I
THE
Boofe of Common Draper
INTERPRETED
BY ITS HISTORY.
BY
C. M. BUTLER,
RECTOR OF GRACE CHURCH, BOSTON.
BOSTON:
JAMES B. DOW, PUBLISHER.
PHILADELPHIA: GEORGE S. APPLETON.
1845.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1845y
By C. M. BUTLER,
An the Clerk s Office of the District Court of Massachusetts,
Wm. J3. Hall $ Co. s Press, 141 Washington street,
TO THE
REV. ALEXANDER H. VINTON, D. D.,
IS INSCRIBED, BY
HIS AFFECTIONATE FRIEND,
THE AUTHOR.
Preface.
THE greater portion of the following work was
brought before the author s congregation in the
form of lectures, during the past winter. As it
now stands, it is the partial fulfilment of a plan
which was designed to embrace the whole Book of
Common Prayer. It is published with the hope
that it may aid in guiding the inquiring mind of
the Church and the public, to the true interpreta
tion of our forms and services.
c. M. B.
HOWARD STREET,
BOSTON, JUNE 2, 1845.
FACE
I.
. 13
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYEB
II.
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY 33
III.
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH 52
IV.
THE MORNING PRAYER 73
V.
" (continued) 90
VI.
THE LORD S SUPPER 10
VII.
c < (continued) 132
VIII.
" (continued) 154
IX.
< { (concluded) 182
X.
IWFANT BAPTISM ^
XI.
THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES, AND THE CATECHISM 232
XII.
CONFIRMATION 255
I.
of ,fbrtn0 of
will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also."
1 CORINTHIANS xiv. 15.
THE Apostle, in the chapter from which the text is
taken, rebukes the Corinthian disciples for their abuse
of miraculous and spiritual gifts. He censures those
who, in the common assemblies of Christians, were ac
customed to pray in an unknown tongue. His objection
to it is that it is not edifying. The gift of tongues was
imparted, that the Gospel might be preached to all na
tions. It was an abuse of that gift to pray in religious
assemblies in a tongue unknown by those present.
" Therefore," declares the Apostle, " if I know not the
meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a
barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto
me. For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit
prayeth, but mine understanding is unfruitful. What is
it then ? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with
the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I
will sing with the understanding also." 1
To attain the ends of public worship, it is necessary
that we should pray both with the spirit and with the
understanding. In our public assemblies for the worship
1 1 Cor. xiv. 11, 14, 15.
14 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
of God we should, therefore, adopt such a method as is
best calculated to effect that object. The Church,
throughout all ages, imitating Scripture example, has
adopted forms of prayer. That branch of the Church to
which it is our privilege to belong, by providing for our
use that Liturgy whose history and origin and doctrine it
is my purpose briefly to unfold, has declared it her
opinion that this object is best secured by the use of such
a prescribed formulary of prayer, as shall both meet the
wants of the spirit and satisfy the demands of the under
standing. An examination of the grounds of this opinion
will show it to be firmly founded.
It is proper to remark at the entrance upon this ex
amination, that the reasonings which may be adduced in
favor of forms of prayer in general, will be conducted
with special reference to the peculiar advantages pos
sessed by our own formulary in particular, in enabling
the worshippers who rightly use it to " pray with the
spirit, and with the understanding also."
That there is such a thing as praying with the spirit,
without the understanding, may be inferred from the Ian-
gauge of St. Paul in the text. The Corinthians, to whom
he addressed himself, might be placed under such cir
cumstances as that while they could pray with the spirit,
they could not pray with the understanding. Coming to
their assemblies with the spirit of devotion, with hearts
full of penitence, faith, and love, they might experience
deep religious sensibilities even during those prayers
which were uttered in an unknown tongue. Hearing
the tones and reading the language of prayer and praise,
made visible by gesture and expression, they might join
in spirit with the spirit of supplication or of thanksgiving
which pervaded the assembly. But such prayer the
Apostle considered imperfect. It was destitute of one of
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 15
the essential elements of real worship. He contends for
the necessity of praying, not with the spirit only, but
with the understanding also. He would have religious
feeling grow out of the clear perception and deep realiza
tion of religious truth. Therefore it is, that he censures
a course of proceedings in the religious assemblies of the
Corinthians which tended to put asunder what God had
joined together. St. Paul desired to see exhibited by his
converts not the fluctuating fervor of a pietism which
arises from feeling and impulse only, but rather the
bright and steady flame of devotion which ever aspires
heavenward, the blended homage of the understanding,
the conscience, and the heart. It is to the production of
such a spirit of prayer that we contend that forms of
prayer in general, and our own in particular, are emi
nently adapted.
I. It will not be difficult to prove that the possession of
a form of prayer for the public worship of God enables
those who use it to pray with the understanding.
1. By the use of a form of prayer we are secured
against presenting or joining in any praises or petitions
whose meaning we do not understand. Being already
familiar with our forms before we enter upon public
worship, we are not called upon to join in, or add our
" amen " to prayers whose meanings have not received
the deliberate sanction of our understandings as involving
right views of the character and government of God, and
of the position, duty, and privilege of man. As the
worship of our Liturgy is grounded upon the truths of
God as they are generally set forth in sacred scripture,
we are not liable to have our understanding perplexed
and dissatisfied by prayers and praises whose language is
constructed in reference to controverted and difficult
16 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
points of doctrine. It is surely an essential condition of
true and acceptable worship, that the mind should fully
and readily comprehend the prayers which it offers up to
God. But can this essential condition be secured when
we are called upon to offer up our prayers in the lan
guage of another, language of which we can know
nothing before it is uttered, and which may be based
upon or announce doctrines of the truth of which our
understanding is not satisfied ?
2. While the argument applies to all classes of hearers,
it has peculiar force when viewed in reference to the
case of the poor and the uninstructed, with a view to
whose benefit all the parts of public worship should be
particularly arranged. The same remark is applicable
to another argument which we derive from the style and
language of the Liturgy.
The language of our forms of prayer is eminently
perspicuous, simple, scriptural, and easy to be under
stood. "And," says the Apostle, " unless ye utter by
the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be
known what is spoken ? For ye shall speak unto the
air." ~ " For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound,
who shall prepare himself for the battle ? " 3 The lan
guage of the devotional portions of the Prayer-Book
gives no uncertain sound. It may be comprehended by
the meanest capacity. The precise meaning of all its
sentences is recognised at once. Its chaste and elo
quent beauty satisfies the most cultivated taste, and its
transparent clearness commends it to the humblest
understanding. It does not deal in vague, exaggerated,
metaphorical, mystic language, constituting to all but
the initiated an unknown tongue. It does not wrest the
2 1 Cor. xiv. 9. s 1 Cor. xiv. 8.
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 17
figurative terms and historical incidents of Scripture from
their original connection and signification, and adapt
them to new, remote, and conventional meanings. Not
called upon to put his mind upon the search after the
meaning of the petitions or praises which he employs,
the devout worshipper is enabled, by the use of our
forms, while he prays with the spirit, to pray with the
understanding also.
3. The same important object is promoted by the
impressive exhibition of Gospel truth presented by our
formulary of "Common Prayer." In it are included all
the melting, subduing, uplifting doctrines of the cross.
The sinfulness of man, the holiness of God and his law,
the mediation of the Saviour, the life-giving influences of
the Spirit, are recognised and implied in all its offices.
It is a summary of Gospel truth. There we find the
blessed truths of God s Holy Word, not in the lifeless
and skeleton form of a system, but as a living, breathing,
pulsating, moving body. There it is animated, as by its
heart and soul, with the feelings it is calculated to
awaken, and the duties which it enjoins. Often repeated
and meditated, as the truths of the Gospel must be by
those who truly join in the worship of our Church, they
may become thoroughly understood. Thus the great
doctrines of the Bible are laid away in the chambers of
the understanding, anointed with the fragrant and conse
crated oil of holy feeling, and whenever they are brought
forth, the odor of that ointment filleth all the building.
Vividly does the understanding retain what the heart thus
hallows. The understanding may first present the truth
to the heart ; but if the conscience be quickened, and the
heart moved by that truth, they send it back into the
understanding invested with a vividness, power, solem
nity, glory which it never possessed before. Fervid
2*
18 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
feeling burns into the substance of the understanding the
truths which before were but pictured upon its surface.
The mode in which religious truth is presented in the
Liturgy is thus found to aid an intelligent devotion ; to be
greatly instrumental in enabling the worshipper to pray
with the spirit, it is true, but with the understanding also.
4. Nor let any think it a matter of light moment that
we should pray with the understanding. St. Paul did not
so regard it. No one can so regard it who will consider
what an important influence prayer with the understand
ing has upon prayer with the spirit. When the under
standing has calmly decided upon the duty and the
privilege of prayer ; when it has investigated the grounds
upon which the petitioner may hope for an answer to his
supplications ; when it has looked at the weighty motives
and glorious results of prayer, then has the best provision
been made to secure a steady fervency of spirit in
addressing the Almighty. Then, when the heart is
pouring itself out in the deepest fervor of penitence and
love, its blessed current is not checked and chilled by the
suggestions of an ill-informed understanding that the
grounds of its earnest emotion may be all delusion. On
the contrary, the calm decision of the understanding is,
that in view of the awful and yet cheering truths of reve
lation, the heart cannot and will not feel enough. It
brings the momentous realities of eternity to bear upon the
heart, and cries shame upon it for its coldness and indiffer
ence. It reasons, it expostulates with the sluggish heart.
It says to that blind heart, " Can you look on God s holy
law, by you violated, and not tremble ? " It says to that
hard heart, " Can you look upon a buffeted and bleeding
Saviour, and not mourn ? " It says to that earthly heart,
" Can you see Jesus at the right hand of God, your
exalted High Priest and King, and do otherwise than
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 19
rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory ? " When
the understanding thus reasons with the heart, and the
heart feels in accordance with the dictates of an enlight
ened understanding, then we need not fear but we shall
be able to pray with the spirit and with the understanding
also.
We are thus led to inquire whether our forms of
prayer, which we have found favorable to praying with
the understanding, be not favorable to praying with the
spirit, also.
II. What is to pray with the spirit? It is to have
permitted access to the mercy-seat of God. It is to have
a realized communion with the Father of our spirits. It
is to have the soul abstracted from the things of time and
sense, and intently absorbed in high and holy fellowship
with the Invisible. To pray with the spirit, is to have
the heart abased in penitence when the lips are confes
sing sin ; to have it touched with rapture at the utterance
of praise ; to have it thirst and long for grace upon the
pouring forth of supplication.
1. The first and indispensable requisite for praying
with the spirit and we speak now, of course, of public
prayer, in which a whole congregation unite is that the
language be adapted to produce and express such senti
ments and emotions. The language of our Liturgy is, we
think, adapted to this end. Its confessions of sinfulness
and of sin are full and deprecating, embodying the very
spirit of that self-abasing penitence acceptable to God,
which exclaims, " God be merciful to me a sinner!"
Its prayers for holiness of heart and life breathe a spirit
of such earnest sincerity, and are expressive of so true a
yearning for high attainments in the Christian life, as can
be fully sympathized with only by those who are spirit-
20 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
ually-minded and alienated from the world. Its anthems
of praise are the outpourings and ascendings of a sense
of gratitude which ascribes to God all the glory of man s
renovation and salvation. Its supplications for all orders
and degrees of men manifest wide and catholic love for
all mankind. They are general, without coldness, and
minute, without offensive specification. That they are
adapted to the expression of our deepest religious feel
ings, may be proved by an appeal to the consciousness
and experience of those who have rightly and devoutly
used them. To such we put these questions, with no
doubtfulness of the answer. When you are in the great
congregation, under any peculiar circumstances which
have awakened your religious sensibilities, do you not
find these forms fitted to express those feelings? Have
you, under such circumstances, ever been so deeply
penitent for your sins, so cast down in utter self-abase
ment, that the words of this book were not fully equal to
the expression of that penitence ? Have you ever
so magnified Christ in your heart as your Saviour and
your King, as that its hymns of praise failed to give
to your feelings full and satisfying utterance ? Has
the Spirit ever so comforted and blessed your soul, as
that its grateful words proved insufficient to express your
thankfulness ? Rather have you not found that they are
cold only when you are cold, that they are formal only
when you are formal ? We are confident that you will
reply, that instead of desiring to drop the language of the
Liturgy, as inadequate to express your feelings when
awakened or sublimed, you have looked to it and clung
to it as the only fit vehicle of expressing the emotions
burning and beating at your heart, and said to it,
" Lend, lend your wings!"
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 21
And when lifted up on its soaring praises, and borne
towards heaven s gate on the wings of its importunate
supplications, you have been able to exclaim,
"I mount! I fly!"
2. By the use of our forms of prayer we are enabled
to pray with the spirit in the public worship of God,
because such forms are best adapted to give expression
to those general wants, feelings, confessions, and suppli
cations which are in common experienced by, and appro
priate to, sinful humanity. We meet in the sanctuary of
God for common and united prayer. Our Liturgy secures
us alike against the incompetency and the varying feel
ings of individuals. We are always provided with lan
guage fitted for its object. We enter the house of God
in full confidence that our prayers will be presented
before the throne in language sober, reverent, and fer
vent, embodying all we feel, all we need, and all we
desire. Without such security, we may be exposed to
have many of our deepest feelings and most earnestly
realized wants unexpressed. If he whose duty it is to
lead the devotions of the people, were incompetent to
present them fully and fervently, the service would prove
unedifying and unsatisfactory. If otherwise competent,
his devotional feelings would be liable, as all men s are,
to become at times cold and stupid, and he would then
sometimes offer up hesitating, heartless, and formal
prayers. And if, from temperament or education, or
any other cause, he was one who gave undue prominence
to any particular class of duties or of doctrines, such a
peculiarity would be manifested in his public prayers.
If, then, the chastened fervor and fulness of our forms be
not favorable to the production of the fever-fits of devo
tion, neither do they allow the soul to be seized upon and
22 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
prostrated by its deadly chills. If the soul, under their
moulding and shaping influence, may not exhibit exag
gerated development in some of its forms, at the expense
of a puny growth in others, it may yet gradually assume,
under their equal pressure, a form of symmetry and
beauty remotely assimilated to that of our divine Ex
emplar !
3. Again ; by our forms of prayer we are secured
against another impediment to praying with the spirit,
which we must always be liable to encounter with
out them. We are not under the necessity of having
prayers offered up in which we cannot in conscience or
consistency engage. And, at the present day, when a
spirit of sincere but misguided benevolence would con
vert the Church of the living God into an agency for the
furtherance of other and lesser objects than the salvation
of the souls of men, objects concerning the necessity or
excellence of which there are wide differences of opinion,
this is a matter of no light importance. Nor is this an
imaginary impediment. It not unfrequently happens
that he who leads the devotions of an assembly of wor
shippers who use no forms, may be so deeply persuaded
of the excellence of a cause in which his affections are
engaged, as to pray long and earnestly for the further
ance of an object whose success he accounts a blessing
greatly to be desired ; while many of the congregation
regard the object as chimerical, pernicious, or unjust.
How, under such circumstances, can a congregation offer
up united prayer ? How can they pray with the spirit
and with the understanding ? Brethren, let us be thankful
that we are not exposed to such violent interruptions to
our devotional feelings. We are sure that there are no
petitions or praises in our service in which a Christian
cannot join. We are sure that there will be no phrases
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 23
in that service consecrated to a system or a sect, the
arousing watchwords which wake, even in the house of
God, the hateful spirit of partizanship and strife. We are
familiar with all its words, and are not called upon to
exercise the discrimination of the understanding when
we would pour forth the feelings of our hearts ! The
soul flows on in its accustomed channel, now dark and
deep under the shadows of penitence ; now the mirror of
heaven in its tranquillity ; now murmuring grateful praise,
and sparkling in the sunshine of joy, and not liable to
meet obstructions against which it must chafe, rage,
and foam ! 4
4. But we take higher ground on this subject. We
4 That the evils of extemporary forms of worship for forms
all must have, and the choice is only between good ones and poor
ones are beginning to be felt by those who use them, is evident
from several indications, particularly in this vicinity. From the
preface of " The Service Book for the Use of the Church of
the Disciples," an Unitarian congregation who meet in the
Masonic Temple .the following passage is taken as evidence of
the truth of the remark: " Seeing advantages in the forms of the
Episcopal Church, in the silent worship of the Quaker, in the
congregational singing of the Lutheran and Methodist, and in the
extempore prayer usual in our New England churches, we have
endeavored to blend them together in liturgic forms which shall
be at once rich and free, avoiding the extremes of barrenness and
poverty on the one hand, and of stiff formality on the other. We
have allowed in these services ample room for variety." Perhaps
if so ample room had not been allowed for variety, there might
have been a remedy in this Unitarian worship for the fatal neces
sity imposed by the theory of the Unitarian congregational disci
pline, for the minister who composed this form to admit to his
pulpit the avowed infidel, Theodore Parker. If these liturgic
forms had not been at once so " rich and free" Mr. Parker might
not have been willing to have used a form of worship which
treated the scriptures as not made up of fables, and the Saviour as
at least as good a reformer as we have yet had, or have reason to
expect.
24 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
contend that forms of prayer are demanded by the wants
of our mental and moral nature, and that those wants are
fully satisfied only by such a provision as is made in our
Liturgy.
As social beings, we crave, and love to express, and
hear expressed, sympathy and affection. All our feel
ings are deepened by being shared and mutually ex
pressed. True as the remark is in reference to all
human feelings, it is preeminently true of religious feel
ing. It delights in sympathy. Sympathy is the breath
which fans it into flame. Hearts melted by holy feeling
are attracted towards and blend with each other. When
this is the case, how pleasant it is with united hearts and
voices to praise and pray ! We find this want and feel
ing expressed in some assemblies of Christians by
audible exclamations, indicative of sympathy and assent
with those who lead the prayers and praises of the con
gregation. Our Liturgy has admirably provided for this
social feeling of the heart by an arrangement which calls
upon the people to add their loud "amen!" or their
responsive thanksgiving or supplication to those which
are uttered by the officiating minister. 5 Nor only so.
This social feeling, softening and affecting as it is when
experienced in reference to those who worship under the
same consecrated roof, becomes sublime and elevating
when it breaks abroad beyond the precincts of the Church
in which it is awakened, and takes in its warm grasp all
in distant and separated places, who are occupied in
worshipping God with the same prayers and praises. It
5 The people echo out amen, like a thunder-clap, says St. Je
rome. And Clemens Romanus, " We raise ourselves on our tip
toes at this last acclamation of our prayers, as if we desired that
the word should carry up our bodies as well as our souls to
heaven." H. L ESTRANGE S Alliance of Divine Offices, p. 76.
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 25
makes us imperfectly to realize the communion of the
saints, when we reflect that earth is almost encircled by
a continuous echoed strain of our pleading Litanies and
exulting Doxologies. It unites us with the saints of all
ages, and with the church triumphant in heaven, when
we remember that some of the language which we em
ploy has conveyed consolation to the hearts of Apostles
and holy men ; some has expressed the devotion of pious
hearts through succeeding ages ; some has trembled on
the lips of expiring martyrs ; some is ascending, in the
temple not made with hands, to the Lamb that was slain.
O, how poor, though breathing all the fervor of a true
devotion, are prayers and praises, which are destitute of
this rich provision for the wants of our moral nature ! 6
6 The preeminently wise Lord Bacon, in his " Certain Con
siderations touching the better Purification and Edification of the
Church of England," in describing such a Liturgy as a sound
judgment demands for worship, includes a provision for this
social feeling of the heart. His words, indeed, describe our
Liturgy as it is, though they seem to imply that the form should
not be absolutely and unchangeably binding.
" So as none, I suppose, of sound judgment will derogate from
the Liturgy, if the form thereof be in all parts agreeable to the
Word of God, the example of the primitive Church, and that holy
decency which St. Paul commendeth. And, therefore, first that
there be a set form of prayer, and that it be not left to an extem-
poral form, or to an arbitrary form. Secondly, that it consists as
well of lauds, hymns and thanksgivings, as of petitions, prayers
and supplications. Thirdly, that the form thereof be quickened
by some shortness and diversities of prayers and hymns, and with
some interchanges of the voices of the people as well as of the
minister. Fourthly, that it admit some distinction of times and
commemorations of God s principal benefits, as well general as
particular. Fifthly, that prayers, likewise, be appropriated to
several necessities and occasions of the Church. Sixthly, that
there be a form, likewise, of words and Liturgy in the administra-
3
26 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
5. But it is sometimes said that it is impossible to
express the feelings of the heart in forms of prayer ; that
their use inevitably induces coldness, formality, and
hypocrisy. It is objected that feelings so deep and
fervent as are those of the real Christian, disdain the
trammels of a prescribed service, and find adequate ex
pression only in the outpourings of spontaneous, unpre
meditated prayer. Let us examine this objection. Let
us see if it be true that human nature rejects a form of
words for the expression of its deeper and holier feelings.
It was thought to have been a striking observation,
" Give me the making of a people s songs, and I care
not who makes its laws." The observation proceeded
from a deep knowledge of human nature. It implied
that he who can give popular expression to the feelings
of patriotism and affection he who can place in every
man s hand an instrument through which the vaguely
struggling impulses of his heart can find expression,
wields an influence in the formation of a nation s charac
ter mightier than that of legislators and laws. It pro
ceeded on the supposition that the human mind needs,
seeks, and loves such a vehicle for its deepest emotions
as commends itself to the sympathies of our common
nature, and is expressive of the feelings of universal
humanity. And it will be found that the more frequently
any vehicle for the expression of feeling is used, the
dearer does it become. The deepest emotions will find
fittest utterance in the words which have most frequently
expressed them. All that is sacred and affecting in
the past, comes and clothes the language which gives
tion of the sacraments, and in denouncing of the censures of the
Church, and other holy actions and solemnities."
LORD BACON S WORKS, vol. ii., p. 426.
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 27
utterance to the wants or feelings of the present. Hence,
the enthusiasm which gathers about those national songs
through which the awakened patriotism of a people has
burst forth in frequent and earnest expression. Hence,
the exile from his native hills will weep when he hears
the songs of his country, as they come to his ear laden
with the memory of happy days. For the expression of
casual and passing feelings, new and lighter lays, which
have no old associations, may suffice. But when the
heart is stirred to its foundations, it likes not novelty of
expression. It asks for the old words and the old tunes.
The language of universal humanity is,
" Sing aloud
Old songs, the precious music of the heart ! "
Everywhere and always, it is found that the deepest
emotions of the human soul are best expressed in those
fervid words, around which seem to linger something of
holy enthusiasm from all the hearts which they have
successively touched and thrilled.
But here is a marvellous thing ! When we seek
a fit expression for those feelings which are deeper
than love, and stronger than patriotism ; when we
would find words to convey the rapture of pardon, the
gladness of gratitude, the joy of love, the triumph of
faith, the sorrow of penitent humiliation, we are told to
discard this principle. For the expression of the deepest
and most solemn feelings of which the human soul is
susceptible, we are told that unconsidered words, spoken
from the sudden promptings of the heart, are the best
vehicles. Can it be so? Is nature so variable in her
teachings ? Is God so unstable in his laws ? Shall
we find that a principle, established by God, ceases to
operate just at that point where, from all analogy and all
28 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PKAYEK.
observation, we should expect to observe its most perfect
operation ? When we would offer adoration and prayer,
is it no incitement to our devotional feelings that the lan
guage we use was uttered by holy men of old, consecrated
by ages, and spoken by the same household of faith in
many lands? When we would emulate a martyr s
faith, is it no aid to us to use a martyr s prayer ? When
we would express our gratitude and praise to the Almighty,
and glorify Christ because of the glory which he had
with the Father before the world was, and because of his
condescension and love in man s redemption, shall we not
send our souls upward upon that triumphant " Te Deum"
on whose wings so many Christians have ascended and
skirted the battlements of heaven, and caught over them
bright glimpses of the paradise of God ? Truly, if our
hearts are right towards God and man, then when we use
our forms we may adopt the Apostle s language, " I will
pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understand
ing also." 7
Such are some of the grounds on which we feel, that
by the use of forms of prayer, we can best render that
7 The same thought is found admirably expressed in Dr. Coil s
excellent sermon on forms of prayer. "Fault-finders with Litur
gies have insensibly adopted the unfortunate mistake that prayer
is an exercise for the head rather than for the heart, and must,
therefore, exhibit incessant variety. It is not true, as a fact, that
the heart covets or loves that variety which is (by some) presumed
to be indispensable to fervent worship. The heart, the affections,
love unchangeable things, love old things, love things which en
dure, like the hills of earth and the stars of heaven. Few under
stand the deep philosophy as well as benevolence of the Church in
her provision for the service of God s house. In the chancel, she
gives the heart what it loves, sameness; in the pulpit, she gives
what the head delights in, variety ; thus provi ding for all the
wants of our craving and exacting nature."
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 29
true devotion, which consists in offering up those praises
and petitions, which the heart embraces as it receives
them from the understanding. Let us, then, as church
men, and as Christians, realize the obligations which are
laid upon us by the possession of our treasured Liturgy.
Let us show forth to the world, by lives eminently blame
less and devoted, that we make earnest and diligent use
of our blessed privileges. It does not become us to be
ever marching with boastful banners, around the walls of
our spiritual Zion, marking with proud satisfaction her
impregnable bulwarks, and counting with elated heart
her lofty towers. It becomes us to kneel in penitence at
her altars. It becomes us to fill her courts with the
incense of true devotion, and to offer up the acceptable
sacrifice of a contrite and consecrated heart. It becomes
us to remember that the forms of devotion may remain
in their purity when the spirit of devotion shall have fled.
Symmetry and loveliness may linger in the lifeless corpse.
The walls may remain without a breach, and the gleam
ing turrets may lift themselves in the sunshine, from a
silent Necropolis a city of the dead ! Let us not be
high-minded, but fear !
It is difficult for us to estimate the debt of gratitude
which our Church owes to her forms of prayer. That
the Church has hitherto been enabled to maintain unity
of faith on the fundamental points of doctrine, may be
due less to our formularies of faith than to our forms of
devotion. If that unity is to be continued, it is, I appre
hend, to be effected, not so much by entire harmony of
sentiment upon the explanations of creeds and articles,
as it is by a heart-felt unity of spirit in the use of our
Scriptural forms of prayer. Perhaps there never was a
period in the history of our Church, when the value of
her devotional services was put to a severer test or
3*
30 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
received a more triumphant demonstration, than at the
present time. United prayers may be twined into soft
and silken bonds, which shall hold in loving and unforced
unity, those who, if they were bound together only by
the iron fetters of articles and confessions, would snap
them asunder, and assault each other with their broken
fragments. What degree of blessing in answer to the
prayers of those who have prayed with the spirit, and
with the understanding, has descended upon Churches
and individuals, eternity will disclose !
Let us, then, faithfully improve the privileges which
we enjoy by means of our Common Prayer. We shall
never know its value until our hearts go up on its devo
tional words with something of the fervor and faith with
which those by whom they were framed, ascended.
What a change might be made to come over our beloved
Church, if we would but heed one of her briefest rubrics,
Let us pray! Great things are promised to united
prayer. We should seek them. We should expect
them. In our public services we should pray as those
who are addressing a present God ; as those who un
falteringly believe that he hears and answers prayer.
Shall thousands of worshippers, prostrate at once in prayer,
pour out with united hearts and voices her humble
confessions, her solemn vows and her burning praises,
and no large blessings follow ? Shall neither Churches,
ministers, nor members, receive grace and strength ?
Shall not the careless be wakened, the lukewarm
enlivened, the doubting and the distressed be cheered ?
Has God forgotten to be gracious ? Is his ear heavy
that it cannot hear ? Is his arm shortened that it can
not save ? No. God hears ; but do we pray ? It is
not prayer to follow with the eye, or ear, or lip, the
words of supplication.
ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER. 31
" Prayer is the soul s sincere desire,
Unentered or expressed ! "
Let us pray ! The sins of our own souls are grievous
to be borne ; the aid of the Spirit must be constantly ex
tended to us, or we cannot keep out of perdition ; sinners
are falling into eternal death ; the darkened nations of the
earth are throwing wide their doors, and raising the
Macedonian cry for our prayers, our sympathy, and our
aid ! Let us pray ! When the members of our Church
es shall have learned to prepare, in private devotion, for
public worship as for one of their highest privileges and
most sacred duties ; when they shall all come duly at the
appointed hour, so that nothing shall mar the hushed
solemnity of the sacred service ; when they shall realize
that the Lord is in his holy temple, and that it is none
other than the house of God, and truly the gate of heaven ;
when they shall feel it to be a fearful thing to allow their
minds to wander when they are professedly addressing
the Lord God Almighty ; when they shall speak aloud the
responsive service, and allow the intonations of the voice
to give expression to, and deepen the emotions of, the
heart ; when the heart shall be prepared to utter with true
feeling every spoken word, then will the frivolous and the
worldly be made to feel that God is in his sanctuary ;
then will the Church throw off the spirit of heaviness, and
be clothed with the garments of praise ; then will he, who
leads the devotions of the people, no longer be subjected
to the charge of a dull, uninterested, or formal discharge of
the duties of his sacred office, but it will be with a beating
heart and fervid voice that he will besiege the throne of
grace, leading in the van, and speaking in the name of
earnest and urgent supplicants.
And, finally, let us remember that out of the house of
32 ADVANTAGES OF FORMS OF PRAYER.
God there is a transcript of the pages of our Book of
Common Prayer known and read of all men. It is
spread out to the world s easy perusal, and in its busiest
hours men will catch and read some passages. Our lives
and conversations will he read as the living transcripts of
that volume by those who never open its pages. Oh that
they may see and be won to the acknowledgment that as
that volume is but the word of God converted into prayer,
so our lives are but the exhibition of that prayer, trans
cribed in our practice, and realized in our life ! May
they see in us its hallowed meekness, its realizing faith,
its ardent love !
II.
ijiatorical Sketct) of tfje i
IT is no part of the design of this series of Lectures
upon the history and doctrines of portions of the Book of
Common Prayer, to give an account of the causes and
progress of the Reformation. A general knowledge of
that great event must be supposed. Nevertheless, a very
slight sketch of the progress of religious opinion during
the reign of Henry VIII., and an account of the publi
cation of several religious documents during the same
period, seem necessary to a full history of the Liturgy.
Very little progress towards purity of doctrine was
made during the reign of Henry VIII. Nevertheless,
preparation for progress had been made. In casting off
the supremacy of the pope, in translating the Word of
God, in ceasing to offer public prayer in an unknown
tongue, measures had been taken, under which sprang
up the strong and irrepressible spirit of free inquiry.
Knowledge of, and contact with the Lutheran Reforma
tion, had convinced many minds that the claims of the
Romish Church to purity of doctrine were as groundless
as her scouted pretensions to universality of power.
Notwithstanding, therefore, that Henry started back at
the rush and roar of the stream of public opinion for
which his own "hand had opened the channel ; notwith
standing that just before the termination of his reign all
34 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
the essential errors of the Church of Rome, with the
exception of the supremacy of the pope, were established
by the Six Articles ; notwithstanding that the popish
party, favored by the king, were in the full ascendant,
yet Protestantism, in seclusion, meditation, and prayer,
was preparing for high achievement and marked success.
But as yet there was only preparation. In the language
of Hooper, " The king cast out the pope, not popery." 1
In tracing, therefore, the history of our Book of Common
Prayer, we should expect to find, correspondently with
the progress of religious knowledge, but little actually
accomplished, during the reign of Henry VIII., towards
the formation of a pure formulary of public worship;
while, at the same time, we should look for evidence that
such preparation had been made for a purer worship as
needed but a propitious time to be matured into a spiritual
and holy ritual.
The first step towards the reformation of the worship of
the English Church, was the publication of the King s
Primer. The title indicates that it was published with
the royal approbation. It was published in 1535, the
same year in which the pope excommunicated Henry
and his adherents. It consists of various tracts, then first
collected in one volume. 2 After passing through a variety
1 Card vveiraJTwo Liturgies of Edward compared, p. 6.
2 Strype s Memorials, vol. i., p. 217.
Shepherd s Morning and Evening Prayer of the Church of
England, p. ii.
The following abstract of the Primer of 1535 is taken from
Shepherd : " The larger editions, after the preface, began with an
exposition of the commandments, another of the creed, and a confes
sion, wherein all are directed to examine their lives by the rule of
the commandments. These are followed by two pious and judi
cious tracts, entitled, Directions concerning Prayer, and An Exposi
tion of the Lord s Prayer ; a caution concerning the use of the Ave
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 35
of editions, it was published, by authority, in the year
1545. " The object of its publication was to furnish the
unlearned with such parts of the Church service as were
most required, as well as to supply them with the creed,
the Lord s prayer, and the ten commandments, in the
vulgar tongue." 3 The Litany, varying but little, in other
respects, from the present form, contains petitions re
questing the prayers of angels, saints, and martrys, as
also to be delivered from the tyranny of the Church of
Rome. It contains, also, prayers for the dead.
Besides this first step towards the reformation of the
forms of public worship, there were several formularies of
Maria, or the angel s salutation, with a prayer to our Creator;
prayers for Bishops and rulers, for husbands and wives, cf-c., or an
office for all states ; a tract on good works, and an exhortation to ex
pect the cross, and to bear it patiently. Then follow matins, lauds,
evensong, &c. After these stand the seven penitential psalms, and
the Litany, different copies of which, in different editions, vary
almost as much from each other as some of them do from our
present form. After the Litany, is a contemplation on Psalm li. ;
a prayer to our Saviour; the history of Christ s Passion, taken from
the Gospels, and divided into ten sections-, a practical discourse on
the Passion ; instruction for children; a catechetical dialogue; prayer
against blindness and hardness of heart; several prayers and thanks
givings from Scripture, and the Dirige, or office for the souls of
the dead, with a preface prefixed, which inveighs against the
practice of misapplying to the dead, passages used by the living to
excite the compassion of friends. We have rung and sung, mum
bled and murmured, and piteously pewled a certain sort of Psalms>
which make no more for the purpose than Te Deum or Gloria in
Ezcelcis. In the Dirige there is nothing taken out of Scripture
that makes any more mention of the souls departed, than doth the
tale of Robin Hood." Then follow COMMENDATIONS, &c. In some
copies, the Collects, Epistles and Gospels throughout the year, are
added, and, in others, expositions of them. But in the smaller
volumes, many of the Articles already enumerated are omitted.
3 Short s History of the Church of England, pp. 278, 279.
36 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
faith put forth in the English tongue during the same reign.
A very general notice of them must suffice. None of these
documents are of any authority at the present day ; but
they are interesting and important in tracing the history of
religious opinion. The first document was " The Articles
devised by the king s highness majesty to stablish Chris
tian quietness and unity among us, and to avoid conten
tious oppositions, which Articles be also approved by the
consent and determination of the whole clergy of this
realm, Anno Domini 1536." The second formulary of
faith was " The godly and pious institution of a Christian
man, containing an exposition of the Creed, of the seven
Sacraments, of the Ten Commandments, of the Lord s
Prayer, together with Articles upon Justification and
Purgatory." This was published in 1537. The third
was a republication and enlargement of " The pious insti
tution of a Christian man," and was called, " The neces
sary Doctrine and Erudition of any Christian man." An
examination of these formularies of faith will confirm the
opinion before expressed, that but little progress towards
purity of doctrine had been made during this reign.
Nevertheless, these articles and formularies, in con
nection with other causes, removed many obstacles in
the way of reformation. The clamor, excited among
the papists by their publication, attests their influence as
preparatory to more important changes. The injunctions
set forth in the name of the king in the same year with
the articles contributed to the same result. By them the
clergy were enjoined to explain what were articles of
faith, and what related only to discipline ; they were
bidden not to extol images, to discourage pilgrimages, to
instruct children in the principles of religion ; they were
enjoined to refrain from games, and from frequenting
public houses, and to devote themselves to the study of
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 37
the sacred Scriptures. These were the dawnings of a
bright day for the English Church. She had thrown offV
the iniquitous external bondage of the Church of Rome. I
During the reign of Edward VI. she cast off the doctrinal}
corruption of that Church also, and came forth clad in the/
shining livery of truth.
In 1547, a most important step was taken to reform the
public worship. A communion service, by the direction
of an act of parliament, was composed, which provided
that the Holy Communion should be received by the
laity in both kinds, and excluded the superstition of the
mass. This service is very similar to, though shorter
than that which formed part of the Book of Common
Prayer published the following year.
But it was in the following year, the first of King
Edward VI., that the whole service was put forth in the
English tongue, and all the worshippers thus enabled to
worship with " the spirit, and with the understanding also."
Henry VIII. died in 1547. Edward VI., a pure and
Protestant child, succeeded him. The advocates for
reform, Cranmer and Ridley, then rose into ascendency.
Public disputations were held at Oxford, and at Cam
bridge, on the doctrine of Transubstantiation. At Cam
bridge, the theses summed up by Ridley, were that
" Transubstantiation cannot be proved from the direct
words of Scripture ; nor be necessarily collected from it ;
nor is it confirmed from the early fathers ; that in the
Eucharist no other sacrifice is made than the remembrance
of Christ s death and sufferings." Thus was the way
fully prepared for the first Liturgy, which was published
in the year 1549.
This, the original Book of Common Prayer, though in*
its general appearance, like that at present in use, differs*
from it in many particulars, some of which are important.!
4
38 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
It contains some of the errors of the Church of Rome
which were afterwards rejected. It has_ been justly said
to form a connecting link between the Missal and the
A committee of thirteen
bishops jmd divines, with the Archbishop ofjganterbury
at their head, were appointed to prepare this service of
the Church. 5 "In order to this," says Burnet, " they
brought together all the offices used in England." 6 " So
it being resolved," says the same authority, " to bring in
the whole worship of God under set forms, they set one
general rule to themselves (which they afterwards de
clared) of changing nothing for novelty s sake, or merely
because it had been formerly used." 7 The whole of
s_jri the English tongue. In the Funeral
I Service there^were prayers for the dead. The, custom of
? anointing with oil is retained in the Office < for -Baptism,
and in the Visitation of the Sick, when they require it.
In the Office of Baptism also, there is a^form of exorcism,
/to expel the evilspirit _from the ^cjiild. The form ofjhe
. cross was retained in consecrating the elements in the
celebration of the_communion,in matrimony, in confirma-
-, tion,and in^visiting, the sick. The arrangement of thet
f service was also, in several particulars, different from*
* Short.
3 Such is the statement of Fuller. Burnet says, " Some had
I been, in King Henry s time, employed in the same business, in
\ which they had made a good progress, and were now to be brought
| to a full perfection." Burnet names twenty- four on the commission.
I Shepherd remarks, that " the commission is not probably on record,
and in the statute the archbishop only is named. The other com
missioners are there called most learned and discreet bishops and
divines." The same author remarks, that " the work probably
passed only through the hands of a few."
SHEPHERD ON COMMON PRAYER, p. 18.
1 c Burnet, vol. ii., p. 114. 7 Burnet, vol. ii., p. 116.
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 39
that of the present service. The Morning and Evening
Prayer began with the Lord s Prayer, and the prayers
for the king, the royal family, and the clergy, were]
wanting in the end of the service. A prayer for rain r
and one for fair weather, were placed at the close of the
Communion Service.
The ancient offices of the Church of England were
not, as might be inferred from the above language of
Burnet, the only sources whence our Liturgy was derived.
It was greatly indebted also to the labors of the continental
reformers. Says Dr. Cardwell, a learned ritualist of
the present day, 8 " In the great body of this work indeed
they derived their materials from the early service of
their own Church ; but in the occasional offices, it is
clear, that they were indebted to the labors of Melancthon
and Bucer, and through them, to the older Liturgy of
Nuremburg, which those reformers were instructed to
follow." " It is a strong indication," he adds, " of the
prudence and discernment of the English divines, and
especially of the primate, who presided over them, that
they drew up so temperate a form of public worship,
when the great body of the people, for whom it was de
signed, were totally unfitted for any further alteration." 9
8 The Two Liturgies of Edward VI. compared, p. 16.
9 The following is the title and table of contents of the first book
of Edward VI.
" The Book of the Common Prayer and Administration of the
Sacraments, and qther Rites and Ceremonies of the Church ; after
the use of the Church of England. Londoni in officino Edwardi
Whitchurch. Cum privilegio ad imprimendun solun Anno Do.
1549. Mense maii.
The contents of this book.
1. A Preface.
2. A Table and Kalendar for Psalms and Lessons, with necessary
Rules pertaining to the same.
40 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
Here, then, we have the first form of the Book of
Common Prayer, the first and best gift of the Reformation
to the Church. Though it needed alteration in several
particulars, it was yet, under the circumstances, an un
speakable blessing to the Church, and gave birth to a
spirit which demanded and effected its purification from
the fe_vv Romish errors, which yet spotted its else perfect
gunty!
In ,1552, but three years after^its formation^ it was
revised. Cranmer and other divines, probably the same
as originally compiled it, subjected it to a full review.
" While this was in progress, two learned foreigners,
who were then in England, were consulted on the subject,
and their opinions seem to have coincided with, or to
have influenced the decisions of the English bishops, for
most of the points objected to by Bucer, were subsequently
amended, and the sentiments of Peter Martyr appear to
3. The order for Matins and Evensong throughout the year.
4. The Introits, Collects, Epistles and Gospels, to be used at the
celebration of the Lord s Supper and Holy Communion through
the year, with proper Psalms and Lessons for divers Feasts and
Days.
5. The Supper of the Lord and Holy Communion, commonly
called the Mass.
6. The Litany and Suffrages.
7. Of Baptism, both public and private.
8. Of Confirmation, where also is a Catechism for Children.
9. Of Matrimony.
10. Of Visitation of the Sick, and Communion of the same.
11. Of Burial.
12. The Purification of Women.
13. A declaration of Scripture, with certain Prayers to be used the
first Day of Lent, commonly called Ash-Wednesday.
14. Of Ceremonies omitted or retained.
15. Certain Notes for the more plain explication and decent
ministration of things contained in this book.
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 41
have been very similar to those of Bucer. 10 Says
Bishop Jeremy Taylor, " The truth is, that although they
framed the Liturgy with the greatest consideration that
fi, be by all the united wisdom of church and state,
yet, as if prophetically to avoid their being charged, by .
after ages, with a crepesculum of religion, a dark, twilight,
imperfect reformation, they joined to their own star all
the other shining tapers of the other reformed churches,
calling for the advice of the most eminently learned and
zealous reformers in other kingdoms, that the light of all
together might show them a clear path to walk in. And
this their care produced some change ; for, upon con
sultation, the first form of King Edward s first service book
was approved, with the exception of a very few clauses, .
which, upon that occasion were reviewed and expunged,
till it came to the second form and modest beauty it was
in th^ edition of J552. and which Gilbertus, a German,
approved as a. transcript of the ancient and primitive
forms." 11 The Prayer-Book^ thus " reviewed and ex-*
ipunged," differs yery little Jrom the one, now in use in*
%u ^Church. The introductory sentences, the exhortation,/
the confession^ and the absolution, were_.th_en_ introduced, 1
and were. takenJn great part from a Liturgy composed *
by^ Calvin. 12 The Ten Commandments were then also/*
introduced into the Communion Service, probably from J
the same source. 13 A very important addition to the
work, was the introduction of a service called "The*
form and manner of making and consecrating of Bishops,?
Priests, and Deacons." The introit, a psalm used before
10 Short s History of the Church of England, p. 281.
11 Bishop Taylor s Works, vol. vii., 288.
" Lawrence t Bampton Lectures, p. 207.
13 Short, p. 281, note.
42 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
the collect, was omitted, together with the name of the
Virgin Mary, the sign of the cross in the consecration of
the elements, and the invocation of the Word and the
Holy Ghost upon them which accompanied it, aiid^ the
^mixture of water with the wige. In ^baptism, the forms of *
exorcism, of anointing with oil, and of the trine immer
sion, were omitted. The sign of the cross, and the
g*rvinVj)f goldjarid silver m matrimony were omitted.
In the Visitation of the t Sick, the anoinfaig andjhe^direc-
tions forjjrivate confession, were omittejj. In the Burial
Service, the prayers for the dead ; and the Office ofjhe
Eucharjst at funerals, were omitted. Thus, in the most
significant manner, were all these practices condemned.
The Book of Common Prayer thus came forth from the*
fhands of the Reformers the most perfect formularly off
^worship which the world ever saw.
When, soon after the accession of Queen Elizabeth to
the throne, Protestantism was reestablished in England,
in 1560, this second Liturgy of King Edward was adopted
few and unimportant alterations. 14
14 This is a proper place to specify once for all, what these
changes were. They are thus concisely stated by Short : " The
changes specified in the act of uniformity, 1st Elizabeths, are with
one alteration of certain Lessons to be used every Sunday in the
year, and the form of the Litany altered and corrected, and two
sentences only added in the delivery of the sacrament to the com
municants, and none other or otherwise." Of these, the changes in
the Lessons are not considerable. In the Litany the petition to be
delivered from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome was omitted,
and that for the queen altered. And at the communion both the
clauses at the presentation of the elements, which had stood in the
first and second of Edward, were put together forming the words
now used. The clause in the act of uniformity, 1st Elizabeths,
I about dresses is, " Such ornaments of the Church and of the min
isters thereof, shall be retained and be used, as was in the Church
t
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 43
In 1604, during the reign of James I., in consequence
of a conference with the Presbyterian divines, held at
Hampton Court, a few changes were introduced into the
Liturgy ; but such as had no legal authority, because
only sanctioned by royal proclamation, not by the
authority of the convocation and of parliament.
In 1661, the Common Prayer was submitted for altera-*
tion to the convocation then sitting. After the restoration/
of Charles II., there had been a fruitless conference at thel
Savoy between the Bishops and the Presbyterian divines.|
The Book of Common Prayer was then put into the form
in which it now stands in the Church of England. The
alterations which were made at this revision were many
of them changes in the arrangement of the services.
The new version of the Bible was adopted except in the
Psalms, the Ten Commandments, and the sentences in
the Communion. Service. The prayer for parliament,
for all conditions of men, the general thanksgiving, and
some new collects were added. The service for the
baptism of those of riper years was introduced, and also
the form of prayer to be used at sea. Some minor
changes it is not regarded as important that we should
notice.
We have thus rapidly brought down the history of the
Book of Common Prayer until its completion as it is now
in use in the Church of England. It remains for us to
( of England by authority of parliament in the second year of the*
reign of Edward VI., until order shall be therein taken by the J
authority of the queen s majesty," by jhe advice of the ecclesi
astical commission or of the metropolitan of this realm. " I am
tnot aware that any such order was ever taken by Queen Eliza
>beth. And by the act of uniformity, Charles II. 14th, and the
> rubric, this is now the law of the land." (Short, 282.) We shall
[have occasion hereafter to refer to the subject of habits.
44 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
narrate the circumstances under which the Liturgy of
the Protestant Episcopal Church in this country was
adopted.
The situation of the members of the Episcopal Church
in this country, after the war of the Revolution, was
peculiar and unprecedented. Before that period, they
had been a branch or Diocese of the Church of England,
under the Episcopate of the Bishop of London. When
this country became independent of England, the mem
bers of the Episcopal Church became, of necessity,
severed from all connection with the Church of England.
What, then, was their condition ? The union with the
Church of England was dissolved ; but their unity with
her was maintained, because they still retained the same
Creeds, Liturgy, and Articles. What was the position of
the several Episcopal congregations towards each other ?
There was unity among them all, but was there also
union ? Manifestly not. Each congregation dropped
off from the authority which, running through them,
united them, and became a Church, complete and inde
pendent, at unity with all other Episcopal congregations,
but not in union. But it was both the duty and interest
of all Episcopal congregations in the country, to be not
only in unity in the faith, but united also in ecclesiastical
government as one body. Providentially left as separate
Churches, in unity without union, it was their duty, on
Gospel principles and primitive usage, at once to effect a
: union in each separate State. How was that effected? .
t First, the several congregations in each State met in con
vention and adopted a constitution and canons which
made them- separate and independent Dioceses in each
i State. One step from unity to union here was taken.
* There was union between all the Churches in each State.
But the Church thus one in one State, was not yet in i
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 45
union with the Church in any other State. We will now
briefly detail the steps which were taken to bring about
that union of all the Churches under one constitution, by
means of which they became the one Protestant Episco
pal Church in the United States of America. 15
The first step towards forming a collective body of
the Episcopal Church in the United States was taken at
a meeting, for another purpose, of a few clergymen of
New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, at Brunswick,
New Jersey, on the 13lh and 14th of May, 1784. These
clergymen met for the purpose of consulting upon the
renewal of a society formerly existing for the support of
widows and children of deceased clergymen. Here a
meeting was appointed to be held in New York, in
October, to confer on some general principles of union.
The meeting accordingly was held. The general princi
ples which they agreed should be the basis of union were,
the continuance of the three orders, the use of the Book
of Common Prayer, and the establishment of a represen
tative body of the Church, consisting of clergy and laity,
who were to vote in distinct orders. They recommended
to the Church to send clerical and lay deputies to a
meeting to be held in Philadelphia, on the 27th of
September, of the following year.
On the 27th of September, accordingly, in 1785, a
convention of clerical and lay deputies from seven of the
thirteen States assembled in Philadelphia. The States
represented were New York, New Jersey, Delaware,
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and South Carolina.
They made such changes in the Book of Common
Prayer as were necessary to accommodate it to the
changes in the State. A general ecclesiastical constitu-
15 Hawks s Constitution and Canons, pp. 5-8.
46 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
tion was proposed ; measures were taken to obtain the
Episcopacy ; changes in the Prayer-Book and Articles
were proposed and published in a book, never adopted
by our Church, called the Proposed Book. It remained
to be seen whether the Episcopate could be obtained,
and whether the union thus proposed would be ratified
and effected in a subsequent General Convention. A
committee was appointed with power to reassemble
them, if it should be deemed necessary or expedient, at
Philadelphia.
Having received an answer from the English Bishops
to their application for the Episcopacy, the convention
was reassembled in Philadelphia, June 20, 1786. The
Bishops of the English Church expressed a wish to
comply with the request, but delayed to take measures
for that purpose until they saw what alterations in the
form of faith and worship were to be adopted in conven
tion. The convention, by an address, acknowledged the
friendly letter of the Bishops, and declared a determina
tion of making no further alteration in the Articles and
Liturgy than a change of circumstances made necessary,
or than was conducive to a union of the Churches of the
several States.
The answer to this address was soon received, in
which the Bishops enclosed an act of parliament,
authorizing them to consecrate Bishops for America, and
in which they also expressed a desire to be satisfied with
regard to the omission of the article in the creed which
expresses a belief of Christ s descent into hell. They
were also dissatisfied that no express provision was made
for the presidency of Bishops in conventions. The
General Convention reassembled at Wilmington, Dela
ware, removed these objections, and signed the testimo
nials for the consecration of the Rev. Drs. Provoost, of
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 47
New York, White, of Pennsylvania, and Griffeth, of
Virginia, who had been duly chosen by the conventions
of their respective Dioceses. On the 28th of July, 1789,
the General Convention having again assembled, the
Episcopacy of Bishops White and Provoost Dr. Grif-
feth not having been able to proceed to England to
obtain it was recognised, and the constitution of 1786
remodeled and amended. Assembled again in Septem
ber, 1789, the constitution thus remodeled and amended
was, with slight alterations, adopted ; the Book of Com
mon Prayer, reviewed and slightly altered, and thus
amended, became our formulary of faith and worship.
.Thus the Episcopal Churches in the various States be-
Jcame the one Protestant Episcopal Church of the United j
States, with our present constitution and Liturgy. 16
These brief historical details have been given, that it
may be seen precisely whence and how we received and
adopted our Book of Common Prayer. Having traced
it as a whole, in its external history, as it came forth
from the hands of the Reformers, and as it passed down
through the successive periods of English and American
history, till we see it as it now lies upon the desks of our
churches, we shall, on subsequent occasions, open its
golden pages, and read its sound forms of faith, and its
burning words of prayer. Here we pause, to make a
few concluding inferences and remarks.
1. We call your attention to the fact, that the Church
of these United States is perfectly independent of the
Church of England, and of all other Churches. Even
when we speak of her as a branch of the one holy
Catholic Church, nothing more can be meant by the ex
pression, than that she is united in the unity of the faith,
w Bishop White s Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal Church.
48 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITUKGY.
on fundamental articles, with the true Churches of Christ
of every clime and of every age. The uniform language
of each of the Dioceses, and of the General Convention,
is in substance that which was uttered by the Diocese of
Maryland : " We consider it the undoubted right of the
t Protestant Episcopal Church, in common with the other
Churches, under the American Revolution, to complete
and preserve herself as an entire Church, agreeably to
her ancient usages and professions, and to have a full;
enjoyment and free exercise of those purely spiritual
powers which are essential to the being of every congre
gation of the faithful, and which, being derived from
Christ and his Apostles, are to be maintained independent
of every foreign or other jurisdiction, so far as may be
consistent with the civil rights of society." 17
2. If this Church be thus entire and independent, then
her Book of Common Prayer, her Creeds, Articles, and
forms of worship, constitute the law for the faith and
practice of the ministers and members of that Church.
