Full text of "The Holy Communion; four visitation addresses A.D. 1891"

Commmunn

FOUR VISITATION ADDRESSES

A.I). 1891

JOHN WORDSWORTH, D.D.

Bisfjop of alt

OXFORD & LONDON

PARKER AND CO.,

MDCCCXCI.

SALISBURY :

BENNETT BROTHERS, PRINTEKS,
JOURNAL OFFICE.

CONTENTS.

PAGE

INTRODUCTION .... 5

I. THE GOSPEL NARRATIVE OF THE INSTITUTION OF THE
LORD S SUPPER - ... 8

Decay of Judaism and growth of Christian rites, p. 9, &c. Their
witness to Christ, p. 12. Discourses at Capernaum, p. 13. The First
Cup, p. 15. The Feet-washing, p. 17. Argument of the Society of
Friends, p. 19. Preparation, p. 23. Exit of Judas, p 24, Leavened
or Unleavened Bread, p. 24. Symbolism of the Elements, pp. 27 32.
Picture at Madrid, p. 33.

II THE MEMORIAL OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE

EARLY CHURCH AND THE PRIMITIVE LITURGY - - 34

Jewish Memorial of the Messiah, pp. 3436. Ours more than a
Memorial of the Crucifixion. Christ s sacrifice purifies Heaven, pp.
36 39. Assembly of the Early Church, hour, place, order, purposes,
popiilar character, pp. 40 43. Business and finance ; Agape, pp. 44
46. Lights, Hymns, Kiss, Confession, pp. 47 49. Prophecy, Epistle,
Gospel, pp. 49 52. Creed, Sermon, p. 52. Direction by special
Ministry, p. 53. Practical Lessons, p. 54.

III. THE PRIMITIVE LITURGY, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE

TO THE MANNER AND FORM OF CONSECRATION - - 56

Dismissal of Catechumens, p. 56 Change of hour. Separation of
Agape and Eucharist. Sunday celebration, pp. 57 60. S. Justin s
description, pp. 60 62.

I. The Intercession before the Offertory, p. 63. 1. Prayer for Con
version of Israel. The Birkhath ham minim. Christian prayers for
Jews rare, pp. 6571. 2. Prayer for Missions also rare. Bad
results, pp. 7174. 3. Prayers for Kings, &c. Defect of Eoman
Liturgy, pp. 74 79. 4. Common Prayers in a fixed form pp. 79 81.

II. The Kiss; permanent lesson, pp. 82 84. Litanies.

III. The Offertory of the elements. Mixture of Chalice, pp. 84 88.

IV. The Consecration. 1. By the Minister alone. Evidence. Ter-
tullian s Lay-priesthood. Reasons for restrictions, pp. 89 93.
2. said audibly, p. 94 3. Four elements in it. (1.) Thanksgiving,
p. 96. The " Word of God and prayer," p. 99. (2 ) Invocation, its
character, p. 100. (3). The Institution ; how it came to be insisted on ;
early but not universal ; Greek and Roman view of it. Council of
Florence and Pope Eugenius, pp. 102 107. (4). Lord s Prayer im
portance of, pp. 107109. Primitive doctrine of Christ s presence.

V. The Distribution 1. By Deacons, p. 111. 2. Individually; pp.
109 111. manner of reception, pp. 112 115. 3. After use of Sacra
ment Reservation, pp. 115 118.

IV. THE COMMUNION OFFICE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 119

Object of the Address. 1. General principles of Reform Lutheran
and" Evangelical" Service, pp. 122128 Calvin s and "Reformed"
Service. Revision in France and Scotland, pp. 129 133. Tendency
of English revision ; the Sacrifice and the presence ; explained by
union with the worship of heaven, pp. 134 140. 2. Structure of our
Office compared with Latin : (1) omissions, p. 141 ; (2) trans
positions and alterations, p. 142 ; (3) seven noteworthy additions, pp.
145147. 3. Frequency of Celebration ; rules of Communion con
fused with rules of celebration ; wishes of Reformers. General
principle, pp. 147 157. 4. Hours of Celebration and presence of
non-communicants; reasons for early celebration. Evening Com
munions. The Prayer-Book and non-communicants. Suggestions,
pp. 157 162. 5. Private preparation for the Celebration and Com
munion, p. 162. 6. Preparation of the Elements the Sacristan, p.
164. 7. Division and conduct of the service (1) Six-fold division, p.
165. (2) Posture of celebrant and people; North side, &c., pp.
166 170. (3) Notes on the meaning of different parts. The General
Preparation. Collects, &c., Creed, The Filioque, Banns of Marriage,
pp. 170176. The Ofertory, alms and oblations. Special inter
cessions, pp. 176178. The Preparation of Communicants ; use of
the Exhortations, p. 179. The Consecration, pp. 180 184. The
Communion, p. 184. The Thanksgiving, p. 185.

APPENDIX I. ON THE USE OF THE MIXED CHALICE AND
THE PLACE AND TIME OF MIXING IT (with memorandum
by Dr. J. Wickham Lcgg) - 187

APPENDIX II. ON THE JEWISH PRAYER AGAINST HERETICS,

(with memorandum by Rev. H. C. Reiclmrdt) - - 195

APPENDIX III. DIOCESAN STATISTICS. A. Personal. B.
Financial. C. Obituary of Clergy since last Visitation.
D. Church Building works. E. Particulars of Faculties

(18881891) - - 108

APPENDIX IV. ADDITIONAL NOTE ON THE USE OF THE

LORD S PRAYER IN CONSECRATION - . 205

APPENDIX V. DIOCESAN BIBLIOGRAPHY (18S&gt; 1891) - 207

INTRODUCTION.

At the close of the last of my four addresses to you, dear
Brethren, delivered at my first Visitation of this Diocese in
1888, I just touched upon the subject of the Holy Com
munion. I have since always had it in mind to say
something to you more at length on that holy ordinance,
something which, by God s help, might tend to its more
reverent and intelligent administration and reception
though reverence and intelligence are very rarely wanting in
any of our parishes. To make such an attempt now seems
particularly opportune when we (that is to say the Arch
deacons and Rural Deans acting with myself) are about to
establish a Diocesan Guild of Communicants and Church-
workers, taking the word Church-workers in the broadest
sense, which we hope may affiliate to itself all such existing
Guilds and make it easy for others to be founded in a great
number of our Parishes. I venture also to hope that I may
be able to do something in the cause of peace and reunion, by
a calm and dispassionate yet critical account of what I have
learnt from others, and have ventured to conclude myself, as
to the early history of the Liturgy of the Church. Such a
survey will, I trust, remove some prejudices and misconcep
tions, and dispose the minds of those who hear or read these
pages to acknowledge the breadth and depth of meaning that
is in this Sacrament, and therefore to make them more
tolerant of others who have grasped a side or aspect of its
meaning, not so evident, it may be, or so attractive to them
selves. I shall avoid as much as possible all controversy and
anything that may tend to wound or irritate any of those
who may be expected to read these addresses. I am too
profoundly convinced of the value of a manifold representa-

G Introduction.

tion of life and thought in the Church as a manifestation
of the " manifold wisdom of God" the TroXuTrot/ciXor; tjofia
of which St. Paul speaks (Eph. iii. 10) to wish to crush or
drive into opposition any element that bears upon it the least
mark of the Holy Spirit s consecrating hand. Life is too
short for us Christians to quarrel about words and names.
Life is too precious for us to dispense with the warmth of
any brother s love, or the help of any brother s brain and eye
and hand.

But if I should, as I cannot fail to do, touch upon some
controverted points, I trust that you at least, dear brethren,
whose abundant kindness to myself and unselfish and
brotherly co-operation in the work of the Church I have
experienced for now more than five years, will give what is
said a patient and indulgent hearing. You will not accept or
condemn without consideration, but first "Prove all things,"
and then "hold fast" that which you find to be good.
(1 Thess. v. 21.)

It is impossible in the course of only four addresses to say
all that could be desired even in the somewhat limited range
of topics which I have selected ; and it is to be regretted that
the addresses must of necessity be delivered to different
audiences. It will therefore be advisable to prefix to the
whole series a plain summary of their contents.

I. The First Address which I shall give is headed The
Gospel Narrative of the Institution of the Lord s Supper.
It begins with a general enquiry as to the reasons for the
prominence of Sacramental rites and similar ordinances in
the Church of Christ. Then we go on to speak particularly
of the Sacrament of the Lord s Supper ; and first of the
preparation for its institution in the Discourses at Capernaum
(St. John vi.) Then follows a review of the Gospel narratives
of the Institution in which particular attention is paid to the
following points : (1) the first cup described by St. Luke ;
(2) the feet-washing described by St. John ; (3) the exit of
Judas ; (4) the Bread used by our Lord ; and (5) the reasons
for His choice of the elements of Bread and Wine as
instruments for conveying His Body and His Blood to us.

Summary of Contents. 7

II. The Second Address is entitled The Memorial of Christ
in the Assembly of the Early Church and the Primitive
Liturgy. This address begins with a consideration of the
meaning of the memorial which our Lord desired us to make,
its nature and extent ; and then continues with a description
in detail of an assembly of the Early Church for the three
purposes of Church business and finance, social intercourse,
and Eucharistic worship, up to the dismissal of the Cate
chumens.

III. The Third Address continues the same subject and
is called the Primitive Liturgy, uith special reference to
the manner and form of Consecration, and thus touches
upon one of the most difficult questions in the history of the
Church. In it I have taken my text from the short but very
interesting account of the Eucharist given by Justin Martyr.
It is concerned particularly with five points : (1) the prayers
of the faithful ; (2) the kiss of Peace ; (3) the Oftertory ;
(4) the Consecration ; (5) the Distribution and after use of
the Sacrament.

IV. The Fourth Address is concerned with the Communion
Office of the Church of England, and will, I hope, be
practically helpful both to clergy and communicants. I
have compared our office with other Reformed Liturgies, as
well as with the previous Latin rite, and have tried to bring
out its beauties and the general tendency of its teaching. I
have discussed also the questions of the frequency and hours
of celebration and the presence of non-communicants, and
have endeavoured to give suitable directions for the conduct
of the service in detail.

The first three Addresses have all been subjected to con
siderable revision and enlargement since their delivery. The
fourth has been chiefly written since the Visitation. The
volume is now sent forth with a heart full of thankfulness to
God and of love to those to whom it is primarily addressed
the Clergy of the Diocese of Salisbury.

SALISBURY,

12th August, 1891.

THE GOSPEL NARRATIVE OF THE INSTITUTION OF THE
LORD S SUPPER.

Nothing so strikingly marks the difference between the
Law and the Gospel as the small space occupied by outward
ordinances in the teaching of our Lord and His Apostles in
comparison to the detail with which they are described and
enforced in the Old Testament. Yet if we compare the
present condition of Jewish religion with that of Christianity
we shall be struck by the fact that our Christian rites have
grown to great importance and have attained great prominence,
while those of Judaism have dwindled or been wholly lost or
suspended.

The rites of the Law must at all times have been felt to be
burdensome and, so to speak, lifeless. Our Lord s reproach,
" Did not Moses give you the Law and yet none of you
"keepeth the Law?" (John vii. 19), and St. Peter s
description of it as a yoke "which neither our fathers nor
" we were able to bear " (Acts xv. 10), harmonise with what
we read in Old Testament history of the cessation even of the
Passover for long periods, and of the loss even of the book of
the Law. The decay of Judaism was indeed to be expected
by those who had the key to the Old Testament in the New.
Not only did the prophets 1 before the Captivity speak of the
cessation and rejection of Jewish sacrifice, but Jeremiah
prophesied distinctly of a " new covenant " (xxxi. 31), which
was clearly to take the place of that which was old. When

1 Hosea iii. 4. " The children of Israel shall abide many days without
" a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an
" image, and without an cphod and without teraphim," and ix. 35
cp. Amos v. 21, 22, "I hate, I despise your feast days," &c., and
Isaiah i. 1116, "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices
" unto me?" &c.

Decay of Judaism and Prominence of Christian Rites. 9

therefore the disciples heard our Lord speak of the new
covenant in His blood, when they witnessed the rending of
the veil of the Temple coincidently with His cry of death, and
when they saw that Temple destroyed by the folly of His
own people, the passing away of the rites of the Law became
clear as daylight to them. " In that he saith a new covenant
(says the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, ch. viii. 13,
writing on the eve of this destruction and commenting on the
passage of Jeremiah) he hath made the first old. Now that
" which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."

So far there was no difficulty ; but the growth in impor
tance of Christian rites was not so clear beforehand, since not
only did they occupy but a small space in the positive teaching
of the New Testament, but inasmuch as great part of that
teaching was directly opposed to a ceremonial and scrupulous
spirit, and was an actual attack upon Pharisaic trust in the
externals of religion.

Yet I am bold to say that there never was a time, in the
history at any rate of the Church of England, when the two
Sacraments ordained by our Lord Himself, and the other
sacred ordinances of the Church, particularly of Confirmation
and Ordination, were held and deservedly held in higher
honour by experienced and intelligent Christians, or were
more felt to be channels of divine grace and to answer to
the needs of human nature. There are no doubt not a few
persons outside the Church who impugn their value or
make light of their importance, and dissuade others from
trusting in them. But at the same time I am persuaded
that there is a growing sense of their dignity and worth in
the minds of fair-minded Nonconformists, and that the oppo
sition, such as it is, is less bitter and inconsiderate than in
past days. A very slight study of the reign say of Charles
the First and of the period of the Commonwealth will con
vince anyone of this change of temper of which I speak.

If we ask what is the general explanation to be given to
the value attached to those external things in a Christian
Society to which our Lord gave such a strong inward and
spiritual direction, we must answer : (1) That He insisted

10 The Gospel N(irr&lt;itirc.

Himself quite clearly on their value, and left them, being few
in number, to stand out in much greater relief than any
of the older ordinances did, except perhaps those of the
Sabbath and circumcision. Without pressing too much the
probability that our Lord gave further unwritten instruction
on such points, in His discourses just before His Ascension,
we may point out that He not only gave directions about
Almsgiving, Prayer, and Fasting in the Sermon on the
Mount, but that in the same discourse He apparently contem
plated some sort of continuance of sacrifice in His kingdom. 2
(2) They are so clearly connected with the life of our
Lord and the great truths of His Gospel, that they are the
most powerful witnesses of our faith to the world, more
powerful in some respects by far than any amount of
preaching. The two sacraments arc not inaptly compared to
the two olive trees of Zcchariah (iii. 3, 11, c.) and the two
witnesses of the Apocalypse (xi. 3 foil.), whether they are
actually prefigured or not by these mysterious symbols. The
rites of Confirmation and Ordination may also claim thus
much at least of direct connection with Him, that He set a.
positive example of laying on of hands on children in
blessing them, and that His choice and training of the
Apostles was in some sort the principal work of His
ministry. 3 Hence all these solemn rites and practices, by
their silent, uncontroversial witness, going on day after day,
and year after year, make an impression on mankind which

2 Matt. v. 23, 24, R.V. " If therefore thou art offering thy gift at
the altar, aiid there reinembercst that thy brother hatli aught against
thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be recon
ciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." This passage
is clearly referred to in the AtSax^j or Teaching of the Apostles (about
100 A.D.) chap. xiv. speaking of the Eucharist, " And let none that
" hath a difference with his fellow come together with you, until they
" be reconciled, that our sacrifice be not defiled." S. Irenaeus takes it
in the same way (Haer. iv. 18, 1, as a command to offer the pure sacri
fice of Malachi, the firstfruits of God s creatures.

:&lt; Cp. F. D. Maurice The Kingdom of Christ (vol. ii. p. 148 cd. 2,
1842) " If we called the Four Gospels the Institution of a Christian
" Ministry we might not go very far wrong, or lose sight of many of
" their essential qualities." See also The One Religion, Lect. viii., pp.
348 foil, ed. 2, 1887.

Value of the Sacraments. 11

no merely verbal assertion of a belief, or teaching of a philo
sophical school, could convey.

(3) They give us inside the Church a sense of our Saviour s
actual presence, by the power of the Holy Ghost, ministering
to the wants and necessities of human nature. What these
wants are, all religion, both Jewish and Pagan, cries aloud with
many voices, and often in such strange sort that we too are
perplexed or repelled, rather than consoled by the answers it
elicits. The satisfaction of these wants by Jesus Christ
shews that His Gospel is a living Gospel, a Gospel of
Grace, and Peace and Joy.

(4) Besides the evidence of the coming of a new Covenant
into the world to supersede the old, which we have found in
ancient prophecy, there was also a prophecy of Malachi (i. 10,
11), which from the first century onwards has been constantly
applied to the Christian Liturgy, while it foretells the cessa
tion of the Jewish types and shadows : " I have no pleasure
"in you, saith the LORD of Hosts neither will I accept an
" offering at your hand. For from the rising of the sun, even
" unto the going down of the same, my name shall be great
" among the Gentiles ; and, in every place, incense shall be
" offered unto my name and a pure offering (minchah), for
" my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LOUD
" of Hosts." We have only to read the newly discovered
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles to add another and a very
early testimony (about the year 100 A.D.) to the long series
of writers who witness to this interpretation, including four
of the foremost fathers of the first three centuries. 4

4 See on this text Bp. Clir. Wordsworth s Commentary for some of
the most important passages of Anglican divines and others on the right
view of the Eucharistic sacrifice. The early writers who quote the
text of Malachi are (1) the AtSax^ chap. xiv. immediately after the
words quoted in Note 2. " For this is that [sacrifice] which was spoken
by the Lord, In every place and time offer (irpoo-Qfpeiv) me a pure
" sacrifice ; For I am a great King, saith the Lord, and my name is
"wonderful among the Gentiles," where the LXX., as quoted by
Harnack (in agreement with Clem. Alex.), is nearer than the Hebrew,
but does not agree with Tischendorf s edition (1869) ; (2) St. Justin
Martyr Dialogue 28 end, 41, 116, 117 quoting more exactly, and dis
tinctly referring to the Eucharistic oblation. It is in chap. 41 that he
also refers distinctly to the words TOVTO TrojeTre els rrjv e^V o.vo.^vr\(nv and

12 The Gospel Narrative.

Such are the general reasons which account for the pro
minence of the Christian sacraments and sacramental rites.
Let us now turn especially to the most conspicuous of them,
the sacrament of the Lord s Supper, and try to define the
place which it takes in the New Testament.

I think we may fairly say that it was marked out by our
Lord Himself as one of the most important witnesses to the
truth of His claims to Messiahship.

He was, you will remember, many times pressed during
His ministry to prove His claims by working miracles. He
of course always refused to do this. I say " of course " as I
am speaking to Christians, who know the meaning of faith in
Him. Infidels still are apt to claim that neither He nor His
Church w r ill work miracles, when pressed to do so, under such
conditions of scientific observation as would force assent from
a reluctant criticism and oblige them to believe even against
their will. But we know that He came to draw men to Him,
not to force them, and to teach and proclaim the value of
willing faith and obedience. He refused then to work miracles

so as to make it clear that he interpreted iroitiv in the Hebrew and LXX.
sense of offer. He compares the meat offering of fine flour, made for the
recovered leper (Lev. xiv. 10, 20, 31) with the bread of the Eucharist :

TVTTOS -f)V TOV &pTov TTjs tv-%a.pKTTia.s , oi/ eis o.vo.^.vf](nv TOV Trd6ovs . . .
IrjcroCs Xpttrrbs 6 Kvpios r]/j.uv 7rape 8a&gt;Ke iroitlv. He further 11SCS 7rote?v
twice, exactly in the same sense, both of the bread and the cup,
in chap. 70 ; (3) St. Irenaeus (circa 180 A.D.) Hacr. iv. 17, 5 and 6
and 18, 1, &c., writing at considerable length of the Eucharistic
oblation of first fruits. In 17, 6 he explains the incense as "the
prayers of the saints" from Apoc. v. 8. Cp. Fragm. xxxviii. (a
doubtful Pfaffian Fragment) which refers to the Sevrepcu Siard^is or
" second ordinances" of the Apostles, which possibly may be our AiSax?? ;
(4) Tertullian (circa 200 AD.) adv. Judaeos 5 interprets the passage of
spiritual sacrifices offered in the church, and adv. Marc. iii. 22 (after
quoting^ Malachi) " gloriae scilicet relatio, et benedictio, et laus, et
hymni," apparently thinking rather of the Eucharistic praises than of
the oblation of bread and wine ; (5) St. Clement of Alexandria, (circa
200 A. p.) Strom, v. 14, 137, quotes the passage, but merely in an ex
planation of the name of God ; (6) St. Cyprian (circa 250 A.D.) Testim. i.
16 under the heading Quod sacrificium vetus evacuaretur et novum
celebraretur, no doubt referring to the Eucharist, cf. e.g. ep. 63, 17,
" passio est ciiim Domini sacrificium quod offerimus ;" (7) St. Hippo-
lytns (ed. Lagarde, p. 160) e Cod. Chisiano in Dan. n. xxii. p. 110,
" When (Antichrist) comes the sacrifice and libation, which now in
everyplace is offered to God by the Gentiles, will be taken away."
Cf. Hieron, in Dan. c. 9, vol. v., p. 689.

The Discourses at Capernaum. 13

to prove His Messiahship; but He did not refuse all evidence.
On several occasions He gave certain prophecies of His death
and its consequences, the fulfilment of which, after a lapse of
time, when men had had leisure to reflect upon it, was really
a much stronger evidence than a sudden miracle would have
been. Such a miracle could not have touched the conscience
or even satisfied the reason ; the fulfilment of the prophecy
appealed to both. Thus at one time when asked for a sign
He prophesied His death and resurrection and consequent
founding of the Church upon it, under the figure of the de
struction of the Temple and the rearing up of it again in three
days. At another He gave the sign of Jonas. On a third
occasion when He was pressed with the question of the mean
ing of His claims " What sign shewest thou then, that we may
see and believe thee ? What dost thou work?" (John vi. 30),
He spoke of Himself in answer as the Bread of Life. He
gradually defined what He meant speaking of His own
descent from Heaven, speaking of His flesh being for the life
of the world, speaking of the necessity of eating His flesh
and drinking His blood (ib. 38, 51, 53, &c.) Now this was
clearly a prophecy of His death, and of life too to come
through it, life to Himself and life to the world. The word
flesh implied sacrifice; the thought of drinking His blood
made the manner of the sacrifice even more distinct, and
must have appeared specially strange to His Jewish hearers
to whom the taste of blood was forbidden as a pollution.

Now I do not intend to discuss the relation of this
prophecy to the Holy Communion at any length. We
naturally shrink from limiting it only to the Sacrament
since it seems harsh to say that all non-communicants have
" no life" in them. Yet I think it is as clear that the
primary reference is to this Sacrament, as that the closely
parallel words to Nicodemus, about being " born of water,"
(John iii. 5) refer to Baptism. Certainly our own Church
in the Prayer of Humble Access just before the Consecration
applies the words to the reception of Holy Communion,
making especial use of the beautiful thought of verse 56
" He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in

14 The. Gospel Narrative.

me and I in him." We must make every allowance for
ignorance and prejudice especially such prejudice as arises
from the had examples of nominal Christians God we feel
sure will pardon and supply such defects, and it is not ours
to judge our neighhours. But we have a duty to put the
warnings of the Gospel seriously before the world ; and to
tell those, whom our voices may reach, that the use of the
Sacraments is obligatory as the use of food is obligatory ;
as necessary to the life of the soul as the use of food is to
the body.

If then these great discourses, 5 spoken beforehand, were
a prophecy of the Lord s death and resurrection and of the
benefits of feeding upon His sacrifice, the Institution at the
Paschal Supper, a year later, fell upon ground prepared in the
hearts of the Apostles. The words so solemnly uttered at
Capernaum explained what might otherwise have seemed
sudden and inexplicable to the company collected in the
Upper Room at Jerusalem. Our Lord indeed made most
impressive preparations for that Passover, all the more
impressive from His neglect of it on a previous occasion.
His journey to the Feast had been marked with many
noticeable incidents ; the place of the Supper had been
pointed out with special prophetic signs. The Paschal Meal
itself, 6 it would seem, while beginning in the usual way, was

5 They were spoken, according to the common supposition, just
about a year before the last Passover, and contain the first distinct
reference to the treachery of Judas. These are points of connection
which enforce the argument from the similarity of language and
subject.

6 I take it generally for granted that Our Lord ate the Passover at
the right time and on the eve of His Passion. I interpret the words of
St. John (xiii. 1), "Now before the Feast of the Passover Jesus,
knowing that his hour was come that he should depart out of this
world unto the Father, having loved his own that were in the world,
loved^ them unto the end," as a short and pregnant description of Our
Lord s loving preparation of the supper which is spoken of without any
warning in the next verse. Something is obviously wanted to connect
the two verses. It is possible that an actual lacuna of a few lines may
account for the difficulty. The fact that the writer was one of the two
sent to prepare the Passover (Luke xxii. 9) was probably known to all
who first heard or read the Gospel, and was doubtless one of the signs
of the Master s love which he recalled when He wrote the words, " He

The First Cup. 15

transformed as it proceeded into something evidently higher
and more glorious.

The Gup mentioned by St. Luke alone (xxii. 15 18) may
have answered to the first cup used at the Passover. We
may suppose that our Lord began with the simple grace or
benediction, " Blessed art thou Jehovah our God, Lord of
the world, who hast created the fruit of the Vine :" but it is
less likely that He would use the " blessing of the day,"
which (according to the form that has come down to us)
spoke with something like pride and self-righteousness of the
choice and exaltation of Israel over all other nations. 7 St.
Luke s words intimate that there w r as something at once
familiar and new in our Lord s action. " And when the
" hour was come, he sat down and the Apostles with him.
" And he said unto them, with desire I have desired to eat
" this passover with you before I suffer : for I say unto you
" I will not eat it until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
" And he received a cup [probably a cup of mixed wine 8
" handed to him by an attendant] and when he had given
" thanks he said, Take this and divide it among yourselves :
" for I say unto you I will not drink from henceforth of the
" fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God shall come."
(R.V.) These words opened a door into the future which
must have been as wonderful in its revelation as the "door

loved tliein unto the end." Another explanation is to distinguish the
" Feast of the Passover" and the more joyous sacrifice of peace-
offerings, from the " first day of unleavened bread." Others place the
Eucharist first and the Paschal Supper afterwards. Others (including
some of the early Greek fathers and Dr. [Bp.] Westcott) suppose that
Our Lord suffered at the time of the killing of the Paschal Lamb, and
distinguish His supper wholly or partly from the Paschal Supper.

I agree with Godet and Edersheim in thinking that Our Lord followed
generally the lines of the Passover ritual, but modified them as He
went along. There is an excellent account of this ritual in [Canon]
T. L. Kingsbury s Spiritual Sacrifice and holy Communion note F,
Macmillan and Co. 1868 a book full of thought, devotion, and learning.

7 This blessing and other particulars are given by Dr. Edersheim.
The Temple : Its Ministry and Services at the time of Jesus Christ.
Rel. Tr. Soc. [1874], p. 204, and Kingsbury 1. c. p. 160.

8 See the Appendix I., in which the evidence is given, and the method
and time of the ritual mixing of the chalice is discussed,

16 Tlw Gospel Narrative.

opened in Heaven" was to the Seer of the Apocalypse. They
said in fact, " This is my last passover : the last year of my
life," and then, perhaps after an interval, " This is my last
supper : the last day of my life" (so Godet). They belong
therefore to the Last Supper, as a single historical event,
rather than to the Lord s Supper as a permanent institution
of the Church. 9 Yet they are important as being very pro
bably the words on which St. Paul founded his pregnant
description of the Sacrament as a showing forth of the Lord s
death "till He come" (1 Cor. xi. 20).

The question may indeed be raised how these words are to
be reconciled with the fact of our Lord s not only " breaking
bread" with His disciples going to Emmaus, but of His
Apostles " eating and drinking" with Him on other occa
sions, as St. Peter taught Cornelius. 10 But the answer to
this is that Our Lord s words here refer not to ordinary eating
and drinking, nor even to sacramental eating and drinking, but
look onward from the Passover at which He suffered to the
other great Paschal Supper the Marriage Supper of the
Lamb, at the Eternal Easter-tide, when all things shall be
made new in the kingdom of God. Then, He teaches us,
He will drink the true fruit of the true Vine, that is, He will
delight in the graces and virtues of His saints who will be
near Him and round Him. For thus we must surely read
side by side with St. Luke His discourse about the true

9 No notice of this first cup is apparently taken in any Liturgy. A
cup of unconsecrated wine is handed round, I am told, in some churches
of Switzerland, but this is probably a substitute for communion, some
thing like the pain beni or eulogia. It is noticeable that verse 20,
describing the second cup, with the concluding words of verse 19 (after
fyioij/) is omitted in the Codex Bezae and certain old Latin texts (a b
e ff a i 1 ; be putting verses 17, 18, instead of the words after v^wv
to the end of verse 20). The Curetonian Syriac omits verse 20, and
substitutes for it verses 17, 18. St. Paul once mentions the Cup before
the Bread, and the Teaching puts a Thanksgiving over a Cup before
that over the Bread, but that was probably part of the Love-Feast, and
no argument against verse 20 can be drawn from cither. The second
cup was very probably omitted in the MSS. mentioned to avoid a sup
posed difficulty of harmonising Our Lord s words about not drinking
any more of the fruit of the vine with His act in blessing a second Cup,
and perhaps to bring St. Luke nearer to St. Matthew and St. Mark.

10 Acts X. 41 ; cp. &lt;Tvva\t6/j.(vos TrapT)yyfi\fv avrols lb. i. 4.

The Feet-Washing. 17

Vine and the fruit-bearing Branches which St. John has pre
served to us. 11

The practical lesson then to be learnt from this is that
every celebration of the Holy Communion should be regarded
as a step forward towards the great unveiling of the glory of
our Saviour s Kingdom. It should be regarded indeed as a
time of triumph for victory already potentially won, and yet
only as a shadow, a veil of that great day of triumph when
sin and sorrow shall cease, and all Christian souls be
reunited, and when we shall see our Lord with joy visibly
among us, as we know that He is now present invisibly.

The next part of the Paschal ceremonial which our Lord is
described as touching is that action of His, "after the
" beginning of supper, or during supper," 12 which took the
place of the washing of the hands by the Head of the
Company.

This act of washing followed probably immediately after
the circulation of the first Cup. St. John thus describes it,
" And during supper, the devil having already put into the
" heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon s son, to betray him, Jesus
" knowing that the Father had given all things into his
" hands, and that he came forth from God, and goeth unto
" God, riseth from supper, and layeth aside his garments,
" and he took a towel and girded himself. Then he poureth
" water into the bason and began to wash the disciples feet,
" and to wipe them, with the towel wherewith he was girded "
(John xiii. 2 5 R.V.) He arose then, as the Head of the
Paschal Company was expected to rise, but not to wash His

11 This explanation is similar to that which we must give of another
hard saying of our Lord s before He went up secretly to the Feast of
Tabernacles (John vii. 8), " I go not up," or " I go not up yet unto this
" Feast," meaning that He was not going up to the Feast of Tabernacles
in any solemn way and in the ordinary sense of going up to a Feast,
and was looking forward from it to the Feast of the Passover which
He was going up to, solemnly and openly, in the way in which His
brethren wished Him to go up to the Feast of Tabernacles.

12 John xiii. 2, where the right reading appears to be Senn/ou yivopcvov
" during supper." Bishop Westcott renders it " during a supper," but
this implies that the hearers and readers of the Gospel did not know
that it was the Lord s last Supper. Our A.Y. renders, unfortunately,
" Supper being ended."

18 The Gospel Narrative.

own hands, as if to prepare and consecrate Himself, but to do
an act of lowest servitude to His disciples. The meaning of
this act He Himself partly explains by the words used at the
close of His short dialogue with St. Peter, " He that is bathed
" (o AfAoiyievoc) needeth not save to wash (vi\f/aa6cu) his
" feet, but is clean every whit : and ye are clean but not all "
(ib. 10 K.V.) He that hath once bathed in the waters of
baptism and has been there cleansed in body and soul, needs
not to be baptized again, but must by repentance and
contrition wash off the dust and mire that clings to his feet
as he walks through life, and this we are to help one another
to do. I do not say that this exhausts the meaning of the
words, but it is the most obvious meaning to attach to them.

There is a point which must be raised here in order to
justify this explanation. It has sometimes been questioned
whether the Apostles themselves had been as yet baptized.
But it is surely almost certain that they were. Our Lord in
speaking to Nicodemus of the necessity of Baptism and of
the work of the Spirit renewing life in Baptism, seems to
join their testimony as to its blessings with His own : " We
" speak that we do know, and bear witness of that we have
" seen, and ye receive not our witness " (John iii. 11). Nor
can we think it possible that He who submitted to Baptism
Himself and baptized others, delegating the office (as we are
told) chiefly to His disciples, should have failed to baptize
them (John iii. 22 and iv. 2). Their further baptism " with
" the Holy Ghost and with fire " on the day of Pentecost
answered rather to our Confirmation, and was followed by an
outpouring of marvellous spiritual gifts (see Bp. Wordsworth
on Acts i. 5). This being the case, they were prepared to
understand the words "He that hath bathed" of a baptized
person.

The washing of the feet then was a lesson of the kind of
purification necessary to the baptized before entrance upon
the rite that was to follow. Our Lord had not as yet
explained what He was about to do, though He had given
some indications of His purpose. But the washing of the feet
to men of Jewish birth of itself suggested at least two prin-

Argument of the Society of Friends. 19

cipal ideas : (1) the welcoming of guests into a house for a
festival, (2) the purification of those about to be engaged in
a solemn service, like that of the priests at the Laver before
entering the sanctuary and offering sacrifice. (Exod. xxx.
1820, &c.)

This act then differs from the giving of the first cup in
being one of perpetual importance to the Church. All have
been baptized, and none but baptized persons are admissible
to the Holy Eucharist, 13 and they must be admitted through
some such purification as that which our Lord used to
prepare His disciples. " Know ye (He says) what I have
" done to you ?" implying that His act was one to be carefully
considered, pondered, and acted upon. "Ye call me Master
" and Lord: and ye say well ; for so I am. If I then the
" Lord and the Master, have washed your feet ye also ought to
" wash one another s feet. For I have given you an example
" that ye should do as I have done to you." (John xiii.
12 15). What then is the permanent meaning to us of
this command ? It is certainly not a literal washing of the
same kind.

Members of the Society of Friends are apt to argue
and we must be prepared to answer them that this com
mand is almost as explicit as the " Do this in remembrance
" of Me," which we interpret as a command to make a per
petual memorial in the Sacrament. They conclude then that
as the command to wash one another s feet is not to be taken
literally for so all are agreed therefore the latter need not
be literally fulfilled.

Now I am quite willing to admit that if we had only the
text of the Gospels put into our hands for the first time to
day, and were told to construct a sacramental system out of

13 The Liturgies that have come down to us provide regularly for a

dismissal of Catechumens or candidates for Baptism. The AtSax^

chap, ix., says, " And let none eat or drink of your Eucharist but sucli

as have been baptized in the name of the Lord ; for concerning this

the Lord hath said, Give, not that which is holy to the dogs." Cp.

Justin, Apol. i. t)6. " No one is permitted to partake (of the Eucharist)

except him that bclieveth that our teaching is true, and who has been

washed in the laver which is for remission of sins and a new birth,

and lives according to Christ s commands." See the III fl Address.

20 The Gospel Narrative.

it, or to decide whether a sacramental system was necessary,
we might hesitate exactly what answer to give. I feel sure
that we should think a sacramental system necessary ; but I
conceive we might very possibly think it wisest to incorporate
a literal washing, of some kind or other, into our Liturgy.
But as a matter of fact, this difficulty has never presented
itself to the Church. The Sacraments come to us through a
body of living persons, the first generation of whom had been
carefully trained to hand on traditions from father to son, as
for instance with regard to the meaning and ritual of the Pass
over. Their witness being universally, or all but universally,
in one direction, we are bound to accept it, even should it be
not perfectly clear to us why it takes a particular line this
way or that. The case before us is analogous to the observ
ance of Sunday and the cessation of Jewish Sabbath-keeping,
and the Baptism of Infants. We accept both, because of the
abundance of evidence for them and the absence of any
weight of evidence to the contrary. And so we omit a literal
feet-washing from our Liturgy, because we have no evidence
that it was ever in use, at any rate to any extent, as part even
of the regular preparation of the celebrant, except perhaps
here and there in some Churches of the East. 14 We have
also contrary evidence in the Commentaries of the Fathers
that it never occurred to them to consider its literal fulfil
ment. A washing of the hands on the part both of clergy
and people was indeed a very early custom, as a preparation
for prayer, both private and public, and it has become cere
monial in many Liturgies and at different parts of the

14 Freeman Principles of Divine Service vol. 2 part 2 cli. 2 4,
p. 312, says, " Renaudot says the old Eastern rule was for the priest to
wash his feet, i. 176." I cannot find this passage in Renaudot. But
he says of the Copts (i. 159 ed. 2), " Sacerdos pedes et manus lavare
" debet : jejunasse etiam die praecedenti, et ad vesperam abstinuisse a
" vino," &c. Egypt, in which the heathen priests made such elaborate
washings of themselves, is just the country where such a custom would
take root. There are some other notices of feet-washing in Mr. A. J.
Butler s Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt, but not as a preparation
of the celebrant. Feet-washing as a baptismal ceremony was a spe
cially Gallican rite. See Diet, of Chr. Ant. Baptism, 34 and 67.
The 48th Canon of the Council of Eliberis forbids it. (Brims
Canones ii. p. 9.)

The two Mandates. 21

But I am not aware that this hand-washing has
been considered by any writer of eminence as of serious
importance.

There are however other reasons, which when we have
weighed the testimony of the Church to the spiritual and not
literal importance of our Lord s command or Mandate 16 (as
the Church has often called it) will enable us to draw a dis
tinction between it and the other command, " Do this in
"remembrance of me."

The washing is set, as it were, in a discourse which
explains it. Its symbolic character is at once brought to our
notice. On the other hand, " Do this " is almost curt in its
brevity. It waited for its explanation ; and immediately
afterwards that explanation was given by the events of Good
Friday and Easter Day. Following close upon these events
we find a rite of " breaking of bread " or Eucharistic service
taken for granted as well understood by all Christians.
Secondly, our Lord s precepts are universal and not local
in their character. This particular kind of washing, as done
by one for another, is so local that we have only two other
references to it in the New Testament one in the Gospels
(Luke vii. 44) and one in St. Paul s First Epistle to Timothy
(v. 10) neither of them in connection with public worship.
On the other hand we have the Institution of the Eucharist
described in three evangelists and referred to frequently in the
Acts and in St. Paul s First Epistle to the Corinthians. The

15 The earliest reference is probably Tertullian, A.D. 192, de Oratione
13. " What is the sense of entering on prayer with the hands washed
" indeed, but with the spirit denied ?" It is possible that there is an
allusion to the custom in St. Paul s, " I desire therefore that men pray
" in every place, lifting up holy hands," &c. (1 Tim. ii. 8). The first
distinct description of it in the Liturgy is S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat.
Myst. v. (A.D. 347 or 348), as coming after the dismissal of Cate
chumens. In the Roman Missal a washing of the priest s fingers (of
comparatively late introduction) forms part of the ablutions of the
sacred vessels. A washing of the hands is also part of the preparation
in the vestry.

16 The Thursday in Holy Week is often called Dies Mandati or
Maundy Thursday from the antiphon " Mandatum novum do vobis ut
" diligatis invicem" (John xiii. 34). But mandatum is also a name,
though probably not an early one, for the feet-washing.

22 77/6 Gospel Narrative.

particular phrase used by the latter, Ye do shew the Lord s
" death till He come " (1 Cor. xi. 26) is surely sufficient by
itself, as against the Society of Friends, to establish the
permanence of the Sacrament, and to link it with the progress
of the Church through all ages of history up to the Second
Advent.

We are bound however to point out to the Society of
Friends that the Church does not tie the blessings of Com-

munion to the external observance of eating and drinking,
where it cannot be had. It is enough to remind you of the
rubric (last but two) at the close of the Service for the
Communion of the Sick, which teaches in what cases a man
may "eat and drink the Body and Blood of our Saviour
" Christ profitably to his soul s health, although he do not
" receive the Sacrament with his mouth." 17

The washing of the feet then is in a spiritual sense the
cleansing of the baptized, one by another, before they enter
the Master s House as His guests, and take part in the solemn
Liturgy to which He calls them as a company of priests. It
is specially marked as a lowly ministerial office, a servile duty
possibly with a foresight of the misuse which might be
made of penitential discipline by Confessors lording it over
God s heritage. As far as such a preparation has to be made
in private (as it must from time to time be the case, especially
with the sick) it is certain that nothing but deep humility can
be of any avail in the minister of God who has to help a
sin-laden and sin-stained soul to wash off its defilements and
to get clear from its entanglements.

He who tells a brother of his faults, or listens to the tale
when offered to his ears, can be of no service to that brother
unless he is deeply conscious of his own sinfulness and is

17 Cp. the authorities cited by Scndamore Notitia Eucharistica ed. 2
1876, p. 1038. The doctrine may be traced up to St. Augustine s
Comment on St. John vi. 2729, Tract xxv. 12, and especially to the
words, " Crede et inauducasti." The teaching of St. Ambrose as to
cases in which Baptism could be dispensed with, in reference to the
death of the Emperor Valeutinian II. while still a catechumen, would
also tell in the same direction. See his DC obitu Valentiniani Con-
solatio.

