offering can only be yielded by a 
 heart inflamed, as Christ's was perfectly, and a& 
 ours through the working of His Spirit may be 
 imperfectly, with the love of God and man. 
 
 But there is another sacrifice in the Eucharist,, 
 distinct from that of the Eucharist, which this is 
 the place to notice. If a man sincerely gives him- 
 self to God, he gives with himself his property ; 
 what he has follows what he is. Our Lord detected 
 the fact that the rich young man had not given
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 
 himself up to God, in the self-surrender of perfect 
 love, by applying to him the test of a demand, 
 which God was then and there making upon him ; 
 but with which he was backward to comply. 
 " One thing thou lackest : go thy way, sell what- St. Mark 
 soever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou 
 shalt have treasure in heaven." We see from the 
 example of Cornelius that alms no less than prayers 
 may come up to very good purpose before God ; 
 "thine alms are come up for a memorial before Acts x. 4. 
 God." And alms are distinctly recognised in the 
 l!^ew Testament as a sacrifice under the Gospel. 
 St. Paul called the things sent to him through 
 Epaphroditus from the Philippians, " an odour of PhU. iv. 
 a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing * 
 to God." And in the Epistle to the Hebrews the 
 sacrificial character of alms (assuming them of 
 course to be offered in the faith and love of Christ's 
 Name) is expressly recognised ; " To do good and Heb.xiiL 
 to communicate forget not : for with such sacri- 
 fices God is well pleased." 
 
 And it will be remembered that in the earlier 
 part of the English Communion OfiBce there is 
 a distinct recognition of this particular sacrifice. 
 " The Alms for the Poor, and other devotions of 
 the people," are at a certain point of the Service 
 to be received " in a decent bason to be provided 
 for that purpose ; " and then humbly presented by 
 the Priest and placed upon the holy Table ; after 
 which, so much Bread and Wine having been also
 
 I04 The Euc harts tic Sacrifice 
 
 placed there as the Priest shall think sufficient, 
 he is directed to use these words ; " We humbly 
 beseech thee most mercifully to accept our alms 
 and oblations, and to receive these our prayers, 
 which we offer unto thy Divine Majesty." 
 
 Here, then, there is a second sacrifice made in 
 the Eucharist, distinct from the sacrifice of the 
 Eucharist, the sacrifice of our substance, which 
 necessarily accompanies the sacrifice of ourselves. 
 We may call it, if we will, the sacrifice of the meat- 
 offering under the New Law. Eor the meat- 
 offering foreshadowed Christ's devotion to the 
 interests of men, as the burnt-offering fore- 
 shadowed His devotion to the cause of God. And 
 alms are for the relief of our fellow-creatures. 
 
 III. But, thirdly, what is done in the Eucharist 
 as regards Christ's Peace-Offering for thanksgiving 
 and for the fulfilment of His vows ? Here at 
 length we come to the Eucharistic Sacrifice proper, 
 as distinct from the sacrifice of our souls and 
 bodies, of our prayers and alms, which are made in 
 the course of the Eucharistic Service. It has been 
 already said that our great High Priest in heaven, 
 He who, in the strict and highest sense of the 
 word, is our only priest, deals with His Thank- 
 Offering in a different manner from that in which 
 He treats His Sin-Offering and His Burnt-Offering. 
 His life cannot be — needs not to be — lived over 
 again. His death cannot be — needs not to be — 
 died again. Neither Sin-Offering, nor Burnt-Offer-
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 105 
 
 ing does He, nor can He, repeat ; He only pleads 
 them efficaciously before the throne of grace. But 
 His Thank-Offering, in the nature of things, is 
 capable of being repeated. And He does repeat 
 it continually. Nor does He repeat it singly and 
 alone. What Christ does in Heaven, His Church 
 does upon earth ; nay rather, it is not as if He 
 were in one place far remote, and His people in 
 another ; He does it not only for them, but with 
 them and among them, standing in their midst. 
 For though "the natural body of our Saviour 
 Christ is in heaven, and not here," yet, in virtue of 
 His promise, He is in the midst of the two or three See St. 
 who are gathered together in His Name, and is 20. 
 with His true disciples " always, even unto the end See St. 
 of the world." He " walketh in the midst of the xxviii. 20. 
 seven golden candlesticks," which are His churches; r^ev. ii. 1. 
 His ascension having exempted Him, if I may so 
 speak, from the condition of a local presence, to 
 which He was subjected upon earth, and having 
 given Him that ubiquity as Son of Man, which He See Eph. 
 always had as Son of God ; and His Spirit being 
 that living thread of connexion between Himself 
 and His people, which draws Him down, with His 
 retinue of angels, into the midst of their assemblies. 
 In these assemblies He is Precentor as well as 
 Priest, leading and conducting, though unseen by 
 the bodily eye, their sacrifice of praise and thanks- 
 eivini^. This He vowed before His Incarnation that Heb. ii. 12 
 
 and Ps 
 
 He would do ; " In the midst of the church will I xxii. 2i
 
 io6 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 
 sing praise unto tliee." And this He does at every 
 Communion Feast, as well as at the assemblies of 
 His people for lower and less blessed exercises of 
 devotion, in pursuance of that vow. 
 