Much loose, radical, disorganizing speech on this sub
ject has, of late years, been heard among us. It has
been customary for some to speak as if the ministers of
this Church have a far wider range in which to form their
opinions, and from which to adopt their practices, than
our own Church standards specify. They have spoken
as if we were connected with the Church Catholic, not
by the unity of faith in fundamentals only, but in such
binding sort as to be under obligation, or to be at liberty
to adopt tenets or rites not provided for or enjoined by
our own as authorities. But what is the fact of the case ?
17 A declaration of certain fundamental rights and liberties of
the Protestant Episcopal Church in Maryland.
SMITH S SERMONS, vol. ii.
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 49
Our Church has adopted such fundamental articles of
faith, and such rites and services from the Church Cath
olic, as she judged conducive to the promotion of godli
ness of heart and life, and these are the rules and the
limits for her children. For individuals, who have bound
themselves to her standards, to go beyond them, and
select for themselves what they may choose to call
catholic truths, or catholic customs, what is it but a most
arrogant and undutiful exercise of private judgment
against the teachings of their mother Church ? what is it
but a shameless violation of holy vows ? This Church
knows no laws as authoritative but her constitution and
her canons ; no formularies of faith as hers but her Creeds
and Articles ; no rites, ceremonies, or prayers, as by
her to be practised or allowed, except those which are
contained in her Book of Common Prayer. He who,
travelling back into the dark ages, becomes enamored of
childish mummeries and a corrupted faith, might press
their introduction into our Creeds and Articles, if they
were now to be anew adopted, with whatever of elo
quence or of logic he might possess ; but to hold them,
and continue in connection with a church from which
they have been cast out, is to be recreant to principle
and to honor.
3. But though the Church in this country be inde
pendent in fact and right of the Church of England, it is
with gratitude that we acknowledge her to be indebted,
under God, for her first foundation and long continuance
of nursing care and protection to that venerable mother.
It is with pride that we claim a close resemblance in
forms of faith and worship, though not in ecclesiastical
organization, to her who numbers among her sons so
many saints and martyrs. Though the Bishops of the
English Church hesitated to convey the Episcopacy to this
5
50 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY.
Church, from fear that important deviations from the
faith and practice of the English Church would be in
troduced, they soon found their fears to be groundless.
We glory and we joy in being thus, in unbroken line,
connected with the blessed martyrs of the Reformation.
Let who will glory in being of yesterday ; we rejoice that
the fathers of the English Church are our fathers. We
press this Liturgy closer to our hearts, that in it they
being dead yet speak. Yes, we can read its forms of
sound words, and hold communion with the calm, even-
balanced, judicious, judicial mind of Cranmer. We can
lay its fervent prayers upon our hearts, and feel vibrat
ing from them still, through their every fibre, the throb-
bings of the pure, strong, noble, lion heart of the sainted
Ridley. We can mount on its triumphant antherns as
on eagles wings, and find ourselves soaring in compan
ionship with Latimer, and Bradford, and Taylor, and
Phil pot, and Rogers, for whose high hearts they furnished
rejoicing death-hymns. Nay, we rejoice that in these
services, we can be united in spirit with whatever of
pure piety lived and glowed in the hearts of God s chil
dren of "the ages all along;" esteeming the grains of
pure gold none the less that they have been washed
down to us by the stream of time, overlaid and buried in
the detritus of the Middle Ages. And if any oppose to
us the argument that we should reject it because it
has been in the Romish Church, we meet it with the only
answer which such argument deserves, the answer of
King James to the Presbyterian divines at Hampton
Conference, "The papists wear shoes and stockings,
therefore we must go barefoot." Because this book
embodies much of the old forms which were heard in the
Churches of the East which Paul planted and Apollos
watered, and which were afterwards transferred to the
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE LITURGY. 51
Churches of the West, we cling to it with the deeper
love. And when one comes to us with the hackneyed
words of accustomed censure upon our forms, as induc
ing coldness of spirit, and checking the free outflow of
the feelings, we answer, with the memories of the past
glowing in our hearts, that the expression which conveys
the thoughts of one mind and the feelings of one heart,
cannot satisfy the soul of one whose mind has been filled
with the expression which conveys the collective mind of
centuries, and whose heart has been bound up by our
prayers in one sweet brotherhood with the warm, beating
hearts of holy men of various climes and of every age.
Yes, this is our answer, to such ungrounded cavil,
" Mine is no solitary choice;
See here the seal of saints impressed ;
The prayer of millions swells my voice,
The mind of ages fills my breast ! "
III.
^Doctrinal 00tem 0f
HAVING rapidly traced, in our last chapter, the external
history of our Book of Common Prayer, we shall now
proceed to open its pages, and inquire after their mean
ing. If we shall be able to fix upon a right method of
investigation, and to ascertain the general scope or system
of doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer, that we may
thereby be furnished with a key to unlock each passage
in detail, then the inquiry may be profitably and satisfac
torily conducted.
I. First, let the object which we have in view stand out
distinctly before our minds. Here is our formulary of
faith and worship. We desire to know what is the
meaning of its Creeds, Articles, and Prayers. That is
the object of our investigation. That is the only object.
We have heard that there is a diversity of opinion as to
what are the doctrines of this Protestant Episcopal Church
of these United States, and we are desirous of ascertain
ing for ourselves what they are. They are contained in
this Book of Common Prayer. Let us open it and read.
But different individuals upon opening it, come to differ
ent conclusions, as to what its real meaning is. Some
say it embodies the doctrinal system of Calvin. Others
say, " Nay, but it favors the Arminian scheme." Some
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 53
contend that it embodies semi-popish views of the word,
the ministry, and the sacraments. Others say, " Oh,
no, it is purely and wholly Protestant in its character."
This is precisely what different parties say of the Bible,
and furnishes presumptive evidence, at least, that the
Prayer-Book is like and embodies the doctrines of the
Bible. Now it is manifest, in this diversity of opinion,
that it will not avail us to ascertain what different men
say is the meaning of this book. We must ourselves
endeavor to get at its meaning. Our object, then, is not
to ascertain what any man, or set of men, in the Church,
or out of it, think to be the doctrines of this book. Our
object is not even to learn what a majority of the mem-
T)ers of this Church suppose or have supposed to be its
doctrine for majorities are not infallible. Our one ob- .
.jectis, with a teachable and honest mind, to solve this
inquiry, " What mean the words of this book ? "
II. This being our object, what method of investigation
shall we pursue ? I think we shall be able to fix upon
some principles, sanctioned by reason and common sense,
which will guide us to a right method.
Here, let it be remembered, that our object is to ascer
tain the meaning of this Book of Common Prayer of the
Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States. In
some respects it differs from that of the Church of Eng
land.
The historical sketch, which was given in our last
chapter, may guide us to a right method of investigation.
We may first take the formularies of faith published in
the reign of Henry VIII. If there be any ambiguity in
their language, we can turn to the known and recorded
opinions of those who framed these documents. We
shall be fully persuaded, by such a method, of their pre-
5*
54 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
vailing character. In the same way we may take the
first Liturgy of Edward VI. If there be any doubt as to
the meaning of any part of this book, great light may be
thrown upon it, by a knowledge of the opinions, on the
point in question, of those by whom the Liturgy was
framed. And here great care should be taken that the
opinions of its framers, at the time of its formation, should
be ascertained. As the Reformers came very gradually
to the adoption of those views in which they ultimately
rested, it would manifestly throw no light on the formula
ries which they composed, at one period, to ascertain their
different sentiments at a previous period. For instance,*
it is well known that Cranmer did not renounce the doc-4
trine of Transubstantiation until the year 1545, when he|
was convinced of its falsity by Ridley. Now it would/
manifestly give an erroneous view of the Communion!
Service framed under the direction of Cranmer, in 1548, f
to refer to his writings previous to 1545. By this method
we shall be able to determine tne doctrines of the first
book of Edward VI. Again ; when we find the book
revised and republished in 1552, we may be able in th
same way to ascertain its meaning. We turn to the
history of the change. We learn with what view certain
portions of the service were introduced, and others
omitted. We find certain other authentic and authorita
tive documents issued at the same period and by the
same authority. We resort to them for light. Now as
our single inquiry is, " What is the meaning of that book? "
which is a different inquiry from this, " Did the great
mass of the clergy and people of England at that time
believe the doctrines of that book ? " we are not con
cerned to know the private opinions of men who had no
part in framing the service, but only the meaning and
intent of those by whom it was framed and authorized.
I
i
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 55
In this way, we ascertain the doctrines of the second
Liturgy of Edward VI., which remain fixed as thus
ascertained, whatever may be the private views of any
officers and ministers of the Church, until again changed.
If any changes are authoritatively introduced, we adopt
the same method as before. In like manner, after we
have thus traced the Book of Common Prayer to its
present form in the English Church, we ascertain whatu
changes from that form have been made in the American*
Book of Common Prayer, and with what view those
changes have been introduced.
Now if these plain principles be correct, we shall be
able, from the vast mass of books which surround the
Liturgy and claim to illustrate its meaning, to select
such as have a right to be heard upon this subject.
/Doubtful or ambiguous passages in the Prayer-Book ofC
NEdward VI., can best be illustrated by resorting to the \
* writings of those who framed it, and to the other author
itative documents of the Church during the same period.
When, subsequently, changes are introduced, we may
ascertain by the history of those changes, how far the
doctrine of that formulary of faith has been modified by
them. When, having crossed the Atlantic, and become
the standard of the faith and worship of the Protestant
Episcopal Church of the United States, the Book of
Common Prayer is subjected to other changes, we may,
by the same method, learn what, if any, modifications of
faith or practice are thereby introduced. A course of
thorough investigation, therefore, would be to reject all
merely private and individual interpretation of the Book
of Common Prayer, and confine ourselves to the works
of those who framed it, and to other authorized documents
put forth at the time of its formation. Pursuing this
course, we should resort to the writings of Cranmer and
56 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
Ridley, and other Reformers, by whom, or under whose
oversight, the Liturgy was framed. Then we should
examine the Catechism and the Homilies put forth at the
same time, and by the same authority. Here we should
have the great body of doctrine as established in the
Church of England. Our task, then, would be substan
tially completed; for it is confessed that the great body
f of doctrine remains unaltered as it was established by the
^second Liturgy of Edward VI.
When the Liturgy was reestablished under Queen
Elizabeth, it was with so few changes as to leave it sub
stantially the same. Here, however, we find a most
important and authorized work put forth expressly to
explain it Jewel s Apology of the Church of England.
It was approved by all the Bishops as a true explanation
f of its doctrines. I know no work to which we can resort, >
which may be regarded as so authoritative in fixing the
doctrines of the Book of Common Prayer. Says Bishop
Short, " It may be deemed a book authorized by the
Church of England." It was published at the command
of the queen, and ordered to be set up in churches. 1 It
is quoted in the Canons of the Church of England. 2 Says
Bishop Whittingham, of Maryland," The Apology of the
Church of England bears nearly the same relation to that
Church that is possessed with regard to the Lutheran
Church of Germany, by the symbolical books. Like the
latter, the Apology is a statement of doctrine and disci
pline put forth for the purpose of refuting the calumnious
misrepresentations of the Romish Church. Like them, it
is an explanation and defence of the avowed principles
of the communion of which it bears the name. Like
them, it was formerly acknowledged as such by the whole
1 Short, 124, note 7. 2 Canons of the Church, p. 228.
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 57
body of the communion" 3 And again : " In another
paper relative to the same Convocation [he is speaking of
a Convocation held soon after the publication of the work]
supposed by Strype to be the production of Archbishop
Parker s secretary, it was proposed to extract from the
Apology, articles for general assent. When it is remem
bered that these propositions were brought before the
Convocation in which the Catechism and Articles, as they
now stand, were discussed and adopted, the high ground
occupied by the Apology as a standard of the Church
comes clearly into view." 4 With these sources of in
formation before us, and with a careful eye on the few
subsequent changes in the Book of Common Prayer, it
would seem to be a task not impossible of accomplish
ment, to ascertain accurately its doctrines.
Obviously just as these principles are, it is curious to
observe how summarily they are disposed of by certain
writers who are determined to find in a latent, if not in a
developed state, all the private and individual notions
which they baptize with the name Catholic. " They*
/ought to be there, and therefore they are ! " is the argu-^
} ment. Keble, 5 in his Introduction to Hooker, expressly ad
mits that his (Keble s) views of Episcopacy do not appear
in the writings of the Reformers, by whom the Liturgy
was framed, nor in the writings of those who immediately
succeeded them. What then ? Shall we infer that they
did not hold them ? O, no ! says Mr. Keble, they held
them ; but they did not avow them because of their rela
tion to the foreign Protestants ; because they wanted the
full evidence of antiquity, and because of the influence of
the court. Can any man believe a thing so absurd ?
3 Standard Works, vol. iii., p. vi. 4 Td., p. ix.
5 Keble s Hooker, Introduction, pp. xxxi-vi.
58 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
I Here are doctrines which, by their very nature, are
^regarded by those who hold them, as fundamental ; as
tholding the front rank in importance ; as those upon
which rest right views of the method of salvation ; nay,
as those on which salvation itself, is, ordinarily, de
pendent. And yet men who went to the stake for princi
ples which they regarded as fundamental, did not hint
these necessary truths, when they professed to be pro
claiming and recording for future times, their whole
system of religious truth. And this course they pursued
from the most unworthy and cowardly motives. And the
proof of this strange state of mind, where is it? It is not
found in any private records or letters by which the true
mind of those most reserved Reformers can be ascer
tained ; but it is reasoned forth in syllogisms whose con
clusions would not follow even if their premises were
granted. It is obvious, says Mr. Keble, that, in these doc
trines, the true strength of their cause was found ; they must
have occurred to them, because they were the received
octrine of the Church down to their time ; therefore they
ust have held these doctrines; therefore, having with- \
held the expression of them, it must have been on account .
of these reasons which have been specified, because no
better reasons can be found. This is the argument. It
is obvious to Mr. Keble ; but we may be sure that had it
been obvious to Ridley and Cranmer, we should find
1 them proclaiming their convictions. They must have
occurred to them and so did the doctrine of Transub-
S stantiation but the Reformers were very far from
i adopting every doctrine that occurred to them. The
truth is, that the system of doctrine held by the Re
formers and embodied in our formularies, is not regarded
by many as sacredly binding on the conscience. What
ought to have been there ; what has subsequently been
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 59
developed and held by individuals or by schools, are the*
doctrines of many who subscribe to the unchanged stan-<
dards of the Church, with the conscious or unconscious!
proviso in their minds that they are to be understood, not<
as they were when first established, but as developed,
though without being authorized, by wiser men of later
times. If this method of ascertaining the doctrine of the
Church be sound, the search is manifestly hopeless.
All doctrines and systems may be found in our Book
of Common Prayer, in germ if not in flower, by the
decision, on the part of individuals, that certain grounds
were obviously the true and strong ones for the Re
formers to assume, and thence arguing, that they must
have reservedly held, and disguisedly expressed them, in
words which, to the casual observer, seem to convey
other meanings. There are some sign-boards so in
geniously constructed, that from a certain point, as we
stand before them, they convey one announcement, and
as we move away from them and look back, they are
found to convey another. Some such device must have
been adopted by the Reformers of the Church. As we
stand before, and fix a direct gaze upon the fair and
strong structure which they have erected, the word
PROTESTANT, in bold, bright characters meets the eye,
but, as we move away from it and turn a backward
glance, the word CATHOLIC is found to have usurped its
place ; and if we move far enough it is said by some,
we will find, in red and glaring characters, the word
ROMAN. 6
6 That we have correctly represented Mr. Keble s views, is
evident from the following passage. Here, however, instead of a
development of views previously, though latently existing, we find
it distinctly intimated that the views advocated by the new class
of writers, were such as they had not previously held, such as they
acquired by unlearning opinions heretofore entertained. On
60 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
> If we bear in mind the principles which we have here
unfolded, we may hope to be preserved from material
error.
III. Having stated the precise object which we have
in view, and having indicated the method by which that
object may be accomplished, it will greatly aid us fin
unfolding the meaning of particular passages, if we can,
at this stage of our inquiry, ascertain the general scope
or system of doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer.
In the Church of England there have been, at various
times, those who embraced the doctrinal system of
Calvin, and who have contended that they did so in
consistency with the Articles of the Church. Does our
Book of Common Prayer set forth the system of doctrine
called Calvinism ?
That it does not set forth or involve that system, we
think can be very briefly and clearly proved. The
.system is too well known to make it necessary that I
.should here describe it.
; 1. In the first place, we may remark, that the offices
of our Church were not drawn from, nor materially
i nfluenced by, nor completely reformed upon the model
of the Calvinistic, but rather upon that of the Lutheran
either hypothesis though both, manifestly, cannot be true the
same fact is acknowledged, namely, that the views of Episcopacy
for which Mr. Keble contends, do not appear in the writings of
the Reformers.
"It were easy to multiply quotations; but enough has been
advanced to justify the assertion, that while Hooker was engaged
in this great work, a new school of writers on Church subjects had
begun to show itself in England; men who had been gradually
unlearning some of those opinions which intimacy with foreign
Protestants had tended to foster, and had adopted a tone and way
of thinking more like that of the early Church."
KEBLE S HOOKER, p. xxxv.
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 61
Church. The only trace of the Calvinistic formularies
to be found in our Liturgy is the introduction of the
Sentences, Exhortation and Confession, at the beginning
of our service, from the translation of a form prepared
by Calvin for the Church of Strasburgh. This is not a
servile copy, but the adoption of a general plan, with
several variations. They, however, involve no peculiar
views of doctrine. It is evident to one familiar with the
history of the time, that Lutheranism was the system
which had most influence over the minds of the framers
of the Liturgy. The fact that Peter Martyr and Martin
Bucer were consulted in the revision of the Liturgy, in
1552, has been adduced as evidence of the necessary
Calvinism of the Church standards. But Bucer was a
Zwinglian, not a Calvinist. Martyr was indeed a
Calvinist; but it is remarkable that none of his suggested
amendments of the Liturgy referred to the points involved
in Calvinism. Indeed, it was not until after his return
to the continent, during Mary s reign, that Calvinism in
its fullness as a system was maintained. 7 Cranmer, it is
well known, was, at the time of the formation of the
Liturgy, a Lutheran in all points but that of Consubstan-
tiation. " To ascertain his peculiar sentiments," says
Dr. Lawrence, "is to ascertain those of the Reformation;
for under his direction, and by his individual aid, were
prepared the offices of our Church and the articles of her
Creed." 8 So extensive was his correspondence with
the German divines upon the single subject of a General
Council, that he employed an agent, whose sole business
it was, under his direction, to conduct that correspond
ence. He translated a Lutheran Catechism, in 1547,
7 Lawrence, Bampton Lectures.
8 Bampton Lectures, p. 18.
6
62 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
two years before the Liturgy appeared. He was in
(constant correspondence with the celebrated Melancthon.
l"he divinity chair of Cambridge was kept open for
Melancthon during all the period that the Articles were
n preparation. It is well known that Melancthon, with
whom Cranmer had such cordial sympathy, had, with
;he assent of Luther, expunged from the Augsburgh
Confession the article which asserted an unconditional
election and reprobation. The Articles of the Church,
which Cranmer confessed to his persecutors to have been
ris composition, are found, upon comparison, to be
strikingly similar to the Confession of Wirtembergh,
>ublished the same year in which our Articles were
completely arranged by Cranmer. The resemblance*
does not consist in the occasional use of a phrase, similar!
or the same, but, in many cases, entire extracts were^
made without the slightest omission or variation. It is
clear, therefore, that our Liturgy is not drawn from
alvinistie creeds, and was not modified by the preva-
ence of Calvinistic views on the part of those who
Tamed it. In addition to these conclusive reasonings, it
may be remarked, that Calvin himself was very far from
)eing satisfied with our Liturgy and Articles, as he cer-
;ainly would have been, had they contained his system.
Writing to Cranmer, he said, "I hear such a heap of
al corruptions has been spared, as must nearly
overwhelm the pure and genuine worship of God." Of
the second Liturgy, he wrote to the English residents at
Frankfort, that it " contained many fooleries which might
for the present be endured." 9
But though our Articles of faith were not derived from
The facts in the above paragraph will be found in Strype s ;
Memorials, and in Lawrence, Bampton Lectures.
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 63
Calvin, it may be asked, Has not our Church, in the
exercise of her independent judgment, adopted the same
system? It can, we think, be clearly proved by the
admission and conduct of Calvinists in the Church, that
she has not.
During the reign of Mary, many of the Reformers
resided on the continent, and there a number imbibed the
views of Calvin. After the return of those exiles, upon
the restoration of Elizabeth, these views acquired great
prevalence among the divines of the English Church.
Yet, be it observed, the standards of the Church remained
unchanged. The Calvinists have shown that they are
not completely satisfied that our standards exhibit their
system, by repeated attempts to make them more explicit.
In 1595, the two divinity professors at Cambridge,
v having differed on this subject, the matter was discussed
\n the Archbishop s palace, and the Lambeth Articles, as
they have since been called, agreed upon. These con
tained the full system of Calvin. They were not, how-
.ever, drawn up by any authority, and are in no sense part
of the Creed of the Church of England. This is mani
fest from the fruitless efforts of the Calvinists to procure
the insertion of the Lambeth Articles among the Estab
lished Articles of the Church. The effort was made at
the Hampton Court Conference. The proposal was there
made by Dr. Reynolds, that those Articles be added to
those already adopted, and that the others be altered in
various particulars to agree with them. Having failed,
under James, to correct what they called the " errors and
imperfections of the Church, as well in matter of doctrine
as discipline," they commenced, in the reign of Charles
Jf., by the authority of parliament, a reformation of our
. Articles. This they did, says Neal, the historian of the
s Puritans, that they might " render their sense more ex-
64 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
press and determinate in favor of Calvinism." They
proceeded as far as the fifteenth Article, modifying them
all to suit the Calvinistic system, and there abandoned the
work, either because they found the Articles incorrigibly
opposed to them, or because they discerned the prospect
of being able soon to form a new creed completely con
formable to their views. These facts show conclusively,
the Calvinists themselves being judges, that their views
were not necessarily contained in our standards. That
we have an Article on Predestination, no more proves
that we hold the Calvinistic view of Predestination,
than the fact that we have Articles on the Sacraments
proves that we hold the Romish views of the Sacraments.
Belief in a doctrine of Predestination held in some
sense by every Church is surely to be distinguished
from belief in the doctrine as held by Calvin. The tes
timony of history is clear that our Liturgy does not set
forth, and is not constructed upon the system of Calvin.
2. Is the system of doctrine called Arminianism that
of our Book of Common Prayer ? If it be, it cannot be
because it was adopted from Arminius or his successors,
because their system had not been proclaimed when our
Liturgy appeared. But does it embody that system of
doctrine ? Certain it is that during the primacy of Laud,
what was called Arminianism, was as prevalent among
the divines of the English Church, as Calvinism had been in
the later years of Queen Elizabeth. But still the Church
standards on these points remained unchanged. Much
that was then called Arminianism, it is believed, is not to
be found in the system of its founder and of its continental
disciples. Indeed, it would be difficult to systematize
the low and unscriptural views at that time going under
the name of Arminianism. It was a party name to
designate those who agreed with Laud. Perhaps the
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 65
answer of Bishop Morley to the country gentleman who
asked him what the Arrninians held, is as good a one as
could be given. " They hold," says he, " the best
bishopricks and deaneries in England. 10 Arminius, a* -
disciple of Calvin, began to differ from his master in|
1591, on the subject of Election. The chief difference! *-^J
between his system and that of Calvin, is that he re-j Sj
garded Election as conditional on the foreseen repentance *
and faith and perseverance of the elect, whereas Calvin;
regarded Election and Reprobation as unconditional.! -
Our Church has not defined the ground of Predestination >
to be the foreseen faith of the elect, but has designated the ;
predestinated as those whom " he hath chosen in Christ
out of mankind." Our Liturgy, therefore, does not set;
forth Arminianism.
3. Does our Liturgy set forth Lutheranism ? We
have already shown how much it is indebted to the
Lutheran Church, and how much resemblance there is
between its doctrinal system and that of the Wirtembergh
Confession. But inasmuch as it rejects Consubstantiation,
and retains the three orders of the ministry, it cannot be
said to set forth the Lutheran system.
4. In the last place, is the general system set forth in
our Creeds and Articles, that of Semi-Popery, or as it was
termed by Bishop Griswold, Low Popery ? There have
been those in the Church, at various periods, who have
held a system which is thus appropriately termed. They
could not be said to be papists, because they rejected the
supremacy of the pope and the doctrine of Transubstan-
tiation. Or if, in some cases, they have not rejected the
latter doctrine, they have declined to explain it and avow
it with the same particularity and fullness as the papists.
10 Short, History of English Church.
6*
66 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
Still, although rejecting these doctrines, they have con
tended for the real presence of Christ s body and blood
in the elements, and have regarded the Lord s Supper as (
a sacrifice, propitiatory for sin, the presbyter a priest,
and the table of the Lord an altar. They have described
Barjtism as the source and cause of the inner spiritual
regeneration. They have encouraged prayers for the
ad. They have attributed efficacy to the prayers of
the Virgin Mary. They have denied the doctrine of
Justification by faith. They have introduced tradition,
as a joint rule with Scripture, of faith and practice.
They have preached the practical infallibility of the
Church. They have introduced the distinction betwee
venial and mortal sins. They have favored the re-intro
duction of the confessional, and contended for the powe
of authoritative priestly absolution. In short, they hav
embraced doctrines of which it is a mild description of
them to say that they are Semi-Popish.
Is this the system of our Book of Common Prayer ?
The question may be answered distinctly by referring
to the history of the Liturgy. In the " Articles about,,
Religion," in "the Necessary Erudition," and the " Pious 4.
Institution of a Christian Man," most of the doctrines of-.-
the Romish Church, with the exception of the pope s ^.
supremacy, are retained. But when the first Liturgy of
Edward VI. was formed, most of them were omitted.
Yet some of those views which belong to the system
which we have called Low Popery still lingered in this
firstjervjce. Had they been continued there, it might
be said that the Liturgy favored this system. But as
they have been cast out, it cannot, for a moment, be
maintained. In the first Liturgy, in the prayer in the
Communion Service, there is a thanksgiving for " all the
wonderful grace and virtue declared in all the saints,"
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 67
and " chiefly in the most glorious and blessed Virgin
Mary." This is omitted in the second Liturgy. In the
same prayer there is a petition for the dead that they
may rest in peace. This is omitted likewise in the
second Liturgy. In the first Liturgy, the words ad-
\dressed to the communicants on delivering the bread
ywas, "the body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was
(given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto ever-
llasting life." Lest the words should be misapprehended,
land be supposed to involve the doctrine of the real
presence in the elements, they were omitted, and these
words used : "Take and eat this m remembrance that*; 1
Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by^
faith with thanksgiving." This fact shows the anxiety >.
of the Reformers to clear themselves of any suspicion
even, of holding popish views. The same anxiety was
shown by another change. In the Communion Service
there was a prayer of oblation, (which, because it con
tains nothing really objectional has been restored in our
American Prayer Book,) which contained a supplicationC
!for the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the bread and |
wine, which, because it was supposed to represent a /
sacrifice, was omitted in the second Liturgy of Edward, 1
and never again restored to the English Book of Common |
Prater. Now, take these facts in connection with the
statements of our Articles upon the sufficiency of Scrip
ture ; upon Justification by faith only ; upon sin after C
Baptism ; upon Purgatory ; upon the Sacraments as signs
s and sejajs of grace, and means of grace to those on]y
4 who rec.eiye them in faith ; upon the wicked who eat not
the body of Christ in the Lord s Supper, and upon the one
oblation of Christ finished upon the cross; take all these
testimonies together, and it is clear that the system of
Low Popery receives not the slightest countenance from
the Liturgy of the Church.
68 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
5. But it may be asked, What then is the system of the
r Book of Common Prayer ? If it teaches neither Calvin-
ism, nor Arminianism, nor Lutheranism, nor semi-popery,
what does it teach ? We answer that it is its peculiar
glory, that it calls no man master ; that it sets forth no
human system. It was framed by men of large learning,
reat experience, fervent piety, and consummate wisdom,
hey had before them the creeds and offices of all times
and nations. They were familiar with the writings and
persons of the continental Reformers. Preparing offices
not for a sect, but for a nation, for a branch of the great
\ Church Catholic, they laid under contribution the theolog-
lical treasures of all time. They made selection of what
I they judged to be agreeable to the Word of God, and the
mind of the Spirit, from the ancient creeds and liturgies
from those in use in the English Church, as well as from
the creeds and offices of the Reformers. They weren
careful to avoid all human speculations, and to embody
only the great doctrines of the Bible, in the way in which
they are presented in the Bible itself, setting forth each
truth in its fullness, without binding it within the chains
of human definitions. The spirit in which its offices were
4 framed, is that wise and temperate one, manifested upon
" the subject of Predestination, by Ridley, in correspondence
with Bradford, when both were in prison. " Know you
that concerning the matter you mean, (namely, Election)
^ I have in Latin drawn out the places in Scripture, and;
^ upon the same have noted what I can for the time. Sir,|
in these matters, I am so fearful, that I dare not speak;
further, yea, almost none otherwise than the very text}
does, as it were lead by the hand." n Happy had it been*
for the Church, had all imitated this wise and humble
11 British Reformers, Ridley.
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 69
Tearfulness ! And this moderation of Scriptural statement
of the truth is the reason why men who have adopted
human systems;, suppose that they find their own scheme
in the Prayer-Hook, because they iiml here and there
expressions which favor their particular views. The
Calvinist finds in it an Article on Predestination, and
statements as strong as himself would make, on the
necessity of preventing and assisting grace, and straight
way thinks that he has found Calvinism, and that he must
explain other parts of the same book by the same system
It is precisely the way he treats the Bible. The Armin
ian finds in it constant warnings to take heed lest he fall,
and concluding that the Prayer-Book sustains the idea
that we may fall from grace, (fecides that it must teach
Arminianisrn. It is precisely the way he treats the Bible.
The Semi-Papist finds the language of the Bible, on the
subject of the sacraments in the Prayer-Book, and hence
draws from the one the same inference that he does from
the other. Are not these facts evidence THAT THE SYSTEM
OF THE CHURCH is THE SYSTEM OF THE BIBLE? No one
ever mistakes the meaning of the Westminster Confession,
and accuses it of Arminianism. No one ever takes the
confessions of Arminian Churches to be Calvinistic ! If
our formularies set forth distinctly one system or the
other, no one could mistake their meaning. But the Church
has avoided human definitions of Scripture doctrines, while
she has set forth every Scripture doctrine itself in all its
fullness and all its glory. This is the boast, this the
honor of the Church to which we belong. Let her
willingly submit to the ignorant reproach, that men of
every creed can find in her something to favor their
views, while she shares this reproach with the Word of
God. It is this fact which fits her for universality. In
this fact is found her power.
70 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
Having thus distinctly presented the object of our in
quiries, having indicated the mode of investigation proper
to be adopted for the attainment of that object, having
ascertained the general scope and character of the Book
of Common Prayer, we shall in our next chapter be able
to enter upon the consideration of the Morning and
, Evening Prayer. We shall be prepared to find the
materials of the services gathered from every quarter,
while, at the same time, we shall expect to find the simple
truths of God s Word presented in glowing fullness, un-
incumbered with the rash and impertinent definitions and
speculations of human reason.
This is the system of our Book of Common Prayer ;
this the pure truth for whose maintenance the framers of
I the Liturgy perished at the stake. For this, they were
cast into prison. Because they would not recant or dis
own it they were burned. If looking upon it as we have,
at this time, as a whole, any thing could endear it to our
hearts more than its intrinsic excellence, it is the fact
that not one word of it would be given up by its framers ;
that it was baptized, as it were, in the heart s blood of
them that framed it. When Cranmer, and Ridley, and
Latimer, and Bradford, were thrust into the Tower, this,
by the description of the good old Latimer, was their
occupation. " Mr. Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury,"
said he, " Mr. Ridley, Bishop of London, that holy man,
Mr. Bradford, and I, old Hugh Latimer, were imprisoned in
the Tower of London, for Christ s Gospel preaching,and be
cause we would not go a massing. The same Tower being
so full of prisoners, we four were thrust into one chamber,
as not to be accounted of. But God be thanked, to our
great joy and comfort, there did we read over the New
Testament with great deliberation and painful study ; and
I assure you, as I will answer before the tribunal of God s
DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 71
majesty, we did find in the Testament of God s body and I
blood, no other but a spiritual presence, nor that the mass}
was any sacrifice for sin." Beautiful picture of holy
faithfulness unto death, reaching forth for the imperish
able crown, hung out amid the flames ! The voice
of this martyr-spirit was echoed from another prison,
where another valiant witness for the truth of Christ,
John Rogers, refused to modify or recant the doctrines of
this our cherished book. " That we have preached the
very doctrine of the Apostles and none other, we are
sufficiently able to declare by their writings, and by
writing for my part I have proffered to prove the same
as it is now often said. And for this cause we suffer the
like reproach, shame, and rebuke, of the world, and the
like persecution, losing of our lives and goods, forsaking
as our master Christ commands, father, mother, sister,
brethren, wives, and children ! " And from the miserable
coal-hole of bloody Bonner s palace, where, though cold
and hungry, and almost dead, the soul of Philpot burned
with the fire that man cannot quench, there issued a trum
pet-tone of joy, and victory, and exultation. " This is the
day that the Lord hath made, let us rejoice and be glad
in it ! This is the way, though it be narrow, which is
full of the peace of God, and leadelh to eternal bliss.
Oh how my heart leaps for joy, that I am so near the
apprehension thereof! God forgive my unworthiness and
unthankfulness of so much glory. I have so much joy of
the reward that is prepared for me, wretched sinner, that,
though I am in a place of darkness and moaning, yet I
cannot lament, but both night and day am joyful as
though I were under no cross at all."
And again, after having been exposed to the pain and
ignominy of the stocks, this is his heroic exclamation :
" Better is it to sit in the stocks of this world than to sit
72 DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH.
| in the stocks of a damnable conscience!" And after
Cranmer and Latimer had been in succession baited and
insulted by the commissioners at Oxford, and witnessed
each a good confession, this is the voice of stout-hearted
Rowland Taylor, himself a prisoner, which reached
them in their bondage. "I cannot utter with my pen
|how I rejoice in my heart for you ; three such captains
:in the forevvard under Christ s cross, banner, or standard,
|in such a cause and skirmish. This, your enterprise, in
jthe sight of all that be in heaven and all God s people in
earth, is most pleasant to behold. This is another man
ner of nobility than to be in the forefront of worldly
warfares. For God s sake pray for us, for we fail not
daily to pray for you. We are stronger and stronger in
the Lord, his name be praised, and we doubt not that ye
| be so in Christ s own sweet school. Heaven is all and
wholly of our side. Therefore Gaudete in Domino
semper et iterum gaudele et exuliate. Rejoice always in
the Lord, and again rejoice and be glad." 12 Out of such
hearts came the Liturgy. For its truths such hearts
dared death. By its influences were such hearts
moulded. May we catch the fervor of their sainted
spirits ! May we not become the degenerate branch of
a noble vine !
12 "Works of the British Reformers.
IV.
Horning
" THE order for Morning and Evening Prayer " is the
subject to which our attention is now to be directed.
I. ARRANGEMENT. It will be found to be admirably
arranged to meet the wants of the soul when we go
up to the house of God.
The first words which usually break upon our ears at
the morning service are these: "The Lord is in his holy
temple, let all the earth keep silence before him." They
are fitting words to prepare the soul for solemn audience
of God. Then follow other and encouraging sentences
declarative of the pardoning mercy of God to the penitent.
They are words well chosen to uphold the trembling soul
of him who feels himself in the presence of the God
whom angels hymn as the thrice HOLY. An exhortation
to confession of sins is then made. A lowly and united
confession of sins follows. What can we better do in so
dread a presence, than fall down with awed Peter when
convinced of Christ s divinity, and cry, " Behold I am a
sinful man, oh Lord ? " Then a comforting declaration
of the absolution of the sins of the truly contrite is pro
nounced by God s commissioned Minister. With this
blessed assurance falling on our heart, can we longer
kneel and pray ? Oh no! we must rise and sing praises
7
74 THE MORNING PRAYER.
unto God, for his tender mercy and loving-kindness.
But how shall we find words to praise him? " Oh Lord,
open thou our lips," bursts from the mouth of the Minister,
and the response of the people is, " And our mouth shall
show forth thy praise." Then swells the exulting
anthem, " Oh come, let us sing unto the Lord ! " The
heart thus attuned to praise and worship, finds further
expression for all its feelings in the Psalms of David.
Then is it not in a fit state to drink in, with thirsting ear,
the word of life from the sacred book ? A chapter from
the Old Testament is read, and as we are musing on the
noble works which God did in the days of our fathers and
in the old time before them, the fire burns in our hearts,
and we must again sing the praises of the all-merciful
and wonder-working God. The Te Deum waits, as a
chariot of fire, to bear our souls to heaven. Again, we
listen to the Gospel in which life and immortality are
brought to light ; and again, we sing the glad "Jubilate"
or the grateful " Benedictus" But a child of God can
not be satisfied with the expression of his own wants or
feelings. He gathers together all those precious truths,
on which his hope rests, and from which his joy springs,
and making his public confession of Christ before men in
the use of the Apostle s Creed, he prepares, having been
engaged in confession and praise, to offer up supplications
for himself, for his brethren, and for all the world. Bowed
in prayer, there go up from all the congregation of God s
people, according to the exhortation of St. Paul, united
"supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of
thanks for all men." Fervent prayers for "peace" for
" grace" for the President of the United States, and all
our rulers, are then offered. The pleading Litany for
deliverance from evil and from sin ; for power to dis
charge all duty, and for mercy to the suffering and the
THE MORNING PRAYER. 75
sinful, then rise up to Him who has assured us that his
ears are opened to our prayers. Then, after a general
prayer for trust in God s promised mercy, and a general
thanksgiving for all the blessings of providence and
grace, and the invocation of God s promised answer to
the prayers of those who are gathered in his name, the
service closes with the Apostolic benediction.
The Evening Prayer, which is similar to the Morning
Prayer, with the exception of the Litany, and of the Ante-
Communion Service, which properly belongs to the
Communion Service, will hereafter claim our notice.
The morning service, as far as the Apostle s Creed, will
furnish us with an ample subject for our present chapter.
II. HISTORY. The first Liturgy of Edward com
menced with the Lord s Prayer, without the Sentences,
Exhortation, Confession, and Absolution. It was followed
by the versicles, as in our Prayer-Book, with the addi
tion of these two, which are still retained in the English
service.
" Priest. Oh God, make speed to save me." l
" Answer. Oh Lord, make haste to help me."
After the doxology, in answer to the Priest when he
says, " Praise ye the Lord," the people are directed to
say from Easter until Trinity Sunday, "Hallelujah."
This was afterwards omitted, and the answer now is as
in our service, " The Lord s name be praised." Then
follows in order the " Venite exultemus ; " the Psalms for
the day ; the "Gloria Patri" after the Psalms; the first
Lesson in the Old Testament ; the " Te Deum" or the
"Benedicite omnia Opera;" the second Lesson, and the
" Benediclus" which has fourteen verses instead of four.
1 Me is changed to us, in the present English service
76 THE MORNING PRAYER.
The alterations in this portion of the service when the
second Liturgy of Edward was published, were the
introduction of the Sentences, Exhortation, Confession,
and Absolution, and the anthem "Jubilate Deo, " in addition
to the " Benedictus." The Sentences began with that,
which in our Liturgy is the fourth, from the 51st Psalm,
" The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit," &c. 2
This portion of the service is precisely the same in the
present English Prayer-Book, with one exception. In the
declaration of Absolution the word Minister, in Edward s
book, is clumged to__the word Priest. It is supposed
to be one of the unauthorized changes of Archbishop
Laud, which, having been introduced without authority,
are still continued. 3
This portion of our American service is nearly identi
cal with the present English service. The first three
sentences were newly introduced. The two versicles
after the Lord s Prayer, which we have already noticed,
were omitted. After the Psalms, direction is given that the
Gloria Patri, or the Gloria in Excelsis shall be said or
2 The first Liturgy had directed that " the Priest, being in the
quire, should begin with a loud voice the Lord s Prayer." A
rubric, at the beginning of the second Liturgy of Edward, directs
that "the Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in such 5
place oTthe church, chapel, or chancel, and the minister shall so *
turn him, as the people may lest hear." The place at which
prayer should be read will be noticed in a subsequent chapter.
3 Laud denies that he was the author of those changes, asserting
that " the alterations were made either by the king himself, or
some other about him, when he was not at court." (Troubles and
Trials, quoted in Neal, vol. L, p. 314.) This is an acknowledgment
that the changes were made. Certain it is that the word Minister,^
in the second of Edward, was not changed to Priest at the revision^*-
of the Liturgy under Elizabeth, nor yet at the last one underjj
Charles; and yet Minister has disappeared, and Priest is in its,*
stead.
THE MORNING PRAYER. 77
sung. The Gloria Patri is not enjoined, as in the English
service, to be said at the end of every psalm. In all
other respects, the services are the same.
III. SOURCES. The sources, whence this portion of the
Liturgy was derived, is the next subject of our inquiry.
A We have already stated that the introductory Sentences,*
^Exhortation, Confession, and Absolution, are borrowed*
,,<and slightly changed from a Liturgy composed by Calvin.^
The excellence of the arrangement consists, as we have
shown, in its adaptation to the wants of the true worship
per. The Lord s Prayer was used in the beginning of
the service in the Churches of England, as may be seen
in the breviaries of Salisbury, York, Hereford," &c. 4
" The versicles have been used from time immemorial,"
says Palmer, "by the English Church." The Gloria
Patri occurs frequently in the ancient liturgies, and is
here appropriately introduced. The Veuite exuliemus is
found in the ancient offices of the English Church. The
use and the position of the Psalms for the day are taken
from the matin service of the English Church. The
reading of Lessons alternately with Psalms, is also an
ancient custom of the British Churches. The Psalms
were arranged to be read through in the order of daily
service once a month. The composition of the Te Deum
has been ascribed to St. Augustine, or St. Ambrose. It
is certainly as old as the fifth century. The Benedicite,
and the Jubilate Deo, are selected from the offices of
the English Church. Thus we see, even in this short
portion of the service, the truth of the remark, that the
Reformers selected whatever they judged best for the
public worship, retaining in their Liturgy many of the
4 Palmer s Antiquities of the English Ritual, vol. L, p. 217.
7*
78 THE MORNING PRAYER.
prayers used in the old English offices, and which had
been retained in the days of Roman supremacy, and in
troducing large and important portions of the service from
the Liturgy of one of the continental Reformers. They y
no more committed themselves to the system of Popery *
/ by the one act, than they did to the system of Calvinism,-
, by the other. We see, also, how large a portion of the i
- service, thus far, is taken from the Word of God. X
It has been observed, that in the American Book of
Common Prayer, some alterations, from the present form
of the English Prayer-Book, have been made. It may
be well here to refer to the views and principles of those
who composed that book, and to sketch a history of its
formation.
We have already described the successive steps by
which the scattered Episcopal Churches in the several
States, became the one Protestant Episcopal Church of
the United States. The Convention of 1785 undertook
to make such alterations in the English Prayer-Book as
should fit it for use in the United States. " They also
proposed such improvements in the service and the
Articles as they deemed to be proper." 5 U A moderate
review," says Bishop White, " fell in with the sentiments
and wishes of every member." The committee, consist
ing of Bishop White, Dr. Smith, and Dr. Wharton, pre
pared and published what has since been called the
Proposed Book. From the manner in which their duty
was discharged, it is clear that the Convention and the
committee regarded themselves as having full authority
to make any such changes in the statement of doctrines,
or in the forms of prayer, as they deemed advisable and
important. Accordingly, they proceeded to bring the
6 Bishop White s Memoirs, p. 103.
THE MORNING PRAYER. 79
XXXIX Articles within the number of XX. A change of
expression was made in the Articles on Predestination
and Original Sin. An important change in the Baptismal
Service for infants was introduced, in the omission, after
the baptism, of thanks to the Father, that it hath pleased
him " to regenerate this infant by his Holy Spirit." The
language of the framers of this book in the preface dis- P
tinctly shows that they felt themselves at perfect liberty
to frame it according to the views held .by those who..
then constituted the Church in this country. They quote
the language of the Church of England, declaring the
necessity and expediency of occasional alterations and
amendments. They refer to a commission issued in
1689, to a number of bishops and other divines, for a
revision of the Liturgy, and enumerate thirteen queries
proposed by them, having reference to the improvement
and alterations in the work. " When, in the course of
Divine Providence," they continue, "these American
States became independent, with respect to civil govern
ment, their ecclesiastical independence was necessarily
included, and the different religious denominations in |
these States were left at full and equal liberty to model
and organize their respective churches, and forms of
worship and discipline, in such manner as they might
judge most convenient for their future prosperity ; con
sistently with the constitution and laws of their country." 6
This, and more language of the same kind, is retained in/. ,
our present preface to the Prayer-Book. When, at the
meeting of the next General Convention, this Proposed
Book was not adopted, it was not from any idea that they
had not power to make such alterations, but simply be
cause the alterations proposed were not such as met their
6 Preface to the Proposed Book.
80 THE MORNING PRAYER.
approbation. Says Bishop White, our highest authority
on this subject, " In the appointment of a committee on the
different departments of the Book of Common Prayer,
Dr. Parker proposed that the English book should be the
ground of the proceedings held, without any reference to
that set out and proposed in 1785." This was objected to
by some, who contended that a Liturgy ought to be formed
without reference to any existing book, although with
liberty to take from any, whatever the Convention should
think fit. " The issue of the debate was the wording of
the resolves, as they stand on the journal, in which the
different committees are appointed to prepare a Morning
^ and Evening Prayer ; to prepare a Litany ; to prepare a
< Communion Service ; and the same in regard to other
vdepartments, instead of its being said, to alter the said
^services, which had been the language in 1785." 7
These facts conclusively prove, that the American
Church did not feel herself bound to adopt, in a body, all
the doctrines and language of the English Church ; but
that, on the contrary, as stated in the preface to the
Prayer-Book, they felt themselves at liberty " to establish
such other alterations and amendments therein, as might
/. expedient." We have dwelt upon these points,
"not only as necessary to a full understanding of the posi-
.*., - s tion of the Church in this country, but that we may remind
the reader, that if a doctrine be proved to be held by
the English Church, it is not, therefore, necessarily proved
* , to be held by our Church also, unless it can be shown
that we have made no change, addition, or omission in
the language of the English formularies. We notice
this principle, because we are about to apply it to that
portion of the service now under consideration.
7 Bishop White s Memoirs, p. 147.
THE MORNING PRAYER. 81
IV. DOCTRINE. Having noticed the arrangement, and
sketched the history, and indicated the sources of this
portion of our service, we are now prepared to speak
briefly of the doctrine involved or embodied in it.
We need not pause to dwell upon the harmony of the
Exhortation with the language of Scripture, of the self-
abasing spirit that breathes through the Confession, and
the fervent devotion which burns in the inspired anthems
and the Gloria in Excelsis. Our attention will be con
fined to the Confession of Sins, and the Declaration of
Absolution.
An examination of our Liturgy, in connection with.
the history of that of the Church of England, on this<
subject, will show that our Church neither enjoins, nor^
recommends, nor sanctions private confession to the,
minister, but that, on the contrary, by what she has
retained and what she has omitted, has plainly indicated*
that she has been satisfied to prescribe to her children
confession of their sins to God, leaving to the conscience
of all, the measure and the mode of confessing their sins
to each other.
In the first Liturgy of Edward, the Confession stands
in precisely the same form in which it is now found in^
the English and American Liturgies. But in the Ex- ^
hortation, read the day before the celebration of the
Communion, the people are allowed to use or abstain
from auricular confession. This is its language: "Re- ;
quiring such as shall be satisfied with a general confes-
sion, not to be offended with them who do use to their
further satisfying, the auricular and secret confession to
the Priest; nor those, also, which think needful or con
venient for the quieting of their own consciences, par
ticularly to open their sins to the Priest, to be offended i
with them that are satisfied with their humble confession I
82 THE MORNING PRAYER.
|to God, and the general Confession of the Church."
This permission to use auricular confession was after
wards withdrawn. Yet the Church of England has
retained in her service for the Visitation of the Sick, a
rubric, which directs that particular confession of sins
should be recommended. The rubric is as follows:
: " Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special
confession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled
with any weighty matter. After which confession, the
priest shall absolve him, (if he humbly and heartily
desire it,) after this sort." Now not only has our Church*
,<omitted the permission to use auricular confession, but^
she has also omitted this rubric in the Office for the^
Visitation of the Sick. She has thus significantly shown j^
* that in no sense does she sanction or recommend private ^
auricular confession.
On the subject of ABSOLUTION, also, it will be seen,
that she has manifested wisdom and moderation, and in
no way authorized the language which is sometimes used
with regard to the power of the Ministry to absolve the
sinner. We do not, at this time, touch the question of jj
the priestly power by which absolution is proclaimed, |{
, but only the force of the act itself.
It is to be observed, that the form of Absolution is
called " a declaration of the Absolution or Remission of
sins." And this word declaration, we think, expresses
the doctrine of our Church on this subject. She does not
claim a power on the part of her Ministers, authoritatively
to absolve penitents from their sins, but only to declare
and pronounce to God s people, being penitent, the abso
lution and remission of their sins. Neither is this a
distinction without a difference. It marks the difference
between a mere messenger, employed by the king to
announce his pardon to returning and confessing rebels, |
THE MORNING PRAYER,
and a vicegerent, holding delegated authority from the,
king, to extend, in his own name, pardon to the penitent.
Our Church assumes for her Ministers no more power
than that which belongs to authorized messengers who
convey the message of their king. Herein she has, as
we think, most wisely departed from the example of the
Church of England.
Bishop Jeremy Taylor has truly observed, that there
are, in the English Church, three forms of Absolution;
1, the declarative ; 2, the optative, and 3, the authorita-^
tive, or that which is pronounced by a delegated author
ity. 8 The Declaration of Absolution or Remission of sins
in the Morning Prayer, is an example of the declarative
absolution. The form which occurs in the Communion
Service, is an example of the optative absolution a
form which invokes, in the way of a blessing, God s
pardoning mercy. That which occurs in the Office for
the Visitation of the Sick, (in the English service,) is an
example of the authoritative absolution. We have al
ready spoken of the exhortation to a special confession
of sins to the Priest, which is found in that office. It is
immediately followed by an absolution in this authoritative
form : " Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to
his Church to absolve (not simply to declare the absolu-^
tion, but to absolve) all sinners who truly repent and -
believe in him, of his great mercy forgives thee thine
offences, and by his authority committed to me, I ABSOLVE
thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." This is language
which our Church has not presumed to put into the
mouth of her Ministers. She has altogether omitted thisi
form of Absolution in her Office for the Visitation of the i
8 Works, vol. vii., pp. 308, 309.
84 THE MORNING PRAYER.
Sick, and has nothing like it in any other of her offices.
She has retained but the declarative and optative, or
supplicatory form, which is of no higher force than the
declarative. Nay, so careful has she been to avoid even
the appearance of forgetting for a moment, that in no
sense can any forgive sins but God only, that she has not
retained the language of the rubric before the form in,
the Communion Service, which, in the English book,
/directs the Priest to " pronounce their absolution," but
has changed it to this modest form "Then, the Priest
shall say to those who come to receive the Holy Com-
**O % Jmunion." In view of this statement, it is simply false
and foolish to say of our Church, that she usurps God s
prerogative of forgiving sins. That the Church of Eng
land has laid herself open to charges upon this subject
which do not apply to us, is from this history clear. In
deed, we cannot but think, that the Church of England,
by retaining this portion of the Office for the Visitation of
the Sick, has inadvertently sanctioned a doctrine, not
i elsewhere claimed by her, and not claimed for her by
the_best expositors of her views.