Preparation private and public. 23

willing to confess that he is unworthy of the least of God s
mercies. This caution applies to Parents and Guardians,
School Teachers, Masters and Mistresses, Physicians and
confidential friends, who have to warn and counsel others and
try to bring them to a sense of the danger, folly and ruinous
consequences of sin as well as to the Clergy. Often such
warnings are given in a harsh or in a merely formal way.
We cannot wonder if they often pass unheeded. They will do
so unless we give something of ourselves, and add some piece
of personal abasement with the warning.

The public use of united preparation and confession, and of
solemn warnings put into the priest s mouth like those in our
Prayer Book exhortations, are however the main and ordinary
fulfilments of our Lord s command, that as He did for us so
we also should do for one another. I am glad to think that
there is a growing sense of the importance of parochial pre
parations for Holy Communion, such as were sketched by our
beloved Archbishop in his Seven Gifts (pp. 100 and 126). In
our own Communion office we have a double public pre
paration, the first centering round the Ten Commandments,
the second just before the act of consecration. Some form of
the first used on a week day, coming, perhaps, once a quarter,
would surely not be an impossible devotional exercise even in
quite small parishes. 18

It would not be possible within the limits of one address to
go in detail through the records of those heart-searching dis
courses recorded by St. John, in reading or hearing which
the soul seems to float in an atmosphere of heavenly calm
above the world and yet conscious of its wants and its
sorrows, its approaching trials and martyrdoms. The Holy
Spirit clearly did not think it needful that we should know
exactly the relation of these discourses to the ritual of the
Paschal meal or even the incidents of that memorable night.

18 Some help to such a service will be found in the Manual of the
Diocesan Communicants Guild just published. A useful form called
an Office for a Communicant s Preparation Service by Rev. J. P. A.
Bowers, M.A., Diocesan Missioner, may be obtained from Mrs. Packer,
S.P.C.K. Depot, College Court, Gloucester.

24 The Gospel Narrative.

It is now, however, generally agreed that the scrutiny who
was to be the Traitor was closely followed by the hasty exit of
Judas, after taking the sop (containing probably a piece of
the Paschal Lamb) from Christ s hand, and that he did not
remain to the end of the supper. Our Church, indeed,
following the medieval tradition, based on the order of St.
Luke s narrative, has introduced a reference to his case into
the first of the warnings to the people before Communion. 19
But we are not of course bound to accept this as decisive.
Bishop Westcott apparently supposes that Judas received the
bread but not the cup.

We must apparently place the blessing and breaking of the
bread before the end of the supper, since St. Matthew and
St. Mark say "as" or "while they were eating." That of
the cup is as distinctly said by St. Luke and St. Paul to
be " after supper" (/isra TO ^nrvrjaai). The bread used is
supposed by Dr. Edersheim 20 to have been a piece of one
of the unleavened Passover cakes, such as the Jews now put
aside and reserve under the name of Aphikomen or after-dish
or dessert. The cup " after supper" which St. Paul calls the
" Cup of Blessing" is also identified by the same authority
with the Third cup of the Passover. The " hymn" which
was sung before they left the upper room would probably be
part of the Hallel, perhaps Psalms cxv. cxviii.

But our Lord, it would seem, rather used the material
substances before Him on account of their universality and
their constant connection with sacrifice, than because of any
deep and serious symbolism attaching to their use at the
Passover. He made no reference, for instance, to the bread
being leavened or unleavened, a matter which to the Jews is
of serious importance, and which has been from time to time

19 Sec Scudamore Notitia Eucli. p. 453. This Exhortation is found
in the Communion Order of 1548 which preceded the first prayer-book
of 1549. Bp. Westcott s opinion is given in the note before John xiii.

20 ^See the Temple Its Ministry, &c. pp. 209 foil. Life and Times,
&c., ii. p. 504 where he writes it Apliikomon. At the time of our Lord
it is supposed that the Jews did not eat sucli an after-dish, and in fact
were forbidden to eat anything after the Lainb. If this is so, the
modern Jewish custom is an unconscious following of our Lord s act.

Use of leavened or unleavened Bread. 25

made matter of sharp controversy in the Church. It is well
known that nearly all Orientals 21 use and have apparently
always used leavened bread, while the Latins, since the Xlth
century, if not a good deal earlier, have used unleavened
cakes or wafers, or as the Greeks call them azymes.

Those who use unleavened bread may claim that our Lord
probably did so, and may refer to the general use of un
leavened cakes in all meat offerings under the Law (Lev.
ii. II), 22 and to St. Paul s words about keeping the feast
with the " unleavened bread" of sincerity and truth. (1 Cor.
v. 7).

Those who use ordinary leavened bread may urge that in
the first age of the Church, especially when the Eucharist
was celebrated daily and connected with a common meal,
there was probably no attempt made to supply and perhaps
scarcely a possibility of supplying, any special kind of Bread
for the Communion. Those who believe, as some of the
early Greek fathers did that our Lord instituted His Supper
before the Passover, and suffered on the day and at the hour
when the Paschal Lamb was slain, have an additional reason
for preferring leavened bread : and a natural wish to avoid
the appearance of Judaizing may further incline them in the
same direction. The probability is that ordinary leavened
bread was in common use in the West 23 as long as the people

21 The Armenians who use an unmixed cup also use unleavened bread.
It has been an obvious criticism to connect these usages with their
Monophysitism, but the evidence for the connection is not so clear.
The Marouites also use unleavened bread. The Greeks mixed not only
leaven but salt, and probably continue to do so. The Syrian Christians
add also oil. Mr. Scudamore, following Cardinal Bona, N.E. pp.
857-875, writes strongly and ably against the early use of unleavened
bread in the Western Church. The article Elements in the Diet. Chr.
Ant. [signed G. W. Pennethorne and Cheetham] is in favour of an
earlier Western use in the 7th or 8th centuries and perhaps earlier still.

22 An exception was, however, made in the case of peace-offerings,
which were, being of a more social character, to be accompanied with
leavened bread (Lev. vii. 12).

23 The evidence that unleavened bread was in use in the Celtic Church
earlier than elsewhere, collected by F. G. Warren, Liturgy and Ritual
of the Celtic Church, pp. 131, 132, 1882, is not strong. The reference,
e.g., to Walafrid Strabo s Life of St. Gall, i. 17, does not prove much,

26 The Gospel Narrative.

offered their own oblations ; but that even while this usage
still continued, a distinction grew up as to what part of these
oblations was, and what was not, to be employed for the
Sacraments ; and that, when the usage was lost, the use of
unleavened bread became fixed partly from convenience and
partly out of a feeling of reverence, wishing to discriminate it
from ordinary food.

The Greeks attacked the Latins on the subject in the Xlth
century, and later, and often with great bitterness ; but we
can hardly suppose that it would now be considered a serious
obstacle to communion.

In our own Church happily this has not been a matter of
serious strife. Hooker could point to it as a thing generally
allowed among us to be indifferent, and as such could use it
to illustrate the absurdity of the Puritan axiom that things
indifferent become unlawful because those in error use them. 24
Let us strive rather to increase than to diminish the area of
such indifference, while we hold fast to the general sense of
the Church universal as to what is permanent and essential.
See the wise words of S. Anselm, quoted by Maskell, Ancient
Liturgy of the Church of England, p. 48, 3rd ed. 1882.

We arc now in a position to ask more particularly what
was Our Blessed Lord s intention to teach us when He took
Bread leavened or unleavened and blessed or gave thanks
and brake and gave to His disciples, sajdng TAKE EAT (Mt.),

since the deacon brought him not only " panes a/ymos et lagimeulam
" vini," but also " oleuni et butyrum ct inel in vasculis cum piscibus
" assis," and all this was apparently the preparation for a common meal,
which is described immediately afterwards. Other references are
criticised in detail by Scudamore, whom Mr. Warren does not seem
to have consulted. The evidence of Alcuin, ep. 90, adfratres Lugdu-
nenses, is more important, though indecisive, and the Ps. Theodore s
Penitential quoted from B. Thorpe Ancient Laws fol. ed. 1840, p. 304,
is thought by Wasserschlebcn to be old, though not I suppose of the
age of Theodore. Rabanus Maurus de cleric. Instit., i. 31, is perhaps
the earliest distinct evidence as yet adduced.

24 Eccl. Politij, Book iv. chap. x. 3. The argument in short is :
If both Greeks and Romans are in error, as is assumed, we, on this
axiom, could not follow the custom of either of them in respect to
things indifferent. Consequently we could use neither leavened nor
unleavened bread ; which is absurd.

Our Lord s choice of the Elements. 27

THIS IS MY BODY (Mt., Mk., Lu., 1 Cor.), WHICH IS GIVEN (ol.
Cor.) FOR YOU. DO THIS IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME (Lll., Cor.),

and likewise the cup after supper and gave thanks and gave it
to them saying, DRINK YE ALL OF IT (Mt.), FOR THIS is MY

BLOOD OF THE COVENANT (Mt., Mk.), OT THIS CUP IS THE NEW
COVENANT IN MY BLOOD (Lu., Coi 1 .), WHICH IS SHED FOR MANY
(Mt. 1Tpl 9 Mk. VTTEp), or WHICH IS SHED FOR YOU (Lu.), FOR
REMISSION OF SINS (Mt.). DO THIS, AS OFT AS YE DRINK IT,
IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME (Cor.).

We must not say with the Jews of Capernaum, " How can
" He give us His flesh to eat ?" That is a mystery surpassing
human capacity. But what thoughts did He intend us to
think ?

The action was a strange and unexampled one, and surely
intended to stimulate thought. The Bread had been lying,
some time it may be, on the table lifeless and unregarded.
Suddenly He takes it into those wonderful hands, which have
raised the dead, and cleansed the leper, and lifted up the sick
from their beds, and stilled the storm, and fed the multitudes,
and He tells His disciples that this Bread lying in those
Hands, is His Body. The contrast between the lifeless
thing and the living life-giving Person was nothing else but
astonishing. How could the two be brought into relation ?

1. The first answer to this deep question surely is : The
Eucharist is a consecration of Nature by the author of
Nature.

When we first open our eyes to the mysteries around us we
are naturally at a loss how to reconcile the existence of an
infinite and perfect Being with the finite, growing, imperfect
nature, which we partly see and partly know and partly
imagine around us, ranging from the minutest atoms to the
heavenly bodies, and from senseless dust up to thinking man.
If God is what we believe Him to be, all this is, at its best,
very imperfect, and in one sense, unworthy of Him ; and yet
it clearly did not make itself.

It does not seem too much to say that, even apart from the
mystery of evil and " darkness," the mystery of the Creation
would be inexplicable without the mystery of the Incarnation,

28 The Gospel Narrative.

and the mystery of the Incarnation would be unintelligible
without that of the Blessed Trinity, one person in which is
revealed to us as the Word of God, the instrument of Creation,
and the proper subject of Incarnation. If we had merely on
the one side a solitary Divine monad, an isolated Unitarian
God, and on the other an imperfect and growing creation,
and had to imagine the relation between them, we should be
constantly trembling and hovering between the demonstrably
false and misleading vanities of Pantheism, Dualism, Mani-
cheisni, and Deism. I will not trouble you with an ex
planation of these terms further than to remind you that
Pantheism confuses God and nature, Dualism and Mani-
cheism put them on an equality or at variance, and Deism
represents God as a Creator who sets His work going and
leaves it, generally speaking, to take care of itself.

It is from this hopeless confusion between antagonistic and
jarring explanations of the relation between spirit and matter,
God and nature, that Christ sets us free. He represents
nature as His own work and as capable of being consecrated
and elevated by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which has
first consecrated His own human nature Body, Soul and
Spirit and is then given by Him to the Church.

St. John in his wonderful prologue tells us of the Word of
God that is of His representative power going out to create
and order and arrange all things. He tells us that " all
" things were made by Him, and without Him was not
" anything made." It makes but little difference whether
we complete the sentence with the words "that was made,"
or take them as the beginning of a new sentence, 25 with many
ancient and weighty authorities, " That which hath been
" made was life in Him, and the life was the light of men."
(R. V. margin), or "that which hath been made in Him
" was life, and the life was the light of men." In either
case we learn that the Word was the instrument of all

25 Quod factum est in ipso vita erat, t&gt; yeyovev tv a.\n&lt;? fay l\v or " that
" which hath been made ill Him, was life, and the life was the light of
" men," is the punctuation of the oldest MSS. both Greek and Latin,
as far as we can trace it, and that of many of the Fathers.

Tlie Eucharist a Consecration of Nature. 29

creation, and that all life was a revelation of His presence
" the light of men," that through which they knew God
before the Light of the World was manifested in our flesh.

The words " This is My body," " This is my blood," then
are a concrete and striking statement of the great fact that
the material world is an embodiment of the life of the Son of
God. Some of the half- Christian Manicheans had got hold
of this truth and twisted and perverted it, as one may readily
imagine a modern Brahmin might do. But because of the
perversion we must not shrink from the truth. Our Lord s
words imply the sacredness of matter, and not only the
possibility of the consecration of nature but the intention of
God that it should be consecrated.

What a practical light does this throw on the dignity of
your calling, dear brothers, who have to do with the things of
earth and the processes of nature, with agriculture and the
keeping and breeding of sheep and cattle ! How it exalts all
labour that tends to make nature more subservient to God s
great end, in glorifying the life of man and revealing God to
him and in him ! How it lifts up handicraft into the region
of art, and art to that of poetry, and poetry to that of
prophecy and inspiration !

2. But there is a second answer of no less importance.
There is a further meaning surely in the choice of bread and
wine as the symbols and instruments for conveying Christ s
life. They are before all things food, and the food by which
the life of man, not of beasts, is nourished. The choice of
these elements harmonises with the choice of human nature
as the subject of Incarnation, and with the designation of the
Church of the redeemed as Christ s Body, and the description
of the sufferings of His Saints as filling up that which is
lacking of His afflictions (Col. L 24).

(a) The Eucharist is not only a consecration of nature, but
a consecration of human nature and life and (be it observed)
not of human life in a wild and unsettled, much less in a
savage state, but of the life of civilised and settled humanity,
organised in society, in which each member lends to the
other the substance of his life. So it was too under the

30 The Gospel Narrative.

Levitical law, with its " shadow of good things to come."
The sacrifice of the produce of the earth that was ordered
was not one of simple fruits or flowers, but of wine, oil, meal,
cakes, with carefully prepared frankincense. " It was required
(as Bishop Westcott well says. Hebrews p. 289) that man s life
" and lahour should have entered into that which was offered
" to God (Gen, iii. 17 19)." Our Lord did not choose the
fruits of the ground, cultivated or uncultivated, nor did He
choose the water that springs from the rock which is the
food and drink of men in their unsettled life- nor did He
choose the flesh of animals, which is of such various kinds,
and is rejected by so large a portion of mankind but He
chose the simplest and commonest food of civilized humanity,
i.e., that humanity which is the aim of God to produce.

(b) Both elements have this further property, that they are
the result of the union of many individuals of a natural
species in one substance. Bread is a substance to which
thousands of grains, brought together in different stages of
their history, on the barn floor and in the mill and the
kneading trough, have contributed till it is united in one new
creature so to speak the constituent parts of which are
indistinguishable from one another. This (as St. Paul
reminds us) is a type of the unity of the Church, " We
" being many are one bread, and one body" (1 Cor. x. 17)-
a thought to which one of the oldest prayers 26 (that of the
Teaching of the Apostles, chap, ix.) gives another and a
beautiful turn, "As this broken bread was [once] scattered
" upon the mountains and was gathered together and became
" one, so let thy Church be gathered together from the ends
" of the earth into thy kingdom." Similarly wine is produced

20 Tliis is more properly a benediction at the Agape ; see below, p. 46.
The thought of St. Paul is also found in St. Cyprian. After saying
that the mixed chalice symbolises the union of Christ and His people,
lie goes on to observe that flour and water must likewise be used to
make the Sacramental bread, " quo et ipso sacramento populus uoster
" osteuditur adunatus, ut quemadmodum grana multa in tinum collecta
" et coninolita et comnixta panem nnnin faciunt, sic in Christo, qui cst
" panis caelestis, unuui sciamus esse corpus, cui coniunctus sit noster
" numerus et adunatus" (ep. 63. 13) ; see also the reference in the next
note to ep. 69, 5.

The Elements symbolise human life. 31

from many grapes of many clusters, pressed out in the wine
vat and then left to change their nature by fermentation, till
a new product is formed to which the whole mass has
contributed something. 27

(c) If this had been all, one element or symbol might have
sufficed, but our Lord chose bread we may suppose as re
presenting one side of human life and wine the other, one a
manifest symbol of the life of work, the other of the life of
feeling or emotion, both necessary to the perfection of human
nature. Take a piece of bread" and ask yourself how it came
to be what it is ? What a series of pictures of labour of
different kinds does it call up in forest and field, in barn and
mill, and in the home ! of hard monotonous daily tasks
dignified by the union of men and women, indoors and out of
doors, of many heads and hands, of foresight and co-operation
as well as rough and enduring toil ! Nothing could be so fit
an emblem of this side of human life.

Again our Lord, as at Can a and at the feast of Levi, did
not shrink from contact with the more dangerous and yet
more poetical and noble side of human life, the life of feeling,
of the heart in high pulsation, of warm excitement, of deep
emotion whether for sorrow or for joy. He knew well that
religion must claim this for her own or be incapable of satisfy
ing the needs of humanity. He knew well that to lay down
a rule of total abstinence from earthly enjoyments not in
themselves sinful, would be not only misused by those who
held intellectually wrong beliefs as to the material creation,
but would lead to a revolt from religion altogether on the part
of those who could not bear the heavy yoke.

It is because the Cup amongst other things symbolizes the
consecration of earthly affections that we cling to it as a
necessary part of Christ s ordinance. The false spirituality
which denies the Cup to the laity, while it bans the marriage
of the Clergy, has much to answer for ; and may ask itself
whether this has not something to do with the alienation of

32 The Gospel Narrative.

great part of society from the visible fold of Christ ? Certainly
in the Sacrament we are touching upon profound mysteries,
intimately connected with the springs and sources of human
conduct, and, though we must not be over-scrupulous or
over-censorious, we cannot maim or mutilate Christ s
ordinance, however good the pretext may be, without a loss
far greater than would at first seem possible.

3. Thirdly we must go a step higher and remind ourselves
that the choice of bread and wine by our Lord was naturally
linked with all the associations of Jewish sacrifice not only
with those of the Passover and of sacrifice, as in the case of
Melchisedech, outside the Law. In all the diversity of ancient
ritual, both among Jews and Gentiles, something akin to
these two was a constant accompaniment of sacrifice, and felt
at times to be the most important part of it. The meat
offering and the drink-offering are spoken of by the Prophet
(Joel ii. 15) as synonymes of a perfect sacrifice, a sacrifice,
which if God gives us the means to offer it, will be a pledge
to us of His favour. The words immolation and mactation
which properly describe the sprinkling of the meal and the
libation of wine, poured upon the victim s head, are used by
the ancient Romans, as has been well observed, for the whole
action of sacrifice. We need not go further into this topic,
which has been abundantly illustrated by Archdeacon Freeman
and others. 28

Remembering all this we cannot doubt that when our Lord
said, "This is my body which is for you or is given for you,"
" This is my blood of the new covenant which is shed for you
" and for many for the remission of sins," He was consecrating
Himself by this meat-offering and drink-offering for the
sacrifice which was so soon to follow. If not clear then it was
clear soon after. Not that we must limit the sacrifice to the
moment of death, as I shall show in the next address.

It is difficult to know exactly where to place the Institution
in the narrative of St. John, but the words spoken after the
exit of Judas, " Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is
"glorified in Him," and the mention of the new commandment

28 Cp. Principles of Divine Service vol. 2 part 2 p. 75 foil.

The new Covenant of Love. 33

of love that follows are closely connected in thought with the
lessons and the language of every Eucharist (xiii. 31 35).
The glorification of God is by the willing acceptance on the
Son s part of that Passion which was the determined issue of
the Incarnation, and is brought home to us every time we
sing the Hymn " Glory to God in the Highest." 29 The new
commandment of love is surely closely connected with the
new covenant of love, a covenant which is made ours not
merely by acceptance of what Christ does for us, but by our
sacrificing ourselves in love for our brethren after His
example. Hence the Eucharist is pre-eminently a feast of
love, indeed it must at one time have had the name of Agape
or Dilectio or Love.

" By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye
have love one to another." My brethren, let us pray earnestly
that we may never, by our curious speculations, or our rash
censures, or our sharp controversies, profane the feast of love,
and turn it into a battle ground on which one Christian is to
strive to injure and assault another.

I have never been so painfully impressed with any work of
art as with a large picture in the Prado or Public Gallery at
Madrid, in which all the different scenes of an " Auto de Fe"
an Act or Sentence of Faith, as it was called, are delineated
with true Spanish realism. The commencement of all is a
celebration of the Holy Sacrament ; the end the burning of
heretics in the name of Jesus Christ. It is easy for us to feel
ashamed of such a profanation worked by Christians of
another age and of another country, and separated from us
by serious differences of religion. But I doubt not that the
time will come when our own descendants in the Church of
England will be as ashamed of the bitterness of some of our
modern controversies, as modern Spaniards are of the Inqui
sition, which all but ruined their Church and nation, at one
time perhaps the most flourishing in Christendom.

29 Cp. Freeman Principles vol. 2, pt, 2, ch. 2, 5, p. 315 foil., and
see below, pp. 48 and 49.

II.

ON THE MEMORIAL OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE EARLY
CHURCH AND THE PRIMITIVE LITURGY.

There is a remarkable prayer 1 used on all the great Jewish
Festivals, in the morning and evening and after meals, which
is called from its first words the Ya aleh v e yabo, which has
probably been used from the third century 2 of our era instead
of the sacrifice which can no longer be offered. It runs thus
in full :

" Our God and the God of our Fathers, may our memorial
(zikron) and our remembrance, and the memorial of our
fathers, and the memorial of Messiah son of David thy ser
vant, and the memorial of Jerusalem thy holy City, and the
memorial of all thy people the house of Israel, ascend and
come and draw near and be seen and be accepted and be
heard and be looked upon and be remembered before thee, for
deliverance, for good, for grace, for kindness and for com
passion, for life and peace, on this day the beginning of
the Month the day of Remembrance (new year) the feast of
Tabernacles the feast of the Eighth day of Tabernacles
the feast of Unleavened Bread the feast of Weeks (as the

1 My attention was first drawn to tins prayer by Archdeacon P.
Freeman s Principles, vol. 2, pt. 2, ch. 2, 1, p. 291, referring appa
rently to The Book of Religious Ceremonies and Prayers of the
Jews, as Practised in their Synagogues and Families, tr. from the
Hebrew by Gamaliel BeuPedahzur, Gent. London 1738, p. 66. [I
understand from Dr. Neubaucr that this is a nom de plume, being that
of the chief of the tribe of Mauasseh (Numb. i. 10, &c.), and that the
author s name was Meyers.] Freeman s method of citation is some
what confusing, and the translation not exact, and I have translated the
prayer directly from Michael Sach s Gebeibuch der Israeliten, Heb. and
Germ., p. 436439, ed. 2, Berlin 1859, under the heading Tischgebet.
It may be found also in Hebrew Prayers ace. to the Liturgy of the
Israelites in Poland and Germany, cd. H. Filipowski, p. 115 foil. Lond.
J. A. Joel, 42, Fore-street, E.G. 1862 and De Sola s Festival Prayers.

2 So I learn from Dr. Neubauer referring to Landhut s Commentary
Higgion Leb (Meditation of the Heart), printed at Berlin.

The Jewish Memorial of the Messiah. 35

case may be). Think on us on this day, Lord our God,
for good, and visit us on it for blessing, and help us on it for
life, and for the sake of the Word that promises salvation and
compassion, spare us, and be gracious to us, and have com
passion upon us, and help us, for to thee are our eyes for
thou art a God [king] gracious and merciful."

You will not be surprised at my taking this remarkable
prayer as the text of my address to you on the primitive form
of that Liturgy or Eucharistic service which the true Messiah
bade us perform as His ava/uvricriQ or memorial. There can
be no reasonable doubt that Jewish forms of prayer espe
cially of synagogue prayer had great influence in the Early
Church, and were often the vehicles of very similar or analo
gous feelings, though the subject of their relation is one con
fessedly of great difficulty.

There are four points which I would ask you to consider in
reading or hearing this prayer.

1. First, it is a memorial of the Messiah. He is the only
person directly mentioned in it. He is regarded as the ideal
head of the race, and as having therefore an existence in all
ages, even though the Jews do not yet believe him to have
come. There is also in it a reference to " the Word that
promises Salvation," which suggests another thought of His
presence.

2. Secondly, it is a memorial before God. Primarily there is
no thought of man in it. The Old Testament parallels nearest
seem to be in Nehemiah s words (xiii. 14, 22, and esp. 31),
" Kemember me, my God, for good," and Jeremiah s prayer
(xv. 15) " Lord, thou knowest: remember me and visit rne."

3. Thirdly, it is a memorial in the place of sacrifice, being
one of two kinds of substitutes for sacrifice 8 used by the Jews
in their dispersions, the other naturally being the recitation
of the sections of the Law relating to sacrifice.

4. Fourthly it is, in some sort, an actual fulfilment of our
Lord s own command on the part of His own people. They

3 The Hebrew word for remember (/akar) is used of God s accepting
an offering in Ps. xx. 8, and the words for memorial (zikkaron, zikron,
azkareh) are frequently used in close connection with sacrifice.

86 The Memorial of Christ

knew not what they did in crucifying Him ; they know not
what they do now in commemorating Him on all their great
festivals. Yet we may surely hope that God, who sees
through all the outward disguises and forms and reads the
heart, accepts this prayer too when it is offered hy Israelites
from an honest and good heart, and looks with pity upon
them for the sake of their and our Messiah.

Now if the memorial of the Messiah be so precious to the
Jews themselves, what must it have heen to Christians, who
not only knew that He had come, but knew that He was with
them, though unseen, in all their acts of public worship, who
knew that in Him they had a new life, and that He was their
great High Priest, passed into the Heavens, who was for ever
interceding for them with the Father ?

When therefore our Lord said, " Do this for my memorial,"
He spoke words which fell certainly upon no unprepared or
inattentive ears. Those who heard Him knew the sense of
the Hebrew words intuitively. They knew that by rouro
Troiare ae TJ)V f/u&gt;}v ava/nvriGiv, He did not mean " Do (or offer)
this to remind yourselves of me," but " By this make a solemn
commemoration, an ava/uvr/cnr of me to God." You will
observe also that the words are not " Do this as the memorial
of my death," but as " my memorial." No doubt death is
implied in the acts which are to be performed, and is part of
the memorial, but it is very doubtful whether we are right in
making it so nearly the whole, as we are most of us in the
way of doing, and as the character and language of the
Liturgies and the hymns, both ancient and modern, now in
use throughout the whole Western Church, insensibly in
cline us from our childhood to do. This is not a question
of the difference between Protestant and Catholic, Anglican
or Roman, Lutheran or Calvinist forms of worship : the
tendency, more or less general, to limit the commemoration
to the Passion is a defect, if it be, as I think it certainly is, a
defect, common to them all. The breaking of the bread is in
our habitual thoughts and probably in our prayers generally
connected with our Lord s body being broken on the cross.
If the word " broken" (KXt^ucvov) were certainly part of the

more than a Memorial of Crucifixion. 37

text we should perhaps be justified in so connecting it, but
the right reading of St. Luke is " given" (SiSo/uevov) as our
Liturgy very rightly has it; and in St. Paul it is simply, " This
is my body which is for you." 4 The thought then is rather
of the Body of Christ being given for us, or existing for us, as
a whole ; and this makes us mindful of His whole personality,
His Incarnation, Infancy, Ministry, Death, Resurrection,
Ascension, Session at the Right Hand of God and Second
Coming, not only of the moment of His Passion. 5 Of His
Blood indeed (according to all the four accounts which have
come down to us), our divine Redeemer said that it was
being shed or to be shed (EK^UVVO^VOV) for the sacred pur
poses of our redemption, and that it was the Blood of the
Covenant, or more particularly of the New Covenant no
doubt that which a study of prophecy had led them to expect
in the place of the Old. This carries us at once to the
thought of Sacrifice, and of Sacrifice involving the death of the
Victim. But even here the thought does not rest upon the
mere moment of death. The aphorism, " Without shedding
of blood there is no remission of sins" (Heb. ix. 22) is not
to be explained simply of the outpouring of the blood of
the slain beasts when they received their death wound.
We are apt to give far too great prominence to this in
our conceptions of sacrifice. But this was not the special
work of the priest. That was rather connected with the
blood the symbol of life after it had left the body ; first
the reception of it, and then its application, which was, as has
been well said, " the most significant part of the sacrifice." 6

4 1 Cor. xi. 24. r6 vnep vfjiuv. Many MSS. add KKw^evov, D*
QpvTrr6/j.vov, some versions have tictofjifvov. Similarly in St. John vi. 51, a
like shorter reading seems better attested than the longer one. " And
the Bread which I will give is my flesh for the life of the world." " Et
panis quern ego dabo caro mea est pro mundi vita," not " is my flesh,
which I will give for the life of the world."

5 The ancient Liturgies generally have a Memorial of the Resurrec
tion, Ascension and Second Advent joined to that of the Death : see
Hammond pp. 17, 42, 70, 112, 154, 187, 222, 270, 276, 334; and the
Roman also in the Unde et memores p. 336. Cp. Justin Dial. 70.

6 See Westcott Hebrews, p. 291, and cp. Maimonides on the Passover,
De Sacr. i. 2, 6 (quoted by Westcott on Heb. ix. 22 x^&gt;P LS alfutrtKxvffias)
" The sprinkling of the blood is the main point (^) i jl sacrifice."

38 The Memorial of Christ.

In some cases it was sprinkled on the altar in others it was
applied to the horns of one or other of the altars and poured
out at the base of the altar in others it was sprinkled upon
the veil or lastly it was taken, as on the day of atonement,
within the veil and sprinkled upon the mercy seat seven times
and then applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering
and sprinkled upon it seven times. 7 Then there was the con
sumption of the whole or part of the victim by fire and
lastly in some cases the sacrificial meal.

Now in Scripture we are taught to compare our Lord s
sacrifice specially with the sin-offering, and more particularly
with that of the day of atonement on which the High priest
took the blood of the victim with certain remarkable cere
monies into the Holy of Holies. This is regarded in the Papistic
to the Hebrews as a symbol or type of our Lord s entrance
into Heaven, through His own blood, and through the veil,
which is apparently described as " the veil which is His
flesh." 8 The latter phrase is very difficult, but receives illus
tration from the rending of the veil of the temple at the
moment of our Saviour s death-cry. His flesh both hid the
presence of God and was the destined way through which He
and we enter into that presence. Now that His flesh has
been torn for us upon the Cross, we through mystical union
with His sacrifice, are bold to enter into the same presence
into which He has gone. This is the general drift of the
teaching of this great Epistle on the sacrifice of Christ ; and
further the Eucharist is certainly referred to in it (Heb. xiii.
10) as a feast upon the same sin-offering, which, as we know,
was not a privilege allowed to the Jewish ministers of the
Tabernacle, by whom the sin-offering was not eaten but
wholly burnt outside the camp.

Taking all this together we must beware of absolutely
identifying the memorial of Christ made in the Eucharist,

7 Lev. xvi. 14, 15, 18, 19. It is not said how the rest of the blood
was disposed of.

8 Heb. X. 20, *nv IveKaiviasv rj/j. iv oftbv irp6ff&lt;po.TOV Kal ^axray, 5to rov
Karairfrdfffj.aros TOUT cffn TTJS crapes avrov. Westeott connects &lt;55oi/ rather
than KaTa.TrtTacrfj.a with TOUT e&lt;m TTJS ffa.pt&lt;6s.

How His Sacrifice purifies Heaven. 39

according to His command, with the description of it
given by St. Paul to meet a special difficulty, "ye do
show or proclaim the Lord s death till He come" (1 Cor.
xi. 26). 9 The memorial certainly includes every aspect
of His revelation from His Incarnation to His Ascension
and present intercession for us in Heaven, which Heavens,
to use the language of the same Epistle to the Hebrews
(ix. 23), He has purified with better sacrifices than those
which under the law purified the Holy of Holies of the
earthly Temple. We are to bring before God the whole
dispensation of His love, the love of the Blessed Trinity
united in the great work of our redemption and the re
demption of the world, and to think in turn of the different
moments of it. And with regard to the last mysterious
point to which reference was made, the cleansing of the
Heavens themselves by the entrance of Christ " through His
blood," have we not in this a new thought given us to put
into those hymns in which we join with the angels ? This is
of course the thought of their exultation at the victory over
sin and death, brought into the world by the apostate mem
bers of their company a victory in which they have an even
stronger interest than we have though they have not them
selves sinned. How must they have grieved at the injury
done to God by His noblest creatures ! How must they have
lamented the profanation of His near presence by the sins of
Pride and Envy and Murder on the part of Satan and his
fellows ! How must they rejoice therefore at the victory
which the Incarnation and work of Christ as man has
wrought, now that His human presence has everywhere pre
vailed from lowest Hell to highest Heaven !

9 Several of the ancient Greek Liturgies, including that of St. Basil,
add these words to the recital of our Lord s words of Institution ; but
not so S. Chrysostom s or the Roman Liturgies. They are found in
the G-allicau and Mozarabic, see L. Duchesne Origines du culte
Chretien pp. 206, 207, Paris, 1889. The Ambrosian given by Ham
mond Liturgies Eastern and Western p. 334, expands them, " Haec
quotiescunque feceritis in in earn cominemorationen facietis, mortem
" meam praedicabitis, resurrectionem meaui annunciabitis, adventum
" meum sperabitis, donee iteruin de coelis veniam ad vos."

40 The. Memorial of Christ

Thoughts like these, of the fulness and life and joy of the
commemoration which is ours to make, may help us in
studying the early Liturgies and forms of Christian worship,
and may be of practical value to us in deciding the tendency
of our teaching, not only as to ritual (which is of some con
siderable importance), but also as to the conduct of Church
business and the whole social aspect of Christian life and
fellowship.

We have to think of the Memorial of Christ as covering
the whole area of Christian intercourse.

I shall attempt then to give a fairly full description of a
public assembly of the primitive Church for the three
purposes which then as now mostly united the family of Jesus
Christ (1) for public business, (2) for social enjoyment, (3)
for Liturgical worship. We shall find our material chiefly in
the Epistles of St. Paul and the Acts of the Apostles, but
shall naturally make use of the early writers of the second
and third centuries and shall not scruple to include illustra
tions from any sources that may be available.

The materials for this description are perhaps more
abundant than we generally suppose, though the task of
using them is exposed to something of the same dangers as
beset the reconstruction of a work of art, say of brass or
marble, mosaic or painted glass, partly from actual fragments,
partly from descriptions or pictures of it as it appeared in
different centuries, and partly from descriptions of other like
objects. I am trying at this moment, for instance, with the
help of friends who are experts, to restore the brass of Bishop
Wm. Smyth, founder of Brasenose College, partly from the
fragment of the stone itself, partly from a picture by Sir
Wm. Dugdale, taken just before the outbreak of the Civil
War, partly from parallel examples of the 16th century, and
I am therefore in a position to realise the hazardous nature of
such an undertaking. There was a time when it would have
been impossible to attempt such tasks, whether in art or in
the history of religion, without danger of perversion by
prejudice ; but it is I believe one of the great blessings of this
age in the Church of England, that we are not only conscious

hi the Assembly of the Early Church. 41

of this danger and of the directions in which it lies, but are
sincerely anxious to be fair to all our fellow- Christians and to
recognise that the Spirit of God works and has worked in them
as well as we humbly trust in ourselves.

Let us try then to picture to ourselves 10 the circumstances
of such a meeting of the early Church in the latter half of the
first century say at Corinth, about which, through St.
Paul s two letters and the very early letter of St. Clement, we
have more detailed information than about any other single
Church of that date, hardly excepting the Church of Jerusalem
itself. Such assemblies were, we may suppose, held with
peculiar solemnity in the afternoon and night that closed the
Sabbath or Saturday and ushered in the Lord s Day. They
would begin probably in the middle of the afternoon at a time
when the ordinary secular business of the day was over an
hour reached in that age and country much earlier than
among ourselves. The place of meeting would not be at first
in a consecrated building, though the distinction between
" houses to eat and to drink in " and the " Church of God "
is one of St. Paul s own drawing (1 Cor. xi. 22). The
Synagogue, which at first was partly available, had now
definitely shut its doors, and there were as yet no places
wholly set apart for Christian worship. The Church or Ecclesia
met in the great hall or large upper room of some wealthy or
liberal member. Our Lord had celebrated His last Passover
in such an upper room at Jerusalem, and in such a room in
the house of the family of John, surnamed Mark, who is
generally identified with the Evangelist, and possibly in the
very same one the Church of that city continued to meet.
At Corinth the place of meeting was either in the house of
Gaius whom St. Paul, writing to the Eomans (xvi. 23),
describes as his host and the host of the whole Church or
in that of Justus, which we are told lay close to the Syna
gogue (Acts xviii. 7). At Ephesus, when the Synagogue
was no longer accessible, the school of one Tyrannus, who

10 The following paragraphs up to page 49 are taken, with slight
alterations and additions," from a sermon preached by me before the
University of Oxford, 19 January, 1890.

42 The Memorial of Christ.

was probably a sophist or teacher of rhetoric (ib xix. 7),
afforded a temporary shelter to the Church. Justin Martyr
again describes himself as holding meetings in a room,
perhaps a workshop, over a bath at Koine (see Passio Jnstini
3.) But whatever might be the homeliness and simplicity,
or even the secular associations of the surroundings, the
assembly itself was full of reverence and order, and yet of joy.
The Elders or Presbyters 11 of the Church sat doubtless at the
upper end of the room, probably on a raised platform. We
do not know their names at Corinth, but it is most likely
that Crispus, if he were still alive, would be one of them ;
that Stephanas and some members of his family, including
perhaps Epaenetus, would be others. Sosthenes again may
have held such a position, first in the Jewish community and
then in the Christian if it is right to identify the ruler of
the Synagogue who was beaten before Gallio with the
"brother " mentioned by the Apostle in such an honourable
place in the opening of the first letter to the Corinthians.
One of these elders would act as president if the Apostle or
his deputy were not present. The first occupation we may
suppose would be the discussion of any question affecting the
persons or property of the community. The assembly would
be at this time a mixed one of men and women, seated side
by side ; for St. Luke notes this at the beginning of the Acts
as characteristic of the Christian Church in opposition to the
Jewish (Acts i. 14). 12 The separation of the sexes on different

11 The ordination of Elders by the Apostles Barnabas and Paul is
mentioned by St. Luke in the description of their first journey (Acts
xiv. 23). It is his custom to give the first instance of a habitual act.
From several passages of the Acts and Epistles we learn that the names
of Church officers were sometimes designated by the Holy Ghost,
speaking by the mouths of the prophets, probably at or after the
Eucharist. Cp. Acts xiii. 2 (choice of Barnabas and Saul), 1 Tim. iv. 14

(rov ev ffol x a p L ^^TO^, & e 5^07j ffoi Sta irpo^Teias K.rA.) and perhaps Acts
xx. 28 (" The flock, in which the Holy Spirit made you Bishops or over
seers.") See below page 54.

12 See Dean Plumptre s article, S.D.B. iii. p. 1399, for the arrange
ment of men and women in the Synagogue, in ancient and modern
times. See also Buxtorf, Synagoga Judaica, p. 291, ed. 3, Basel, 1661.
The regulation of the kiss by canons of Councils, and St. Clement of
Alexandria s reference to the slanders and suspicions raised by some

Arrangement and business of the Assembly. 48

sides of the church, though early, does not seem to have been
absolutely primitive. But in St. Paul s own lifetime the rule
was firmly established that women were not to take part in
the debates, or in the public teaching of the Church 13 . A
possible exception may have been made as to this rule of
women speaking in public in the case of those who were
known to have the gift of prophecy such as the four
daughters of Philip the Evangelist 14 but it is perhaps more
probable that their gift of prophecy was exercised within the
family rather than in the public assemblies of the Church.
The utterances also of the prophets seem to belong to a later
hour or period of the meeting, rather than to the time spent
in discussing details, though we cannot suppose that they
were bound by rule as to this matter. In any case the
business of the Church was left to men, and the ordinary
ministry of the Word and Sacraments was confined to the
officers of the Church.

With this exception the assemblies for debate, on such
matters as we have supposed, would be of a very popular cha
racter. The adult male communicants at Corinth would seem to
have had an equal voice in the trial and excommunication of
the son who was guilty of such a terrible offence both against
his father and against the law of God. It is expressly said
that he was condemned by a majority 15 no doubt a large
majority under the absent Apostle s direction. And it is
implied that this exclusion from the Church carried with it a
loss of Christian privileges and supports which laid the
offender open to the attacks of Satan, for the punishment of
the flesh, that the spirit might be saved in the day of the
Lord s coming to judgment, to which the Church was always
looking.