 But what is there, then, distinctive in the Com- 
 munion Feast, which differences it from, and gives 
 it a higher rank than, other assemblies of the 
 Church, — makes it, not only a, but tlu — the dis- 
 tinctively Christian sacrifice of praise and thanks- 
 giving, the sacrifice which bears on it Christ's own 
 stamp and signature ? It is that provision is made 
 in it for bringing the worshipper into direct and 
 close communion with the object of His worship. 
 In order to join worthily in the sacrifice of praise 
 and thanksgiving (or, at least, as worthily as it is 
 given to flesh and blood to do), the w^orshipper 
 must be united to Christ the sacrificing Priest. 
 This is effected in the old way, the way which was 
 recognised in the Church under the Law, and 
 which is still recognised in the Church under the 
 Gospel. The eating of a sacrifice was held ta 
 bring the eater into communion with the being to 
 whom the sacrifice was offered. As the Apostle 
 intimates, when speaking of the Lord's Supper, 
 recognising its correspondence under the Gospel 
 with the Levitical sacrifices of the Old Dispensation, 
 and unfolding to us the communion with Christy 
 which is enjoyed by a faithful participation of it. 
 1 Cor. X. " Behold Israel after the flesh : are not they which 
 
 18, 20, 21, 
 
 eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar ?
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 107 
 
 the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacri- 
 fice to devils, and not to God : and I would not 
 that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye 
 cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of 
 devils : ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, 
 and of the table of devils." 
 
 In accordance, then, with this view of the effect 
 of eating a sacrifice, it was decreed that men should 
 still have communion with God by the eating and 
 drinking of the consecrated symbols of His Son's 
 Passion and Sacrifice. There was still to be in the 
 Church a material offering, the " Peace-Offering for 
 thanksgiving " of the New Law, which should be 
 consumed by the worshipper, and which being 
 received in penitence and faith, should bring him 
 into immediate communion with the one great 
 Priest, the one great Leader of the Church's wor- 
 ship. Great modifications of the outward form of 
 the offering were to be made, corresponding to the 
 change of the Dispensation. Bloody sacrifices 
 were abolished; and an oblation of bread and 
 wine, the strengthening, restoring, exhilarating 
 food of man, and in some respects more instructive 
 in its symbolism than animal sacrifices could be, 
 was substituted in their stead. And the con- 
 sumption of part of the sacrifice by the fire of the 
 altar, connected as it was with the idea that the 
 god himself, to whom the sacrifice was offered, 
 liter ally partook of it, — this was abolished. The 
 Peace-Offering of the New Law, unlike that of the
 
 io8 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 
 
 Levitical ritual, was to be wholly consumed by 
 the worshipper. 
 
 The above observations will, I think, have made 
 it appear that the whole Eucharistic act, including 
 the oblation of the elements, their subsequent con- 
 secration, and (last, but not least) the reception of 
 them, is in itself a sacrifice of praise and thanks- 
 giving, the "Peace-Offering for thanksgiving" of 
 the Old Law, preserved in its essentials under the 
 new, but brought out in a new form, and with 
 great modifications, corresponding to the change of 
 the ceconomy. 
 
 If now in conclusion we are asked categorically, 
 whether the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist, 
 considered in themselves, be a sacrifice, there is no 
 reason to blink the answer. The ^t^iconsecrated 
 Bread and Wine are, and were recognised by the 
 earliest Fathers and Liturgies as being, an oblation, 
 or offering of the fruits of the earth, made out of 
 our substance, to God, in acknowledgment that we 
 are nourished and preserved by His bounty. But 
 they are not an offering of the Body and Blood of 
 Christ, nor indeed (since, at the time of offering 
 them, they have not yet received consecration) 
 have they yet become even the authorized symbols 
 of His Body and Blood. It is a most instructive 
 circumstance that in all the earliest Liturgies 
 wdiich have been preserved to us, the oblation or 
 offering of the elements is made (just as in our
 
 The Eucharistic Sacrifice 109 
 
 own Liturgy)^ before and independently of the 
 CONSECRATION. And immediately after the obla- 
 tion, and the prayer that God would accept it, follow 
 words to this effect ; " Send down thy Holy Spirit, 
 the witness of the sufferings of the Lord Jesus, on 
 this sacrifice, that he may exhibit {airo(py]vr}) this 
 bread, the Body of thy Christ, and this cup, the 
 Blood of thy Christ ; that all who shall partake 
 of it may be confirmed in godliness, may receive 
 
 remission of their sins and may obtain 
 
 everlasting life." This petition clearly shows two 
 things ; first, that in those early days the Bread 
 and Cup were regarded as a sacrifice ; secondly, 
 that they were not regarded as a sacrifice of the 
 Body and Blood of Christ. Tor after the sacrifice 
 has heen offered, the Holy Ghost is invoked over 
 it, to make it to the faithful receiver, what there- 
 fore it was not before. It is much to be resetted 
 that the compilers of the American Liturgy have 
 departed from this primitive order, by placing the 
 oblation of the elements after the consecration of 
 them, thereby hazarding a great and fatal mistake, 
 
 * I am indebted for this observation, as also for the passage 
 of the Clementine Liturgy ("admitted to be the best represen- 
 tative we have of an Ante-Nicene Liturgy ") quoted further on, 
 to the Rev. John Le Mesurier's most valuable treatise on "the 
 Scriptural and Primitive Doctrine of the 'Eucharistic Sacri- 
 fice,'" written for "Anglo -Catholic Princii^les Vindicated, " Part 
 XII. (1871 to 1874, Oxford and London, Parker & Co.), a 
 serial which contains many words in due season, and is likely 
 to do good service. Dr. Biber's papers in the same Part are 
 also of great interest and importance.