The testimony of Bishop Jewel, in his Apology,
which, says Bishop Whittingham, of Maryland, " bears
nearly the same relation to the Church of England, as is
possessed with regard to the Lutheran Church of Ger-
^^many, by the symbolical books," is very clear and
t j ^ explicit. He does not claim for the Church of England
the power of authoritative absolution. This is his lan
guage : " And we say that the office of loosing consisteth
in this point, that the Minister, either by the preaching of
fthe Gospel, ofTereth the merits of Christ, and full pardon,
to such as have lowly and contrite hearts, and do un~
feignedly repent themselves, pronouncing unto the same,
a sure and undoubted forgiveness of their sins, and hope
THE MORNING PRAYER.
of everlasting salvation : or else that the same Minister,
when any have offended their brothers minds with some
great offence, or notable and open crime, whereby they
have, as it were, banished and made themselves strangers
from the common fellowship and body of Christ then,
after perfect amendment of such persons, doth reconcile
them and bring them home again, and restore them to
the company and unity of the faithful." Here the Bishop
speaks of a declaration of the terms of pardon to the
penitent, and of the readmission of expelled communi
cants, as descriptive of the Church s power of Absolution.
The truth is, that to contend for a power of authorita
tive absolution, is to contend for that which, in its nature,
is impossible. The power of authoritative absolution
cannot be committed to man ; because the only condition
upon which it is possible to exercise it, is one which man
cannot possess. If man be commissioned to pardon,
to say, "/ absolve thee" then he must be gifted also
/with the divine faculty of knowing that the individual
,whom he absolves is truly penitent, because, on this
^condition alone, can sins be forgiven. This power, then,
it is not possible that man should exercise. Nor can any
intermediate power, between that of authoritative declar
ation and authoritative absolution, be attributed to the
Minister of God. It must be an absolute or a conditional
act. If absolute, omniscience is required. If conditional,
% it can be but a declaration of that which is suspended on
i the fulfilment of the condition. This is but an author-
* itative declaration. This point has been argued with
consummate ability and convincing clearness, by Bishop
Taylor, in his " Ductor Dubitantium." The following
passages contain the substance of his argument on the
subject; an argument which is hardly to be reconciled
with his statements upon the subject of Absolution, to
,JU
8b THE MORNING PRAYER.
which we have already referred. "The soul is not,
, cannot be, properly subject to any jurisdiction but that
of God. Now none can give laws to souls but God ;
he only, is Lord of wills and understandings ; and there-
"fore none can give judgment or restraint to souls but
God. But as by preaching, the ecclesiastical state does
imitate the legislation of God, so by the power of the
keys she does imitate his jurisdiction. For it is to be
observed, that by the sermons of the Gospel, the ecclesi
astics give law to the Church ; that is, they declare the
laws of God ; and by the use of the keys they also
declare the divine jurisdiction." 9
" But the use of the keys does differ from proper
* jurisdiction in this great thing. That if the keys be right
ly used, they do bind or loose respectively ; but if they
err, they do nothing upon the subject, they neither bind
.nor loose. Now in proper jurisdiction it is far otherwise ;
for, right or wrong, if a man be condemned, he shall die
i for it ; and if he be hanged, he is hanged." 10
This sober and Scriptural view of the subject, will
prevent us alike, from too highly exalting, and from too
( lightly regarding, the power of binding and of loosing,
scommitted to the Ministry of Christ.
Our sense of the danger of regarding a Ministry, as
//the possessors of an authoritative and absolute power of
pardoning sin, we have no words fully to express. If the
voice of the past could reach us, its testimonies on the
subject would appal the heart. Sinful man cannot sup
pose himself the possessor of this fearful power, without
finding that the demon which sleeps or wakes in every
man s heart, rises and laughs outright, and seizes a fiery
9 Taylor s Ductor Dubitantium, lib. 3, chap. 4, 11.
10 Id., 12.
THE MORNING PRAYER. 87
sceptre and mounts the soul s throne, and reigns hence
forth inexorable and supreme. Such a privilege and
power were too much even for a good man, while there
is within him a principle of pride and selfishness and
love of rule, to which it might appeal. Why, the holy
Apostle Paul, when he was permitted but to see those
heavenly things, which it was not lawful for him to
describe, needed a buffeting from Satan, and a thorn in
the flesh, lest he should be exalted above measure. But
to have the power and the prerogative of Heaven, be
stowed on a body of men, among whom there are not
many St. Paul s what would it be but to place the i
sword of Michael in the hand of Lucifer? True, the
time is past, when an arrogant and cruel Priest, could,
by his spoken excommunication, breathe over his victim
a moral leprosy ; deprive him of every means of grace
and every hope of glory ; cut him off from human
converse and human sympathy; rob him in life of all
that makes life tolerable, and at death cast out his un-
buried body for the ravens, and give his name to execra
tion, and to infamy. 11 But restore this power to the
Priesthood, and the time may come again. Restore this
power to the Priesthood, and the injury which would
ensue to them, and the terror and agony of the hearts
which would cower under the power of God, wielded by
the hand of sinful man, no language could portray. God
have mercy on the people whose sins are forgiven them
by men !
Nor let us look at the power of an authoritative
declaration of absolution, as one which is to be regarded
with low esteem. Some cast the reproach upon this
view, that it makes the power of binding and loosing,
11 See Hallam s Middle Ages.
88 THE MORNING PRAYER.
committed to the Ministry, no more than a power to pro
claim the terms of pardon no more, in short, than the
power committed to them of preaching salvation through
the cross. And is that a power to be lightly esteemed ?
Is the assurance of salvation, given by a commissioned
and accredited ambassador, to be regarded with indiffer
ence ? What would \ve have more? What can we
y have more ? We must either receive an absolute pardon,!]
or we must receive the authorized proclamation of thejf
.* terms of pardon. As the first is a power not committedJ
i t to man, because it could not be exercised, the latter -j
Pwef is the only one that tejnains. And that is a||
blessed one for the heart. That is sufficient. That is
l -pronounced under circumstances which are calculated to
give to the heart, deep, sweet peace. If condemned
criminals hear a rumor, that their pardon has been j)ro_-
nounced by a merciful government, _on certain condi
tions, the mere rumor awakens joyful hope. If, from
ft their prison-house, they hear the authorized heralds pro
claiming those good tidings, their hope heightens into j
;, glad assurance. But if, under circumstances calculated
**to impress the solemnity and blessedness of the act
Meeply on their minds, they are ushered into the august
resence of the offended power, and there with united
voice confess their transgressions, and assent to the terms
of pardon ; then they feel most deeply grateful, when
the authorized heralds proclaim that their penalty is re
mitted, their offence pardoned. Similar are the feelings
of the pardoned sinner, when the sentence of absolution
is pronounced. He comes into God s holy temple, where
his special presence is ; and there, with fellow-sinners,
audibly confesses his transgressions, and renews "his con
secration ; and it is with no ordinary emotion, that he
hears God s commissioned Minister declare not, J
THE MORNING PRAYER. 89
absolve thee, but "HE pardoneth and absolveth all
those who truly repent, and unfeignedly believe his Holy
Gospel." If he is conscious that he complies with the
conditions, he may appropriate the promise !
8*
V.
CONTINUED.
IN our last chapter we noticed the admirable arrange
ment of the Morning Prayer ; sketched the history and
traced the sources of that portion of it, which extends to
the Apostle s Creed, and unfolded the doctrine of our
Church on the subject of Confession and Absolution.
- We now turn our attention to the Psalter, the Lessons,
- the Creeds, the Litany, and the concluding prayers.
One of the most delightful portions of our daily service
is the use of the Psalms of David. Every experience of
joy and sorrow, of comfort and perplexity, of assurance
and of doubt, of rapture soaring to the gate of heaven,
and of gloom sinking to the gate of death, is here most
vividly portrayed. They have ever furnished to the
Church her choicest expressions of devotional feeling.
The custom of having them read over once a month is
very ancient. Says St. Chrysostom, speaking of this
custom, " In the Church s vigils, the first, the midst, and
, .the last, are David s Psalms. In the morning, David s
..J Psalms are sought for, and the first, the midst, and the
** last, is David. And in funeral solemnities, the first, the
t midst, and the last, is David. In private houses where
the virgins spin, the first, the midst, and the last, is
David." 1
1 Sparrow s Rationale, p. 28.
THE MORNING PRAYER. 91
THE PSALTER.
The arrangement of the Psalter in the present
English Liturgy and in our Book of Common Prayer
is the same as was established at its first formation.
The translation which was made in the reign of Henry
VIII. is retained. Besides the Psalter, regularly divided,
as it is in the English Church, we have also ten selec
tions to be used instead of the Psalms for the day, at
the discretion of the Minister; an arrangement which
enables the officiating clergyman, under circumstances of
a peculiar character, to bring the Psalms into harmony
with the spirit of the occasion. In addition to this, we
have anthems for the five principal festivals of Christmas,
Ash- Wednesday, Good Friday, Ascension Day, Whit
sunday, to be used instead of the Venite exultemus, when
any of the foregoing selections are used. Bishop White
strongly advocated the plan of allowing the officiating
Minister to use the Psalms, at his discretion, on the
grounds that " many of them retained more of the
severity of the legal, than of the mercy of the evangelical
dispensation," and that most of the Psalms were ",ejf>
pjessive of peculiar states of mind, none of which could be
supposed descriptive of any body of people convened on a
Qommon _. occasion^of _deyjQtioji. The objection was
characteristic of that venerable father of our Church,
whose modest and humble piety, and whose calm and
tranquil spirit, made him fearful of ever using language
warmer than his feelings. The selections were made
with a view, in some measure, to obviate this objection.
Though it seems, in the abstract, a plausible objection,
yet, I think, the experience of the Church, in the use of
the Psalter, would testify that it is not well grounded.
That which is legal in the Psalms, is, by the light of the
New Testament, which shines upon it, viewed in an
92 THE MORNING PRAYER.
evangelical sense. The particular states of mind which
they express, are those with which God s children are
familiar. Under the peculiar influence of public worship,
they can live over again the varied experiences of the
past, and make them present. And the very fact that
they are expressive of peculiar states of mind, is that
which makes them so dear to the Church s heart. Each
individual finds in them something which he peculiarly
needs, and he receives it as a precious gift sent him
directly from his God, and hides the good word in his
heart.
THE LESSONS.
The general plan upon which the reading of the
Scriptures is arranged in the English Prayer-Book, is as
follows : The Old Testament is appointed for the first
Lessons at Morning and Evening Prayer, and the New
Testament for the second Lessons. For the ordinary
daily Morning and Evening Prayer, the Church begins
the year with the beginning of Genesis for the first
Lesson, and St. Matthew for the second in the morning ;
and Genesis again for the first, and St. Paul s Epistle to
the Romans for the second in the evening. By this
arrangement the greater part of the Old Testament is
read through once in a year, the Gospels twice, and the
Epistles three times. For the Sundays, Lessons are
. selected appropriate to the several seasons. For saints
days, the first Lessons are usually taken from the Apoc
rypha, and the second from such portion of the New
<* < A 1 Testament as contain notices of their history. While
our Church retains this general plan, she has in detail
introduced many alterations, which are great improve
ments. All the tables of, Lessons in the English Prayer-
Book were revised with much care and labor. In many
; cases the Lessons have been changed for those which
THE MORNING PRAYER. 93
Jare more appropriate. In the English book, for most of
the Sundays of the year, no second Lesson is particularly
aointed, and that Lesson is, therefore, to be found in
the table of daily Lessons, for the day of the month jpn
which the Sunday falls. From this defective arrange
ment, it is manifest that that connection of subjects and
homogeneousness of expression so strikingly character
istic of our own service, and in which so much of its
excellence depends, must be often wanting. And again,
the selections for the several sacred seasons have been
changed with decided improvement. For instance : in
the English Liturgy, for the three Sundays preceding
Lent, and for those of the Lent season, the book of
Genesis is read for the first Lessons. In the place of
them, we have adopted the sublime and appropriate
chapters of the Prophets, which expostulate with Israel
for her sins, and call her to repentance, fasting, and
humiliation. An examination of other portions of the
selections for the Lessons, would show a similar improve
ment. The Lessons from the Apocrypha, appointed for*
saints days, are much fewer in number than in the
English Liturgy. I am aware that they have been
pointed at as shreds of the Babylonish garment, which
are still hanging upon us. I grant that we should bej
^ justly liable to censure, if we read or appealed to them j
as God s Word. But we expressly declare that we use
them only for instruction in life and conversation. Thus
used, there can be no more objection to them than to the ,
reading of homilies, or the preaching of sermons.
This full and frequent reading of God s Holy Word is
a feature of our Church for which we have great reason
to be thankful. God s truth is the soul s food. It gives
life, and sustains life. All of it is needful for the soul s
health. Its early records, its types, its prophecies, its
94 THE MORNING PRAYER.
histories, its psalms, its narratives of Christ and his
disciples, its epistles, all in their place and proportion,
minister to the spiritual life. Where it is withdrawn,
there is death. Where it is administered partially, and
according to the feelings of individual minds, there is
distorted, unhealthy life. If we are, as a Church, to be
preserved from the inroads of heresy, from the sway of
superstition, from the corruption of doctrine and the
decay of godliness, this, we believe, is to be our security.
Nothing, indeed, but God s grace can preserve individuals
or churches from falling. But the best security, in
dependence on that grace for ourselves and our children,
is to hide in our hearts the truths of God s Word, so that
when error comes with her sophistries, and sin with her
blandishments, those divine truths shall spring from the
memory, like armed guards, and disarm these stealthy
emissaries of Satan. To have these truths frequently
and solemnly read in the public worship of the Church,
is a great means of fixing them in the heart. May we
understand our privileges, realize our dangers, and duly
feel our high obligations to our own and other souls !
THE CREEDS.
After the reading of the Lessons, and the singing of
the anthem, follows, in our service, either the Apostles
or the Nicene Creed. The Apostles Creed was first
introduced into the second Liturgy of King Edward. It
stood, and in the English Liturgy still stands, alone in
the morning and evening service. The Nicene Creed
has, in the English Liturgy, always followed the Epistle
and Gospel. Besides these Creeds, the Athanasian
Creed, as it is called, has always been in use in the
English Church, upon the chief festivals. Our Church,
THE MORNING PRAYER. 95
it will be observed, has retained the Apostles Creed, in
the daily Morning and Evening Prayer ; has transferred
the Nicene Creed from its position in the Ante-Com
munion Service, to the daily Morning and Evening
Prayer, to be used in the place of the Apostles Creed, at
the discretion of the Minister ; and has altogether omitted ... , -
the Athanasian Creed.
"That which is called THE APOSTLES CREED, is"""
merely the ancient creed of the Church of Rome, and is
no more entitled to that name than any other of the ^..J^
ancient creeds." 2 Its name is retained by us, not be
cause it is supposed to have been framed by the Apostles, -
but because it contains the Apostles doctrine. That no
precise form of words was left by the Apostles as the
Christian creed, is evident from the fact, that the creeds
jof the ancient church differ in their forms, and in the
number of articles of faith which they express. Scripture
is silent as to the production of any such form by one
or all of the Apostles. 3 They indeed required a con
fession of faith from the candidates for Baptism, but no
precise form of words is provided in which that confession
shall be made. The Ethiopian eunuch simply declared,
" I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The
Philippian jailer was bidden " to believe in the Lord
Jesus Christ." The command to baptize in the name of
Good s Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, vol. i. ; p. 9G.
8 1 suppose it will be news to many intelligent readers of God s
Word, to hear that the Creed "is delineated and recognised in
Scripture itself, where it is called the hypotyposis, or outline of
sound words." Such is Mr. Newman s understanding of 2 Tim.
:i. 13: " Hold fast the form of sound words which thou hast heard
of me," &c. This Creed is supposed by him to be quoted by St.
Paul, in 1 Cor. xv. 3: " I delivered unto you first of all that which
1 1 also received, how that Christ died for our sins," &c.
96 THE MORNING PRAYER.
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, was no doubt adminis
tered only upon profession of belief in them. Here we
can trace the origin of the Apostles Creed, and of vari
ous other ancient creeds, which contain an expression of
belief in the prominent facts concerning the Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost. It is an evidence of the considerate
kindness of our Church for her children, that she requires
of those who are to be baptized a belief in no more than
is contained in the Apostles Creed.
THE NICENE CREED, so called, because in its first
form drawn up at the Council of Nice, in the year 325,
is fuller and more doctrinal in its Articles, than the
Apostles Creed, and was prepared with a view to coun
teract the Arian heresy. Arius had maintained that the*
Son was inferior to the Father, in nature and in dignity.!
This Creed declared that he was of the same substance
or essence with the Father. The Creed which is called
INicene, is more properly the Constantinopolitan having
been put into its present form by the Council of Constan
tinople, in the year 381.
THE ATHANASIAN CREED, so called because it was long
supposed to have been framed by Athanasius though
that opinion is now relinquished contains a fuller and
more minute statement of the doctrine of the Trinity,
than the Nicene Creed. It was excluded from our
Prayer-Book, probably because of objection, in part, to
its minuteness of explanation, upon a subject beyond
human comprehension; and more particularly because
of what are called its damnatory clauses, which declare
that " he who will be saved must thus think of the
Trinity;" and that whosoever will be saved, unless he
keep this faith whole and undefiled, " without doubt he
shall perish everlastingly." Bishop White declares, that
if the Archbishops of the English Church had made the
THE MORNING PRAYER. 97
restoration of this Creed an indispensable condition of I
conferring the Episcopate on the jVmerican Church, " thef
matter would have been desperate." Here, as in so
many other cases, we have reason to admire the wisdom
and firmness of the fathers of our Church in excluding a
portion of the English formulary which has been the
source of vast contention and of bitter obloquy and
reproach.
Here we are led to notice the historical fact above^
alluded to, that some objection was made by the Arch-.:
bishops and Bishops of England, to conveying the Epis-^
copate to the American Church, on account of our rejec-X
tion of the Athanasian, and an omission in the Apostles jt
Creed. As there has been no event of more importance.-,
to us as a Church, than the consecration of our first <
Bishops, it may be useful and important to narrate the
circumstances connected with their consecration.
In 1783, the clergy of Connecticut recommended thei
Rev. Samuel Seabury, D. D., to the English Bishops for
consecration. Failing of success in their application to i?
that quarter, he applied to the Non-Juring Bishops of
Scotland, and was consecrated by them. When, there
fore, the Convention of 1785 met at Philadelphia, there
was already a Bishop in Connecticut. Neither Con-r
necticut nor any of the Eastern States were represented!
in that Convention. Connecticut declined at first to join
with the seven States then met in Convention, on the
ground of objection to some of the provisions of the
proposed constitution. They objected that the power ofl
Bishops was too much circumscribed, and that the laityj
were allowed a seat and voice in Conventions. Suchi
was the state of things when the Convention of 1785J
applied to the Archbishop and Bishops of England for)
the Episcopacy. Their address was forwarded to John
9
98 THE MORNING PRAYER.
Adams, then minister at the British court, and by him
presented and recommended. In the spring of 1786, the
committee received an answer to their letter from two
Archbishops and eighteen of the twenty-four Bishops of
England, declaring their wish to comply with the appli
cation, but delaying measures to that effect until they
should have seen the proposed alterations in the doctrine,
discipline, and worship of the Church ; as they had been
led to fear, from private sources of information, that
essential deviations from the Church of England were
about to be made. Not long after, the committee re
ceived another letter from the Archbishops of Canterbury
and York, to whom the management of the business had
been left, in which they express their dissatisfaction at the
omission of the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, ai^d of
the ^descent into jiell in the Apostles Creed. They ob
jected, also, to an article in the constitution which they
erroneously supposed subjected future Bishops to a trial
j by Presbyters and laymen. After the receipt of the first
| letter, the General Convention reassembled in Philadel-
j phia, on the 20th of June, 1786, at which time another
address was prepared and sent to the English prelates,
, in which they acknowledge their friendly and affectionate
letter, and avow their determination not to depart from
I any of the essential doctrines of the English Church.
On the receipt of the second letter, the Convention again
met in the following October. The offensive article in
the constitution had been already done away, before
the arrival of the objection of the Archbishops. The
omission of the Nicene Creed had been regretted, and it
was without any difficulty restored. The clause in
ithe Apostles Creed, of the descent into hell, was also,
after considerable debate, restored. The Athanasian
Creed was rejected. Thus all obstacles but the restora-
THE MORNING PRAYER. 99
tion of the Athanasian Creed, were removed. Jis i rejigra-
tion was not pressed by the English prelates. A special
act of parliament, authorizing the Archbishop of Canter
bury to consecrate American Bishops, was procured.
The Rev. Samuel Provoost, rector of Trinity Church,
New York, and the Rev. William White, were chosen
respectively Bishops of New York and Pennsylvania.
On the fourth of February of the following year, they
were consecrated in the chapel of the archepiscopal
palace of Lambeth, by the Most Rev. John Moore, Arch
bishop of Canterbury. Thus was the completeness of the
Episcopal Church in this country providentially provided
for. In 1789, the Bishop and Convention of Connecticut
acceded to the constitution, and the Episcopal Churches
in this country became one. Thanks be to God, who,
by his gracious Providence, so harmonized the varying
judgments of the Churches of the different Dioceses, as to
unite them at last in the unity of the spirit, and in the
bond of peace !
THE LITANY.
That most fervent portion of our service, THE LITANY,
now claims our attention. Its fullness and fervor com- <
mend it to the Christian s heart in his most earnest moods,*
and shame him into feeling and fervor in his mood of jf
coldness and indifference.
The origin of Litanies in the Churches, is thus described
by Palmer. "At first, the term was applied in general
to all prayers and supplications whether public or private.
In the fourth century, the word Litany became more
especially applied to solemn offices, which were perform
ed with processions of the clergy and people." " Soc
rates relates that in the time of John Chrysostom, the
Arians of Constantinople, being obliged to perform divine
100 THE MORNING PRAYER.
service outside of the walls, were accustomed to assemble
themselves within the gates of the city, and sing anthems
and hymns suited to the Arian heresy, for a great part of
the night. And early in the morning, singing anthems
of the same sort, through the middle of the city, they
went out of the gates, and proceeded to the places where
they celebrated their worship. Chrysostom, fearful that
his people might be induced to join the Arians by these
processions, established them on a greater and more
splendid scale in his own Church. By the liberality of
the Empress Eudoxia, the people were furnished with
silver crosses, bearing wax lights, which were carried
before them. Such processional offices were called Lit
anies. The custom of processions and solemn prayers for
special emergencies, was borrowed by the Western from
the Eastern Churches. The English Church appears to
have received stated Litany days from the Gallican
Church, and formerly on those days there were pro
cessions. Later, this custom was confined to one day,
o-n which the people perambulated the bounds of their
parish. According to the injunction or advertisement of
Queen Elizabeth, the office for that day, was to consist
of the two Psalms, beginning Benedic mea Aninia, &c.,
the Litany and Suffrages, and a Homily especially
appointed for the occasion. This office was recited in
the Church on the return of the people from the pro
cession ; and in the course of the procession, the curate
was to admonish the people to give thanks to God, with
singing the 103d Psalm. A distinct service, as is now
said without the procession, is in accordance with the
ancient rites of the English Church. Of the petitions
which are comprised in the Litany, it may be observed
that they are of remote antiquity in the English Church.
Mabillon has printed a Litany of the Church of England,
THE MORNING PRAYER. 101
written probably in the eighth century, which contains a , **~- *j
large portion of that which we repeat at the present day,
) and which preserves exactly the same form of petition,//
5 and response which is still retained." These remarks
made with reference to the English Litany, are applicable
to our own, inasmuch as there is scarcely any other
change, than that of the four petitions for the king and
royal family, into the one which contains a prayer for all
Christian rulers and magistrates.
COLLECTS.
Upon the prayers which precede and follow the Litany,
we need not dwell at length. Their Scriptural character,
their simple majesty, their supplicating fervor, are familiar
to the reader s mind and heart. In King Edward s book,
two prayers followed the Creed and the versicles ; that for
peace and that for grace. Our Liturgy and the English
retain the same. Then follows, in the English, a prayer
for the king and royal family; in the American, a prayer
for the president of the United States, and all in civil
authority. Then follows the Litany. After which, follows ^
the repeated and responsive versicles, " Oh Christ, hear
us," " Lord, have mercy upon us," which were of very
ancient use in the Eastern Churches. Then, to the end
of the services, the prayers in the English and American
services are alike, except that the general thanksgiving,
which is in our Morning Prayer, is, in the English book,
printed among the occasional thanksgivings. All of these
prayers, however, are to be used in the English book ;
while part of them are left discretional in the American.
The prayer, for all conditions of men, to be said when
the Litany is omitted, is printed in the American book in
the Morning Prayer, and in the English with the occa
sional prayers.
102 THE MORNING PRAYER.
The Prayers and Thanksgivings upon several occa
sions, to be used before the two final prayers of morning
and evening service, enable the Church to meet all those
peculiar and more individual dispensations, which fur
nish proper subjects for prayer and praise in the house
of God. In King Edward s second Liturgy, there were
prayers " for rain," " fair weather," " in time of dearth
and famine," " in time of war and tumults," " and in
time of any common plague or sickness," and " for the
high court of parliament." These are retained substan
tially the same in the English service, and in our own,
except that we have a prayer for congress, instead of
that for the high court of parliament, and several other
prayers are added. By comparing our Liturgy with the
English, it will be seen that we have several prayers and
thanksgivings which they have not, having reference to
the sick and the afflicted, and to those who are going to,
or returning from, sea.
Having now sketched a history of the Morning Prayer,
and noticed such doctrines involved in it as seemed most
to demand our attention, we shall be prepared in our next
chapter to take up some of the occasional offices of the
Church. The order for Evening Prayer, being so similar
to that of the Morning, with the exception of the Litany
and the Ante-Communion Service, need not detain us.
We trust, that while these details may have wearied
the reader, they may, at the same time, have strengthened
in his mind the positions which we have assumed, and
confirmed and increased his love to our formulary of
worship. It is evident that our service is not the product
of a few minds, or a few ages. The piety of the past
and the present, beams with blended light from every
page. The venerable remains of ancient worship are
everywhere intermingled with the rich and spiritual forms
THE MORNING PRAYER. 103
of later ages. From every part of the service there go
forth innumerable threads of holy fellowship with the
past, some reaching to the founders of our American
Church, others extending to the Reformers, and others
stretching out to the gray fathers of the early Church,
binding all together as one in Christ Jesus. Let us re
member that as these things constitute our privileges,
they constitute our obligations also !
And let me, in conclusion, having in previous chapters
spoken the words of congratulation for our privileges,
here speak the word of warning. We need, as a Church,
to be warned not to rely too much on her external or
ganization, or the excellence of her services.
We must not too much rely, as a church, or as indi
viduals, upon the excellent Creeds and Articles and
Liturgy which we possess, as that which will inevitably
secure the same purity of doctrine in the living Church
as is found in the established formulary. We have been
accustomed to speak, I fear, too boastfully of our Liturgy
as that which secures to us, almost beyond fear of loss,
the truth as it is in Jesus. We have triumphantly pointed
to those sects which, being without the Episcopacy and
Liturgy, have run into every species of heresy, terminat
ing, often, in open infidelity. Doubtless it is a great
advantage of our forms and creeds, that error of doctrine
is not likely to proceed so fast or far as in denominations
which are not guarded like our own. But on this subject
it surely becomes us, at this time, not to boast, not to be
high-minded, but to fear. It becomes us to remember
that churches with Liturgies, and with pure doctrines,
too, have fallen. It becomes us to remember that
churches and individuals are now upon probation ; that it
depends upon their watchfulness, prayerfulness, and
holiness of living, whether they hold fast the truth, or be
104 THE MORNING PRAYER.
seduced from it by the watchful adversary. No external
advantages can secure churches against the danger of
falling into error. The promise of God, that the gates of
hell never shall prevail against it, is not a promise to the
separate true churches of the Redeemer that they shall
never fail, or fall, or err, but a promise that God s church
shall never fail on earth ; that somewhere his true people
shall be always found. Let us rely, then, not on old
and steadfast creeds, not on time-hallowed and holy
services, but upon God s grace, given to those who em
brace them with a living faith, and use them with an
earnest heart. The spirit of error and delusion there
is no disguising it is abroad. Let us hold fast to our
forms, and supplicating God to fill them with his spirit,
live and grow under their influence. Let us be not
Churchmen only, but faithful, fervent, humble, and
American Churchmen, moulded by our system as it is
peculiarly our own. Wiser and holier men than shaped,
and were shaped by, that system, the world has never
seen ! In a day of confusion and error and sadness for
the Church, let us go and meditate over the graves of a
White and a Dehon, a Moore and a Griswold, and by the
light of their saintly lives, and beautiful examples, learn
alike what, as American Churchmen, our Church should
be and do to us, and what we should be and do for her.
" Oh Lord, we beseech thee let thy continual pity cleanse
and defend this thy Church, and because it cannot con
tinue in safety without thy succor, preserve it evermore,
by thy help and goodness, through Jesus Christ our
Lord !
VI.
orb 1 s Supper.
IN the course of our examination of the sublime and
beautiful office for the celebration of the Lord s Supper,
the falsity of the charge that it has been drawn from the
Church of Rome will evidently appear. It will be seen
that the Church of England rejected the gross supersti
tion and silly puerilities of the Mass, and with a wise
determination, selected from the Liturgies of the ancient
Churches such portions of them as she judged to be
agreeable to the Word of God, and suitable to aid the soul
in commemorating the love and sacrifice of the Saviour ;
and added whatever else she deemed necessary to give
completeness, fervor, and edification, to the blessed com
memoration. If our own service and that of Rome have
any thing in common, it is because the latter has here
and there retained in her offices some fragment of the
purer doctrine which she had so large an agency in
corrupting.
Upon comparing our service with the present service
of the Church of England, it will be seen to be almost
identically the same. The Lord s Prayer, the Collect
following, and the Ten Commandments, are in both.
The chief differences in the remainder of the service are,
that instead of the Saviour s summary of the Ten Com
mandments and the Collect in our service, which may or
106 THE LORD S SUPPER.
may not be said, in the English service are two prayers
for the queen, one of which only is to be offered ; that
the Nicene Creed which follows the Gospel in the Eng
lish service, is not printed in our Communion Office, and
is to be used only when neither it nor the Apostle s
Creed have been said in the Morning Prayer ; that after
the prayer of Consecration, the Oblation and Invocation
are not in the English service, and that the prayer which,
in our service, follows the Invocation, in the English
service succeeds the administration of the elements, and
is placed immediately after the Lord s Prayer. The
other variations in the service are chiefly in the rubrics,
and are slight and unimportant. We shall take our own
service as it stands, and make it the subject of inquiry in
connection with the present and past services of the
English Church.
As we have already mentioned the circumstances
under which the first Communion Office was formed, we
may here take up its separate parts and give them that
degree of attention which our limits will allow. The
changes of phraseology which will be noticed, will be
seen by the attentive reader, to be often significant of a
desire to avoid or express certain views of this Holy
Sacrament.
The name of this Sacrament is derived from Scripture,
being called in one place " the Lord s Supper," 1 and in
another place the " communion" of the body and blood
of Christ. 2 In the first book of Edward it was called the
" Supper of the Lord," and the Holy Communion com
monly " called the Mass." At the review of this book
in 1552, the title was changed to its present form.
The first rubric authorized the Minister to repel from
1 Cor. xi. 20. 2 1 Cor. x. 16.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 107
the Communion any " notorious evil liver," or any one
who may " have done such wrong to his neighbor by
word or deed as that the congregation are thereby
offended." The second rubric conveys the same power
to the Minister in the case of those " betwixt whom he
perceiveth malice and hatred to reign." No doubt a real
power of repelling from the Communion is hereby
entrusted to the Ministers of the Church. When they
perceive the malice to reign, and take note of the
"notorious evil liver," they are to exercise the power.
But it is a power which they are particularly called upon
to exercise in u the meekness of wisdom." It is a power
limited to the cases specified. The Minister has no right
to set up qualifications which his own judgment dictates
should have been specified, or to prohibit what he thinks
should have been enjoined by the Church. The recom
mendation of the House of Bishops to all the members in
communion with the Episcopal Church to abstain from
certain specified amusements, 3 invests the Minister with a
3 EXTRACT FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS.
" TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1817. The House met. Present as
yesterday.
" Resolved, That the following be entered on the Journal of this
House, and be sent to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies to
be read therein.
" The House of Bishops, solicitous for the preservation of the
purity of the Church and the piety of its members, are induced to
impress upon the Clergy the important duty, with a discreet but
earnest zeal, of warning the people of their respective cures, of the
danger of an indulgence in those worldly pleasures which may
tend to draw the affections from spiritual things. And especially
on the subject of gaming, of amusements involving cruelty to the
brute creation, and of theatrical representations, to which some
peculiar circumstances have called their attention they do not
hesitate to express their unanimous opinion that these amusements,
as well from their licentious tendency, as from the strong tempta-
108 THE LORD S SUPPER.
moral power of reproof and dissuasion, in effect little
short of law in the case of those who frequent such
scenes ; but still it clothes him with no legal power to
repel those who are addicted to them, unless they are so
far devoted to them, as in the estimation of the Minister,
to be " notorious evil livers." In all cases, where this
power is exercised, it is provided that the Minister should
" give an account of the same to his Ordinary, (or Bish
op,) so soon as conveniently may be." This regulation is
taken from the English rubric, which is predicated on the
existence of a power of appeal on the part of the repelled
communicant. It is difficult to see the propriety of such
a regulation, if it does not suppose a right on the part of
the Bishop to ratify or reverse the sentence. 4
But though this power be limited to the cases specified,
it is still a real power, not as in the English Church,
practically almost nullified by the conflict of the regula
tions of the Church with those of the state. 5 Thoush in
tions to vice ; which they afford, ought not to be frequented. And
the Bishops cannot refrain from expressing their deep regret at the
information that in some of our large cities, so little respect is paid
to the feelings of the members of the Church, that theatrical repre
sentations are fixed for the evenings of her most solemn festivals."
The same subject is enforced in the Pastoral Letter of the House
of Bishops for that year. The Convention of the Diocese of Vir
ginia in the year 1818, passed a resolution similar to that of the
House of Bishops. There is a Canon of the Diocese of Maryland,
with the title, " Theatrical Exhibitions and other light and vain
Amusements forbidden." The sense of the Church as to the in
compatibility of such amusements with a Christian profession, is
seen to be distinct and emphatic.
4 Bishop Brownell s Common Prayer, p. 362.
5 " A fruitful source of contention has arisen from the collision
of the English Canon and Civil laws. The Canons require the
clergymen to repel certain offenders from the Communion without
allowing him any discretion, any power whatever. But the Test
THE LORD S SUPPER. 109
particular cases it might seem that the purity of the
Church could be better maintained were the regulations
more stringent, yet a larger view of the bearings of the
whole case, and particularly of the power of persuasion
and rebuke which the Ministry enjoy, may lead us to
rest satisfied with provisions which are framed in the
spirit of the Master and the Gospel, whose chiefest attri
bute is mercy.
There is a rubric in the English service, which is
omitted in our own, which requires that those who
" intend to be partakers of the Holy Communion shall
signify their names to the Curate, at least some time the
day before." The omission of this rubric by our Church 4
did not arise from any indifference to the qualifications ofl
those who were to be admitted to the Communion, butl
" probably from the inconvenience of conveying the I
notice in our scattered congregations." 6 The usage of
the Church in this particular a usage so uniform as to
have become an unwritten law is that persons desirous
of coming to the Lord s Supper for the first time, should
Acts which bring so many persons to the Communion, in order
to qualify themselves for offices civil and military, make no allow
ances for their exclusion in any case, nor have any proviso to in
demnify the Minister for proceeding according to the rubrics or
Canons in denying them the Sacrament. And by a statute of
Edward VI., it is enacted that " the Minister shall not, without a
lawful cause, deny the Sacrament to any person that devoutly and
humbly desires it. If we inquire what constitutes a lawful cause,>
Bishop Andrews informs us that the law of England will not
suffer the Minister to judge any man a notorious offender, but.
him who is so convicted by some legal sentence. And the English*
civilians and canonists seem to agree that nothing amounts to
notoriety in the law, but proof by confession in open courts, or
con viction by a sentence of the judge." BISHOP BROWNELL S Book
of Common Prayer , p. 361. Also Shepherd, vol. ii., pp. 147-164.
Bishop Brownell s Prayer-Book, 360.
110
THE LORD S SUPPER.
make their wishes known to the Minister. Indeed, the
regulations of the Church upon the subject of adult Bap-
tism and Confirmation which in all cases are to pre
cede admission to the Lord s Supper imply such a
personal examination of the fitness of the person present
ing himself for Communion, as to make the notice re
quired in the English rubric unnecessary. 7
In the first book of Edward, the next rubric which fol
lowed, prescribed that in the administration of the Holy
Communion the Priest that should execute the holy Min
istry should put upon him the vesture appointed for that
ministration ; " that is to say, a white albe plain, with a
vestment or cope." Those who assisted the officiating
Minister were required to wear albes or tunics. This
rubric also contained a clause to the effect that the Priest
should say the Lord s Prayer and Collect " standing in
the midst of the altar" The first part of the rubric was
omitted in the second book of Edward, and the word
altar changed into table ; a change made wherever the
v word occurred throughout the service. 8 In the next
review of the Liturgy under Elizabeth, the old rubrics ofi
the first book of Edward, with regard to ornaments and
L vestments, were again brought into authority by the first
[rubric before the Order for Morning Prayer, which is as
Vollows : " And here is to be noted that such ornaments
\
7 This rubric, until the revision of 1661, provided that the names
should be given in over night, or in the morning before the begin
ning of Morning Prayer, or else immediately after. This regula-
tion shows that the Communion Office_was distinct from the
Morning Prayer, and tnat an interval occnrred between them
suSiciently longlo allow such notice to be giyen ? and inquiries to
be instituted, as were~ necessary, begge the person applying could
ibe admitted to thej-iord s J T able.
9 Dr. CardaeH s Two Liturgies of Edward VI. compared, p. 266.
THE LORD S SUPPER. Ill
of the Church and of the Ministers thereof, at all times of
their ministration, shall be retained and be in use, as we
in this Church of England by the authority of parliament
in the second year of the reign of King Edward VI."
The attempt to carry out this rubric which, though^
never revoked, has long become obsolete has caused t
much difficulty and discussion, of late, in the English f
Church. It need not be remarked that as we have not
detained the rubric we have no authority to introduce the
^garments which it specifies. Indeed, we have no law
upon the subject. The use of the Bishop s robes, and of C
the surplices and gowns, has no other sanction than thatt
of custom ; and if this be a sufficient law for their use, k
is a law equally sufficient to limit the clergy to the use of
those only, and of those in the mode and place which
kCustom has prescribed.
The third rubric directs that the table at Communion
time, having a fair linen cloth upon it, shall stand in
the body of the church or chancel. The position of the
Communion Table, has furnished a subject for much
discussion, but it is sufficient to remark here, that the
usual custom in this country the universal is that the
table stand within the chancel. The Minister is directed
to perform the service " standing at the north side of. the
table, or where the Morning and Evening Prayer
appointed to be said." The rubric directs that the
Minister shall stand at the north side of the table which
as the churches in England were, after the ancient
models, so constructed, as that the table was at the east
end was the ri^ht side o/ the table. As our churches
are not uniformly constructed so that the table is placed
at the east, custom has properly determined that the
Minister shall stand at the right side of thetafyle. The
expression " or where Morning and Evening Prayer are
112 THE LOKD S SUPPER.
-appointed to be said," has been sometimes supposed to
indicate the Lord s Table as the proper place for the
performance of that service. As this is a subject which
has excited some discussion, and has led to diversity of
practice, it is somewhat important to ascertain, if
possible, what was the intention of our Church. We
may, perhaps, best ascertain it by an historical analysis.
The first book of Edward contained a rubric at the
beginning of the Morning Prayer which directed that " the/
Priest, being in the quire, should begin with a loud voicel
the Lord s Prayer, called the Pater Noster." This!
direction seems to determine the Morning Prayer as well
as the Communion Service to be said at the Communion*
Table. It was changed at the next revision to a direction
that " theJVIgrning^ ajnd Evening Prayer shall be_used in i
such place of the church, chanel^ or chancel, and the!
Minister shall turn him, as the people besL may hear."*
All controversy which might arise was to be referred to
the Ordinary. Much diversity of practice having arisen
on the accession of Queen Elizabeth, the rubric was.
^changed, and directed that " the Morning and Evening!
/Prayer should be used in the accustomed place of the*
^church, chapel, or chancel." This rubric is somewhat
ambiguous, though probably it refers to such places as
had been accustomed under the direction of the rubric^
which provided that jhe prayers should so be read ^as|
that the people best mi^ht hear. By being retained after
Reading" JJesks were established, not only by practice,
but by order of Convocation, in the beginning of the
reign of King James, it indicates clearly the Reading
Desk or Pew as the accustomed place. This being the
intention of the rubric before the Morning Prayer, the
expression in^this rubric before the Communion Office,
which seems to have reference to the old practice of
THE LORD S SUPPER. 113
reading in the choir, is admitted by Whately 9 to have
been retained through inadvertence, and is spoken of by
Shepherd, as that which ought to have been expunged
"after the place was transferred from the Table to the
Reading Desk." 10 It is clearly then the direction of
the Church of England, that the Morning and Evening
Prayer are not to be said at the Communion Table, but
in the Reading Desk.
Our Church, by retaining the practice of the Church of
England, although she omitted the rubric which directed
that Morning Prayer should be said in the accustomed
place, may properly be supposed to occupy the same
position, in regard to this subject, with the Church of
England. Certain it is, that when she adopted the
Liturgy, her practice, in this respect, corresponded to
that of the English Church. Morning, and Evening
Prayer were performed in the Reading Desk, within or
without the chancel, so that the people best might hear, I
and only the Communion Office was read at the Commun-4
ion Table. It is manifestly proper that, in all cases, thel
Ante-Communion Service should be read at the Lord s
Table. 11
9 Whately, p. 113. 10 Brownell s Prayer-Book, 362.
11 The postures proper to be observed during the administration
of the Lord s Supper, were thus specified by the House of Bishops
in 1832, at the request of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies.
Kneeling during the whole of the Ante-Communion, except the
Epistle, which is to be heard in the usual posture for hearing the
Scriptures, and the Gospel which is to be heard standing.
The sentences of the Offertory are to be heard sitting, as the
most favorable posture for handing alms, &c., to the person collect
ing.
. Kneeling, to be observed during the prayer for the Church mili
tant.
Standing, during the Exhortations.
10*
114 THE LORD S SUPPER.
The services commence with the Lord s Prayer and
the Collect for purity. The Ten Commandments, which
are found in no ancient or modern Liturgy, are with great
propriety placed in the forefront of a Sacrament, in which
we renew our consecration to God, repenting of all past
violations of his laws, and taking upon ourselves new
vows to have respect to all his commandments. Then
follow the Collect, Epistle, and Gospel for the day ; after
which, notices of the holy days that are to be observed
and of the Communion, are to be given. Then succeeds
the sermon, after which, when there is a Communion, the
Offertory is to be said. 12 We need not detain the reader
Kneeling to be then resumed, and continued until after the
prayer of Consecration.
Standing, at the singing of the hymn.
Kneeling, when receiving the elements, and during the post-
communion, or that part of the service which succeeds the deliver
ing or receiving of the elements, except the Gloria in Ezcelsis,
which is to be said or sung standing. After which the congregation
should again kneel to receive the blessing.
12 As the practice of using the Offertory weekly has been resum
ed in some portions of our Church, we give the following extract
from a Letter of Bishop Hopkins, of Vermont, which shows how
unauthorized the custom is in our Church.
" It is notorious that this order of the Offertory, which made it
a constant part of the Ante- Communion Service, went out of use
by very general consent in England, long before the period of the
American Revolution ; so that the almost universal practice was
to close the service with a collect and the Apostolical benediction
immediately after the morning sermon, even on communion days;
and then allow the non-communicants to depart, before proceed
ing to the Offertory: while on other days the whole congregation
were dismissed at the same time, with the larger benediction of
the Communion Service, precisely as our own mode was after
wards fixed, and as, with very few and recent exceptions, it still
continues. How far this change of practice ought to influence the
.present judgment of the prelates of our mother Church, is a mat-
THE LORD S SUPPER. 115
with details upon these obviously appropriate portions
of the service. The prayer for the whole state of Christ s
Church militant here on earth, was in the first Liturgy
merely called the prayer for the whole state of Christ s
ter for them and not for me to consider. But I adverted to the
fact, in order to account for the striking difference, which the
fathers of our American Church established in our rubrics, by con-/
forming them to the then prevailing custom of the Church, instead
of copying them from the English Prayer-Book.
" The distinction thus confirmed will be perfectly apparent on a;
comparison of the English rubric with our own, which is as fol
lows:
" IT Then shall follow the sermon ; after which the Minister, WHEN THERE i
is A COMMUNION, shall return to the Lord s Table, and begin the Offer-]
tory, saying one or more of these sentences following, &c.
" Here we perceive that the words WHEN THERE is A COMMUNION, i
which, in the English Liturgy, are placed after, in our Liturgy;
are placed before the Offertory. From which it is obvious that our*
rubric authorizes the Offertory only when there is a Communion ;;
whereas, the English rubric orders it in all cases where there is a
sermon following the Ante- Communion Service. Hence the famil
iar practice of all our regular Churches to dismiss the non-com
municants with_a collect and the benediction after the sermon, was
thenceforth in agreement with our rubric, because the Offertory
was now fixed as a part of the ordinary public administration of
the Sacrament, and the placing of the alms and other devotions of
the people upon the holy table, was connected with the prayer for
Christ s Church militant, as being offered by those only who re
mained for the purpose of communing. Consequently , while the
Bishops of the mother Church, do indeed innovate upon the pre
vailing custom amongst their own parishes, by ordering the Offer
tory to be used every Sunday and holy day, whether there be a
communion or not, yet they can fairly allege their rubric in justifi
cation. Whereas, we cannot authorize such a course without di-
irectly contravening our rubric, which agrees with the usage of the
Church in England, and which our venerated fathers arranged in
its present form, for the very purpose of making the written law
harmonize with the general custom."
116 THE LORD S SUPPER.
- .Church, and contained a commemoration of the Virgin
t Mary, and a prayer for the dead. At the next revision
- the commemoration of the Virgin and the prayer for the
dead were omitted, and the words, "militant here on
earth," were added to the title ; changes expressive of a final
emancipation of the framers of the Liturgy from some
of the last and clinging errors and superstitions in which
they were trained. In no part of our services could this
jprayer be more appropriately introduced. The Exhorta
tion which follows, and is to be read on the Sunday or
holy day immediately preceding the celebration of the
Holy Communion, and that which is to be used " if the .
Minister shall see the people negligent to come," are.
-amongst the most perfect specimens of faithful, affection
ate, and Scriptural preaching, anywhere to be found.
At the time of the celebration of the Holy Communion
there follows another Exhortation, to come to the feast
with self-examination, penitence, faith, charity, and*
(thanksgiving. It is such an exhortation as he who is
about, with the people, by the lifting up of his heart with
theirs, to enter into the very presence of Christ, may well
address to them. It will be observed, that this Exhortation
is addressed to those who are about to receive the Com
munion ; while the other two are directed to the whole
congregation. Originally (in the first Liturgy) the Ex
hortation which stands first in our present service was
placed second, and the rubric directed that it should also
" some time be said at the discretion of the Curate ; "
while that which now stands second was first, and was
directed to be read (not on the Sunday previous, but on
the same Sunday, when the Communion was adminis
tered) at certain times when the Curate saw the people
negligent to come to the Holy Communion. The changes
were made at the last revision of the Liturgy, in 1662, at
THE LORD S SUPPER. 117
the suggestion of the Presbyterian divines. There are
several changes and omissions in these Exhortations
significant of the advance made in purity of doctrine from
the first Liturgy of Edward, to which your attention here
after will be called.
All things being now ready, the communicants are
invited to draw near and take the Holy Sacrament to their
comfort, confessing, and listening to the proclamation of
pardon for, their sins. Then follow four sentences from
Scripture, admirably calculated to cheer and elevate the
heart. Then the versicles, so suitable to an eucharistic
service, " Lift up your heart," &c., together with the
trisagion, prepare us for the blessed feast which the
Apostles kept with " gladness and singleness of heart,
praising God." This delightful part of the service is
found in all the ancient liturgies of the Church, and
usually is the commencement of the service. The trisa
gion, or hymn of the angels, was almost universally con
nected with a long eucharistic enumeration of the glories
of God and his blessings to mankind. After the example
of the ancient liturgies, this portion of the service in the
first book of Edward, commenced immediately after the
Offertory, and before the prayer for the Church militant.
A prayer is said by the Priest in the name of all the
people, immediately before the consecration. Then the
Priest, standing before the table, repeats the prayer of
consecration. The elements are consecrated as the
memorials of the Saviour s body and blood, by the whole
prayer, in which are included, historically, the words of
the Saviour at the institution of the Sacrament. In the
English Liturgy, the prayer of consecration closes with
the words of the Saviour, " Do this, as oft as ye shall
drink it, in remembrance of me." One of the petitions,
however, contained in our invocation are included in it ;
118 THE LORD S SUPPER.
namely, " Grant that we, receiving these thy creatures of
bread and wine, according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus
Christ s holy institution, in remembrance of his death and
passion, may be partakers of his most blessed body and
blood." The Oblation and Invocation were restored to
our service, from the first Liturgy of Edward, by our
General Convention, in 1789. It was omitted in the
second book of King Edward at the instance of Bucer
and Martyr, and has never been restored in the English
office. There is great beauty and propriety in connect-
mtltiiif * n ^ tnese an i ent prayers with the eucharistic service,
r They contain a formal and solemn offering up of ourselves
* and our services to God, and a fervent supplication that
God would bless the consecrated elements to us, and us
in the reception of them, that we may obtain all the
benefits of his passion. What more proper than that,
n we are receiving one of God s greatest blessings,
we should offer up our most solemn sacrifices of praise
and thanksgiving, and renew the consecration of ourselves
to his service ?
After the singing of a hymn, a regulation not found in
the English Church, the Priest receives the Communion
in both kinds himself, and proceeds to deliver to the
Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, (if any be present,) and
then to the people. The elements are received by all
devoutly kneeling. 13 In the first service of Edward, only
the first clauses of the sentences " the body," &c., " and
the blood," &c., were repeated at the institution of the
71 elements. At the first review under Edward, that part was
13 A sufficient defence of this custom, if it need any, is found in
| these words of good Bishop Wilson: "No posture can be tooi
humble when we receive a pardon and a pardon which must I
deliver us from death eternal."
BISHOP BROWNELL S Prayer-Book, p. 389.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 119
altogether omitted, and the portion which forms the second
clause in each of the sentences was introduced. At the
review under Elizabeth, both clauses were united as they
are at present. The omission of the expressions, " the
body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee,
preserve thy body and soul to everlasting life," and " the
blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was shed for thee,"
&c., probably arose from the anxiety, which we trace in
all thgir chflpqea T to pmJT any thing which ffljg|[tf ft^*iy
to favQijhe doctrine of the real presence. The introduc-
tion of the other clauses, in which the single idea of a|
memorial is found, shows, what view of the Sacrament!
was held by the Reformers. ^The reunion of the two by
Elizabeth was made for the double purpose one of
which marked all her reign of conciliating the Papists,
and of guarding against low and radical views of the
Sacrament, which were or were supposed to be held by
some Protestants on the continent.
After all have communicated, then the Minister with
the people repeats the Lord s Prayer ; then he offers a
thanksgiving for the blessings connected with the Lord s
Supper. Then follows, by all standing, the Gloria in
Excelsis, and the benediction. The Collects at the close
of the service are such as may be said after the Collects
at Morning and Evening Prayer, or at the Communion,
at the discretion of the Minister.
Such is a brief description of the Communion Office of
our Church ; a service which, for holy beauty, devotional
fervor, and Scriptural purity of doctrine, has, probably,
no equal in ancient or modern days. The dignity of the(
Sacrament, and the importance of right views upon it,
will render no excuse necessary for making it the subject!
of somewhat protracted consideration.
The nature and office of this Sacrament being con-
120 THE LORD S SUPPER.
tained in a few passages of the Bible, it would seem not
difficult to ascertain. Let us, for a moment, forget that
there has ever been any controversy on the subject, and
turn to the holy record to ascertain what it teaches in
regard to this Sacrament.
There are three separate accounts given of its institu
tion by St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke, besides the
one given by St. Paul. The following is the account of
its institution as given by St. Matthew : 14
" Now when even was come, he sat down with the
twelve," &c. (v. 20.) "And as they were eating, Jesus
took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to his
disciples, and said, Take, eat ; this is my body. And he
took the cup and gave thanks, and gave it to them, say
ing, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the New
Testament which is shed for many for the remission of
sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of
the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new
with you in my Father s kingdom."
Now let us observe what is included in this account.
1. Bread and wine constitute the matter of the Sacra
ment; the one broken and given to the disciples to be
eaten ; the other presented to them to be drunken.