The sentence voted by the general body was of course

persons who made a licentious use of the kiss to trouble the Church
(Paedag. iii. 11, 81), show that the Church of old differed from the
Synagogue in this particular. Cp. Scudamore N.E., pp. 498, 500 foil.,
503.

13 1 Cor. xiv. 33, 34, 35 ; 1 Tim. ii. 12.

14 Cp. 1 Cor. xi. 5 and Acts xxi. 8.
ls f] 7rtTt|U,i a r] uTrb r&v ir\ti6vwv, 2 Cor. ii. 6.

44 TJie Manorial of Christ.

pronounced by the President, and would not, we may
suppose, have been valid without his ratification.

In the other letter dealing with the inner life of this same
Church, written by St. Clement in the name of the Church of
Kome probably before the end of the century, we find clear
indications of the continuance of the same popular organisa
tion. The elders there referred to are described as appointed
by the Apostles, or afterwards by other men of repute, " with
the consent of the whole Church" (ch. 44). And in another
place there is a clear reference to a vote of the general body
of the Church carrying with it a sentence of exile upon
persons who had caused faction and strife, though of course
not to be enforced with civil penalties (ib. 54).

Questions then of discipline and respecting the recognition
of clergy were discussed in the full assembly, though it is
clear that reference to special judges was a natural expedient
resorted to when necessary. Other questions brought before
the same assembly would be those of finance, and the appoint
ment of messengers and delegates to carry letters or to go on
embassies to other churches, or to administer funds belonging
to or collected by the Church. Such delegates are referred to
by St. Paul as to be selected to carry the collection for the
poor Christians at Jerusalem (1 Cor. xvi. 3). Such were
Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus (ib. 17) the bearers
of the Corinthian letter to which this is in great part an
answer. Such were many others whose names or descriptions
are scattered up and down the epistles of the Apostolic and
sub-Apostolic age.

When Tertullian wrote, more than a hundred years later
than the time we have supposed, some changes had already
been introduced, in the province of Africa, of which he was
speaking, such as the general substitution of a monthly for a
weekly collection. But he gives an account of the purposes of
Church finance, which in its outline was doubtless true of the
first age also. He is meeting a supposed objection that the
offices of the Church might be places of ambition on account
of the control of the common funds. " Even if there be with
us a sort of public Chest (area), no sum is therein collected

The Public Chest and the Agape. 45

discreditable to religion as though she were bought. Every
man placeth there a small gift on one day of each month or
whensoever he will, so he do but will, and so he be but able ;
for no man is constrained but contributeth willingly. These
are as it were the deposits of piety ; for afterwards they are
not disbursed in feasting and in drinking, and in disgusting-
haunts of gluttony, but for feeding and burying the poor, for
[educating] boys and girls without a fortune and without
parents, for [supporting] old men now confined to the house,
for the shipwrecked also, and for any who in the mines [as
convicts] , or in the islands [as places of exile] , or in prisons,
are pensioners of their Creed, provided only they are sent
there for the cause of the w r ay of God. But it is the exercise
of this sort of love which cloth, with some, chiefly brand us
with a mark of evil. See (they say) how these Christians
love one another for in truth they themselves hate one
another ; and * See how ready they are to die for each other
for they themselves are more ready to slay each other."
(Apol. 39).

The same spirit of love and simplicity was carried into all
the other proceedings of the assembly. It is difficult to be
certain as to the exact order in which the various actions
were performed, nor is it likely that there was constant uni
formity even in the same place. But it would seem probable
that the feast called the Agape would follow closely on the
conclusion of the business of the Church. It seems to have
been held in daylight, and therefore not later than four or five
o clock in the afternoon. It was doubtless, like the Paschal
Supper, from which it seems to have derived much of its
character, interspersed with prayers and blessings, and with
the reading of Scripture, as well as with the more joyous
accompaniments of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,
and of familiar conversation especially on religious subjects.

Tertullian again gives the fullest account of such a festival.
" Nothing mean, nothing unclean has any admittance here;
we taste first of prayer to God before we sit down to meat ;
we eat only what suffices nature, and drink no more than what
is strictly becoming chaste and regular persons. We satisfy

46 The Memorial of Christ.

appetite as those who know that they must wake in the night
to the service of God, and discourse as those who remember
that they are in the hearing of their Master. When supper
is ended and we have washed our hands and the lights are
brought in, every one is invited to sing praises to God, either
such as he collects from the Holy Scriptures, or such as are
of his own composing." (Apol. 39). 16

The actual benedictions of the food at the Agape would be
founded probably on Jewish benedictions, but enlarged in a
Christian sense. Such seem to be those earlier thanksgivings
preserved in the Teaching of the Apostles, first for the cup
and then for the bread, which have often been treated, but I
think mistakenly, as if they were actually prayers of Eucha-
ristic consecration in the ordinary sense. The reason for
thinking that they are not so is (1) that they occur in a
treatise for popular use, addressed apparently to the newly
baptized ; (2) that they are wholly dissimilar from any
consecration prayers that have come down to us ; (3) that
the thanksgiving for the cup comes first ; and (4) that after
them we read of further thanksgivings, /uera TO ^u7rAr?&lt;y0fivcu,
" after ye are filled," i.e., after the meal is over. This is
important evidence of the continuance of the Agape in its
earliest place before the Eucharist proper, probably to the
end of the first century. We shall consider in the next
address at what date and under what circumstances it was
dissociated from the Communion.

The Thanksgiving over the cup is as follows : " We thank
" thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David thy child,
" which thou hast made known to us by thy child Jesus "
this is instead of the ordinary Jewish thanksgiving for the
creation of the " fruit of the vine." The " vine of David"
is the Church as Christ s body. Then follows: "We
thank thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge
" which thou hast made known to us by thy child Jesus.
Thine be the glory for ever. As this broken bread (*:Aaa/*a)
" was once scattered upon the mountains, and being gathered

16 Tcrtulliau, after he became a Montaiiist, was not ashamed to take
up the heathen slanders against the Agapae in his de leiuniis 17.

Benedictions of the Agape. Hymns. Lights. 47

" together became one : so let thy church be gathered together
" from the ends of the earth unto thy kingdom. For thine is
" the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever."
(Teaching, chap, ix.)

With the entrance of the lights began probably the more
solemn and sacred part of the work of the Christian assembly.

We have, happily, preserved to us one of the hymns of
which Tertullian speaks, which in the age of St. Basil (De
Spirit n Sancto 29), in the second half of the fourth century,
was of unknown authorship, and considered of primitive
antiquity. " Our fathers (he writes, defending the divinity of
the Holy Spirit) thought it not right to receive the joyous gift
(\apiv} of evening light in silence, but directly it appeared to
give thanks. And though we cannot say who was the author
of those words in the thanksgiving at the lighting of the
lamps, yet it is certainly a primitive (ap^aiav) utterance to
which the people gives voice, and no one yet has ever thought
them guilty of an impiety for saying

We hymn the Father. Son, and Holy Spirit divine."

This may be as early as the first or second century, and be
one of the hymns in which "Christ is adored as God," of
which Pliny and St. Hippolytus write from such opposite
quarters. 17

If we are right in thinking that the lighting of the lamps
was the prelude to the Eucharist, it is easy to see how,
without anything forced or strained, they were recognised as
symbolising the presence of Christ the Light of the world.
He had promised His presence wherever two or three were
gathered together in His name. And so the spontaneous out
burst of Christian piety recognised in the gift of light and in

u See Pliny Letters to Trajan, 98, " Adfirmabant autem hanc fuisse
" summain vel culpae suac vel erroris, quod essent soliti state die ante
" lucem convenire carmenque Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem,
&c. I assume that the treatise against Artemon, quoted by Eusebms
H.E. v. 28 is by St. Hippolytus. It is at any rate of his date (circa A.D.
200). The writer asks, 5, " How many psalms and songs are there
" written by faithful brethren from the beginning, which hymn Christ,
" the word of God, as God ?" and cp. Origen against Celsus viii. 67.

48 The Memorial of Christ

the suddenness of the change which it wrought, even in the
simple array of lamps in the upper chamber, such as St. Paul
had round him at Troas (Acts xx. 8), something really akin
to the gift of our Lord to a gloomy and darkened world. It
saw in the transition something recalling the circumstances
of His Nativity, when the true Light that lighteth every man
came into the world. Without anything artificial or super
stitious this old hymn -writer or prophet, for the words are
more akin to prophetic rhythm recalled the primary truth
that the God of Nature is the same as the (rod of Grace,
and that He who said " Let there he light" in the material
heavens also sent His Son to repair the defects of natural
light, and to give the joy of a new birth to men.

It was said by one of old, " at eventide there shall be
light," and so it was actually at the birth of Christ. The
sun had gone down on the hills of Bethlehem, but the
Glory of the Lord suddenly shone round about the shepherds,
and they heard angel voices proclaiming the new-born king,
with a promise of peace on earth and good-will towards men.

If we consider all this together we may perhaps conjecture
that the original position of the holy kiss, symbolical of
Christian love and peace, and of the absence of all hatred
and variance in the community, was coincident with the
conclusion of the supper and with the lighting of the lamps,
followed by the singing of this or some similar song of praise
and adoration.

Though the hymn is doubtless well known to all here, let
me repeat it (in Mr. Keble s version), while the circumstances
to which it was apparently originally adapted are fresh in your
memory.

Hail ! gladdening Light, of His pure glory poured,
Who is the immortal Father, heavenly, blest,

Holiest of holies Jesus Christ our Lord !
Now we are come to the sun s hour of rest :

The lights of evening round us shine,

We hymn the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit divine !
Worthiest art tliou at all times to be sung
With undefiled tongue,

Son of our God, giver of life alone !

Therefore in all the world Thy glories, Lord, they own.

as the Light of the World. 49

It is not impossible that the first ten verses of the Te
Deum are translated from a similar early Greek hymn, also
addressed to our Lord, and sung, not at the lighting of the
lamps, but at the reading of the Gospel. The short antiphons
or responses, which it is still customary to say at the be
ginning and end of the Gospel, Glory be to Thee, Lord,
and Thanks be to Thee, Lord [for this Thy holy Gospel],
and the like, are relics of the same usage which have come
down to our own day.

The actual song of the angels at the Nativity, which has
been expanded into the Gloria in Excelsis as it appears in
our Liturgy, might very well have been sung at this time-
but there is evidence rather to the contrary, and it is probable
that it was not at first a Eucharistic Hymn. 17 It is now
found at the opening of the service in the Roman service
book : but it is equally in place where we use it as a thanks
giving after Communion.

There is another element of the Liturgy which is most
certainly primitive, the exact place of which it is difficult to
fix though it clearly belongs to the early part of the service.
This is the public confession of sins, which is referred to in
the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, chap, xiv., as preceding
the Eucharist. It is to this public confession that St. James
probably also refers at the end of his epistle (v. 16). It may
be paralleled with the precept in Leviticus (v. 5, 6), and with
a prayer said by the Jewish priests before offering sacrifice.
(Diet, of Chr. Ant. s. v. Confession, Liturgical.)

The reading of passages from Holy Scripture suitable to
the seasons and festivals was adopted no doubt from the
Jewish Synagogue service for the Sabbath, in which our
Lord Himself took the part of a reader (Luke iv. 16), pro-

17 See Gloria in Excelsis in Diet, of Christian Antiquities and cp.
Scudaraore Not. Euch. pp. 784, foil. ed. 2. It is not mentioned by S.
Germanus in his full account of the Liturgy, but he says that the

(Migne Pat. Lai. 72 p.
about 585 A.D. The hyinn as a " morning hymn" is given in the Codex
Alexandrinus of ^the Greek Bible.

50 The Memorial of Christ.

bably on many occasions. St. James reminded his hearers
at the Council of Jerusalem that the influence of the Jewish
Law would naturally tell upon Christians who attended these
Synagogue services as many no doubt still continued to do
unless the Council made a definite rule about what ob
servances it would consider binding, " For Moses from genera-
" tions of old hath in every Synagogue them that preach him ;
"being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath" (Acts xv.
21). It is well to remember that this same Apostle writing
to Christians uses the name "Synagogue" rather than
"Church" for the assemblies of the faithful, a term very
suggestive of at any rate an external likeness in the mode
of worship.

In the very earliest days these lessons from the Old
Testament would be the only lessons, except when some
epistle of an apostle was introduced either one just received
or one which was treasured up in the church chest. I need
not remind you how St. Paul several times refers to such
reading of his letters in the public service. 11 * The order in
which these three lessons appear in some of the old books
viz., Prophecy, Epistle, and Gospel is no doubt his
torically important. It represents the order in which they
were introduced into the service of the Church, first the Old
Testament lesson, then that of the Epistle, and then the
Gospel, when the Gospels were written. But the Gospel
lesson was probably introduced very early, that is to say as
soon as the Apostles ceased to be present in the flesh, and per
haps even before that time. Nothing can be so important to
a well-instructed Christian as to possess a full and accurate
account of the words and acts of our Saviour ; and directly
our forefathers did so, even if the form may have been less
perfect than that which we now possess, there was every
reason why they should make much of it and place it on as
high a level as the writings of the Prophets. I do not
myself doubt that St. Paul cites a saying of our Lord s as
" Scripture," side by side with a quotation from the Old

IS 1 Tli 88. v. 27., 2 Cor. i. 13, Epli. iii. 4, Col. iv. 16.

Prophecy, Epistle, Gospel. 51

Testament, in his first epistle to Timothy (v. 18), or that St.
Peter reckons up St. Paul s epistles as " Scriptures" (2
Pet. iii. 16), though it has heen the fashion amongst critics
either to doubt these obvious interpretations, or to throw dis
credit upon the authenticity of the writings in which they
occur. The frequent reminders in the Teaching of the
Apostles of precepts given by the Lord " in the Gospel," shew
that the language at any rate of His discourses was familiar
to all Christians, even to those who required rudimentary
teaching. This could hardly be except through public reading,
and this public reading would almost necessarily be at the
Eucharistic service, which was apparently the first introduced
into the Church.

Justin Martyr, 19 who wrote about A.D. 140, is the first
who actually mentions this reading, but the language in which
he does so implies that it was not a new custom. " On the
" day called Sunday (he writes, 1 ApoL 67, describing what
" was done for the benefit of the Emperor Antoninus Pius and
" his adopted sons) an assembly gathers together of all [of us]
" who dwell in cities or country places and the memoirs of
" the Apostles or writings of the Prophets are read as far as
" time permits. Then, when the reader has finished, the
" President makes an address admonishing and urging [those
" present] to an imitation of such noble [precepts.]"

You will notice that he puts the Memoirs or Commentaries
of the Apostles which he elsewhere calls " Gospels " first,
showing that they had already begun to take the principal
place in the thoughts of Christian people. In his time it
was apparently customary to read only one lection, and that
probably a much longer one than those now in use. If we
wish to realise the character of the primitive Liturgy in this
matter we cannot in our own Church approach to it nearer
than by a study of the services for Holy Week, in which, as
you will remember, readings from the Prophet Isaiah are on

19 Tortullian de praescript. haeret. 36 is also quoted, but he does not
expressly say that the " reading of the Law and the Prophets together
" with the Evangelical and Apostolic writings " was at the Eucharist,
Most probably it was.

52 The Memorial of Christ.

two days substituted for the Epistle, and those from the
Gospels are much longer than usual. Even more evident
traces of the triple lesson are preserved in the Roman services
for Holy Week. 20 Its general use was suppressed at Rome in
the fifth century ; hut it lasted longer in the Gallican Liturgy
and is, I believe, still retained amongst the Armenians. 21
We may, if we choose, consider the recitation of the Ten
Commandments among ourselves as a constant prophetical
lesson, interspersed (after the ancient fashion) with responses.

It is surely a precious witness to the unity of the Church
that, in her most solemn service, lessons from the Bible and
nothing else, as far as we know, are everywhere read as the
basis of the Christian teaching which is to follow, and to
prepare Christ s flock for closest communion with Him.

The Creed which follows in existing Liturgies was of course
not part of the primitive Liturgy, as it was not drawn up till
the fourth century. It is said to have been first introduced
into the service about A.D. 469 by Peter the Fuller, Patriarch
of Antioch, and his example followed in 510 by Timotheus of
Constantinople. 22 Hence it gradually spread, but even now
it is by no means at all times said in the Western Church. 23
Our Church has done well to make it universal so that we have
in turn the witness first of the Law, then of the Apostles,
then of the Gospels, then of the Church Universal, and lastly
in the sermon of the living minister, all conspiring to testify
to the faith in Jesus Christ once for all delivered to the Saints.

2U See Duchesne Origines p. 160 an interesting passage. He ex
plains (with great probability) the double piece of chanting after the
Epistle, viz., the Gradual and Alleluia, or the Gradual and Tractus in
certain seasons of penitence, as a relic of the two lessons which preceded
the Gospel.

21 Duchesne I.e. pp. 160 and 185 foil. It remained in the Ambrosian
Liturgy up to the llth century.

22 See the details in Scudamore N.E. pp. 268 foil. St. Augustine
addressing catechumens about to be baptized tells them that at the
altar service they will hear the Lord s Prayer daily " but ye do not daily
hear the Creed" (Serm. 58 12, 13, vol. v. col. 490 Gauine).

23 The Roman rubric of the Ordo Missalis is " Deinde ad medium
altaris extendens, elevans, et jungens manus dicit, si dicendum est,
Credo in unum Dew-wi." Gavantus cd. Merati i. p. 56, 1749, and
Thalhofer Kath. Liturgik ii. p. 130, Freiburg 1890, explain this.

The Creed and the Sermon. 53

The sermon is, as you will remember, referred to by Justin
Martyr, but this also was by no means universal in the
Church, particularly in the West. I will quote the words
of a modern Koman Catholic writer of repute the Abbe
Duchesne which may serve to explain something of the
darkness which settled down upon the Church of Kome in
the 8th and 9th and following centuries, the diversion of the
priesthood to the work of external service, and the discon
tinuity of Christian teaching there which has been a great
injury to the Church. " After the lections we ought to find
" the sermon. But at Eome the sermon appears to have
" fallen pretty early into disuse. St. Gregory and before him
" St. Leo are the only ancient Popes whose sermons are
" extant or who are even known to have delivered sermons.
" Further the sermons of St. Leo are short, and reserved for
" certain solemn days. The Roman priests had not the right
" of preaching, and the Popes were jealous lest other Bishops
" should permit their priests to do so. Sozomen, who wrote
" about the time of Xystus III., reports that no one preached
" at Rome." 24

We have now reached the close of the first part of the
Liturgy, the point when in early times Catechumens were
dismissed, and must reserve what is to be said of the second
part for the next Address. I will only add here, what will
not be so well in place there, that the direction of that more
solemn service seems in quite the earliest times to have been
more specially the duty of the apostolic, prophetic, or
missionary officers of the Church those in fact who had
special Charismata or spiritual gifts, and from them to have
passed naturally to the local arid permanent ministry. We

24 L. Duchesne Origines du culte Chretien p. 163. For the last
statements lie refers to a letter of Pope Celestine to the Bishops of
Provence, Jaffe 381, and Sozomen H.E. vii. 19. The reference to
Jaffe s Regesia should apparently be A.D. 431 p. 32, and the letter
speaks rather of heretical (Pelagian) preaching, than of preaching- in
general. It may be found in full in P. Constant Rom. Pont Epistolae
p. 1185, Paris 1721 and elsewhere. At most it asserts the Bishops
right to be the chief Teachers of the Church, and their delinquency in
letting others teach error while they are silent as to the truth. Under
lying all this may be a kind of class jealousy of the presbyters rights.

54 The Memorial of Christ.

have already noticed the well-known text, "As they ministered
" to the Lord and fasted the Holy Ghost said, Separate me
" Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called
" them " (Acts xiii. 2 p. 42 n. 11). Other sayings of the
Holy Ghost may be understood of the voices of the prophets,
speaking probably in the Eucharistic assembly (Acts xvi. 6, 7,
xx. 28). The " faithful sayings" of the Pastoral Epistles are
of similar character.

The general result of the picture we have drawn is to give
us a sense of the fulness of Christian fellowship as an ideal
at which to aim. The methods of the Early Church are not
to be followed strictly as a legal model. But the results,
both as to Church business and social converse and worship,
must by some means be reached if we are not to fall away
from the true type of Churchmanship.

In regard to Church business we have already made some
considerable progress towards a restoration of the laity to
their proper duties. They seem never to have included the
definition of doctrine or the control of divine service, but
they did embrace a much more active and personal participa
tion in Christian work than has often been customary among
us. The last twenty years have witnessed the establishment
in nearly every Diocese of a Conference or representative
Synod of clergy and laity to attend to these duties. It is but
a short period of trial, and we must not judge of their future
usefulness simply by the past. But it is clear that they are
altogether in the lines that St. Paul contemplated when he
gave ordinances to the churches which he founded. The
main difficulty before us is the application of similar principles
to parochial life. Here public opinion is often weak, and a
single ill-disposed person may hamper or destroy what should
be the work of a united parish. The very lax ideas of schism
that are prevalent amongst the less educated, the little
personal jealousies, which prevent one moving unless another
will do so, the readiness to take offence and to believe evil
these are no doubt the results of the absence in the past of
training in Church business, but they are also very great
obstacles to its restoration.

Duties of the Laity and Social Gatherings. 55

The time has riot come for any wide establishment of
Parochial Councils, and in any case the Diocese not the Parish
is the true unit of Church life ; hut there are many other
ways in which the adult male members of a parish may be
drawn into loving union and co-operation. Perhaps one of the
most hopeful and helpful would be an assembly of fathers
of families for the purpose of considering the question of
education in general and the future employment of their
children in particular.

The lessons of the Agape again have been gradually learnt
as regards the importance of large social gatherings, parochial
entertainments and the like, in all well ordered parishes and
dioceses but there still remains much to learn. The kiss
of charity is hardly likely to be given usefully amongst men
except on some solemn occasion, such as the reception of a
Bishop by his Chapter, but are we not often too reserved
with other signs of greeting ? " All the brethren greet you,"
writes St. Paul. Christians should not be afraid to shake
hands at least with one another, and to greet one another
with smiles of recognition, if not at every meeting yet at
certain times of freer intercourse.

I have heard of churches where, after the sermon, the con
gregation often remained to thank the Minister and shake
hands with him. Where this is a natural expression of
feeling and not something artificial and affected tending to
exalt the man at the expense of his message it is surely in
the spirit of the early Church.

For my own part I wish, wherever I may be in the Diocese,
to enter into some Christian and friendly relation, however
transient, with every person I meet. It is a difficult thing
to carry out in the hurry of railway travelling and on the
roads and in the press and necessary preoccupation of
business. But if you, dear brethren, will help me and
specially if clergy and people, farmers and labourers, em
ployers and employed, and their respective wives, will do the
same at least in their own Parishes we shall be preparing the
way for that united action which both the needs of our own
time and the example of early days certainly demand of us.

III.

THE PRIMITIVE LITURGY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE
MANNER AND FORM OF CONSECRATION.

In the previous address we traced out the different stages
of the primitive Liturgy considered as forming part of the
general assembly of the Christian Church as far as the
delivery of the Sermon.

The subject of this present address will be the more
solemn part of the service beginning with the dismissal of the
Catechumens or candidates for Baptism, which followed the
Sermon.

It has been sometimes questioned (as by de Pressense)
how far this dismissal was primitive. It is true that Justin
Martyr says nothing about it, but it might well be a detail
on which he would not insist in giving such a description as
that which he has introduced into his Apology. Something
of the kind seems certainly an almost necessary feature of the
Liturgy. For he says that none but baptized persons were
allowed to partake of the Eucharist, and that each of those
that were present did so (1 Apol. 65, 66).

Either therefore none other than baptized persons had been
present throughout, or they had been dismissed at some point
in the service which is not noticed. But the assemblies for
public worship seem from the first to have been open to
others besides Christians, as the Synagogue services were
apparently open to Gentiles. This openness of the Syna
gogues, at least in some places, may be gathered from the
description in the Acts of what happened at Antioch in
Pisidia on the occasion of St. Paul s first visit. On the first
Sabbath after their arrival Paul and Barnabas, as usual,
attended the Synagogue, and were invited to preach after the

Dismissal of Catechumens. 57

reading of the Law and the Prophets. After the sermon St.
Paul was asked to repeat what he had said on the next
Sabbath, and when he did so " almost the whole city came
together to hear the Word of God" (Acts xiii. 14, 42, 44),
apparently to the Synagogue. As regards the Church, which
certainly was not less accessible than the Jewish Synagogue,
the entrance into it of unbelievers is taken for granted by St.
Paul as a natural incident (1 Cor. xiv. 23, 24) ; and St.
James in his Epistle seems to imply that a rich man, even if
he were not a Christian, might come in to take a seat in the
Christian " Synagogue " and be preferred to the poor " rich
" in faith" (ii. 2, 5, 7). Then there would be the unconverted
members of a family, children and dependents, who would
come in with their relatives and masters. These would
naturally be dismissed, and hence grew up in time a regular
form of dismissal proclaimed by the Deacon, traces of which
lasted on into the middle ages. 1

A few words may also be said by way of introduction as to
the frequency of the celebration and the hour at which the
Sacrament was administered. There can be no doubt that
from the very first the first day of the week or Sunday was
kept as the memorial of the Lord s Resurrection, and was
hallowed by the commemoration of Himself which He desired
His Church to make. At first, we may suppose, in the
Church of Palestine, and others under the influence of Jewish
modes of thought, the evening of the Sabbath or Saturday,
after sunset , would be considered the beginning of the Lord s
day. Hence the Agape would be followed immediately by

1 See the Section in Scudamore N.E. p. 335 foil, headed The
dismissal of the Catechumens and other non-communicants. The
word " missa," a doublet of " missio," = dismissal, (as in the phrases
" missa eatechnmenorum" and " Ite : missa cst" at the end of the
service), gradually changed its meaning, in popular and incorrect
parlance, and came to be used for the service ended by the dismissal,
and then as a synonym for Liturgy or Prayer. Hence the word
"mass." The word is used in its original sense in a Canon of the
Fourth Council of Carthage A.D. 398, which ordained that "the
" Bishop should forbid no one, whether heathen or heretic or Jew, to
enter the Church and hear the Word of God so far as the dismissal
(missam) of the Catechumens " (canon 84, Bruns p. 149).

58 The Primitive Liturgy.

the celebration of the Sacrament some time in the night
which ushered in the Sunday. Such a celebration appears to
have been the one held at Troas as described in the Acts (xx.
7, 8, II). 2 Such a one is also implied in the book called the
Teaching of the Apostles, i.e. one succeeding a common meal.

When the Agape was separated from the celebration of the
Eucharist it would be natural to keep generally to the same
time, but with such variation of the hour as would be suitable
and convenient to those who had taken no food before the
service. It would be natural, that is to say, to choose an
hour still in the night time, but after not before sleep.

We find distinct traces of this change in Pliny s famous
Letter to Trajan (96), written apparently in the year 112
A.D. The persons whom he examined informed him that
" they were accustomed on a fixed day to meet before day-
" break and to sing a hymn to Christ as to a God [they
spoke, we must remember, as renegades] in response to one
" another, and to bind themselves with a sacrament (or oath)
" not to the commission of any crime, but not to commit
" thefts, robberies, adulteries, not to break their promise not
" to refuse to return a trust when called upon ; after per-
" forming which things they had a custom of departing, and
" of coming together again to take food, but of a simple and
"innocent character; and that they had left off even this
" since the publication of my edict, in which according to
" your commands I had forbidden the formation of clubs
" (hetaerias)." The religious service is here stated to have
been still before daylight, but followed, not preceded, by the
social meal, and it seems that the latter was being given up

2 Bishop Clir. Wordsworth considers that the assembly took place on
the afternoon or evening of Sunday, and was continued till Monday
morning ; but this seems less probable. The Sunday celebration is
expressly mentioned in the Teaching of the Apostles, ch. xiv., " On the
Lord s-day of the Lord [i.e., as opposed to the " Sabbath of the Lord"]
gather together and break bread and give thanks," &c., and Justin 1
Apol. 67 (twice), and probably referred to by Barnabas, xv., " Therefore
we keep the eighth day with rejoicing, being the day on which Jesus
rose again from the dead, "and Pliny, Letters to Trajan 96 and Trajan s
reply. See above p. 47 note, and both letters, with full notes, in Light-
foot s Ignatius i. pp. 50 56.

Separation of the Agape from the Sacrament. 59

on account of the well-known jealousy of the Eoman Govern
ment of all kinds of guilds and voluntary societies. Thus
the fear of government interference, the desire to disarm
heathen calumnies, and the wish to avoid such real disorders
as St. Paul noted and reproved at Corinth, would be motives
all uniting to separate the Agape from the Eucharist and to
bring the latter from a night service to one just before day
break and gradually just after it. We may date this change
about the time of the persecution of Trajan, of which Pliny s
letter describes one chapter, since in the state of things
presupposed in the Epistle of St. Ignatius to the Smyrneans
(ch. 8) the Eucharist and the Agape still seem to be united,
while in the careful description given by Justin Martyr (circa
140 A.D.) they appear to be quite separate. 3 From Justin s
account it would seem that the assembly took place in the
morning in the countries with which he was familiar. This
was in fact almost a necessity of the case in a society
numbering many slaves amongst its members, who would of
course have to work on Sunday as well as on other days. It
was only in out of the way places, as in parts of Egypt, that
the custom of celebrating the Eucharist, after a meal and in
the evenings, still continued. 4 I shall say a few words both

3 See Bp. Liglitfoot Ignatius i. pp. 52, 386 and note in Ad Smyrn. 8.
To "hold a love-feast" here clearly implies a concomitant celebration
of the Eucharist. The Emperor s jealousy of secret societies is well
illustrated by Liglitfoot from Pliny s letters to Trajan 42 and 43, ib. p.
19. It may be remarked that the difference between Ignatius and
Justin is an argument for the early date of Ignatius Epistles though
not by itself an absolute proof. For the early hour of celebration cp.
Tertullian de corona 3. " The sacrament of the Eucharist though it
" was commanded by the Lord at meal time (or during a meal) and to
" all, we take in assemblies before day-break (etiam antelucanis coetibus),
" and from the hand of no others except our Presidents," and 2 ad
Uxorem 5 (dissuading from marriage with a heathen). " Tour husband
" will not know what you are tasting secretly before all other food."
The suggestion about Sunday work is from C. Prichard and E. B.
Bernard s Selected Letters of Pliny p. 163, Oxford 1872.

4 Socrates Hist. Eccl. v 22 describing peculiarities of Church custom
and ritual. " The Egyptians in the neighbourhood of Alexandria and
the inhabitants of Thebais . . . after having eaten and satisfied
themselves with food of all kinds, in the evening make their offerings
and partake of the mysteries."

60 The Primitive Liturgy.

on the frequency of celebration and the hours most suitable
for it in my next address. I may add, however, here that the
fact that each Sunday was marked by a celebration of the
Lord s Supper may make us quite certain that the general
principles of the service were thoroughly understood by those
who refer to it or describe it, and that there is no room to
doubt the primitive character of the main lines of the tradition
which has come down to us. Let us then piece together
Justin s two accounts of the service so as to form one
description, since we have no other so full and explicit of this
early date. The fact that it was a public description given in
an apology or petition for toleration, presented to the Emperor
and chief men of the Koman Emperor, gives its positive
statements additional weight, though no doubt such a
circumstance might lead to the avoidance of minute detail
and elaborate explanation.

After the reading of " The Memoirs of the Apostles or
the writings of the Prophets" comes, as we have seen, the
sermons in which the lessons of these Scriptures are enforced
by the presiding minister. " Then we all rise up in a body
and put up prayers" (ch. 67). These Justin describes as
" common prayers" made by " those who are called brethren"
. . . " both for themselves, and the newly-baptized
" person, and all others everywhere with earnest purpose,
" that we having learnt the truth, may have grace to act as
" good representatives of it and to be found keeping the com-
" mandments which we have received, that we may be saved
" with an eternal salvation. When we have concluded our
"prayers we salute one another with a kiss. Afterwards
" there is brought to the President of the brethren bread and
" a cup of water and wine, and he, receiving it, offers up
"praise and glory to the Father of all things, through the
" name of the Son and the holy Spirit and makes a thanks-
" giving of some length for His goodness in vouchsafing to
" give us these things" (65). In the second passage he
says : " When we have finished our prayer bread is brought
" and wine and water, and the President likewise utters
"prayers and thanksgivings with all his power" (67).

Justin s description of the Liturgy. 61

" When he has ended his prayers and thanksgivings all the
" people that is present adds with loud voice Amen. Now
" Amen means in the Hebrew tongue So be it. And when
" the President has given thanks and all the people has
" answered, those who are called among us Deacons give to
" each of those who are present to partake of the bread over
" which thanks has been given, and of the wine and water,
" and it is sent by the Deacon s hands to those who are absent"
(65). " And those who are well off and benevolent give each
" according to his own purpose, (cf. 2 Cor. ix. 7) what he wills ;
" and that which is collected is laid up in the hands of the
" President, and he helps orphans and widows and those who
" are in need on account of sickness or any other cause, and
" those who are in bonds, and those who are sojourners in a
" strange land, and in fact he is the kinsman and helper of
" all those who are in want. But we keep the Sun-day by
" coming all together in this manner inasmuch as it is the
" first day on which God set Himself to turn darkness and
" matter by creation into an orderly world, and Jesus Christ
" our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For
" they crucified Him the day before Saturn s-day (Satur-day),
" and the day after Satur-day, which is Sun-day, appearing
" to His apostles and disciples He taught them these things
" which we have now proposed to your consideration" (67).

In the chapter which intervenes between the two descrip
tions which we have thrown into one he says something about
the doctrine of the Sacrament which bears upon the form of
consecration and must therefore be mentioned here. After
saying that none but baptized persons may partake of " this
food called Eucharist (or Thanksgiving)" he goes on, "For
" we do not receive these things as common bread or common
" drink, but just as Jesus Christ our Saviour becoming in-
" carnate through the Word of God took flesh and blood for
" our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food
" which has become Eucharist by means of the word of
" prayer which comes from Him, from which (food) our
" blood and flesh receive nourishment by assimilation, is the
" flesh likewise and blood of that Jesus who was incarnate.

62 The Primitive Liturgy.

" For the Apostles in the Memoirs which they composed,
" which are called Gospels, have thus delivered to us that
"they received a commandment; that Jesus having taken
" bread gave thanks and said, Do this for my memorial, this
" is my body, and likewise having taken the cup gave thanks
" and said, This is my blood, and gave it to them alone."
By the word of God through which our Lord became Incar
nate (according to Justin) I understand the message of the
angel at the Annunciation, and by the word of prayer which
comes from Him (Si fv^g \6yov rov nap avrov) I under
stand, as on the whole most probable, the Lord s Prayer,
which is the only form of Prayer known to have been given
by our Lord for the use of His Church. I shall speak of this
more at length in the latter part of this address.

We are now in a position to compare the description given
by Justin with the actual forms of service that have come
down to us. Allowing then for the circumstances attending
his Apology we may be almost surprised how clearly the
character of the service corresponds with what we know to
have been the usage at a later date. The action may be
divided into five parts. I. First the "common prayers,"
said by all together standing, which correspond in their
general contents with the " prayer of the faithful" which in
the Liturgies succeeds the dismissal of the Catechumens.
II. Then follows the kiss of Salutation or Peace as in the
Greek Liturgies. III. Then the Offering of Bread and a
mixed Cup, brought to the celebrant. IV. Then his prayers
and thanksgivings made alone, followed with or accompanied
by what we suppose to have been the Lord s prayer, to all
which the people answers Amen : and V. Lastly the distri
bution of the food called Eucharist. These five actions
correspond generally to the order both of Eastern and
Western Liturgies except that the kiss was given at Home
and in Africa after the consecration, and at Rome the Lord s
Prayer was probably not part of the consecration Prayer till
the time of Gregory the Great.

Let us take each of these five points in turn.

The Intercession for all Men. 63

I. THE INTERCESSION FOR ALL MEN BEFORE THE

OFFERTORY.

This is one of the most important points of the Liturgy,
considered as a memorial of our great High Priest, who is
passed into heaven and under the cover of whose intercessions
we are bold to approach the throne of grace (Heb. iv. 14, 16).
He has given us a type of what He desires such prayers to
be in the only prayer He has left us, the Lord s prayer, the
first half of which is clearly a petition for the conversion of
all men, for the good government of the world and of the
Church, and for the sanctification of human wills after the
pattern of angelic service. Nor did our Lord leave His
desires on these points vague and indefinite. He bade us
in the Sermon on the Mount not only to love our enemies
and bless those that curse us, but to pray for those that
despitefully use us and persecute us (Matt. v. 44) ; He
exhorted His disciples to pray the Lord of the harvest
that He would send forth labourers into His harvest (ib. ix.
38) ; He laid down the far-reaching principle of rendering
to Caesar the things which are Caesar s (Matt. xxii. 21
and parallels) ; He spoke of God s love to the world in
giving His only begotten son, and when moved by the
coming of the firstfruits of the Gentiles, He described His
lifting up from the earth as something that would draw
all men to Him (John iii. 15, 17, xii. 32) ; and finally upon
the cross He prayed for His murderers (Luke xxiii. 34). It
is only a natural extension of His master s precept and
example that made St. Paul describe his own great heaviness
and continual sorrow of heart in thinking of his countrymen,
and, in his magnificent hyperbole, assert his wish that he
himself could be accursed from Christ for their sake (Rom.
ix. 1) ; and that his heart s desire and prayer to God for
Israel was that they might be saved (ib. x. 1). It was only
a simple rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar s
that made him exhort one of the Bishops appointed by
himself, no doubt for the purposes of Liturgical worship,
" that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and
" giving of thanks be made for all men ; for kings and for

64 The Primitive Liturgy.

" all that are in authority ; that we may lead a quiet and
" peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is
" good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour ; who
" will have all men to be saved and to come unto the know-
" ledge of the truth" (1 Tim. ii. 14).

It is clear from this that the Intercessions of the Church
as a body ought not to be limited to the welfare and growth in
grace of her own members : but ought to include at least
three other great Intercessions. The first is for the con
version of Israel ; the second for the conversion of the
heathen and for the sending forth of missionaries to them ;
the third for civil rulers, whether they be Christian or infidel,
heretics or orthodox. We shall find, I regret to say, that
these duties have been very much overlooked and obscured,
partly by natural selfishness and want of public spirit, which
is a danger of Christians as of other human beings, partly
owing to the provocation of opponents, partly by the
tendency to fix the Liturgies irrespective of change of
circumstances, partly I fear by independence on the part of
the priesthood, and partly by certain dogmatic prepossessions.
The last can only be just touched upon as having a long
history, which has perhaps been insufficiently attended to. I
mean particularly to refer to the principle which St. Augustine
asserts as a definite rule of the Church, that it is wrong to
"offer" for anyone who is not incorporated by baptism into
the body of Christ. 5

This principle could not of course properly touch the Inter
cessions before the offertory, of which we are now speaking,
and which are, I believe, without doubt, the primitive " Great
Intercession" of the Liturgy. St. Augustine indeed in ano
ther place, in the course of that same Pelagian controversy,
which led him to write as he did against " offering" for the

5 St. Aug. de anima et eius origine i. 10 and 13: ii. 15 and 21;
and iii. 18 against a certain Vincentius Victor, who wrote on free-will
and the solvability of unbaptized infants. I have to thank Mr. F. E.
Bright man, of the Pusey House, for directing my attention to this
and some other important points. The other passage in which St.
Augustine takes a broader line is in his letter to Yitalis, ep. 217 (alias
107) written circa A.D. 427. See Gaume s edition vol. 2, col. 1213.

Of Prayer for the Conversion of Israel. 65

unbaptized, takes a somewhat different and a broader line.
He insists that it is right for the priest at the altar to offer
intercessions for those who do not believe and for catechu
mens, as well as for the perseverance of those who do believe,
and he supports himself by the authority of St. Cyprian in
his exposition of the Lord s Prayer (de dom. or. 17). But it
is easier to contract men s sympathies than to expand them,
and I believe that the restrictive principle was gradually,
though improperly, extended to these earlier intercessions.
I think too it is not impossible that our Lord s words after
the Last Supper, " I pray for them : I pray not for the
" world, but for those whom thou hast given me, for they are
" thine," may have been misused in the same direction (John
xvii. 9). The other motives we have indicated may be easily
traced in their operation or results. They probably were
rarely present singly, but co-operated, now in this way and
now in that, to narrow the circle of Christian prayers.

1. Of Prayer for the Conversion of Israel.

It will not be possible to do justice to this point without a
recollection of the attitude of the Jewish nation and its
ecclesiastical rulers towards those who were converted to
Christianity. During the last year of Our Lord s Ministry
the " Jews," that is, we may suppose, the Jewish Sanhedrim,
determined that if any one confessed Him to be the Messiah
he should be put out of the synagogue (John ix. 22). After
the Ascension there was no doubt in many places a hesitation
as to how the preaching of the Gospel was to be regarded by
the representatives of the law. I may just notice in passing
how carefully the writer of the Acts depicts certain varying
features of this hesitation, thus showing the early date at
which he wrote and his access to original sources of informa
tion. But, after a few years, a settled antagonism on the part
of the Jews of Palestine, and places under Palestinian
influence, became the rule. When St. Paul wrote to the
Corinthians it is clear that anyone who then returned to
Judaism from Christianity was forced to pronounce a curse on
the Lord Jesus, just as in later days Christians were forced

6G The Primitive Liturgy.

by Roman officials to blaspheme Christ. 6 The composition of
the imprecation on heretics which has been inserted as the
twelfth of the Eighteen (or, with it, nineteen) Benedictions of
the Jewish Synagogue service, must certainly be placed in the
course of the first century. Older writers assign it to the
time of Gamaliel the Elder, the master of St. Paul, while
modern ones are inclined to date it in that of his grandson,
and after the destruction of the Temple. It was also cer
tainly directed against those Jewish Christians who were
considered apostates and traitors by their brethren, 7 and
intended to stop the flow of converts from the Synagogue
to the Church. Credible witnesses of the second and fol
lowing centuries inform us of the daily imprecations which
in their days were pronounced on Jewish converts to Chris
tianity, or, as some of them understood it, on the Christian
Church as a body. 8 The same prayer in a modified form is
used at the present day in England and probably in all
countries where the Jews exercise any amount of freedom.
It is to be remarked that it was not only directed against

6 Cp. 1 Cor. xii. 3 R.Y. " I give you to understand that no man
" speaking in the Spirit of God saith Jesus is anathema ; and no man
" can say Jesus is Lord [the earliest baptismal creed] but in the Holy
" Spirit." The original of the anathema was no doubt Deut. xxi. 23
ki-qil lath elohim talliy on we Karri pa/j.evos vnb Oeov iras Kpe/j.d l u,evos tirl |uAou,
cp. Gal. iii. 13, and Buxtorf Lexicon s.r. tdlali s.v. tdluy ( hanged ),
for instances of the application of this word to Our Saviour. The
Hebrew q e lalah is apparently considered as hero equal to cherein
avdO/j.a, and so Zech. viii. 13 " as ye were a curse among the heathen."
For the curses on Christ exacted by heathen magistrates see Plin. Ep.
ad Traian. 96, 5 and G, and Martyr. Poly carpi 9.

1 See Appendix II. on the Jewish Prayer against heretics or Birkhath
ham-minim. I have to thank the Rev. Henry 0. Reichardt, curate of
Winterborne St. Martin. Dorset, and formerly a missionary at Tunis
and Damascus, for much kind help in investigating this subject.

8 St. Justin constantly makes this statement in his Dialogue with
Trypho chaps. 16, 47 ? 93, 96, 108, 117, and 137. In ch. 96 he explains
Deut. xxi. 23 as a prophecy not of God s wrath against our Lord, but of
the Jewish curses. From ch. 137 they appear to have been uttered specially
after prayers. St. Jerome seems to think that the curse was specially
against those who were still half Jews and half Christians. Writing to
St. Augustine (ep. 112) he says Up to the present day through all the
" Synagogues of the East there is a heresy among the Jews called that
" of the Miuaei [i.e. Minim] which is everywhere anathematized (dainna-
" tur) by the Pharisees. They are commonly called Nazarseans and
" believe in Christ the Sou of God, born of the Yirgin Mary, and say

The Jewish Prayer against Heretics. 67

so-called "heretics," but also against the Kingdom of Pride,
that is to say the Koman Empire. I cite it in a form kindly
communicated to me by one of our own clergy (Mr. Reichardt)
from an ancient manuscript in his possession. It runs as
follows :

"May there be no hope to the apostates (m e shumadim),
" even the heretics (minim), the double-tongued (malshinim),
" the infidels, the traitors; may they all perish together in a
"moment; and may the enemies of thy people Israel be
"speedily annihilated; and may the Kingdom of Pride
" (malkuth zadon) be speedily destroyed and broken into
" pieces. And mayest thou humble them speedily in our
" days. Blessed art thou, Lord, who breakest into frag-
" ments all enemies and humblest the proud ones."

Such being the bad example set in the Synagogue the
extent of which I have no wish to exaggerate it is scarcely
wonderful that the example and precept of Our Lord and His
Apostles was very incompletely followed. Justin indeed, who
frequently mentions the Jewish imprecations, tells us that
Christians pray for their enemies and those who hate them
(1 Ap. 14) and amongst others for Jews (Dial. 35 and 133),
but he gives no hint that this was done, in any detail at
least, in the Liturgy.

It is indeed a matter of some difficulty to prove that
prayers for the ancient people of God ever formed part of the
ordinary service of other days than Good Friday, and for
Wednesday in Holy Week. It is however I think probable
that M. Duchesne s ingenious conjecture is right, and that
the series of collects now said only on Good Friday, after the
Or emus which precedes the singing of the offertory, were once
said much more frequently. At present this Or emus is left
as it were hanging in the air and is followed by no collect,
either in the Roman or the Sarum Missal, except on this

" that He is the same that suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again,
" in whom we also believe : but while they wish to be both Jews and
" Christians they are neither Jews nor Christians." Elsewhere St.
Jerome speaks of Christians being cursed three times a day in the
Synagogue under the name of Nazarenes in Isaiam v. 18, 19 ; xlix. 7 ;
Hi. 4 : ed. Vail. iv. pp. 81, 565, 604, cp. Epiph. haer. xxix. 9.

E 2

68 The Primitive Liturgy.

particular day. We know, from the so-called Gregorian
Sacramentary, that the Good Friday collects were also said
on the previous Wednesday in the 8th century, and we
have evidence of about the year 431 A.D. that at that
date intercessions covering much the same subjects, though
apparently in different order, were then part of the Liturgy,
and it would seem a regular and constant part. The
passage in which this evidence occurs is part of a catena
of authorities appended to a letter of Pope Celestine I.
addressed to the Bishops of Gaul. It is not referred to by
M. Duchesne, but certainly supports his conjecture up to a
certain point, and it is in itself interesting both in its expres
sions, and as shewing that at one time at least the Church
tried to do her duty in respect to the fulness of her inter
cessions. After citing the opinions of Popes Innocent and
Zosimus to prove that the beginning of a good will was due
to divine grace, this writer goes on "let us also consider the
" sacraments of priestly intercessions, which being delivered
" to us by the Apostles, are uniformly celebrated in the
" whole world and in the whole Catholic Church, so that the
" law of praying may define the law of believing (ut legem
" credendi lex statuat supplicandi). For when the prelates of
" our holy congregations discharge the embassy committed to
"them, they plead the cause of the human race with the
" divine clemency, and, while the whole Church groans
" together with them, they demand and pray that faith may
" be given to infidels, that idolaters may be liberated from
" the errors of their impiety, that the light of truth may be
" manifest to the Jews the veil being taken from their heart,
" that heretics may grow wise again by receiving the catholic
" faith, that schismatics may receive the spirit of reviving
" charity, that the remedies of penitence may be conferred on
" the lapsed, and lastly that catechumens may be brought to
" the sacraments of regeneration and the palace of heavenly
" mercy be unclosed to them." 9

9 This passage is found in the catena of authorities subjoined to the
letter (ep. 21) written by Pope Celestine I. A.D. 431 to Yenerius,
Mariuus and other Bishops of Gaul. It may be found in Migne Pat.

Of Prayer for the Conversion of Israel. 69

But excellent as the example of the Church at one time
may have been, she has long ceased to think seriously or
frequently of this duty in her public offices. It would not
indeed be even true to say that there are no official prayers
against the Jews ever uttered by Christian lips. It is painful
to think that in one of the Antiphons for Good Friday, used
perhaps everywhere to this day in the orthodox Eastern
Church, the good things wrought by Christ to the Hebrew
race are first recalled and then He is three times besought,
" render unto them, Lord, according to their works." 10

In the Western Church, including our own, prayers for
the Jews are, I believe, now only found in the Liturgy on one
day in the year, that is, of course, on Good Friday. In the
Roman Liturgy the Collect is headed, you will remember,
by the very grudging and unloving introduction, Or emus et
pro perfidis Judacis, and in itself expresses a kind of
astonishment that God should show them any mercy :
" Omnipotens sempiterne Deus qui etiam judaicam perfidiam
"a tua misericordia non repellis," &c. The " improperia"
which follow, that is the series of reproofs or remonstrances
with Israel, beginning, " Popule meus quid feci tibi ?" are
much more of a Christian character, and might be effective,

Led. 50 col. 535, Labb. Cone. ii. 1616 foil. and Constant. Epist. 1193 ; cf .
Jaffe Regesta p. 32. Binius (ap. Labb. col. 1613) ascribes the catena to
Prosper of Aquitaine. It is printed in his works P.L. 51 col. 205 foil.,
but the editor thinks it was more probably drawn up at Celestine s
request by St. Leo (afterwards Pope) for Prosper s use. It was inserted
by Dionysius Exiguus (circa A.D. 550) in his collection of Canons and
was not unnaturally quoted as Celestine s. See for instance Petrus
Diacouus P.L. 62 c. 91 and 65 c. 450 (whatever may be the date of the
book de Incarnatione et gratia] who cites this passage as if by Celestine.
It is also used by Rabanus Maurus de Instit. Cler. ii. 37 (as if it were
his own composition) to describe the Good Friday service. Hence we
learn that in the 9th century such a series of collects was apparently
confined to that day. So it is also in the 7th cent. Gelasiau Sacra-
mentary i. 41. For Duchesne s conjecture see his Origines du culte
Chretien pp. 164 foil. Paris 1889.

10 Antiphon xi. G. V . Shaun ; Euchology p. 306 Kidderminster 1891,
" For the good things thou hast wrought, O Christ unto the Hebrew
" race, they have condemned thee to crucifixion and given thee vinegar
" and gall to drink. But render unto them, O Lord, according to their
" works ; for they understood not thy condescension," &c. Cp. the
Maronite Song of the B.V.M. at the Cross, in De cruce Vat. Comment.
pp. 3437 Rome 1779.

70 77/0 Primitive Liturgy.

where they were understood, in touching some Jewish hearts.
But I do not feel sure that our own Communion does not
stand alone in Christendom in having a prayer for the Jews
without any reproach or sting in it. Yet even that is not all
that could be wished, and it is only ordered on one day in the
year.

We shall never see the Church what (rod designed her to
be until Israel is converted, and the surest way to secure the
conversion of Israel would be to introduce a petition for it in
the Liturgy, to-be said every Sunday a petition, it may be,
recognizing our own shortcomings towards the ancient people
of God, and certainly not reproaching them for the sins of their
forefathers. If I were Bishop of a Colonial or Missionary
Church I would use all my influence to introduce such a
collect into the Liturgy, but I can do something towards it,
and that is to ask my brethren of the clergy and laity to use
such a prayer silently in the Church, whilst the alms are being
collected, and at family prayers in their households every
Sunday. 11

Next I think we might reasonably approach the Jews and
ask them to discontinue using the Birkhath ham-minim, even
in its present modified form. It cannot be of any advantage
to them, and it is not unfairly used by their enemies as a
pretext for suspicion, both religious and civil, against them.
I have heard, for instance, that it is forbidden to them to use
it in the Russian Empire. They know that they have the
sympathy of the majority of Englishmen, and are regarded
by us as loyal fellow-subjects. Ought they not at our request
to restore their Eighteen Benedictions to their proper number
and genuine character, and to omit this intrusive Imprecation

11 I venture to recommend the following prayer, which is printed in
our Salisbury Diocesan Guild Manual.

For the Conversion of Israel.

O Ever-living God, Whose mercies fail not, look down with pity
on Thine ancient people Israel, and take the veil from their hearts.
Open their understandings that they may understand the Scriptures ;
and pour upon them the spirit of grace and supplications, that they
may look on Him Whom they have pierced; so that both Jew and
Gentile may be made one in Him, and be brought together to Thy
heavenly kingdom ; through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.

Of Prayer for Missions and Missionaries. 71

of which we have spoken. We know that they pray for the
Queen and Koyal Family on stated occasions, but we should
feel surer both of their kindness to us and of their loyalty to
the civil power if they ceased to use what was once at least
coloured by hatred to the Church of Christ and to the Civil
Government.

2. Of Prayer for Missions and Missionaries.

Next we have to ask what is the attitude of the Liturgy
towards Missions to the heathen and the infidel ? Here again,
though earlier centuries were more open-minded, those who
framed the existing Liturgies very scantily recognised their
duty in this respect.

St. Cyprian, as we have already implied, explains the
Lord s prayer in the sense of an intercession for unbelievers,
especially the petition, Thy will be done. He suggests that
in heaven may mean in the disciples of Christ, and in
earth ( in those who are as yet unwilling to believe. "We
" too (he says) who ought to be like God our Father, who
" maketh His sun to rise on good and evil, and raineth over
"just and unjust, so pray and make request according to
" Christ s bidding as to make a prayer for the salvation of all
" men, that just as the will of God is done in heaven, that is
" to say in us by our faith through which He has willed that
" we should be of heaven, so also the will of God may be
" done in earth, that is in those who are unwilling to believe
" ( credere rcoZentibus Hartel), in order that those who are
" still of earth by their first nativity may by a birth of water
" and the spirit begin to be of heaven" (de dom. or. 17). The
premisses are hardly sound, but the practice and conclusion
are. Justin s prayer for all men must necessarily have in
cluded heathens in its intention, and St. Augustine witnesses
that the prayers said by the priest at the altar included inter
cessions for unbelievers and catechumens as well as believers.
But when we look into the Liturgical texts that have come
down to us we find generally little more than a petition " for
the peace of the whole world," evidently with a view to the
comfort and advantage of the Church, much more than to

7 2 The Primitive Liturgy.

that of those outside. Prayers for Kings and Rulers, where
they were used, no doubt in the first ages had a kind of mis
sionary tendency, but when the Empire became Christian,
they lost it and were not replaced by others.

The Clementine Liturgy which was apparently never used

has a prayer very like those in our Litany for enemies and
persecutors, for those who are without and those who have
gone astray (Hammond, p. 19) ; but perhaps there is no more
beautiful Missionary prayer in any existing Liturgy than that
which comes no doubt originally from the Church of Alex
andria. It is preserved at present only in the Coptic and
Ethiopic, and is said after the reading of the Catholic Epistle
and before that of the Acts. It may remind us that the
witness of little known and perhaps despised Churches may
sometimes recall happier parts of Christendom to duties
which in their careless ease they have left unfulfilled. Yet
even this is not so direct an appeal to the Lord of the harvest,
nor so full a recognition of the wants of the heathen as could
be wished. It may be translated as follows from the Coptic
Liturgy : " Lord God who by thy holy Apostles hast
" manifested to us the mystery of the glorious Gospel of thy
" Christ, and according to the greatness of thine infinite gift
" of grace hast given to them to preach the fulness of thine
" unsearchable mercy to the whole world ; we beseech thee
" Lord to make us worthy of a part and lot with them.
" Grant that we may continually walk in their footsteps, that
" we may imitate their contests, and take part with them in
" the labours and toils which they underwent for the sake of
" religion. Preserve thy holy Church, which thou hast
" founded by their means, bless the lambs of thy flock and
" increase this vine which thy right hand hath planted in
" Christ Jesus our Lord ; through whom &c." (Hammond
p. 198 foil. cp. p. 249).

We have already spoken of the larger use of the Good
Friday intercessions in ancient times, which must have been
Gallican as well as Roman, otherwise the argument from
them would have been of no avail as addressed to Gallican
Bishops. In our own Church we have the prayer for " all

Of Prayer for Missions and Missionaries. 73

" sorts and conditions of men" in our daily matins and even
song, for which we must be thankful. But we have nothing
in the Communion Office, and what we have is not such a
moving of the Lord of the harvest as our Saviour certainly
designed us to use. This neglect of a plain duty has led to
two great misfortunes of which we are constantly feeling the
ill effects.

In the first place it has made it possible for many men,
even among those who wish to be considered true sons of the
Church, to go out into the world and to take part, it may be,
in the government of a great heathen province or empire,
without any idea that active sympathy with missions is an
obvious and indispensable part of a Churchman s duty. Even
many of our clergy and parishes, as the diocesan statistics
show, have not yet realised this elementary fact ; but the
failure to understand it is probably less in England than in
any other Christian country.

In the second place, and as a natural result of the former,
Mission work has been left to be guided too much by chance
enthusiasm or undisciplined piety, or by voluntary societies,
claiming certain fields of labour as their own. I am not
speaking of our own Church only by any means, but of the
general results in Christendom. All know or have heard
something of the struggles and rivalries of Dominicans and
Jesuits. Similar rivalries, sectarian or partisan, affect a great
portion of modern mission work, and trouble the relations of
Western missionaries, English, American, or Latin, with the
orthodox Eastern Church and other Oriental communions,
such as the Armenians and Assyrians. It is not too much to
say that if a petition for foreign missions and for the sending
forth of missionaries had been a regular part of the Liturgy
of all Christian Churches, there would have been in the first
place greater peace and unity among them, a diversion of energy
away from internal party strife and internecine hostilities
between Church and Church, into proper lines and channels.
Secondly, there would have been greater wisdom and boldness,
greater force and efficiency, and by God s grace greater and
more evident success in our efforts to evangelize the world.

74 The Primitive Liturgy.

I would say of this as I said about the former prayer for
the Jews, that pending an open restoration of it to the public
service such a prayer should be said silently in Church, and
openly at family prayers, by all who have the welfare of
Christendom at heart. 12

3. Of Prayer for Kings and Civil Eiders and Magistrates.

The other difficult element of the "prayer of the faithful,"
namely that for the Emperors and for civil rulers, has been
much more readily and generally adopted into the Christian
Liturgy. Yet even this was by no means universal. It would
not be fair to insist upon the short precepts and forms of the
Teaching of the Apostles as being exhaustive, but I confess
that they leave the impression that the Liturgy represented
in that remarkable little book, while it avoided the Jewish
imprecations, did not contain fixed intercessions except for

12 The following prayer by Bishop Cotton originally worded all
Thy people of India" is very suitable :

For the Conversion of the Heathen.

O GOD, who hast made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell
on all the face of the earth, and didst send Thy blessed Son to preach
to them that are far off, and to them that are nigh ; grant that all Thy
people who sit in darkness and the shadow of death may seek after Thee
and find Thee ; and hasten, O Lord, the fulfilment of Thy promise to
pour out Thy Spirit upon all flesh ; through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.

To which may be added the following by Bp. Chr. Wordsworth :
For Missions and for Grace to help them.

O LORD Jesu Christ, Saviour of Mankind, who hast commanded Thy
disciples to go into all the world and to preach the Gospel to every
creature, and who hast declared that this Gospel of the Kingdom shall
first be preached to all nations, and that then the end shall come ;
we humbly beseech Thee to raise up men full of faith and of the
Holy Ghost, and send them forth to do the work of evangelists by
spreading abroad the glad tidings of salvation ; and so to fill us with
Thy love, and to quicken us with Thy grace, that we may labour
joyfully with them by prayers and offerings for their work, so that
finally at Thy Second Coming to judge the world, we together with
them, and with those who have received the Gospel at their hands, may
rejoice in Thy presence with exceeding joy, and may praise Thee for
evermore, oar holy and most merciful Redeemer, our most worthy Judge
Eternal, our most mighty Lord and God, to whom, with the Father and
the Holy Ghost, be all honour and glory now and for evermore. Amen.

There is a good prayer in Abp. Hermann s Consultation (p. 352 ed.
1548) before the Creed.

Of Prayer for Kings, &lt;Cr. 75

the Church. This is the text of the prayer which answers to
Justin s " common prayers," and which evidently was the
next step in the service after the conclusion of the Agape
(ch. x). It may have been based on the Jewish grace after
meat, to which it has some close analogies both in its position
and its contents. 13

" And after being filled thus give ye thanks :
We thank thee, holy Father, for thy holy name which
" thou hast made to dwell in our hearts, and for the
" knowledge and faith and immortality, which thou hast
" made known to us by thy child Jesus. Thine be the glory
" for ever. Thou, Almighty Sovereign, didst create all
" things for thy name s sake, and gavest men food and drink
"to enjoy; that they might give thanks unto thee; but to
" us thou didst graciously give spiritual food and drink and
" life eternal through thy child. Before all things we give
" thanks to thee for that thou art mighty. Thine is the glory
" for ever. Remember, Lord, thy Church to deliver her
" from all evil and to perfect her in thy love ; and gather her
" together from the four winds, her that is sanctified unto thy
" kingdom which thou didst prepare for her. For thine is
" the power and the glory for ever. Let grace come, and this
" world pass away. Hosanna to the God of David. If any
"is holy let him come; if any is not let him repent.
" Maranatha [i.e., The Lord cometh or hath come] . Amen.
" But suffer the prophets to give thanks as pleaseth them
" (o&lt;m fl

13 See Buxtorf s Synagoya Judaica, pp. 263 foil., for this grace. It
(1) is said " after being filled ;" (2) it contains thanksgivings for God s
special favours to His people ; (3) it contains prayers for the Restoration
of the City and Kingdom of David, the Temple, &c., and the gathering
of the people out of captivity. The Jewish form is however unfor
tunately hostile in its spirit towards Christians, though it does not
contain imprecations.

14 In the Hosanna to the God of David and the words that follow
we seem to have the germ of the Benedictus qui venit and the Sancta
sanctis shortly indicated. The God of David instead of Son of David
was probably a protest against Ebiouism : see Barnabas, ch. 12, 10 and
11, and Harnack s notes. Dr. C. Taylor has an interesting note on the
Maranatha Amen, in which he sees a kind of memoria technica of an
ancient hymn. See his Teaching of the Twelve Apostles with illustra-

76 The Primitive Liturgy.

The Teaching of the Apostles is closely connected with the
Church of Palestine and would be unconsciously influenced
by Jewish feeling in this matter, even while it was guarded
from distinct lapses into Ebionism or distinct hostility to the
secular powers. The Epistle to the Hebrews implies that the
Church of Jerusalem had a hard struggle to free itself from
old associations and from the natural instincts of patriotism.
It may I think also be taken for granted that the Liturgy
known to Justin, who was a native of Nabliis in Samaria, was
similarly defective in this point. For if these prayers had
referred to the Emperor he could hardly have failed to press
this point in proof of the loyalty of Christians, as Tertullian
twice does on similar occasions. 15

Now Justin Martyr was not only a native of Palestine, but
he preached and suffered martyrdom at Home. It is natural
to connect this defect in the Liturgy which he describes with
the other most striking instances of the absence of prayers
for civil rulers, the Eoman and the Mozarabic. If we accept
M. Duchesne s conjecture in its entirety, the prayer for the
Emperor and the Empire said on Good Friday was also used
daily in the fifth century, though not after the eighth century.
Yet it is to be noticed that the catena attached to Pope
Celestine s letter makes no mention of such prayers for the
Emperor, while it touches all the later elements of the Good
Friday collects, though in different order. Be that as it may,
it is a great blot upon the Roman Liturgy from the ninth
century onwards that, except on Good Friday and in a Litany
said on Easter Eve, it makes no mention of any official persons

tionsfrom the Talmud, Camb. 1886, pp. 7779. Tliis hymn, beginning

-hm keloheuu, " There is none like our God," may be found in De Sola

festival Prayers, vol. vi., Tabernacles, p. 184. The Ua et\ov&lt;n v is like

ustm s b^ 5tW/ S afirjJ of the President s prayers, ch. 67, and implies

?e ot a fixed form of consecration on the part of the Minister.

15 See Tertulliaii Apol. 30 foil, and ad Scap. 2. Justin s reference to

prayers for Jews and enemies generally (see above p. 67) is indirect

evidence for the same conclusion. Prayers for kings, &c., are mentioned

by bt. Cyril Cat. Myst. v. 8, after the consecration. They form part of

most existing Oriental Liturgies, St. James (MSS. and recently-edited

text), bt. JrJasil, St. Chrysostom, the Clementine, the Coptic, Ethiopia

Syrian and others. The position of the prayers varies.

Roman Missal defective in prayer for Rulers. 77

as deserving the prayers of the faithful, except the Pope and
the Bishop of the Diocese. 16

Whatever may he the case with the Liturgy of the Church
of Palestine and that described by Justin, and whatever may
be the explanation of the long and unfortunate silence of the
church of Rome, it is certain that some members of that
church in primitive times, carried out St. Paul s instructions
in a most edifying manner, by praying for civil rulers even
when persecutors. There is perhaps no more beautiful part of
the Epistle of St. Clement, third Bishop of Rome, written in
the name of the Roman Church, than the intercessory prayers
towards its close. When we remember that he was writing
under Domitian, the persecutor of the noble family to which
he was in all probability attached, and in evident fear of
further dangers, we shall be the more inclined to honour their

16 The series of Good Friday collects is as follows : 1, The Church ;
2, The Pope ; 3, Bishops and other clergy, &c. ; 4, The Emperor and
Empire ; 5, Catechumens ; 6, Those in tribulation ; 7, Heretics arid
schismatics ; 8, Jews ; 9, Heathen. Those in the Appendix to Celestine
are almost in inverse order : 1, Infidels and idolaters ; 2, Jews ; 3,
Heretics and schismatics ; 4, Lapsed persons ; 5, Catechumens. But
the prayer for lapsed persons must have been very different from that
for those in tribulation, and the description of the prayers for the Jews
and others has little verbal agreement except in the use of the word
" resipiscant " of heretics. On the whole I incline to think that the
Celestine series represents a Gallican usage, in which prayers for the
Church and Empire were separated from the rest. In France, the King
(or Emperor) was named in the first prayer of the Canon, the Te igitur,
after the Pope, or after the Pope and Bishop, from very early times up
to 1870 (cp. S. Greg. Op. iii. p. 3, Paris 1703). Similarly Pope Inno
cent III., commenting on the words " uua cum famulo tuo Papa nostro
" et omnibus orthodoxis," approves of praying for the local pontiff (out
side the Romana dioscesis ) and the prince, though it was clearly not
the custom in Rome itself (de sacro alt. myst, iii. 5, P.L. 217 c. 844).
It was the custom in Spain to do so ; and a concession was made by
Pius Yth, the reformer of the Missal, dated 17th Dec. 1570, for this
mention of the King " prout hacteuus in dictis partibus servari solitum
est," and for the substitution of his name for that of the Roman
Emperor in the Good Friday collect and Easter Eve Litany. This
mention was extended to the Austrian Empire by Pope Clement XIII.,
and was even in use in this country in the last century, as the Latin-
English Missals prove. Now in England the collect from the Mass
Pro Rege is said after Mass. In Venice the Doge was mentioned.
Otherwise it is held to be a mortal sin, to name any other person, King
or Prince, or general of any order, &c., without Papal indulgence ; see
Romsee Op. Lit. iv. p. 183 cp. Thalhofer ii. p. 203. On the Laudes
see Scudamore N.E. p. 229, Martene I. iv. 3 13, P.L, 138 col. 902.

78 The Primitive Liturgy.

writer. You will I am sure be glad to listen to them for their
own sake and as the words of one who was writing, it may be,
before the publication of the Gospel according to St. John.

Thou through Thine operations didst make manifest the everlasting
fabric of the world. Thou, Lord, didst create the earth. Thou that
art faithful throughout all generations, righteous in Thy judgments,
marvellous in strength and excellence, Thou that art wise in creating
and prudent in establishing that which Thou hast made, that art good
in the tilings which are seen and faithful with them that trust on Thee,
pitiful andcompassionate,foi givc us our iniquities and our unrighteous
nesses and our transgressions and shortcomings. Lay not to our
account every sin of Thy servants and Thine handmaids, but cleanse
us with the cleansing of Thy truth, and guide our steps to walk in
holiness and righteousness and singleness of heart, and to do such
things as are good and well-pleasing in Thy sight and in the sight of
our rulers. Yea, Lord, make Thy face to shine upon us in peace for
our good, that we may be sheltered by Thy mighty hand and delivered
from every sin by Thine uplifted arm. And deliver us from them that
hate us wrongfully. Give concord and peace to us and to all that
dwell on the earth, as Thou gavest to our fathers, when they called on
Thee in faith and truth witli holiness, [that we maybe saved,] while we
render obedience to Thine almighty and most excellent Name, and
to our rulers and governors upon the earth.

Thou, Lord and Master, hast given them the power of sovereignty
through Thine excellent and unspeakable might, that we knowing the
glory and honour which Thou hast given them may submit ourselves
unto them, in nothing resisting Thy will. Grant unto them therefore,
O Lord, health, peace, concord, stability, that they may administer the
government which Thou hast given them without failure. For Thou,
O heavenly Master, King of the ages, givest to the sons of men glory
and honour and power over all tilings that are upon the earth. Do
Thou, Lord, direct their counsel according to that which is good and
well-pleasing in Thy sight, that, administering in peace and gentleness
with godliness the power which Thou hast given them, they may obtain
Thy favour. O Thou, who alone art able to do these things, and things
far more exceeding good than these for us, we praise Thee through the
High -priest and Guardian of our souls, Jesus Christ, through whom be
the glory and the majesty unto Thee both now and for all generations and
for ever and ever. Amen. (S. Clem. Cor. 60, 61, tr. by Bp. Lightfoot.)

There is something at once dignified and touching in these
words. They recognise that persecution does not of itself
make saints ; that those who are persecuted (even by a
Domitian) may have sins to be forgiven ; that it is at any rate
their duty not to court persecution, but to do, as far as God s
law permits, what is well-pleasing in the sight of their rulers.
They recognise the dignity of Government as part of God s
order, and the duty of obedience to it as to Him. The

Of" Common Prayers" in a fixed form. 79

prayers which follow for the guidance of rulers, that their
work may be blessed by God and themselves obtain his favour,
are very models of what such a prayer should be in a Chris
tian Liturgy, say in China or Japan, where the Government
was still unchristian.

Had the Church of Kome been blessed with many such
Bishops as Clement, how different would have been the state
of the world and the Church. Instead of proclaiming that
unhappy separation, or rather gulf, between Church and
State, which makes the future of Italy so dark, and which
seems to prevent good citizens and patriots from being good
sons of the Church, the foremost see of Christendom might
have set the example of loyalty to the throne and unworldli-
ness in its own office ; and instead of clinging to the shadow
of temporal power, of which God in His mercy has taken
away the substance, it might have set an example of detach
ment which would have elevated the life of all Bishops and
Pastors, even of different Communions.

As I have said in a previous address, the substance of the
Liturgy touches the springs of human conduct far more
deeply than we should at first have supposed possible, and
any rash mutilation of it has a disastrous effect, far greater
than could have been apprehended by those who made it.
The omission of the prayer for the Sovereign is not indeed
an attack upon so vital a part of the Liturgy as the denial of
the cup to all but the celebrant, but it comes very near it. It
is a denial to CaBsar of the things that by God s ordinance are
Caesar s ; an unfair and independent attitude on the part of
the priesthood, with what disastrous consequences we know,
not only in Italy, but elsewhere.

4. Of " Common Prayers" in a fixed form.

Another important observation may be made under this
head. It seems fairly certain, from the distinction drawn
by Justin between these " common prayers" said by the
people, and the thanksgivings proper said by the President
"with all his power," to which the people answered Amen,
that the first prayers were in a measure at least fixed and

80 The Primitive Liturgy.

formal, while the second were less so. It would have been
impossible for the people to join, as much as the expressions
used imply that they did join, unless they had known before
hand what they were going to say. The description given of
Christian society in the Acts (ii. 42), " They were continuing
" steadfastly in the doctrine of the Apostles and their fellow-
" ship and in the breaking of bread and in the prayers" implies
probably some stated common form of prayer or liturgy. 17
We may conjecture that this would take very naturally the
shape of some kind of Litany, with responses.

It is strange that there should have been a controversy on
this point so bitter as it was at one time ; but while we see
that the early Church used fixed prayers it was to a great
extent, we may suppose, for purposes of convenience and
certainly without attaching undue importance to their form.
They were never imposed as of necessity, they were clearly
transposed and transformed according to the needs of each
Church, no stress was laid on their words and syllables, and
so a great deal of liberty was left under the uniformity which
existed. I am not here arguing that it is possible or desirable
that such liberty should be re -introduced within the bounds
of our own communion so as to give permission to every con
gregation to make its own Liturgy. That would lead to
terrible confusion and distress, and would be in religion
something like the restoration of the Heptarchy in politics.
But I wish to make two things clear. First to those, if there
be any, who still think prayers out of a book unreal. We
must say that as early as we can go back into the past such
fixed prayers, probably committed to memory rather than to
writing, and following precedents in the Jewish Synagogue
service, were said in the Church at the Communion Office.
Secondly I wish to point out to those others, who stickle for
identity and uniformity in every particular, to whatever school
or party they may belong, that such exact uniformity is alien
at any rate from the spirit of the early Church, and that it is
almost an impossibility when people are really thinking and

17 Bishop Wordsworth on Acts ii. 42, aud see the quotation from
Bishop Pearson there given.

Of " Common Prayers" in a fixed form. 81

caring for what they do. In the Church of Rome it is com
paratively of modern growth, and is still incomplete, wherever
local customs survive, and, as far as it exists, it is connected
with the use of the service in a dead language, and with a
theory of the service which differs not a little from our own.
I am not sufficiently acquainted with the Oriental Churches
to be clear as to their practice. In the Anglican Communion
there are certain differences in the Scotch and American
offices which are well known or can easily be ascertained by
any who like to inquire and these certainly make no dif
ference to the unity of feeling and perfectness of communion
that exists among us. We are therefore right in clinging to
our own Liturgy as a priceless symbol of unity within the
Church of England, but we must not turn unity into absolute
bondage. Those who have read the Judgment of the Court
of the Archbishop of Canterbury in a recent case will know
the sort of liberty which I am advocating and the principles
on which my advocacy of it rests in regard to certain matters
of ritual. But the principle is capable of rather wider ex
tension especially when we consider the needs of our colonial
and daughter Churches.

I have said just now that the " common prayers" said by
the people very probably soon took some form like that of a
Litany. The oldest form of such a Litany seems to be that
which is called the lesser Litany, " Lord have mercy upon
us," " Christ have mercy upon us," " Lord have mercy
upon us," which is an address to the Blessed Trinity. It is
probable that the short sentences at the end of the prayer in
the Teaching of the Apostles are a kind of memoria technica
or headings of such a responsive service. Dr. Taylor, in his
most interesting and useful Lectures, illustrating this little
book from the Talmud, shows that the words " Amen : come"
are the title of a primitive Jewish hymn, "Eyn kelohenu,"
" There is none like our God." The " Maranatha Amen,"
and the /u?5v ep^ov or " Amen: come" at the end of the Apo
calypse, may be similar titles. The hymn just quoted might
be without difficulty adopted by a Christian congregation. 18

18 See above p. 76 note 14.
F

82 The Primitive Liturgy.

II. THE SALUTATION WITH THE Kiss.

St. Paul in four of his early epistles (1 These, v. 26, 1
Cor. xvi. 20, 2 Cor. xiii. 12, Rom. xvi. 16) bids those to
whom* he is writing greet one another with a " holy kiss,"
and St. Peter (1 Pet. v. 14) writes of a similar greeting with
a " kiss of charity." There could be no more evident token
of the incorporation of all Christians in a common family. 19
Among the Jews, in whom the sense of unity of race has
always been strong, the kiss was a salutation between host
and guest, friend and friend, as well as between near rela
tions (Luke vii. 45, Matt. xxvi. 48 foil, and parallels). When
St. Paul parted so pathetically from the brethren at Miletus
they all fell on his neck and kissed him (Acts xx. 37). Such
kisses, we may suppose, were also frequently a sign of re
conciliation, as our own proverb witnesses, " kiss and be
friends ;" and would be the beginning of a new relationship
of kindness and charity towards all men.

We have spoken of the position of the kiss as possibly-
being at the commencement of the more religious part of the
assembly in quite early times. It would in fact come in
almost at any moment when Christian affection had been
specially stirred. The mention of it at the end of five epistles
is not without significance. The writer may well be supposed
to imagine himself present in spirit with the assembly while
his letter is read, and as a sort of seal to his exhortations he
bids this salutation be given, just as in our familiar letters
we send our " love" at the conclusion. But in the early
Liturgies it was even more naturally a prelude to the more
solemn part of the Liturgy, after the dismissal of the cate
chumens and the prayer for all men, but before the offertory.
In one of the most ancient Liturgies, that named after St.
Mark, occurs the prayer " Send down on us the gift of thine

19 rpj ie "ius osculi" ill the Roman Empire was a term of well-known
signification, implying all within a certain limit of kindred or affinity :
see the passages from Polylmis ap. Athen. 10 p. 440 f. and Plutarch
Quaest. Rom. 6 cited by A. Rossbaeh Die Romische Ehe p. 438.
Stuttgart, 1853.

The Salutation with the Kiss. 83

" all-holy Spirit, that in a pure heart and good conscience we
" may salute one another with a holy kiss." 20

The Coptic Liturgy has also a very beautiful prayer at this
point, which begins by referring to God s original creation of
man and to the peace proclaimed by angels at the Nativity,
and concludes thus : " Of thy goodness, Lord, fill our
" hearts with thy peace, and cleanse us from every stain and
" all contention, all fraud, all malice, all deadly recollection
" of injuries. Grant, Lord, that we may be all worthy to
" embrace one another with a holy kiss, and so to take part
" in it, that at the Judgment thou mayest not repel us from
" thy immortal and heavenly gift, through Jesus Christ our
"Lord." 21

Its connection with the offertory that followed may have
been suggested by our Lord s words about reconciliation
before offering, which as we have seen were very early inter
preted as referring to the Eucharistic oblation, and which are
quoted by St. Cyril in explaining the meaning of the kiss to
catechumens.

" Think not (he says) that this kiss ranks with those given
" in public by common friends. It is not such ; this kiss
" blends souls one with another, and solicits for them entire
" forgiveness. Therefore this kiss is the sign that our souls -
" are mingled together, and have banished all remembrance
" of wrongs. For this cause Christ said * If thou bring thy
" gift to the altar and there rememberest that thy brother
" hath ought against thee ; leave there thy gift upon the
" altar, and go thy way ; first be reconciled to thy brother,
" and then come and offer thy gift. (Cat. Myst. v. 3).

The permanent lesson of the kiss for us then is to make a
serious effort not only passively to forgive what others have
done to us, but to do the even more difficult duty of con
fessing ourselves when we are in the wrong, and the still
more delicate and trying work of making up a quarrel when

20 In the middle of a longer prayer on the same subject ; see C. E.
Hammond Liturgies p. 178 and cp. Scudamore N. E. p. 497.

21 Hammond 1. c. p. 205 ; cp. H. M. Luckock The Divine Liturgy
p. 213.

84 TJie Primitive Liturgy.

we think we are in the right. All three steps in Christian
holiness are necessary steps ; and nothing can be more
grievous or offensive to God than the sort of perverse upside
down way in which these words and other similar warnings
are sometimes taken. People twist the prohibition to offer
to God, unless they are reconciled, into a license to remain at
variance provided they neglect public worship and holy com
munion. They have even been known to burden their souls
with a rash vow not to come to Church as long as one with
whom they have quarrelled does so. More often they allow
images of bitterness and enmity and petty details of irritating
letters or unguarded words so to occupy their souls that they
get no good by their worship. Should any of you know of
such cases, dear brethren, it is your duty to explain that such
vows are null and void being in a matter not open to us to
bind ourselves about. No one can vow to do what is wrong.
To keep such a vow is a sin ; to break it is a duty. Herod
Antipas vow to do whatever Salome asked him, was not
binding when she asked him to commit a sin. To preserve
the life of an innocent person was an absolute duty, especially
in a king. He sinned in making a foolish vow ; but he
sinned much more in keeping it. So to be reconciled to a
brother and to attend public worship and to receive Holy
Communion are both absolute duties for a Christian. To
bind ourselves not to do so is a sin ; but to keep such a vow
or promise is a greater sin.

III. THE OFFERTORY.

The third point in the primitive Liturgy as described by
Justin is the Offertory or offering of the elements. After
the kiss, he tells us, " bread and a cup of water and wine is
" brought to the President of the brethren." Nothing is said
here of other alms and oblations, and the way in which the
gifts of money for the poor and needy are mentioned later on
implies, in my opinion, distinctly that they were not offered
in the same way as the bread and cup. This is also the
natural inference from the passage of Tertullian s Apology

The Offertory. 85

(89) of very similar import describing the " area" or chest of
the Christians. I conclude that this was an actual box, like
our poor-box a feature which would naturally be borrowed
from Jewish religious life. 22 We read in the Book of Kings
(2 K. xii. 9) how the High Piiest Jehoiada made such a
chest and bored a hole in the lid to receive the offerings of
money for the restoration of the Temple ; and we know that
a number of such chests, shaped like Trumpets, were ranged
round the Court of the women in the so-called Treasury of
the Second Temple. " There are generally two near the door
of the Synagogue (says Dean Plumptre) one for the poor of
Jerusalem and one for local charities" (S.D.B. iii. p. 1399).
If this were a primitive Jewish custom it throws light on St.
Paul s anxiety for the collection for the mother Church, as a
sign of the love of gentile or half- Jewish communities. As to
the mode of collection I imagine that each person put his gift
into the chest without any special ceremonies. Later on it
would seem that these gifts were received by some officer of
the Church, but I can find no distinct trace of money being
laid upon the altar in early times or even in the age of Charles
the Great and his sons. 23

The offering then of the bread and cup, containing ac
cording to the evidence that has come down to us, with but
slight exception, 24 wine mixed with water, is the primary

22 See Diet. Chr. Ant. s.v. area and Liber Pontificalia c. 24 for the
" area pecuniae" handed over by Pope Stephen A.I). 260, to his arch
deacon, &c. The treasury- chests or Trumpets in the Temple are de
scribed by Dr. Edersheim The Temple and its Services p. 26. Cp.
John viii. 20, Marie xii. 41, Liike xxi. 1.