2. The blessing at the taking of bread, and the giving
of thanks at the taking of the cup.
3. The declaration, by the Saviour, that bread was his
body and the cup his blood of the New Testament, which
was shed for many for the remission of sins.
4. The cup is the blood of the New Testament or
Covenant ; that is, the seal of the New Covenant for the
remission of sins through the blood of the Redeemer; a
seal which God affixes to his covenant, and to which
l * Matt. xxvi. 20, 26-30.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 121
we anew subscribe our faithful adherence as oft as we
drink it.
5. A declaration, (which forms no part of the institu
tion,) that he would not drink of the fruit of the vine, &c.
In explanation of the second point, it is to be observed,
that whereas, in the English version, the reading is, " he
took bread and blessed it ; " in the original, the word it is
not expressed, and, by the learned Greisbach, the word / r
God is supplied. The meaning of the expression, then, *~
would be, that he blessed God. When the Saviour ; *
declared the bread to be his body and the cup his blood,
were his words to be literally taken? Is the whole
account literal ? Clearly not. He calls the wine the
cup. Here is one figure. Again, he calls the cup, which
stands for the wine, the fruit of the vine, after hgjhaci
declared it to be his blood of the New Testament. Here
isTsecond figure. If the cup or wine was not literally
his blood, after he had called it so, we conclude that the
bread was not literally his body, after he had called it so.
If not literally and really so, then they must have been
so symbolically ; if not his body and blood, then they
represented them. With this, its own explanation of
its own meaning, the passage conveys these points,
included in the institution of the Sacrament by Christ, as
there recorded :
1. Bread and wine, the elements or matter of the
Sacrament ; the one to be broken and given to the disci
ples, to be eaten ; the other to be presented to them, that
they might drink it.
2. Blessing and thanksgiving to God before presenting
the bread and wine.
3. The bread and wine the symbols which represented
the body and blood of Christ.
4. The cup the seal of the New Covenant for the
11
122 THE LORD S SUPPER.
remission of sins through the blood of the Redeemer ; a
seal which God affixes to his covenant, and to which
we anew subscribe our faithful adherence as oft as we
drink it.
The following is the account of the same scene, given
by St. Mark :
" And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed,
and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat ; this
is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had
given thanks, he gave it to them ; and they all drank of
it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the
New Testament which is shed for many. Verily I say
unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine
until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of
God." 15
The same points are included in this narrative as in
that of St. Matthew.
The more brief account of St. Luke is as follows :
"And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and
gave unto them, say ing, This is my body which was given
for you ; this do in remembrance of me. Likewise, also,
the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the New Testa
ment in my blood, which is shed for you." 16
Here there is nothing contravening those points
already developed ; while two of them are not brought
out with the same fullness as they are in the records of
j^. St. Matthew and St. Mark. For instance, while it is
recorded that he gave thanks, the mention of blessing is
omitted ; while, as above, he calls the bread his body, he
calls the cup " the New Testament or Covenant in his
* ,
blood ; " language so manifestly figurative as to fix upon
the words a symbolical meaning, as evidently as the
15 Mark xiv. 22-25. Luke xxii. 19, 20.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 123
expressions in the other Evangelists, which designate the
blood so called, as " the fruit of the vine." But a new
point is brought out in this brief record of St. Luke, in
the words, "do this in remembrance of me." Here the
Saviour declares that the object of these representations
of his body and blood is, that they may serve for a
memorial of him.
We now turn to the record of St. Paul, contained in
the first Epistle to the Corinthians : " For I have received
of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that
the Lord Jesus the same night he was betrayed, took
bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it,
saying, Take, eat this, my body, which is broken for
you ; this do in remembrance of me. After the same
manner, also, he took the cup when he had supped,
saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood ; this
do as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me. For as
oft as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye do show
the Lord s death till he come. Wherefore, whosoever
shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord
unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the
Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him
eat of that bread and drink of that cup. For he that
eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh
damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord s body." 17
This passage contains essentially all the points hitherto
developed. We have, 1, the bread and wine; 2, the
blessing at the taking of the bread, and also of the wine,
for "he took the cup after the same manner;" 3, the
bread called the body, and the cup the blood, because
they represented them, as is manifest from the fact, that
they were called bread and the cup by the Saviour, after
17 1 Cor. xi. 23-30.
124 THE LORD S SUPPER.
they were spoken of by him as his body and blood. In
this account, also, we have the idea fully developed
which may be involved but is not expressed in the Evan
gelists St. Matthew and St. Mark, and is more briefly
indicated in connection with the bread, in St. Luke. The
bread and wine which represent the body broken and the
blood shed, are to be memorials of the Saviour s death.
When Christ presents the bread and the wine to his dis
ciples, he says, " This do," and " This do ye as oft as ye
drink it, in remembrance of me. For as oft as ye eat
this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord s
death till he come." The bread and wine are to be
memorials of the Saviour s death.
Besides these points, there are others also brought out
in this passage of St. Paul. 1. The Lord s Supper is to
be a perpetual institution ; the Lord s death being showed
in it till he come. 2. The unworthy partaker is declared
to be guilty of the body and Wood of Christ, and to eat to-
his condemnation or judgment, because he does not discern
the Lord s body ; that is, because he discovers nothing
more in, and is no more benefited by, this Supper,
;than by a common meal. 3. The duty of examining
^himself before eating that bread and drinking that cup, so
that in them (bread and cup still) he might discern the
Lord s body. 4. This commemorative service will be a
perpetual showing forth to the world in a manner, strik
ing and significant, the death of the Lord until he come
again. In the language of Dr. Stone, " It carries with it
the evidence of a moral monument to the truth and divine
origin of Christianity, and to the identity of the Church
throughout all ages."
Another passage in St. Paul s Epistle to the Corin
thians refers to the same blessed institution. " The cup
of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the
THE LORD S SUPPER. 125
blood of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not the
communion of the body of Christ ? For we being many
are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of
that one bread. 18 The word here translated communion,
is everywhere else in the New Testament rendered by
the word fellowship, or participation, and sometimes
by the terms distribution 20 or contribution.^ The idea
thus expressed by it is that of fellowship or participation,
and that usually in the sense of receiving benefits.
Taken in connection with the verse that follows, the
translation of Macknight, who renders it the joint partici
pation, is, perhaps, the most accurate that could be given
to the word. The meaning of the passage, then, is, that
in the reception of this bread and wine, which are the-
memorials of the Saviour s death, we jointly partake or
have fellowship in the body and blood of Christ ; that is,,
we are partakers of the benefits of his death. 22 Thei
18 1 Cor. x. 16, 17. 20 2 Cor. ix. 13.
19 1 Cor. i. 9 ; 2 Cor. vi. 14 ; Acts ii. 42. 21 Romans xv. 26.
K That this is the sense of the passage may be made yet more
evident. If it is not to be understood as a communion or partici
pation of the benefits of Christ s death, then it expresses the idea
that we receive and partake of his real body and blood, his
human flesh. This cannot be, for that which is called the com
munion or fellowship of his body and blood is called the " bread
which we break," and " the cup of blessing which we bless." And
that this is the name given to the elements after they are blessed,
is clear from the 17th verse, which declares that " we are all par
takers of that one bread,;" bread, the right reception of which is
the communion of the body of Christ, that is, of the benefits which
accrue to us by his crucified body. The 21st verse confirms this
interpretation. " 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." If they who partook of the Lord s Table, literally
and actually partook of his human flesh and blood, then they who
sat at idol feasts, in partaking of the food sacrificed to idols, must
11*
126 THE LORD S SUPPER.
passage also involves the idea, that in addition to the
giving of thanks, and the blessing rendered to God, the
cup, and, therefore, probably the bread, is to be blessed.
That which is set apart to a sacred use is, in Scripture,
thereby said to be blessed. 23 The fellowship and union
of the partakers of the benefits of Christ s death with
Christ, and their fellowship with each other, arising from
their fellowship with him, is another idea contained in
this passage.
The other notices of this Sacrament, in the Word of
God, are merely incidental, and contain no new points,
as constituting part of its nature and design. 24
be supposed actually to hare eaten the substance of the demons to
whom the feasts were consecrated. Such absurdities of Scripture
interpretation does the idea, that we partake of the literal body and
blood of Christ, compel us to adopt !
The idea that the communion or fellowship of a thing involves
the literal reception of the real and identical thing itself with
which there is communion, would lead to strange interpretations
of various portions of God s Word. Take, for instance, Philip-
pians iii. 10, and 1 Peter iv. )3, in which the word here rendered
communion occurs: " That I may know him and the power of his
resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings." " The fellowship
of his sufferings," on the principle above mentioned would be com
pelled to take the impossible meaning that we might experience
Christ s own identical agonies in the garden and on the cross.
And so with the passage in St. Peter. When that Apostle bids us
rejoice that we are made partakers of Christ s sufferings, our re
joicing is not to be that we are permitted to suffer like him and
with him, and to be partakers of the benefits of his sufferings, but
we ourselves are to lose our identity and be clothed with his, and
undergo his personal agonies !
asQen. ii.3; Ex. xx. 11.
24 Those who may suppose, that the sixth chapter of St. John
has reference to the Lord s Supper, we refer to Dr. Stone s mas
terly analysis of that chapter, in his " Mysteries Opened," and to
Dr. Turner s learned exegetical Essay on our Lord s Discourse at
Capernaum.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 127
Now let us gather together all the circumstances
connected with the institution of this Sacrament, and we
shall be able to see what a Scriptural service, in which
this Sacrament is celebrated, should contain.
1. The bread and wine are the elements or matter of
the Sacrament ; the one to be broken and given to the
disciples to be eaten, the other to be presented to them
that they may drink it.
2. Blessing God and giving him thanks, are to precede
the distribution of bread and wine.
3. Blessing the cup, and, therefore, probably the
bread, by the solemn setting of them apart for the holy
use of the Sacrament, is also to precede their distribution.
4. The bread and wine are to be employed as the
representatives of the body and blood of Christ.
5. The object of such representatives or symbols is to
present a perpetual memorial or remembrance of the
Saviour s death until his coming again.
6. It is a seal of the New Covenant for the remission
of sins made through the blood of the Redeemer ; a seal
which God affixes to his Covenant, and to which we
anew subscribe our faithful adherence as often as we
commemorate the Saviour s death in this memorial.
7. This Supper of the Lord, thus instituted, is also a
sign and seal of the love which Christians ought to have
among themselves one to another, as well as a memorial
of the Saviour s death.
8. This commemorative service is to continue as a
monument, erected, as it were, over the place of the
Saviour s death, testifying, through all time, his death
and sacrifice for man.
9. The partaker of this feast should examine himself
lest he eat and drink unworthily.
10. He who eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth
128
and drinketh to his condemnation or judgment, not dis
cerning the Lord s body, and is guilty of his body and
blood.
11. Another point clearly expressed in 1 Corinthians
x. 16, and resulting by direct inference from some of
the latter statements, is, that the Lord s Supper is a
means of grace to the worthy recipient. Christ s death is
the world s life. The symbols of the Lord s body and
( blood, taken in remembrance of his death a remem-
*A ^y^brance wherein faith, passing over from the visible
symbols to the crucified Saviour, lays hold of that
^ta^ sacrifice as the soul s redemption, righteousness, and
, sanctification this reception of the consecrated symbols,
quickens and sanctifies the soul. The commemoration
thus becomes a means of grace. Faith s remembrance
of the union of Christians with each other, and of all with
Christ ; of the fact, that we being many are one bread
and one body, for we are all partakers of that one
bread ; 25 faith s remembrance of this blessed truth
awakens love to Christ and to each other in the heart of
the worthy recipient. In this way it is a means of grace.
And again ; that it is a means of grace, is implied in the
direction to examine ourselves before we eat and drink;
and in the assertion, that the unworthy eat and drink
judgment, not discerning the Lord s body. By these
expressions, it is implied that they who worthily partake
of the Lord s Supper, do it not to their condemnation, but
to their approval and acquittal in the sight of God ; and
that it becomes us to examine ourselves, that we may be
prepared to partake worthily of the holy feast, with an
eye which discerns the broken body of our Lord given
for our salvation, and a heart that appropriates him as all
our salvation and all our desire.
26 1 Cor. x. 17.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 129
It is believed, that there is no important element in thet
Scriptural description of the Sacrament of the Lord s!
Supper omitted in the above enumeration. That each of
the points enumerated are found in their right place and
proportion in our admirable service, is what we shall, in
another chapter, endeavor to demonstrate. At present,
it will suffice, in the conclusion of this chapter, to ascer
tain what is the chief design of this holy service.
"Christ crucified " is the great central doctrine of the
Gospel. It is the key-stone of the arch which supports
the weight of a lost world s redemption. Other Scripture
truths, disconnected from it, neither support any thing,
nor are supported. St. Paul determined to know nothing
else among those to whom he was sent. The prophecies
of the Old Testament point to it. The types of the Old
Testament shadow it. In short, it is the substance of
God s revelation to lost man. It is that on which the
sinner must depend for forgiveness, for redemption, for
the renewal of his nature, for his title for admission into
heaven. Without figure and without abatement, "Christ
is all in all" to condemned and polluted man. The
design of all revelation, from its beginning to its close, is
to hold up Christ slain as the world s ransom. Now it
is before this dread, mysterious, potent, life-imparting,
throned truth CHRIST CRUCIFIED that the soul of
man must be brought and detained, that it may render to
it homage, receive from it law, accept from it forgive
ness, obtain the renewing spirit, be drawn by the power
of the sweetly constraining love beaming from it, till all
its powers are surrendered to Christ, and filled with
Christ. Of this great truth, Christ has left a great, sig
nificant, and blessed MEMORIAL. As we assign the first
place among Scripture truths to the revelation of Christ
crucified for us, so should we assign the first place among
130
THE LORD S SUPPER.
all the ordinances appointed by Christ and his disciples,
or instituted by the Church, to that commemorative
service in which the Saviour is again evidently set forth
crucified among us. In instituting the Sacrament of his
death, Christ had respect to the same design which he
had in view in submitting to the crucifixion. It was by
his death, believed in and accepted by the sinner as his
soul s atonement, that man was to be saved. But this
truth he knew would be foolishness to the wise, and a
stumbling-block to the carnal. He knew that sinful men
would hate it, and that Satan would veil it from the view
of a perishing world, whose only hope it was. He there
fore made provision that this great saving truth should be
preserved, and evidently seen of all men to be THE
TRUTH, by the reception of which alone men could live
again. He instituted but one oft to be repeated Sacra
ment in his Church. He established no memorial of his
mysterious Incarnation, his shining Transfiguration, his
mighty Resurrection, or his glorious Ascension. By the
Sacrament of his death provision was made that this
great saving truth should be perpetually showed forth till
his coming again. He was lifted upon the cross, that he
might offer a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice for the
sins of the whole world. He was symbolically lifted
upon the cross, in the memorial of his death, in the
breaking of bread and the pouring forth of wine, that
men might be directed to his atoning merits, and that
those who commemorated his sacrifice, might vividly
realize it through that commemoration, as its expressive
sign ; and might, with humble confidence, appropriate its
blessings, by the reception of the Sacrament as a heaven-
stamped and assuring seal He who loves the Saviour,
and trusts only in his merits, will love and honor the
MEMORIAL of his dying love.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 131
" When, therefore, you have the elements, the bread
and wine, delivered into your hands, do but seriously
think with yourselves, Now God is delivering a broken,
a bleeding Saviour unto me. If I will by faith receive
him, he testifies and seals by his bread and wine that I
shall certainly receive remission of my sins and everlast
ing life through him. Let us, therefore, say, Lord
Jesus, I now accept of thee upon thine own terms, on the
very conditions on which thou art pleased to tender
thyself unto me. I take a broken Christ for my entire
Saviour; a Christ crowned with thorns as my alone
King. He shall be my Prophet, whom the blasphemous
Jews buffeted and derided with a " Prophesy who smote
thee ! " As I reach forth my bodily hand to receive the
bread and the wine, so I reach forth the spiritual hand
of my faith, to receive that Christ whose body was thus
broken, and whose blood was thus poured forth. Now
to those only who thus by faith receive Christ Jesus, who
thus eat his flesh and drink his blood, the Sacrament
doth conceal and confirm that they shall have eternal
life by him, and shall be raised up at the last day to that
glory with which he is invested." 26
26 Bishop Hopkins on the Two Sacraments.
VII.
Curb s Supper.
CONTINUED.
IN our last chapter upon the Lord s Supper, we evolved
from the account of its institution given by the Evangelists
and from other references to it found in the Word of God,
what we supposed to be the prominent characteristic of
that blessed Sacrament. The conviction was confidently
expressed that every truth which Scripture contains in
reference to this holy institution will be found transferred
to that sublime service in which the Church commemo
rates the Redeemer s dying love.
It is a characteristic of that divine wisdom which is
manifold, that it connects with those works and institutions
which have one great primary object, other and subor
dinate ends and uses. The Sabbath sacredly set apart,
in commemoration of God s rest from the work of the
world s creation, for worship and for cessation from all
works other than those of necessity and charity, was also
designed to commemorate the release of the Israelites
from Egypt, 1 and as a sign of the separation of the Jews
from all other nations, to make them remember that it is
the Lord who sanctified them. 2 It will be entirely in
analogy with God s providential dispensations, and with
his other positive institutions, if we find in the Lord s
1 Dent. v. 15. 2 Ezek. xx. 12, 20 ; Ex. xxxi. 13.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 133
Supper one primary intent connected with other subor
dinate and kindred aims.
What, then, is the nature of the Lord s Supper?
What is its chief character, its main design ? What is
that primary and prominent characteristic which should
give it its name ?
Several of the points which we have gathered from the
Scripture account of this institution, have reference to the
manner in which it was established and to be celebrated ;
and some of them to the ends and blessings connected
with its chief design. If in the brief Scripture records on
this subject we turn to those only expressions which bear
on the subject of its nature and design, their meaning
seems clear and unequivocal. When our Saviour, in
stituting the Sacrament, said, " Take, eat, this is my
body," and " Drink ye all of this " cup, " for this is my
blood of the New Testament," we have seen that inas
much as he regarded the wine as wine after he had
called it his blood, his meaning was that the bread and
wine were the signs or representatives of his body and
blood. 3 In the gospel of St. Luke, we find the Saviour
in enjoining it, expressing the purpose for which it was
enjoined : " This do in remembrance of me." When the
risen Saviour communicated to St. Paul the account of its
institution, the instituting words which describe the nature
and object of the Sacrament are prominent and repeated :
" This do in remembrance of me ; " " This do ye, as oft
as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." And again ;
"As oft as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do
show the Lord s death till he come." Now as the Saviour
does enjoin it upon his disciples to partake of this Sacra-
3 This point is very fully and convincingly proved by Dr. Stone.
Mysteries Opened, p. 285.
12
134 THE LORD S SUPPER.
ment in remembrance of him, and does not specify any
other object of its institution, there can be no possible
error in the inference, that the primary object of its in
stitution, was that it should be a perpetual MEMORIAL of
his death upon the cross as an atonement for the world s
sin. That word describes its primary object ; that is the
name which designates its generic character. To this
divinely instituted and obligatory memorial of his death,
Christ has assigned several offices, and attached various
blessings. It is a seal of the New Covenant wherein
forgiveness of sins is pledged ; it is a sign of the spiritual
union of believers ; it is a perpetual witness to the world
of the sacrifice of the cross ; it is a means of grace
whereby the faithful recipient obtains quickened faith,
deeper lov.e, and new graces of the spirit.
Such as we have found this Sacrament in the Word of
God, we shall find it also in the Book of Common Prayer.
Its primary design, its various uses, its attendant blessings,
and the mode of its institution, will all be found in their
proper place and proportion in our admirable service.
I. Immediately on entering upon that portion of " The
Order for the Administration of the Lord s Supper,"
which has direct reference to the Sacrament, we are met
by expressions which indicate that its primary nature and
design is that of a memorial. Does the Minister give
warning that he will administer the Sacrament to those
who are " religiously and devoutly disposed ? " It is " to
be by them received in remembrance of his meritorious
cross and passion, whereby, (that is, by the cross and
passion,) alone we obtain remission of our sins, and are
made partakers of the kingdom of heaven." Does he
earnestly expostulate with those who, being " lovingly
called and bidden by God himself," refuse to come to the
THE LORD S SUPPER. 135
holy feast? The ground of the solemn duty is, then,
expressed in these explicit words. "And as the Son of
God did vouchsafe to yield up his soul, by death, upon the
cross for your salvation, so it is your duty to receive the
Communion in remembrance of the sacrifice of his death,
as he himself hath commanded." Is the table of the
Lord spread, and does the Priest exhort the people to
come in a right spirit to the blessed commemoration?
His pointed injunction is that, " above all things they are
to give humble and hearty thanks for the redemption of
the world by the death and passion of their Saviour
Christ, both God and man ; " and this is followed by his
explicit assertion, that the object of the institution was,
that they might ever remember that precious death. And
TO THE END that we should always remember the exceed
ing great love of our Master and only Saviour, thus
dying for us, and the innumerable benefits which, by his
precious blood shedding, he hath obtained for us, he hath
instituted and ordained holy mysteries as pledges of his
\QVQ,andfor a continual remembrance of his death, to our
great and endless comfort. Does the officiating Minister,
standing before the table, pronounce the consecrating
words ? They are the words which the Saviour revealed
to St. Paul, in which he bids the disciples eat and drink
in remembrance of him. Does he, after the consecration,
in the name of himself and the people, declare his com
pliance with the Saviour s dying words, and offer the
privileged service for God s forgiving acceptance ? His
language is, " We, thy humble servants, do celebrate and
make here before thy divine majesty with these thy holy
gifts, which we now offer unto thee, the MEMORIAL thy
Son hath commanded us to make, having in remembrance
his blessed passion and precious death." Does he invoke
God s Holy Word and Spirit to bless and sanctify the
136 THE LORD S SUPPER.
bread and wine ? It is " to the end that we, receiving
them according to our Saviour Christ s holy institution, in
remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers
of his most blessed body and blood." Are the conse
crated elements delivered to the kneeling and solemnized
communicants ? The same object which has been seen
to pervade all the preceding service is here briefly and
finally enjoined. " Take and eat this in remembrance
that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by
faith with thanksgiving." "Drink this in remembrance
that Christ s blood was shed for thee, and be thankful."
The primary nature, the end, the design of the Lord s
Supper is thus found to be, in this service, as in the
Scriptures, that it may be a MEMORIAL of the Saviour s
sacrifice for sin. This Sacrament, whose name and
character is memorial, has many blessings connected with
it, all of which are recognised and set forth in our service
as they are in the Word of God. Every part of that
service will be found to have significance and propriety
in connection with some one or other of the ends and
uses assigned to it in the Scriptures.
And here it may be proper to notice the principle upon
which our Church has constructed those services in which
ordinances of divine institution and obligation are cele
brated. While she has retained in them all things
necessarily and inseparably connected with their original
institution, she has not felt bound to abstain from the
exercise of her " authority to ordain, change, and abolish
ceremonies or rites of the Church, ordained only by man s
authority, so that all things be done to edifying," 4 by
such additions to the original mode of their institution, as
carry out more fully, or harmonize with, their original
4 Article XXXIV.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 137
design. On this ground, she introduces the sign of the
cross at the service of infant Baptism. This principle of
the Church, was violently attacked by the Puritans, and
defended by Hooker, with his usual calm, comprehensive,
and conclusive reasoning. While Cartwright insisted,
that " it was best to come as near to the manner of cele
bration of the Supper which our Lord Christ used, as may
be," Hooker contended, that "to do throughout every
the like circumstance which Christ did in this action, were
by following his footsteps in that sort to err more from
the purpose he aimed at, than we now do by not following
them with so nice and severe strictness." 5 The intro
duction of the commandments, the offering of alms and
oblations, and other portions of the service, while they
form no part of the original institution of the Lord s Sup
per, will be seen to harmonize with the design of its
establishment
II. We have seen that one of the important designs of
the Lord s Supper is, that it should be " a seal of the
New Covenant for the remission of sins, made through
the blood of the Redeemer ; a seal which God affixes to
his covenant, and to which we anew subscribe our faith
ful adherence as often as we commemorate the Saviour s
death in this memorial." This office of the Lord s
Supper gives us a high idea of its importance, and of the
solemnity with which it should be approached. We
come to renew our solemn covenant with God. We
come to see the Saviour graciously re-impress the seal of
his forgiveness of all our sins, and the conveyance of all
other benefits of his passion, on the condition of renewed
repentance and faith ; and to sign anew our promise of
6 Hooker s Eccl. Pol., vol. ii, p. 456.
12*
138 THE LORD S SUPPER.
a faithful fulfilment of the terms prescribed. Well may
the Apostle give the admonition, " Let a man examine
himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that
cup ! " Well may the Church warn us of the " peril of
the unworthy receiving thereof ! " Well may she with
affectionate fervency admonish us that, " as the benefit is
great if, with a true penitent heart and lively faith, we
receive that holy Sacrament, so is the danger great if we
receive the same unworthily."
In this renewal of our covenant with God, it is manifest
that we must make a new and solemn profession of com
pliance with its conditions. Those conditions are repent
ance and faith, and the renewed consecration to God of
our lives and substance, presented to him as an offering,
which we beseech him to accept, " not weighing our
merits, but pardoning our offences." A large portion of
the service is occupied with incitements and exhortations
to the faithful performance of these conditions, with the
prayer that we may, or with the profession that we do,
comply with them, and with an outward act the offer
ing of alms significant of the same.
Viewed in this light, how appropriate it is that the Ten
Commandments should stand at the entrance of the ser
vice, at once to present to us our rule of life, and to con
vict us, by the remembrance of their repeated violation,
of the sin which makes it necessary that we should lay
hold upon the New Testament in Christ s blood ! How
cheering, under the felt condemnation of the law, to
listen to the teachings and messages of the Epistles and
the Gospel, and to see those living epistles the lives of
apostles, saints, and martyrs. It is in perfect harmony
with the same design that the sermon, which it may be
supposed will refer to the manner and spirit in which we
should come to the holy table, should succeed. How
THE LORD S SUPPER. 139
appropriate also, in view of the same end, that \ve should
have presented to us the simple but sure test of our glad
consecration to God and love to man, which is furnished
by the Offertory ; in which we are enabled, by an imme
diate act, to give a pledge of the sincerity of our professed
subjection, and a significant symbol of the entireness of
our consecration. It is an expression of the same spirit
of surrender to him and love to his people, which, in the
prayer for the Church militant, presents the offered alms
and the oblations of the bread and wine for the Sacra
ment to God for his acceptance, and utters a fervent
prayer for the universal Church. The Exhortations, which
are to be addressed to the communicants on some occa
sion previous to the celebration of the Lord s Supper,
contemplate the same object, and admonish those who
expect to come, that they recall their sins, that they
make full purpose of amendment, that they make restitu
tion for all injuries and wrongs done by them, and that
they forsake all sin. At the time of the celebration, with
the same great end prominently in view, they are bidden
to examine themselves with searching faithfulness, whether
they have " a true penitent heart and lively faith," that
they may worthily, and to their great benefit, receive
the holy Sacrament. And when the invitation to draw
near is pronounced, it is extended to those only who " do
truly and earnestly repent of their sins, and are in love
and charity with their neighbors, and intend to lead a
new life, following the commandments of God and walk
ing henceforth in his holy ways. Then in the confession
follows the act of penitence ; and in the absolution the
authorized declaration that if their repentance be sincere,
and their faith real, their sins are pardoned, and they
may worthily receive and subscribe to the heavenly seal
of forgiveness. Comforting sentences of Scripture con-
140 THE LORD S SUPPER.
firm that authorized declaration of remitted sins, that the
hearts of God s covenanting children may not doubt or
waver in their faith. Then their hearts are lifted into the
serene realization of their privileges as God s children,
and pardoned sinners join with sinless angels in the
anthem of heaven to their common God and Father.
After, by the prayer of Consecration, the elements of
bread and wine are set apart in " memory," or as a
memorial " of the full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice,
oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world,"
there follows, on the part of the Priest, in behalf of all
the people, a solemn oblation of those holy gifts, as the
memorial commanded by the Saviour. We have pro
fessed to exercise repentance and faith. We have pre
sented our alms, oblations, thanksgivings, and prayers,
and earnestly besought God that he would accept them.
And now that the highest act of our religion, in which
we anew receive a visible seal of forgiveness, and anew
profess that compliance with the terms, without which
the ordinance seals no benefit received, but only a curse,
threatened and impending, is about to be performed ; in a
moment when, by our sincerity or faithlessness, we are
about to take to our bosoms a heavenly blessing or a
condemning wo, is it not altogether proper that we should
make an oblation of this high act of worship, on which
are suspended such mighty issues, in the same way that
we presented our alms and prayers, for God s forgiving
acceptance ? Is it not proper that, under a deep sense
of a want of fervency and steadiness in our purposes and
services, we should lift a fervent invocation for God s
blessing that we may so receive this privilege and per
form this service, as not to fail of receiving the benefits
procured by his death, and sealed to us in this blessed
memorial? It is a moment in which the heart should
141
most earnestly implore God to receive the memorial
gifts which we present, and accept the memorial service
which, according to his gracious command, we offer,
beseeching " him mercifully to accept this our sacrifice
of praise and thanksgiving." It is a moment in which,
while we pray for the reception of his highest blessing,
even that " we may obtain the remission of our sins and
all other benefits of his passion," that we " may be filled
with his grace and heavenly benediction, and made one
body with him that he may dwell in us and we in him,"
it is meet that we offer the highest act of devotion to him
in these expressive and solemn words : " And here we
offer and present unto thee, O Lord, ourselves, our souls
and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and living sacrifice
unto thee."
All those parts of the Communion Service, then, which
prepare for, enjoin, pray for, or express repentance and
faith ; all which contain the offering up of our prayers
and services and alms ; all in which there is a presenta
tion of our celebration of this holy service, and our
prayers, as " sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving," and
of ourselves as " living sacrifices ; " all these portions of
the Communion Service are proper for us who are about,
in the memorial of our sacrifice for sin, to receive the
covenant assurance of the benefits of his passion con
veyed to us by faith, and assured to us by this the
Saviour s own attesting seal.
And this leads us to remark, that as there are large
portions of the service which have reference to our ful
filment of the conditions of the covenant in Christ s blood,
so there are also other portions which refer to the bles
sings conveyed to us, and sealed to us, on that fulfilment.
They are contemplated all along through the service, in
connection with those acts of repentance, faith, obedience,
142 THE LORD S SUPPER.
love and consecration of means and services, with which
they are inseparably connected. Those blessings are, in
one place, summarily expressed by the phrase, " the for
giveness of sins and all other benefits of his passion."
They appear throughout the service to be for the most
part comprised and contemplated under the two divisions
of the forgiveness of sins, and the consequent sanctifica-
tion of the spirit. They are sometimes prayed for as the
blessing promised and desired, and sometimes spoken of
as the blessing actually in possession. By the New Testa
ment in Christ s blood, the soul is justified, and receives
the gift of the Holy Spirit. Enabled by that Holy Spirit,
faith lays hold of the promises of God in Christ, and
receives the continued accessions of grace by which the
soul is strengthened and sanctified more and more. The
Spirit, by taking the things of Christ and showing them
to the heart, strengthens and confirms all its graces
love, joy, and peace, in the Holy Ghost. Thus the soul
feeds on Christ, on his dying mediation, on his broken
body and shed blood. It so feeds upon him in this
blessed Sacrament. By the aid of the expressive and
divinely consecrated symbols of bread and wine, the soul
takes the truth of the crucified Son of God, and feeds
upon it, and glows with strengthened and quickened life.
The partaking of the sacramental body and blood of
Christ is thus coincident with the soul s reception of the
strengthening and sanctifying doctrine of [a slain Re
deemer. That this Sacrament is at the same time a
divine symbol, and a heavenly seal of forgiveness, and of
all the benefits of a redemption, is a double aid to faith
in appropriating the benefits of the Saviour s passion.
Hence, the language of St. Paul : " The cup of blessing
which we bless, is it not the communion (the joint par
ticipation) of the blood of Christ ? The bread which we
THE LORD S SUPPER. 143
break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? "
Hence, the Church, in this service, appropriates the
figurative language of Jesus Christ in the sixth chapter of
St. John, and applies what the Saviour there says of the
reception of his doctrine in general, to the reception of
the specific doctrine of his death as a sacrifice for sin.
Sometimes she has reference only to the inward act of
faith by which the soul takes the death of Christ as its
redemption, righteousness, and sanctification, and calls it
an eating of the flesh and a drinking of the blood of the
Son of Man. Sometimes she refers to that complex
action in which we, at the same time, exercise a living
faith in a crucified Redeemer, and receive the significant
symbol of his broken body and shed blood, and, on our
part, sign the already heaven-signed seal of the covenant
of redemption, and calls that celebration of the heavenly
feast which consists of both this outward and inward part,
a participation or eating and drinking the body and blood
of Christ. Freely, however, as this language is used in
the Communion Service in reference to the complex act
spoken of above, or to the act of faith alone, it is not ap
plied to the reception of the symbols without the exercise
of faith ; thus showing that the eating and drinking of the
body and blood of Christ has always reference to the
soul s appropriation of the benefits of his passion. The
language which the Communion Service so freely uses,
the Articte (XXVIII) accurately explains. " The body
of Christ," says the Article, " is given and taken and
eaten, in the Lord s Supper, only after a heavenly and
spiritual manner; and the mean whereby the body of
Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith ; "
and that it is, in the view of the Church, by the act of
faith that we eat and drink the body and blood of Christ,
144 THE LORD S SUPPER.
is clear, also, from her language in the rubric for the
Communion of the Sick.
" But if a man either by reason of extremity of sick
ness, or for want of warning in "due time to the Minister,
or for lack of company to receive with him, or by any
other just impediment, do not receive the Sacrament of
Christ s body and blood, the Minister shall instruct him,
that if he do truly repent him of his sins, and steadfastly
believe that Jesus Christ hath suffered death upon the
cross for him, and shed his blood for his redemption,
earnestly remembering the benefits he hath thereby, and
giving him hearty thanks therefor, he doth eat and drink
the body and blood of our Saviour Christ profitably to
his soul s health, although he do not receive the Sacra
ment with his mouth."
We need not long dwell on those portions of the ser
vice, so numerous and prominent, in which the blessings
connected with Christ s covenant are spoken of as re
ceived in this holy Sacrament. In the Exhortation, it is
declared to be our duty to " render most hearty thanks
to Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, for that he hath
given his Son, our Saviour Jesus Christ, not only to die
for us, but also to be our spiritual food and sustenance in
that holy Sacrament." In the prayer which is said in
the name of all the people, immediately before the Insti
tution we pray, " Grant us, therefore, gracious Lord, so to
eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and drink his
blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his
body, and our souls washed by his most precious blood,
and that we may evermore dwell in him and he in us."
In the Invocation the prayer is offered that we may so
receive the creatures of bread and wine % blessed by his
Word and Holy Spirit, that "we may be partakers of
his most blessed body and blood." In the same Invo-
THE LORD S SUPPER. 145
cation, accompanying the offering of ourselves, our souls
and bodies, as a living sacrifice, is the prayer, that " we
and all others who shall be partakers of this holy Com
munion, may worthily receive the most precious body
and blood of thy Son Jesus Christ, be filled with thy
grace and heavenly benediction, and made one body
with him, that he may dwell in them and they in him."
After having communicated, we return thanks to God in
this form : " We most heartily thank thee for that thou
dost vouchsafe to feed us, who have duly received these
holy mysteries, with the spiritual food of the most
precious body and blood of thy Son Jesus Christ."
Having thus shown that the two prominent character-
istics of the Lord s Supper occupy the same place in the
service of our Church, as they do in the institution of the
Saviour, as recorded in the Word of God, it will not be
necessary to prove the same thing with so much minute-
ness in reference to the other points which were gathered
from the various Scripture records, as belonging to this
holy Sacrament.
III. Some of those points have reference to the manner
of its institution, and some to the blessings connected with
its right reception, or to the condemnation which falls on
those who receive the same unworthily. In all particu
lars which are not merely incidental such as cele
brating the service in an upper room, and with the
accompaniments of the Jewish Passover it will be
found that our Church has reverently adhered to, and
carried out, the design of the Saviour.
" Bread and wine," without permission to mix the
wine or change the bread into the wafer or other form,
are provided as the matter of the Sacrament. " Thanks
and blessings are offered to God, and the elements them-
13
146 THE LORD S SUPPER.
selves are blessed, preparatory to a participation in the
feast. We have already seen that the bread and wine
are regarded as symbols for a memorial of Christ s death,
and for a seal of forgiveness, and of other spiritual bles
sings. The use of the Sacrament as a moral monument
of the Saviour s death, is expressed in the prayer of con
secration, where it is spoken of as that which Christ " did
institute, and command us to continue as a perpetual
memory or memorial of his precious death and sacrifice,
till his coming again." Its character, as a sign and seal
of the union and communion of Christians with each other,
is expressed in the invocation and in the prayer which
succeeds the participation of the bread and wine. In the
former, the prayer is offered that we " may be made one
body with him ; " and in the latter, thanks are offered,
that God does by this holy Sacrament, " assure us that
we are very members incorporate in the mystical body
of his Son." That the partakers of this feast should
earnestly examine themselves, is the reiterated injunction
of the Exhortations. That they who eat and drink un
worthily, eat and drink to their condemnation, and that it
is a means of grace to the worthy recipient, is abundantly
set forth in those passages which we have already quoted,
which have reference to the blessings received in this
Sacrament by those, who, in the renewal of their cove
nant with God, exercise sincere repentance and true
faith. It would be an easy task, but superfluous, to show
with more minuteness, the correspondency of this service
of the Church with the Scriptural account of the Supper
of the Lord. Thankful we are that while our Church
has rejected every thing in doctrine or in practice,
which superstition has added to this holy feast, she has
retained every thing which accords with the design of its
institution, so that her children may not be deprived of
THE LORD S SUPPER. 147
any of the blessings prepared for them by the Saviour s
love, as they " feed on the banquet of that most heavenly
food ! "
Eapid as our enumeration of the ends and uses of this
heavenly feast has necessarily been, it has been sufficient
to show the great dignity of this holy Sacrament, and the
duty of so preparing for its right reception, that we may
not lose its manifold blessings. If we have a low appre -
ciation of its dignity and blessedness ; if we come to it
expecting little in its reception ; if we fail to examine
ourselves ; if we approach without renewed repentance
and faith ; if we come without the solemnity and collect-
edness of spirit, which becomes those who are performing
a renewed act of covenant with God, with all the condi
tions and duties on the one hand, and all the blessings,
temporal and eternal, on the other, lying out-spread before
the soul ; if this be the spirit in which we approach the
table of the Lord, we shall, as we come to it without
the enjoined preparation, leave it without the promised
blessing. If we gather together the blessings of the holy
Sacrament, and meditate upon them, though it be but
briefly, can we fail to feel that in it we may enjoy our
highest privilege, and be drawn into nearest communion
with our Saviour ?
1. As a MEMORIAL of his death, how great are its
blessings ! That death, proclaimed by the living herald
of salvation, or by God s Holy Word, is the truth by
which the Spirit saves and sanctifies the soul. Those
" visible words," the symbols of Christ s blessed body
broken, and his precious blood shed, are made by the
Spirit, to show that redeeming death yet more vividly to
the heart. In our Communion Service, accordingly, we
pray that God would sanctify them by his Word and
Holy Spirit, as we pray that he would sanctify, or
148 THE LORD S SUPPER.
accompany with sanctifying power his holy truth, that we,
rightly receiving them, may obtain the same blessings
which follow the proper reception of the life-giving Word.
When we come to that holy feast, how are we aided to-
view Christ thus evidently crucified before our eyes, and
how should we improve the gracious aids thus afforded us,
to gaze upon, till we deeply love, that wondrous sufferer,
out of whose more than tragic woes sprung our joys, out
of whose dying came our life, from whose burial rose our
resurrection ! Then aided faith recalls the past and it
lives again. If we look on a dying Saviour only with
the eye of recollection and not of faith, we shall view it
as a still picture, not as a represented reality, whose sounds
are heard by us, and whose sights pass before us. Look
upon the sufferer! Heaven and hell are, and earth
should be, amazed at that spectacle ! u Consider, were
there a sight to be represented at which heaven and earth
and hell itself should stand amazed ; wherein God him
self should suffer, not only in the form of a servant but
under the form of a malefactor; and the everlasting
happiness of all mankind from the creation of the world
to the final dissolution of it should be transacted ; in which
we might see the venom and the poisonous malignity of
the sins of the whole world wrung out into one bitter cup,
and this cup put into the hands of the Son of God to
drink off the very dregs of it; in which we might see the
gates of hell broken to pieces, devils conquered, and all
the powers of their dark kingdom triumphed over. I say
were there such a sight as this, so dreadful and yet so
glorious, to be represented to us, would we not all desire
to be spectators of it ? Why, all this is frequently repre
sented to us in the Sacrament. There we may see the
Son of God slain, the blood of God poured out. We
may see him, who takes away our transgressions, num-
THE LORD S SUPPER. 149
bered with the transgressors. We may see him hanging
upon the soreness of his hands and feet ; all our iniquities
meeting upon him, and the eternity of divine vengeance
and punishments contracted in their full extremity into a
short space. We may see the wrath of God pacified,
the justice of God satisfied, mankind redeemed, hell
subdued, and devils cast into everlasting chains. All
this is to be clearly seen in this ordinance if we bring but
faith to discern it ; without which indeed all this will be
no more to us than a magnificent and exquisite scene to
a blind man." 6 All this passing before us, we shall look
on him whom we have pierced and mourn ; we shall take
part with God against our sins, and look upon them with
holy abhorrence ; we shall be awed into solemn views of
the justice, and be thrilled with fearful realizations of the
dreadfulness, of the wrath of God ; and from all and
above all, will rise adoring gratitude to God and Christ,
for " love so amazing, so divine ! "
2. If we meditate on this Sacrament as a seal of our
covenant with God, we shall find it full of blessings for
the soul. In this point of view it should be magnified, it
should be received as a most precious assuring token of
God s mercy and forgiveness. In this point of view, it is
scarcely possible to exaggerate its value. Think of it !
We have in Baptism entered into covenant with God.
We were admitted to the privileges of his earthly house
hold, the Church, and have had assurances of pardon,
justification, adoption, regeneration, and sanctification.
We have them still. His Holy Word assures us that
they are ours, if we do not sin them away and cast them
from us. We believe it. We cannot doubt it. Still
our many transgressions, the remaining sins of our hearts,
6 Bishop Hopkins s Two Covenants, p. 149.
13*
150 THE LORD S SUPPER.
weigh upon us, and make us feel that it is scarcely possi
ble that we can still be recognised as his children. We
are so conscious of deserved wrath, that the shadow of
the departing curse yet rests upon our souls, almost as
darkly as the curse itself, when it gathered over them,
still and dreadful ! We know that when with true and
honest purpose, we gave ourselves to Christ in the vows
of Baptism, or in their renewal in Confirmation, then God
loved us and accepted us. But does he love us now ?
The heart yearns for some token of acceptance and of
continued love from the Father against whom we have
so often sinned. The Word remains to us, and its
assurances are precious, but they are to us as the letter
of a friend long since received, whose unchanging affec
tion we cannot doubt, but from whom we would fain
receive some token of undiminished love, some new
assurances of affection. And now in this blessed Sacra
ment we receive such a token from our God. In this
expressive service, we receive new and convincing as
surances of pardon, and new gifts of grace. We are
brought into a realized and close communion with our
heavenly Father, where we can hear with a distinct
ness which the voice of God in his Word had ceased to
afford us, that he is reconciled to us, through his dear
Son. In this commemoration, he puts upon us his signet
ring with which we go forth into the midst of the enemies
of our souls, an assuring token to us, and a confounding
token to them, that he is our God, and that we are his
favored and accepted children. 7
7 When Cranmer appeared before the council who had plotted
his ruin, he had on his finger the ring which King Henry had
given him, and at the sight of it they ceased all action and sub
missively resorted to the king, and then fawned on him they would
have ruined. LE BAS S CRANMER. vol. I., p. 213.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 151
3. Nor is this blessed Sacrament less calculated to
awaken love to each other than it is to assure us of God s
love to us. It is when our Christian brethren are seen
in their character as God s children, the objects with us
of his love and of his covenant mercy ; when we meet
them at the heavenly feast, as all partakers with us of
that one bread, that we are enabled to realize that we
being many are one bread and one body. 8 Seen apart
from this union with Christ, and this union with us in
Christ, their human imperfections would alienate our
hearts. But in this Sacrament we are made to view
them in their high character as heirs together with us of
the grace of life, as all joint heirs with Christ of the
heavenly kingdom. There we realize, that notwithstand
ing their human imperfections, they bear the image
of our dear Redeemer. There we learn the lesson of
forgiving and forbearing love. There we are reminded
of the promised feast with Christ himself in heaven.
There we are made to see that God s children are a
peculiar people, strangers and pilgrims in the world, and
therefore needing each other s sympathy and love.
There, being in charity with all the world, we have a
taste of that enjoyment of which David spake, " Behold
how good and pleasant a thing it is for brethren to dwell
together in unity ! "
4. And, after this, need we say that this Sacrament is a
means of grace and should be as such greatly valued ?
In all the particulars above enumerated, it is found to
promote our spiritual welfare. But it is most of all as a
communion with Christ himself in which we enjoy such a
sense of his presence and such a participation of the
blessings of his redemption as is expressed by eating his
8 1 Cor. x. 17.
152 THE LORD S SUPPER.
flesh and drinking his blood ; it is in this respect most
eminently a means of grace. The Sacrament of the
Lord s Supper has every condition to which the promise
of the Spirit s sanctifying power is attached, besides those
which are peculiarly its own. Christ promises to meet
and be with his people, who are gathered together in his
name. They are so gathered at that heavenly feast.
He promises grace in answer to his people s prayers.
There they ascend under circumstances calculated to
make them earnest and desiring. His richest gifts are
reserved for the strongest exercise of faith. There faith
is aided in its exercise by visible signs and seals of
invisible gifts and graces. Blessing is connected with
the discharge of every duty, and the reception and
thankful acknowledgment of every privilege. There the
grateful child of God complies with the Saviour s dying
injunction, and gladly opens his heart for the reception
of the promised benefits from that kind Father whose
commands are also always gifts. Coming to the com
memoration of the Saviour s death, in which all these
blessings meet and unite upon his heart, how can he, if
he come in penitence and faith, how can he do otherwise
than enjoy communion with his Saviour Christ ? How
can he fail to dwell in him, and have him dwell in his
own opened heart, prepared with welcomes for his
coming? He hears the injunction of Christ, that in this
memorial he should show forth his death until he come.
He realizes that in it he is continuing to hold up Christ
crucified to the world. He perceives that is a glorious
office of the Church with which he is united, from age to
age, to present to the world, in symbol, a continued and re
peated crucifixion of that Lamb of God, that taketh away
the sins of the world. He feels that he lays hold of that
chain of repeated commemorations which, reaching from
THE LORD S SUPPER. 153
the upper chamber where the Passover becomes the
Supper of the Lord, extends to him, and on beyond him,
through the successive generations of believers, till it is
united to Christ as he comes again to take his faithful
ones to higher feasts and more immediate intercourse !
" All one in Christ Jesus ! " is the exclamation of his
kindled spirit, as he realizes the blessedness of the fellow
ship. Along that chain, which unites Calvary to the
mediatorial throne, there come vibrating through his
spirit, now the influences of redeeming mercy from the
cross, and now renewing and sanctifying graces from
the throne. Cold is the heart and dead the faith which
finds little or no blessing in the memorial of the dying
Saviour !
VIII.
CONTINUED.
THE comparison of our Communion Service with the
testimony of Scripture on the subject of the Lord s Sup
per, has shown how completely our Church has, in that
service, adopted the language, and carried out the inten
tion of the blessed Saviour in its institution. It would
have been an advantage to this view of the subject,
previously to have shown the fact, that the Reformers
who composed that service held the views of this divine
institution which we have drawn from the Word of God ;
and then to have come to the Communion Service with
this knowledge of the mind of its framers. But as we
traced the correspondence of the service with the Word
of God, we found it so obvious and complete, as to make
such a course unnecessary. But for the fact that great
and prevalent error, on the subject of the Lord s Supper,
shelters itself under our Communion Service, we might
leave the opinions of the Reformers and the history of
the service altogether untouched.
In attempting to designate erroneous views upon the
subject of the Eucharist, we feel the necessity of discrim
inating between language which may be injudicious, at
the present time, and liable to lead to error, but which is
susceptible of a sound meaning, and has the sanction of
direct or analogous Church usage, and doctrines dis-
rtiE LORD S SUPPER. 155
tinctly avowed, for the explanation and enforcement of
which such language is confessedly applied. It would
be unfair to charge error upon those who, without
avowing their adherence to an erroneous system, use a
phraseology, which, while it is susceptible of an unsound,
is also susceptible of a wholesome interpretation. We
may lament such a course as injudicious. We cannot
blame it as heretical.
Endeavoring to bear this principle in mind, our aim
will be to show what views, advocated by some members
of our Church, are, in our opinion, inconsistent with the
Word of God and with our standards, and of dangerous
consequence to the purity of the Gospel scheme of
salvation, and to the spiritual interests of those by whom
they are embraced.
It will be remembered that our service speaks with the
utmost unreserve of eating the flesh and drinking the
blood of the Son of Man ; of our dwelling in him and of
his dwelling in us. To speak, then, of the real presence
of Christ in the Eucharist, and of our eating and drinking!
his flesh and blood, is to adopt language sanctioned by I
analogy, at least by the Church. If, along with the?
language of the Church, her explanation of the meaning
of that language be adopted and expressed, no one can(
be censured for its use. Our celebration of the service,
our presentation of alms and oblations, and of " the holy
gifts" of bread and wine, and of prayers and thanks
giving, and of ourselves our souls and bodies is
called a " sacrifice," and "sacrifices" unto God. If
this language of the Church be adopted and applied to
the same objects, and used in the same sense in which it
is used in the Communion Service, no one can properly
object to this authorized usage, that it is in itself im
proper, however its habitual and unexplained use may
156 THE LORD S SUPPER.
be, at the present time, ill-judged. The same may be
said of the word Priest. Even the word Altar, though
banished from this service, because of its liability to
bring along with it the error with which it had been long
associated, yet, because found in other services, may be
rightfully we say not wisely used, if, along with its
use, there is ever implied or expressed the meaning
intended by the Church.
With these preliminary observations, we proceed to
designate those views which we regard as erroneous.
The " real presence," as explained by the writers to
Xitlitfl Whom we refer, is not the presence of Christ, by his
Spirit, to the heart of the believer, nor the presence of
I his once broken but now glorified body to the faith which
" lifts up the heart " to heaven, and sees him there, and
lays hold of him crucified, risen, glorified, Prophet,
Priest, and King and appropriates him as righteous
ness, sanctification, and redemption, and receives from
him the pardon of sin and the graces of the Spirit ; thus
spiritually eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the
j Son of Man. " The real presence of the body and blood
j<* **&& *of Christ in the elements, as distinguished from what
would be understood by the presence of Christ at the
^Sacrament, is unequivocally affirmed, even the presence
^Ibof that very flesh and blood which were given and shed
for the life of the world ! " 1 It is said to be " literally
true," that " the consecrated bread is Christ s body." 2
X " The real and essential presence of Christ s natural
fl body and blood at the Communion," is affirmed. 3 The
explanations which are made of these expressions disap
point the charitable hope that they may have been used
^ Mysteries Opened, p. 256. 3 Tract tNo. 13LXXVI.
a Tract No. XC.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 157
with a sound meaning. A figurative or symbolical -
presence is contemptuously disowned. A presence of
the body to faith is discarded, for it is declared " tobejt
there independently of our faith," 4 and to be to the sinner,
"his Redeemer s very broken body, and his blood whichf
was shed for the remission of sins." 5 The sacrifice of
the Eucharist, is not a sacrifice of thanksgiving and
praise, and the offering of ourselves as sacrifices to God
in a new and holy life. It is described as the offering up
of the consecrated bread and wine, made the body and
blood of Christ, as a sacrifice commeniomtive of that
offered by the Saviour upon the cross ; and that by it,
offered by the Priest, the remission of the sins of the
whole church is obtained, and that the souls of the
departe4,.righjteoiiis are_refreshe_d^by this_sacrifice. 6 The
words, " Priest" and "Altar," are used in correspond
ence with this word sacrifice, to signify, the one, the
place on which the sacrifice is offered, and the other,
the sacrificer or the offerer up of the sacrifice which is
to be presented. 7
Our object, it will be remembered, is not so much to
show the disagreement of these views with the Word of
God, as to prove that they are not to be found in our
Communion Service. We are confident of making it
appear, not only that our Church rejects these gross and
sensual views of the Eucharist, but that throughout this
^ 4 Dr. Pusey s Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, p. 86.
* Dr. Pusey s Sermon on the Eucharist.
6 See Goode s Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, vol. ii., p. 11^3
et seq.
7 These views, and the multiplied proofs that they are correctly f\
represented, may be seen more at length in Goode s Divine Rulelt
of Faith and Practice, Dr. Stone s Mysteries Opened, and Bishop ?/
Hopkins s " Third Letter."
14
158 THE LORD S SUPPER.
service she contemplates and admits no other real pres
ence than that of Christ by his spirit in the hearts of the
communicants, or that of his now glorified body to the
view of faith, which ascends to meet him and embrace
him ; no other sacrifice than that of our prayers, praises,
services, and renewed vows of consecration ; no other
Altar than a Table figuratively called Altar, and no
other Priest than a Presbyter, sometimes called Priest in
the generic sense of a minister of God, but never in
a specific sense as the offerer of a sacrifice (sacerdos)
for sin.
In referring to the history of the Communion Service,
in proof of these positions, we shall show how carefully
any sanction of such views was avoided by the framers
of that service. 1. By the use which they made of the
ancient liturgies ; 2. By the care which they manifested,
on a revision of the Liturgy, to expel from it whatever
seemed to sanction such views ; 3. By reference to the
recorded opinions of those by whom the service was
framed, and of some others near to them in time, whose
testimony on the subject is regarded as authoritative;
and, 4. By an account of the views of our own Church
in the adoption of the Communion Service as it now
stands in our Book of Common Prayer.
I. That our Communion Service was framed in part
upon the model of the ancient liturgies, and, in some
parts, closely resembles them, has heen already inti
mated. A comparison, however, of the revised Liturgy
of Edward with those ancient liturgies, will show that,
in many particulars, the framers of that service deviated
from their example. They refused to adopt expressions
found in those offices, which appear to sanction the
views which we have described, lest they might seem to
THE LORD S SUPPER. 15SI
countenance errors against which their lives and deaths
were earnest protests and testimonies. Let us collect
some of the expressions of those liturgies which were
not adopted, or if at first adopted, were, on more mature
consideration of their tendencies, promptly excluded.
In the Clementine Liturgy, regarded as one of the
most pure and ancient, we find these petitions : " And
send down thy Holy Spirit, the witness of the sufferings
of the Lord Jesus, on this sacrifice, that he may make this
bread the body of thy Christ, and this cup the blood of
thy Christ" The rubric directs that the Bishop shall
give the oblation, saying, "The body of Christ; the!
blood of Christ; the cup of life." The Liturgy of St.
James has this expression : " We sinners offer to thee,
O Lord, this tremendous and unbloody sacrifice, beseech
ing thee," &c. ; also this petition : " Have mercy upon
us, O God, according to thy great mercy, and send down
upon these thy gifts which are here set before thee, thy
most Holy Spirit" In the same Liturgy is found the
following prayer for the dead : " Father, we offer to thee
for all the saints who have pleased thee from the begin
ning of the world, the Patriarchs, Prophets, Righteous
Men, Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors, Bishops, Priests and
Deacons, Sub-Deacons," &c. &c. In the Clementine
Liturgy a rubric directs that after the Bishops, Priests,
Deacons, &c., have communicated, then "afterwards the
children, and then all the people in order." In St.
James s Liturgy we find this language : " Then he takes
the cup and says, Likewise after Supper he took the
cup and mixed it with wine and water, and presenting it
to his God and Father, he gave thanks, and sanctified
and blessed it and filed it with the Holy Ghost." 1 v In
the Liturgy of St. Mark there i& a prayer for the dead 3*
the elements are signed with the sign of the cross ; the
1,60 THE LORD S SUPPER.
wine and water are said to be mixed ; of the cup it is
said that Christ " blessed it and filled it with the Holy
Ghost." The Liturgy of St. Chrysostom contains a
prayer that God would change the bread and wine by his
Holy Spirit; a commemoration of the Virgin Mary which
changes to an invocation to her in these words : " We
magnify thee, mother of God," and the burning of frank
incense before the Altar, with many other ceremonies
unknown to us. "After the Priest has received, he
decently and reverently wipes the holy cup and his own
lips with the veil, saying, This has touched my lips and
shall take away mine iniquities, and purge me from my
sins, now and evermore. " "The Deacon draws near,
and bending down once, says, 4 Behold,! draw near to the
immortal King. " The Priest says, "Thou, O Deacon,
the servant of God, receivest the precious and holy body
and Hood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for
the remission of sins and eternal life!" 8 The Liturgy
of St. Basil, and the Ethiopian Liturgy, contain many
similar expressions to those above extracted.
This very brief view of the ancient liturgies, will
suffice to show in how many and important particulars
our Church has, in her Communion Service, deviated from
their example. Whether all these expressions of the
ancient services are capable of a sense which harmonizes
with the Scripture doctrine, is not the point before us.
Our object is, to show how carefully they have been
avoided by the framers of our service, and that this fact
proves conclusively, that they rejected the views which
these expressions may be supposed to sanction. 9
I 8 Brett s Ancient Liturgies.
9 In Bishop Jewel s famous challenge to the Romanists, to find
a sentence out of any old Catholic doctor or father, or General J
THE LORD S SUPPER. 1C1
In these extracts from the ancient liturgies, we find
the prayer that God would change and make the ele
ments to be the body and blood of Christ. The bread
and wine are given as the body and blood of the Saviour
without any expression which intimates that they are so
only as a Sacrament or memorial. These expressions
are regarded by Romanists and the Oxford Tract writers
as favoring their view of the real presence. The elements
are presented as a tremendous and unbloody sacrifice,
and the touching of the lips to the wine is described as
purging sins and taking away iniquities. Here the doc
trine of the Eucharist, as a sacrifice for sin, seems
sanctioned. The words Altar and Priest are freely used
in these services in a way which has been avoided in our
own Liturgy, however capable it may be, as used in
those services, of being explained in harmony with our
own. It will be observed, also, that Christ was said to
have filled the cup with the Holy Ghost; that the dead
were commemorated in the prayer; that the Virgin was
magnified by invocation; that the wine of the Sacrament
was mixed with water; that children partook of the
Eucharist; that the elements were signed with the sign
Council or Holy Scripture," in favor of any one of twenty-seven
specified articles, we find the following: "That the Priest had
this authority to offer up Christ to the Father ; or that any Chris
tian man called the Sacrament his Lord and his God ; or that the
people were then taught to believe that the body of Christ remaineth
in the Sacrament as long as the accidents remain there without
corruption; or that the Sacrament is a si^n or token of the body
of Christ that lieth underneath it; or that whosoever said the
Sacrament was a figure, a pledge, a token, a remembrancer of
Christ s body, had, therefore, been adjudged for an heretic." This
challenge is a proof of the confidence of the Reformers that the
fathers, in the use of language strongly figurative and hyperbolical,
held the same views with themselves.
14*
162 THE LORD S SUPPER.
of the cross; and that frankincense was burned before
the altar.
Now turn to our Communion Service, and how different
is its language! how carefully has it avoided all ex
pressions which are liable to perversion ! how skilfully
has it separated what is pure and Scriptural in these
services, from what is error in its seed if not in its growth
and flowering! Instead of the prayer that the Holy
Spirit would change the elements and make them the
body and blood of Christ, the petition is, " Vouchsafe to
bless and sanctify with thy Word and Holy Spirit these
thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, [so called
after consecration] that we, receiving them according to
thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ s holy institution in
remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers
of his most blessed body and blood ! " The prayer is
not that the elements may be changed into Christ s
body and blood, but that God by his Word and Holy
Spirit would make them to us visible signs of inward
grace and seals of promised forgiveness, and of other
benefits of Christ s passion, that we may so partake of
them in this their consecrated, holy, spiritual character,
as to become partakers of Christ s body and blood. It is
not a prayer that the bread and wine should be made the
body and blood of Christ, but that we may partake his
body and blood as we receive their signs. When the
elements are distributed, it is with the injunction which
explains that they are not called Christ s body and blood.
" The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for
? thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life ! "
4 That is, May Christ crucified become your salvation !
f Take and eat this [bread, as it is called after the conse
cration] in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and
on him thus remembered, as the body feeds on
THE LORD S SUPPER. 163
this bread, in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving !"jtX
The real corporal presence receives not even seemingXJC
sanction in these words, as it may be supposed to do in*J*
the words of the Clementine Liturgy. Instead of the*
tremendous and unbloody sacrifice, the reception of which A
is described as taking away sin, no other sacrifice is
spoken of than a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, and jl
the living sacrifice of ourselves to God. Instead of the
wordAUar, the word Table is uniformly and carefully
adopted. There are no expressions which countenance
the idea that the Holy Ghost is joined to or mixed in the
element of wine ; no commemoration of the dead, nor
invocation to the Virgin; no mixing of water with the
wine ; no admission of children to the Eucharist ; no
signing of the elements with the sign of the cross, and no
offering of frankincense before the Altar. When we
remember the reverence of our Reformers for the fathers
of the Church, and their uniform assertion that their
testimony on the subject of the Eucharist, rightly under
stood, was in favor of their own views, it will give us a
high idea of their determined opposition to the errors we
have specified, to find that they have deviated from the
language of the fathers, whom they venerated so highly
because they deemed it, not essentially erroneous, but
liable to be perverted and misunderstood. 10
10 The difference between our Communion Service and the ancient
liturgies is sufficiently apparent from the history of the Non-Jurors,
as they were cabled, who, at the Revolution of 1688, refused to take j
the oaths of allegiance to William and Mary. A party of them
formed a new liturgy, partly on the model of the first book of
Edward, and partly on that of the ancient services, with the ex
pressed view of restoring to the English Church some of those fea
tures which we have noticed as contained in the early liturgies,
and not found in our own. The " usages" as they were called,
164 THE LORD S SUPPER.
II. The care which our Reformers manifested, on the
revision of the Liturgy, to exclude whatever appeared
consisted of four points; the mixing of water with the wine in the
Sacramental cup ; the commemorating of the faithful departed at
the Altar ; the consecration of the bread and wine, and the using
of the prayer of Oblation before distributing the elements. (In the
English service it follows the distribution ) Although our Amer
ican Book of Common Prayer has retained the two latter points
enumerated among the usages, it is in a different manner from
what they were found in the ancient services, as it will be seen
also that they differ from the same portions of the service in the
first book of King Edward.
As we have mentioned the Non-Jurors, we would remark that
there is a Prayer-Book composed by Deacon, the leader of the
separating Non-Jurors, which we should suppose would precisely
suit the Tractarian writers, who mourn over the mutilated condi-l
tion of our Liturgy, which Calvinistic hands have rifled as theyf
say of so many precious Catholic rites and usages.
This book was composed in 1734. It is called the Book of
Common Prayer. It has an order for Morning and Evening
Prayer. After it, there are prayers for the catechumens, the
energumens, the candidates for baptism, and the penitents. The
energumens were supposed to be possessed with evil spirits, and
prayers suitable to their condition are provided. Next follows
a penitential office, to be used by the faithful and penitents, on
Wednesdays and Fridays. Then follows the Communion Ser
vice. Besides the mixture of water with wine, the Priest is direct
ed to sign his forehead with the sign of the cross, and to administer
the elements to Deaconesses and infants, saying simply, (as in the
Clementine Liturgy,) " The body of Christ, and the blood of
I Christ, the cup of life." Chrism is used in Confirmation, and the
rite is ordered to be administered to infants. In Baptism, the form
of exorcism, the anointing with oil, and the trine immersion are
retained. Milk, honey, and white garments, were given to the
child. Deaconesses were to baptize females. There is a form for
consecrating milk and honey. There are collections for private
devotion, for morning and evening prayer, for the ancient hours
of prayer, and offices for daily private communion, and for the
commemoration of the dead.
LATHBURY S HISTORY OF THE NON- JURORS, p. 496.
THE LORD S SUPPER.
165
to sanction the views which we have spoken of as erro
neous, is another proof that they utterly and strongly
rejected them.
We need but briefly to repeat what has been said with
regard to the first formation of the Communion Service, i
The formularies of faith constructed under Cranmer s t
eye, during the reign of Henry VIII., all unequivocally MMMftK
assert the doctrine of Transubstantiation ; a doctrine
then held imdoublingly by Crunmer. From the first
Liturgy of Edward this doctrine was excluded. In that
Liturgy, however, there were expressions which, while
they could not be made, even seemingly, to sanction the
full Romish doctrine of Transubstantiation and sacrifice
for sin in the Eucharist, might be supposed to favor a
corporal presence in the elements, and a sacrifice other
than that of praise and thanksgiving and personal con
secration. The care with which these expressions were
modified or omitted, is conclusive evidence that such
views are designedly excluded from the Offices, as they
are from the Articles, of the Church.
In the first Communion Service of Edward, the word
Altar is repeatedly ..used in the rubrics, but is altogether
omitted in tlresecopd. In the Exhortation, to those who
are about to receive the Communion, there is found this
expression : " And to the end," &c., " he hath left in
those holy mysteries, as a pledge of his love, and a con
tinual remembrance of the same, his own blessed lody
and precious Hood for us to feed upon spiritually." Now
although the latter clause explains the method in which
we are to feed on Christ, in a way which excludes the
idea of a corporal local presence, yet as the body and
blood are said to be left in the holy mysteries, this lan
guage was omitted, and the sentence stands thus : " He I
hath instituted and ordained holy mysteries as pledges of J
166 THE LORD S SUPPER.
his love and continual remembrance of his death to our
great and endless comfort." The change is indicative of
a jealous scrutiny for the detection and exclusion of every
expression which might be supposed to convey the idea
of a corporal presence in the elements.
In the Exhortation, to those who are negligent to come
to the Communion, we find this expression : " For whom
(us his unworthy servants) he hath not only given his
body to death and shed his blood, but also doth vouch
safe, in a sacrament and mystery, to give us his said
body and blood." That the body and blood are given in
a sacrament and mystery in reality guards the expression
for a Romish sense ; but inasmuch as the expression the
said body, (referring to that which was crucified,) might
be misunderstood or perverted, it was altogether omitted,
and this simple expression substituted in its place : " He
t hath given his Son our Saviour Jesus Christ, not only to
die for us, but to be our spiritual food and sustenance."
The word corporas found in one of the rubrics a
word whose use in the Romish Church implies its recep
tion of a body in connection with the direction that the
bread be laid upon it, was omitted in the revision.
A commemoration of the Virgin Mary, and a prayer 4
**for the dead, is found in the prayer for the whole state of
****> pChrist s Church. It is as follows: "And here we do
give unto thee, most high praise and hearty thanks, for
the wonderful grace and virtue declared in all thy saints,
the beginning of the world, and chiefly in the
and most blessed Virgin Mary, mother of thy
Son Jesus Christ our Lord and God ; and in the holy
Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, and Martyrs, whose ex
amples, (O Lord,) and steadfastness in thy faith, and
keeping thy holy commandments grant us to follow. We
commend unto thy mercy, (O Lord,) all other thy ser-
|
j[
THE LORD S SUPPER. 167
vants, which are departed hence from us with the sign of
faith, and now do rest in the sleep of peace ; grant unto,
us, we beseech thee, thy mercy and everlasting peace;!
and, that, at the day of the general resurrection, we and,
all they which be of the mystical body of thy Son, may
altogether be set on his right hand, and hear that hisj
most joyful voice, Come unto me," &c. With a caution
we may regard as excessive, the revisers of the service
not only altogether omitted the commemoration of the
Virgin Mary and holy men, and the prayers for the dead,
but they excluded also that form of petition, now found
in the English service and our own, to which no objection
can be made "Beseeching thee to give us grace so toij
follow their good examples, that with them we may bejf
partakers of thy heavenly kingdom ! "
In the prayer of Consecration is this petition, " Hear
us, (O merciful Father,) we beseech thee, and with thy
Holy Spirit and Word vouchsafe to bl-|-ess and sanc-f-dfy
these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they
may be unto us the body and Mood of thy most dearly
beloved Son Jesus Christ." The language is changed]
from a petition that the elements may be to us the body
and blood of Christ, into a prayer that we may so receive i
them " the creatures of bread and wine" " that weft
may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood."
After the Consecration the Oblation and Invocation
follow in the first book of Edward. The revised book
contains the Consecration with the omission which\
we have mentioned but omits the Oblation, and has
placed the Invocation after the distribution of the ele
ments. To the latter fact, we shall have occasion to
refer as conclusive of the point, that the framers of the
Liturgy contemplated no other sacrifice than that of
praise and thanks and vows.
168 THE LORD S SUPPER.
Immediately before the invitation to the communicants
to draw near and make their humble confession, there
are found in the first service these words :
Then the Priest shall say, The peace of the Lord be
with you.
The Clerks. And with thy spirit.
The Priest. Christ, our Paschal Lamb, is offered up
for us, once for all when he bare our sins in his body
on the cross ; for he is the very Lamb of God, that taketh
away the sins of the world ; wherefore let us keep a
joyful and holy feast with the Lord." For what object
these words were omitted, we cannot tell, unless it were
to remove expressions which might be explained to favor
I the idea of a feast upon a sacrifice; an idea intimately
connected in the minds of many with the doctrine of an
Jeucharistic offering for sin.
We have before adverted to the fact, that, upon the
distribution of the elements, they were presented with
these words only : " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ,
which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul
unto everlasting life. The blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and
soul unto everlasting life." At the revision of the service,
these words were omitted, and this form adopted : " Take
and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee,
and feed on him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving."
" Drink this in remembrance that Christ s blood was
/shed for thee and be thankful." It is well known that
j^the change was made from an apprehension, that the first
j form would tend to countenance and keep up in the minds
of the people an idea of a corporal presence of Christ in
l(the Sacrament. The two forms were connected at a
subsequent revision under Elizabeth, because the latter
THE LORD S SUPPER. 169
clauses were regarded as forming an explanation of the
meaning of the former. ^TftttM^HT ^ &**+f*
In the offering of thanks after all had communicated,
this absolute form of expression was adopted: "We
most heartily thank thee, that thou hast vouchsafed to
i
feed us in these holy mysteries with the spiritual food of I *
the most precious body and blood of thy Son our Saviour!
Jesus Christ." This language might be interpreted to
import that all the partakers had actually fed upon the
body and blood of the Saviour, whether they had exercised
faith or not, and thus to imply a presence of Christ, " in
dependent of faith." This expression significant of a
%design to express the opposite sentiment was intro-
duced : " That thou dost vouchsafe to feed us, who have
duly received these holy mysteries, with the spiritual food
of the most precious body and blood of thy Son our
Saviour Jesus Christ." ll
11 The astounding assertion of Palmer, (on the Church, vol. i.,
p. 475,) that " it appears then that during the reign of Edward VI.,
the Church made no alteration in doctrine, [from that of the for
mularies of Henry VIII.,] except in leaving the mode of the real
presence in the Eucharist undetermined," has been well exposed
by Bishop Hopkins, in his " Third Letter." It is true, that Mr.
Palmer afterwards strangely changes his language after this sort :
R" Altogether I do not see that there is any very great contradiction
Jbetween these two formularies, [the XXXIX Articles and the
J Necessary Doctrine,] in matters of doctrine." This latter ex-
pression we can hardly reconcile with the former. By the first
sentence it is declared, that " the Church made no alteration in.
<f doctrine, except" &c.; while, by the latter, it is admitted that
iCthere is contradiction, though not a very great one. Of degrees of
contradiction, Tractarian writers may be able to form some con
ception, but the rest of the world know nothing. If the Articles be
contradictory to the Necessary Doctrine, they are contradictory f
and that is the end of it. I suppose we are to reconcile the two
assertions of Mr. Palmer, in the same way that he reconciles these
two opposite formularies of faith, by the eminently Tractarian
15
170 THE LORD S SUPPER.
Upon a review of these changes from the first service
of Edward, introduced into the second, which was pub
lished but three years after, nothing can be clearer than
the fact of the determination of the framers of the Liturgy
not only to bring down the upas tree of Romanism, but
.to root out its minutest fibres from the soil, that it might
not sprout again in the garden of the Lord, and cast
blight and death over the tree of righteousness which
their hands had planted. After those giant men had,
with panting and earnest blows, cut through the close-
grained trunk, the compact growth of centuries, and
brought it, with a crash that startled the nations, to the
ground, and with efforts of herculean strength moved off
the broken and heavy limbs, and the rotten rubbish
the nests of foul birds on its topmost boughs they
addressed themselves with patient labor to grub out the
clinging and tangled roots of error, each fibre of which
was instinct with an evil life. How thorough and suc
cessful their labors were, our Liturgy is the witness.
They have removed every expression which appears to
imply a presence of Christ s body in the elements, or any
presence of that body in the Sacrament other than a
presence to the faith of the recipient. They have re
moved every expression which might be worried into a
reluctant witness that the doctrine of the offering up of
the elements, or the performance of the whole service, 12
explanation that there is no very great contradiction between them.
It is this principle of" no very great contradiction" and " non-natu
ral sense" which enables learned and subtle men to eat the bread
iof the Church, against which they lift up their heel. Shame upon
Jthem !
12 Bishop Hopkins (Third Letter) has shown, that when we
speak of the Sacrament as consisting of both the outward sign
and inward grace, we may speak of Christ s real presence in t
"HE
THE LORD S SUPPER. 171
was a sacrifice propitiatory or impetratory for the sins of It
the living, or refreshing to the spirits of the departed, h
There is no commemoration of or prayer for the dead. II
The Romish doctrine of the Eucharist is not there either Jl
in its development, or its principle.
It will be observed, that hitherto we have made but
slight allusion to the terms Priest and AJtar, and the
erroneous doctrine connected with, and fostered by their
free and unexplained use. We have felt it the less
necessary from the conviction that if the doctrine of aj
real, in the sense of corporeal, presence, either in the >
r Sacrament, that is, his presence to the hearts of the faithful. In
this sense it was that Cranmer professed his belief in the presence
of Christ at the Sacrament. " When I used to speak sometimes-
as the old authors do, that Christ is in the Sacraments, I mean the
same as they did understand the matter; that is, not of Christ s
arnal presence in the outward Sacrament, but sometimes of hisj
.cramental presence, and sometimes by this word Sacrament, Ij
mean the whole ministration and receiving of the Sacraments either
of Baptism or of the Lord s Supper. And so the old writers many
times do say that Christ and the Holy Ghost be present in the
Sacraments not meaning by that manner of speech that Christ and
the Holy Ghost be present in the water, bread, and wine, (which*
be only the outward visible Sacraments,) but in the due ministra
tion of the Sacraments, according to Christ s ordinance and insti
tution, Christ and his Holy Spirit be truly and indeed present by
this mighty and sanctifying power, virtue, and grace, IN ALL THEM?;
THAT WORTHILY RECEIVE THE SAME." What is here said of the
presence of Christ may be applied also to the sacrifice of the
Eucharist. We have shown that the whole ministration of the
Sacrament, the offering of alms and prayers, and the gifts of
bread and wine, and the celebration of the Lord s Supper, is
called a sacrifice, but it is a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving.
The above extract from Cranmer is exceedingly valuable, as f
showing in the preface to his book on the Sacrament, what is his
meaning throughout. The next chapter contains extracts from^
the book itself, which confirms the view which he here expresses.
172 THE LORD S SUPPER.
elements or in the communicants, and that of a sacrifice
available to atone for sin, or avert wrath, or benefit the
living and the dead, were proved to be ungrounded, the
connected errors of a sacrificing Priesthood and an Altar
of propitiation and atonement would fall with them. As
the attempt, however, has sometimes been made, by con
founding the functions of the Jewish and Christian Priest
hood, to fix upon the latter a character which made a
sacrifice necessarily connected with his office, it will be
proper to devote a few pages to the consideration of the
office and function of the Gospel Priest.
The ambiguity and fluctuation of language has on this,
as on so many other subjects, caused much confusion.
The word Priest is used, sometimes in a more general
tand sometimes in a more specific sense. Attention to
[this circumstance will tend to clear up the subject to our
Iminds.
Under every dispensation, God has employed and em
powered some men on his behalf to speak in his name,
and make known his message to the world, and to offer
up, in the name of the people, their sacrifices, prayers,
It praises, and thanksgivings. At first, the head of every
family discharged this office. This was the arrangement
until the establishment of the Jewish dispensation. Then
the tribe of Levi was set apart for the sacred office of
ministering to men on behalf of God, and of offering
homage and sacrifice and prayer to God on behalf of
man. When Christ came, the office of this class of
commissioned agents for God ceased. A third class of
divinely commissioned Ministers, not belonging to the
tribe of Levi, were then sent forth, with power to per
petuate their succession, as the servants and messengers
of God to the people. All these classes agreed in this,
that they were agents and messengers of God to men.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 173
They differed, however, in the mode of discharging that
agency, as they stood before or after Christ. The first
two classes being both before Christ, agreed essentially
in the mode of their ministration, and differed chiefly in
the facts that the first class consisted of all the heads of
families, whereas the latter were taken from a single
tribe, and that the duties of the latter were prescribed with
minute particularity in a divinely revealed and divinely
obligatory ritual of service, whereas no such minute
directions were given to the former.
The Ministers of God after Christ, differed in the mode
of their ministration from those who were before him.
Not that they had nothing in common even in the modes
of their ministration, but that the prominent features of
those modes were diverse. They both, for instance,
" taught the people " God s Word. But the prominent
work of the Jewish Minister of God was, that he should
offer up and be occupied with the services connected with
the offering up of a sacrifice to God for the sins of the
people. He presented constant sacrifices for the expia
tion of the violation of the ceremonial law, and for the
remission, in some cases, of the penalties annexed to the
violation of the moral law. The prominent work of the
latter was to preach and teach "the Gospel of the king
dom." The one was to set forth a coming Saviour, and
the salvation which he was to bring, by outward and
typical signs, sacrifices, and ceremonies. His chief
work was to offer sacrifice. The other was to show
forth, by proclaiming, a Saviour who had come and gone.
His chief work was to preach. The one was to teach
chiefly by the outward action of sacrifice; the other,,
chiefly by word. Now as the mode of ministration orr
the part of these two classes of God s commissioned
agents was different, so were their titles. The one class
15*
174 THE LORD S SUPPER.
were called Priests. The other were called Ambassa
dors, Apostles, Heralds, Elders, Prophets, Evangelists,
Teachers, all words expressive of proclaiming and teach
ing. Alike in this, that they were both commissioned
agents on the part of God to treat with man, they differed
in this, that the chief function of the one was to offer up
sacrifices, and of the other to present, in teaching, the
great truth which was glad tidings alike to Jew and
Gentile.
To sacrifice, then, is peculiar to a Priesthood, except
when the term is used in a figurative sense ; and to "
preach and administer the Sacraments (a more impres
sive preaching) is peculiar to the Gospel Ambassador
ship. 13
13 The great Lord Bacon, whose mind embraced all sciences,
and detected the sources of error with wonderful acuteness, has!
thus given his opinion upon the use of the word Priest: " That the|
word Priest should not be continued, especially with offence, the!
word Minister being already made familiar. This may be said J
that it is a good rule, in translation, never to confound that in one!
word in the translation, which is precisely distinguished in twoj
words in the original, for doubt of equivocation and traducing.!
And, therefore, seeing the word HQta()vTiQo? and itQtvg be always;
distinguished in the original, and the one used for a sacrifaer, and
the other for a Minister ; the word Priest being made common to
both, whatsoever the derivation be, yet in use it confoundeth the
Minister with the sacrificer."
LORD BACON S WORKS, vol. ii., p. 426.
The essence of the Priesthood has been defined by one as a
ministerial intervention for the forgiveness of sins, and by another,
as ministerial intervention for the salvation of man. The former is I
an imperfect, and the latter a complete definition, it seems to us, of|
the essence, not of Priesthood, but of all ministerial agency on the?
part of those who are commissioned by God to convey to man thej
terms and method of pardon and salvation. Of this commissioned
agency, whose character is ministerial intervention for the forgive
ness of sin and the salvation of man, Priesthood is one species,
THE LORD S SUPPER. 175
It would lead us much too far should we enter into
detailed proof of these positions. Let it suffice to call
the reader s atteniion to two facts which speak a clear
and loud testimony on this subject. The first is the fact
that when Christ first sent the Apostles forth, it was with
.the injunction, " And as ye go, preacli, saying, The king
dom of heaven is at hand ; " and when he gave to them
their final commission, it was that they should go and
teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The other fact, still
more remarkable, is, that the Apostles and those whom
they commissioned, are never called Priests in the New
Ambassadorship is another. To sacrifice is the peculiar and
prominent duty of the one; to preach, the prominent function of
the other.
In confirmation of the second definition of Priesthood, that its
essence is intervention for man s salvation, it seems to us not by
any means conclusive to quote the passage in Hebrews, (v. 1,)
that a "Priest is ordained for men in things pertaining to God."
This language occurs in a description of the office of the Jewish
Priesthood, arid is spoken of the High Priest. It is not used in
reference to what is specially characteristic of Priesthood as such,
but of what is applicable indeed to the Jewish Priesthood, but to
that in common with every other species of commissioned agency
for man from God. For if we limit its application to the High
Priest of whom it is spoken, then it excludes the Christian Min
istry from this character, an exclusion not intended by the author
who has quoted the passage.*
It seems to us that much confusion on this subject has arisen
from assuming that every commissioned agency from God is a
Priesthood that such is the generic name which belongs to such
a commission and then gathering the functions which were
peculiar to one class of Ministers for God, the Jewish, and trans
ferring them over to another class, the Christian. Each has its
appropriate character and office. The one was abolished when
the other was introduced.
* Two Lectures on the terms, Priest, Altar, and Sacrifice. Bal timer 1843.
176 THE LORD S SUPPER.
Testament. When we recollect that these Apostles were
all Jews, we can find the explanation of this remarkable
fact only in the supposition that they were divinely re
strained by the Spirit, from the use of a term to which
they were so much accustomed, but which designated a
Ministry which had passed away. It appears surprising,
inasmuch as they had known no Ministry of God, but
that of a Priesthood, that they should never have used,
even by way of accommodation, the term appropriated
to the Ministry under one dispensation, to designate them
under another. And what adds to the significant singu
larity of this fact is, that in the single instance 14 in which
the word Priesthood occurs in an accommodated or
figurative sense, it is used with reference not to the
Ministry, but to the faithful disciples of the Saviour.
Such being the facts with regard to the Word of God,
we turn to the Book of Common Prayer. There we
find the word Priest freely used. It is acknowledged
by all, that, in a majority of cases, it is used as an
abbreviation for the word Presbyter, the second of the
three divinely constituted orders of the sacred Ministry.
But, in other cases, it has been contended that it has
another sense, as descriptive of a function which can
only be expressed by the word priestly, as contradis
tinguished from the function appropriate to the Presbyter,
as the second order of the Ministry. Now, if by this it
were meant that in our Prayer-Book the word Priest and
Priesthood were sometimes used to designate that general
Ministry in behalf of God, which Priests under the law,
and Presbyters under the Gospel, alike discharge; or
that these words were figuratively employed to describe
the duties of the Ministry under the Gospel by those
14 1 Peter ii. 5, 9.
177
under the law, we should not be anxious to contro
vert such a position. This extended and figurative use
of a word, originally applied with a narrower meaning,
is common in all speech, human and inspired. We do
not believe, however, that even such a use of the term is
to be found in the Book of Common Prayer. We are
fully persuaded that wherever the term occurs, it has
reference to the second order of the Ministry, and to the
functions appropriate to that order as contradistinguished
from that of the Diaconate. That it is used in the
Prayer-Book to designate any function which is not
appropriate and peculiar to the Presbyter ; that it is used
in such an extended meaning as to take in any of the
functions peculiar to the Jewish Priesthood, as a specific
Priesthood, we do not grant.
" The rubric before the forms of Absolution and the
larger Benediction, and the Office for the administration
of the Holy Communion, and that of the Institution of
Ministers into Churches," have been adduced as in
stances in which the word Priest is used with reference
not to the functions which are appropriate to the Presby
ter, but in reference to what may be rightfully consid
ered " priestly acts," or " sacerdotal functions."
We have already shown that the word Minister stood
in the rubric before the form of Absolution, and that its
change to the word Priest, however it may have occurred,
was unauthorized. This shows, even at a time when the
minds of our Reformers had not become fully emanci
pated from the prejudices of their Romish education, that
jthey did not regard the declaration of Absolution as a
jpriestly act, and that they did regard it as a ministerial
fact. It may have been innocently introduced, with the
intention of making a distinction between the Exhortation
and Confession, which might be said by a Deacon, and
178 THE LORD S SUPPER.
the solemn form of declarative Absolution, which, on
account of the lower office of a Deacon, there was a
propriety in confining to the Presbyter.
The larger Benediction is to be pronounced by the
Priest ; or Bishop, if he be present. This has been sup
posed to be an act not appropriate to the Presbyter as
such, or to the Bishop as such, but of another kind,
belonging to each in a higher or different character, and
partaking of the characteristics which were peculiar to
the Priesthood. It is obvious to remark, in reply to this,
that a Bishop does not cease to be a Presbyter, and to
perform all the functions peculiar to that office, because,
in his character of Bishop, he has other powers conferred
upon him. 15
In the Institution Office, it must be granted that the
word Priest is used in many instances as synonymous
with the word Presbyter. The Institutor, for instance, is
sometimes called Presbyter, and sometimes Priest. But
inasmuch as the terms, "sacerdotal function," and
" sacerdotal relation," occur in this service, they have
been supposed to designate an act of a specifically
priestly character. We have expressed the belief that
the word Priest is never used, even in an extended or
figurative sense, as descriptive of the Gospel Ministry.
Here, however, the words sacerdotal function terms
synonymous with priestly function, in the Jewish sense
must be used either in a figurative, or literal sense.
If it be used in a literal sense, then our interpretation of
this whole subject has been wrong. Then the Ministry
of the New Testament, according to our Prayer-Book, is
a Priesthood in another sense than that of being a Pres-
15 " The Elders among you I exhort, who am also an Elder ^
says St. Peter the Apostle, (I Peter v. 1.)
THE LORD S SUPPER. 179
bytership. How else shall we decide this point, than by
examining what the service specifies as belonging to what
is here called a " sacerdotal function 1 "
We venture to say that there is not a syllable in the
enumeration of the functions thus designated, which
extends them beyond what is either appropriate to the
Presbyter, or common to every Minister of God ; not a
word which expresses any thing peculiar to that specific
kind of ministration which belongs to a Priesthood. He
is " to feed the flock ; " he is " to dispense the Word, to
lead the devotions of the people, [not make offerings
for them,] to exercise discipline, and to be a pattern to
the flock committed to his care." That it is only in a
figurative or accommodated sense that this term is em
ployed, is evident from this enumeration of what is
included in the sacerdotal function, and also from the
second Collect after the anthem, in which the Ministers
of Apostolic succession are mentioned in connection with
the offering up of the sacrifice of prayer and praise. If
the sacrifice were other than figurative, the ministry would
have been called an Apostolic Priesthood. Conversely,
if the sacerdotal function mentioned had been used in
other than a figurative or accommodated sense, the duties
specified as belonging to that function would have been
other and more than those which belong to the Presbyter.
With regard to the use of the word Priest, in the
Communion Office, it is sufficient to refer to what has
been said upon the subject of a sacrifice, and without
which there can be no Priest. That the celebration of
the Holy Communion should be limited to Presbyters and
Bishops, is in accordance with its Scriptural institution
and Scriptural usage.
The word Altar has been shown to have been banished
from the Communion Service altogether, and, therefore,
180 THE LORD S SUPPER.
does not, on this occasion, call for more extended
examination. Our Church has not sanctioned, but has
set the seal of her disapprobation on its use, in any sense,
in connection with the Communion Service. The injunc
tion of Bishop Ridley was, that " the Lord s board should
be after the manner of an honest board, and not of an
altar, that the simple may be turned from the old super
stitious opinions of the Popish Mass, and to the right use
of the Lord s Supper." The use of the word in the
Institution Office is too manifestly an accommodated one,
to call for remark.
The two doctrines of the Eucharist which we have
presented in this chapter are essentially diverse. They
proceed on different views of the nature of the Gospel, of
the office of the Ministry, and the design of the Sacra
ments. The one regards the Gospel as a system of
TRUTH, which, by means of the written and preached
Word and the Ordinances, the Spirit takes, presents to,
fixes upon, and burns into the very substance of the soul.
By this it is convicted, converted, and sanctified. The
other does not regard the truth of Scripture as the chief
instrument of the Spirit in its work upon the human soul,
but supposes the Sacraments to be filled and instinct with
grace, residing in them by God s appointment, and con
veyed to the souls of those who receive them from the
hands of the divinely commissioned administrators. The
one regards the Ministry as the dispenser of the Word of
Life in preaching and in Sacraments. The other regards
it as a vehicle of grace, connecting on to an unbroken
succession of such, from the time of Christ, the primal
source of grace, by which the Sacraments, else forms
void of life, become sources of spiritual influence. The
one regards the Sacraments as signs of grace and seals
of covenanting mercy, the right reception of which
THE LORD S SUPPER. 181
secures directly from God the full blessing which they
guarantee, and the full grace they signify. The other
regards them, when administered by the divinely com
missioned Ministry, as that in which grace inheres, and
from which it is derived to the hearts of the recipients.
The one brings the heart directly to God as the source
of grace; the other interposes the Sacraments which
hold gathered grace for all, whence it is distributed to
each by the commissioned dispensers of the same.
These varying views of the very nature of the Gospel,
the design of the Ministry and office of the Sacraments,
branch off into widely different developments of the
intent of each Sacrament, and the meaning of its details.
The error of regarding Sacraments, not as institutions on
God s part, by which he testifies of promised grace on
conditions, and as acts on our part by which we signify
our grateful reception of such promised grace by the
fulfilment of the conditions specified, and which, when
thus received, are the occasions and instruments of
bringing the soul to God, to receive immediately from
him, and not from them, spiritual gifts and graces ; but
rather as the reservoir of grace interposed between the
fountain head and them, whence each is to derive it to
his own soul ; this is the root of error which is germinant
of sensual views, which rob the soul of its spiritual
portion. From supposing the grace to be fixed in the
Sacrament; from regarding " the cup as filled with the
Holy Ghost," and the bread as holding divine influence
within itself; the transition is not difficult to the grosser
view of the bodily presence in the elements the
presence of a body, natural or spiritual, but still of a real
body, as contradistinguished from a body present only
by sacrament and symbol. Rome stands forth as an
example of the fruit of such teaching. If we would not
reap her harvest, we must not sow her seed !
IX.
QL\]e Sorb s Supper.
CONCLUDED.
III. WHAT degree of importance should be attached to
the teachings of Cranmer and Ridley, and the Reformers
who were associated with them, as individual doctors of
the Catholic Church of Christ, in our search after the true
interpretation of the Word of God, is a question upon
which there may be great differences of opinion. It
would seem, however, that there could be but one senti
ment as to the decisive weight of their testimony, when
we inquire after the meaning of those articles and offices
which they themselves composed. Had there been, in
the circumstances in which they were placed, any con
trolling influences which would have compelled or in
duced them permanently to have embodied in the for
mularies and offices of the English Church, sentiments
repugnant to their own, there might be some reason to
look with suspicion upon their individual writings as the
true key to the interpretation of the public services which
they framed. But when those services were revised and
shaped into their present form, there were no such in
fluences. Cranmer and Ridley, and their associates, had
the management of ecclesiastical affairs in their own
hands. They were no longer overawed by the stern
and peremptory tyrant, Henry. They were the guides
of the pious and thoroughly Protestant boy, King Edward.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 183
They were at perfect liberty to introduce into the Liturgy
every truth which they believed to be of God, from the
least important to the most fundamental. 1 While they
1 That there were those among: the commissioners appointed to
examine and amend the offices of the Church, who were opposed to
the views of Cranmer and Ridley, there is no doubt. (Burnet, ii. 99.)
That the Archbishop, from prudential considerations, abstained
from making, in the first book of Edward, the complete change
in the Communion Service which he contemplated, is also highly
probable. If so, it is an evidence of his moderation and wisdom.
The discussions at Cambridge and elsewhere, which were held
between the formation of the service and its revision, enlightened
and prepared the public mind to receive the service purged of all
Romish corruptions. That Cranmer had a controlling influence
on both occasions is perfectly evident. Palmer (on the Church,
vol. i., 465-91) speaks as if the doctrinal views of the standards of
Henry VIII. were continued on unmodified during the reign of
Edward, and that whatever Cranmer may have written as " a
private theologian," has no decisive weight in ascertaining the
doctrine of the Church of England. The attempt to deny or dis
guise Cranmer s controlling influence in modeling the Liturgy of
the Church of England, and to make it appear that the doctrinal
standards of the Church remained unchanged under Edward as
they were under Henry, is one of the hardiest experiments on the
presumed ignorance of his readers, of which we have ever known
a respectable author guilty. Says Le Bas, (Life of Cranmer, vol.
i., 256,) " To assign to every individual engaged his proper share
in this glorious performance, (the Liturgy,) would be an impossible
attempt ; but it lias never been doubted, that Cranmer was the life
and soul of the undertaking ; and it is highly probable that Ridley
and Goodrich were his most effective auxiliaries, and that Hoi-
beach, May, Taylor, Haynes, and Cox, all of them men of dis
tinguished ability and learning, continued throughout to aid the
compilation." This refers to the first Liturgy. Strype gives the
same testimony with regard to the second. At the disputation at
Oxford, in 1554, by Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer, on the one side,
and Weston and other Romanists on the other, the charge was
made by Weston, that "a renegate Scot took away the adoration
or worshipping of Christ in the Sacrament." Strype remarks,
184 THE LORD S SUPPER.
so constructed the formularies as to give them, in matters
unessential, that comprehensiveness which is indispensable
in standards intended for a national Church, they admitted
nothing which they believed to be contrary to the Word
of God. When we recollect that the greater part of their
writings which remain, were composed expressly to de
fend or explain the doctrines of the Book of Common
Prayer, we surely are authorized in resorting to them for
the purpose of explaining the meaning of its articles and
offices. If the fathers of the Church are regarded as the,
best interpreters of the meaning of the Scriptures, because
being nearest to them in time, they are most likely to
have known the mind of the sacred writers ; we may at
least grant to the fathers of the Reformation, that they
are the best interpreters of their own productions, being,
as we suppose, best acquainted with their own mind and
meaning.
In collecting the testimony of these venerable men, we
shall select such passages, chiefly, as have reference to
the real presence of Christ and to the sacrifice of the
Eucharist. If their testimony on these two points shall
be found to be clear, there will be little need of showing
their sense of the Priesthood and the Altar ; doctrines
which stand or fall with those of the bodily presence and
the sacrifice.
Cranmer has himself informed us of the workings of
his mind on this subject. " There are few readers," says
Dr. Wadsworth, 2 "who will not admire the sober and
" but there was no Scot that ever I could read or hear of that
assisted at the review of that Communion book. And indeed
Cranmer, Ridley and Cox were the chief that managed that affair,
though they consulted with Bucer and Peter Martyr."
MEMORIALS, vol. iii., p. 117.
2 EcclesiasticaVBiography, vol. i., p. 186.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 185
pious language of this excellent man, on occasion of its
being objected to him by Dr. Richard Smith, that he had
maintained in his short instruction in Christian religion,
printed in 1548, the doctrine of the carnal presence.
After denying the truth of Smith s allegation, he thus
proceeds : 4 But this I confess of myself, that not long
before I wrote the said Catechism, I was in that error of
the real presence, as I was many years past, in divers
other errors, as of Transubstantiation, 3 of the sacrifice
propitiatory in the Mass, and many other superstitions and
errors that came from Rome, being brought up from my
youth in them, and nourished in them for lack of good
instruction in my youth ; the outrageous floods of papisti
cal errors at that time overflowing the world. For which
and other mine offences in youth, I do daily pray unto
God for mercy and pardon, saying, " Good Lord, remem
ber not mine ignorances and offences of my youth ! "
" But after it had pleased God to show unto me by his
holy Word a more perfect knowledge of his Son Jesus
Christ, from time to time, as I grew in knowledge of him,
by little and little I put away my former ignorance.
And as God of his mercy gave me light, so, through
his grace, I opened my eyes to receive it, and did not
wilfully repugn unto God and remain in darkness. "
The work in which this change of view, especially on
the subject then most discussed, is brought forth, is thus
described by Mr. Le Bas : " The first part contains an
exposition of the true doctrine of the Eucharist, and a
brief enumeration of the various abuses by which it had
been corrupted. The second part is devoted to the
subject of Transubstantiation ; and its object is to show
* Here we observe, that Cranmer distinguishes the error of the
real presence from that of Transubstantiation, and disclaims both.
16*
186 THE LORD S SUPPER.
that the notion is contradictory to the Word of God, to
the reason and senses of man, and to the belief of the
ancient fathers of the Church. The third part explains
the meaning of the assertion that Christ is present in the
Holy Supper ; and its object is to show that as our re
generation in Christ by Baptism is spiritual, even so our
eating and drinking is a spiritual feeding ; which kind of
regeneration and feeding requires no real and corporeal
presence of Christ, but only his presence in spirit, grace,
and effectual operation. " 4 This description of an im
partial historian, confirmed by an extract from the great
work concerning which he writes, is, itself, evidence of
the highest kind for the position which we aim to
establish.
Let it be remarked, that while Cranmer and the Re
formers rejected Transubstantiation and a real presence
of the natural body and blood, or of the glorified spiritual
body 5 of Christ, they yet spoke without hesitation of his
body and blood as present at the Sacrament, and as really
partaken of by the faithful communicant. 6 It excites
no surprise to find those who framed our service using
such language, since we find it also, agreeably to the
Scriptural phraseology, freely adopted in our Communion
Office. There are at least four different senses in
which Christ s presence is frequently and familiarly ad-
4 Le Bas s Life of Cranmer, vol. ii., p. 50.
5 In the sense of St. Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 44, where he speaks of the
risen body as a spiritual body.
6 In my book I have written in more than a hundred places that
we receive the selfsame body of Christ that was born of the
Virgin Mary, that was crucified and buried, that rose again,
ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the
Father Almighty ; and the contention is only in the manner and
form how we receive it. CRANMER ON THE SACRAMENT, p. 370.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 187
mitted. 1. He is spoken of as present, because he is
present, in Sacrament or by symbol. Hence the bread
and wine are called his sacramental body and blood ;
language which does not imply that it is a new kind of
body, a nameless, tertium quid existence, called a sacra
mental body, but that it is a body only sacramentally or
symbolically. 2. Christ s body is said to be present by
its " grace " or " virtue ; " that is, by its redeeming and
sanctifying efficacy. 3. Christ is said to be present in
the Sacrament, as a whole service, in the sense of being
present by his Spirit, not in the elements, but in the
hearts of the believing and repenting recipients. These
are two methods of expressing a sense substantially the
same. 4. Christ s body is described as being present
to the believer, not because it comes down with a local or
non-local 7 presence, but because the believer s faith
ascends to it in heaven, and feeds on it, as the all of sal
vation and of life. In such sense was the expression,
" lift up your hearts," and the answer, " we do lift them
up to the Lord," repeatedly explained both by the fathers
and the Reformers.
We do not hesitate to say that whenever the Reformers
speak of the real presence of Christ, it will be found that
one of these senses is necessarily imposed upon the
expression by the immediate context or by other portions
of their writings.
We have already quoted one passage from Cranmer
in which he explains what his own meaning is throughout
his work on the Sacrament. Here is another consisting
of a part of his examination before the commissioners at
Oxford.
" Now as concerning the Sacrament, I have taught no
See Tract XC.
188 THE LORD S SUPPER.
false doctrine of the Sacrament of the Altar ; for if it
can be proved by any doctor above a thousand years after
Christ, that Christ s body is there really, I will give over.
My book was made seven years ago, and no man hath
brought any answer against it. I believe that he who so
eateth and drinketh that Sacrament, Christ is within him,
whole Christ, his nativity, passion, resurrection, and
ascension, but not that corporally that sitteth in heaven." e
Here Christ is described as within the believer, but not
really or corporally. The truth and the benefit of his
nativity, passion, resurrection, and ascension, which
could be only within the soul, and by faith, are within
the believer. This is the spiritual presence of Christ in
the believer s heart.
The same signification is perceived to belong to the
term really in the following passage : " As for this word
really, in such a sense as you expound it (that is to say,
not in phantasy and imagination, but verily and truly,) so
I grant that Christ is really not only in them that duly
receive the Sacrament of the Lord s Supper, but also in
them that, duly receive the Sacrament of Baptism, and in
all other true Christian people at other times when they
receive no Sacrament" 9 Christ s presence " in those who
duly receive Baptism," and " in true Christian people
when they receive no Sacrament," is that presence of
which St. Paul speaks, when he prays that " Christ may
dwell" in the hearts of the Ephesians, "by faith" By
really it is plain Cranmer does not mean corporally.
But we will arrange our quotations from him in such
order as to show that it is in one of the four senses above
8 Wadsworth, Eccl. Biography, vol. i., p. 218.
9 Cranmer on the Sacrament of the Lord s Supper, (Parker
Society Edition,) p. 140.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 189
specified, that this master-builder of the Communion
Service always speaks of the presence of Christ.
1. Christ is described as sacramentally present in the
following passages :
44 And as before is at length declared, a figure hath the
name of a thing that is signified thereby. As a man s
image is called a man, a lion s image a lion, a bird s
image a bird, and an image of a tree and herb is called
a tree or herb ; so were we wont to say our lady of
Walsingham, our lady of Ipswich, our lady of
grace, 1 our lady of pity, St. Peter of Milan, and
St. James of Amias, and such like; not meaning the
things themselves, but calling their images by the name
of the things by them represented." " So doth John
Chrysostom say, that we see Christ with our eyes ; touch
him ; feel him ; grope him with our hands ; fix our teeth
in his flesh ; taste it, break it, eat it, and digest it ; make
red our tongues and dye them with his blood, and swallow
it, and drink it."
44 And in a Catechism by me translated and set forth,
I used like manner of speech, that with our bodily
mouths we receive the body and blood of Christ. Which
my sayihg, divers ignorant persons, not used to read old
ancient authors, nor acquainted with their phrase and
manner of speech, did carp and reprehend for lack of
good understanding." 10
This passage has a threefold value. It proves how
readily Cranmer spoke of the symbol as if it were that
which it signified ; it shows in what manner he under
stood the strongest expressions of the fathers which
appeared to imply a bodily presence ; and it conclusively
vindicates him from the charge of having been a Consub-
10 Cranmer on the Sacrament, 225, 226.
190
stantiationist at the time he translated and published the
German Catechism of Justas Jonas.
" The bread and wine be not Christ s very body and
blood, but they be figures which by Christ s institution be
unto the godly receivers thereof sacraments, tokens,
significations and representations of his very flesh and
blood ; instructing their faith, that as the bread and wine
feed them corporally and continue this temporal life, so
the very flesh and blood of Christ feedeth them spiritually,
and giveth them everlasting life." n
" And although Christ in his human nature, substan
tially, really, corporally, naturally, and sensibly, be
present with his Father in heaven, yet, sacramentally
and spiritually, he is here present. For in water, bread,
and wine, he is present, as in signs and sacraments, but
he is indeed spiritually in those faithful Christian people,
who, according to Christ s ordinance, be baptized, or
receive the Holy Communion, or unfeignedly believe in
him." 12 In this passage we have the description both
of the sacramental presence of Christ in the water, the
bread and wine, and his spiritual presence in the hearts
of the believing recipients of either Sacrament. The
idea, so often repeated by him, that Christ was present in
the Holy Communion no otherwise than in Baptism,
sufficiently shows what kind of presence he allowed.
2. Christ s presence by his grace and virtue is de
scribed in the following passages :
" And they be no vain or bare tokens, as you would
persuade, (for a bare token is that which betokeneth
only and giveth nothing, as a painted fire which giveth
neither light nor heat,) but in the due administration of the
11 Cardwell s two Liturgies Compared, p. xxix.
"Cranraer on the Sacrament, p. 47.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 191
Sacraments, God is present working with his Word "and
Sacraments."
" And therefore you gather of my sayings unjustly, that
Christ is indeed absent ; for I say, (according to God s
Word and the doctrine of the old writers,) that Christ is
present in his Sacraments, as they teach also that he is
present in his Word, when he worketh mightily by the
same in the hearts of his hearers. By which manner of
speech is not meant that Christ is corporally present
in the voice or sound of the preacher, (which soon
perisheth as soon as the words be spoken) but this speech
meaneth that he worketh with his Word, using the voice
of the speaker as his instrument to work by ; as he
useth also his Sacraments, whereby he loorketh, and there
fore is said to be present in them." 13 The presence of
Christ in the Word is a presence of his grace and spirit.