23 See the article Oblations xvi. p. 1426 in Diet. Chr. Ant. The
third of the so-called Apostolic Canons (possibly collected in the second
half of the third century) shows that at that date nothing but the bread
and cup and certain offerings in kind were contemplated, as placed
upon the altar, and of these only "fresh grains of unripe wheat and
bunches of grapes at the proper season," and that nothing else was to
be brought to the altar besides " oil for the lamp and incense at the
" time of the holy oblation."

24 Origen stands apparently alone amongst the fathers in saying that
our Lord used " unmixed wine," Horn. xii. in Jerem. 2 (vol. iii., p 194).
He seems to have gathered this merely from the absence of any descrip
tion of the mixture in the Gospels. The Armenians use unmixed wine

86 The Primitive Liturgy.

offering to which all antiquity hears witness as the one com
manded by our Lord. Everything else is an accessory, and
a non-essential, but with this we see no means of dispensing.
We have seen the reasons why our blessed Lord may be
supposed to have chosen these elements to represent to us
His Body and His Blood. We must not indeed insist too
much upon these reasons as if they were matters of revela
tion ; and we must remember the variations of symbolic
interpretation of details which have distracted rather than
edified the Church. What is quite certain is that these gifts
were at first true gifts. It is rather remarkable that the
practice of men and women actually bringing up their own
offerings of bread and wine to be placed on the holy table
and in part to be consecrated, went on in the local Roman
Church longer than in most other places. In the Eastern
Liturgies and in those derived from the East, such as the
Mozarabic in Spain, the preparation of the elements became
in early times a matter for the Clergy, often done with con
siderable ceremony, and followed by an " entrance" or
illation, which was often an imposing part of the service.
In our old Sarum use there is a distinct trace of this feeling
be it Gallican or be it a tradition brought in by
Abp. Theodore in the preparation of the elements away
from the Altar, between the reading of the Epistle and
Gospel. 25 The mixture of the chalice at the altar in the
Roman rite, though it may seem at first sight hard to believe
it, is a relic of the old custom of the people s offering. Let
me explain how this is.

In quite primitive times of course the Chalice, as Justin
tells us, was brought already mixed no doubt by some of
the congregation, as the deacons are mentioned only in

(sec Scudamore N.E., p 389), and it does not seem that this was
originally connected with their Monophysite heresy ; though the notice
of this custom does not go beyond the fourth century. But other
Churches, perhaps all other, used a mixed cup.

25 See the description in the Register of St. Osmund ed. W. H.
Rich Jones i. p. 150, &c., The early printed Sarum missals before 1500
A.D. contain no order for mixing the chalice. It is taken for granted
as having been done by the Deacon or Sub-Deacon.

The mixed Chalice. 87

another connection. But anything like a special prepara
tion of it does not seem to have been attempted for some
time. When, however, theologians began to reflect upon
the matter, and to give mystical interpretations of the mixed
cup, as St. Cyprian already does (about A.D. 254) 26 it became
natural to take measures for securing that the mixture should
not be omitted by accident. This gradually ripened into a
ceremony, and naturally a ceremony performed by the
officiating priest or one of the inferior clergy. In the East
ceremonies grew more quickly than in the West, and a
certain amount we may almost say of superstition concen
trated itself upon the preparation of the elements, including
the mixture of the chalice. 27 On the other hand the Roman
Ritual was at once less theological and less symbolical,
though not devoid of a good deal of pomp and circumstance,
and we may add of common sense. The laity, men and
women, still continued in the ninth century to offer bread
and wine, and in much larger quantities than was wanted for
the consecration. A certain portion was chosen for this
purpose by the Deacon or Archdeacon, who, before presenting
it, took care to put a little water into the chalice, in order to
preserve the symbolism, but apparently without any prayer and
with very slight ceremony. I speak of the order of the ninth
century in Rome itself, of which minute accounts have come
down to us. 28 The contrast between this and the " Great

26 In his ep. 63, 13, "uidcnms in aqua popidum iutellegi, in uino
" uero osteudi sanguinem Christ!, quaiido autem in calice uino aqua
" miscetur, Christo populus adunatur, &c.," and then he argues that
neither water or wine can be offered alone.

27 See the Office of the Prothesis, in Neale and Littledale s Transla
tions of the Primitive Liturgies, p. 182, 2nd ed. Loud. 1869. This
preparation takes place in the Chapel of the Prothesis, generally on
the north side of the Bema or Sanctuary.

28 See Symphosius Arnalarius, who propagated a knowledge of
Roman ritual in Gaul in the first half of the ninth century, esp.
Eclogae de officio missae de oblatione, Migne P.L. 105 p. 1324.
He speaks reprovingly of persons " disdaining" to make offerings
" as disdaining, though not audibly, to confess that they are not
" redeemed by the passion of Christ and that they do not keep that
" passion in remembrance" just as we might speak of those who
neglected communion. Probably " offering" had very much taken the

88 The Primitive Liturgy.

Entrance," or bringing in of the carefully prepared elements,
in the Oriental Church, is very striking. That is observed
with more outward devotion, that is to say with prostration
and adoration, than the actual consecration. The Greeks
find this hard to defend. But its best defence is surely that
the Ancient Church did not limit the presence of Christ to
one moment in the service, but beheld Him throughout
ministering to His people. We shall speak of this on another
occasion. I may notice here that, though the Roman method
of mixing the chalice is historically interesting and practically
convenient, the fact that the primitive and Sarum use so far
combine points out the line which it is natural for members
and ministers of the Church of England to take wherever the
mixture of the chalice is used namely, that it should be
mixed before it is brought to the Priest.

IV. THE CONSECRATION OF THE ELEMENTS.

We now come to the most solemn part in the service, the
blessing and thanksgiving by the " President" of the brethren,
as Justin calls him, which preceded the distribution. This
name President was at this time applied both to Bishops and
Presbyters, though in and after the fourth century it was
generally confined to Bishops. 29

Justin s account, though it is very short, implies several

place of communion iii that age. Below lie says, " Solus autem archi-
" diaconus infert aquam in amulam pontificis ut osteiidatnr corpus
" Christi unuui esse," &c. This was written I believe about 831.
Compare liis longer and probably earlier book, de eccl. off. iii. 19. ib.
pp. 1129, 1131, made up largely from extracts of other authors, " Omiiis
" populus intrans ecclesiam debet sacrificium Deo offerre . . .
" Populus oifert vhiuin, cantores aquam. Sicut viiiimi et aqua unum
" fiunt in calice, sic populus et cantores in corpore Christi." In the
ordines Romani (Paris M.S. 974. saec. ix., from St. Amand), printed
by Duchcsne Origines p. 440 foil., the description of the Pontifical
Mass is similar. One of the choir (scola) brings water to the oblacion-
arius, who gives it to the Archdeacon, who makes a cross with the
water as he pours it into the cup held by the subdeacon at the right
horn of the altar (p. 444). No prayer it would seem is said.

29 See the article Bishop in Diet. Chr. Ant. p. 209 and cp. similar
names of a general character irpoia-rd/j.fvoL I Thess. v. 12, Tiyov^voi Heb.
xiii. 7 and 17, &c., and irportyov^voi. Clem, ad Cor. 21, Hermas Vis. ii.
2, iii. 9.

The Consecration of the Elements. 89

most important facts : (1) that the prayer was said by the
President alone ; (2) that it was said aloud ; (3) that its exact
wording was not fixed ; (4) that a word of prayer given by the
Lord was used as a specially efficacious part of it.

It will be necessary to say something on each of these
points in turn, and

1. Of Consecration by the Minister alone.

That the prayer was said by the Minister alone implies a
class of persons set apart for the Ministry and having alone the
right to officiate in this particular relation of the people to God.
This was no new thing, St. Clement of Kome, forty or fifty
years before, had given a description of the office of presbyters
which is in fact a definition of their rights and duties in this
respect. Writing in the name of the Church of Kome to the
Church of Corinth, which had expelled some of its presbyters,
he speaks of them as those " who blamelessly and holily
" offered the gifts" (ch. 44). This phrase does not stand by
itself, but in a remarkable context, in which he points out the
orderly nature of God s kingdom and work, both in the world
and in the Church, using illustrations both from the Koman
Empire and the Jewish Law.

He is careful to insist (as Bishop Lightfoot well puts it)
" that these offerings should be made at the right time," no
doubt on the Lord s day, "and in the right place and by the
right persons." He ascribes the institution and appointment
of " Bishops and Deacons" to the Apostles, and records their
further care for a permanent succession of ministers after
their own deaths. There can be no doubt that he thought
the offering of the gifts to be a special privilege of the
ministry. I believe that the " gifts" of St. Clement are the
oblations of bread and wine, and possibly certain first-fruits,
but have nothing to do with " alms" in the technical sense
of gifts of money. 30 Those whose privilege it was to receive

30 Bishop Lightfoot s note, continuing what is quoted above, is
perhaps slightly misleading. " The first day of the week had been fixed
" by Apostolic authority not only for breaking of bread (Acts xx. 7)
" but also for collecting alms (1 Cor. xvi. 2) ; and the presbyters, as the

90 The Primitive Liturgy.

and solemnly present the oblations were also of course the
persons who said the prayers over them and blessed them.
We have other evidence of this date, the end of the first
century, that it was so. Thus the so-called Teaching of the
Apostles after giving the order to assemble on each Lord s
Day and break bread and give thanks goes on, "Elect there-
" fore unto yourselves Bishops and Deacons worthy of the
" Lord ; men meek and not loving money and truthful and
" approved ; for unto you do they minister the ministry of
" the prophets and teachers" (ch. 15). The connection is
obvious between the pure sacrifice and the ministry that
offered it. St. Ignatius writing to the Smyrneans (about
110 A.D.) says, "Let that be a valid (/SejSam) Eucharist
" which is under the Bishop or one to whom he shall have
" committed it. Wheresoever the Bishop shall appear there
" let the people be ; even as where Jesus may be there is the
" Universal Church. It is not lawful apart from the Bishop
" either to baptize or to hold a love-feast. But whatsoever
" he shall approve that is well -pleasing also to God that
" everything which ye do may be sure and valid" (Smyrn. 8,
see above note 3). I need not quote later writers for what is
so much a commonplace. Tertullian says (you will re
member) " The Sacrament of the Eucharist which was insti-
" tuted by our Lord at meal-time and committed to all, we
" receive in assemblies before day-break and from the hands
"of no other persons except our Presidents" (de corona 3).
The only passage of apparently different import, in any early
writer, is from the same author, after he became a Montanist
and in many ways took up an antagonistic and critical atti
tude against the Church and her ministers, who seemed to
him not to be sufficiently spiritual. In this well-known
passage where he is exalting the priesthood of the laity, in

" officers appointed by the same authority, were the proper persons to
" receive and dispense the contributions." But St. Paul in that passage
does not order the alms to be " collected," but to be " laid up in store"
apparently in each man s own house, and I can find no evidence that
alms were placed on the holy table in early times. In our own Prayer
Book this was only introduced at the last revision (1662) from the Scotch
Liturgy. I do not know where Abp. Laud found his precedent. Cp.
p. 85.

Tertullian on the Lay-priesthood. 91

order to enforce a strict discipline upon them, especially as
to second marriages, lie says " The authority of the Church
" and honour consecrated by sitting in order of rank has
" established the difference between clergy and laity. And
" so where there is no order of ecclesiastical precedence and
" no bench of clergy thou both offerest and baptizest and art
" a priest to thyself alone. But where three are together
" there is the Church : though they be laymen" (de exhort,
cast. 7). 31 Even this rather strong statement does not
venture to deny the privileges of the clergy where they are
present, or to suggest doing without them except in cases of
necessity. Nay to most of us it would seem almost a truism
to assert that in cases of necessity a layman may baptize ;
and that persons removed from clerical ministrations may
have the benefit of the sacrament of the Lord s Supper in
spiritual communion is, as I have said in a former address
(p. 22), a salutary doctrine of the Church of England. Ter
tullian s words lend no colour to what St. Augustine called
setting up altar against altar, much less to setting up a lay
altar against a clerical one. I do not even feel sure that he
intended them to mean so much as they seem to mean. In
the Churches of Africa and Egypt, especially in the monas
teries and hermitages, it was customary for people to take
home with them consecrated bread and to keep it in store for
private communion, sometimes for a long period. Tertullian
himself refers to this custom in regard to the case of a woman
married to a heathen (2 ad ux. 5), and St. Basil has an in
teresting letter in which he approves the practice of daily
or frequent communion (ep. 93), adding that in times of
persecution it ought not to be considered a hard trial for a
private person to take the communion with his own hand.
He illustrates this practice from the monastic custom, " All
" those who live in solitudes as monks or hermits, where
" there is no priest, keeping the communion in their houses

;il " Differentiem inter ordinem et plobem constituit ccclcsiae aucto-
" ritas et honor per ordinis consessum sauctificatus. Adeo ubi ecclesiastic!
" ordinis non est consessus et offers et tinguis et sacerdos es tibi solus.
" Scd ubi trcs Ecclesia cst, licet laid."

92 The Primitive Liturgy.

" take it with their own hands. And in Alexandria and in
" Egypt each, even of the lay people, for the most part has
" the communion in his own house and when he wills com-
" municates himself. For when once the priest has conse-
" crated the sacrifice and has delivered it, he who has once
" received it as a whole, and partakes of it day by day ought
" to believe that he partakes and receives from the hand of
" him who has given it." It seems not unreasonable to
suggest, though I do so with some diffidence, that Tertullian
is referring to this once widely-spread custom, and is re
minding his readers how responsible this privilege ought to
make them feel.

In any case his words have an application to persons really
thrown on their own resources and at a distance from clerical
help and immediate supervision, in the colonies for instance,
or on shipboard, which I should be glad to think was taken
to heart by our earnest young or older people who may
wander far from home. There are many of the blessings of
united Church life which might be realised by them, espe
cially in Sunday gatherings for public or semi-public worship,
without attempting the hazardous practice of celebrating the
Eucharist without proper clerical leadership. I can conceive
a Bishop in one of our colonies going a good deal further
than we do at home in authorising lay ministrations, but I
cannot suppose that any Bishop of any age would have ap
proved of a Eucharistic service without a properly ordained
presbyter. The reason of this is clear. The clergy are
responsible persons, governed by strict laws, and even more
by righteous customs and precedents, specially instructed in
church doctrine and trained to rule and guide others, and
having a Commission to do so from our Lord acting by the
Holy Spirit in His visible body. They have to decide who
shall or shall not be admitted to Communion : they have to
keep the faith and the life of the Church pure from invasion
or defilement. They have on the other hand to take care
that the Church does not become a narrow clique a little
coterie meeting in a room and refusing fellowship with those
who will not pronounce certain shibboleths. The danger of

Reasons for restricting Consecration to the Priesthood. 93

laxity, the danger of heresy, the danger of narrowness and
partiality, would be in themselves sufficient to make an exten
sion of the maxim ubi tres Ecclesia est "three laymen make
" a Church" so as to cover private Eucharists, utterly con
trary to Church order, and an absurdity of imprudence.

Yet, when one comes to look into it, this maxim, taken
unguardedly, is one of the main pillars of English Noncon
formity that is to say of all those bodies, however designated,
who organise themselves on a simply Congregational basis.
It has of course its foundation in our Lord s words, " Where
" two or three are gathered together in my name there am I
" in the midst of them" (Matt, xviii. 20). But these were
not the only words spoken by our Lord as regards His
Church. They must be taken in connection with His other
sayings about unity and universality, about order and disci
pline, and they must be construed in harmony with His acts
and practice, especially the careful training of the Apostles
and the commission to them to represent Him to the world.
These glorious words about "two or three" are rather a
charter of blessing than a constitution of the Church. That
was left to be worked out by the Church herself under the
guidance of Christ s Deputy, the Holy Spirit.

I cannot help hoping and believing that as this becomes
clearer to Nonconformists, as it certainly is becoming clearer
to many important persons among them, they will set them
selves to work, not to oppose and destroy the organisation and
position of the Church, but to join us in such salutary
reforms, in regard for instance to patronage, as are necessary
to give her the freedom and spirituality which noncon
formity aims at. I have no time to indicate more fully what
I mean, but as I said in a former Address, I do not think
the time has arrived when Parochial Councils based on
manhood suffrage, with legal powers, would be a useful
instrument of such freedom and spirituality. The necessary
correlative and correction to such Councils would be a system
of Church discipline and Church Courts, and of free legis
lation by National and Provincial Synods, which those who
promote such Parochial Councils would probably be the last

94 The Primitive Liturgy.

persons to wish to see in vigorous action. We must work
with the instruments which God has given us, tempered to
the circumstances of our life. Under Establishment hy the
State we must work with the methods proper to Establish
ment : without Establishment under other conditions and
with other instruments. I have given reasons elsewhere, in
my Pastoral Letter of Nov. 1885, for adhering to Establish
ment, and no doubt other and better reasons could be given.
But I have seen no reason in these six years to change my
opinion that Establishment is for us and on the whole the
best security for true religion.

2. Of saying the Prayer of Consecration audibly.
That the Prayers or Thanksgivings of the celebrant were
said aloud is so evident that nothing further need be added
to prove it. St. Paul, apparently speaking of such eucharistic
prayers, warns those possessed of the gift of tongues not to
use it for this purpose " else how shall he that occupies the
room of the unlearned say the ^4 men after thy giving of
thanks ?" (ETTI TIJ ay tvyjapiaria 1 Cor. xiv. 16). We can
imagine with what severity he would have spoken if a
presbyter had said the consecration prayer wholly inaudibly,
in a sort of whisper. This is now, alas ! the universal rule
in the Roman communion, and has been the local rule of the
Roman Church not always at all the same thing ever since
the eighth century. 32 I need not enlarge on the history of this
innovation or the reasons which have been given for it, and

32 See the evidence collected by Scudainorc N.E. pp. 563 foil. The
earliest witness to the practice mentioned by him is the "second Ordo.
" Romanus in point of age in the collections of Hittorp, Mabillon and
others," not later than the 8th century. Amalarius discusses the
point in his Eclogae de officio Missae ; De " Te igitur" cur secreto
cantetur Migne P.L. 105 col. 1326. Caesarius of Aries circa A.D. 502
gives evidence that the consecration of the Eucharist was both seen and
heard in his day in the Churches. You can hear the Scriptures read
elsewhere, " you cannot see or hear the consecration of the Body and
" Blood of the Lord anywhere except in the house of God" (Horn. 281
of the Appendix to St. Augustine s Sermons). He speaks of the
necessity of remaining to the end of the service, but not of the benefit
of communion. Cp. note 27 p. 87. No doubt this sermon was addressed
to a rude and half-converted audience. The Amens still remaining in
the Canon of the Mozarabic Liturgy show clearly that it was said aloud.

Of saying the Prayer of Consecration audibly. 95

the arguments urged in defence of it, which are of no
particular interest or value except as showing the shifts to
which good men are put in defending what is indefensible.
I will only pass on remarking that in this, as in other things,
the rule of the Church of England is openness and not
theatrical display.

3. The Consecration Prayer ivas not definitely fixed in early
times ; and 4. In Justin s time it contained a word of
Prayer given by our Lord, which was considered efficacious
in the consecration.

It will be convenient to handle both these points together,
and indeed it will be desirable not to limit ourselves only to
them, but to consider generally what was the primitive method
of consecration, and how the existing forms grew up, and
what parts, if any, of them may be considered as necessary to
a valid consecration. The most prominent parts, it will be
seen, are four in number, though others are constantly found
in company with them. The four are, I need hardly say :
(1) Thanksgiving ; (2) Invocation ; (8) The Recital of the
Institution ; (4) The Lord s Prayer. But before I touch on
these in detail I must say a few words of general introduction.

On first approaching this question of the primitive Con
secration we cannot fail to be struck by two facts : firstly that
our Lord used a form of words, in Blessing both the Bread
and the Cup, which has been wholly lost, and on which the
Church seems never to have laid any stress ; secondly that
His command was to do something, not to say something :
to make a solemn memorial of Himself before God, and to
eat and drink of it, as He gave His Apostles to eat and drink
of it ; to do in fact what He did as nearly as it is possible for
us to do.

With regard to the first point, it is remarkable that our
Lord not only did not attempt to impress His own words
upon our memories, but that He gave no command to use
any particular form of words, as He seems to have done in
the parallel case of the Sacrament of Baptism. Certainly the
Church which has made the use of certain words obligatory

96 The Primitive Liturgy.

in the administration of Baptism, has had no such universal
or quasi-universal practice in the celebration of the other
Sacrament, except it be in the words of administration or
distribution.

If therefore we were asked to point to some form as much
essential to Holy Communion as the words " In the name of
the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," are in
baptism, we might well be inclined to find it in doing and
saying, as near as may be, what our Saviour did, when we
administer the Bread and Cup which He had blessed, rather
than in any particular form of previous blessing. He said
"Do this for my memorial," and we more nearly approach
His acts when we use the words the Body of Christ, the
Blood of Christ, or some longer benediction like that of our
own Communion Office, in the act of distributing the ele
ments, than in any form of consecration prayer however
beautiful and however primitive. It was a merciful pro
vidence which preserved these words to our Church, seeing
that in the reign of Edward YIth it lost them for a few
months.

(1) The Element of Thanksgiving.

This being the primd facie view of the case, starting from
the New Testament narratives of the institution, w r e have to
ask what is the evidence of the descriptions of the Eucharist
in early writers ? They speak of it as an act of breaking
bread," that is most probably of taking one loaf and distri
buting it amongst many persons, or as " giving thanks" or
" blessing." By blessing they clearly mean not so much an
act of consecration as blessing God for His gift of this
spiritual food, for this is clearly the analogy of all the many
Jewish benedictions of material things. The words " sancti-
fication" or " consecration" are I think hardly found in the
first two centuries as descriptive of the Eucharistic action. 33

33 Mr. Briglitman informs me that the earliest instances of this use of
aytdfav he has been able to find are in Clem. Alex. Frag. 82 cf. Strom.
iv. 25 163 of Melchisedek, and of consecrare in Tertull. adv. Marc.
iv. 40, " ita et mine sanguinem suum in vino consecravit, qui tune vinum
in sanguine figuravif cp. Origen in Exod. xiii. 3 torn. ii. p. 176 E
" consecrati muneris."

The Element of Thanksgiving. 97

I do not in the least mean to imply that there was not a
thought of this consecration or that there was not a prayer
for it in the Liturgy, hut I feel sure that it was not the pro
minent thought in that age. The main thought was the
thanksgiving for what God had done for us in Christ, and the
bringing it home to the receivers by a solemn distribution of
the elements over which thanks had been given. The words
tv^apiGTYiOtiGct rpotyii, wy^apiGTriOelg aprog &c., " Thanks-
given food," "thanksgiven bread," where we should say
" consecrated food," "consecrated bread," are of themselves
enough to prove this. 84

The element of thanksgiving is further emphasised both in
the Teaching of the Apostles (10 and 15), and in Justin s
Apology (65). "Let the prophets give thanks as they wish,"
says the Teaching. The President " offers up praise and
" glory to the Father of all things, through the name of the
" Son and the Holy Spirit, and makes a thanksgiving of some
" length for His goodness in vouchsafing to give us these
" things," says Justin (65) ; and again, " The President . .
" utters prayers and thanksgivings with all his power" (67,
see p. 60).

Have we any evidence to determine the form of these
Thanksgivings ?

It is natural to suppose that they began with the prefatory
versicle and response, Lift up your hearts : We lift them up
unto the Lord, the Sursum corda and the Habemus ad
Dominum, to the use of which St. Cyprian already bears
witness (de dom. orat. 31). We may suppose also that they
were followed by something like our preface, ending with the
Tersanctus or Triumphal Hymn from Isaiah, "Holy, Holy,
Holy, Lord God of Sabaoth," joined in all likelihood with the
verses of the 118th Psalm, "Blessed be He that cometh in
the name of the Lord, Hosanna in the highest." The

34 Justin 1 Apol 66 ; ib. 65 cf. Iren. haer. i. 13, 2 (irornpiov) TOV fab
rrjs yvvaiKbs euxapcmjfiej/ou and Cleni. Alex. Strom, i. 19 96 p. 375
Pott. etVl yap ot Kal vSwp tyixbi/ ^vxapiffrovaiv where euxapt(TTei&gt; is a tran
sitive verb used in the sense of " consecrate." See also Scudamore.
N.E. pp. 574 foil, where other important evidence is collected.

98 The Primitive Liturgy.

Teaching of the Apostles (chap, x), as we have already seen,
supposes such hymns in this part of the service, which pro
bably had a close relation to more ancient forms. Such an
act of praise is found in various forms in the Jewish daily and
festival services, where it is called Q e dushah or " Holiness,"
e.g. in the third of the Eighteen Benedictions which contains
the words of Isaiah, Ezekiel iii. 12 and Psalm cxlvi. 10. Cp.
De Sola Festival Prayers vi. Ill, 227, &c.

But the great richness and variety of some Liturgies in
this matter of prefaces, especially the Gallican and Mozarabic,
implies that there was a condition of freedom attaching to it,
as indeed there was to the whole of this prayer, or series of
prayers. The records we have quoted clearly indicate that
their form and length depended upon the ability and will of
the minister who said them. He certainly had no book
before him to guide or fetter him. No one ever heard of
Liturgical Books being confiscated in persecution, as texts of
Holy Scripture constantly were.

Up to the fourth century indeed the form of consecration
in all its parts appears to have remained a matter of unwritten
tradition gradually taking shape, but varying in different
places and in the mouths of different persons. St. Basil
says distinctly that it was like the use of the sign of the
cross and praying towards the East, a matter of custom.
" Which of the saints (he continues) has left us in writing
" the words of Invocation at the consecration (avaS )
" of the Bread of the Eucharist and of the Cup of Blessing ?
" For we are not content with the words which are reported
" by the Apostle or the Gospel, but we both say some things
" before them and some things after them, as being of great
" moment for the purpose of the Sacrament, which we have
" received from unwritten doctrine." (de sp. sancto xxvii.
66.) Here St. Basil implies three of our four parts already
mentioned, the Thanksgiving before and the Invocation after
the Recital of the Institution from St. Paul and the Gospel ;
and no doubt all was ended with the Lord s Prayer. Other
incidental notices of Eucharistic celebrations during the first
three centuries support this description of the unwritten and

Sanctification by the word of God and prayer. 99

traditional character of the Consecration prayers. To say
these prayers was, as we have seen, at first the office of the
apostolic, prophetic, or Missionary officers of the Church.
They spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, and it
would seem that a certain amount of their spiritual freedom
descended upon the local Ministry which gradually took their
place. 85 Indeed I am inclined to think that the sanctification
" by the word of God and prayer," of which St. Paul speaks
(1 Tim. iv. 5) in reference to ordinary food, and of which
later writers speak in reference to the Holy Eucharist, simply
means sanctification by the word of God the Holy Ghost
speaking first in the Thanksgivings and Invocation of the
apostles and prophets of the new dispensation, and then in
those of the ministers of the different local Churches who
succeeded them. 36 I am led to make this suggestion partly
by the remarkable description of the Christian assembly in the
fourth chapter of the Acts (v. 31) to which the Apostles Peter
and John reported their trial before the Sanhedrim. This
assembly first burst forth into prayer, and then, it is said,
the place was shaken and they were all filled with the Holy
Ghost " and they spake the word of God with boldness."

It would be natural that as the outward miraculous signs
of the Holy Spirit s presence passed away, and as the Christian
Scriptures consequently and properly filled an increasing

35 See above pp. 42 note and 54, and cp. Duchesne Origines p. 47.
The texts which prove this are 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 16, " I will pray with the
" spirit and I will pray with the understanding also . . . Else if
" tliou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the
" unlearned say the Amen at (or after) thy giving of thanks for he
" understandeth not what thou sayest ?" &c. Teaching of the Ap. x
" Suffer the Prophets to give thanks as pleaseth them ;" ib. xiii. the.
prophets are to receive first-fruits "for they are your chief priests;"
ib. xiv. " Elect therefore (for the Sacrifice) to yourselves bishops
" and deacons worthy of the Lord . . . for unto you do they minister
" the ministry of the prophets and teachers. Despise them not there-
" fore ; for they are they that are set in honour among you with the
" prophets and teachers." Cp. Hernias Mandate xi.

36 This passage is exceedingly difficult though expressed in words
which to the writer must have been perfectly clear. It has been
explained of (1) G-od s word in creation, Gen. i. 31 or in Acts x. 15 ;
(2) prayer in Scripture language ; (3) the Holy Spirit (Ffoulkes) ;
(4) Scripture reading at meals ; (5) the Lord s Prayer and in other
ways.

100 The Primitive Liturgy.

space in the consciousness of the Church, the term " word of
God" should he transferred from the utterances of Christian
prophets to the books in which their ripest experience was
gathered up ; and the original meaning of the phrase be bit
by bit forgotten. To this gradual and almost unfelt change
in all probability was due the gradual progress of the idea
that the " word of (rod" as found in the Recital of the
Institution was essential to consecration.

(2) The Element of Invocation.

The closest descriptions of the prayer of consecration as
distinguished from the thanksgivings that have come down to
us from early times concern, curiously enough, heretical or
schismatic teachers rather than those of the Church. St.
Firmilian writing to St. Cyprian (A.D. 256) describes a
prophetess who started up in Cappadocia and professed to
administer the Sacraments, and in consecrating the Eucharist
used " no contemptible invocation" (S. Gyp. ep. 75, 10). We
have also two Gnostic apocryphal Acts of Apostles which give
us specimens of such invocations over the Eucharistic bread,
dating probably from the second or third centuries. 37 They
differ from one another, but are alike in both containing a
series of titles, of an almost magical character, addressed to
the powers or attributes or aeons which are invoked to descend
on the bread. The blessing of the cup is not mentioned in
either of the three cases ; though it forms the subject of a
remarkable story told by St. Irenaeus of the Valentinian
heretic Marcus, who by his long and magical incantation
changed the colour of the wine to purple and red, "so as to
"make it appear that the super-celestial [aeon] Grace let her

37 The Ada Thomae and the Ada Johannis published in a more or
less incomplete form by Thilo and Tischendorf (Tisch. Act. Apocr. pp.
213 foil, and 273) and more fully by Max Bonnet (Ada Thomae 46
pp. 35, 36 Lips. 1883) and Th. Zahn (Ada Johannis pp. 243, 244
Erlangen 1888). The passage in the former is the nearest to the form
of a Church prayer. It begins lyaov Xpurrt, vie rov Oeov, 6 Karaid!&gt;o-as
-rjfius rys evxapto rias rov ffu&gt;/jLaT6s ffov rov aytov Kal rov rifj.lov a"/j.aros
Kowuvriffai, iSov KaTaroA^oJ/xej/ TT)S vxapiffrias Kal 3tnK\-f)ffe(as rov ayiov ffov
6v6fj.aros. eA0e vvv Kal Koiv&vriaov jjfuv. Then conies a string of Gnostic
titles eA0e TO. ffir\d.yx va ra TeAeta^ e A0e rf noivwvia rov appevos, etc.

The Element of Invocation. 101

(&lt; blood drip into the cup, by reason of his invocation" (Haer.
i. 13, 2). In themselves these consecration prayers are
worthless, but though merely base imitations of the Church s
practice, they shew that the true prayer of consecration was
not only variable, but at any rate usually, after the middle of
the second century (the time of St. Irenaeus) contained an
Invocation, or prayer for the descent of divine power upon the
elements. St. Irenaeus is the first extant writer who speaks
of this practice in the Church, but he argues from it as an
established custom : "As bread from the earth receiving the
" Invocation (b /c/cArjo-tv) of God is no longer common bread
" but Eucharist, consisting of two parts, an earthly and a
" heavenly, so our bodies receiving the Eucharist are no
" longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to
" eternity" (iv. 18, 5). We need not go through all the
evidence on this point in later authors, which has been very
well collected by Dr. Hoppe, 88 Mr. Scudamore, and others,
and forms the main subject of a recent book by Mr.
Ffoulkes. 39 St. Cyril s description may stand as an example
of the form most usual from the fourth century onwards.
After describing the hymn of the Seraphim, he proceeds :
(7) " Then having sanctified ourselves by these Spiritual

38 Lud. Aug. Hoppe Die Epiklesis der griech. und orient. Litur-
gieen und der romische Consekrationskanon, Hurter, Schaffliausen
1864 (now Teubner, Leipzig). Cp. Scudamore N.K pp. 576, 587594,
and 649 (Mozarabic and Galilean).

39 Primitive Consecration of the Eucharistic Oblation, with an
earnest Appeal for its Revival, by Edmund S. Ffoulkes, B.D.
London and New York, 1885. Mr. Ffoulkes conclusions are startling.
Not only does he hold that the Epiclesis or Invocation of the Holy
Spirit is the primitive form, for which no doubt much may be said, but
he believes that the Recital of the Institution was introduced with an
heretical bias by a Serni-Arian or Macedonian heretic, whom he sup
poses to have wished to obscure the divinity of the third Person of the
Blessed Trinity. He traces all the mischief to the Liturgy of the
Apostolic Constitutions, usually called the Clementine, which he con
jectures to have been the work of Eusebius of Emesa, a Semi-Arian.
Mr. Ffoulkes book is full of important matter, but its main conclusion
is based on inadequate evidence, and I believe the Recital to be older
than he does, and to have a very natural place in the Consecration,
particularly in its position before the Invocation, which he thinks a
great blot. See below p. 105.

102 The Primitive Liturgy.

" Hymns, we call upon the merciful God to send forth His
" Holy Spirit upon the (gifts) lying before Him ; that He may
" make (TrouVy) the bread Christ s body and the wine Christ s
" blood : for in verity whatsoever the Holy Spirit hath
"touched, is sanctified and changed." Then follows a
description of Intercessions for the peace of the Church, the
quietness of the world, &c., then a commemoration of the
departed, and then the Lord s Prayer. These Intercessions
we have reason to think are not in their original place.

In the extant Liturgies this Invocation almost always takes
the form of an address to God the Father, like that I have
just cited from St. Cyril, that He would send down His Holy
Spirit upon the Gifts, the Bread and the Cup, and sanctify
them, and make them or shew them, to become or to be,
either simply or to us, the Body and Blood of Christ. This
is indeed the thought underlying, we may suppose, all the
Invocations, since our Saviour has so clearly spoken of the
Holy Spirit as abiding in the Church in the place of His own
visible presence. But as a matter of fact, it is by no means
certain that this thought of the operation of the Holy Spirit
was always fully expressed in words. Indeed the passage of
St. Irenaeus just quoted speaks only of the " Invocation of
God," and the Gnostic Invocations, worthless as they are, are
rather direct prayers to a heavenly power to descend, than
prayers to God to send down His Spirit. Beautiful as the
Oriental Invocation is, we cannot think it necessary, nor need
we be seriously dissatisfied with our own, which forms the
central part of the Prayer of Consecration proper.

(3) The Recital of the Institution.

But if both Thanksgivings and Invocation were indefinite
and variable, there were two other elements, more entirely
Scriptural, which formed also from early times the more fixed
portion of the Consecration. These are, as we have said, the
Recital of the Institution and the Lord s Prayer. It is in the
first of these that the Western Church has tended, with a
certain hesitation, but on the whole decisively, to find the
"form" of the Sacrament supposing with the schoolmen

The Recital of the Institution. 103

that the Sacrament must have a necessary and essential form
as a counterpart to its matter. The Greek Church has been,
on the whole, equally decisive in finding the essential part in
the Invocation for the descent of the Holy Spirit. A more
probable conclusion is that neither of them is essential,
though both are hallowed by long usage, and are in their
union, together with the Thanksgivings before and the Lord s
Prayer after, the fittest and fullest form that the Church as
yet has learnt to use.

The evidence with regard to the Recital of the Institution,
which for the sake of brevity we may call the Institution,
seems to show firstly that it was introduced early, but was
not universal ; secondly, that it was considered at first as
descriptive rather than effective, in fact as a ground of appeal
for the Invocation rather than as itself a prayer. We have
already given a hint as to one of the causes which may have
gradually led to its being considered essential (p. 100).

The evidence respecting the Lord s Prayer is similar. It
has more the character of universality, and it seems to have
had more weight ascribed to it in early times than the Insti
tution. But this latter is, it must be allowed, a moot point,
on which only a probable conclusion can be attained. The
language of early writers, beginning with St. Paul, as to
sanctification of food " by the word of God and prayer"
(1 Tim. iv. 5) is, no doubt unintentionally, extremely ambi
guous, and has proved as great an enigma and as severe a
crux to interpreters as perhaps any words of Holy Scripture.
It is quite clear, however, that whatever St. Paul may have
meant, he did not mean the Institution, for he is speaking of
" every ; creature of God," that is, of all kinds of food,
possibly eaten at an Agape, but certainly with no special
reference to the Eucharist. Hence, when later writers like
Irenaeus speak of bread and wine " receiving the word of
God," and when Origen and Gregory of Nyssa 40 speak of
consecration of the bread and wine by "the word of God

40 See the passages quoted by Hoppe die Epiklesis, pp. 233 foil., esp.
Origen in Matt. torn. xi. 14, and Greg. Nyss. Oratio Catechet. p. 71 ed.
Krabinger Monach. 1838. The passage occurs chap, xxxvii. torn. ii. p,

104 The Primitive Liturgy.

and prayer," they must either be held not to mean the Insti
tution or to be using St. Paul s language in a non-natural and
misleading sense. Further St. Irenaeus uses the expressions
" receiving the invocation of God" (iv. 18, 5) and "receiving
the word of God" (v. 2, 3) as convertible terms. I do not think
that by "the word of God" he means "the Holy Spirit"
simply, as Mr. Ffoulkes seems to do, but I think he may well
mean the word of God spoken by the prophets, or embodied
in the quasi-prophetic and extemporary or half-extemporary
utterances of the Ministers of the word, as I have already
suggested. St. Paul may conceivably mean the Lord s
Prayer or something else by these enigmatical words, and it
is to be recollected that the Lord s Prayer has long been used
as a grace before meat in many countries. But I think this
less probable.

The Institution is found in almost all existing Liturgies,
but it is not referred to distinctly by any of the ante-Nicene
fathers as part of the consecration prayer, nor is it touched
upon in the full description of the Liturgy by St. Cyril of
Jerusalem (A.D. 348) who explains and paraphrases the
other three elements of the Consecration the Thanksgivings,
Invocation, and Lord s Prayer nor is it found in the Nes-
torian Liturgy of SS. Adaeus and Maris, which is thought
to be of an early date and certainly before the Council of
Ephesus (A.D. 431). Nor is it expressed, except in some
cases by the first two words, in the Gallican books. St.
Germanus passes from the Sursum corda to the Confmctio
et commixtio without the least reference to the Institution :
indeed it would seem that he considered the Commixture
to be the important point (P.L. 72, 94). The position
of the Institution, sometimes before and sometimes after
the Invocation 41 is also, in all probability, an evidence

536, ed. Paris 1615. I have not seen Krabinger s edition, but tlie note
on p. 7 (by Fronto Ducaeus) just before the Appendix, shews that there
is a doubt as to the reading els rb a-w/uLa rov \6yov or els rb 0-w/j.a, Sib rov
\6yov /jLrairoiov/j.Vos KaOws ^fprjrai vTrb rov \6yov, 6n rovr6 tern rb ffu/md fj.ov.

But in neither case is the change effected necessarily referred to the
Recital. "By means of the Word" may mean by the Son of God, as
r High Priest,

41 See Scudamore N.E. pp. 592 foil.

The Recital of the Institution. 105

that it was of more recent introduction into the Liturgy.
This is an argument of the same sort as is used by scholars
in reference to a certain section of St. John s Gospel, which
is for good reasons thought to he borrowed from another
book. The supposed early references to consecration by
these words cannot be considered as at all certain ; indeed,
some of those, which are often cited as witnesses, are of no
value for the purpose. In any case, notwithstanding some
suggestions of Dr. Neale s, we cannot suppose that the
record of Institution, apparently taken from the Gospels
and St. Paul, could have been used before the publication
and circulation of those books ; and therefore it is hard to
suppose that it has since become necessary, having never
been enjoined by any Council or other sufficient authority,
and not even by any authority absolutely binding in the
opinion of Koman Catholics. Indeed St. Gregory the Great
was clearly of opinion that consecration by the Lord s Prayer
alone was the practice of the Apostles (Ep. ix. 12, circa A.D.
600). He may have been, and probably was, wrong, but he
was a student of Liturgies and had personal acquaintance
with the Greek Church, and had access to materials no longer
in our possession.