Such, says Cranmer, is his presence in the Sacrament. A
multitude of passages conveying this sense may be found
in the writings of Cranmer, and a still greater number in
those of Ridley. The sense of the above passage is
brought out very clearly in the preface to his book
against Bishop Gardiner. " Moreover, (says he,) when I
say and repeat many times in my book that the body of
Christ is present in them that worthily receive the Sacra
ment, lest any man should mistake my words and think
that I mean that although Christ be not corporally in the
outward visible signs, he is corporally in the persons that
duly receive them ; this is to advertise the reader that I
do no such thing. But my meaning is that the force, the
grace, virtue, and benefits, of Christ s body that was cru
cified for us, and of his blood that was shed for us, be
really and effectually with them that duly receive the
Sacrament."
13 Cranmer on the Sacrament, p. 11.
192 THE LORD S SUPPER.
3. Every page of the work on the Sacrament has
testimonies in every form to the spiritual presence of
Christ in the believer s heart, as that whereon by faith he
feeds and lives.
" But here you take such large scope that you flee from
the four proper matters that be in controversy, unto a
new scope devised by you that I should absolutely deny
the presence of Christ, and say that the bread doth only
signify Christ s body absent ; which thing I never said
nor thought. And as Christ saith not so, nor Paul saith
not so, even so likewise I say not so ; and my book, in
divers places, saith clean contrary, that Christ is with us
spiritually present, is eaten and drunken of us, and
dwelleth within us although corporally he be departed
out of this world and is ascended up to heaven." 14 The
absence of Christ s body is here denied. Its presence is
affirmed. How is it present ? Not corporally, for so he
is in heaven. He is spiritually present as opposed to
corporally. He is present by faith in the believer s
heart. That this is his meaning is clear beyond all pos
sibility of mistake from the following passage :
" And if Christ had never ordained the Sacrament,
yet should we have eaten his flesh and drunken his blood,
and have had thereby everlasting life ; as all the faithful
did before the Sacrament was ordained, and do daily
when they receive not the Sacrament. And so did holy
men that wandered in the wilderness, and in all their
lifetime very seldom received the Sacrament ; and
many holy martyrs either exiled or kept in prison, did
daily eat of the food of Christ s body, and drank daily the
blood that sprang out of his side, or else they could not
have had everlasting life, as Christ himself said in the
14 Cranmer on the Sacrament, p. 12.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 193
Gospel of St. John, and yet they were not suffered with
other Christian people to have the use of their Sacra
ments." 15 How precisely this language corresponds
with that of the rubric in the Communion Office for the
Sick!
Again : " The true eating and drinking of the said
body and blood of Christ is, with a constant and lively
faith, to believe that Christ gave his body and shed his
blood upon the cross for us, and that he doth so join and
incorporate himself to us, that he is our head, and we
his members, and flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone,
having him dwelling in us and we in him. And herein
standeth the whole e/ect and strength of this Sacra
ment." (p. 43.)
And again : " We say, as the Scripture teacheth, that
Christ is corporally ascended into heaven, and, neverthe
less, he is so in them that worthily eat the bread and
drink the wine given and distributed at his Holy Supper,
that he feedeth and nourisheth them with his flesh and
blood." 16
And, finally, on this point. "And, therefore, in the
Book of Holy Communion we do not pray absolutely
that the bread and wine may be made the body and
blood of Christ, but that unto us in that holy mystery
they may be so ; n that is to say, that we may so worthily
receive the same that we may be partakers of Christ s
body and blood, and that therewith in spirit and in truth
we may be spiritually nourished." (p. 79.)
Quotations to the same purport might be almost in-
15 Cranmer on the Sacrament, p. 25. See also, p. 75.
16 Id , p. 54.
17 Reference is here made to the Communion Service of the first
book of Edward.
17
194 THE LORD S SUPPER.
definitely multiplied ; but it is believed that these are
superfluously sufficient to confirm our position.
4. In common with Jewel, Cranmer also speaks of the
real presence of Christ s body to the believer, because
his faith ascends to embrace it in heaven.
" And so the old doctors do call this speaking of Christ
tropical, figurative, anagogical, allegorical; which they
do interpret after this sort, that although the substance of
bread and wine do remain and be received of the faithful,
yet notwithstanding Christ changed the appellation there
of, and called the bread by the name of his flesh, and the
wine by the name of his blood, non rei veritate sed
significante mysterio ; that is, l not that it is so in very
deed, but signified in a mystery ; so that we should
consider not what they be in their own nature, but what
they impart to us and signify ; and should understand the
Sacrament not carnally but spiritually ; and should
attend not to the visible nature of the Sacraments, neither
have respect only to the outward bread and cup, think
ing to see there with our eyes no other things but only
bread and wine ; but that lifting up our minds we should
look up to the blood of Christ with our faith, should touch
him with our mind, and receive him with our inward
man ; and that, being like eagles in this life, we should fly
up into heaven in our hearts, where that Lamb is resident
at the right hand of the Father which taketh away the
sins of the world ; by whose strypes we are made whole ;
by whose passion we are filled at his table ; and whose
blood we receiving out of his holy side, do live forever ;
being made the guests of Christ, having him dwell in us
through the grace of his true nature, and through the
virtue and efficacy of his whole passion ; being no less
certified and assured that we are fed spiritually unto
eternal life by Christ s flesh crucified, and by his blood
THE LORD S SUPPER. 195
shed, the true food of our minds, than that our bodies
be fed with meat and drink in this life." 18
These four methods of stating and explaining the
doctrine of the real presence, in each of which he care
fully disclaims a bodily presence in the elements, or at
the Sacrament, or in the receiver, and reiteratedly insists
on the sacramental presence, or the spiritual presence of
Christ in the heart, and by grace, and to faith, contain
the entire doctrine of Cranmer on the subject. His
views upon the Eucharist, as a sacrifice propitiatory for
sin, are no less explicit.
" The memorial of the true sacrifice upon the cross,
as St. Augustine saith, is called by the name of a sacri
fice, as a thing that signifieth another thing is called by
the name of the thing which it signifieth, although in
very deed it be not the same." 19
" I speak plainly, according to St. Paul and St. John,
that only Christ is the propitiation for our sins by his
death. You speak according to the Papists, that the
Priests in their masses make a sacrifice propitiatory. I
call a sacrifice propitiatory, according to the Scripture,
such a sacrifice as pacifieth God s indignation against us,
obtaineth mercy and forgiveness of all our sins, and is
our ransom and redemption from everlasting damnation.
And, on the other hand, I call a sacrifice gratificatory,
or the sacrifice of the Church, such a sacrifice as does
not reconcile us to God, but is made of them that be
reconciled, to testify their duties, and to show themselves
thankful unto him. And these sacrifices, in Scripture,
be not called propitiatory, but sacrifices of justice, of
laud, praise, and thanksgiving. 20
l Cranmer s Works. Disputation at Oxford, vol. i., p. 393.
w Cranmer on the Sacrament, p. 87. Id., p. 361.
196 THE LORD S SUPPER.
"Therefore when the old fathers called the Mass or
Supper of the Lord a sacrifice, they meant it was a
sacrifice of lauds and thanksgiving, (and so as well the
people as the Priest do sacrifice,) or else that it was a
remembrancer of the true propitiatory sacrifice of Christ;
but they meant, in no wise, that it is a very true sacrifice
for sin, and applicable by the Priest to the quick and
dead." (p. 352.)
These testimonies (and the whole of the fifth book on
the Sacrament is full of them) exclude every sense of a
sacrifice in the Eucharist, other than that of praise and
thanksgiving. He calls the Lord s Supper a sacrifice,
either because it commemorates that of Christ, or be
cause it is a sacrifice of thanks and praise. It is offered
up by the people as well as the Priest, he speaking in
their name. In no wise in no sense and to no degree
is it a sacrifice or propitiation for sin. Any lengthened
comments on these clear testimonies is unnecessary.
We now turn to the testimony of Bishop Ridley. It
has been very confidently stated to differ from that of
Archbishop Cranmer. The latter has been confessed to
testify against the views which we have censured, while
the former has been claimed as their advocate. Says Mr.
Palmer, (on the Church, vol. i., p. 471,) "I shall not
attempt to defend all the doctrines of Cranmer in his
Treatise on the Sacrament, A* D. 1550, and his answer
to Gardiner the next year, which in fact (though he
seems not to have been aware of it) amounted to a
denial of the real presence, and is very different from
that of Ridley and Poynet, from the Necessary Doctrine,
the Homilies, and the Prayer-Book, composed in 1548."
The importance of Ridley s testimony on this subject
can hardly be overestimated. On this point, Cranmer
was his pupil. His enemies testify to his predominating
THE LORD S SUPPER. 197
influence in fixing the doctrine of the Eucharist. Said the
Bishop of Gloucester, on Ridley s last examination before
the commissioners at Oxford, u Latimer leaneth to Cran-
mer, Cranmer to Ridley, and Ridley to the singularity of
his own wit; so that if you overthrew the singularity of
Ridley s wit, then must needs the religion of Cranmer
and Latimer fall also." 21
Now we venture to say that the testimony of Ridley
will be found to be no stronger and none other than that
of Cranmer. Like him he avows the real presence in
clear terms. Like him he explains it to be a figurative
or sacramental presence; or a presence by grace; or a
spiritual presence of Christ in the heart ; or a presence to
faith of Christ s body which is in heaven. Like him, he
repudiates the doctrine of a sacrifice in the Eucharist,
other than that of praise and thanksgiving.
First we find him admitting Christ s real presence at
the Eucharist. The passage, however, which contains
this statement in its strongest form, contains also as
strong a testimony against a carnal or corporal presence.
I know no passage in Ridley s works in which his lan
guage is stronger than in the following. Yet it is plain
from it alone, by the expressions that he " is present by
spirit and grace," and by the explanation of eating and
drinking Christ s body and blood that " he is made
effectually partaker of his passion," that he meant no
gross presence of a real body.
" For both you and I agree herein, that in the Sacra
ment is the very true and natural body and Jblood of
Christ, even that which was born of the Virgin Mary,
which ascended into heaven, which sitteth on the right
hand of God the Father, which shall come from thence
81 Ridley s Works, Parker edition, p. 283.
17*
198 THE LORD S SUPPER.
to judge the quick and the dead ; only we differ in mode,
in the way and manner of being ; we confess all one
thing to be in the Sacrament, and dissent in the manner
of being there. I, being fully by God s Word thereunto
persuaded, confess Christ s natural body to be in the
Sacrament, indeed, by spirit and grace, because that
whosoever receiveth worthily that bread and wine, re-
ceiveth effectuously Christ s body, and drinketh his blood,
(that is, he is made effectually partaker of his passion ;)
and you make a grosser kind of being, enclosing a
natural, a lively, and a moving body, under the shape or
form of bread and wine." ^
We shall now verify our statement of the sense in
which he held a bodily presence by other extracts from
his writings. A passage brought for one point of proof
will often be found equally available for another.
1. And first we show that Ridley sometimes spoke of
the body as present by figure or Sacrament.
" Now, on the other side, if, after the truth shall be
truly tried out, it shall be found that the substance of
bread is the material substance of the Sacrament;
although for the change of the use, office and dignity of
the bread, the bread, indeed, sacramentally is changed
into the body of Christ, as the water in Baptism is sacra
mentally changed into the fountain of regeneration, and
yet the material substance thereof remaineth all one as
was before," &c. 23
Unless the substance of water be changed in Baptism,
then the ^substance of the bread remains unchanged in
the Eucharist. That by the expression " sacramentally
changed into the body of Christ," was not meant that
22 Ridley s Works, p. 274.
23 Wadswortb, Eccl. Biography, vol. ill, p. 12.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 199
Christ s body was in, orunder, or with the bread, is evident
from the first of the following extracts, and that it was
meant that he was there only by figure, is proved by the
second.
"As for Melancthon, quoth I, whom Mr. Feckham
spoke of, I marvell that he will alledge him, for we are
more nigh an argument here in England than the opinion
of Melancthon to you. For on this point we all agree
here that there is in the Sacrament but one material sub
stance^ and Melancthon, as I ween, saith there are two."
" What author have ye," quoth Mr. Secretary, " to
make of the Sacrament a figure ? "
" Sir," quoth I, " ye know I think that Tertullian in
plain words speaketh thus : Hoc est corpus meum. Id
est figura corporis mei. This is my body ; that is to
say, a figure of my body" 24
Ridley was accused, in Queen Mary s reign, of having,
in 1550, set forth the corporal presence of Christ. The ac
cusation was made by Feckham, in a sermon at St. Paul s
Cross. Here, in his denial of the charge, he declared
that he called the bread the body of Christ," because unto
this material substance is given [that is, attributed] the
property of the thing whereof it beareth the name." 25
And again, in the Disputation at Oxford, he uses this
language : " The Sacrament of the blood is the blood ;
and that is attributed to the Sacrament which is spoken
of the thing of the Sacrament."^
2. But a very frequent and favorite method with
Ridley of explaining Christ s true presence at the
Eucharist, was to show that he was present by the grace
84 Ridley at the Tower. Ecclesiastical Biography, vol. iii.,p. 18,
25 Strype s Ecclesiastical Memorials, vol. i., p. 70.
26 Ridley s Works, p. 238.
200 THE LORD S SUPPER.
and efficacy of his crucified body. As Cranmer more
frequently explained it by a spiritual presence of Christ
in the hearts of the faithful though, as we have seen,
he sometimes spoke of his presence by grace so
Ridley more frequently used this mode of explication.
" Now, then, you will say, what kind of presence do
they grant, and what do they deny ? Briefly, they deny
the presence of Christ s body in the natural substance of
his human and assumed nature, and grant the presence
of the same by grace ; that is, they affirm and say that
the substance of the natural body and blood of Christ is
only remaining in heaven, and so shall be unto the latter
day when he shall come again in glory accompanied
with the angels of heaven, to judge both the quick and
dead. And the same natural substance of the very body
and blood of Christ, because it is united in the divine
nature of Christ the second person of the Trinity, there
fore it hath not only life in itself, but is also able to give
life unto so many as be or shall be partakers thereof;
that is, that to all who believe on his name which are
born not of blood, as St. John saith, or of the will of the
flesh, or of the will of man, but are born of God, though
the selfsame substance abide still in heaven, and they
for the time of their pilgrimage abide here on earth ; by
grace (I say) that is, by the gift of this life, (mentioned
in John,) and the proportion of the same, meet for our
pilgrimage here upon earth, the same body of Christ is
here present with us. Even, for example, we say the
same sun which in substance never removeth his place
out of heaven, is yet present here by his beams, light
and natural influence, when it shineth upon earth. For
God s Word and his Sacraments be, as it were, the
beams of Christ, which is Sol Justitia, the Sun of Right
eousness." 27
27 *Ridley s Works, p. 12.
THE LOKD S SUPPER. !<J01
According to this passage the body of Christ is in
heaven, and is present by grace. Lest even this ex
pression should be misunderstood, it is explained to be
" the gift of life." Unless we are prepared to contend
that the light of the sun on earth is the sun which is in
heaven, we cannot attribute to Ridley the doctrine of the
corporal presence.
The following passage is very valuable, as showing in
what sense Ridley understood the fathers on this subject.
The expressions towards the close of the quotation,
show that when the strongest terms which language
affords which convey the meaning that Christ whole
Christ is present in the Sacrament, are used, all that is
meant by them is, that there is " the spirit of Christ ; that
is, the power of the Word of God."
" I say and believe, that there is not only a significa
tion of Christ s body set forth by the Sacrament, but also
that therewith is given to the godly and faithful the grace
of Christ s body, that is, the food of life and immortality.
And this I hold with Cyprian. I say, also, with St.
Augustine, that we eat life ; and we drink life ; with
Emissene, that we feel the Lord to be present in grace ;
with Athanasius, that we receive celestial food, which
cometh from above ; the property of natural communion,
with Hilary ; the nature of flesh, and benediction which
giveth life, in bread arid wine, with Cyril ; and with the
same Cyril, the virtue of the very flesh of Christ, life and
grace of his body, the property of the only begotten,
that is to say, life; as he himself in plain words ex-
poundeth it.
" I confess, also, with Basil, that we receive the mys
tical advent and coming of Christ, grace and the virtue
of his very nature ; the Sacrament of his very flesh, with
Ambrose ; the body by grace, with Epiphanius ; spiritual
202 THE LORD S SUPPER.
flesh, but not that which was crucified, with Jerome ;
grace flowing into a sacrifice, and the grace of the Spirit,
with Chrysostom ; grace and invisible verity, grace and
society of the members of Christ s body, with Augustine.
Finally, with Bertram (who was the last of all these,) I
confess that Christ s body is in the Sacrament, in this
respect ; namely, as he writeth, because there is in it the
spirit of Christ, that is, the power of the Word of God,
which not only feedeth the soul, but also cleanseth it.
Out of these I suppose it may clearly appear unto all
men, how far we are from that opinion, whereof some
go about falsely to slander us to the world, saying, we
teach that the godly and faithful should receive nothing
else at the Lord s Table, but a figure of the body of
Christ." 28
In what sense Ridley regarded the spirit of Christ in
the Sacrament, the following passage explains :
" This Sacrament hath the promise of grace to those
who receive it worthily, because grace is given by it as
by an instrument ; not that Christ hath transfused grace
into the bread and wine"^
Again : " He took his flesh with him after the true
and corporal substance of his body and flesh ; again, he
left the same in mystery to the faithful in his Supper, to
be received after a spiritual communication and grace.
Neither is the same in the Supper only, but also at other
times, by hearing the Gospel and by faith.
3. The presence of Christ, by his spirit, in the heart
of the believer, upon which Cranmer so much dwells, is
implied in the declarations so frequently occurring in the
writings of Ridley, that " the true and corporal substance
of his flesh " is not received in the Supper only, " but
s
38 Ridley s Works, pp. 201, 202. 9 Id., p. 241.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 203
also at other times, by hearing the Gospel and by
faith." 30
4. In like manner, Ridley does not, like Cranmer and
Jewel, dwell upon and repeat the idea of Christ s pres
ence in heaven to the faith that ascends and embraces
him. Yet he again and again contends that Christ s
body is in heaven and nowhere else, and that it is present
only to faith, beholding it as the only source of grace
and life.
His views upon the Eucharist, as a sacrifice, are
summarily expressed in the following passage :
"I know that all these places of the Scripture are
avoided by two manner of subtle shifts; the one is, by
the distinction of the bloody and unbloody sacrifice, as
though our unbloody sacrifice of the Church were any
other than the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, than a
commemoration, a showing forth, and a sacramental
representation of that one only bloody sacrifice, offered
up once for all." 31
The quotations which follow from Bishop Jewel, will
be found to coincide with those of Ridley and Cranmer.
To the authority of this eminent Reformer s writings, we
give the following additional testimony of Archbishop
Williams :
"Three great princes successively, (namely, Queen
Elizabeth, King James I., and King Charles I.,) the one
after the other, and four Archbishops of very eminent
parts, (Parker, Grindal, Whitgift, and Bancroft,) have
been so satisfied of the truth and learning of this book,
that they have imposed it to be chained up and read in
all parish churches throughout England and Wales." 32
80 Ridley s Works, p. 222. si Id., p. H.
M Archbishop Williams s Holy Table, Name and Thing.
204
The Sacraments he calls, after the manner of the
Catholic fathers, "figures, signs, marks, badges, prints,
copies, forms, seals, signets, similitudes, patterns, repre
sentations, remembrances, and memories. And we make
no doubt," he adds, " together with the same doctors, to
say that these be certain visible words, seals of righte
ousness, and tokens of graced 33
The formal definition which he gives of the Eucharist
is as follows :
" We say, that Eucharistia, that is to say, the Supper
of the Lord, is a sacrament that is, an evident repre
sentation of the body and blood of Christ, wherein is
set, as it were, before our eyes, the death of Christ, and
his resurrection, and whatsoever he did whilst he was in
his mortal body ; to the end we may give him thanks for
his death, and for our deliverance ; and that by the tfften
receiving of this Sacrament, we may daily renew the
remembrance thereof, to the intent we, being fed with
the body and blood of Christ, may be brought into the
hope of the resurrection, and of everlasting life, and
may most assuredly believe that as our bodies be fed
with bread and wine, so our souls be fed with the body
and blood of Christ." 34
In accordance with these views, he declares that
Christ s body is present by mystery or symbol, 35 that the
33 Apology, pp. 49, 50.
34 These two kinds of eating must evermore necessarily be
joined together. And whosoever cometh to the holy Table, and
advanceth not his mind unto heaven, there to feed upon Christ s
body at the right hand of God, he knoweth not the meaning of
these mysteries, but is void of understanding, as the horse or mule,
and receiveth only the bare Sacraments to his condemnation."
DEFENCE, p. 223.
35 Apology, p. 55.
THE LOHD S SUPPER. 205
elements are not changed, 36 that Christ s body is in
heaven, 37 and that it is by faith that we are to reach up
our hands to heaven, and lay hold upon him sitting
there. 38
When he speaks of the Eucharist as more than a bare
sign, he does not mean that it in any sense contains the
real body of Christ, but that it is a token or seal of real
blessings. The following passage, from his defence of
the Apology, contains a view of the subject which is
often repeated in his writings :
" Neither hereof do we make a bare or naked token,
as Mr. Harding imagineth, but we say, as St. Paul saith,
it is a perfect seal and a sufficient warrant of God s
promises, whereby God bindeth himself unto us, and we
likewise stand bounden unto God, so as God is our God
and we are his people. This I reckon no bare or naked
token. And touching this word signum, (sign,) what it
meaneth, St. Augustine showeth in this sort : A sign is
a thing, which, besides the form or sight that it offereth
to our senses, causes of itself some other thing to come
to our knowledge. " 39
He allows no other presence of Christ s body in the
Eucharist than there is in the written Word. The reader
will notice the strength and distinctness of his assertions
on this point :
"If any man thinks it strange that the Sacrament is
called the body and flesh of Christ, being not so indeed,
let him understand that the written Word of God is also
called Christ s body and Christ s flesh, even the same
that was born of the virgin, and that the Father raised
again to life, although indeed it be not so. So saith St,
Hierom." 40
8 Apology, p. 56. 37 Id., p. 59. Id., p. 60.
39 Jewel s Defence, p. 380 ; edition of 1565. Id., p. 383.
206 THE LORD S SUPPER.
Jewel repeatedly explains the real presence to be that
of Christ in heaven, to the faith which lifts itself up to
him and embraces him.
" We are taught, according to the doctrine of the old
fathers, to lift up our hearts to heaven, and there to feed
on the Lamb of God. St. Chrysostom saith, Whosoever
will reach to that body must mount on high. Augustine
likewise saith, How shall I lay hold of him, being ab
sent ? How shall I mount up to heaven and hold him
sitting there? Send up thy faith and thou hast taken
him. Thus spiritually, and with the mouth of our faith,
we eat the body of Christ and drink his blood, even as
verily as his body was verily broken and his blood verily
shed upon the cross." 41
He also utterly rejects any other sacrifice in the
Eucharist than that of praise and thanksgiving, and thus
accounts for the use of a phraseology which has intro
duced grievous error into the Church :
" Howbeit, the old learned fathers, as they oftentimes
delighted themselves with these words, Sabbatta, Par-
asceue, Pascha, Pentacoste, and such other like terms of
the old law ; even so likewise they delighted themselves
often with these words, Sacerdos, Altare, Sacrificum, the
Sacrificer, the Altar, the Sacrifice, notwithstanding the
use thereof were then clearly expired ; only for that the
ears of the people, as well of the Jews as of the Gentiles,
had been long acquainted with the same." (p. 555.)
We have been able only to reap the outer edges of a
vast field of testimony which lies outspread and invitingly
before us. Whoever will enter into it, will be able to
come out with sheaves fully ripe and heavy with the
golden grains of truth. 42
41 Jewel s Defence, p. 319.
48 An account of Hooker s views on the subject will be found in
Appendix No. I.
THE LORD S SUPPER. 207
IV. We have no space to devote to the testimony of
the American Church against the views which we have
designated as erroneous. It has been seen, incidentally,
that the adoption of the oblation and invocation which
was in the first book of Edward, and excluded from the
second, give no countenance to the Tractarian doctrine
of a sacrifice, expiatory or impretatory, available to
atone for sin. The changes made in the service rescue it
from any such interpretation. The testimony of Bishop
While on the subject, also shows the views with which it
was introduced into our Church. 43
We now bring to a close this protracted and yet most
imperfect examination of the views of our Church on the
Lord s Supper. If we respect the opinions of those who
framed our service, if we feel the obligation of adhering
to our own standards, we can no more admit that view of
the Eucharist which, to use the language of Coleridge,
"condenses it into an idol," than we can that which
" evaporates it into a metaphor." As a blessed memo
rial of the death which is our ransom and our life ; as a
token of love, a seal of forgiveness, and a means of
grace, it is too full of real blessings to need that we
should attach to it any which are fictitious. May we
have grace to receive it with reverent and adoring grat
itude, to our souls health and strength!
3 See Appendix, No. II.
X.
Xnfcmt
IN entering upon the consideration of the Baptismal
Service of the Church, I desire to repeat that the primary
object of these pages, is not to show the correspondence
of the statements and doctrines and rites of the Prayer-
Book with the teachings of the Bible. Their chief object
is to furnish information upon the history and origin of
various portions of our Liturgy, and to deduce from them
the doctrine of our present formulary of faith and worship,
" The Book of Common Prayer according to the use of
the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States."
By tracing the origin and marking the changes, by addi
tion or omission, of some portions of this formulary, we
have been able to reach sure conclusions as to what its
teachings are. But in entering upon the much con
troverted subject now before us, while we have no
misgivings as to the propriety of the method we are to
pursue, we feel the difficulty of applying it successfully
to a service, which, if obscure, has been made doubly so,
through excess of explanation.
Adopting the method hitherto pursued, we shall sketch
the history and origin of the service for the public Baptism
of infants ; and, as our limits will allow, dwell upon its
prominent points of doctrine.
INFANT BAPTISM. 209
HISTORY. The rubrics introductory to the service are
substantially the same as they were at the first. In the
first Liturgy of Edward, it is stated that the Sacrament of
Baptism was commonly ministered only on Whitsunday
and Easter. This statement was subsequently omitted.
Sundays and holy days are recommended as the most
suitable for the performance of the rite, that the con
gregation may testify that they receive the newly baptized
into the number of Christ s Church, and that they may
be put in remembrance of their own baptismal vows.
The recommendation is retained ; but the excellent reason
on which it is grounded, is omitted. The present English
Prayer-Book contains a rubric, in addition to the above,
which directs that for every male child there shall be two
godfathers and one godmother, and for every female
child two godmothers and one godfather. Our Church
directs that the same number shall be present when they
can be had, and allows the parents to stand as sponsors;
an arrangement forbidden in the English Church by the
twenty-ninth canon of the first year of James I.
In the prayer which follows the address, there are
expressions in the first Liturgy of Edward, which involve
important points of doctrine, and which were omitted
in the subsequent revision. There is a supplication that
" by this wholesome laver of regeneration, whatsoever
sin is in them may le washed clean away." This ex
pression, which appears to involve the Romish doctrine,
that by Baptism, all sin, original and actual, is not only
fully forgiven, but completely destroyed, is omitted.
Another expression, that the children to be baptized, may
be received into the ark of Christ s Church, and so saved
from perishing an expression which countenances the _^
other Romish idea, that Baptism is absolutely essential
to salvation is also omitted. After the first prayer in the
18*
210
INFANT BAPTISM.
first Liturgy, the rubric directs the Priest to ask the name
of the child, and then to sign the cross upon its forehead
and breast, saying nearly the same form of words which
are used when the child is baptized. This rubric and
these words were omitted upon the next revision of the
service. After the second prayer, there was in Edward s
first Liturgy a form of exorcism, to expel the evil spirit
from the children. As such a form was not unusual in
the primitive Church, it may at least to gratify curiosity
to insert it. " I command thee, unclean spirit, in the
name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,
that thou come out and depart from these infants, whom
our Lord Jesus Christ hath vouchsafed to call to his holy
Baptism, to be made members of his body and of his
holy congregation. Therefore, thou cursed spirit, re
member thy sentence, remember thy judgment, remember
the day to be at hand, wherein thou shalt burn in fire
everlasting, prepared for thee and thy angels, and pre
sume not hereafter to exercise any tyranny towards these
infants, whom Christ hath bought with his precious blood,
and by this his holy Baptism calleth to be of his flock."
Nothing resembling this exorcism remains in the present
service. The Gospel and the Exhortation remain as
they were at first. The Lord s Prayer and the Creed
follow the Exhortation in the first Liturgy, and are
omitted in all the rest. The prayer following has re
mained in all the services the same. Then in the first
Liturgy, the Priest was directed to take one of the
1 It being urged by Bucer in his censure of the Liturgy, that this
exorcism was originally used to none but demoniacs, and that it
was uncharitable to imagine that all were demoniacs who came
to baptism, it was thought prudent by our Reformers to leave it
out of the Liturgy, when they took a review of it, in the fifth and
sixth of King Edward. WHEATLEY, p. 367.
INFANT BAPTISM. 211
children by the right hand the others being brought
after him and lead him into the church, repeating a
benedictory form of admission into the Lord s holy
household. The font was then, and is still, very fre
quently in England, placed by the door, and the children
were brought in from the outer porch. The address to
the godfathers and godmothers which follows has but one
additional phrase, that which declares that the infants
must faithfully promise by their sureties, " until they
come of age to take it upon themselves." The questions
and answers which follow, are broken into smaller
portions in the first Liturgy, and the Apostles Creed is
repeated. The questions are substantially the same in
the English and our present service, except that the word
renounce is used instead of forsake. An improvement is
introduced into our service, by adding to the promise " I
will," the expression " by God s help." The benedictory
supplications which follow, were introduced into the
second Liturgy of Edward. The first rubric which
followed in the first Liturgy, directed the child to be
dipped in the water three times. This trine immersion,
as it was called, was afterwards omitted, and permission
given, if the child were weak, to pour water upon the
child, instead of dipping him. Our rubric allows us to
adopt either method. In the first Liturgy, the minister
then put upon the child the " white vesture, commonly
called chrism," and in an address to the child bid him
receive it as " a token of the innocence given him in
Baptism." He also anointed the child in token of the
forgiveness of his sins, and the unction of the Spirit.
Both these ceremonies were upon the next revision
omitted. They appear to have been grounded upon the
discarded doctrine that all sin, original and actual, is
washed away in Baptism. The conclusion of the service
212 INFANT BAPTISM.
as it stands now is for substance the same as the second
Liturgy of Edward.
ORIGIN. To explain the origin of a portion of this
service, it will be necessary to refer to a custom in the
primitive Church and retained in the English Church
prior to the Reformation. It was customary to introduce
a catechumen or candidate for Baptism, into the church
by a certain form of admission, accompanied with certain
rites. They were signed upon the forehead with the
sign of the cross ; exorcised ; anointed with oil, and pre
sented with salt. A length of time intervened between
these initiatory rites and the reception of the sacrament
of Baptism. But afterwards this service was added to
and administered at the same time with that of Baptism,
even in the case of infants. The absurdity of admitting
infants as catechumens, as those who were to be taught
previously to being baptized, is sufficiently manifest,
though by one who will find nothing in the past but what
is to be admired, it is dismissed with this remark, that
" it is not easy to determine the exact reasons " for the
custom. 2 The introduction to our Baptismal Office is said
to be derived, in some measure, though with such
changes as make it suitable to a Baptismal service, from
that for the admission of persons as catechumens. A
remnant of that service retained in the first draught of
the Liturgy namely, the signing of the child with the
cross _ has been already noticed. The address to the
congregation bears great resemblance to, and appears to
have been borrowed from one in use in the Archbishopric
of Cologne, composed by Bucer and Melancthon. The
second Collect in the service, is one which was used in
2 Palmer s Antiquities of English Ritual, vol. ii., p. 168.
INFANT BAPTISM. 213
the ancient services of the English Church. The portion
of St. Mark s Gospel which follows, is also found in the
introductory office for making a catechumen, in the
Churches of Salisbury and York. The renunciation of
Satan, which, in our service, is merely verbal, was
anciently in the Eastern Church, accompanied by a turn
ing on the part of the candidate to the west, the place of
darkness, and the supposed dwelling of Satan, and re
nouncing him with gestures and spitting, indicative of
rejection and abhorrence. The profession of faith was
usually made by a repetition of the Creed. The ben
ediction and the consecration of the waters, are in forms
very similar to ours, found in all the Eastern and Western
Churches. The sign of the cross has been always in
use in this service. In addition to it, other emblematic
rites were retained in the early church, such as clothing
the baptized in white raiment as symbolical of purity
obtained through Baptism ; giving them milk and honey,
as representing their new taste and nature as babes in
Christ ; and anointing them with oil as emblematic of
the unction of the Spirit. These rites were properly
rejected. The other portions of the service, whose origin
we have not indicated, were probably composed by the
framers of the Liturgy, by the aid of, and upon the model
of, some of the continental offices.
We sometimes hear the church of primitive times
referred to as little less than perfect in all its doctrines,
rites, and its pervading spirit. All its practices are held
forth as worthy of devout adoption. Notwithstanding
the great reverence which the framers of our Liturgy felt
for the early church a reverence breathing through
all their writings, and conspicuous in the Homilies it is
manifest that such was not their judgment. From the
history of the Baptismal service, it is clear that they have
214 INFANT BAPTISM.
placed the stamp of their disapprobation upon many of
the rites almost universally prevalent in the primitive
church. And a mind, it appears to me, must be strangely
constituted, to which some of those rites do not seem
gross and improper ; some puerile and tending to super
stition ; and some based upon or countenancing erroneous
doctrine. In what has been rejected, and what has been
retained by the framers of our service, we have additional
proof of their wisdom, and of the presence with them of
that God who guides the minds submissive to his power,
into all truth.
They have rejected, as we have seen, the introductory
service which was used to make catechumens, and with it
the anointing with oil, the exorcism, and the presentation
of salt, with which it was accompanied. The all but
universal ancient custom of baptizing persons, divested
of all clothing, under covered baptisteries ; the trine
immersion ; the clothing of the baptized person with a
chrism or white garment ; the anointing of him with oil,
and the presentation to him of milk and honey to eat, are
all omitted. Here are eight distinct ceremonies or
customs in the single service of Baptism, universally
prevalent in the primitive church, which were rejected
by the framers of our Liturgy. And this they did in the
exercise of that liberty which is proclaimed in our
XXXlVth Article, that " it is not necessary that traditions
and ceremonies be in all places one or utterly alike."
On the contrary, the Church of Rome has retained and
multiplied these superstitious and puerile customs, and it
is in explaining and exalting them, that the childish
rhetoric of its writers, suited to its theme, grows most
tawdry. Says Moehler, 3 " Symbol is crowded upon
3 Symbolism, p. 296.
INFANT BAPTISM. 215
symbol, in order to express in the most manifest way the
one idea, that a total permanent change is to occur in
man, and a new, higher and lasting existence is hence
forward to commence." Yes, alas ! symbol is crowded
upon symbol, until the one spiritual idea of a new nature
disappears under them, instead of being manifested
through them ; some of these symbols having dug its
grave, and others standing pompous and boastful monu
ments over the place of its departure.
Beside the mere act of Baptism, in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, we retain one rite which is
expressive and proper, that of signing the child s fore
head with the sign of the cross, in token of his consecra
tion to the service of the Crucified. So much does this
significant rite commend itself to the minds of all, that
although it may be omitted when those who present the
child shall desire it, I have never known or heard of a
case in which the desire to have it omitted has been
expressed. The canons of the Church of England, 4
which explains the lawful use of the sign of the cross,
declares that " it is no part of the substance of that Sac
rament," that " it doth not add any thing to the virtue or
perfection of Baptism, nor being omitted doth detract
any thing from the effect and substance of it." We retain
the custom of sprinkling or pouring instead of immersion,
because although we regard immersion as a common
method of Baptism in the Apostles days, and those
immediately succeeding, we do not regard that particular
method as having been ever enjoined or always practised
or as essential to the Sacrament. The words translated
baptism and baptize, which are confidently said to
mean uniformly immerse, have been critically examined
4 Canons of the Church, p. 228.
216 INFANT BAPTISM.
by a ripe scholar of our own Church, and the result is,
that out of ninety-three places in which the words occur,
they have the sense of immersion in but two. 5 In other
places they express the meaning to dip partially, to wet,
to pour, to sprinkle. The custom of having godfathers
and godmothers is a wise and kind provision for the
training of children in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord. In our attempt to develop the doctrinal meaning
of our service, the necessity for sponsors will be apparent.
Indeed, on what we regard as the Church s view of Infant
Baptism, the provision of sponsors is essential to its
performance. If Infant Baptism is to be performed, it
can only be, as we think, upon the profession of faith and
penitence on the sponsors part. Had we space, then, to
show that, in the language of our Article, " the Baptism
of young children is in any wise to be retained in the
church as most agreeable with the institution of Christ,"
we should in so doing show how the office of sponsors is
inseparably and necessarily connected with it. Taking
for granted, at this time, that Infant Baptism was, in the
design of Christ, to be retained, it will appear how
necessary a part of it, is the sponsors promises and
profession.
The meaning and intent of this service, has been and
is a subject of unceasing discussion. By one class it has
been represented as setting forth the doctrine, that in and
by virtue of Baptism, as instituted by Christ, the child
receives the remission of his original sin, and a signed
and sealed admission into the privileges of the covenant
of redemption privileges secured to him in the act of
Baptism, and extended to him as soon as he is capable of
receiving them. By another class, the service is regarded
5 Chapin s Primitive Church.
IJSFAJNT BAPTISM. 217
as teaching not merely the remission, but the removal of,
original sin ; not only the secured admission to the priv
ileges of heavenly citizenship, but such an actual recep
tion of transforming grace as makes the infant to be born
again, by a change of his moral nature. Upon a subject
so much controverted, we can hope, in the brief space
that remains, to do little more than express our own
strong convictions, and leave the briefly indicated grounds
of those convictions, to the further examination and
reflection of the reader.
Much of the perplexity upon this subject has arisen,
we believe, from the different senses in which the word
baptism is used. In Scripture, we find it generally used
in one of three different senses. Sometimes it means
the outward rite of Baptism, sometimes the inward change,
the new nature given by grace through the exercise of
faith in Christ and repentance towards God, of which
outward Baptism is the sign and seal. At other times, it
is used in a sense which embraces both the outward sign
and the thing signified. This is a point very important
to be borne in mind. An example of the first sense is
found in the address of St. Peter, upon the day of Pente
cost, when he said, " Repent, every one of you, and be
baptized." John the Baptist s declaration, that the
Saviour should baptize with the Holy Ghost and with
fire, is an example of the second sense. The declaration
of St. Peter, that " Baptism doth now save us," is an ex
ample of the last sense, in which both the sign and the
thing signified are included, as is evident from the fact,
that he adds, it is not the outward part, but the inward,
which brings us into a state of salvation ; " not the putting
away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience towards God." And yet it was not the inward
part, as disconnected from, but as united to the inward,
19
218 1JNFANT BAPTISM.
which saves. Both the outward sign and the inward
grace, then, are meant, when it is said, " Baptism doth
save us."
Now it will be granted, that when Baptism is spoken
of in Scripture, as the initiatory rite into the Church of
Christ, it has reference generally to the baptism of adults.
At the first promulgation of Christianity, it was, of
necessity, adults who were first admitted into the Church.
Wherever outward Baptism is mentioned in connection
with adults, it is ever spoken of, not as the means by
which the inner Baptism, the converted heart, was to be
obtained, but as that which was to follow that inner Bap
tism, as its expressive sign and its attesting seal. Such
we find to have been the case with the covenant seal of
God, even under a less spiritual dispensation. The rite
of circumcision held the same place under the Jewish,
as Baptism under the Christian, dispensation. St. Paul
tells us, that "Abraham received the sign of circumcision
not as the instrument of imparting to him righteous
ness but as a seal of the righteousness which he had,
yet being uncircumcised." This is the uniform testimony
of the New Testament. It is by the Word, by faith in
Christ, that the soul s new birth is said to be effected,
and then Baptism is applied as its sign and seal. " Who
soever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God."
The three thousand who were converted, under the
preaching of St. Peter, were pricked to the heart or con
victed of sin, and gladly received the Word both of
these being the effects of the Holy Spirit and were
then baptized. Cornelius and the Gentiles with him,
after there was poured out upon them the gift of the
Holy Ghost, were then baptized in the name of the Lord.
The jailer was bidden by the apostles, when he asked
them what he must do to be saved, not to be baptized,
INFANT BAPTISM. 219
that he might be made regenerate, but to " believe in the
Lord Jesus Christ, and he should be saved." After
hearing the Word of God, he and his household were
baptized. The Ethiopian eunuch was assured, that if
he believed Jesus to be the Son of God, he might be
baptized. Now when we are told that none can believe
Jesus to be the Son of God but by the Spirit, we find in
this instance, also, that the "spiritual baptism preceded,
or was professed to have preceded, the baptism of water."
We take it, therefore, as an established Scriptural prin
ciple, that in Adult Baptism, the inner and spiritual wash
ing preceded that outward baptism, which was its signifi
cant symbol and its appropriate seal.
And now we come to advert to the fact already noticed,
that Baptism is often used in Scripture as expressive both
of the outward sign and the inward grace. " By a
common figure of speech, also, that is sometimes attributed
to the outward rite, which belongs either to the inward
grace alone, or to the inward grace and the outward sign
together." Having learned from Scripture history that
the inward grace precedes the outward sign, we are not
liable to explain passages in which this complex use or
this use of one part for the whole of the word baptism
occurs, as teaching that the outward rite precedes the
inward grace as its cause ; but that although thus men
tioned, the relation between them is that indicated by
such Scripture as we have adduced. Now here are the
simple principles and the more they are tested by
Scripture the more evident will they be by means of
which all the language of Scripture receives an easy and
consistent explanation. Does Ananias say to Paul, "Arise,
and be baptized, and wash away thy sins ? " We do not
conclude that a new doctrine meets us here, and that the
outward baptism is the means by which sins are washed
220 INFANT BAPTISM.
away. We believe this Scripture harmonizes with all
the rest. Turning to the history of St. Paul s conversion,
we find that Ananias was sent to him by Jesus, that he
might receive his sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Then, he arose and was baptized. When Ananias thus
bid him to arise and be baptized and wash away his sins,
he used baptism in the sense of that completing ordinance,
by which the washing away of sins, which was effected
by faith in Christ, would be symbolized and visibly
attested and secured by God s established seal. And
thus whenever, in Scripture, baptism is connected with
the remission of sins and with spiritual regeneration, it
will be found either to include the idea of both the inward
and outward baptism ; or if it be expressive of the outer
rite, it will be found to be on the supposition, or in con
nection with the fact, that it has been or is to be preceded
by the inner spiritual baptism. Such various use of the
word is natural, and has its numerous analogies in social
and civil life. I might speak of the inauguration of the
president of the United States, and truly say it conferred
upon him no powers as president. Then I should speak
of it as a mere outward act, which could have been of
no force or benefit, but for his previous election by the
people, in accordance with the provisions of the constitu
tion. The ceremony did not confer, but signified, sealed
and formed the initiatory mode of his entrance upon the
possession of a power already his by the constitution and
the people s will. Or I might truly say, that his inaugura
tion conferred upon him the power of president of the
United States ; and then I should use the word as ex
pressive of the completing ceremony which, in connection
with what had gone before, was a significant outward
method of formally, finally, solemnly, investing him, upon
his taking the oath required by the constitution, with that
INFANT BAPTISM. 221
possession namely, the power and prerogative of his
office which was already his by right and law. So in
Scripture, we find that Baptism, the mere outward rite, is
said not to convey salvation ; " not the putting away of
the filth of the fleh," by the outward rite, " saves us," says
St. Paul. But Baptism saves when it is the answer of a
good conscience towards God. That is, when the out
ward rite has been preceded by the inward grace, then
we say it saves us ; as when inauguration has been pre
ceded by a right election, it may be said to convey, to
him who is elected, the office of president of the United
States.
Now with one additional remark with regard to Baptism,
as described in the Bible, we shall be prepared to ex
amine the services and teachings of the Church upon
the subject.
It is found that many of the cases of Baptism, mention
ed in Scripture, are accompanied, or enjoined with, or fol
lowed by the promise of the bestowal of the Holy Ghost.
This gift of the Holy Ghost is to be distinguished from the
precedent gift of the Spirit which produced the work of
penitence and faith in the sinner s soul. It was usually
in the Apostles days, a miraculous gift of tongues or
miracles, and no doubt was accompanied by the sanctify
ing grace which ever renews the soul into a completer
image of the Master.
Turning to the Church, we find these views of Scrip
ture corroborated to our minds, by observing the same
language upon the subject of Baptism, as we find in the
Word of God. The authoritative doctrine of the Church
upon the subject is found in her Articles. The XXVIIth,
" of Baptism," reads as follows : " Baptism is not only a
sign of profession and mark of difference whereby Chris
tian men are discerned from others that be not christened,
19*
222 INFANT BAPTISM.
but it is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, where
by, as an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly
are grafted into Christ s Church ; the promises of the
forgiveness of sins and of our adoption to be the sons of
God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed ;
faith is confirmed, and grace increased, by virtue of
prayer to God." Now here that outward Baptism which
follows the inward, is described in exact conformity with
what we have found to be the Scripture statement. It is
a badge of Christian profession. It is a sign of regenera
tion or new birth. Not its cause, but its sign ; the sign of
that which has preceded it; namely, a new birth unto
righteousness. It is an instrument, not by which we are
born again, but by which they who receive Baptism
rightly that is, as is evident by comparing this Article
with the XXVth, they who worthily and in faith receive
the same are grafted into the Church. The promises
of forgiveness of sins and of adoption to be the sons of
God by the Holy Ghost, are not, be it observed, then first
fulfilled, but are then visibly signed and sealed. Faith
is, not then given, but having been previously exercised
to the soul s justification, is confirmed. Grace is in
creased, not because it comes through the Sacrament as
itself a channel of conveyance, but by virtue of prayer
to God. Turning to the Catechism, we find, in reply
to the question, " What is required of persons to be
baptized ? " the answer : " Repentance, whereby they for
sake sin ; and faith, whereby they steadfastly believe the
promises of God made to them in that Sacrament." Re
pentance and faith, then the gifts of the Spirit are to
precede Baptism. Thus the Prayer-Book harmonizes
with the Bible in the statement that repentance and faith
must precede Baptism ; and that then Baptism is to be
administered as a badge of Christian profession ; a sign
INFANT BAPTISM. 223
of regeneration ; an instrument, rightly used, of being
grafted into the Church ; a visible sign and seal of the
promises of forgiveness and adoption ; a means for the
confirmation of faith and the increase of grace, by virtue
of prayer to God.
We have reached, at length, the Baptismal Service for
infants. The question is, Is there such a change in the
nature of Baptism, when applied to infants, that it ceases
to be a sign and seal in the same sense as it was before ?
Does it now so change its nature, as that it is not a sign
and seal of something that goes before; but that it is first
the cause of spiritual regeneration, and then its sign and
seal ? Now if there be such a change in the nature of
Baptism when applied to infants, we might confidently
expect to find it noticed in our Article on that subject.
But as the Article concludes with only the assertion,
" that Infant Baptism is to be retained in the Church,"
we are left to apply all that it says about Baptism to that
of infants. No distinction between them is pointed out
to us. But they who contend that infants are really re
generated, by a change of their moral nature, in Baptism,
as its source, or cause, or instrument, do overthrow all
the statements of Scripture, and do run counter to all the
definitions of the Liturgy, in making the inner grace
succeed, instead of precede, the outer sign. It is said,
that because infants are incapable of repentance and
faith, therefore it is impossible that it should be exhibited ;
and, therefore, preposterous that a profession of it should
be required. Nevertheless, this profession is required
before infants can be baptized. Our Reformers seem to
have come to the formation of our Liturgy with this
principle deeply fixed. " No repentance and faith, then
no Baptism. Nothing signified, then no sign." They
require something to precede the sign in Infant, as they
224 INFANT BAPTISM.
do in Adult Baptism. It is the same thing they require
in both, repentance and faith. In the case of adults, it is
a profession of their own belief and penitence. In the
case of infants, it is a profession on the part of sponsors.
Here we see the truth of the remark, that the office of
sponsor, is inseparable from the rite of Infant Baptism.
In the latter case something precedes Baptism, as well as
in the former. It is a spiritual life not in possession but
in promise ; it is repentance and faith, not exercised, but
guaranteed. The children of believers are born with a
title to the inheritance of their fathers. Such we suppose
to be the import of the Apostle s declarations, that the chil
dren of the believing wife are holy ; and such the compass
of the assertion that the promise to the Jews, spoken of by
St. Peter, is, to them and their children. The parents
or sponsors treat with God on their behalf. The sponsors
must present the infant as a believer, and promise, on
its part, that it will act and appear as such when capable
of so doing, and of a practical manifestation of its princi
ple and exhibition of its profession. The Church will not
baptize till this promise has been made, distinctly and
solemnly made. With one voice her service for adults
and for infants proclaims that faith must precede Baptism,
or Baptism cannot be administered. 6
6 We also infer that infants should be offered to God in Baptism,
upon the faith of the parent or master, because the blessings which
Christ conferred upon men, were frequently given to children and
servants on the faith of the parents or master. Thus the servant
of the Centurion was healed on the faith of his master. (Matt, viii.)
The Rabbi s daughter was restored to life and health on account of
her father s faith, (Luke viii. ;) and the woman of Samaria, by her
faith, obtained the like blessings for her daughter. (Matt, xx.)
And the little children on whom Christ bestowed his blessing, were
presented to him on the faith of believing parents. In view of
these, and many other facts of a similar character, it is impossible
INFANT BAPTISM. 225
This view of the subject is confirmed by the language
of the Catechism. After the answer that repentance
and faith are required of those who are to be baptized,
the question is asked," Why, then, are infants baptized,
when, by reason of their tender age, they cannot perform
them?" "Why, then?" Observe, it is a question of
surprise and of objection. It involves this objection. If
repentance and faith are indispensable, why are infants
who cannot exercise them, baptized ? Now mark the
answer ! The difficulty is met, not by saying that in the
case of Infant Baptism, the child has given to him the
inner grace ; not by the assertion that Baptism will con
vey those graces, but by the recognition and acceptance
of the profession of others instead of his own ; by accept
ing the proxy for the principal. Infants are baptized, it
is answered, because they promise both repentance and
faith. They promise them by their sureties. 7 It deserves
particular notice, that repentance and faith are not
promised for children, as the consequence of, but as the
qualification for, Baptism. The Church asserts expressly,
that in every case, without exception, repentance and
faith are required as prerequisites ; and then she pro
ceeds to show upon what principle infants can be re
garded as possessed of these graces, and entitled to the
rite. 8
for us to see how any servant of Christ can drive from his altar,
and reject from his covenant, those to whom he extended those
blessings while on earth, and of whom he said, " of such are the
kingdom of God." CHAPIN S PRIMITIVE CHURCH, p. 83.
7 Accommodat mater ecclesia aliorum pedes ut veniant, aliorum
cor ut credant, aliorum linguam ut fateantur. The Church provides
that they may come with the feet of others, believe with the heart
of others, confess with the tongue of others.
AUGCSTINE DE VERBIS APOSTOLIS.
8 It is not they (the sponsors) that promise these things for them
selves; neither, indeed, do they promise that the child shall do
226 INFANT BAPTISM.
But there is a passage in the Baptismal Service, which
is supposed to teach the doctrine, that in Baptism the
soul of the child is spiritually transformed, and that the
inward and spiritual grace follows the outward sign, as
its cause. The passage is this : " We yield thee hearty
thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to
regenerate this infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him
for thine own child by adoption, and to incorporate him
in thy holy Church." Now bear in mind that if this be
the true meaning of the service, then it teaches two dis
tinct and opposite rules on the subject of Baptism, while
Scripture gives but one ; nay, while the Article and
Catechism give but one. If this be the meaning of the
expression, then this service teaches that repentance and
faith are to follow Baptism, while the Article and Cate
chism assert that, in all cases, they are to precede ; some
times personally, in those who are to be baptized ; some
times vicariously, in the persons of the sponsors. But let
us look at the passage. You observe that the child s faith
and repentance are not actually his own, but are sup
posed and imputed. As the inner grace preparatory to
Baptism is in supposed or reckoned possession, so, cor-
them ; but it is the child that promises these things by them. It is
not their duty, by virtue of that promise, but his. Indeed, they
ought to contribute their best help and assistance thereunto ; but
that is all that is incumbent on them; which, if they have done,
and the child prove notoriously wicked, they have not thereby
broken any covenant, but only he himself; for in entering upon
those holy engagements they bore the person of the infant, and
their stipulation is legally his, so that they leave him obliged to
perform what in his name is promised, which, if he performs,
eternal life will be his reward ; if not, eternal death. They lay
this engagement upon the child as parents, and those deputed by
parents may do ; leaving him to fulfil the covenant or to transgress
it at his own peril.