That the Institution was at first considered descriptive
rather than effective, a ground of fact on which we appeal to
God, in the Invocation which generally follows, and beseech
Him, to do so great an act, is an opinion reasonable in itself.
We naturally refer to God s great acts or revelations of old
time, His beginnings and foundations, when we ask Him to
do something of the same kind anew. Thus we refer to the
Flood, to the Red Sea, to the Baptism in Jordan, in every
Christian Baptism ; to the sending abroad of the Apostles
and others in Ordination ; to Adam and Eve, Abraham and
Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, and to the miracle of Cana, in the
Marriage Service. That the use of the words of Institu
tion is of this kind is also the opinion of those who most
fully represent the mind of the Greek Church, even at
the present day. In a note to a recent edition of the Greek
Prayer Book the Deacon is directed not to point with his

106 The Primitive Liturgy.

stole to the elements, when these words are said, as the
custom seems to have grown in some places to be, on the
ground that the words are said by way of historical narration
(Sti7-yr//icmKwe). 43 This was the line taken up by Marcus
Eugenicus, Archbishop of Ephesus, who represented the
Greek party at the Council of Florence ; and in consequence
of the feeling of those who sided with him, through the
intervention of the Greek Emperor, no sentence defining the
form of consecration was introduced into the decree of Union
agreed to at that Council between Easterns and Westerns. 43

The only quasi-conciliar authority which the Romans have
to show for their opinion is the Decree of Pope Eugenius IVth,
for the instruction of the Armenian Uniats, 44 published at the

42 See the Ei&gt;xo\6yiov rb neya Venice 1869.

43 See the passages from Mark and his forerunner Kabasilas, Metro
politan of Thessalonica (circa A.D. 1354), quoted by Hoppe die Epi-
klesis pp. 5 foil. What actually happened at the Council was that
Bessarion, Bishop of Nicaea (afterwards Cardinal), the head of the
Romanizing party among the Greeks, made a statement on 5th July,
1439, in his own name and in that of the other fathers representing the
Oriental Church to the following effect : " Yerba dominica esse ilia
" quae mutant et transsubstantiant paneni et vinum in corpus verum
" Christi et sanguinem, et quod ilia verba divina Salvatoris omnem
" virtutem transsubstantiationis habeut," Hoppe 1. c. p. 5 quoting
Mansi Cone. xxxi. col. 1045 1047 and Ma billon Mus. It. torn. 1 part
2 p. 243. See also Sylvester Sguropulus Vera historia unionis non
verae inter graecos et latinos sive concilii Florentine exactissima
narratio, Greek and Latin ed. Rob. Creyghton (aft. Bp. of Bath & Wells)
Hagae comitis 1660, sec. x. cap. 8 p. 293, who gives a similar summary
of Bessarion s speech, and says that the Latins wished the definition to
be introduced into the decree of union but that the Emperor would not
permit it. [Bp.] M. Creighton s passing statement Hist, of the Papacy
during the Reformation ii. 188, " The Greeks did not doubt the fact,
but objected to the declaration as unnecessary," seems scarcely borne
out by the older narratives.

44 The first decree is to be found in Labb. Cone. xiii. p. 537, the second
ibid p. 1211. The Catechism of the Council of Trent says (Part. II. chap.
4, quest. 19, p. 136 ed. prin. Romae 1566), " Praetermitteiida sunt hoc
" loco sanctorum Patrum testimonia, quae infinitum csset enumerare, et
" Concilii Florentini decretum, quod omnibus patet atque in promptu
" est, &c." Mr. Ffoulkes seems to have read Tridentini for Florentini,
and naturally looks in vain for a decision on this subject in the Decrees
of Trent, Primitive Consecration, p. 469. The following is the passage
of the first Decree for the Armenians, which it may be convenient to
have in full : " The form of this Sacrament is the words of our Saviour,
" by which He perfects (conficit) this Sacrament. For the priest
" speaking in the person of Christ perfects this Sacrament. For by

The Lord s Prayer. 107

Council of Florence in 1439, and enlarged in 1441, but never
receiving (as far as I am aware) any conciliar approbation.
This is nevertheless the only authority which the Catechism
of the Council of Trent thinks fit to name to prove the
necessity of the form in question.

Now had this decree been of an ordinary character, I might
perhaps be considered presumptuous in doubting how far
Roman theologians, especially since the Vatican Council,
would feel themselves bound by it. But inasmuch as it is in
this same decree that the Pope makes an astonishing blunder
in describing the " matter" or outward sign of ordination, I
do not suppose that he can be considered as much of an
authority on points of ritual. A writer who makes the matter
of ordination consist in the giving of the chalice and paten to
the priest and of the Book of the Gospels to the Deacon, and
who wholly forgets to mention imposition of hands, can hardly
be supposed to have much weight in a discussion on liturgical
questions. This is in fact one of the recognised difficulties
which defenders of Papal Infallibility in detail are hardly able
to meet.

(4) The Lord s Prayer.

That Justin means the Lord s Prayer when he speaks of
the " word of prayer which is from Him" by which our

" the virtue of the words themselves the substance of the bread is
" turned into the body of Christ and the substance of the wine into the
" blood of Christ." In 1441 Pope Eugenius, having had his attention,
we may suppose, called to the want of clearness of the first sentence,
gave the following explanation : " Whereas in the above- written decree
" for the Armenians the form of words is not explained, which the Holy
" Roman Church, supported by the doctrine and authority of the
" Apostles, has always been accustomed to use in consecrating the body
" and blood of the Lord, we have thought it right to insert it in these
" presents. In the consecration of the Body [the Church] uses this
" form of words, Hoc est enim corpus meum, and of the Blood, Hie est
" enim calix sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti, mysterium
" fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis cffundeiur in remissionem pecca-
" torum." A Roman theologian who wished to minimize might say
that this only stated the Roman form without anathematizing any other
or declaring it invalid. Hoppe (p. 224) admits the insufficiency of this
decree, saying that it " hat bekanntlich nicht unausweichlich dogmatische
" Giltigkeit." He appeals of course to the Catechism and the prefatory
matter of the Missal De defectibus no. V. sec. 1 De defectibus formae
for more precise statements.

108 The Primitive Liturgy.

ordinary food becomes Eucharist, is at any rate a tenable and
to my mind a probable opinion (pp. 61, 62). The fact that it
is put forward by members of the Lutheran communion, who
have no Invocation in their Liturgy, but merely the Kecital of
the Institution followed according to Luther s use (though not
now always in the "Evangelical Church") by the Lord s
Prayer, is indeed to most of us no very strong argument. 45
They may be said to have a natural tendency to justify their
position. But when we look at the facts themselves, apart
from their interpreters, they are seen to form a solid body of
argument. When we find the Lord s Prayer coming at the
end of the prayer of Consecration, and as its culminating
point, as the prayer which we are " bold to say," in all
existing ancient Liturgies actually used (that is in all except
the Clementine) 46 ; when we find this use referred to by the

45 This opinion is generally connected in this country with the name
of Chevalier Bunsen, who popularised it in his Hippolytus and his Age.
Hoppe (p. 228) quotes several other German writers as supporting it.
Hoppe s argument that in existing (Greek) Liturgies the Lord s Prayer
is said by the people and therefore it cannot have been said here in
Justin s time, because he only mentions the people as saying Amen, is
weak : since the custom of the second century in this matter (if it were
the custom) was not necessarily the custom of the fourth. In the
Roman Liturgy, which may represent Justin s custom, the Lord s
Prayer was said by the Priest alone. So also it probably was in the
African Church. See S. Aug. Serm. 58 quoted in note 22.

46 See the authorities collected by Scudamore N.E. pp. 654 foil.
Another exception may have been the Roman Liturgy in the period
just before St. Gregory, see the passage quoted below note 49. But
our information as to the Roman use before St. Gregory is very in
complete and uncertain. It may well be that in Justin s time the
Roman use was, as he seems to describe it, a thanksgiving ending with
the Lord s prayer to which the people answered Amen. Then the
Lord s prayer may have been wholly or partially dropped and then
revived by Gregory. Cp. the 10th Canon of the lYth Council of
Toledo A.D. 633, Brans p. 226, by which it appears that some priests
at that time in Spain only said the Lord s prayer on Sundays. The
Lord s prayer was said in the Gallican Liturgy as St. Germanus
testifies Brevis Exppsit. Migne P.L. 72 p. 94 " Oratio vero Dominica
pro hoc ibidem ponitur, ut oninis oratio nostra in Dominica oratione
clandatur." It is noticeable that St. Germanus does not seem to refer
to the words of Institution and that they are omitted in some of the old
Gallican service books, and in the rest only indicated by the words
Quipridie. See above p. 104 cp. Duchesne p. 206. He quotes St.
Germanus very obscure sentence but does not explain it p. 208.

The Lord s Prayer. 109

Fathers 47 ; when we read their explanations of the petition
for daily bread as a petition for the spiritual food of the
Sacrament 48 ; when we recollect that this was the only prayer,
as far as we know, given by our Lord to His Church and
therefore the only one which could be said to be a word of
prayer Trap avrov i.e. delivered by Him ; and when we
recollect Gregory the Great s strongly expressed assertion
that the Apostles by that prayer alone were accustomed to
consecrate the oblation 49 this opinion assumes great con
sistency. I do not say that it acquires certainty.

These enquiries, my brethren, have much more than a
mere antiquarian or literary, or historical interest, though I
have tried to conduct them with all the impartiality which
befits such investigations. The conclusions to which they
lead us seem to be in particular two in number.

First, the early Church believed in the reality of the effect
of consecration, whether by a simple thanksgiving or by any

47 See esp. Optatus Milevit. de schism. Don. ii. 20 "ad altare
conversi (af ter admitting- penitents) orationeni dominicam praetermittere
non potestis ;" S. Cyril. Hierosol. Cat. Myst. v. 11 ; S. Aug. ep. 149,
16 ad Paulinum (alias 59), defining precationes as said before the
beginning of the blessing of what is on the Lord s table, " orationes
vero ^cuiii benedicitur et sanctificatur et ad distribucndum com-
minuitur, quain totam petitionem fere omnis ecclesia dominica
oratione concudit;" S. Hieron. contra Pelag. iii. 15 "Sic docuit
Apostolos suos ut quotidie in Corporis illius sacrificio credentes
audeant loqui Pater noster . . . Panem quotidianum sive super
1 omnes substantias veuturain Apostoli deprecantur ut digni fiant
corporis Christi," etc.

48 Tertull. de oratione, 6; S. Cypr. de dom. or. 18; S. Cyr. Cat.
Myst. v. 15 ; S. Aug. Serm. 56, 57, 58, 59, torn. v. pp. 468A, 478A, 485s,
492D., ed. Gaume. ; S. Hieron. ut supra.

49 S. Greg. Mag. Ep. ix. 12 (alias vii. 64) Johanni Episcopo Syracu-
sano. He is defending certain changes made by him in the Liturgy :
" Orationeni vero dominicam idcirco mox post precem dicimus ; quia
mos apostoloruni fuit ut ad ipsani soluuiniodo orationeui oblationis
hostiam consecrareut. Et valde mihi inconveniens visuni est ut precem
quam scholasticus composuerat super oblationem diceremus et ipsani
traditionem quam Redemptor noster composuerat super ems corpus et
sanguinem non diceremus. Sed et Dominica oratio apud Graecos ab
omni populo dicitur apud nos vero a solo sacerdote." St. Gregory may
have formed this opinion from the passage of Justin or from that of
St. Jerome quoted in note 47, or from some source unknown to us. His
word " traditio" suggests the Trap aurov of Justin ; it should not be
altered to " oratio." His reference to the Apostles touches Jerome.

110 The Primitive Liturgy. The mystery of Christ s presence.

or all of the other devotional instruments of which we have
been speaking. The voice of the Church is " It is no longer
" common bread but Eucharist, consisting of two parts, an
earthly and a heavenly." A mystery has been performed, like
that of the Incarnation, in which under earthly forms a
divine power was brought into the world, and a glory revealed
to men, which is given to men, shewn to men, helpful to men,
existing outside them though existing for them, and not exist
ing merely in virtue of their faith or their appreciation of it.

On the other hand the Church shrank from fixing the
moment of this mystery. By a kind of prophetic instinct
of reserve and caution, she made no attempt to treasure up
our Lord s own words of Blessing or Invocation, and, for
several centuries at least, had no doctrine as to a necessary
" form" of consecration. She did not define that up to a
certain definite instant common bread was there, and then at
a given minute and in a given space, which could be pointed
at with the finger, or announced with the ringing of a bell or
the blare of a trumpet, the divine power was brought into the
earthly forms. Not so was the Incarnation of the Son of God.
The Nativity indeed was heralded by the voices of the angels,
but the message of the Angel which announced the Incarna
tion was in the stillness of the Virgin s chamber. So it is
in the Eucharist. When the consecrated Bread and Cup is
delivered to the Communicants the Body and Blood of the
Lord is proclaimed aloud to the faithful. But the actual
moment of the mysterious union of Christ with the elements
is not known to man. To seek to fix it is to be wise above
the teaching and example of Christ, wise above the doctrine
of the Apostles, wise above the early Liturgies. It leads to
a dangerous and curious materialism and carnality, from
which I trust you will all keep yourselves and the flocks com
mitted to you free.

No doubt human weakness is such that it seeks to have
the certainty of exact knowledge and to support and vivify its
languor by the thrill of momentary emotion. But we must
fight against this weakness. It is unworthy of the name of
true faith. It is an attempt to intrude sight and sense into

The Distribution of the Food called Eucharist. Ill

the domain of the spiritual and the unseen. Teach your flocks
that Christ, spiritually and actually present, though unseen,
Himself gives His body and blood to them in the Sacra
ment, but do not seek to localise and, so to say, temporise the
presence they adore, or you will be leading them astray.
Even the Catechism of the Council of Trent, which has
unfortunately done so much to rivet the opinion of the
Schoolmen upon the conscience of Western Christians, may
warn you of the danger of too curious enquiry and too close
application of the thought of place (ii. 5, 41 and 42). It is
much more important to emphasise the living presence of
Christ as the great High Priest feeding His people, than to
think of Him as shut up within the elements. If we turn
our eyes and thoughts and reverence to the latter, we shall
be in danger of forgetting the former.

V. THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE FOOD CALLED EUCHARIST.

" When the President has given thanks (says Justin) and
" all the people has answered, those who are called among
" us Deacons give to each of those who are present to partake
" of the bread over which thanks have been given, and of the
" wine and water, and it is sent by the Deacon s hands to
" those who are absent" (65).

There are three points to be commented on here : (i) the
administration of both elements by the Deacons ; (2) the ad
ministration individually ; (3) the after use of the Sacrament.

(1) The Administration by the Deacons.

There is quite sufficient evidence to show that this use was
not peculiar to the particular Church of which Justin is de
scribing the custom. At a later date indeed restrictions were
usual, and it became common to limit the Deacon to the
delivery of the Cup. 50 But traces exist of their ancient pri-

60 Cf. S. Cyprian, de Lap sis 25 A.D. 251, S. Aug. Serm. 304, 1
(on St. Laurence), Lit. Clement. Hammond p. 21. St. Chrysostom
treats it as forbidden for them to do even this Horn. xlv. in Matt. 3.
St. Ambrose s words implying that St. Laurence, as deacon, consecrated
the cup, stand alone and are variously explained, de off. min. i. 41 214.

112 The Primitive Liturgy.

vilege, even so far as to shew that the Deacons sometimes
ministered to Presbyters, and these indications are found till
a comparatively late date in some countries. The Council
of Nicaea A.D. 325 forhade the Deacons to give the Eucharist
to presbyters ; the Liturgy called St. James represents them
as ministering both Paten and Chalice to the people ; Isidore
of Seville A.D. 610 similarly treats the dispensation as part
of the Deacons office, though this had only been conceded
in case of necessity but still conceded by the Council of
Carthage in A.D. 398. 51

In our own country a canon of Aelfric, of the 10th
century, says " (a deacon) should baptize children and housel
(i.e. communicate) the people." This liberty was restricted
to cases of necessity, according to the tenor of the Canon of
Carthage, by the Legatine Synod held by Abp. Hubert Walter
at York in 1195, when it was decreed " that a Deacon (unless
" in the most urgent necessity) do not baptize or give the
"Body of Christ." 52

It is easy to see that the Deacons were gradually, though
perhaps not unwisely, being deprived of a privilege which had
been anciently theirs, but that the tradition of it was too
strong to be wholly obliterated. In our own Church it seems
to be intended that the celebrant himself shall always deliver
the hallowed bread, and the Deacon or assistant Priest the
Cup. But in case of necessity, such as the infirmity or
defective eyesight of the Celebrant, or the large number of
communicants, where more than one paten is used, there can
be nothing wrong in a Deacon dispensing either half of the
Sacrament, and in general it is his duty among us to ad
minister the Cup.

(2) The Administration individually.

Nothing is said in detail by Justin of the manner of com
municating, but it is certain that in early times the sacrament
was given to each singly, standing, and with words addressed

51 Canon Nicaen. xviii, Lit. S. Jacob. Hammond p. 51, Isidore 2 de
eccles. offic. S, Cone. Garth. IV. Canon 38, Bruns p. 145.

62 Aelfrici Canon xvi. Wilkins Cone. \. p. 252 ; Decret. v. ib. p. 501.

The Administration individually. 113

to each. His brief account merely implies that each person
present received from the hands of the Deacons, that is to
say that there was no passing from hand to hand, as in some
reformed congregations to the present day, and as was the
puritan custom in some places in England. Nothing can be
gathered from our Blessed Lord s words in giving the first
cup (Luke xxii. 17) " Take this and divide it among your-
" selves," on which some puritans relied as a justification.
But it is indeed noticeable that He said of the true
Eucharistic Bread and Cup "Take Eat," "Drink ye all of
this" in the plural number. This is one of the points
where Tertullian notices a change of practice in the Church,
observing that though our Lord gave the command (to take
and eat) to all, yet we receive "from no other hands than
" those of our Presidents," i.e. not from one another (de
corona 3 cp. p. 59 n. 3). We have in fact no evidence of the
contrary practice that I am acquainted with. Certainly as
soon as any discipline by way of excommunication came
into use, such as necessarily must have grown up very early
and in the lifetime of the Apostles, it was requisite that no
one but those who were responsible to the whole Church, and
who could be trusted for their discretion, should administer
the Communion. The same reasons, which led to the restric
tion of the consecration to the authorized Ministry, were
applicable almost equally to suggest restrictions on the ad
ministration. It was only a carrying out of the same
principle that put the Deacon into a more subordinate place
than he at first occupied in regard to this office. Our Lord
(we may presume) followed a different practice when He
gave their first communion to His chosen band of Apostles
in order to imply their equality, just as, at the Feedings of
the multitudes, He had used each of them to act as His
instrument in the distribution of the loaves and fishes. At
any rate no argument from His single action in regard to
them could be drawn so stringently as to make it a necessary
guide to our practice, or to justify a departure from the
wholesome practice of the Church in its reasonable use of
discretion.

114 The Primitive Lilurgy.

The standing posture of the communicant in primitive
times seems to be well established though those who mention
it are not many. 53 This is still the rule in the Oriental
Churches, and some traces of it remained till a comparatively
late period in the West. The celebrant is now the only person
who as a general rule receives standing in the Western
Church, unless it be at a consecration of Priests when the
newly-ordained, by a beautiful survival of the primitive
relation, act as concelebrants with the Bishop who has
consecrated them. 54

It is said by Liturgists that the Pope, when he celebrates"
solemnly, receives sitting ; but others say that he only seems
to sit. One of the Roman ordines of the 8th or 9th century
speaks of him as returning to his seat to communicate before
the fraction and commixture, so that the custom is certainly
of some antiquity. 55 But it would be hazardous in the
absence of all other evidence to argue from this exception to
a more general rule for other Bishops.

The words used at the distribution varied, but were in
almost all cases, as w r e have hinted, some form adapted from
our Lord s own words, The Body of Christ, the Blood of
Christ, either simply or expanded into a benediction. Justin
says nothing of this, but directions to use these words are
often absent from Liturgical books, even when we know from
other ancient sources that they were used. They were no
doubt traditional, and probably to some extent variable, in
the mouths of the Deacons.

53 E.g. S. Dionys. Alex. ap. Ens. H.E. vii. 9, S. Chrys. Horn. xx.
in 2 Cor, ix. 15., S. Basil Ad Amphil canon 56. See Scudamore N.E.
p. 726 foil, aiid the plates in Rohault de Fleury, La Messe, etudes
archeolgiques Paris, Impriuieries Bennies, 1883 c., torn. iv. pi. 257
263 both for receiving standing and in the hands. These plates and the
letter- press accompanying them shew the gradual growth of communion
kneeling and reception in the mouth, probably not before the 12th
century. See the frescoes of San Lorenzo at Rome of the 13th century,
toin. i. pi. xix. also published by the Arundel Society.

54 Our custom at Salisbury is for the newly ordained priests to
continue kneeling together until they have communicated. On the
celebrant s posture in receiving in our own Church, see the next address.

JU See Duehesne Originee, Appendice p. 445, " pontifex vadit ad
"sedem suani"; cp. Scudamore p. 698.

The mode of receiving the Saerament. 115

The communicants received the consecrated bread into
their hands, as the common custom now is amongst ourselves,
the right hand resting on the left, as St. Cyril says, to make
a throne, as if to receive a king. The Roman custom of
receiving into the mouth is comparatively late, and the date
of it has not been accurately fixed. It may have been due
either to an exaggerated reverence, such as that which at one
time obliged women to cover their hands with napkins, or
to a wish to avoid the danger of the wafer falling to the
ground, or it may have been intended to prevent communi
cants retaining the bread and taking it home for private
reservation or even for magical ceremonies. 50 At first the
chalice was held by the minister to the mouths of the com
municants, as ancient writers and monuments represent it/ 7
This was no doubt found after a time to be inconvenient,
though it is still used among the Lutherans. In the Eastern
Churches now a spoon is used with which the species of
bread dipped in the cup is ministered to the laity, no doubt
to avoid the dangers specified above. The partial use of a
tube in the West, for the reception of the consecrated wine,
was a prelude to the denial of the cup first to the laity and
then to all but the celebrant.

(8) The after Use of the Sacrament.

In the first ages of the Church, and generally speaking up
to and during great part of the fourth century, the Eucharist,
especially the consecrated bread, was widely used outside the
Christian assembly. Justin tells us that it was part of the

5fi See the Rubric at the end of Edward Vltli s first Prayer-book,
and Scudamorc p. 725.

57 See S. Cypr. de laps-is 25 " pcrstitit tamen diaconus et reluctant!
licet de sacrameuto calicis iiifudit." For pictures see Rohault de
Fleury La Hesse, esp. torn. iv. pi. 257, 260264, cp. S. Cyr, Cat.
Myst. v. 22. In two representations on plate 259. from Psalters of
Mount Atlios and Moscow (9th cent.), Apostles are represented as
taking the cup into their own hands. In one of those on plate 264 from
a Stuttgart Latin Psalter, of the 12th cent., our Lord seated holds the
Chalice in his left hand and puts a round cake or wafer, probably pre
viously dipped into it, into the mouth of the communicant (S. Peter ?),
who is standing.

11G The Primitive Liturgy.

deacons office to carry it to those who were not present
implying that this was done at the direction of the President.
This was not only, we may suppose, in case of those hindered
hy sickness, hut as a token of love to those who were other
wise prevented from attending it might he hy reason of
work, as for instance to slaves, it might he to prisoners, it
might be to clergy or laity as a sign of communion. Clergy
about to travel or newly-ordained Bishops and Priests would
also take the Eucharist with them. I have already mentioned
the case of private lay communion, especially in Egypt and
Africa, on the part of those who took home for themselves a
portion of the consecrated elements, either to their own homes
or to monasteries. 58 This was a custom which was specially
and properly resorted to in times of persecution. But it
clearly could not be carried on in quiet times without dangers
of different kinds. The Eastern Church generally, and our
own more explicitly, have met these dangers by reverent
consumption of what remains in the sacred building. 59

In the Eastern Church however some of the consecrated
bread, steeped in the chalice, is reserved for the sick and dying,
and hung up in a box, usually behind the altar. 60 This how
ever is in any case out of sight of the people.

08 See above p. 91. An interesting case is mentioned by St.
Dionysius of Alexandria ap. Euseb. H.E. vi. 44 of " a small portion of
the Eucharist," apparently reserved by the Priest in his own house,
being sent to a sick person by a servant. Much other information is
given by Scudamore N.E. pp. 903 foil. St. Ircnaeus (fragm. 3) gives
the earliest instance yet known of the sending of the Eucharist to a
distance as a pledge of Communion. The practice was forbidden by
the Council of Laodicea in 365 and the use of the Eulogia or Blessed
Bread substituted. The practice of commixture may have been at first
really a preparation for such a sending away of the Eucharist, in a
convenient form and in both kinds, particularly for the sick. It might
also be for immediate administration : see the last note and cp. Scuda
more p. 675. In some Gallican Churches the commixtio was perhaps
the most important point of the consecration ; see esp. the description
of S. Germanus P.L. 72 col. 94, referred to p. 108 n. and below.
Augere there may mean to add wine to the chalice, addere to put the
bread into it. The Roman prayer " haec commixtio et consecratio
" Corporis et Sanguiuis D. N. J. C. fiat accipientibus nobis in vitam
" aeternam" may possibly be a Gallican prayer introduced into the
Roman rite. Consecratio is otherwise hardly explicable.

59 Scudamore pp. 895 foil. co ib. p. 915.

The after Use of the Sacrament. Reservation. 117

In the Western Church, on the other hand, the danger of
misuse outside the Church has been met, or supposed to be
met, by reservation in a special receptacle, which has gradually
come to take a prominent place in the eyes of the worshippers
and to absorb great part of the ordinary devotions of the
people in the popular service of Benediction with the reserved
Sacrament. From the ninth century onwards this box
received the name of Pyxis or Pyx, and began to be placed
on or over the altar. 61 For some time before the Reformation
in this country this Pyx was usually suspended over the altar,
often in the form of a Dove or enclosed within a Dove, and
there received the worship of the people. Innocent III rd
however had decreed that the Sacrament should be kept under
lock and key, and this decree was inserted in the Canon Law. 62
In the Roman Communion I suppose that such a locked
Tabernacle is now universal or almost universal, thus
testifying to the original intention of the reservation, not for
the purposes of adoration, but for safety.

It is not unnatural that some should wish to restore reser
vation for the sick ; but it is certainly very rarely necessary,
and being directly contrary to the rubrics of our Communion
Office, it must be pronounced unlawful without fresh
authority. Nor should I personally be anxious to move for
such authority. The dangers of profanity on one side and
of superstition on the other have been proved too great, and
we had better not hamper ourselves with such dangers.
Further, the act of consecration, in our service for the com
munion of the sick, is so beautiful and seemly and so short,
that, except in cases of grave emergency, like cholera or
pestilence, there could be no reason for wishing to do
without it. On the contrary there is every reason for clinging
to it. But if a general rule authorising reservation for the
sick were passed, it would inevitably tend to become the

61 Scudamore p. 909, quoting Leo IVth A.D. 847 (Labb. Cone. viii. 34),
" Let nothing be set on the Altar but boxes with the relics of the Saints,
or perhaps the four holy Gospels of God, or a Pyx with the body of the
Lord for the Viaticum of the sick."

62 Decret. Greg. IX. book iii. tit. xliv. chap. i. Statuimus.

118 The Primitive Liturgy.

ordinary method (in many parishes at any rate) to reserve
always, on the plea of providing against emergency, and to
give up consecration in the sick room.

We have now, my dear brethren, touched rapidly upon the
main features of the great mystery, as it was set before the
Church in the Second Century, with illustrations carrying us
on to our own day, and showing, I hope, the coherence and
continuity of Church history in a concrete form. In the
course of this address I have ventured to make some sugges-

tions which may seem bold, and to propound some conclu
sions which to some of you may possibly be novel. I would
say, however, do not judge hastily of what you have heard.
The subject is a wide and difficult one. I do not claim to
possess any special knowledge as a Liturgist indeed I am
often conscious of the narrow limits of my knowledge but I
may just mention that in taking up this subject I have
returned to some of my earliest studies as a teacher at
Oxford, when leisure for thought and ready access to books
were real conditions of life. I shall be glad of any criticism
which your greater knowledge can furnish ; I shall be thankful
if I can stimulate any of you, young or old, to read and think
on this matter for yourselves.

To each I say, as a student, with the old poet who was the
friend of our boyhood,

Si quid novisti rectius istls,
Candidas import! : si iion, his utere mccniii.

To each I say, as a " fellow-elder," with the Apostle, "As
every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same
one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of
God. If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God ;
if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God
giveth : that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus
Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever.
Amen" (1 Pet. iv. 10, 11).

119

IV.

THE COMMUNION OFFICE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

I do not propose, my brethren, to go deeply into the
somewhat difficult and perplexing questions which concern
the origin of the Communion Office in our present Book of
Common Prayer, or to recount at length the revisions to
which our Liturgy was subjected from A.D. 1548 to 1662.

It was, as you know, in March, 1548, in the second year
of King Edward Vlth, that the first English Order of
Communion was published, the precursor of the Book of
Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and
other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church : after the use of
the Church of England, which came into use on Whitsunday,
1549, and which is the foundation of all the later books.
On 20th Dec., 1661, the finally revised Prayer-Book was
adopted and subscribed by the Bishops and Clergy of both
Houses of Convocation and of both Provinces. In the
following year the book was attached to the Act of Uniformity
and thus received Parliamentary sanction, completed by the
Royal Assent on 19th May, 1662.

Our present office in all its details has now nearly two
hundred and thirty years authority, and has been subjected
to the test of time and experience and of minute comparison
with other formularies. Since it is a human work, it is
possible to see points in which it might be amended or
improved ; and since it is a work dating mainly from a
particular epoch, it is possible to indicate details, especially
of arrangement, which were natural to that epoch rather
than particularly suitable to our own. We cannot blame the
Church of the United States for certain alterations which it
has made, to a great extent following the Scotch precedents
of a return to the language and structure of the earlier

120 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

Liturgies. But it would be difficult for us to adopt any
amended or altered form, even if we could all agree to do so,
without a loss very disproportionate to the possible gain.

What we can do is to use the precious heritage that has
come down to us in a reverent and intelligent manner, and,
while we recognise a certain area of variation in our use, such
as I have referred to in a previous address (pp. 80, 81), to
make as much as possible of the great and profound agree
ment which exists between us all. In many respects, such
as the use of the surplice in the pulpit, the employment of
surpliced choirs and the like, there is a wonderful advance
towards a common method in externals which at one time
caused no little stir and debate. It is easy to foresee similar
advances in the future. I think we can also observe a
corresponding tendency to caution and considerateness on the
part of those who have led the way in the matter of change
or return to ancient practice. I do not expect, nor do I wish,
to see an absolute uniformity ; but I should like to see such
a measure of unity and mutual understanding that, not only
a Bishop or Archdeacon or Eural Dean, but any Incumbent
or Licensed Priest, might be welcomed to officiate or assist
at the Holy Table in any Church of the Diocese without
feeling himself, or bringing to others to whom he ministered,
a sense of incongruity or uneasiness. There is no doubt
that the absence, to a certain extent, of this natural freedom
of intercourse in holy things, as far as it exists, is a cause of
weakness to our beloved Church ; just as its presence is a
great source of strength to the Roman Communion. The
fact that in that Communion a Priest has, as a general rule,
the duty to say Mass daily, makes it necessary for him on his
travels to have free access to the altars of the Churches
wherever he may be. He is admitted as a brother, and is
allowed to minister, if he brings the proper certificate, and
thus feels himself at home in whatever place or country he
may be. I do not wish to introduce this system of daily,
and practically private, celebrations for all clergy in priests
orders, which would be alien to the character of our teaching
and dangerous to our own spiritual life. But I think that we

Object and Contents of this Address. 121

ought to be ready as a matter of course to welcome brother
Presbyters to the service of the Sanctuary, especially those of
our own Dioceses, of course under proper conditions, and to
make a real effort to exhibit in deed the unity of the Church,
both as regards its ministers and its services. This unity
exists in great measure, but is not as yet universal. Perhaps
in our own Diocese we have as much of this freedom and
brotherliness as in any in England.

The constant migration which goes on, especially in the
southern and central part of Dorset, is another and a very
practical reason for this effort to make our services more
thoroughly harmonious, and to introduce a real solidarity of
clerical brotherhood.

I shall therefore enter into a certain amount of practical
detail, even on minute points, and shall comment on the
Communion Office in its different aspects, trusting that what
I say will be accepted in the spirit in which it is written ; and
with a hope and a prayer that it may be of real use to my
brethren, to whom I feel that I owe a debt to give them my
best and most careful thoughts on a subject which touches
nearly every part of their clerical life.

I shall divide what I have to say under the following
heads :

1. On the general principles which underlie our service and
on the contrast between it and the Lutheran and Calvinist
offices ; with some observations on the difficult questions of
the Eucharistic sacrifice and the nature of the presence of
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the Sacrament.

2. On the general structure of our service as compared
with the older Liturgy from which it was derived, its
omissions, alterations, and additions.

3. On the frequency of the celebration of the Lord s Supper
and on the rules as to communion in our own Church.

4. On the hours of celebration and on the presence of non-
communicants.

5. On the private preparation for the celebration and com
munion.

6. On the preparation of the Elements.

122 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

7. On the parts into the which the service is divided, with
notes on the method of conducting it.

1. On the general principles underlying our service and on
the contrast between it and the Lutheran and Calcinist
formularies.

The main object of the Reformers everywhere was no doubt
to restore the dignity of Communion, and to bring the lay-
worshippers to look to that as their principal duty in regard
to the Sacrament. Previously they had been taught that
they were not fit for Communion more than once a year, and
that their chief duty was to attend as devout and sympathetic
spectators of the Sacrifice, and as doing worship to the
Sacrament.

Let me quote the prologue to the once popular Lay -folks
Massbook, 1 of which I have ventured slightly to modernise
the language. It is ascribed to the twelfth century, but
even at that comparatively early date says nothing of the
communion of the people.

" The worthiest thing , most of goodness,
In all tliis world, that is the messe.
In all the books of holy kirk
That holy men, that time, gone work, 2
The messe is praised manyfold ;
Its virtues might never be told.
For if thousand clerkes did nought else,
After that the booke tells, 3
But told the virtues of messe singing,
And the profit of messe hearing,
Yet should they never the fifth part,
For all their wit and all their art,
Tell the virtue modes and pardon,
To them that with devotion,
In cleanness and with good intent,
Do worship 4 to this Sacrament."

1 Edited by Canon Tlios. Fred. Simmons for the Early English Text
Society, Triibner and Co., 1879.

2 i.e. At any time have written.

3 This line is merely a colloquial phrase to fill up space and rhyme
with else much like our " as they say," " as the story goes."

4 By worship we must of course understand honour, respect,
reverence, including, but not simply identical with, adoration.

Principles and character of our Reformation. 128

To remedy this one-sided and mutilated condition of things
was the natural and proper object of the Reformers ; but the
manner in which the cure was attempted differed widely in
the Lutheran and Calvinist congregations on the Continent,
and both present a striking contrast to our own Liturgy.
Both remedy one-sidedness with one-sidedness of a different
kind, though in very various ways. Our own Liturgy alone
of the three preserves its balance.

If we compare the Lutheran and Anglican formularies we
shall find that the Lutheran has preserved in parts a greater
external resemblance to the Latin rite than our own Church
has thought it necessary to enforce, both in the form and
sequence of the portions retained, but that it has wholly lost
an important part of the primitive Liturgy.

This no doubt was due to the overmastering personality of
Luther, which had happily no counterpart in the English Refor
mation. There was also a more extended preparation for the
reforming movement among us and a longer period in which
it worked itself out, not ending indeed till the period of the
Restoration. More persons of different degrees and orders of
mind were concerned in it. Men had been trained in freedom
of debate by the constant assemblies of clergy and laity in
Parliament and Convocation. The successive Sovereigns took
a more personal, though sometimes a misguided and mis
guiding interest, in the details of Church policy and govern
ment. The Bishops were mostly men of piety and learning,
even when they were vehemently opposed to one another,
and their orderly succession was always maintained. These
and many similar causes contributed to the peculiar character
of our Reformation settlement, the chief of all being the
conservative character of the people, when untroubled by
theorists, schemers, and agitators. There was thus a strong
underlying traditional current to counteract the Lutheran and
Calvinist influences which successively prevailed.

It would not be difficult to point out features of our
Liturgy which are due specially to one or other of these
three currents of feeling ; but as the conclusions would be
somewhat conjectural, notwithstanding the labour that has

124 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

been spent upon the elucidation of the subject, I propose
rather to exhibit in a concrete shape what the Lutheran and
Calvinist forms were and are like, and thus to enable you to
contrast them for yourselves with our own. You will, I feel
sure, agree with me that we have great reason for thankful
ness in the result, as far as it affects ourselves, much as we
must regret the hindrances to the reunion of Christendom
which this comparison certainly reveals ; for any form, how
ever incomplete, used for such a high and holy purpose
becomes dear to those who use it. It is associated with their
best thoughts and purposes, and with the revelations of God s
love and will to their souls. To tamper with it, even when
others generally pronounce it faulty, seems almost sacrilegious.
But much may be done by a sympathetic and dispassionate
study, which, while it strengthens our own love of what is
our own, leads us to recognise the beauty and the force of
other forms, and to learn at least to understand much which
at first seemed alien and unattractive.

I have before me the Liturgy of the " Evangelical Church"
in the countries subject to the Prussian Crown, reprinted in
1879, after the first edition of theAgende put out on 19th April,
1829, 5 by King Frederick William III., who may without
offence be called the founder of the United Church of that
country, in which " Lutherans" and " Reformed" find a
common ground.

This Liturgy is substantially the Lutheran, as described by
Luther, except that it makes it optional to use the Lord s
Prayer after or before the Institution, or not at all, and
wholly omits (as we should expect) the elevation after conse
cration, which Luther for a while retained for the sake of
those who were weak in faith. 6

5 Agende fur die evanc/elische Kirche in den Koniglich Preussischen
Landen von 1829, Berlin, 4, 1879, printed by E. S. Mittler and Son. I
owe a knowledge of this book to Canon Kingsbury, who is a valuable
link between our Diocese and our fellow- Christians on the Continent,
especially in Germany.

6 Luther s own service is described by Hermann Jacoby, Liturgik der
Reformatoren i. pp. 256 foil., Gotha 1871, from the Formula Missae
et Communionis pro ecclesia Wittembergensi 1523, and the Deutsche

Ritual of the " Evangelical Church"

125

The " Evangelical Church" does not shrink from the use of
the term " Altar," which is the regular word in this service
book. It has also a very clear illustration of the altar and its
furniture, which I reproduce, only using English words for
the German. It will be found on p. 20, and shews that a
crucifix and a pair of lighted tapers are part of the regular
ceremonial.

AKKANGEMENT OF THE ALTAR.

i&gt;

a The Crucifix. b b The Candlesticks with lighted wax-tapers.
c The great Bible, d The place for the celebrant (Liturgist).

The first rubric is The Minister (der Geistliche) steps during the
Introit in his priestly Attire (im priesterlichen Ornate) before the Altar
and makes a silent prayer of preparation. After concluding it he
turns towards the Congregation, which stands up and remains
standing with proper reverence until the Altar-prayers and choruses
are ended. He appears to say all the prayers towards the people,
except this silent prayer and the words of Institution and Lord s
Prayer. The stricter Lutherans however apparently insist on other
prayers being said towards the altar. See Herzog Encyldopadie s.v.
Liturgie viii. p. 438 note.

Ill the service that follows we find much outward similarity
to the older service. The ritual crossing is preserved in
saying the Absolution and the Benedictions and in the
recital of the Institution. The Agnus is prescribed to be

Messe of 1526. His attack on the offertory, &c., may be found on p.
263, and his words about the elevation, p. 264, " elevetur panis et calix,
" ritu hactenus servato, vel propter infirmos, qui hac repentina hujus
" insignioris in missa ritus mutatione forte offendentur, praesertim ubi
"per conciones vernaculas docti fuerint, quid ea petatur elevatione."

12G The Communion Office of the Church of England.

said or sung after the consecration, and hymns are sung all
through the communion of the people. In many respects
the order of the Latin service is followed, as previously in
use in Germany, especially in the earlier part of the Liturgy.
But, in deference to Luther s exaggerated hatred of the
"offertory" and the whole sacrificial element in the ancient
service, nearly all the primitive features of the offering of
the bread and wine, and of the memorial of Christ made in
the Sacrament before God and man, have been blotted out.
The Lord s prayer is retained or dropped at pleasure and.
there is no Invocation, and no direction for any manual acts
except the sign of the Cross.

No doubt Luther, like our own Reformers, had reason to
fear the doctrine that the mass is a "true propitiatory sacrifice
for the living and the dead," which was afterwards imposed
upon the Latin Church by the Council of Trent. 7 But it
must have been a great hindrance to the growth of the
principles of a sound Reformation to have given up the
truths of which this was an after growth and a corrupt
development. It no doubt gave many conservative minded
theologians a shock to find how deeply Luther had broken
with the primitive Church, as well as with Roman
errors. It is on this point that we feel thankful to
have preserved the substance in our Prayer-Book as finally
revised, where Lutherans have rather grasped at the shadow.
Whatever may be the case with the people and the less
instructed clergy there are few if any leaders of thought
among us who would not prefer our simple and sometime
ambiguous rubrics and consequent variety of external usage
in details of ceremony, coupled with the fuller memorial that
w r e make, to the definite ritual directions of the " Evangelical
Church" without this memorial.