BISHOP HOPKINS (of Derry) ON THE TWO COVENANTS, p. 139.
INFANT BAPTISM. 227
respondently, the blessing prayed for is assumed as
having been given ; it is in supposed and reckoned
possession also. All that it is possible for the child, by
reason of his tender age, to have namely, the substituted
faith of his sponsors he possesses, and is, therefore, re
garded by the Church as coming with the spiritual graces
required for Baptism. All that it is possible for him, by
reason of the same tender age, to receive, he does re
ceive ; and he is therefore regarded and pronounced by
the Church to have received that full blessing which
belongs to the full baptism of the spirit. As he is
assumed to exercise repentance and faith, before it is
possible for him personally to exercise them, so he is
assumed to receive the full blessings of a complete Baptism
before it is possible for him to receive them. Therefore,
the Church speaks of the baptized child, without hesita
tion, as regenerate. Therefore, in the Catechism, the
child speaks of his Baptism as that wherein he was made
a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of
the kingdom of heaven. They are all assumed as his
because they are all his by secure and sealed promises,
upon the exercise of faith and penitence on his part. If
he fulfils the sponsors profession, he will enter upon the
possession of the signed and sealed inheritance. If not,
he will forfeit it. If an estate be made over to a minor,
on conditions and promises made for him by his guardian,
we speak of the estate as the possession of that minor.
It is his right, by covenant, by a signed and sealed com
pact. But if he violate the condition, he forfeits the
possession. Until he does violate the condition, it is,
and we do not hesitate to speak of it, as his ; his, not in
promise only, but in reality. In a similar sense does the
Church regard the child as regenerate, as adopted, as
incorporated into the Church.
228 INFANT BAPTISM.
And now we bring this discussion to a close, conscious
that much has been left unsaid that might have thrown
light on this much controverted subject. The Church is
found to teach one doctrine upon" Baptism. In the case
of the adult, it is fully carried out in reality. In the
case of the infant, it is carried out in reality, so far as
the nature of the infant will allow, and by substitution
and supposed possession of the prerequisites, which it
cannot personally possess ; and by the sealed and cov
enanted title to that part of the blessing, which it cannot
personally, as yet, enjoy. Summing up, then, the
benefits or blessings connected with Infant Baptism, we
find they are as follows :
1. In it there is a remission of original sin not the
entire destruction of it (for, according to our Articles,
the infection of a corrupted nature doth remain even in
the regenerate) to baptized infants as well as to adults.
2. It is a badge of a Christian profession.
3. It is a symbol of the spiritual regeneration.
4. It is the initiatory rite into the Church of God, where
the infant is surrounded with the means of grace, and
met at the first moment of its moral accountability with
the promised and pledged assistances of heaven.
5. It is a covenanting and sealing ordinance in which
the forgiveness of all sins, and all the privileges of
adopted children are secured and to be extended, by
God on his part, to the child upon the fulfilment, on his
part, of the promises made by the sponsors.
And now, in conclusion, we repudiate the charge, that
it is a want of faith, and a want of reverence for the
Sacraments, and a rationalizing spirit, which rejects that
interpretation of the Baptismal Service which makes the
child to receive the inner and spiritual grace, by and
through the waters of Baptism. Faith is true only when
INFANT BAPTISM. 229
it rests on truth revealed ; and that infants are thus trans
formed in Baptism is not revealed. Reverence becomes
superstition if it be exercised upon error. We reject this
interpretation, not because we doubt that God could, by
this Sacrament, so change the nature of the child, but
because we have no proof or promise that he does and
will. We reject it because it is opposed to the uniform
teaching of the Bible, that the spiritual prerequisites,
repentance and faith, must ever precede Baptism as its
condition, and never follow it as its result. We reject
it because our Church by her Articles and Catechism, and
the provision for sponsors, testifies that such repentance
and faith must precede in the cases of adults and infants
alike in the one case personally, and in the other spon-
sorially the reception of the Sacrament. We reject it
because it runs counter to the universal Scripture truth
that it is through the Word, through faith in a proclaimed
and offered Saviour, and through this means alone, that
the heart is won, through conviction and godly sorrow
and true belief, to the Lamb of God that taketh away its
sins. We reject it because it accustoms the mind to
regard it as a settled principle, that Sacraments operate
with spiritual influence upon the unconscious, unthinking,
and unfeeling soul of infancy ; and because from this
principle, the step is brief and easy to the belief that they
may also operate of their inherent force upon the stupid,
unexercised, impenitent, careless heart, which is brought
under their influence; a belief ruinous to habits of
watchfulness, prayerfulness, and self-examination. We
reject it because we believe with Hooker, that " the
manner of the necessity of Sacraments to life super
natural, is not, in all respects, as food unto natural life,
because they contain, in themselves, no vital force or
efficacy ; they are not physical, but moral instruments, of
20
230 INFANT BAPTISM.
salvation, duties of worship and service, which, unless
we perform as the author of grace requireth, they are
unprofitable." 9
And such a view of the Sacrament, how does it, at the
same time, awaken our gratitude, encourage our hopes,
and secure our diligent culture of the child, whom we
have brought to Christ in Baptism ! That God has
received him into his Church ; that he has graciously
added to his promise to give him his Holy Spirit, a visible
sign and seal ; that he has by attested covenant given
over to the child the heavenly inheritance, upon the
possession of which he may enter, as soon as he shall ex
ercise the conditions, penitence and faith ; that all these
gifts come to the child of believing parents, is to those
parents hearts a thought for comfort and for hope. And
yet, that the child may forfeit the inheritance made over
to him by compact, but not yet, because of his tender
years, in possession ; that he may fail to fulfil the condi
tions how does this consideration lead the anxious parent
to watch over the development of the child s awakening
and opening mind ; earnestly to pray, and carefully to
bring him up in the constant nurture and admonition of
the Lord ! If he were sure that his child were already
spiritually regenerate, he might be tempted to withhold
instruction, prayer, and culture. But when he sees that
upon his faithfulness and effort, in good measure, it will
depend whether his child shall enjoy the rich blessing
of forgiveness and sonship which he enjoys, then every
motive urges him to diligence and to prayer. Yes, over
the sheltered soul of the little immortal, hovers the
promised spirit, ready to beam its sunlight upon the first
unfolding of the roseate leaves of its young existence ;
9 Book v. 57.
INFANT BAPTISM. 231
and human faith and hope and love tend the tender
nursling, and remove every obstruction, and provide
every facility, that the lifegiving influences of the de
scending Spirit, may bring out that bud of immortality,
into full bloom and perfect fragrant life. That such a
blessing may attend all our cares and prayers and pains,
God, in his great mercy, grant !
XI.
Baptismal Sermce, attb tlje
"THE ministration of private Baptism of children in
houses," is an office provided for cases of great neces
sity, when, from sickness, or other causes, children can
not be brought into the church. It provides that the
Lord s Prayer, and some of the Collects in the Office
of Public Baptism be used ; that the child shall be
baptized in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ;
and that the thanksgiving, as in the public office, shall
succeed. The rubric which follows, declares the child
to be " sufficiently and lawfully baptized." Should the
child recover, provision is made that he be brought
into the church, and his true Baptism certified, when the
same service in substance is used, as in the form for public
Baptism. As the service was adopted at the same time
with that for the public Baptism of children, it underwent,
substantially, the same mutations.
There are, however, some points of interest peculiar
to this service which demand our notice.
In our last chapter, we spoke of sponsors as being
necessary, in the view of the Church, in Infant Baptism.
Here, however, sponsors are dispensed with, and still the
Baptism is declared lawful and valid. Does not this fact
overthrow our statement? We think not. Observe
THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES, ETC. 233
that, by the Church s theory, such Baptism is allowed to
be administered only under "a great cause and neces
sity" when so many Collects from the form of public
Baptism are to be used, " as the time and present exi
gence will suffer" Now, as the omission of a Sacra
ment altogether, where from sickness or inability it
cannot be received, is declared by the Church to be no
loss to him who sincerely and in faith desires it ; as the
full benefit and blessing of the Sacrament, under such
circumstances, accrue to him ; so wherever, from the
like necessity, any part of the Sacrament is dispensed
with, we cannot suppose that its validity is destroyed, or
its blessing diminished. This were a sufficient explana
tion of a case which is clearly an exception to a general
rule. But it may be added, also, that what is essential in
sponsorship, namely, the faith and repentance of the
parents or godparents, is supposed in the very act of
their presenting the child, in such exigency, for Baptism.
In the one case, such faith is expressed by words of
solemn promise ; in the other case, because of the
exigency of the time, the promises are implied in the
act, and provision is made, that if the child recover, it
shall be brought to the church, and the solemn promises
be spoken which were before silently implied.
LAY BAPTISM.
This service for private Baptism is one of peculiar
interest, as the question of the validity of Lay Baptism is
intimately connected with it. A brief history of the
service will show what, as a fact, is the doctrine of our
Church, and the Church of England, on the subject.
It is well known that the Romish Church regards
Baptism as so essential to salvation as to allow its admin-
20*
234 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
istration by laymen and women in cases of near approach
of death. Such was the practice at the time of the
Reformation. The first Liturgy of Edward authorized
Lay Baptism, and no change, in this respect, was made
when it was revised in 1552 ; nor when it was again
revised and confirmed under Elizabeth, in 1560. It is
to be observed, however, that women were not author
ized, as they are in the Romish Church, to administer
this Sacrament in cases of necessity. The language of
the rubric is, " let them that be present call upon God
for his grace, and say the Lord s Prayer, if the time will
suffer. And then one of them shall name the child, and
dip him in the water, and pour water upon him, saying
these words." J Notwithstanding that women were not
authorized, it is probable that from long custom they
sometimes administered the Sacrament ; but that they
did so, not only without authority, but also against the
sentiments of the rulers of the Church. In a letter
of Sampson and Humphrey two clergymen of the
Church, who were dissatisfied because the ecclesiastical
habits and some rites offensive to them were enjoined by
Queen Elizabeth a letter written in 1566, to Bullinger,
pastor of the church at Zurich, it is mentioned as one of
the " remaining straws and chips of the popish religion,"
that license is given to women to baptize in private
houses. 2 But in a letter of Bishops Grindal and Horn,
Jto the same Bullinger, in the following year, they de-
Jelare, " We entirely agree that women neither can nor
(ought to baptize infants upon any account whatever."
Sampson and Humphrey probably spoke of what was
sometimes practised without being, as they supposed,
1 Rubric in the last Liturgy of Edward.
2 Zurich Letters, p. 164.
AND THE CATECHISM. 235
* )
;hei
.*A f
licensed by any sufficient authority. Such is the testi
mony of Archbishop Sandys who was one of the
revisers of the Liturgy in the second of Elizabeth
given in his will : " For private baptism to be ministered
by women, I take neither to be prescribed nor admit
ted." 3 The reason of this he elsewhere stated to be,^
that " women are forbidden to perform any function in%
the Church." That laymen, however, were expressly
authorized to baptize in cases of emergency, is evident,
not only from the rubric already quoted, but also from
" the resolutions and orders taken by common consent of
the Bishops, until a synod should be had," in which it is
enjoined " that private Baptism in necessity, as in peril
of death, to be ministered either by the Curate, Deacon,
or reader, or some other grave and sober person, if the
time will suffice." 4 This was in the year 1560.
Although not long after this period, the heads of the
Church, but for the objection and interposition of the
queen, would have enjoined that private Baptism, even 1
in cases of necessity, "should only be ministered by a
lawful Minister or Deacon, called to be present for that
purpose," 5 it is certain that no changes in the regulations of
the Church upon this subject were effected until the reign
of James I. At the Hampton Court Conference, the
Presbyterian divines objected to the practice of Lay Bap
tism. To meet their views, the rubric was so changed as
iio direct " the Minister of the parish, or, in his absence,!
(any other lawful Minister that can be procured," to\
ladminister the Sacrament. In the year 1712, at a meet-
ling of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church, called
3 Strype s Whitgift, vol. i., p. 548. duoled by Short, p. 134.
4 Strype s Annals, vol. i., p. 221.
6 Strype s Grindal, Appendix, p. 61.
236 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
on account of an excited discussion upon this point, they
unanimously resolved " that Lay Baptism should be
discouraged as much as possible ; but if the essentials
had been preserved in a Baptism by a lay hand, it wad
not to be repeated." 6 This is all the legislation of the
English Church upon the subject. Her practice, and
that of our own Church, has been to regard Baptism by |
laymen as valid, and not to be repeated.
From this brief account, we see what is the settled
doctrine of our Church on this subject. It is, in the.
language of Bishop Hopkins, "that Baptism, adminisy
tered by lay hands, though irregular, and unauthorized
by any express rubric since the year 1603, is, neverthe
less, valid, and not to be repeated." 7 That such con- 1
tinues to be the doctrine of the Mother Church, is evident
from repeated decisions of the ecclesiastical courts of
that country. One is mentioned by Bishop White mf
his Memoirs. 8 It was occasioned by a suit brought by al
Dissenter against a parish Minister, for refusing to buryj
a child who had been baptized by a Minister dissenting!
from the Establishment. The judge, Sir John Nichols,
decided it against the clergyman. A much more recent
case was decided in the same way. In the case of
Martin vs. Escott, a clergyman of the English Church
" was sentenced to suspension from the Ministry for
three months, for having refused to bury the body of a
child who had been baptized by a Methodist preacher,
T under the plea that such Baptism was a mere nullity,
| 6 Bishop White s Memoirs, second edition, p. 213. ^
7 Novelties which disturb our Peace, p. 10. The proposition is
maintained by an array of logic and authority not to be over
thrown.
8 Memoirs, p. 211, second edition.
AND THE CATECHISM. 237
being performed not by a lawful Minister, but by a mere
layman. The ecclesiastical court went largely into the
authorities, and condemned the clergyman on the ground
that Lay Baptism, administered with water in the name
of the Holy Trinity, was valid and sufficient, by the
doctrine of the Church of England." 9 That our own
Church occupies the same ground with the Church of
England on this subject, is evident from the fact, that no
change has been made in her Baptismal Services. It is
further evident from history. In the General Convention
of 1811, two clergymen attempted to procure from that
body a declaration of the invalidity of Lay Baptism.
Happily, they found no encouragement ; happily we say,(
for in the language of Bishop White, if this sentiment had/
prevailed, " there would be no certainty of the existence!
of a Bishop in Christendom." 10
9 Hopkins s Novelties, p. 10.
10 The following is the account given of this attempt : " It appears
farther on the Journal, that two reverend gentlemen, Benjamin
Benham, and Virgil H. Barber, made to the Convention an appli
cation, the purport of which is not recorded, but became an object
of attention in conversation, during and after the session, besides its
occasioning a debate at the time, in the house of clerical and lay
deputies. The subject is contemplated as likely to be the cause of
future litigation, and, therefore, now noticed with sorrow. The
object of the two gentlemen alluded to, was to procure a declara
tion of the invalidity of Lay Baptism ; and they were said to be
conscientiously scrupulous of admitting as members of their con
gregations, persons who had received no other. This, of course,
precluded accessions, except on condition of compliance with their
proposal, from the most numerous denomination in the state; their
Baptism by Congregational ministers being considered as per
formed by laymen. Although the clergymen alluded to were
singular in carrying the matter so far: yet there has been an in
creasing tendency in some of the clergy, to administer Episcopal
Baptism to such as desire it, on alleged doubts of the validity of
238 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
The doctrine of our Church, then, upon this subject, is
clear. She does not allow her own members to receive
Baptism from any but lawful ministers ; and, by that term,
it is evident, she means her own ministers. When, how
ever, from any circumstances, any of her members are
baptized by others than her own ministers, or when she
receives into her fold persons baptized in other denomi
nations, she regards the Baptism as irregular and un
authorized, but, nevertheless, valid and not to be repeated.
This, her judgment, is grounded, not upon the supposi
tion that they are lawful ministers by whom the Baptism
has been administered for whatever may be her deci
sion on this point, it is not here involved but upon the
principle that even if they are laymen, the Baptism still is
valid. Her judgment is, as expressed in the last rubric
but one in this service, that the essential parts of Baptism
are, that the child be baptized with water in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. She
has determined that the mode and matter of administer
ing the Sacrament constitute its essence, while the want
of an apostolic ministry belongs to its order, and does not
destroy its validity.
It would be impossible, upon the limited plan which we
have prescribed for this work, to enter upon the considera
tion of the consistency of these views of the Church with
the truth of Scripture. Whoever would see the subject
treated in a brief yet thorough manner, may consult the
former Baptism." The Bishop adds, in a note to the above, that
" one of the two clergymen (Mr. Barber) distinguishing himself as
above, in a few years after became a Roman Catholic. In the
communion thus joined by him, it is not uncommon for midwives
to baptize. It is a well-known property of extremes, that they are
often seen to make the connecting points of a circle."
MEMOIR*, p. 211.
AND THE CATECHISM.
239
first of the masterly letters of Bishop Hopkins on the
" Novelties which disturb our Peace." We can barely
give a specimen of the course of argument pursued, bu
cannot enter upon it. It is found that, the function
which were subsequently committed to the Aaronic Priest
hood, were before exercised without restriction, as is
manifest in the instance of Abel and Noah and Abraham
who offered sacrifices ; and in the instance of Zipporah
who, in a case of extremity, performed circumcision
These sacramental and priestly acts were not, therefore
inseparably tied to the Priesthood. Nay, after the Priest
hood was established, even where it was schismaticall}
and sacrilegiously usurped and exercised by Dathan
Korah and Abiram; and when, for this rebellion anc
impiety the earth opened and swallowed them up, their
offering was not treated as a nullity, " For the Lord spake
unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Eleazer, the son o
Aaron, the Priest, that he take up the censers out oi
the burning and scatter thou the fire yonder, for they are
hallowed. The censers of these sinners against their own
souls, let them mark broad plates for a covering of the
Altar, for they offered them before the Lord ; therefore
they are hallowed" Is it not clear, that the offering
is accepted and regarded as consecrated, even when the
Minister usurps his office ? Again : in the New Testa
rnent our Lord bid the people " observe and do what wa
commanded by the Pharisees, because they sit in Moses
seat." They had no right to occupy that seat, bu
occupying it they were to be obeyed. Their acts were
unauthorized, but being performed, valid. When the
disciples saw one separate from Christ, casting out devils
in his name, they were offended ; but Jesus said, " Forbid
him not." Hre the same principle is involved. It is
involved, also, in the language of St. Paul, when he " re
240
THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
joiced that the gospel was preached, whether in pretence
or in truth." These specimens of Scripture authority
which will repay a full examination will convince the
reader that the view of our Church on the subject of
the validity of Lay Baptism, accords with the principles-
and the practices recorded in God s Word.
We know that there are those who regard this doctrine
as admitted by the Church, but yet with plain inconsistency
with her views elsewhere expressed of the Ministry and
Sacraments. And, indeed, if the doctrine of the Church
be that an Apostolic Ministry is essential to the being of
a Church, and to the administration of the Sacraments,
then her practice and her doctrine on the subject of Lay
Baptism are inconsistent with it, and her offices stand in
direct and gross contradiction to each other. We are
Reluctant to charge such gross contradiction on offices
so wisely and deliberately constructed ; offices which
passed under the searching cognizance of minds enriched
and adorned with the highest gifts of reason and of
learning. Rather than believe that the Church has so
stultified herself, a reverent regard for her authority we
should suppose, would lead her children who cannot
but admit that she sanctions Lay Baptism to question
I the soundness of their interpretation of her views upon
Ithe necessity of a threefold Ministry, not only for the
regular order and the well-being, but for the being of a
fChurch. The unequivocal language of the last rubric of
this service, confirmed by the uniform practice of the
Church of England and our own, is, that the essential
parts of the Sacrament of Baptism, are water and Baptism
in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
Hence, the principle that the Ministry is of the order
(and not of the essence of a Sacrament ; and hence, also*
the correlative principle that it is necessary to the per-
AND THE CATECHISM.
241
feet organization and the well-being, but not to the exist-|
ence of the Church. These principles admitted, thel
Church is consistent with herself. These admitted, we
can blend that Gospel zeal for God s positive ordinances
and institutions, which properly denounces all schism and
separation from his holy Apostolic Church, with that
Gospel charity for all who, having so separated, are yet
serving God and promoting the interests of the Re
deemer s kingdom, which led St. Paul to say of those
who preached Christ even from contention, that therein
he did rejoice, yea and would whatever the feelings of
others, or the promptings of his own narrow zeal might
be he would rejoice. But if these principles be denied,
the Church is made to stand out to the world an elaborate
self-contradiction; she is made to condemn her own
practice, to nullify her own enactments, to depose her own
Ministry, and unchurch her own members. Consummate
is the wisdom of Hooker on this subject, a wisdom
through which speaks the voice of all ages, and the
oracles of all law. " Are not many things firm being
done, although in part done otherwise than positive rigor
and strictness did require ? Nature, as much as possible,
inclineth to validities and preservation. Dissolutions and
nullities of things done are not favored, but hated when
either dpne without cause, or extended beyond their
reach. If, therefore, at any time it come to pass, that in
teaching publicly or privately, in delivering this blessed |
gacrament of regeneration, some unsanctified hand, con-
trary to God s supposed ordinance, do intrude itself to
execute that, whereupon the laws of God and his Church
have deputed others, which of these two opinions seemeth
more agreeable with equity, ours that disallow what is
done amiss, yet make not the force of the Word and
Sacraments, much less their nature and very substance
21
242 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
? to depend on the Minister s authority and calling, or else
theirs which defeat, disannul, and annihilate, in respect of
that one only personal defect, there being not any law of
God which saith that if the Minister be incompetent, his
word shall be no word, his Baptism no Baptism ? Sith
no defect in their vocation that teach the truth is able to
take away the benefit from him who heareth, wherefore
should the want of a lawful calling in them that baptize,
make Baptism to be vain ? "
BAPTISM OF THOSE OF RIPER YEARS.
The ministration of Baptism to such as are of riper
years, was introduced into the English service at its last
review. On account of the growth of many sects during
the Protectorate of Cromwell, Infant Baptism had been
much neglected. Hence, the necessity of a service for
adults was felt immediately after the Restoration. The
service is like that for infants, with such changes only as
were needful to adapt it to persons of riper years. The
first rubric in the English Liturgy requires that a week s
notice of such proposed Baptism be given, that the can
didate may be examined of his fitness for the Sacrament.
By our rubric, timely notice is directed to be given.
Godfathers and mothers are provided as witnesses of the
vows of the baptized, whose duty it is to admonish them
when those vows are violated or neglected. Provision is
made in the American, but not in the English service, that
Adult Baptism may be performed in private, in cases of
extreme sickness. The Gospel used in this service is a
part of the third chapter of St. John. An exhortation suit
able to the circumstances of the candidates follows. Di
rection is also given by rubric, as to the method in which
the two services for Infant and Adult Baptism are to be
combined, when both infants and adults are to be baptized
at the same time.
AND THE CATECHISM. 243
CATECHISM.
" The Catechism, or the instruction to be learned by
every person before he be brought to be confirmed by
the Bishop," is the next portion of the Prayer-Book, to
which we would call attention. It originally formed
part of the office for Confirmation, and followed what
is now called the preface to that service. In the first
service, there was a preface and four rubrics. The
present preface consists of that of Edward and the first
rubric combined, and slightly altered in form, but not in
sense. The three remaining rubrics were afterwards
omitted. Of these three rubrics, the first declares that
Confirmation is ministered to them that be baptized, that
by imposition of hands and prayer, they may receive
strength and defence against all temptations to sin and
the assaults of the world and the devil. This was omit
ted, probably, because it seems too much to elevate the
benefits of the rite, in comparison to what belongs to the
Sacraments instituted by Christ, and to connect the
reception of grace so directly with the laying on of
hands, as to lead to misapprehension, if not to error.
The second rubric declares that it is agreeable with the
usage in time past, that the baptized should be confirmed.
Why this was omitted we cannot conjecture. The third
rubric declares, " so that no man may think any detri
ment shall come to children by deferring their confirma
tion, that if they die in infancy, being baptized, they are
undoubtedly saved." As I find this to have been one of
the points objected to at the Savoy Conference by the
Presbyterian divines, it may have been omitted at the
Convocation which soon followed, in deference to their
objections. The Catechism which followed this preface
and the rubrics in Edward s book, are the same as those
244 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
which we have at present, with the exception of the part
which follows the answer to the question upon the Lord s
Prayer, which contains an explanation of the Sacraments.
In the first Liturgy of Edward, the Commandments are
not given in full ; all of the fourth commandment, for
instance, which is given, are these words : " Thou shalt
not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain." The
explanation of the Sacraments was drawn up by Dr.
John Overall, after the Hampton Court Conference, and
inserted by command of the king, and confirmed by the
Convocation and parliament at the last review, in 1661. n
It has been adopted by our own Church, with a few
alterations. The words godfathers and godmothers have
been changed, in the second answer and third question, to
the word sponsors ; and the word king or queen has been
changed into civil authority, in answer to the question,
What is thy duty towards thy neighbor ? In the answer
to the question which follows the Lord s Prayer, the
terms " dangers ghostly and bodily," and " ghostly
enemy," are changed into " dangers both of soul and
body," and into " spiritual enemy." A very significant
change was made by our Church, in the answer to the
question, " What is the inward part or thing signified,"
in the Sacrament of the Lord s Supper? The answer in
the English Prayer-Book is, " The body and blood of
Christ which are verily and indeed taken and received
by the faithful in the Lord s Supper." In ur Catechism
the answer runs thus : " The body and blood of Christ
which are spiritually taken," &c. An argument had
been derived from the words, verily and indeed, by those
in the English Church, who maintained semi-popish views
of the Sacraments, that the body and blood of Christ were
11 Shepherd on Common Prayer, vol. ii., p. 268.
AND THE CATECHISM. 245
really, literally, locally, present in the elements, and
were, in this sense, taken and received by the faithful.
There is no ground for such argument in the words.
Nevertheless, our Church, to prevent cavil, introduced the
change, and by introducing it showed that she holds no
such sentiment. If it were literally and corporeally pre
sented, it would be in the same manner, and not spirit
ually, received. A spiritual eating of a literal body and
blood, is no greater absurdity, than a corporeal eating of a
truth, a thought, an argument, or a figure. We would fain
not introduce such remarks in connection with this holy
Sacrament. We know that when men take low and
sensuous views of the Sacraments, and make it necessary
for others to show their absurdity, they cry out at the
want of a reverential handling of their notions, as if a
want of reverence for them, were want of reverence for
the holy Sacraments of Christ, which they do but darken
and disfigure. But must we, therefore, let them pass
uncensured and unexposed, from fear of such clamor ?
It were to be unfaithful to our trust as guardians and
teachers of God s Word.
The practice of catechizing the young and the ignorant
in the truths of religion, is very ancient, because it has
ever been found very necessary. The word catechism, is
derived from a Greek term, which signifies instruction in
the rudiments of knowledge, by questions and answers.
It was a custom among the Jews, as we are informed by
Josephus, to have their children instructed in the law, by a
teacher in each village, called " the instructor of babes." 12
Catechetical schools, as they were called, were established
at Alexandria, Cesarea, Antioch, Rome and Carthage, for
teaching the truths of Christianity to the baptized children
12 Shepherd, vol. ii., p. 257.
21*
246 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
of believers. Catechisls were appointed for heathen
catechumens, of several classes, who, instructed and
placed upon probation for two years, and sometimes
more, were, if approved, baptized. One of the earliest
cares of Cranmer, was to provide a catechism for children.
Injunctions were issued as early as 1536, that all the
officers of the Church should admonish fathers and
mothers and governors of youth, to instruct them in the
Lord s Prayer, the Creed, and Ten Commandments. 13
These were published in the King s Primer, 1545. In
1548, Cranmer himself published a catechism, which was
a translation of a German one, hy Justas Jonas, for the
use of the Church in Nurembergh. 14 The same year,
the Church Catechism, in nearly its present form, as we
have already described it, was drawn up, as it is supposed,
by Ridley or Cranmer. 15 Our Church requires this
Catechism* to be learned of every person, before he be
brought to be confirmed by the Bishop. At first, in the
English Church, it was required that once in six weeks,
at least, the children should be catechized in the church,
an half hour before Evening Prayer. Bucer objected to
it as far too infrequent, and referred to the custom of
Germany, where the children were exercised in the
Catechism three days in the week. 16 Accordingly, the
rubric was changed, and now directs the curate of every
parish, on Sundays and holy days, after the second les
son, at Evening Prayer, openly to instruct and examine
the children, who are sent to him, in some part of the
Catechism. A canon of the Church of England, is more
explicit than the rubric, and enjoins that this instruction
be upon every Sunday and holy day. It is a regulation
3 Burner, vol. i., p. 364. 15 Shepherd, vol. ii. ; p. 267.
" Le Bas s Life of Cranmer, vol. i., p. 251. 1C Id., p. 273.
AND THE CATECHISM. 247
not strictly kept in the English Church. In our Church,
as we have not the canon, we are not compelled to regard
it as an injunction to repeat this exercise every Sunday
and holy day. Other rubrics, enjoining the fathers,
mothers, masters, arid mistresses, to send their children
and apprentices to learn the Catechism, and providing
that the children, when they shall come to a competent
age, shall be brought to the Bishop to be confirmed by
him, and that the Minister of the parish shall furnish the
Bishop with the names of the persons to be confirmed,
are the same in the English and American service.
The doctrine taught by this Catechism, has been
already, in part, unfolded. Its teaching upon the subject
of the Sacraments, is the only portion upon which there
is any diversity of opinion. What we believe that
teaching to be has been intimated in the last and present
chapter. The answer to the question, " What meanest
thou by the word sacrament ? " is, " I mean an outward"
and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given
us." It supposes the grace given, and of it the outward
act is a visible sign. A sign of any thing presupposes,
that to be given or reckoned, of which it is a sign. "Or
dained by Christ itself: " this excludes from the char
acter of Sacraments all those five ordinances besides
Baptism and the Lord s Supper, which are regarded as
Sacraments by the Romanists. "As a means whereby
we receive the same : " a means, be it observed, not the
means. Besides being a sign of grace given, whereby
repentance and faith are exercised, it is, also, a means
whereby we receive the grace, yet more and more ;
whereby, in the language of the Article, " faith is con
firmed." "And a pledge to assure us thereof:" it is a
pillar set up, to show us where God has been in his
power, and where he will come again. Then, it is
248 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
declared, that there are two parts of a Sacrament, the
outward sign and the inward grace. In this sense, there
fore, as including both the outward sign, and the inward
grace reckoned, the word Baptism is used in the first part
of the service, where the baptized child declares that he
was made, in Baptism, " a member of Christ, a child of
God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven." What
is the outward and visible sign, and what the inward and
spiritual grace, we have already sufficiently explained.
The answer to the question, "What is required of persons
to be baptized ? " which is " repentance and faith," plainly
proves, that in the Church s view, the inner grace is to
precede the external sign. Why infants are to be
baptized when they cannot personally exercise these
virtues, has been also shown.
And now the words which follow, are worthy of an
attentive and close regard. After the outward part or
sign of the Lord s Supper is defined, the question is
asked " What is the inward part or thing signified ? "
and the answer is, " The body and blood of Christ
which are spiritually taken and received by the faith
ful in the Lord s Supper." Now observe the definition
of a sacrament. It has two parts ; the outward sign
and the inward grace. There is nothing outward, then,
but the sign. The thing signified is " inward," within
the soul, "spiritual" The thing inward in baptism, is a
soul washed by the influences of the Spirit. It is an
invisible grace, whose residence is in the soul. The thing
signified, also, in the Lord s Supper, must be an inward
spiritual thing something belonging to the soul. The
only outward part is the sign, or the bread and wine.
There being two parts, then, to this Sacrament, the out
ward and the inward, and the outward part being wine
and bread, the question is asked, "What is the inward
part or thing signified ? " Now mark, that by the defini-
AND THE CATECHISM. 249
tion of a sacrament, it must be something inward, some
thing belonging to the soul. What is it ? The body
and blood of Christ ! But how can the body and blood
of Christ, be regarded as an inward spiritual grace ? Is
not the definition of a sacrament here violated, by this
answer ? No ; it appears so, only by neglecting to take
the entire answer. The inward and spiritual grace is
"the body and blood of the Lord, spiritually taken and
received by the faithful in the Lord s Supper." That is,
the inward grace is the soul s apprehension and hearty
acceptance of the sacrificed body and shed blood of
Christ as its atonement, as its " righteousness, sanctifica-
tion and redemption." If this be not as it manifestly
is the true meaning of the answer, then it is made to
contradict the definition of a sacrament. Then the thing
signified, is not an inward and spiritual grace. Then both
the sign and the thing signified, are outward and visible.
Then this Catechism, which passed under the review of
enemies and friends, and after having been used for sixty
years in the church, was ratified in solemn Convocation,
is made within the compass of. a dozen lines to contradict
itself. The attempt to find the doctrine of the presence of
the real body and blood of Christ in this answer, is as
successful as it would be to find the doctrine that a death
unto sin and a new birth unto righteousness is not a grace
belonging to the soul, but a living creature, present in or
with or under the element of water. O, when will
men cease to grossly grope after a Christ whom they
can see and handle, and take Christ in their hearts in the
power of his death and his resurrection, as their pardon,
their life, their joy, their all ? O Thou, who art a Spirit,
give us a heart to worship thee in spirit and in truth ;
and while in reverent faith and love we use the outward
sign, give to us, in all its saving and sanctifying power,
the inward and spiritual grace !
250 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
The services which have passed under our review in
this and the previous chapter, are of the deepest interest
to many of us who, as parents or sponsors, are charged
with one of the heaviest responsibilities which it is pos
sible for man to bear. He who looks upon his child with
glad parental love, must feel his eye fill with tears, and
his heart beat with anxious care, when on that child s
soul he sees God s hand has written IMMORTALITY!
Those little ones are not conscious are we? that
upon our faithfulness depends, in large measure, their
eternal destiny. O Christian parents ! I could pray that
they might die and ascend to heaven, without your care
and culture, if I thought you could be so cruelly faithless
to these helpless and dependent innocents ! Think of
the fountains of joyful love, ever flowing, they have
opened in your bosom ; of their dependence upon your
care and nurture, in connection with God s blessing on
your prayers ; of the fact that they owe to you existence,
and that while it is capable of being glorious as a
seraph s, it is perilously liable to be awful as a fiend s ;
think of the glory of sharing, as it were, Christ s high
joy in being the instrument of leading a soul on and up
to heaven s gate, whence it shall speed its rejoicing and
brightening way over the ever-opening avenues of eternal
time ; think of these things, now, while God s beaming
spirit can ripen such thoughts into purposes, and then
determine whether you can be mainly anxious for their
intellectual advancement or temporal happiness ; whether
you can devote most thought and care to fit them for
success in this passing life ; whether you can allow indo
lence, or earthliness, or occupation, to lead you to neglect
their spiritual nurture and admonition ! O, that one
shriek of one lost child, could be made to penetrate the
households of many careless Christian parents, and wake
AND THE CATECHISM. 251
them from that neglect of the young immortals com
mitted to their charge, which is but a protracted murder
ing of their souls ! Let that shriek sometimes ring in
the ear of our fancy, or our stupidity and earthliness will
drown the voice of gratitude, of affection, of conscience,
and of God ! If we should, by neglect, consign our
child to wo, would not that memory, taken with us to
heaven, make in our breast a hell ? " Deliver us from
blood-guiltiness, O God ! "
With these solemn thoughts upon our hearts, let us
look at the position and privileges of our children. Let
us review the truths which have been unfolded, with a
view to a practical use of them in the education and
training of those whom God s providence has committed
to our care.
The children of Christian parents are by their birth
entitled to the blessings which belong to the kingdom of
heaven, or Church of Christ, as Jewish children were to
the privileges of the Jewish Church. " They are mem
bers of a church, as a king is a sovereign before his
coronation, or as a soldier is such before his military
oath." 17 By circumcision in the one case, and by
Baptism in the other, those privileges are to be secured
to them in solemn covenant, with visible signs and seals.
We bring them, in their early infancy, to the baptismal
font. There we go through no unmeaning and unfruitful
ceremony, but we enter into solemn covenant, and secure
a real spiritual blessing for the child. The deed which
conveys to the child the remission of his sins is signed
and sealed. His sins are thereby remitted to him, and
when he shall have become of age to understand his
privileges, he shall enter upon their possession, if he do
17 Bishop Hopkins, of Derry. Doctrine of two Sacraments.
252 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES,
not forfeit them by wilful failure to fulfil the conditions
upon which they are promised. To use the illustration of
St. Bernard, as found in Hooker, " God, by sacraments,
giveth grace, even as honor and dignities are given, an
abbot made by receiving a staff, a doctor by a book, a
Bishop by a ring ; because he that giveth these pre
eminences declareth by such signs his meaning, nor doth
the receiver take the same but with effect ; for which
cause he is said to have the one by the other, albeit that
which is bestowed proceedeth wholly from the will of
the giver, and not from the efficacy of the sign. " The
idea," says Bishop Mcllvaine, " is, that Baptism is said
to convey the benefit of the Gospel precisely as an abbot
is made an abbot by receiving a staff. And no further
than the delivery of the staff implies a change in the
personal fitness of the receiver for his office, does the
receiving of the visible sign and seal of Baptism imply a
spiritual change in the personal fitness of the recipient
for the privileges of the Gospel." 18 The parents and
sponsors, therefore, feel that the children whom they
bring to Baptism have had conveyed over to them, by a
covenant rite, the heavenly inheritance ; that they have
become members of Christ, children of God, and in
heritors of the kingdom of heaven. All that belongs to
God s children, which it is possible for them to receive
in their present condition, is conveyed to them, and all
that remains is secured to them by promise, by a prom
ise signed and sealed. The thought and anxiety of the
parent are concentred, then, upon that which remains.
His care is that his child may not fail to enter upon an
inheritance secured to him, that he may not forfeit the
high privilege, first his by birthright, and then his by a
18 Oxford Divinity, p. 395.
AND THE CATECHISM. 253
covenant, to whose provisions God has affixed his own
gracious seal. Herein lies the parent s awful responsi
bility. For this ascend his earnest prayers. Over this
his anxious fears sometimes gather darkling. Around
this, again, his bright hopes hang clustering. But on
this, also, his faith, grounded upon sure promises, may
rest, if he be faithful to the conditions on which the
promises are made. On the profession of faith and
repentance for himself, he knows that in the Sacrament
of Baptism, all the blessings of the Gospel are conveyed
over to his actual possession and enjoyment, pardon,
justification, redemption, sanctification, adoption. On
the profession of repentance and faith for his child, he
may know as well, that the same blessings, so far as the
child is capable of receiving them, are conveyed to him,
and that the remainder of them wait to meet his opening
capabilities for their reception. The promise is to him and
to his children. It is a promise to himself on his personal
faith and penitence. It is a promise to his child, on his
(the parent s) profession of faith and repentance, and on
the condition that he bring up his child in the nurture
of the Lord. What a rich encouragement has the pa
rent here ! How may he be animated to bring up the
child in the way that he should go, with such sure
guarantees that when he is old he shall not depart from
it. He may look into God s Word, and find the faith of
one bringing a blessing to another, and from this prin
ciple of the divine government, receive most animating
assurances of blessing for his child. He hears the
centurion say to the Master, "Speak the word only, and
thy servant shall be healed ; " and finds that because of
this, the centurion s faith, his servant is healed in the
selfsame hour. He hears the heart-stricken ruler
importunately and impatiently cry out, " Sir, come down,
22
254 THE BAPTISMAL SERVICES, ETC.
ere my child die ! " and sees Jesus take the maid by the
hand and bid her to arise. Although he knows it is a
principle of the divine administration that each soul
stands individually responsible to God, so that it is pos
sible for the child consecrated to Him, dedicated in faith,
and nurtured in the Lord s admonition, to overcome all
grace, and destroy himself; he knows, also, that it is
another principle of the same government, that the
father s faith shall win a blessing to his child, and that
faithful nurture and admonition in the Lord has the
promise of his blessing. Therefore he takes the child,
in strong faith, to the laver of regeneration. There
fore he brings him up, with liveliest hope, in the Lord s
nurture. And his labors and prayers shall not be in
vain. Experience proves that faith and fidelity to bap
tized children are made the instruments of their entrance
upon the enjoyment of all the privileges of the household
of God.
I add but one word more. If we realized these truths,
and acted upon them, the sad spectacle of a whole con
gregation going up to the Table of the Lord without any
of their children, in the days of their youth, would not
be so often witnessed. The Church evidently contem
plates, that under the training of her catechetical instruc
tion, and under the influences of sponsorial faithfulness,
the child will become, or, rather, will not cease to be,
God s child, and thus be fitted at an early age for ratify
ing its baptismal vows in Confirmation, and thence
coming to the Lord s Table. Let us labor that we and
our children may not be condemned for our failure to
fulfil this reasonable anticipation !
XII.
Confirmation.
THE service for Confirmation in connection with the
Catechism, having been already sufficiently described,
we shall proceed at once to speak of the authority and
nature of the rite.
There are some practices of the Apostles which we
learn were not to be perpetuated in the Christian Church,
by the fact that no command remains to continue them,
and no evidence appears that they were meant to be per
petual. When, however, any Apostolic practice is con
nected with an injunction that it be continued, as a
permanent rite or rule of the Church ; or when, without
a command in so many words, it is spoken of by the
Apostles as an essential part of the Christian system ;
and when clear evidence is adduced that after the
Apostles, the Church continuously practised it as a rite
of divine institution, then it is to be reverently received
and practised. Then, instead of presumptuously putting
our minds upon the inquiry, " Is it a useful rite ? " it
becomes us at once to recognise it as necessarily so,
because by God established, and to betake ourselves,
with a humble and grateful spirit, to the inquiry, " What
are the uses and blessings which God has connected with
this divine institution ? " The rite of Confirmation, as
256 CONFIRMATION.
retained in our Church is one, as we believe, not only
practised by the Apostles, but transmitted by them to the
Church, as one of its perpetual institutions, obligatory
upon all.
I. Its Scriptural Authority ;
II. The Position which the Church assigns to it ; and
III. The Qualifications necessary for it.
These are the points to which we shall direct our attention.
I. The fact that the Apostles laid hands upon those
who were baptized, and that therewith the baptized re
ceived the Holy Ghost, is clear. When Saul made
havoc of the Church, the disciples were all scattered
abroad, except the Apostles. It turned out to the further
ance of the Gospel. They went everywhere, preaching
the Word. Among them Philip, the Deacon, went to
Samaria, and so preached that the Samaritans believed
and " were baptized, both men and women." When the
Apostles at Jerusalem heard of this, they sent two of
their number, Peter and John, to confirm the work, well
begun ; who, when they came to Samaria, prayed for the
baptized believers, and " laid their hands on them, arid
they received the Holy Ghost." Here is the fact that the
Apostles laid their hands upon the baptized. It does
not stand alone. In the nineteenth chapter of the Acts,
St. Paul is mentioned as having baptized certain persons
who had before received only John s Baptism, on whom
also he laid hands, and who received the Holy Ghost.
And now the question arises, was this custom regarded
as, and designed to be, perpetual ? A passage in the
sixth chapter of St. Paul s Epistle to the Hebrews, 1
answers the question. The Apostle enumerates what
1 Hebrews i. 6.
CONFIRMATION. 257
lie calls the principles of the doctrine of Christ, and this
is among them. " Leaving, therefore, the principles of
the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not
laying again the foundation of repentance from dead
works, and of faith towards God, and of the doctrine of
baptisms, and laying on of hands, and of the resurrection
of the dead, and of eternal judgment." Now these are
all called principles or fundamentals of the Christian
doctrine. We know that repentance and faith and the
resurrection and the judgment, are these first principles;
and we find among them, as in the same class, " baptisms
and laying on of hands" If the former are to be re
tained as part of the Christian system, so, equally, are the
latter. Baptism, we know, from other passages, is to be
retained, and " laying on of hands " is here placed in the
same position with Baptism. The only doubt that could
possibly arise is, whether the " laying on of hands " here
spoken of is the same mentioned in the Acts to which we
have referred ; or whether it may not refer to the laying
on of hands in ordination, or in healing the sick. It could
not refer to these practices, because these being confined
to small portions of the Church, could not, with any
propriety, be ranked with repentance and faith, as a first
principle of the doctrine of Christ. The evidence
appears perfectly conclusive, that the ordinance was
designed for all time and all people.
II. But, in the second place, what is the precise posi
tion which we assign to this ordinance ?
1. We do not rank it as a Sacrament. A Sacra
ment is instituted by Christ, and has an outward sign or
symbol of an inward and spiritual grace. This was in
stituted by the Apostles and has no outward symbol.
(1.) We do not regard it as conveying of itself, as it did
22*
258 CONFIRMATION.
when practised in the age of miracles by the Apostles,
the gift of the Holy Ghost. It was the miraculous gifts
of the Holy Ghost, which the disciples on whom the
Apostles hands were laid, received. As such gifts were
not intended for all times and all Christians, we retain
the rite, as we do that of laying on of hands in ordination,
although the miraculous gifts which accompanied that
gesture in Apostolic times and by Apostolic hands have
ceased. (2.) Yet we do not regard the rite as a meaning
less and profitless ceremony. Far from it. It has deep
significance and rich blessing. When he who has been
baptized thus stands up according to Christ s appointment,
through his Apostles, to renew his oath of fidelity and
consecration, in the presence of men and angels, doubt
less, in that moment, if his be a true and hearty con
secration, with the prayers of God s people and his
own invoking the presence of the promised Spirit,
doubtless the Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon him.
It has to his soul a solemn significance. It brings to his
soul a real blessing.
2. Let us, then, examine the advantages of this rite
in the case of those who have been baptized in infancy.
In the case of those who have received Baptism in
infancy, it is manifest that some solemn rite or service
should be established, that they may, in their own name
and person, make a confession of Christ before men.
They cannot do it by Baptism, because that has already
been performed. They cannot with propriety do it by
coming to the Lord s Supper, because that blessed ordi
nance is a badge or token of a discipleship already
assumed, and a Christian profession already made, not
a Sacrament by which it is to be done. This is a rite,
then, intermediate between Baptism and the Lord s
Supper, which precisely answers the end of confessing
CONFIRMATION. 259
Christ before men. In other denominations where it is
not adopted and how can it be when the officer, the
Bishop, the successor of the Apostle, by whom it is to be
performed, is wanting? other and human devices are
adopted to make this profession. This has the advantage,
however, as we have seen, of being divinely established.
It was practised in the ages after the Apostles, just as
uniformly as Baptism and the Lord s Supper. Tertullian
in the second century, Cyprian in the third, Jerome and
Augustine in the fourth, all speak of it as practised, and
as obligatory. It is practised in the Lutheran Churches.
Many who have separated from the Church have ac
knowledged the value and the primitive institution of the
rite. Calvin owns it to be primitive and useful. Baxter
has written a long treatise explaining and commending it.
A strong testimony to its primitive use and its importance
is found in a report made some years since, to the
General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the
United States, by a committee appointed for that purpose,
on the best method of treating those who had been
baptized. " It appears, (says the report,) that a rite
called Confirmation, was administered by the hand of the
Minister or Bishop or Elder, together with prayer, on
baptized children of a certain age." " This rite of Con
firmation," continues the report in another place, " thus
administered to baptized children, when arrived at com
petent years, and previously instructed and prepared for
it, with the express view of their admission to the Lord s
Supper, shows clearly that the primitive Church in her
purest days, exercised the authority of a mother over
her baptized." That this rite was elevated to the dignity
of a sacrament, and connected with superstitious usages,
by the Church of Rome, furnishes no reason why we
should relinquish it. Acknowledged even by those who
260 CONFIRMATION.
do not retain it to have been of Apostolic institution and
primitive use, our Church, here as elsewhere, with wise
moderation, retained its use while it threw off its abuses.
It understood the simple, useful distinction between re
moving an excrescence and cutting off a limb.
3. The use and advantages of the rite, when performed
in the case of those who were baptized in infancy, is,
however, acknowledged by some who do not seem to
recognise its propriety in the case of those who are
baptized in riper years. To this point we would direct a
few observations.
(1.) It should be sufficient to say, that we have the
authority of Scripture for the practice. Both the recorded
instances of Confirmation in the eighth and nineteenth
chapters of the Acts of the Apostles, to which we have re
ferred, are of this kind. Those whom St. Philip baptized
in the one case, and St. Paul in the other, were adults.
St. Paul administered the rite immediately after Baptism.
And so " in primitive times, when many persons were
baptized together on the vigils of Easter, Pentecost, and
Epiphany, in the presence or by the hands of the Bishop,
the newly baptized, after ascending from the water, were
immediately confirmed by him, with imposition of hands
and prayer for the Holy Ghost." Now if this rite were
but of ecclesiastical institution, yet as it is an ordinance
of the Church, not repugnant in spirit or in form from
other Scriptural institutions, it would seem that those who
have the mind of the Master, would gladly comply with
it without question and without cavil. The Saviour
submitted to the rite of Baptism, although it was not pro
vided for in the Jewish law, and was but a regulation of
the Jewish Church, and although as a sinless being it
2 Palmer on the Liturgy, vol. ii.
CONFIRMATION. 261
was not personally applicable to himself. This he did,
he declares, " that he might fulfil all righteousness." If
it should seem to any person to be in his case unnecessary,
because he had just taken the vows of Baptism in his
riper years, this example of the Saviour will still show
him that inasmuch as this is a regulation of the church to
which he belongs, it becomes him to submit to it that he
may, in like manner, " fulfil all righteousness."
(2.) But we can see, I think, in several particulars, the
great advantages and important uses of this rite when
administered even to those who have passed the baptismal
vow in their riper years. It is the renewal of the solemn
oath or vow to a higher authority ; to the highest officer
of the church on earth ; to the one who, by divine appoint
ment, in an eminent and peculiar sense, stands as his
representative on earth. This surely fortifies the con
secration of the soul to God by new and solemn sanctions.
It is well known that the same responsibility assumed
and the same vow passed to one holding delegated
authority, remotest from its source, is not so fully felt as
when it is renewed to one who is nearest to the power
by whom ihe obligation and the vow are imposed. It is
a principle understood and acted upon in business tran
sactions, in the higher institutions of learping, in political
and military affairs. The Roman soldier gave in his vow
of fidelity to his standard, when he was enrolled, to some
subordinate officer of the legion ; but we may well sup
pose it to have been then most deeply felt and most
earnestly purposed, when the assembled army, under cir
cumstances calculated to give impressivenesstothe event,
simultaneously renewed their great sacramentum,or oath
of fealty, directly to the imperator, who stood surrounded
by the uplifted eagle standards, the immediate represent
ative of the majesty and authority of world-conquering
CONFIRMATION.
Rome. And so we may well believe that those who
have separately spoken the Baptismal vow, to one of the
lower orders of the Ministry of the Church, when they
stand together before the chief Minister of Christ, and
renew to him the solemn consecration, will brace their
hearts with more earnest purpose, feel their obligation
with more solemn realization, enjoy the privileges and
glory of their position with a more quickly beating heart,
and lift their prayers for aid with more simplicity and
fervor. The strength of this confirmation of their vows
and purposes will abide with them. One advantage of
this rite, then, is found in its adaptation to the nature and
needs of the soul. We surely should welcome an institu
tion, which surrounds the profession of the faith of Christ
crucified with such constraining and impressive sanctions.
(3.) But there is a higher use and significancy in this
rite than any of which we yet have spoken. It corre
sponds with the processes of the spiritual life. Christ
has instituted two great Sacraments as outward and
visible signs of the two great and marked eras of the
spiritual life, its commencement and its development.