7 Condi. Trident. Sessio xxii. de sacrificio missae cap. n.
" Sacrificium missae est propitiatoriuin tarn pro vivis quam pro
defunctis." The latter clause is explained of souls in purgatory "pro
defunctis in Christo, nonduni ad plenum purgatis" cap. ix. Cp. Canon
1. Si quis dixerit, in missa non offerri Deo verum et proprium
sacrificium . . anathema sit." In cap. II. it is called " sacrificiuin
vere propitiatoriuin,"

Service of the " Evangelical Church." 127

It is, I feel sure, because we are convinced and can prove
that our English Liturgy has a good hold upon primitive
tradition, that there are so few either of our clergy or laity
who have a real inclination to Romanism. Some influential
men of the last generation set a bad example, which was
rather widely followed but not even then by their most
pious, prudent and learned adherents,

Those who now take the Homeward path are at any rate
usually the less thoughtful and solid, and some of them, after
being for a time absorbed by the current, are cast back, as it
were, upon the shore, with faith shattered and conscience
strained a warning not to be lightly viewed by those who
are acquainted with such cases as those I speak of.

Let me now describe the Liturgy, of which I have been
speaking, more in detail and sequence.

A public preparation is made on the day before or on the
same day, consisting mainly of an address (Beichtrede p. 33),
a Confession, an Absolution ending with the sign of the
Cross, and an offer of help on the part of the clergy in the
way of private confession and absolution for those who are
troubled in conscience.

The service itself commences with a Hymn or Introit
(EingangsUed). Then come versicles and responses followed
by a Confession and a Sentence (Siirucli) selected by the
Minister from a number (as our offertory sentences are) a
sentence which is not exactly an absolution but is more or
less of that character. Then follow the Gloria Patri,
Lesser Litany, Gloria inExcelsis, Collect, Epistle and Gospel,
and the Apostles Creed all of course in German.

After the Creed follows another sentence selected from a
number of benedictions and forms of praise, then the Sursum
corda and Preface, followed by the Sanctus, Hosanna, and
JBenedictus qui venit. Then comes the General Prayer for
the Church and the Sovereign and State, followed by the
Lord s Prayer and the Blessing, with the sign of the cross
at the end. The Sermon may come either after the Creed
or the Lord s Prayer. The Service ends, if there is
no Communion, with the Hymn that follows the Blessing.

128 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

There is frequent provision for choral accompaniments, &c.
So far the service is almost exactly the old Latin, without
the offertory. If there is a Communion the Minister first
reads an Exhortation, and then says, " Kneel down and
receive the Words of Institution." He then turns to the
altar and says the words beginning, " Our Lord Jesus Christ in
" the night in which He was betrayed took bread," &c. The
note tells us that the Lord s Prayer may precede or follow
these words ; but it is omitted in the text. The Minister
makes the sign of the Cross after the words, " This is my
" body," " This cup is the New Testament in my blood," and
when he has finished the words he turns to the congregation
and says, " The peace of the Lord be with you all." Then
follows a prayer to our Lord, asking for forgiveness and
strength to keep His commandments, which may be consi
dered a preparation for communion, though it has no special
colour or very striking fitness for this place ; and then the
Agnus said three times.

Then follows the distribution, with the words, " Take and
" eat, saith our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ : This is my
" Body, which is given for you ; do this for my memorial"
(or "remembrance)", and similarly at the delivery of the cup,
which is in practice, I believe, put to the people s lips and
not given into their hands.

All the time of the distribution hymns are sung. Then
follows a Thanksgiving, and the whole closes with the triple
Aaronic blessing, ending with the sign of the Cross, and
another hymn.

How unsatisfying this second part of the service is will
be felt at once by any one who compares it with our own.
Yet much, no doubt, is done by the hymns to supply the
want.

The Chevalier Bun sen, as is well known, tried in his own
peculiar way to remedy some of these defects in his Allge-
mcines evangelisches Gesang- und Gcbctbuch znm Kirchen- und
Hamgebrauch, or " General Evangelical Hymn and Prayer-
Book for Church and Home use." One of the prayers after
the words of Institution which he there suggests for optional

Services of Luther and Calvin. 129

use, from the Nuremberg Service Book of 1543, is an address
to our Lord Jesus Christ beseeching Him to bless the gifts of
bread and wine and to make them His body and His blood.
But I am not aware that this book has received any authority
in the Lutheran Communion. 8

But if Luther s service might give a shock to those who
prized traditional forms, Calvin s was calculated almost to
stun them. I take the description of it from his form of
public prayers and administration of the Sacraments (attached
to his Catechism of the Church of Geneva), published first,
I believe, in 1545. 9 Yet it is impossible not to be impressed
with a certain force and dignity, and even pathos, in the
prayers, heavy and long as they are.

When the Lord s Supper is to be celebrated notice is to be
given the Sunday before to prepare the people ; no children
are to be present but those who have been well taught and
have professed their faith in the Church, Strangers who
may be in the city who wish to communicate are to be
instructed by the Ministers (p. 58).

The service on Sunday morning begins with the versicle :
" Our help is in the name of the Lord, who hath made heaven
and earth. Amen." Then follows a confession of sin made
by the Minister and followed mentally by the people. Then
a Psalm is sung, then a prayer, chosen by the Minister,
followed by the Sermon. After the Sermon follows a long
intercessory prayer extending over two closely printed folio
pages, including amongst other prayers those for rulers and
governors and for pastors and people, and for the conversion
of all men (this last somewhat as in Hermann s Consultation),
for those who are afflicted, for those who are under the tyranny
of Antichrist and for the congregation. In the course of this
prayer there is an uncomfortable feeling of antagonism to

8 This book was published at the Rauhe Haus, Hamburg, in 1846.
The prayer in question is said to be taken from the Pfdlzische Agende,
Niirnberg 1543, and may be found on p. 483 of Bunsen s book.

9 Reprinted in Latin in Joannis Calvini Tractatus Theologici omnes
certis classibus congesti fol. Genevse 1576, pp. 18 22. The original
was in French and Latin.

130 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

other religious bodies and an exaggerated stress laid upon the
Fall of Man and its consequences. The language indeed
often seems painful and unfit for a Christian congregation,
and very alien from that love which casteth out fear. 10

Then follows a prayer with special reference to the Lord s
Supper, of which the following is the principal part :

" And as our Lord Jesus Christ was not content with having once
offered to Thee His Body and His Blood upon the Cross for the
remission of our sins, but also destined them for our use as food of
eternal life (nobis quoque in alimentum vitae seternse dcstinavit) : so
do Thou, of Thy great goodness, grant that we may receive this great
benefit from Him in true sincerity of heart and with ardent desire :
that being filled with certain faith we may partake of His Body and
Blood, or rather entirely of Him : just as He who is true God and
Man is truly holy heavenly Bread for our enlivening. . . . There-
fore, O Heavenly Father, give us power this day and in this manner
to celebrate the happy memory of Thy Son (efnce . . nos . .
celebrandse faustse Filii tui memorise compotes). Grant also that we
may exercise ourselves in it, and may proclaim the benefit of His
death ; that receiving new growth and strength both as to faith and
all other blessings, we may with the greater confidence profess onr-
: selves Thy children, and glory in Thee our Father."

After this the Apostles Creed is recited.

After the Creed, which is apparently said by the Minister
alone (p. 58), follows the recital of the Institution, which is
made simply and explicitly a historical narrative.

" Hear in what manner Jesus Christ instituted His most
" holy Supper : as Paul has recorded in the Eleventh Chapter
" of his first Epistle to the Corinthians. I have received of
" the Lord, saith he., that which I also delivered unto you/
and what follows down to l not discerning the Lord s body
(1 Cor. xi. 2329). Then follows a fencing of the Table,
as the Scotch call it, a driving away and repelling, in very
strong language, of all idolaters, heretics, breakers of the
peace of the Church, and offenders of all kinds against the

_ P. 51. Sine te hoc exorari ut vere nobis conscii perditse nostrse
originis, simul etiam reputemus quantam daninationem mereamur : &
quanto cumulo in dies nobis impura & scelesta vita earn augeamus : ut
quum ^nos boni ornnis vacuos esse, carnemque iiostram & sanguinem
plane a cernenda regni tui hoereditate abhorrere cognoverimus, ex intimo
cordis sensu firmaque fiducia dilecto Filio tuo Jesu Christo, Domino
iiostro & Servatori ac Redemptori unico, nos dedanius : ut in nobis ipse
habitans veterem ilium nostrum Adamum extinguat, &c.

Service of the " Reformed Churches" Revision. 131

moral law. This exhortation and an instruction on the
character of the Sacrament occupies a closely printed folio
page, and has much that is true and forcible mingled with its
unattractive and unloving colouring ; but it is far too theo
logical and discursive for the time and place. Then, without
any further consecration, the bread is administered by the
Ministers and the wine by the Elders of the Church. The
Communion was probably taken sitting (Daniel iii. pp. 161,
162). Whilst this is being done a Psalm is sung or a suitable
passage of Scripture is read aloud (p. 60). After it a Thanks
giving is made of a simple and natural character, and the
whole concludes with the Aaronic Blessing (p. 52).

It is hardly necessary to point out the bareness, harshness,
and narrowness of this formula, which has unfortunately
taken root in some of the strongest, though not the largest,
Christian communities, and has fostered in them a spirit
often of antagonism and antipathy towards other bodies. Yet
we must be thankful that it has been instrumental (as in
Scotland) in keeping up a certain affection, though a distant
and awful affection, for the Sacrament, and a belief in it as a
means of grace and a real partaking of Christ. Sometimes
Presbyterians living in England put our people to shame by
the regularity of their communions and the carefulness of
their preparation.

Nor must we omit to notice the important movements in
the direction of Liturgical revision which have taken place in
the " Reformed Churches" both in France and Switzerland
and in Scotland. The Calvinist models being rather in the
way of Directories than of complete Formularies, and per
mitting freely the extempore element, it has been possible for
ministers of these countries to publish and use new forms,
which have in many respects returned to the older Liturgies,
without contravening their own principles. I refer parti
cularly to the Neufchatel service as amended in the beginning
of the last century, to the remarkable Liturgy published by
the great French preacher Bersier in 1888, and to the yet
more important efforts of the "Church Service Society" in the
Scotch Establishment. The Eu^oXoytov first published in

132 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

1867 is now, as I learn from the Bishop of St. Andrews, used
extensively in the Kirk of Scotland and without opposition.
It contains (e.g. in its fifth edition, 1884) an Order for the
Celebration of the Lord s Supper or Holy Communion which
certainly exhibits traces of its Calvinian parentage, but is
evidently modelled on the ancient Liturgies. 11 Let me re
commend a fuller treatment of this subject, which is of great
interest, to some of our younger clergy as a subject for a book,
like that for which we have to thank Mr. Swayne, written as
you will remember at my suggestion.

Some have gone so far as to say that Calvin s doctrine of
the presence of Christ in the Sacrament and our reception of
Him there, differs very little, if at all, from the Anglican
doctrine. No doubt Calvin s doctrine was very different
from the mere " nuda commemoratio " of Zwinglianism, with
which some among us have perhaps ignorantly associated it.

11 The Scotch traditional form may be found in A Collection of
Confessions of Faith, Catechisms, Directories, Books of Discipline,
&c., of public authority in the Church of Scotland, 2 vols. Edinb. 1722,
in the Book of Common Order or the Order of the English KirJe at
Geneva whereof John Knox ivas Minister: Approved by the famous
and learned man John Calvin, dated Geneva Feb. 1556. It is of
course very like Calvin s own. The rubric directs all to sit at the Com
munion, vol. ii. p. 452. The Directory for the Publique Worship of
God, London 1645, also deserves study. It orders frequent Communion,
and in the prayer before the sermon it directs the minister to pray " for
" the Propagation of the Gospel and Kiugdome of Christ to all nations,
" for the conversion of the Jews, the fulnesse of the Gentiles, the fall
" of Antichrist, and the hastening of the second coining of our Lord"
(p. 20). It is of course Calviuist in its general form, but has some
beautiful parts. The Ei&gt;xoh6yiov referred to in the text has now the
the following title, A Book of Common Order ; being forms of prayer,
and administration of the Sacraments, and other ordinances of the
Church ; issued by the Church Service Society, fifth edition, revised
and enlarged, William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh & London,
1884. The first edition contains a useful analysis of different services,
and to it (p. 34) I owe my knowledge of the Neufchatel Service. The
Dutch seem to keep up the reception sitting, and to show the least
advance.

Through the kindness of my esteemed friend Prof. Samuel Berger,
well-known for his history of the Bible in France and similar learned
works, I have copies both of the Reformed (Calvinist) Liturgies and of
that used in his own communion " The Church of the Confession of
Augsburg" in that country : (1) LaLiturgie ou la maniere de celebrer
le service divin dans Veglise de Geneve, Toulouse, 4, 1861, reprinted

Service of the "Reformed Churches." 133

But I cannot believe that a doctrine which is at all adequately
expressed in such a formula as I have described, really
represents the doctrine of the Church of England. Hooker
who began life under Calvinistic influences was naturally
inclined to make the best of it ; and if we said that Hooker s
doctrine of the presence of Christ in the Sacrament was very
like that of Calvin, there could be little to object to in such a
statement. Yet Hooker could not possibly have felt that the
Calvinistic service expressed the fulness and mystery of which
he was conscious, though he might define the " presence" in

from the Geneva edition of 1788. This is Calvinist of the old-fashioned
type. It is interesting as containing a prayer for the Heathen, Jews and
Mahometans, to be said on Monday evening, p. 15. The Festivals of
Christmas, Easter, the Ascension, and Pentecost are also recognised,
and it is implied that there will be a Communion also in September ;
(2) Liturgie pour le service de Dimanche matin et pour la celebration
des Sacrements adoptee par le Synode general officieux des eglises
reformees de France tenu au Vigan 1890, Montauban, Granie, 1891.
It recognises the presence of non-communicants, but gives any who
desire to retire an opportunity to do so. The " fencing of the table" is
retained (p. 23), but it is made less harsh, and the doctrine of the Com
munion is made more attractive (p. 24). It implies that the Communion
" by tables" has partly gone out of use ; (3) Liturgie a Vusage des
eglises reformees publiee par Eug. Bersier pasfceur a Paris, Fischbacher,
1888. This is a very remarkable book and deserves careful study. It
recognises not only the great festivals but the seasons, and has three
lessons for each, morning and evening, and it restores to the people the
duty of responding and brings back to the Commnnion office many of
the ancient forms preserved by ourselves. It has an Invocation over
the bread and cup, with a ritual breaking of the bread and taking of the
cup into the hand (p. 229), and a memorial of the passion and resurrec
tion followed by the Lord prayer. The communicants surround the
table but it is not said whether they sit or stand or kneel ; (4) Liturgie ou
maniere de celebrer le service divine dans I eglise de la confession
d Augsbourg, Nancy, printed by Berger-Levrault and Co., 1887 a
revision apparently of the Liturgie de Montbbeliard of 1741. The
Celebration de la Sainte-Cene reminds us both of the Lutheran and
Calvinist forms. The word altar is used at the beginning. There is
an absolution as well as a confession, and the minister speaks of himself
as ministre ordonne de 1 eglise in giving it. The Lord s Prayer pre
cedes the Institution ; and the words of administration are Scriptural.
Take, eat ; this is the body of Jesus Christ, who was delivered to death
for the remission of your sins, &c. But there is nothing like the same
amount of similarity to the older service which there is in the " Evan
gelical Church," and there is the Calvinist "fencing of the table" before
Communion, and the same sort of long theological exhortation at the
beginning.

134 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

Calvin s terms. Further we must remember that our Prayer-
Book was modified not a little after Hooker s time, and almost
always in a conservative direction. The influence first of
Lutheranism and then of Calvinism passed away, having
always had to struggle against the under-current of religious
conservatism, and that under-current at the last revision
became dominant, though not all-ahsorbing. In order to give
a true account of the Anglican doctrine we must look to the
present Prayer-Book and Catechism, and consider which of
the existing traditional interpretations of the rite best agrees
with them.

Now in our own Prayer-Book we notice that the whole
tendency of the revision has been to give dignity, solemnity,
and joy to that part of the Liturgy which is only used when
there is a Communion. The Lutheran service when there is
no Communion is, as we have seen, nearly as solemn and
festal as when there is one. But the transposition of the
Gloria in excelsis in our book to the end of the service, and the
placing of the Confession and Absolution after the Offertory,
and the introduction of the Comfortable words with their re
ference to our Advocate with the Father just before the
Sursum corda, mark very distinctly that the lifting up of the
hearts to fellowship with the angels is not something to which
Communion is occasionally appended, but is an integral and
essential part of it. This observation seems to me to be
of very great moment to the right understanding of our
Liturgy, as you will easily understand from what I am about
to say.

Nor can anyone fail to perceive that the placing of the
alms and oblations of bread and wine together at the offertory,
which was introduced at the last revision though it might
have been traditional as regards the elements is a very
important recognition of the Eucharist as an offering of first
fruits and a dedication of our life and wealth and all that we
have to God. The verbal oblation that follows, "We humbly
" beseech thee to accept our alms and oblations," is of course
of a piece with it, and refers, as we see by a comparison of the
previous books, to both. So again the distinct specification

Our office contrasted with Luther s and Calvin s. 135

of the manual acts which was made at that time and with
general consent gave emphasis to what was already there,
which is hardly in either Lutheran or Calvinist office, namely,
the definite act of Consecration, the setting apart and blessing
of the bread and wine for the divine purpose of the Sacrament.

The Prayer of oblation that follows Communion is indeed
alternative in its use to the beautiful Thanksgiving, but its
doctrine must be taken to be part of the doctrine of the
Church. There cannot be two doctrines on the subject,
though on one day a formula expressing a certain aspect of
doctrine is permissively exchanged for another.

Let us also look to the Catechism. Now there are two
important elements in the sacrament, on which much and
often painful controversy has been expended, the sacrificial
element and the character of the presence of Christ. These
are both touched in our catechism. The first in the question
as to why the Sacrament was ordained, the answer to which
is " For the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the
" death of Christ, and of the benefits which we receive
" thereby." The second in the question about " the inward
part, or thing signified," the answer to which is "the Body
and Blood of Christ, which are verily and indeed taken and
received by the faithful in the Lord s Supper."

The first answer leads us to think of the memorial of
Christ made before God, and especially to think of it as a
thank-offering, a "sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving."
For a memorial or remembrance of the death alone, without
a remembrance of the benefits which we receive by it, might
lead to merely sad and painful thoughts to the cross indeed,
and to Him who hung thereon, but not to a memorial of the
risen and ascended Christ, whose triumph we expect, while
we note a new step or way-mark along the road to it at every
celebration of the Lord s Supper.

All doctors of English theology reject the doctrine of a
repetition of Christ s sacrifice, and reject the teaching of the
Council of Trent which defines the Eucharist as " sacrificium
vere propitiatorium." But all of them who know what
they are talking about speak of it freely as a commemorative

136 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

and representative sacrifice. I need only quote Bishop
Ridley, one of the bitterest opponents of the Roman mass,
but a man well trained in knowledge of the Fathers. He
defines "our unbloody sacrifice of the Church" as "the
sacrifice of praise and thansgiving," " a commemoration, a
showing forth, and a sacramental representation of that one
only bloody sacrifice, offered up once for all" (Works p. 211).
We need not therefore shrink from such language our
selves unless there is a danger that ill-instructed hearers
may confuse any notion of sacrifice with a repetition of the
one sacrifice, or a claim to make a new propitiation. That is
happily well guarded against by the Introduction to our
prayer of Consecration, but we must be careful, even so, of
conveying wrong impressions to dull or slow understandings.
What then is meant by a commemorative and represen
tative sacrifice ? It surely is connected, best with that part
of the doctrine of the primitive Church and with that part
of the ancient Liturgy which we reserve for communion
times, which recognizes the union of the worship of the
Church on earth with that of the Church in heaven, which
looks to the Stir sum corda as the key note of the whole
action, which regards the presence of angels and archangels
and the whole company of heaven as quite as real as that of
the visible congregation of the faithful. I should say then
that English theology tends more and more clearly to bring
into prominence the principles underlying the Epistle to the
Hebrews and the Apocalypse of St. John as interpreted for
us, to give only a few instances out of many, by St. Irenaeus,
St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, and St. Gregory Nazianzen and
others of the fathers, and by many later writers up to our
own times. St. Irenaeus says, speaking of God s com
mands under the law and the Gospel : " So therefore He
" desires that we too should offer a gift at the altar frequently
" and without intermission. There is then an altar in the
" heavens. For there our prayers and offerings are directed.
: And (he desires that we should offer) at the temple, as
" John says in the Apocalypse, And the temple of God ivas
"opened; and (at the) tabernacle, for behold saith he

The Commemorative and Representative Sacrifice. 137

" the tabernacle of God in which He will dwell with men.
" Of which the (ancient) people received a type, as also the
" prophets prophesied of them as things to come (haer. iv.
18, 6). 12

So St. Cyprian, it seems to me, in his well-known letter on
the offering of the Chalice (ep. 63, 14) not only insists on the
Christian priest doing what Christ did, but thinks of him as
doing, in a representative way, what Christ does. He refers
to our Lord as " the high priest of God the Father," and
speaks of the Christian Minister as " truly performing his
" office in Christ s stead (vice Christ! vere fungitur) when he
" imitates what Christ did. And he then offers a true and
4 full sacrifice in the Church to God the Father, if he so
" begins to offer after the pattern of that which he sees Christ
" to have offered."

This certainly is the meaning of St. Ambrose in an inter
esting passage which comes in, somewhat unexpectedly, in his
book on the duties of the Clergy (i. 48, 248), where he is
speaking of patience under insults. This leads him to treat
of future perfection and of the sort of intermediate place
which the Gospel state has between that of the Law and of
Heaven. " We must therefore seek to attain those things in
" which perfection is, in which truth is. Here (on earth) we
" have the Shadow, here (on earth) we have the Image, there
" is the Truth. The Shadow is in the Law, the Image is in
" the Church, the Truth in heaven. In former times a lamb
" was offered, a calf was offered, now Christ is offered, but is
" offered as a man, and as subject to suffering ; and He offers
" Himself as a Priest, that He may put away our sins : here
" in Image, there in Truth, where He intercedes for us as an
" Advocate with the Father." This passage does not stand
alone, but is closely parallel to another of the same writer s
in his Exposition of the xxxviii th Psalm, 25.

This thought is taken clearly from the Epistle to the

12 The words of St. Gregory .Naziaiizen Orat. 42 in Pascha quoted by
Grabe on this passage are worth comparing : " Let us sacrifice to God
" a sacrifice of praise, at the altar which is above, together with the
" heavenly choir above."

138 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

Hebrews, in which the doctrine of our Lord s High Priest
hood is more thoroughly worked out than in any other of the
New Testament writings. Without going into full detail, it
will suffice to shew that the author considers Him not as a
High-priest seated on the throne of God who has given up
His office, but as one who having offered His sacrifice once
for all, and having taken His seat on the throne, still continues
to plead it, still, that is to say, continues His High-priestly
action. He has entered Heaven and consecrated it anew after
its defilement by the sin of the apostate Angels ; He has
sprinkled the mercy-seat, the throne of God and of Judgment,
with His own blood ; He can never suffer again. But until
the consummation of all things He is still expecting, waiting,
praying, and particularly interceding for us. His mediatorial
kingdom and His High-priestly kingdom are one, and last
without a break from the Ascension to the Day of Judgment.
In this sense Christ is always offering His sacrifice, since He
" ever liveth to make intercession for us" (Heb. vii. 25) on
account of and in virtue of that sacrifice. He is still " a
minister (\urovpy6g) of the sanctuary and of the true
tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and not man," and
inasmuch as He is our High-priest " He too must necessarily
have somewhat to offer" (viii. 2, 3). He is a High-priest
also after the order of Melchisedek, bringing forth bread and
wine, and feeding us from the altar of the heavenly sanctuary.
By Him or through Him we too must " offer our sacrifice of
" praise to God continually, the fruit of our lips giving thanks
" to His name" (xiii. 10, 15). It is true that the author of
the Epistle does not specially mention the point of His
feeding of ourselves with bread and wine as one in which our
Lord is after the order of Melchisedek, and does not say that
the altar of which he speaks (xiii. 10) is an altar in heaven.
But both inferences lie close to hand, and certainly were very
early drawn by the Fathers and the composers of the Liturgies.
Christ as a minister of the true sanctuary has His altar, and
where is that altar except in heaven ? The Apocalypse
implies distinctly that it is there (vi. 9, viii. 3, 5). Hence
the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom has the following prayer in

Union with the acts of our great High Priest. 139

the middle of the Great Intercession, after the Invocation
and before the Lord s Prayer.

[Let us pray] for the venerable gifts now brought before Him and
hallowed. That our merciful God, the lover of mankind, who hath
received them unto His holy and heavenly and spiritual altar, for a
sweet- smelling spiritual savour, may in return send down on us His
divine grace and the gift of the Holy Ghost. 13

The Western Liturgies have expressed this thought less simply in
the prayer Supplices te rogamus which runs as follows :

"We numbly beseech Thee Almighty God ; command these gifts to
be carried by the hands of Thy holy angel to Thy altar on high in the
presence of Thy divine Majesty, that all we who shall have received the
all-holy Body and Blood of Thy Son by partaking at this altar, may be
fulfilled with all grace and heavenly benediction. Through the same
our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

The wording of the Latin prayer is ambiguous, since " His
holy angel" may be either Our Lord Himself " the angel of
mighty counsel" or one of the angels. It was probably on
this amongst other accounts that the prayer was dropped in
our service-book, though some expressions from it have been
incorporated in the prayer of oblation (as it is called) after
the Lord s Prayer. It would have been a great help to our
devotions if the prayer could have been so transformed as to
convey the true and full idea without uncertain phraseology.
It would I venture to think have by its very mystery,
suitable to this wonderful action, supported the existing tone
of the Office and would have helped to rebuke mere common
sense and logical analysis, and have checked the attacks of
rationalism and the secret inroads of superstition. 14

13 Hammond Lit. p. 117. The passage may possibly have been sug
gested by that in the Clementine Liturgy, where it is found in the
Deacon s bidding prayer. It runs thus : " Again and again let us
pray to God through His Christ, on behalf of the gift that has been
brought before our Lord God, that the good God may receive it through
the mediation of His Christ at the altar which is in the heavens for a
sweet-smelling savour." ibid. p. 20.

14 There is a very interesting and full comment on this prayer in
Paschasius Radbertus de corpore et sanguine domini viii. 2, 3, 6, &c.
P.L. 120 col. 1287. There is matter in this treatise of a doubtful
character tending to the superstitious of a later age, but this part is
apparently more original and important than the rest. It was written,
I believe, in A.D. 831 and before his controversy on the subject of
the Lord s Supper with Ratramnus.

140 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

The other most difficult point is the question of Christ s
presence and its relation to the elements. I have already
spoken of the general doctrine of the Church on this
mysterious subject (pp. 109, 110). With regard to our own
Church it is clear from the sentence of the Catechism, which
I have quoted, that she believes and teaches her children to
believe in a " taking" of the Body and Blood of Christ, as
well as an inward reception. The taking is of course spiritual,
that is it is only possible in virtue of our possession of an
immortal spirit, capable of holding converse with God.

There are many things of this nature in human life. You
can give to a man a position or a possession which none but
a man endowed with reason and with a spiritual nature can
hold, but the thing given exists outside of him. You can give
him possession of gold or land which would be worthless to
an inferior animal. You can give him honour and dignity.
But he takes the land or the honour as a thing outside himself.
Something similar is the way in which, in virtue of our
spiritual nature, we take the body and blood of Christ.

But what is it that assures us that we have the right to
expect this gift to be ready for our taking ? It cannot surely
be the mere imitation of Christ by the priest s action. It
must be through the presence of Christ promised to two or
three gathered together in His name. The same thought of
His High-priestly life in heaven, and of our rising up for the
time to be members of the congregation gathered round Him
in heaven, which helped us in our explanation of the Church s
sacrifice, can alone help us here in our explanation of the
virtue in the simple material substances of which we partake.
He is present invisibly, but full of life and power ; present by
the operation of the Holy Ghost. We do not understand
what the manner of the Holy Spirit s work is, but its result
certainly is to bring Christ s presence to us, to bring us close
to Him. He is present then as High-priest and as King, and
He gives us His body and His blood, under the forms and
symbols of the gifts brought out by His type Melchisedek.

We do not adore the gifts, but we adore the giver. We
see the gifts, but our whole attitude of mind is heavenly not

Omissions of matter in the older Liturgy. 141

earthly, spiritual not local and temporal. We therefore make
our worship a heavenly and spiritual worship, not an earthly
and carnal one.

2. The general structure of our service compared with the
older Liturgy.

If we compare our office with that previously in use,
particularly in our own Church of Sarum, we shall find (1)
some things omitted, (2) some things transposed and altered,
and (3) some things added. I will mention some of the
more prominent and striking changes under the three heads.

(1) Among the omissions we may reckon as the most
striking the absence of any directions as to the use of the
Psalter or any variable anthems or hymns ; the reduction of
the number of proper prefaces from ten to five ; the omission
of all mention by name of angels, saints, and other departed
persons in the fixed portion of the service, or of prayers for
their intercession ; the omission of the use of incense and of
moveable lights in the hands of ceroferarii ; of the washing
of the priest s hands and of various benedictions and
crossings, and of the prayers which refer to the sacrifices of
Abel, Abraham, and Melchisedek, and which petition that
the oblations may be carried by God s holy angel, to His
altar on high (sublime), in the presence of His Divine
Majesty ; of the saying of the Agnus Dei privately ; and of
the fraction and commixture of the consecrated elements
which was accompanied by a remarkable prayer ; of the use of
the pax or pax-bred, which was kissed before the Communion ;
and of the washing of the priest s fingers and of the chalice
before the end of the service.

I do not count among the omissions the absence of a
reference to the two stationary lights or to the mixed chalice,
because the first (though customary) were never mentioned at
all in any Sarum rubric, MS. or printed, as far as I know,
and the ceremony of the act of mixing the chalice was not
mentioned in any Sarum MS. or printed book up to 1500.
Their lawfulness or unlawfulness among us has to be

142 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

determined mainly on other grounds ; nor does the singing
of the Agnus or of other hymns at Communion time, or the
washing of the vessels after service, appear to me to be touched
by this omission, unless all hymns are prohibited, and no
necessary action, preparatory to or consequent upon the
service, may be done in Church.

Most of the omissions which I have named are so marked
that they must be considered to be equivalent to prohibitions,
at any rate as regards the prayers to be said by the minister.
But it can hardly be supposed that because certain Psalms or
Hymns were dropped and not made imperative and necessary,
therefore all Psalms and Hymns were to be for ever
prohibited. The absurdity of such a conclusion is evident
when we observe that it would render it impossible to sing a ,
Psalm or Hymn before the sermon or during the offertory.
The use of Psalms and Hymns in the Communion Office, and
specially as an Introit and during Communion time, is one of
the most primitive customs and has long prescriptive use
among ourselves. They may clearly be sung, but at sea
sonable places and times so as not to interrupt the service.

(2) With regard to transpositions and alterations, some of
the most noticeable transpositions are the removal of the
Gloria in Excelsis from the beginning to the end of the
Office, the separation of the Lord s Prayer from the consecra
tion and the placing of the prayer generally called the
Prayer of Oblation after instead of before Communion. This
latter prayer, however, beginning " 6 Lord and heavenly
Father," is not an exact counterpart of anything in the old
service-books, but is made up of expressions borrowed from
many sources, partly from Holy Scripture, partly from the
ancient Canon, partly from a prayer said by the priest after
the dismissal of the people. It distinctly recognises the
Sacrament as a " sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," words
on which, e.g., Bishop Ridley laid great stress; 15 but it adds
to the Commemorative Sacrifice, that which is specially

15 The phrase "sacrifice of praise" is from Heb. xiii. 15 and the second
prayer of the Sarum and Roman Canon, "Memento Do mine famiiloruni
" famularumque tuarum N. et N. et omnium circumstantium quorum

Transpositions and alterations. 143

fitting to be thought of after Communion, namely, the
sacrifice of " ourselves, our souls and bodies," now mystically
united with our Saviour.

So also the Lord s Prayer, though we must regret its
separation from the Consecration as an unnecessary break
with tradition, comes in very aptly as the first expression of
our joy and peace after Communion. It follows the principal
act of the service, just as it does in the Baptismal Office, the
Confirmation Office, the Marriage and Burial Services, &c.
The object of the Reformers being to bring out the im
portance of the act of Communion, which had been almost
wholly lost or at any rate entirely thrown into the shade by
the prominence given to the idea of sacrifice, they very
naturally made this alteration at the time. We may justify
it as being always needed as a safeguard against the tendency
to make the memorial of Christ independent of the use of the
Sacrament. Until we say the Lord s Prayer we feel
instinctively we have not finished the principal action.

The alterations are many of them minute and difficult to
point out in detail; but it must not be thought that the
language of the Roman and Sarum Liturgy was very highly
coloured, and specially connected with the doctrine of tran-
substantiation. There are certain doubtful expressions in the
Canon or Prayer of Consecration, but much of it, as the
Reformers often pointed out, protests tacitly against medieval
glosses and errors. The prayer which answers to the Oriental
Invocation and to that in our own consecration prayer, is
really inconsistent with transubstantiation and is open to no
objection on the score of doctrine. It runs thus in English :.

" This oblation therefore of our service and of that of Thy whole
" family, we beseech Thee O Lord graciously to accept ; and to "dispose
" our days in peace, and to bid ns be delivered from eternal damnation,
" and be numbered among the flock of Thine elect. Through Christ
" our Lord, Amen.

tibi fides cognita est et nota devotio : pro quibus tibi offerimus, vel qui
tibi offerunt, hoc Sacrificium laudis pro se suisque omnibus," &c. See
Ridley s Worlcs, Parker Soc. pp. 211, 216, 217, and cp. Scudamore
N.E. p. 771. The Council of Trent condemns those who say that the
sacrifice of the mass is " only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving,"
possibly referring to the English Reformers. Sessio xxn, Canon III.

144 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

" Which oblation, we beseech Thee, O Almighty God, do Thou
" in all respects bless, approve, ratify and make reasonable and
" acceptable, that it may become to us (nobis . . fiat) the Body and
" Blood of Thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ,"

This phrase " become to us" (nobis Corpus et Sanguis fiat)
reveals the primitive doctrine, of which our Church has taken
the other side or converse, expressing identically the same
truth, in her Invocation " that we receiving these thy creatures
" of bread and wine . . . may be partakers of His most
"blessed Body and Blood." So again, after the words of
institution have been recited, to which as we have seen the
Roman Church practically attaches all the virtue of the
consecration, and with which it connects the change wrought
in the elements, the following prayer is offered by the Priest.
It is a prayer, we may remark in passing, which recalls the
breadth of the memorial of Christ in a manner which we
must regret to have lost in our own office (Uncle et memores,
&c.):

Wherefore, O Lord, we Thy servants, together with all Thy holy
people, calling to mind at once the blessed passion of the same Thy Sou
Christ our Lord, and His Resurrection from the dead, together with
His Ascension into Heaven, offer to Thy excellent Majesty of Thine
own gifts and bounties a pure, a holy, a spotless sacrifice, the holy bread
of eternal life, and the cup of everlasting salvation.

Here the hostia, though consecrated, is still called Bread
which is inconsistent with its being Bread only in appearance,
as the doctrine of Transubstantiation teaches.

So again in several places the presence of other Communi
cants and their participation in the chalice is clearly implied
and indeed expressed, and so the practices of private masses
and of the denial of the cup to all but the celebrant are
tacitly condemned.

Thus the difficult prayer, to which we have referred, about
the carrying of the gifts by the hands of God s holy angel to
the altar in heaven a thought going back to the time of St.
Irenaaus, and possibly a tradition from the school of St. John
the seer of the Apocalypse has the words " that all we (quot-
" quot) who by partaking at this altar shall receive the most
" sacred Body and Blood of Thy Son, may be fulfilled with
" all grace and heavenly benediction."

Doctrine of tJie Roman Canon. Additions. 145

So again the "nobis fiat," "that it may become to us,"
teaches the same truths ; and the prayer of Commixture also :

" Let this most holy union of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus
" Christ be to me, and to all who receive it, health of mind and body
" and a healthful preparation for attaining unto eternal life."

This is the Sarum prayer ; the Koman is different and is a
little shorter, but implies the same thing :

" Hsec commixtio et consecratio Corporis et Sanguinis Domini nostri,
" fiat accipientibus nobis in vitam seternam Amen."

The word " consecratio " here is very remarkable, and
suggests that we have here a fragment of another Liturgy
incorporated without sufficient reflection (p. 116, n. 58).

(3) The number of actual additions is not great, but they
are important. They are practically seven in number, excluding
the exhortations ; and all of them are valuable and helpful :

i. The introduction of the Ten Commandments, no doubt
intended to make the preparation of Communicants more
real and to be a sort of safeguard against unworthy reception,
when the system of private confession fell into disuse.
This is a kind of union of the nine Kyries, which were
in the old service and that of 1549, with a perpetual lesson
from the Old Testament, a tenth being added to sum
all together. There seems some likelihood that they were
adopted from a Keformed Strasburg Liturgy, though they had
been used in this country before the Keformation as a basis
of teaching, and recited in Church a certain number of times
in the year. 16

ii. The placing of the Alms on the Holy Table. This, as I
have before said (pp. 85 and 89), was not a primitive custom.
In our first Prayer-Book it was ordered that the Communi
cants themselves should come forward and place their offerings
in the poor-men s box, which then, under the Injunctions of
Edward VI., was "set and fastened near unto the high altar." 17
In the second book "the Churchwardens or some other by

16 Cp. Scudamore N.E. 225.
17 Injunction 19 in Cardwell Doc. Annals i. 18.

146 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

them appointed" were to " gather the devotions of the people
and put the same into the poor men s hox." This was the
rule till the last revision, when the present ruhric was adopted
from the Scotch Liturgy. The custom, though not primitive,
is beautiful and expressive, and is Scriptural inasmuch as it
follows the rule " To do good and to communicate forget not :
for with such sacrifices God is well pleased" (Heb. xiii, 16).

iii. The Comfortable Words appeared first in the Order of
1548, and have been used ever since. The idea of them
seems to have been taken from Hermann s Consultation, in
which three out of the four are joined with two others in a
list of texts, one of which was to be said between the Con
fession and Absolution at the beginning of the service. 18 The
place in which they appear among us after the absolution and
before the Sursum corda, is very suitable, and is an extremely
beautiful feature of the English office.

iv. The prayer of humble access so called from the title
given to it in the Scotch office. This also is a feature first
introduced in the Order of 1548. It takes the place of a
private prayer often said by the priest, as a transition, between
the Sanctus and the Canon. 19 It is important theologically
as implying the interpretation of the discourses at Capernaum
in St. John vi., which I have assumed in our first address
(p. 13).

v. The Fraction in the Institution. This was not explicitly
ordered in our Prayer-Book before 1662, but it is probable
that, at least in many churches, it was a traditional usage,
dating from long before the Reformation. 20 It was one of the
additions to the Book of Common Prayer which was made at
the last revision by common desire and consent both on the
part of Churchmen and Puritans. The Puritans as repre
sented by Baxter said in their exceptions against the Book of
Common Prayer, "We conceive that the manner of the
consecrating of the Elements is not here explicite and distinct
enough, and the minister s breaking of the bread is not so
much as mentioned" (Cardwell Conferences p. 321). It was

1M Pp. 347 foil. ed. 1548. 19 Scudamore pp. 535, 544.

20 See Chr. Wordsworth Historical Notes p. 8, 1891.

Seven noteworthy additions. 147

equally desired by Bishop Cosin (Works v. 516) as " a needful
circumstance before the Sacrament."

vi. The Thanksgiving after Communion. This is a beauti
ful prayer composed for the first Book of Edward VI., and
was the only post-Communion collect given in that book. It
is to be regretted that the or between it and the previous
prayer was not changed to an and. A move in this direction
has been recommended by both our Convocations in the
Report dated 1879. That of York would make the use of
both obligatory, while that of Canterbury would permit one
or both to be used.

vii. The final Benediction. Such a blessing had not been
usual in the Latin Church before the Reformation. It was,
however, an ancient custom in the East, and had probably
been so also in the West. 21 Mr. Scudamore well says, " The
" post- Communion Blessing of our own Church is at once
" the grandest and the most calmly solemn extant. The
" former part of it, which is derived from Phil. iv. 7,
" concluded the Order of the Communion put forth in 1548.
" The second part was added in 1549. It was of very ancient
" use in the English Church, having been the conclusion of
" every Episcopal Benediction given between the Lord s
" Prayer and the Agnus throughout the year. It is probable
"that these were still employed in England, though they
" had long been disused in the Church of Rome, so that our
" Reformers were here again retaining a well-known usage of
" the National Church." 22

3. On the Frequency of the Celebration of the fiord s Supper,
and on the Rules as to Communion.

When we look into our Prayer-Book, whether in its final
revision or in any of the earlier editions, we find no explicit
rules as to the number and frequency of the celebrations of
the Sacrament. What we do find are rubrical directions
regulating the Communion (1) of the Priest ; (2) that of the
Clergy generally, where they are living together in any

21 See Scudamore N.E. p. 801. - Ib. p. 803.

148 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

number ; (8) that of the Laity. These rules, it will be
found, rest upon an assumed rule as to the frequency of the
celebration, which is not expressed but clearly understood,
and indeed implied in the Collects, Epistles and Gospels
which precede. The first it will also be seen is restrictive,
the second and third are imperative.