They are not only signs of these conditions of the soul,
and seals set to them by God that he now owns and
blesses them, but when embraced in faith and love, are
means to ensure the reality and develop the powers of
the spiritual life. Baptism is the sign and seal of the
new birth unto righteousness, and in the case of those,
who, in penitence and faith come to it, the means where
by that birth becomes completed ; the means without
which, as the general rule, it would be abortive. The
Lord s Supper is that on which the renewed soul has its
confirmed life developed. Something, then, it would
seem, should intervene, that the new life obtained may
be guarded and secured before it be prematurely supplied
CONFIRMATION. 263
with that which is to nourish and increase it. Baptism is
that Sacrament in which forgiveness of sins is conveyed
and signed and sealed. Confirmation is the rite in
which the soul pardoned, comes once to be renewed, to
be confirmed and strengthened and forever settled in its
new character, as consecrate to God and belonging to
the Saviour. The Lord s Supper is that holy Sacrament
in which the soul, thus fixed in its new character, comes
to Christ repeatedly that its new life may be developed,
that it may feed on the heavenly banquet and grow
thereby. Confirmation promotes the establishment of the
soul fixedly in its new state obtained in Baptism, that it
may surely be in that state, and in no other. The Lord s
Supper promotes the progress of the soul in that new
state thus firmly fixed in Confirmation. In the case of
the new-born child, care is taken that its life be first
guarded and insured, before heed be given for its nourish
ment. Here we see a succession of means and signs
suited to the succeeding conditions of the soul. We do
not regard it as fanciful to say, that although repentance,
faith, and love, are involved in all these conditions of the
soul, yet Baptism is more eminently the Sacrament of
repentance, Confirmation the rite of faith, and the Lord s
Supper, the Sacrament of love. I think that the wants
of every soul new born to God, indicate the use and neces
sity of this rite. The true disciple of the Saviour, feels a
reluctance to pass at once from the baptismal font, to the
Lord s Table. His spiritual instincts seem to admonish
him that some intervening rite should introduce him to
the high privilege of commemorating his Saviour s dying
love, with his tried and accepted disciples. It does not
seem right that he, just from the ungodly world, which
crucify Christ afresh, should rush with the stain of its
contaminations so fresh upon his soul, and the words of
264 CONFIRMATION.
mocking, it may be, so lately upon his lip, to that blessed
festival, where Christ s death is commemorated as the
joy, the hope, the glory of the soul. Finding, then, this
rite to rest on Scriptural authority, sanctioned by primi
tive custom, and to occupy a position which makes it cor
respond to the progress of the divine life, and the wants of
the converted heart, we feel constrained to urge it upon
all ; and, like the Apostle, when we speak of the funda
mentals or first principles of the doctrine of Christ, to join
to the doctrine of Baptism that of laying on of hands. 3
III. Having thus contemplated the Scriptural authority
3 The following extracts, from the work of Baxter, to which
reference has been made, contain a view of the position and bles
sing of this ordinance similar to what has been given above.
" PROPOSITION 12. This solemn investiture on personal profession,
being thus proved the ordinance of God, for the solemn renewing
of the covenant of grace, between God and the adult covenanter,
it must needs follow that it is a corroborating ordinance, and that
corroborating grace is to be expected in it from God by all that
come to it in sincerity of heart; and so it hath the name of Con
firmation on that account, also.
" The Papists quarrel with us, and curse us in the Council of
Trent, for denying their creed of Confirmation and making it
another thing. But they falsely describe our opinion. We do not
take it to be a mere catechising, or receiving the catechised to the
Lord s Supper, or to a higher form ; but we take it to be the appro
bation of the personal profession of them that claim a title to the
Church state, and privilege of the adult, and an investing them
solemnly therein upon the solemn renewal (and personal adult
entrance) into covenant with God. Now in this renewed covenant,
as they give up themselves to Christ afresh, and personally engage
themselves to him, and renounce his enemies, owning their Infant
Baptism when this was done by others in their names ; so God is
ready, on his part, to bless his own ordinance with the collation of
that corroborating grace which the nature of the new covenant
doth import." BAXTER S PRACTICAL WORKS, vol. iv., p. 306.
CONFIRMATION. 265
for, and assigned to its true position, the rite of Confirma
tion, we now proceed briefly to speak of the qualifica
tions required on the part of those who are its recipients.
The knowledge required is placed at a low standard,
that the uninstructed and the young whose hearts are
turned to Christ, may not be excluded from the privileges
of his Church. The Creed, the Lord s Prayer, the Ten
Commandments, and the Catechism, are specified in the
Confirmation Service. But surely none would contend
that it is a sufficient qualification to be able to repeat
these formularies. The Confirmation Service is an
assumption and repetition of the vows of Baptism. Of
course, then, the spiritual qualifications required in
Adult Baptism are required in Confirmation. That
which is required of persons to be baptized, is repentance,
whereby they forsake sin, and faith, whereby they stead
fastly believe the promises of God made in that Sacra
ment. He who assumes the vows of Baptism, thereby
fully and unreservedly consecrates himself to God s
service. He who is confirmed does the same. He
promises obediently to keep God s holy will and com
mandments, and to walk in the same all the days of his
life. In so doing, he, of course, promises to obey the
injunction of the Saviour, to commemorate the Saviour s
dying love in the Lord s Supper. What is required of
those who come to the Lord s Supper ? is, then, a ques-
tion, which applies to the candidate for Confirmation.
For in preparing for the rite, he is preparing, also, for the
Sacrament to which it introduces him. He who comes
to the wedding of the great King, must wear, in his
passage through the ante-room, the same wedding gar
ment which will be required when he is introduced into
the banqueting-hall. He is to examine himself, whether
he truly repents of his former sins, steadfastly purposes
23
266 CONFIRMATION.
to lead a new life, has a lively faith in God s mercy
through Christ, with a thankful remembrance of his death,
and is in charity with all men. In short, is his heart
converted from the love of sin to the love of holiness,
from the service of Satan and the world to the service of
God and his cause ? Is it fixed with the earnestness of
gratitude for the mercies of Redemption, in its purpose
of serving God, as not only its duty, but its joy, its
proper end, its only sufficient portion? Then let him
come to this sacred ordinance, and the blessing of God
will rest upon him !
Let all those, then, who are to be admitted to this holy
ordinance prepare to come in the spirit of a true, cheer
ful, and entire consecration. Come, as those who flee
from near and pursuing wrath. Come, hungering and
thirsting after righteousness. Come, with the love of God
in your heart, and praises of redeeming mercy upon
your lips. Come, as those who see life and its vanities
fading and dying, and eternity with its glories opening
and brightening before your eye. Come, as those who are
hurrying over life s brief barrier to judgment, and its
solemn awards for bliss or wo. Come, with your loins
girded and your lamps burning, waiting with eager
expectancy the coming of your Lord. Come, as the
redeemed children of the Lord with everlasting joy upon
your heads. Come to this rite, as to the starting-point
whence, earth forsaken, Satan trampled,, death defied,
hell vanquished through Christ your strength, you spring
forward upon the path of life, heeding not that it be
narrow, difficult, and sharp, because its termination
seen by faith over death s dark stream, to rise with its
golden spires in the light of the Lamb is the city which
hath foundations, whose maker and builder is God !
But there are others, besides those who have resolved
CONFIRMATION. 267
to come to this ordinance for whom this subject should
possess urgent interest those who have not resolved to
come. It is a duty which calls loudly upon all those
young persons who have arrived at an age now for the
first time to assume the vows of Baptism, or to take upon
themselves those which were spoken for them in their
infancy. It is a great mistake to suppose, as many of
you do, that it is perfectly innocent in you to neglect
this duty ; that you have a perfect right to live without
God if you choose. No creature is at any period free
from the obligation to love and serve his God. It is an
obligation born with the soul, and which will die only
when eternity shall die. It is on you, and no power can
move it off. And some of you have the obligation of
distinct vows laid upon you in addition to the general
obligation laid upon all to serve the Lord. The mark of
the cross is upon your forehead, and the vows of your
parents and sponsors are on your soul on your soul,
because they promised for you what it is your duty to
perform. Do you remember that you are dedicated to
God ? Does it ever occur to you that you are under
" vows to renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil ?
Do you say that you have not assumed those vows ?
Will you, then, renounce them ? You must do some
thing with them. Will you renounce them? Go to
some of the altars of Mammon, or of Moloch, or of
Belial, erected at so many corners and in so many
households, and before those gods of this world, but
miserable fiends in their own world, breathe the horrid
renunciation, and strike the horrid compact, " I cast on
your blazing altar the vows of my infancy, offered with
the grateful and hopeful prayers of a father s and a
mother s love ; I efface the mark of the cross from my
forehead, and stamp it on thy burning brand ; and now
268
CONFIRMATION.
give me gold, give me fame, give me pleasure, satisfy
my lust, and I am yours yours for time and for eternity,
for earth and hell!" But you are not ready for this
horrible proceeding. You cannot make up your mind to
renounce your vows. But you must do something with
them. By refusing to assume, do you not virtually, must
you not eventually renounce them? Assume them,
then ; assume them now, before, the opportunity shall
have passed now, when God calls. For what is the
vow ? Not to a hard and miserable service, but to a free
and happy one. It is a vow to escape the present curse
and discomfort of sin, and its eternal punishment. It is
a vow to become a pure, a holy, an exalted, a blissful
being. It is a vow which ensures peace to the spirit
which is so often agitated ; triumph over pain ; joy in the
midst of tribulation, songs in the night-time of affliction ;
in death, strength and victory; in departure into the
world of spirits, blessed angels for your escort; in the
day of judgment, Christ your Saviour for your Judge ; in
heaven, an innumerable company of angels, the spirits
of the just made perfect, and Jesus, the Mediator of the
New Covenant, and God, the source of all blessedness,
for your eternal portion ! It is a vow, too, which you
will find it far easier to make and keep in youth than in
any other period. The virus of sin has not so long
worked in your spiritual system but that the great Physi
cian can arrest its spread. Heaven, which lies about us
in our infancy, is not yet so far removed from you as to
have lost all its attraction for your heart. Conscience is
yet tender. Habits of sin and neglect of God are even
now chains indeed to the spirit, but chains yet hot from
the forging and not riveted by time, and, by the grace
of God, to be broken by him who wills it, as Sampson
broke his green withes. The Spirit, though grieved, is
CONFIRMATION. 269
not quenched within your heart. Come, then, for all
things are now ready. Counting over God s blessings to
you as a sinful creature, adopt the language of the pious
Psalmist, " What shall I render unto the Lord for all
his benefits towards me ? I will pay my vows unto the
Lord, now in the presence of all his people."
But this subject concerns not only the young, but all
those who have neglected to dedicate themselves to God,
and those most, who have neglected it longest. And
some of my readers may have, if not in Baptism, yet
otherwise, laid themselves under vows to serve the Lord.
They are recorded in heaven. We call upon you now
to fulfil them. Remember! when you were ill and near
to death, and you prayed to God to raise you up, did you
not vow that your life should be the Lord s ? Remem
ber ! when you were stricken down in sorrow, and the
light went out in your dwelling, and the world seemed
dreary, and you could not be comforted by its poor
consolations, and you went to God for comfort and he
sent you strength, did you not then promise yourself to
him ? What has become of those vows ? Did you
mean to deceive the Almighty ? Did you mean to bribe
him to give you comfort, or extend your life, while you
had no intention to perform those vows ? O, no ! You
are not so vile a hypocrite as that. You are but a sinful
creature, who knew not your own weakness, whose fears
and sorrows wrung from you a promise which a blinded
conscience and a worldly heart have since allowed you
to neglect. But did you vow any thing more than you
ought to do ? Is not the obligation, then, full on your
soul? Has God forgotten it? Remember that all
events and thoughts and speech and actions are, in the
sunlight of his all-knowing mind, distinctly daguerre-
otyped, as they pass, on the tablets of eternity. When
23*
270 CONFIRMATION.
those vows were made, perhaps you earnestly declared
to God that you had rather die than live to break them.
Perhaps you invoked his righteous wrath upon you if
you should. But he has not taken you at your word.
He has prolonged your life. He has given you oppor
tunity and space to repent. O, does he not wait to be
gracious ? Is he not slow to anger ? What can you do
for all his benefits ? Pay your vows unto the Lord now,
in the presence of all his people !
APPENDIX,
No. I.
THE language of Hooker on the Eucharist, has been
contrasted by Mr. Keble with that of Jewel, as though the
former entertained a higher and more reverent view of
the subject than the latter. 1 It is somewhat difficult to
decide upon the relative reverence of what is called the
" tone of language ; " and therefore we do not know but
Mr. Keble may be correct in representing that of Hooker)
to be far greater than that of Jewel. We venture to say,
however, that the views of Hooker on this subject, did
not differ in any important point from those of his friend
and patron, even though he expounded the sixth chapter
of St. John as having a prospective reference to the
Eucharist, and though it were granted that the one
speaks upon the subject " in tones of unaffected rev
erence," and the other " with peremptory language almost |(
amounting to scornfulness."
Let it be remembered that Hooker immediately suc
ceeded that school of noble Reformers who, while they
gave up their lives for a testimony against the doctrine of II
a real and corporal presence in the elements, and of a H
sacrifice for sin in the celebration of the Eucharist, yetf]
1 Keble s Hooker, Introduction, p. 43.
272
APPENDIX.
freely spoke of signs and symbols as if they were what
they represented. Let it be remembered, also, that his
familiarity with the fathers of the early church, with
whom this practice was habitual, had made the use of
language, which startles one who views the Eucharistic
controversy, only in the light of modern times, a mental
habit which he felt no necessity of correcting. If these
facts be borne in mind, the reader will not be surprised
to find in Hooker, as he has in Cranmer and Ridley and
Jewel, distinct and repeated assertions of the presence of
Christ in the Eucharist, and of the participation, on the
part of the communicant, of the real body and blood of
Christ. But with_Jhe^e_jissertions, he will_always find
explanations which distinctly disavow any other presence
than a sacramental one, or a spiritual presence ofjChrist
to the heart ; any other feeding upjm the body and blood
of the crucified Redeejnel%lhan that of faith which lays
hold of his death, as_j^edmption and righteousness and
life.
The entire view of Hooker on this subject, may be
summed up in the three following propositions :
1. There is no presence of Christ s actual body and
blood in the elements.
2. The presence of Christ, is a presence of his Spirit,
in the heart of the believer.
3. The Sacrament of the Eucharist is an instrument
whereby the faithful recipient has communion or fellow
ship with the person of Christ as God and man, and is
made a partaker of the grace and efficacy of his body
and blood, whereby there is a true change, both of soul
and body, an alteration from death to life. 2
These three propositions exhaust the meaning of
2 Hooker s Works, vol. i., p. 453.
APPENDIX. 273
Hooker s language on this subject. From the passages
which follow, we shall be able distinctly to gather the
first two of these propositions, as well as to ascertain in
what sense the Eucharist is spoken of as an instrument,
and what is meant by the communion and fellowship of
the person of Christ.
I. The first proposition is involved in his statement of
the point at issue.
" Whereby the question is driven to a narrower issue,
nor doth any thing rest doubtful but this, whether, when
the Sacrament is administered, Christ be whole within
man only, or else his body and blood be also externally
seated in the very consecrated elements themselves ;
which opinion they that defend are driven either to con-
substantiate, and incorporate Christ with elements sacra
mental, or to transubstantiate, and change their substance
into his ; and so the one to hold him really but invisibly,
moulded up with the substance of those elements, the
other to hide him under the only visible show of bread
and wine, the substance whereof as they imagine is abol
ished, his succeeded in the same room." 3
In the following passages the first proposition is clearly
and distinctly expressed :
" The real presence of Christ s most blessed body and
blood, is not, therefore, to be sought for in the Sacrament,
but in the worthy receiver of the Sacrament." 4
" There is no sentence of Holy Scripture, which saith
we cannot by this Sacrament be made partakers of his
body and blood, except they le first contained in the Sac
rament, or the Sacrament converted into them" 5
" Now, whereas all three opinions [the Roman, Luther-
3 Hooker s Works, vol. i., p. 449. 4 Id., p. 451. * Id., p. 451.
274 APPENDIX.
an and Sacramentarian] do thus far accord in one, that
strong conceit which two of the three have embraced,
as teaching a literal, corporal, and oral manducation of
the very substance of his flesh and blood, is surely an
opinion nowhere delivered in Holy Scripture, whereby
they should think themselves bound to believe it, and (to
speak with the softest terms we can use,) greatly prej
udiced in that, when some others did so conceive of
eating his flesh, our Saviour, to abate that error in them,
gave them directly to understand how his flesh so eaten
could profit them nothing, because the words which he
spake were spirit ; that is to say, they had reference to a
mystical participation, which mystical participation giveth
life." 6
II. That the real presence of Christ is a presence by
his Spirit to or in the heart of the believer, is distinctly
affirmed in the second of the passages above quoted. It
is also as unequivocally declared in the following words :
" I see not which way it should be gathered by the
words of Christ when and where, the bread is his body
and the cup his blood, but only in the very heart and
soul of him which receiveth them." 7
;i
III. The third position, that the Sacrament of the
Eucharist is an instrument whereby the faithful recipient
has communion or fellowship with the person of Christ,
as God and man, and is made a partaker of the grace
and efficacy of his body and blood, is one which requires
a fuller development.
The substance of this proposition, is stated by Hooker
in various forms. Sometimes he speaks of the mysteries
9 Hooker, vol. i., p. 452. 7 Id., p. 451.
APPENDIX. 275
as " conduits of life and conveyances of his lody and
Hood unto them." 8 Sometimes he speaks of " a real
participation of Christ, and of life in his body and blood
by means of this Sacrament." 9 Again ; he declares that
" the bread and cup are his body and blood, because they
are causes instrumental upon the receipt whereof the
participation of his body and blood ensueth." 10 In all
these different expressions the one idea reigns, that the
Eucharist is an instrument whereby the body and blood
of Christ is conveyed to the believer. That body and
blood are not in, with, or under the elements, (as he
repeatedly declares,) but they are conveyed to the be
liever in the due celebration and reception of the
Eucharist. Now the point before us is, " What is the
meaning of this proposition ? What thought does he
mean to convey by these words ? "
Our attention is directed to the two questions : " In-
what sense does Hooker speak of the Eucharist as an in-\
strument of conveying the body and blood of Christ to
the faithful communicant ? and what is meant by this
conveyance of the Saviour s body and blood ? "
To arrive at a clear and full resolution of the first
of these questions, some preliminary observations are
necessary.
It will be seen that by the term " the conveyance of I
Christ s body and blood " in the Eucharist, the meaning
of Hooker is that we are made partakers of the benefits
of his death and passion that we are justified and
accepted, and are made to receive the sanctifying gifts
of the Spirit. In short, in the language of our Com-
,munion Service, we receive the " forgiveness of our sins |
| and all other benefits of his passion." This position we
8 Hooker, vol.i.,p. 452. Id., p. 451. IO Id.,p, 452.
276 APPENDIX.
take for granted for the present. If not subsequently
proved, all arguments which may be based upon it, will,
of course, be nullified.
Now when Hooker speaks of the Eucharist as an in
strument of conveying the benefits of Christ s crucified
body to the soul, namely, justification and the gifts of the (
I Spirit, he does not intend that these blessings are firstl
/obtained through the instrumentality of this Sacrament.
That office he assigns, with a constant and consistent
uniformity, to faith. The following passage is the more
striking in its testimony on this point, because it is intro
ductory to a discussion upon the grace of the Sacraments.
" The general cause which hath procured our remis
sion of sins is the blood of Christ; therefore in his blood I
[ we are justified, that is to say, cleared and acquitted of all
sin. The condition required in us for our personal
qualification hereunto is faith. Sin, both original and
actual, committed before belief in the promise of salva
tion through Jesus Christ, is, through the mere mercy of
God, taken away from them which believe ; justified they
are, and that not in reward of their good, but through the
pardon of their evil works. For, albeit they have dis
obeyed God, yet our Saviour s death and obedience, per
formed in their belief, doth redound to them ; by believing
it they make the benefit thereof to become their own." u
The Sacrament of the Eucharist, then, is not regarded
by Hooker as the instrument or means by which we first
obtain the benefits of Christ s passion. It is not, then,
the one or the primary instrument of the blessing speci
fied. It is an instrument. Let this point be borne in
mind.
Now let us see in what sense he regards the Eucharist
11 Hooker s Works, vol. ii., p. 36.
APPENDIX. 277
as an instrument of conveying what he calls sometimes
the body and blood of Christ, and sometimes the partici
pation of Christ and of life. His views upon the nature
and office of the Sacraments generally, will show his
opinion upon this point. Freely as he speaks of the
Sacraments as the means or instruments of grace, he
uses the word instrument in a very general sense, not as
that through which the grace is given, but that along
with which, rightly administered and received, it is im
parted directly from God. The distinction may at first
seem slight and unimportant ; but it is one which Hooker
is very careful to observe, and on which depend impor
tant developments of doctrine. If it be a straw, it is
one which lies at the springhead of divine truth, and
separates the fountain into two parts whose onflowings
swell, the one into the turbid and noxious stream of
Romish error, and the other into the clear, salutary, and
abounding river of pure doctrine.
Two passages already quoted, have a direct testimony
on this point. In one, (page 229,) "it is declared that
Sacraments contain, in themselves, no vital force or
efficacy ; they are not physical but moral instruments of
salvation." In the other, (page 252,) after an illustra
tion which itself proves that the grace is not imparted
through the Sacrament, as an instrument, but along with
it, he concludes in language which expressly asserts that
to be the meaning of the illustration ; " He that giveth
these preeminences, declareth by such signs his meaning,
nor doth the receiver take the same but with effect ; for
which cause he is said to have the one by the other;
albeit that which is bestowed proceedeth wholly from the
will of the giver and not from the efficacy of the sign."
In all his language on the subject of the Sacraments
he is careful to maintain this point. What can be clearer
24
278 APPENDIX.
than this passage ? " For so God hath instituted and I
ordained that together with due administration and receipt I
of Sacramental signs, there shall proceed from himself \
grace effectual to sanctify, to cure, to comfort, and |
whatsoever else is for the good of the souls of men." 12
Again ; Sacraments are described by Hooker as marks
whereby to know when God imparts grace, and means
conditional required by God of those to whom he im
parts it. " But their chiefest force and virtue consisteth
not herein so much, as that they are heavenly ceremonies
which God hath sanctified and ordained to be adminis
tered in his Church, first, as marks whereby to know when
God doth impart the vital or saving grace of Christ unto
all that are capable thereof, and, secondly, as means con
ditional which God requireth in them to whom he im-
parteth grace" 13 Here they are described as marks to
know when God imparts grace. This is one of their
characteristics. Another is, that they are means, not
instrumental, but conditional, on the right use of which,
God imparts grace, directly from himself, to the heart
of the receiver. The passage furnishes a key by which
to understand other passages in which the Sacraments
are called instruments of grace.
Once more ; As for the Sacraments, they really exhibit,
but for aught we can gather out of that which is written
of them, they are not really nor do really contain in
themselves that grace, which, with them, or by them, it
pleaseth God to bestow." 14 Here it is plain he does not
regard Sacraments as the proximate instrument through
which, but as the means conditional along ivith, or by
which, he bestows grace and life.
12 Hooker, vol. ii., p. 108. 14 Id., p. 451.
13 Id., vol. i., p. 406.
APPENDIX.
279
A few more passages on the Sacraments generally,
will give us the complete views which he entertained on
this branch of the subject. He calls them signs and
pledges; signs and pledges not of a former benefit, but of
a present one ; not bare signs of instruction or admonition,
but seals of a real and present blessing. Nor are they
signs only. They are means or instruments, in the sense
(as we have seen) of being conditions, on the right use of
which, God bestows his grace upon the faithful recipient
" Let it, therefore, suffice us to receive Sacraments as
sure pledges of God s favor, signs infallible, that the
hand of his saving mercy doth thereby reach forth itself
towards us, sending the influence of his Spirit into men s
hearts, which maketh them like to a rich soil, fertile with
all kind of heavenly virtues," &c. 15
" We take not Baptism nor the Eucharist, for bare
resemblances or memorials of things absent, neither for
naked signs and testimonies assuring us of grace received
before, but (as they are in deed and in verity) for means
effectual whereby God, when we take the Sacraments,
delivereth into our hands that grace available unto eternal
life, which grace the Sacraments represent or signify." "
Here the Sacraments are declared to represent or signify
grace. When we take them, God delivereth into our
hands the grace they signify. In such sense, and in such
only, they are means or instruments of grace.
The passage which immediately succeeds the above, is
still more expressly to the purpose. " If, on all sides, i
be confessed that the grace of Baptism is poured into the
soul of man, that by water we receive it, although it be
neither seated in the water, nor the water changed int
it, what should induce men to think that the grace of th
Hooker, vol. ii., p. 37. 16 Id., vol. i., p. 407.
APPENDIX.
/Eucharist must needs be in the Eucharist before it can be
1 in us that receive it ? "
Now by gathering together all these testimonies, we
have a clear, consistent, intelligible system of doctrine
on this subject, by which we may understand and har
monize all those statements of Hooker which seem to
regard the Sacraments as sometimes only signs, and
sometimes as instruments of grace. It may be stated in
few words.
The virtue and efficacy of the body and blood of
Christ that is, pardon and sanctification through his
atoning sacrifice are first applied to the soul of the in-
.dividual on the exercise of a living faith. Sacraments
are signs of the grace and blessings of redemption
through Christ s blood. They are not only signs, but
they are seals of real and present blessings. They are
not only signs and seals of present blessings, but they
are means, conditional, by the use of which those bles
sings are renewed at the time in which the Sacraments
are rightly received.
Having thus ascertained the meaning of Hooker when
he speaks of the Sacrament as an instrument of convey
ing the body and blood of Christ to the believer, let us
now consider what he means by the conveyance of the
body and blood of Christ.
We have seen that Hooker uses, as perfectly synony
mous with the expression, " the conveyance of the body
and blood of Christ," other language whose meaning
cannot be misunderstood. He speaks of the effect of the
Eucharist as " a participation of his body and blood;"
" a real participation of Christ and of life." We have
seen, also, that he rejects the notion of a bodily presence
in the Eucharist, and allows only a spiritual presence
of Christ in the soul. These premises were sufficient
APPENDIX. 281
to prove that when he speaks of the conveyance of
Christ s body and blood, he cannot, by this language,
intend any meaning contrary to the first two positions,
and these exclude all corporal presence in the elements
or in the soul. Yet we adduce his direct testimony, that
it may be seen that his own mind fell into no contradic
tions on this perplexing subject.
The instrument of union with Christ is described by
Hooker to be faith. By it we are justified, and by it we
receive supplies of spiritual life. By it a living union
with him is begun, and by it this union is continued.
The Sacrament of the Eucharist is a sign and instrument
(in the sense before described) of this union and life,
through the death and sacrifice of Christ. The passages
which follow express this doctrine, and no more.
If no other proof of this position were to be found than
that which is contained in his defence of the Sacra-
mentaries, that would be quite sufficient. They surely
were never accused of holding to a real and corporal
communication of Christ s body and blood to the commu
nicant. Yet Hooker defends and identifies himself with
their view of the subject. ,
" It seemeth, therefore, much amiss that against them
whom they term Sacramentaries so many invective dis
courses are made, all running upon two points, that the
Eucharist is not a bare sign or figure only, and that the
efficacy of his body and blood is not all that we receive
in this Sacrament. For no man having read their books
and writings, which are thus traduced, can be ignorant
that both these assertions they plainly confess to be most
true. They do not so interpret the words of Christ as if
the name of his body did import but the figure of his
body, and to be, were only to signify his blood. They 7
grant that these holy mysteries received in due manner,
24*
282 APPENDIX.
do instrumentally both make us partakers of the grace
of that body and blood which were given for the life of
the world, and besides, also, impart unto us even in true
and real, though mystical manner, the very person of our
Lord himself, whole, perfect, and entire, as hath been
shown." 17
The idea of the union with Christ, and the life result
ing from it, here expressed, is very different from that of
the Roman and Tractarian writers. The latter contem
plates a literal reception of the real body of Christ by
which the body obtains the principle of immortality, and
the soul receives a grace special to this Sacrament. The
former regards us as made partakers of the grace of the^
body and blood of the Redeemer, and as receiving in a
real, though mystical manner, the very person^ of our
Lord.
But let the passages which follow, give the full sense
of Hooker on this point. First, let us hear his description
of the union of the believer with Christ.
" Our souls and bodies quickened to eternal life, are
effects, the^ cause whereof is the person of Christ ; his
body and blood are the tru wellspring out of which this
life floweth. So that his body and blood are in that very
subject wherein they minister life, not only by effect or 1
operation, even as the influence of the heavens is in
plants, beasts, men, and in every thing which they
quicken, but also by a far more divine and mystical kind
of union, which maketh us one with him even as he and
the Father are one." 18
The life imparted from Christ is not the effect of the
t nfluence of an absent and distant cause, like that of the*
sun on plants, but it arises from a vital participation and*
17 Hooker, vol. i., p. 452. J8 Id., p. 450.
APPENDIX. 283
union of his nature with ours.J The meaning of Hooker
may he illustrated hy reference to the nature of our
union and communion with the first man, Adam. As
partakers of his nature, we derive from him disease, sin,
and death. By virtue of our union with Christ, who
now stands at the head of redeemed human nature, im
parting a new influence to all who are in union with himi
by living faith, we derive from him life, grace, and
immortality. As by the first Adam we die, by the
second Adam we are made alive. " His body and blood I
are the true wellspring, out of which this life floweth." j
This mystical union, and the life which it gives, which
we obtain through faith, is enjoyed and confirmed in the
Eucharist, as an instrument of the blessing which it at
the same time signifies and gives in fuller measure. The
following passage is a summary of Hooker s view of all
the benefits of the Sacrament. It will be noticed that, in
the conclusion of the passage, he is careful to show the
peculiar sense in which he speaks of the Eucharist as
an instrument for the conveyance of these blessings.
" It is on all sides plainly confessed, first, that this
Sacrament is a true and real participation of Christ, who
thereby imparteth himself, his whole entire person as a
mystical head unto every soul that receiveth him, and
that every such receiver doth thereby incorporate or
unite himself unto Christ as a mystical member of him,
yea of them, also, whom he acknowledgeth to be his
own ; secondly, that to whom the person of Christ is thus
communicated to them he giveth, by the same Sacrament,
his Holy Spirit to sanctify them as it sanctifieth him
which is their head ; thirdly, that what merit, force, or
virtue soever, there is in his sacrificed body and blood,
we freely, fully and wholly have it by this Sacrament ;
fourthly, that the effect thereof in us is a real transmuta-
284 APPENDIX.
tion of our souls and bodies, from sin to righteousness,
from death to life ; fifthly, that because the Sacrament
being of itself but a corruptible and earthly creature,
must needs be thought an unlikely instrument to work so
admirable effects in man, we are, therefore, to rest our
selves altogether on the strength of his glorious power,
who is able and will bring to pass that the bread and cup
which he giveth us shall be truly the thing he promiseth." 19
After dissuading men from attaching too much im-
(portance to the question, Where is Christ? he plainly^
\ shows that he does not regard his bodily presence to bej
\ in the elements or in the recipient, or anywhere but in I
J heaven.
" In a word, it appeareth not that of all the ancient
fathers of the Church, any one did ever conceive or
imagine, other than only a mystical participation of
Christ s body and blood in the Sacrament, neither, are,
their speeches, concerning the change of the elements
themselves into the body and blood of Christ, such that a
man can thereby in conscience assure himself it was
their meaning to persuade the world, either of a corporal,
consubstantiation of Christ with those sanctified and 1
blessed elements before we receive them, or the like
transubstantiation of them into the body and blood of
Christ."
We think our position is established, that the entire
view of Hooker on the subject of the Eucharist may be
summed up in the three propositions announced at the
beginning of this discussion.
The only seeming difference which we have been able
to discover, between the view of Hooker and that of Jewel,
has reference to the benefits or fruits of the Eucharist.
19 Hooker, vol. i., p. 452.
APPENDIX. 285
Jewel, in common with Cranmer, spoke of the righU
reception of the Eucharist as conveying precisely the?
same blessings as were conveyed in the right reception*
of Baptism and the faithful hearing of the Word. Hooker t
distinguishes between the grace of Baptism and J.hat off
the Lord s Supper. The difference, however, is more
seeming than real. The one contemplates salvation as a,
whole, and speaks of it as signed and sealed and given J
alike by the Word, by Baptism, and by the Lord s Supper.]
The other, with more theological accuracy, contemplates
the various blessings included in salvation, and speaks of
somejis moj& particularly connected with the one or^he
other Sacrament. When, however, Hooker speaks of a
salvation as a whole, he uses language which is very
similar to that of Jewel. All that Jewel meant by his
expressions on this point, is that we receive Christ both
in Baptism and in the Eucharist. So much Hooker
asserts in the following passage. But beyond this*
general assertion, Hooker proceeds, also, to show how*
we receive Christ in the one Sacrament and how in thel
other.
" We receive Christ Jesus in Baptism once as the first
beginner, in the Eucharist often, as being by continual
degrees, the finisher of our life. By Baptism, therefore,
we receive Christ Jesus, and from him that saving grace
which is proper unto Baptism. By the other Sacrament
ive receive him, also, imparting therein himself and that
grace which the Eucharist properly bestoweth. So that
each Sacrament, having both that which is general or
common, and that also which is peculiar unto itself, we
may hereby gather that the participation of Christ, which
properly belongeth to any one Sacrament, is not other
wise to be obtained, but by the Sacrament whereunto it is
proper." 20
20 Hooker, vol. i., p. 407.
286 APPENDIX.
We have dwelt so long upon the views of Hooker, on
this subject, because we conceive that they have been
misrepresented in that edition 21 of his works which will
be most likely to fall into the hands of readers in this
country ; because a slight examination of language so
different from our own, and so usual in the time of
Hooker, might not enable the casual reader to detect the
misrepresentation ; and because, above all, of the justly
high authority of Hooker on all subjects relating to the
constitution of the Church of Christ. As we study his
pages, we feel that the term judicious, honorable and
well merited as it is, falls far below the deserts of one,
who conducted controversy in the spirit of calm and
heavenly meditation, and whose mind, amid the strong
and conflicting and foaming tides of opinion, which tossed
and carried far off amid shoals and rocks, many noble
barks, freighted with the treasures of piety and learning,
rested on the waters like a buoy, with its chain fastened
to the rock, to mark the narrow channel of truth and
safety. The remark of Coleridge, so just and striking in
its application to the saintly Leighton, of whom it was
spoken, seems to my mind, yet more appropriately
applicable to Hooker. " If we could conceive a region
of intellect between reason and revelation to have been
previously unoccupied, we might say that he had taken
possession of that region." 22
2I Keble s. K Christian Observer, for May, 1845, p. 260.
No. II.
The Oblation and Invocation have been proved, in our
chapter on the Lord s Supper, to be in themselves unob
jectionable. Yet they have been adduced as evidence of*
la recognition, by our Church, of a sacrifice other than!
Jthat of praise and thanksgiving. The testimony of
Bishop White on the subject is valuable, as proving the
sense in which he consented to the admission of the
service.
"In the service for the administration of the Com
munion, it may perhaps be expected, that the great
/change made, in restoring to the Consecration Prayer thef
/oblatory words and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, left*
I out in King Edward s reign, must at least have produced
an opposition. But no such thing happened to any
considerable extent ; or, at least, the author did not hear
of any in the other house, further than a disposition to
the effect in a few gentlemen, which was counteracted
by some pertinent remarks of the president. In that of
the Bishops, it lay very near to the heart of Bishop
Seabury. As for the other Bishop, without conceiving,
with some, that the service, as it stood, was essentially
defective, he always thought there was a beauty in those
ancient forms, and can discover no superstition in them.
If, indeed, they could have been reasonably thought to
imply, that a Christian Minister is a Priest, in the sense
of an offerer of sacrifice, and that the table is an altar
and the elements a sacrifice, in any other than figurative
senses, he would have zealously opposed the admission
of such unevangelical sentiments, as he conceives them
to be. The English Reformers carefully exploded everyl
thing of this sort, at the time of their issuing of the first*
288 APPENDIX.
Book of Common Prayer, which contained the Oblation
and the Invocation. Although they were left out on a
subsequent review, yet it is known to have been done at?
the instance of two learned foreigners, and in order to I
avoid what was thought the appearance of encourage
ment of the superstition which had been done away. |
The restoring of those parts of the service by the Amer
ican Church, has been since objected to by some few
among us. To show that a superstitious sense must
have been intended, they have laid great stress on the
printing of the words, which we now offer unto thee, in
a different character from the rest of the prayers. But
this was mere accident. The Bishops, being possessed/
of the form used in the Scotch Episcopal Church, which)
they had altered in some respects, referred to it, to save
the trouble of copying. But the reference was not in
tended to establish any particular manner of printing ; and,
accordingly, in all the editions of the Prayer-Book since/
the first, the aforesaid words have been printed in the!
same character with the rest of the prayer, without any*
deviation from the original appointment. Bishop Sea-
bury s attachment to these changes, may be learned from
the following incident. On the morning of the Sunday
which occurred during the session of the Convention, the
author wished him to consecrate the elements. This he
declined. On the offer being again made at the time
when the service was to begin, he still declined ; and,
smiling, added, To confess the truth, I hardly consider
the form to be used, as strictly amounting to a consecra
tion. The form was, of course, that used heretofore, the,
changes not having taken effect. These sentiments he
had adopted in his visit to the Bishops from whom he
received his Episcopacy." 23
93 Bishop White s Memoirs, pp. 154, 155.
APPENDIX. 289
In this passage, it appears that Bishop White would
have opposed their introduction, had he conceived that
they could have been thought to imply that a Christianr
Minister is a Priest, in the sense of an offerer of sacrifice,?
and that the table is an altar, and the elements a sacri-4
fice, in any other than figurative senses. All that here
appears of Bishop Seabury s view of the subject is, thatj
he considered the form necessary to a strict consecration, ,j
That he entertained a view of the meaning of that part
of the service different from that of Bishop White, is evi
dent from his writings. As it does not appear, however,
that the view of Bishop Seabury was held by any other
persons in the Convention, and as it does appear that
Bishop White would have "zealously opposed the ad
mission of such unevangelical sentiments," if that portion
of the service " could have been thought reasonably to
imply them," (which leads us to infer that his opposition
would have been manifested, had he ascertained that any
members in the Convention believed that it did imply (
such sentiments,) we can regard this opinion of Bishop
Seabury only as an individual one, not sanctioned by the
Church, and not in reality contained in the service whose
introduction he advocated in the belief that it was there
contained.
It is but just, however, to the memory of Bishop Sea-j
bury, to say, that while he regarded the Eucharist as a
sacrifice, he utterly rejected the idea of the bodily
presence of Christ in any sense in the Sacrament. The
following passages, from a sermon on the subject, will
confirm both these statements :
" It appears, therefore, that the Eucharist is not only
k Sacrament, in which, under the symbols of bread and
wine, according to the institution of Christ, the faithful
truly and spiritually receive the body and blood of Christ;
25
290 APPENDIX.
but, also r a true anfl proper sacrifice, commemorative of
the original sacrifice and death of Christ for our deliver
ance from sin and death, a memorial made before God,
to put him in mind ; that is, to plead with him the
meritorious sacrifice and death of his dear Son, for the
forgiveness of our sins, for the sanctification of his
Church, for a happy resurrection from death, and a
glorious immortality with Christ in heaven.
" From this account, the Priesthood of the Christian
Church evidently appears. As a Priest, Christ offered
himself a sacrifice to God, in the mystery of the Eucha
rist ; that is, under the symbols of bread and wine ; and
he commanded his apostles to do as he had done. If his
offering were a sacrifice, theirs was also. His sacrifice
was original, theirs commemorative. His was merito-|
rious, through his merit who offered it; theirs drew all
its merit from the relation it had to his sacrifice and
appointment. His, from the excellency of its own
nature, was a true and sufficient propitiation for the sins
of the whole world; theirs procures remission of sins only
through the reference it has to his atonement.
"When Christ commanded his apostles to celebrate
the Holy Eucharist, in remembrance of him, he, with
the command, gave them power to do so; that is, he
communicated his own Priesthood to them, in suchl
measure and degree as he saw necessary for his Church,
Ao qualify them to be his representatives, to offer the
Christian sacrifice of bread and wine, as a memorial
before God the Father of his offering himself once for
all ; of his passion and of his death, to render the Al
mighty propitious to us for his sake ; and as a means of
obtaining, through faith in him, all the blessings and
benefits of his redemption." 24
94 Seabury s Sermons, vol. i., pp. 177, 178.
APPENDIX. 291
The reader will notice, in the next passage, the decided
disavowal of the belief of any bodily presence, which is
contained in the last two sentences.
"There is, therefore, in this holy institution, no ground
for the errors of Transubstantiation, Consubstantiation, or
the bodily presence of Christ, with which the Church of
Rome, Luther, and Calvin, have deceived, beguiled, and
perplexed the Church. The bread and wine are, in their
nature, still bread and wine ; they are not transubstan
tiated into the natural body and blood of Christ, as the
Papists teach ; the natural body and blood of Christ are
not consubstantiated with them, so as to make one sub
stance, as the Lutherans teach ; nor are the natural body
and blood of Christ infused into them, nor hovering over
them, so as to be confusedly received with them, as
Calvin and his followers seem to teach, for they are far
from being intelligible on the subject. The natural body
and blood of Christ are in heaven, in glory and exalta
tion ; we receive them not in the Communion in any sense.
frThe bread and wine are his body and blood, sacrament-
\ally and by representation." 25
The opinions of Bishop Seabury on the Eucharist as a
sacrifice, will have more force with the reader s mind, if
he simply read this statement of them, than if he examine
the reasons for them which he has advanced in the com
mencement of the sermon from which these passages
are taken. A conclusion based upon the position, that
Christ did not offer himself on the cross, 26 and did offer
himself in the Eucharist, a propitiatory sacrifice for sin, 27
cannot stand. 28
5 Seabury s Sermons, vol. i., p. 179. 26 Id., p, 169. * 7 Id., p. 173.
28 One would have thought that the palpable contradiction of
this statement to that of the Prayer of Consecration, would have
prevented Bishop Seabury hazarding a statement so readily seen
292 APPENDIX.
As the sentiments of Bishop Seabury on the subject of
the Communion are said by Bishop White to have been
adopted by him in consequence of his visit to the Scotch
Bishops, the following account of the Communion Office
of that Church will interest the reader. It will be seen^
by the reader to differ, not only from the service ofl
Edward, but also in important particulars from our own. *
" During the periods when the government, by Arch-i
bishops and Bishops was legally established in the Churchj
of that country, no Liturgical service or Book of Common!
Prayer was enjoined by authority or generally in use ; *
the well-known attempt to introduce such a book in thej
I year 1637 having completely failed, and originated the!
I civil wars which ended in the destruction of the Church
and the monarchy. At the Revolution, by far the
greater part of the Ministers of parishes retained their
| livings; and, in fact there was no essential difference inf
Nthe form or mode of worship between them and the I
jPresbyterians, whatever differences there were in other *
Irespects. The Bishops and others, who did not conform
to the legal establishment of Presbytery, began, about
twenty years after the Revolution, to adopt the use of the
Church of England Prayer-Book ; and about the same
by all to be contrary to the language of the Church : " Almighty
God our heavenly Faiher, who of thy tender mercy did.st give
thine only Son, Jesus Christ, to suffer death upon the cross for our
redemption, who made there (by his one oblation of himself once
offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satis-,
faction for the sins of the whole world." Surely, in these words,
the Church has provided an emphatic testimony against all such
representations of the Oblation and Invocation as would imply
that, in any sense, Christ s sacrifice was again to be offered, or that
it needed being already full, perfect, and sufficient any com
memorative re-offering, "to render the Almighty propitious to us for
his sake!"
APPENDIX. 293
time the act of Queen Anne, 1712, allowed all Episco-J
palian clergymen who used it, and took the oaths asl
loyal subjects, to be tolerated and protected in their 1
places of worship. Thus there would have existed no
visible mark of any religious difference between the
tolerated and the non-tolerated Episcopalians (the political
difference being, that till the death of the Pretender in
1788, the latter did not pray for King George,) had it not
become the custom of the Scottish Bishops and their
flocks to use, along with the English Liturgy, a different
Communion Service from that contained in it, being that
which they found in the Old Scotch Prayer-Book of
1637 ; of which service various editions were printed and
used along with the copies of the English Common Prayer-
Book, but containing important changes or variations,
both from the Prayer-Book of 1637, and from each other,
as will be shown. Of the English Prayer-Book with this
Scotch Communion Office as an integral part of it, no
edition has been printed, as far as is known.
" It could only, therefore, be from the separate editions
of the Scotch Office, that the exact statements which it
contains, are available, had not there appeared an
authenticated copy of it, as acknowledged for many years
by the Episcopal Church of Scotland. This occurs in
4 A Collation of the several Communion Offices in the
Prayer-Book of Edward VI., the Scotch Prayer-Book of
the year 1637, the present English Prayer-Book, and
that used in the present Scotch Episcopal Church.
London, printed in the year 1792. To this tract the
following preface is given. The following collation was
made by a divine of the Established Church of England,
high in situation, at first with a view to nothing more than
his own private satisfaction. It is now, with his permis
sion, printed and dispersed, in order to confute certain
25*
294 APPENDIX.
false and malicious insinuations which have been circu
lated concerning the present practices of the Episcopa
lians in Scotland, with an evident intention to injure them
in the esteem of the British legislature. That the Liturgy
now in use among the Scotch Episcopalians y is precisely
the same with the present Common Prayer-Book of the
Established Church of England, except in the Com
munion Office ; and that the variations found there are
those, and those only, which are exhibited in this colla
tion, is attested by JOHN SKINNER, Bishop and Delegate
of the Scotch Episcopal Church. London, March 30th,
1792.
" Bishop John Skinner, then and tilt his death holding
the rank of Primus among his brethren, was in London
at the above period soliciting the passing of the Relief
Bill for the Scottish Episcopalians, which became an act
of parliament in August, 1792, and relieved that body
from civil penalties, on condition of their clergymen
taking the oaths to government, subscribing the Thirty-
nine Articles of the Church of England, and continuing
to pray for the reigning family. In a letter to Bishop
Gleig, many years afterwards, Bishop Skinner states that
he put his name, at Bishop Horsley s desire, to what he,
(Bishop Horsley) had prepared as a preface to his Colla
tion of the Communion Offices, &c. 29
" Such a document will surely be received as evidence
of what the present Scotch Communion Office really is;
and the differences between it and the older Scotch Office,
and that of the Church of England, are now to be stated.
(" There is a Prayer of Oblation, which follows the
Prayer of Consecration of the sacramental elements.
29 Annals of Scottish Episcopacy, from 1788 to 1816. By the
Rev. John Skinner, A. M., Forfar, (son of Bishop Skinner,) p. 486.
APPENDIX. 295
The Church of England Prayer-Book contains no prayer
of oblation.
" 1. The words in this Prayer of Oblation which we I
now offer unto Thee? are not to be found in the Prayer-/
Book of Edward VI., nor in the Old Scotch Prayer-BookJ
of 1637. They imply a direct offering of the bread and<
wine as a sacrifice; and in order to show their impor- 1
tance, they are printed in capital letters in several!
editions of the office, as in those printed in 1755 and!
1801.
" 2. In the Prayer of Consecration contained in the
Prayer-Book of Edward VI., the Old Scotch of 1637, and
the present Church of England, there are the words
4 By his one oblation of himself once offered, but in the
present Scotch Communion Office they are changed to
4 By his own oblation of himself once offered.
" The intention of this alteration is plainly to allow of
more oblations than one, and thus avoid the apparent
inconsistency between the one great sacrifice of the
Saviour, and the subsequent offerings of sacrifice in the
sacramental elements. The whole meaning is changed
from the single sacrifice of Christ on the cross, so as to
admit the possibility of other sacrifices existing, besides
the full and perfect one made by himself.
"3. In the present English Prayer-Book there are, in
the Prayer of Consecration, the following words : Hear
us, O merciful Father, we most humbly beseech thee ;
and grant that we, receiving these thy creatures of bread 1
and wine, according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus
Chrises holy institution, in remembrance of his death (
and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed body!
and blood.
" In the Prayer-Book of Edward VI., the correspond
ing passage is : Hear us, O merciful Father, we most
296 APPENDIX.
humbly beseech thee; and with thy Holy Spirit and
Word vouchsafe to bl-|-ess and sanc-|-tify these thy gifts
and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be 30
unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved
Son Jesus Christ. 31
" In the old Scotch Prayer-Book, the corresponding
passage is : Heare us, O merciful Father, we most
humbly beseech thee, and of thy Almighty goodnesse
vouchsafe so to blesse and sanctifie with thy Word and
Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and
wine, that they may bee unto us the body and blood of
thy most dearly beloved Son ; so that we receiving them
according to thy Sonne our Saviour Jesus Christ s holy
institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, 32
may be partakers of the same, 33 his most precious 34 body
and blood.
30 In Dr. Thomas Brett s Collection of " The Principal Liturgies
used by the Christian Church in the celebration of the Holy
Eucharist," London, 1720, the words in this part are " maybe made
to us." Dr. Brett was one of the principal English non-jurors of his
time. Both Bishop Horsley, and Bishop Burnet, (History ii. 76,)
slate the words as above.
31 It has long been customary for the defenders of the present
Scotch Office to state that it is the same or nearly so with Edward
VI. s Prayer-Book, framed by Ridley and others. Hence the
necessity of exhibiting the exact difference between them, which
all these writers fail to notice.
32 The words " in remembrance of his death and passion," are
omitted in Horsley s Collation, and no blank space is left to indi
cate that they are in the prayer.
33 The words " the same " are also omitted by Horsley.
34 In Horsley s Collation the word " blessed " is substituted for
11 precious." These errors in Bishop Horsley s Collation, attested
by Bishop Skinner, would be of very small importance, were not
the whole subject complicated with similar mistakes. Even in
APPENDIX.
297
" In the present Scotch Communion Office, there is no
corresponding passage in the Consecration Prayer, it being
removed to the Prayer of Oblation, which follows the
former, altered in important particulars, and denominated
in the margin, The Invocation?
" And we most humbly beseech Thee, O merciful
Father, to hear us, and, of thy Almighty goodness, vouch
safe to bless and sanctify, with thy Word and Holy
Spirit, these thy gifts, and creatures of bread and wine,
that they may become the body and blood of thy most
dearly beloved Son. ,
" 4. When the above transference was made of the
Invocation from the Prayer of Consecration to that of
Oblation, it will be observed that the following passage
was left out : So that we, receiving them according to
thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ s holy institution, in
remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers*
of the same his most precious body and blood.
" These words contain an express reference to the re- -
ceiving of the elements in such a way as shall be accord
ing to the terms of the Divine institution of the Commu
nion, and of its being a commemoration of Christ. The
omission of them, contained as they are in the old Scotch,
Prayer-Book, is significant enough of the intention of the
framers of the alteration, to give all the support in their
power to the doctrine of a real presence of the Saviour
in the bread and wine, and to the offering of these
transcribing the corresponding passage from the Church of England
Prayer-Book, Horsley has left out the important phrase, " in re
membrance of his death and passion ; " omitting at the same time
all or any kind of reference to these words existing in two of the
four offices collated, and wanting in the other two. Yet surely
they are of importance ; the Saviour s command is, " Do this in
remembrance of me."
298 APPENDIX.
elements in some kind of sacrifice. Compare this*
omission and its tendency, with the Church of England!
service, with the whole tenor of that service, or with the I
XXXIst Article of the Church, which boldly designates j
every kind of offering, but that of Christ once made, r
1 blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits.
" 5. This conclusion will not appear the less obvious,
when a still more important alteration in the transferred
passage, or Invocation, is attended to. This is the change
from the words, that they (the bread and wine) may be
1 to us the body and blood, into the words, that they may
become the body and blood.
/ " In this alteration much is involved. For it is to be
Jtaken in connection with the other alterations above
ispecified, all of which point towards a distinct or separate
\offering up or sacrifice of the sacramental elements, in
^addition to the one sacrifice of Christ by himself.
" The omission of the words * to us? evidently leaves,
( complete room to infer that there takes place a change!
of the bread and wine, (not as these elements are received
by the communicants, but,) truly, absolutely, independent
ly of their being used ; in short, as existing in themselves,!
with something else, which, if not real flesh and blood,
is left undefined, and therefore in such language, as to*
allow of the whole essence of Transubstantiation being
most easily engrafted on the words, may become the body
and blood? both in the literal meaning and in the spirit 1
of that Popish doctrine.
" Then, the words * to us? are in King Edward VI. s
and the old Scotch Prayer-Book, aiid why all omission of
them here ? King Edward s Prayer-Book was the first
established book of Common Prayer in England, and in
order to make the transition from the Roman Catholic to
the Protestant religion as moderate as possible, and thus
APPENDIX. 299
reconcile a greater number to the change, its compilers
allowed the word ^lass to stand, as the tit|e of the
Communion Service. But they inserted the words be to
us ; and it is well known, from their numerous writings,
what idea they attached to them, and how opposed they
were to every variety of Transubstantiation. In a few
years afterwards, on modeling the present Prayer-Book,
all invocation was discontinued." 35
! M Comparison between the Communion Offices of the Church of
England, and the Scottish Episcopal Church, pp. 12-21.
BX 5145 .888 SMC
Butler , C. M.
The book of common
prayer , interpreted by
AKL-1400