The directions to which I refer are contained in the first
rubric of the Office, and in several of those which follow at
its close :

So many as intend to le partakers of the Holy Communion
shall signify their names to the Curate (that is Incumbent or
Officiating Minister) at least sometime the day before.

This is the first rubric of the office ; the final ones run as
follows :

1. Upon the Sundays and other Holy-days (if there le no
Communion) shall be said all that is appointed at the Communion
until the end of the general prayer [For the whole state of
Christ s Church militant here on earth] together with one or
more of these Collects last before rehearsed, concluding with the
Blessing.

2. And there shall be no celebration of the Lord s Supper
except there le a convenient number to communicate with the
Priest according to his discretion.

This number is afterwards defined, in No. 3, as three at the
least.

4. And in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and Colleges,
where there are many Priests and Deacons, they shall all receive
the Communion with the Priest every Sunday at the least, except
they have a reasonable cause to the contrary.

8. And note that every Parishioner shall communicate at the
least three times in the year, of which Easter to le one. &c.

These rubrics clearly assume that as a general rule there
will be a celebration every Sunday or Holy-day, at which the
Priest will as a matter of course communicate, and at which
every Parishioner (not under sentence of excommunication or
guilty of some open sin) has a right to receive the Sacrament,
on condition of his sending in his name to the Minister of the
Parish on the previous evening. The words if there be no

Frequent celebrations intended. 149

Communion, to communicate with the Priest, shall receive the
Communion with the Priest, imply that the Priest is as a
matter of course ready and desirous to have a celebration and
to communicate himself on those days for which Collects,
Epistles, and Gospels are provided, and in the octaves of the
great Festivals ; but the Church to avoid the abuses of pre-
Reformation sole Communion makes it necessary for him to
have the company of a certain number of fellow -worshippers
and communicants. It also provides that he should be pro
perly prepared by knowing who are going to communicate
with him, and that he should not suddenly have to exercise
discipline, by meeting with some notorious evil-liver pre
senting himself to receive without warning. Assuming all
this, the Church enjoins a certain rule as to frequency of
communion on the part of different classes of persons, besides
the Priest, viz., other Clergy and the Laity generally.

Unfortunately the obvious distinction, between the implied
rule as to the celebration of the Lord s Supper, and the ex
pressed rule as to the number of communions to be made by
individuals, has been too often lost sight of : and I am afraid
that if some of our candidates for ordination, and others, were
asked what was the rule of the Church as to the number of
celebrations, they would reply by giving the rule as to the
number of communions to be made.

But a very slight knowledge of the history of the period of
the Reformation, and a recollection of previous custom, will
enable us to interpret aright these and other rubrics on which
habit has put a mistaken gloss especially if we begin by
studying the Order of 1548 and the fuller form of 1549.

Up to that date the custom had been for the priest to
celebrate and communicate daily, but for the people to com
municate only once a year, viz., at Easter, and usually it
would seem after or apart from the Mass in which the priest
had communicated. 23 Thus the celebration had been almost

23 See Canon T. F. Simmons Lay Folks Mass Booh pp. xxviii. and
297, E. E. Text Soc. 1879. The Booh of Ceremonies or Rationale
written in Henry VHIth reign, between 1539 1543, describes the
Mass at length, but without any reference to the act of communion on

150 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

wholly divorced from the actual thought of communion on
the part of the people.

The practice as far as we can gather was for the priest to
consecrate as many of the prepared wafers as he thought
would he sufficient for the Communion of the people, and
then reserve them in the pyx till after Mass or till a wholly
different day. When therefore the Reformers returned to
the primitive customs of communion in both kinds, and of
ministration in the vulgar tongue, with a view to attract more
communicants to the Holy Table, it was natural that they
should also introduce a rule about the communion of different
classes of the people. Now, as we have said, when the Com
munion order was published in 1548, the priest communicated
daily, and therefore a rule that the offer of communion should
be made " immediately after the Communion of the priest"
(warning having been previously given by him) implied at
any rate a possibility of very frequent and indeed of daily
communion. This was more distinctly expressed in the
rubrics of the first book of Edward VI., which came into force

the part of the people (Strype Memorials i. p. 289 ed, fol.). The
Primer of John Hilsey, Bp. of Rochester, published by Cromwell s
authority in 1539, contains an Instruction of the Manner in hearing
of the Mass which is equally silent (Burton s Three Primers Oxf.
1834) and indeed speaks only of " hearing and seeing the blessed sacri
fice," p. 406 foil. The Communion Order of 1548 has a rubric as
follows : " The tyme of the communion shalbe immediatlie after that ye
priest himself hath receaved the Sacrament, without the varying of
any other rite or ceremony in the masse (until other order shalbe
provyded) but as heretofore usuallie the priest hath done with the
Sacramente of the body, to prepare, blesse and consecrate so much as
wyll serve the people : so it shell yet contynue still after the same
inaner and fourme, save that he shaU blesse and consecrate the
byggest Chalice," &c. The words " any other rite or ceremony"
seem to imply that there was a variation introduced as to the time of
communion, and sanctioned by this particular order. The third and
fifth articles of the Devon Rebels in 1549 run as follows : " We will
have the mass in Latin as it was before, and celebrated by the priest,
without any man or woman communicating with him." " We will have
the Sacrament of the altar but at Easter delivered to the lay-people ;
and then but in one kind." Though these rebels were ignorant people,
they probably represented the custom of the country correctly enough.
See Cranmer s Works, Parker Soc. 2 pp. 169, 173. See also Canon
Chr. Wordsworth, Historical Notes on the Archbishop s " Judgment"
pp. 13, 14, Longmans, 1891.

Change at the Reformation. Calvin. 151

on Whitsunday, 9th June, 1549, where mention is made of
daily Communion in Cathedrals, and of Communion on
Sundays and holydays in Parish Churches. 24 These rubrics
are discussed at some length by Bishop Beveridge in his
Necessity and Advantage of Frequent Communion (Works,
viii. pp. 557 foil.), and I find that he has drawn from them the
same conclusions that I have done. It is equally clear from the
writings of the Reformers themselves that this was their own
mind, and that it was felt to be an innovation by the people,
and was met with a great deal of positive reluctance and even
opposition. Not only did Calvin insist upon weekly com
munion at the least as the right thing to set before the
people, 25 but what is much more to the purpose Abp. Cranmer
spoke strongly in the same sense in his ansiver to the fifteen
articles of the Devon Rebels who had made the following one
of their demands: "We will have the sacrament of the
" altar but at Easter delivered to the lay-people ; and then
but in one kind." 26

24 " In Cathedral Churches or other places where there is daily Com-
" mimion it shall be sufficient to read this exhortation above written,
" once in a month. And in parish churches upon the week days it may
be left unsaid.

"And if upon the Sunday or holyday, the people be negligent to
" come to the Communion : then shall the Priest earnestly exhort his
" parishioners to dispose themselves to the receiving of the holy coin-
" t inunion more diligently," &c.

25 See Calvin Institutiones IY. xvii. 44 foil. In 46 he says : " Sane
" haec consuetude quae semel quotannis comrnunicare iubet certissinium
" est diaboli inventum. . . . Longe aliter factum oportuit : singulis
" ad minimum hebdomadibus proponenda erat Christianorum coetui
" mensa Domini, declarandae promissiones, quae nos in ea spiritualiter
" pascerent : nullus quidem necessitate cogendus, sed cohortandi omnes
" et stimulandi : obiurgandus etiam ignavorum torpor, omnes gregatim,
" ut famelici, ad tales lautitias convenirent."

26 The rising began on Whitsun Monday, 1549 (the day after the
Prayer-Book became compulsory), and was distinctly in favour of the
old service books and ceremonies, the six articles, &c., and against the
new. Messrs. Gasquet and Bishop go so far as to say, " the imposition
of the book of the new service was only effected through the slaughter
of many thousands of Englishmen by the English Government helped
by their foreign mercenaries," &c. Edtvard VI. and the Boole of
Common Prayer, p. 254, 1890. The slaughter was deeply to be re
gretted, but the rising was not a mere petition, but an actual armed

152 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

Cranmer in his answer says, " What injury do you to many
" godly persons, which would devoutly receive it many times,
" and you command the priest to deliver it them but at
" Easter ! All learned men and godly have exhorted Christian
" people (although they have not commanded them) often to
" receive the communion. And in the apostles time the
" people at Jerusalem received it every day as it appears by
" the manifest word of the Scripture. And after, they re-
" ceived it in some places everyday; in some places four
" times in the week; in some three times ; some twice ; com-
" inonly everywhere at the least once in the week." He
then goes on to urge that frequent communion is the sign of
the spirituality of an age and vice versa, and to remind the
rebels that even the decrees of the ancient councils, which
they desired to have restored, required the people to commu
nicate more than once in the year.

I need not multiply similar passages from such eager
reformers as Bishops Jewel and Hooper and Dr. Thomas
Becon. It is even more interesting to find so strong a puritan
as Thomas Cartwright arguing against private communion of
the sick on the ground that if they had received it, as they
ought, once every week, when they were in health, they would
not be so disquieted during times of sickness. Abp. Whit-
gift 27 naturally replies to this, in defence of the Communion
of the sick, by saying, " To receive once every week is a thing
"to be wished. And yet notwithstanding, were not the com-
" munion to be denied to the sick; for it often cometh to
" pass, that men through infirmity and sickness are not able
" to come to the church in whole months and years, whom
" this weekly communicating could nothing help," &c.

It cannot then be doubted that the rule of the Church
which has been in the book since the 2nd Prayer-Book of

rebellion, involving the siege of Exeter and bringing the country into
serious danger. See the details in Fuller s Church History book vii.
pp. 393 foil. ed. 1655. The way it is referred to by Gasquet and Bishop
is misleading.

27 Works Parker Soc. vol. ii. p. 556 ; cp. Jewel i. pp. 17, 136, 157,
169 ; Hooper ii. 129 ; Becon iii. 381.

Cranmer and others on frequent Communion. 153

1552 " that every Parishioner shall communicate at the least
" three times in the year, of which Easter to be one," was a
real minimum as regarded individual communion, and not in
any sense whatever a guide as to the number of celebrations
of the Sacrament. It was the old rule of the Council of
Agde, 28 in Narbonne, A.D. 506, adapted to English use, viz.,
that "laymen who did not communicate on the Lord s
" Nativity, at Easter and Pentecost, should not be believed
" to be Catholics nor reckoned among them." This Canon
had been adopted by Abp. Ecgbriht of York in 740, and
substantially re-enacted in later canons or laws of 1009 and
1017, under the form " at least thrice in the year," and again
by the Synod of Lambeth in 1378 with a mention of the
Feasts which were of obligation. Thus there was good
English precedent for the number of times fixed, and it was
clearly not realised that an adverse fate would for a time
attend the rule, similar to that which had followed the rule
of the Fourth Lateran Council, 1215 A.D., which enjoined
Easter Communion under a penalty. It was no doubt
thought that the Communion being offered very frequently
would attract at least the few communicants required by the
rubric every Sunday and Holy-day. At first it was attempted
to lay this duty upon those whose turn it was to offer for the
elements in their course, according to the rubric of the
Prayer-Book of 1549. 29 The result however unfortunately
was to make the individual minimum to a great extent a

28 Cone. Ayathense canon xviii. Brims 2 p. 150, " Saeculares qui
" natale domiui, pasclia et pcntecosten non communicaverint catholici
" non credantur nee inter catholicos habeantur." For a large number
of other references to early canons see Scudamore N.E. pp. 931 936.

29 See the two rubrics at the end of the office beginning " And foras-
" much as the Pastors and Curates," &c., and " Also that the receiving,"
which substitute this offering for the elements for the old customary
offering of the price of the " holy loaf" or eulogia. The second of
these rubrics provides that these people or their substitutes shall be
prepared to communicate. The last words, " And the Priest on the
" week-day shall forbear to celebrate the Communion, except he have
" some that will communicate with him," imply that a Sunday without
a celebration was a thing which had never occurred to the minds of
those who framed the book.

154 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

parochial maximum, at least in many country places, and to
reduce the numher of celebrations in such places to three or
four a year, a result worse than that attained by the Church
of Home before the Reformation, at any rate as regards " the
" continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of
" Christ, and of the benefits which we receive thereby."

This was no doubt specially due to the terrible laxity and
neglect of the period of the Civil War and the Commonwealth,
a laxity which could even permit so pious and learned and, in
his way, Churchlike a Presbyterian as Richard Baxter to
abstain from administering the Sacrament for eighteen years,
though a preacher all the time, and in consequence of which,
according to Bishop Patrick, the Sacrament was laid aside in
many parishes for nearly twenty years. 30

Yet even before that time a monthly communion was
rather the ideal practice, as in the Chapel of Bishop
Andrews and the Church of the community of Little Gidding,
Our own George Herbert speaks of it as the proper thing to
aim at, writing in 1632, " Touching the frequency of the
" Communion the Parson celebrates it, if not duly once a
" month, yet at least five or six times in the year : as at
"Easter, Christmas, Whitsuntide, afore and after harvest
" and the beginning of Lent" (Country Parson ch. 22).

We need not therefore be surprised if such an earnest and
exemplary Churchman as Dr. George Bull (afterwards
Bishop of St. David s), who was Rector of Suddington from
1658 1685, was not able to bring the number of Com
munions to more than seven in the year, in that small
parish a number which Robert Nelson, his biographer, tells
us was oftener than is usual in little villages (Life p. 62, ed.
1713.

What the custom of country places was to which Robert
Nelson alludes we learn from a charge of Bishop Seeker s, to
the diocese of Oxford, in 1741, from which it appears that
the minimum of personal communions had become in many of
them the maximum of parochial celebrations, viz., Christmas,

M See a large quantity of evidence in Scudainore p. 833.

The minimum of Communions becomes the rule. 155

Easter and Whitsuntide. " One thing," he suggests, " might
" be done in all your parishes : a Sacrament might easily be
" interposed in that long interval between Whitsuntide and
" Christmas. If afterwards you can advance from a quarterly
" Communion to a monthly, I have no doubt you will." 31
This was all, you see, that he ventured to urge even in that
Diocese, which contained the University and City of Oxford.

Yet no doubt both he and Bishop Bull would have agreed
with Bishop Beveridge who was as nearly as possible Bull s
contemporary in desiring to see the rule of the primitive
Church, and that desired by our reformers, restored. Bishop
Beveridge writes in his treatise on the Necessity and Advantage
of Frequent Communion, already cited : " According to the
" order and discipline of our Church, if a sufficient number
" of parishioners, against whom there is no just exception,
" desire to receive it every Sunday, or every day in the year,
" the Minister of their parish not only may, but as I humbly
" conceive is bound to, consecrate and administer it to them :
" the want of such a number being, as far as I can perceive,
"the only reason that can ever justify the omission of it."
(Works viii. p. 567 foil., first printed in 1710).

Hence in the Visitation Articles of his successor in the see
of St. Asaph, Bishop Fleetwood, which he tells us were gene
rally the same with those of his honoured predecessor, we
find a very excellent question which I myself intend hence
forth to adopt. Not only does he ask the ordinary question,
" Doth (your minister) administer the Sacrament of the
" Lord s Supper so often, that all his Parishioners may
" Keceive at least three times in the year ?" but he adds " Is
" he always ready to administer it when there is a sufficient
" number of his Parishioners duly prepared and desirous to
" communicate with him ?" 82

It is therefore my plain duty, my brethren of the clergy,

31 Bishop Seeker s Second Charge as Bishop of Oxford, quoted by
Abbey and Overton English Church in the Eighteenth Century, ii. p.
15, Longmans 1878.

32 Appendix to Second Report of the Ritual Commission, p 666

1868.

156 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

to urge you that you should endeavour as you find oppor
tunity, to sanctify and brighten every Sunday and Holy-day
in the year with a celebration of the Lord s Supper, and this
not only on the ground of primitive custom, such as we have
considered in the third Address (p. 57 foil.), but as carrying
out the spirit of the English Reformation. You will be
cautious, in making changes, not to advance hastily or
rapidly to a position from which you have to beat a retreat.
I am thankful to find that, in 506 Parishes from which I have
returns, there are already 173 (Wilts 100, Dorset 73) in
which the weekly communion is established. The rest, with
only 18 exceptions, have a fortnightly or monthly communion.
These 18 are mostly quite inconsiderable places such as we
have in this Diocese in rather too great numbers for a
healthy ministry. But there must be a large number of the
315, which have not yet got beyond monthly or fortnightly
communions, in which a weekly communion could well be
introduced if the Clergy thoroughly understood their duty
and the Laity realised their privileges.

I would say then to the Laity of these Parishes, which
make up more than three-fifths of our total number, that it
is your part to claim your rights as members of the Catholic
Church of Christ in this country ; and I feel sure that very
few if any of my brethren of the Clergy will feel anything
but joy and delight when they hear you advance the request,
and " signify your names," according to the rubric, for
weekly communion. To the Clergy I would say, in the
words of one of our old Prayer-Books, that they should be
ready to give communion not only on Sundays, but " as oft
" as their Parishioners shall be disposed for their spiritual
" comfort to receive the same" (Rubric of 1549). I conceive
that if at any time three or more Parishioners desire to com
municate we have no right to refuse them provided they give
due notice before hand. Speaking to the Laity, I would
say, we are your servants for Jesus sake attending upon the
Lord on your behalf for this very thing ; and we ought not
to feel it strange if called upon, upon a week day, on the
occasion of a family or village festival, or even such a simple

Our duty to offer frequent celebrations. 157

domestic event as the going forth of a son or daughter into
the world to service outside the Parish, much more on the
occasion of a wedding or funeral, or the going out of a party
of emigrants, to celebrate the Holy Communion for a few
members of our flock. I feel sure that, if this were tho
roughly well understood and acted upon, the number of our
communicants, and their zeal and devotion too, would very
much increase. The Church in Wales, led by such men as
Bishop Beveridge, has I believe a better record in this matter
than we have.

The weekly celebration will I feel assured be very soon the
rule rather than the exception. The occasional celebration
in the Church will I hope soon be considered no unnatural
or improper thing for even a humble layman or woman to
ask for in times of health, just as now they ask it, naturally,
in their own homes in times of sickness.

The number of times that individuals should communicate
is a different thing, and must depend upon many varying
circumstances. I should certainly wish that members of our
Diocesan Guild should, as a rule, communicate monthly,
and should aim at becoming worthy of weekly communion.
But I would urge that a great point should still be made of
the Quarterly Communion, and that it should be preceded
(as I have previously desired p. 23) lay a public preparation
and confession of sin. To many people, especially those to
whom slow mental processes are habitual, it is quite possible
that a Quarterly Communion, well prepared for, may be still
the best and most religious discipline of which they are
capable.

4. On the Hours of the Celebration, and on the Presence of
Non-communicants.

We have considered, in the third address, the reasonable
and natural process by which the Holy Communion from
being a night service passed, probably about the beginning of
the second century A.D., to an hour just before and then just
after sunrise (p. 58 foil.) Very soon the fitness of this hour
as a matter of devotion and as a help to the spiritual life

158 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

became evident to the writers and thinkers of the Church.
The earliest reason given for it is that of St. Cyprian, who is
meeting the difficulty which some felt about drinking wine
early in the morning. "It is said by objectors that the
" Lord offered the mixed cup not in the morning but after
" supper ? Ought we therefore to celebrate the Lord s sacri-
" fice (dominicum) after supper, so as to offer the mixed
" cup at our repeated celebrations of the Lord s Sacrifice
" (frequentandis dominicis) ? It was right that Christ should
" offer about eventide, that by the very hour of His sacrifice
" He might show the sunset and the evening of the world.
" . . . But we celebrate the Resurrection of the Lord in
" the morning." (Ep. 63, 16).

This reason is still one of the best that can be given to
remind us that it is a risen, a living, and life-giving, and not
a dead or dying Christ that we go to meet, that we should
be like the holy women eager to give the first fruits of the
day to God, and go forth with joy to hail His presence early
in the morning. Two other reasons have from time to time
been added : the first that the communicant is then in the
fittest state of preparation, with mind untroubled by worldly
business or pleasure, with intellect clear and feelings keen
and fresh, and with the body prepared by sleep and abstinence
from food to be under the control of the mind. The second
is closely akin to the first, and really hardly separable from it,
that thereby we show greater honour to the sacramental food
by taking it before all other, just as we put the business of
religion in the forefront of the holy day. 33

All three are good reasons for an early celebration, and to
them we may add, in favour of reception fasting, that the
body is thus made to take its part in the preparation in which
the soul has confessed its sinfulness and unworthiness. We
approach the Lord s table as penitents, as having, by our
misuse, lost the full right to the enjoyment of God s crea
tures. But I deprecate too great scrupulousness and severity,

33 Canon Luckock The Divine Liturgy pp. 19 foil, rather presses the
difference, but I think with hardly sufficient cause.

Reasons for an early hour. Evening Communions. 159

of which indeed (you will pardon me for saying it) we see but
little signs about us. I have already ventured to give a
counsel to the Clergy on the subject in my address to the
Synod of November, 1888, which is in your hands, and I
need not repeat it now. 34 The same counsel may well be
extended to the Laity.

What then shall we say as to the practice of evening
communions ? I do not think that I can do better than to
incorporate our Archbishop s judgment on the subject, in
wilich he places it in the same category as the other custom,
which has grown up in a certain portion of the Church, of
attendance without communicating. As far as we Clergy are
concerned it is imprudent in us to recommend or introduce
either. They are dangerous expedients to draw men to the
memorial of Christ, not justified by a partial and seeming
temporary success.

" I cannot hold that attending at the Eucharist without receiving it
" tends to increase reverence. I can place this in no other category
" than that of Evening Communions. Both tend to familiarity along
" with diminishing responsibility. Both belong in their origin to weak
" ages of the Church. The one dates from times when the dreadful

34 " With regard to the Holy Communion, I cannot advise the Clergy
always as a matter of duty to receive it fasting. The reasonableness of
fasting Communion is, first, that it reminds us that we approach the
Lord s Table as penitents, as those who have in some degree forfeited
the right to the good things of this life, and come to ask pardon at the
foot of the cross ; and, secondly, that we thereby show our intention to
offer our bodies, as well as our souls, a living sacrifice to God. All here
will remember Jeremy Taylor s words in his Holy Living (chap, iv.,
sec. 10, 9, p. 349, ed. Parker, Oxford, 1857), " Let us receive the
consecrated elements with all devotion and humility of body and
spirit ; and do this honour to it, that it be the first food we eat and
the first beverage we drink that day, unless it be in case of sickness
or other great necessity ; and that your body and soul both be prepared
to its reception with abstinence from secular pleasures, that you may
better have attended fastings and prayers. 1 " When it is an early
celebration at 8 or 8.30 or 9 o clock we should naturally wish to follow
this rule. But I doubt very much whether a clergyman, whose duty
may be to take Sunday school at 10 and church at 11, followed by a
celebration, with a sermon, lasting up till one o clock, can adequately
perform all these duties, together with those of the afternoon and
evening, if he is fasting till one o clock. I recommend abstinence from
meat and all pleasant food, and just a sufficiency to enable the work to
be done." (Salisbury Diocesan Gazette, vol. i., pp. 143 foil. 1888.)

160 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

habits of half-converted hordes, which accepted the cross as a necessity
or as a charm, made sincere Christian priests shrink from urging
actual participation amid lives of unredeemed excess. The other
belongs to the milder time which is timorous of urging the least touch
of discipline, even if it be but the discipline of early rising, and which
gives, when the day is over, that which should have consecrated the
Lord s own day and the new week from His resurrection hour. Half
the Christian Era is against the first indulgence ; the whole of it is
against the second. Further, I ask, can there be much doubt of the
shape and turn which might at last be given to the Communion after
Evensong, if it should become more general ? It would be the
reversal of every aim of those who seek to bring it in. Its natural
heir, if that other practice of non-communion also became general,
would be the Benediction Service, the element-worship, of the
Church of Rome." (Seven Gifts, pp. 166 foil. 1885).

I should not, however, like to be supposed to prohibit those
who are habitual Communicants from remaining from time to
time when they do not feel prepared themselves to communi
cate, or have communicated earlier in the day. Nor can it be
said that either at the Reformation (except for a few months),
or at any time since, was it thought wise to force all who may
be present to communicate, or to drive away out of the Church
those who may be or feel themselves unworthy. This caution
against pressing Communion promiscuously on the people
appears very plainly in Archbishop Hermann s Consultation, 8 *
the influence of which on the English office is well known,
and in Cranmer s answer to the third Article of the Devon
rebels. He says in this reply, " Although I would exhort
" every good Christian man often to receive the Holy
" Communion, yet I do not recite all these things to the
" intent, that I would in this corrupt world where men live so
" ungodly as they do, that the old canons should be restored
" again, which command every man present to receive the
" Communion with the priest : which canons, if they were
" now used, I fear that many would receive it unworthily."
(Works P. 8. ii. p. 172). Cranmer and Hermann clearly

36 He advises not " to trouble any man with untimely rigorousness,"
but " howsoever the rest be handled in the Congregation at this time,
" they nevertheless that shall be admitted to the Communion, as soon
" as they have made their oblation, must go together to that place, that
" shall be appointed unto them nigh the Altar." Ed. 1548, p. 361.

Withdrawal of Non-Communicants. 161

supposed that others would be present besides communicants
according to previous custom.

It was no doubt under the influence of these feelings that
an Exhortation was introduced in the Order of 1548, sug
gesting to notorious sinners not to communicate, and a rubric
was added (for the first and only time in the history of the
Keformed Prayer Book), bidding the priest "pause awhile to
" see if any man will withdraw himself." But this, we may
readily suppose, was soon found to be an unpractical and in
convenient measure, since no one was likely to accept the
position of being such a notorious sinner ; and in the Prayer-
Books that followed in 1549, 1552, 1559, and 1604, although
the general sense of the exhortation was retained in the sen
tence beginning, " Therefore if any here be a blasphemer,"
&c., no direction was given to make the pause for withdrawal,
and the pause was probably not made.

In 1662 a further change was made, and this sentence,
including the reference to Judas, was transferred from the
Exhortation at Communion time to the Exhortation at the
time of giving previous warning of Communion. Probably
in 1662, after the break of the Civil War and Commonwealth,
not only had celebrations become much rarer, but all who
attended on those occasions were communicants as we
should judge, amongst other things, by the great size of the
chalices of that date. There was therefore little necessity to
suggest to anyone that he should not receive, much less that
he should withdraw.

It must therefore be admitted that there is no command or
even suggestion to any of the congregation to withdraw in
our present book, nor is there a convenient place for it.
Certainly they ought not to go out before the prayer for the
Church Militant, as that is to be said in their presence on
days when there is no Communion. And it does not seem a
fit place for them to go out after that Prayer, when the more
sacred part of the rite has begun. Yet this is what is
customary among us; and where the custom is deeply rooted,
I should not advise you to set yourselves obstinately against
it. Let the pause, if it be necessary to make it, be accom-

162 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

panied either by silence or by very soft music, not a stirring
march to excite a desire to be in motion, but a gentle pensive
interlude, encouraging to rest and meditation. If possible,
bring the communicants up, according to the old rubrics, into
or near to the chancel, that all the movement may not be in
one direction, but that the instinct of following may draw the
timid and the weak along with the strong and the determined.
Teach those who withdraw, especially the children, to do so
very solemnly and reverently, and the elder ones sadly.
Especially let all the officers of the Church, the Churchwar
dens and Choir, be very careful not to make any display of
withdrawing. It may be a very desirable thing that those of
them who intend to communicate should come and kneel at
the altar rails, as without doubt the rubrics suppose some of
the congregation to do.

For my own part, I much prefer that, where there is a Com
munion after the Morning Prayer and Litany, the break
should be made before the Communion Office begins, and
should be signified by the tolling of the bell for a few minutes,
as is now done in the Cathedral. The sermon may either be
after the Litany, or it may be in the Communion Office itself,
an address to the faithful there assembled, from the chancel
step perhaps, which would often be a delightful opportunity
of speaking heart to heart, and with a different accent of
sympathy and insight from what it is possible always to adopt
towards a mixed congregation.

5. On the Private Preparation for the Celebration and
Communion,

The communicants, as we have seen, are required by the
rubric to give in their names overnight, probably as a matter
of discipline ; and, though this is now rarely done, it is a
custom which, if it were voluntarily revived, would be of
great advantage both to clergy and people. It would enable
the clergy to meet their flocks with greater joy and to minister
to them with greater fervour, and to intercede for them with
greater defmiteness, if, for instance, they could lay upon the
holy table a list of those who had " signified their names."

Private preparation. 163

This was no doubt intended that they should have either
before them or in their memory, when they were bidden to
pray for "this congregation here present," just as in the old
service-books space was left for the names of those who had
offered the bread and wine for the communion, or who had
made a special request to the priest for his intercession. 86
Such a signification of names on the part of the laity would
also lead them to a more earnest and determined preparation,
and when once it became habitual it would lessen the shyness
which now often at the last moment turns back many of our
young people from Communion. The mere fact that this
friend and that relation had sent in their names would
encourage waverers.

I have spoken already several times of public parochial pre
paration (pp. 23, 127). I need not I hope say much of the
private preparation of self-examination, to which all the
manuals in use give helps of various degrees of practical
value. We have paid attention to this subject in our Diocesan
Guild Manual to which I must refer you for details, only
explaining, firstly, that it is necessary to be very careful to
keep a tender conscience as to shortcomings, sins of neglect
and omission, as well as positive offences ; and secondly that
self-examination as to God s mercies and our own indebted
ness in the way of thanksgiving and praise is as much a part
of this great duty as self-examination as to sin. No doubt
the duty of loving God " to worship Him, to give Him
thanks and to put my whole trust to Him" as the Catechism
teaches us, is somewhere or other touched upon in all
manuals ; but it should occupy a much greater space in them
than it usually does.

The clergy should also instruct their people to make use

36 See Maskell Ancient Liturgy pp. 122 foil. ed. 3, 1882, and
Thalhofer Kath. Lit. ii. p 204. The prayer ran in the Sarum use
" Memento Domine fanmlorum famularumque tuarum N. et N". et
omnium circumstantium quorum tibi fides cognita est et nota devotio ;
pro quibus tibi offerimus, vel qui tibi offerunt, hoc sacrificium laudis
pro se, suisque omnibus," &c. The diptychs containing names of saints,
benefactors, great persons connected with the Church, &c., were here
also recited in ancient times. See below p. 178.

164 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

of what we generally call the ante- Communion service as a
time of preparation for Communion, whether they are going
to communicate the same day or not. The commandments
broadly and spiritually interpreted make an excellent outline
for self-examination, and this use of them should be taught
to children when they are instructed in their Catechism ;
so that for instance when they hear the commandment thou
slialt not steal they may think of all kinds of dishonesty-
waste of time and money and unfaithfulness to the steward
ship of life as well as of actual " picking and stealing."

6. The Preparation of tlie Elements.

I need not I feel sure urge my brethren of the clergy to be
very reverent in their own preparation of the elements, and
not willingly to let this preparation pass into other hands,
and certainly not into careless ones. It is very desirable to
train up some thoroughly trustworthy person, the parish
clerk or the schoolmaster, or it may be one of the church
wardens or sidesmen, if willing, to act as sacristan, thatjs as
an assistant in this preparation and as deputy in absence.
Sacristan is only another way of writing and pronouncing
sexton, and the sexton might often do more as a church
officer if he were reminded of the meaning of his name.

If a mixed chalice is used, as I find to be the case in 180
Churches and Chapels in the Diocese (out of 596), it should
be mixed either in the vestry or at the credence table, but as
we have said (p. 88) before the service begins. In this case
the chalice should not be put upon the holy table until the
offertory, when it may either be brought in from the vestry or
brought or taken from the credence after the bread has been
presented. The custom of placing the (empty) chalice upon the
holy table before the service begins is simply the custom of
what was called low-mass, which is not really the best pre
cedent for us to follow. It is much better to follow in this
and some other matters the custom of the more solemn
service in the pre-Reformation Church, which retained more
of the primitive practice than the so-called low-mass.

The objection may be made, " What is to be done if we

Preparation of the elements. Division of service. 165

have made a miscalculation as to the number of communi
cants ?" I can only say, put what amount of wine will
certainly be required into the chalice before the beginning of
the service, adding a certain amount of water ; not more than
half the amount of wine seems to be the old rule. Then if
you find that more is wanted it can easily be added before
consecration, either at the offertory or later.

The English ritual lays greater stress upon the " breaking
of bread " than the older offices did. In fact it is the
only one which has the order for a fraction at the time
of the recital of our Lord s acts and words of Institu
tion. It is therefore necessary that either the whole mass
of bread should be capable of being broken, or that one
piece of it should be of larger size than the rest. The practice
of presenting a number of totally severed fragments or squares
of bread, or a number of small wafers or cakes, seems also
less suitable and symbolical than that, which we use for
instance in the Cathedral, of presenting squares of bread, half
severed, by cross cuts, into 25 or 36 lesser squares. To
prepare this should be one of the duties of the minister and
his sacristan. This is better probably done at home than in
the vestry.

7. On the parts into which the Service is divided, with sugges
tions as to its meaning and the method of performing it.

(1) On the Division of the Service.

The service is divided into two principal parts : I. The
preparation for the Sacrament, and II. The consecration and
administration of the Sacrament, or to use technical language
the Pro- Anaphora and the Anaphora. The first reaches up
to the end of the Comfortable words, the second begins at
the Sursum corda.

Each of these again is divided into three sections making
six in all :

I. (1) THE GENERAL PREPARATION, consisting of the Lord s
Prayer and Collect for Purity, the Commandments and Kyries,
Collects, Epistle and Gospel, Creed and Sermon.

166 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

(2) THE OFFERTORY and Prayer for the Church Militant.

(3) THE PREPARATION OF COMMUNICANTS, consisting of the
two Exhortations, the Confession, Absolution and Comfortable
words.

II. (4) THE CONSECRATION, beginning Lift up your hearts,
and containing the Ter-Sanctus, the prayer of humble access,
and the prayer of Consecration.

(5) THE COMMUNION, first of the clergy and then of the
people.

(6) THE THANKSGIVING, consisting of the Lord s prayer and
Thanksgiving, the Gloria in Excelsis, and the Peace and
Blessing.

In explaining the service to candidates for confirmation
it is desirable to make them learn this division by heart.

(2) On the posture of the celebrant and people at different
parts of the Service.

The Priest or Minister is directed at the beginning of the
service to stand at the North-side of the Table. I shall not
discuss the meaning of this rubric further than to say that
I believe it was felt, or rather known, to be ambiguous at the
last revision, but that those engaged in the revision could not
come to a conclusion which would be satisfactory to all
parties, and so left it in statu quo, for usage to interpret, as I
hope it now has done. It is ambiguous certainly now, con
sidering the present position of the tables, which is universally
altar-wise among us. For, if you take the position at the
North, you do not stand at the side ; if you take your place at
the side, you do not stand facing the South. I am well aware
of all that can be said as to the equivalence of side and
end/ but I am not convinced by it. I have, therefore, ever
since I was Canon of Rochester, stood to commence the ser
vice at the north part of the west side ; because I believe this
to be the best interpretation by which, under the circum
stances of our having to use a table-wise rubric for an
* altar-wise position of the table, we can conform to the law
of the Church.

Posture of celebrant North side. 167

But I quite agree with what our Archbishop has laid down
that the position of the Priest at the north end is a liturgical
usage well established by custom, 37 as it is dear to many of
us by the example of those we have loved and reverenced
both in the history of the Church and in our own experience.
It had also a reason of convenience, when the church was
long and the view of the holy table was obstructed by the
pulpit and reading desk, since it enabled the priest to be seen
by some of the congregation. Far be it from me to seem to
speak against it. I trust that this matter will soon be felt to
be one on which bitterness of feeling is wholly out of place,
either on the part of clergy or their congregations, much
more of single members of such congregations.

Nevertheless I feel bound to say, as Bishop, that if a place
is taken to begin the service in front of the holy table, as
is the case in more than half our churches and chapels, 38
it should be that which I have described, viz., at or in front
of the north-west corner or Gospel side. This seems to me to
be the y pres or nearest possible interpretation, and therefore
to be more correct than a commencement at the Epistle side
or in the centre. In the Sarum rite the prefatory matter was
said in the centre at the step, and then the Priest began the
Introit or Officium at the Epistle side. But this was not
universal in England, since the monks of Westminster and
the Carthusians began at the Gospel side or north side, and
the Carthusians continue to do so to this day. 39 The matter
is comparatively unimportant, but it is desirable to tend at
least towards a common usage, and I trust that I shall not
be considered unduly interfering with your liberty if I urge
those of you who take an eastward position to begin as I
have described. The north part is algo the part of greater
dignity.

As to the posture of the celebrant afterwards, where the

37 Read and others versus the Lord Bishop of Lincoln, Judgment
Nov. 21, 1890, p. 36, MacmiUans.

58 In 314 | 590 in the first part and 349 | 590 in the second part of
the service.

39 See Ohr. Wordsworth Historical Notes, &c., p. 21 note, quoting
Dr. Wickham Legg.

168 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

eastward position is taken, it appears to me that the Creed
and all that follows should be said in the centre, since the
Priest at the Creed is speaking for and with all the people.

The * north-side rubric is not the only ambiguous or
imperfect one. There are occasional uncertainties as to
standing, sitting and kneeling, both of clergy and people.
The priest is directed to stand at the beginning of the service,
and no direction is given to him to do otherwise, except at
the Confession and the Prayer of humble access. As the
Confession may be said by one of the ministers/ that is to
say, by another priest or deacon who may be present, it has
sometimes been doubted whether the celebrant also should
kneel : but it is clear, I think, that he should do so. For
the next rubric runs Then shall the Priest (or the Bishop,
being present) stand up and, turning himself to the people,
pronounce this Absolution. He clearly cannot stand up unless
he has been kneeling down ; so that if these closely connected
rubrics are to be construed together all the clergy must kneel,
not only the one who says the Confession. There is a similar
doubt about the celebrant s posture in communicating. For
my own part, I have always been accustomed to kneel and
shall continue to do so ; but I cannot find fault with anyone
who thinks it more ritually correct and primitive to stand.
We have seen that this was once the posture of all communi
cants, and that the standing posture of the priest is a survival
of this ancient custom. On the other hand, it appears to me
more quiet and solemn to continue kneeling until the time
comes to administer to the people. Nor do I think that we
can so well teach our people the value of this reverent posture
unless we set them an example in our own persons. It is
noticeable that Bishop Andrewes in his Visitation Articles
(1625) required the minister to kneel as well as the people,
and so did several others : Bishop Cosin, at one time at least,
desired to alter the rubric so as to make it clear that the
priest was to kneel. 40

At the Epistle it is customary for the people to sit, though

40 See for Bishop Andrewes 2nd Report of Ritual Commission, p.
497 ; cp. Scudamore N.E. p. 696, and Cosin s Works, v. 517.

Posture of celebrant and people. 169

it is not prescribed. But this was the ancient use apparently
for both clergy and people before the Reformation, 41 and
should be continued. The Gospel is according to the rubric
to be heard standing. There is a doubt as to the Gloria in
Excelsis. When it was said at the beginning of the service,
as in the Latin Liturgy and in 1549, the people probably
stood, and so they commonly do now or till lately used to do.
Either posture seems allowable one on the ground of custom,
the other on the ground of following the rubric. For the
rubric, no doubt, supposes them to continue kneeling after
reception and to receive the Blessing, though it is not
distinctly ordered.

The Epistle is by custom read at or in front of the south
west corner of the Holy Table, and towards the people, and
by any of the ministering clergy, not only by the celebrant.
All three usages are taken from previous custom, and are not
clearly defined by the rubric. The rubric relating to the Collect
bids the priest " stand as before," i.e., at the beginning of
the service, and therefore not with his face to the people, and
still at the North side. That for the Epistle merely says,
Immediately after the Collect the Priest shall read the Epistle,
saying, &c. If we had not custom to interpret this rule, we
might construe it as a prohibition to a deacon or second priest
to read the Epistle, or to read the Epistle or Gospel towards
the people, or to read the Epistle at the south side.

The Gospel is also read by custom towards the people, but
at the north-west corner. The Gospel may, like the Epistle,
be read by a deacon, and, as you will remember, each of them
in his ordination receives special authority to read it "in the
Church of God," and one is selected to do so immediately
afterwards.

There seems no reason why in some of our long churches
the Epistle and Gospel should not be read from the chancel
step or lectern, or even from the pulpit, provided it is really
expedient so to do. In old days they were constantly read
from the same ambo or pulpit, but the Epistle from a lower,

41 See the Sarum Rubric for the Clergy, ed. Dickinson, p. 586.

170 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

the Gospel from a higher step. On this account, where there
are several steps in front of the Holy Table, it is customary
for the Epistoler to stand lower than the Gospeller. But
these are matters of slight moment. In old days, when the
men and women were on different sides of the Church, the
Gospel was read specially to one and the Epistle to the other,
but differently at different dates. Now they should be read
facing the mass of the people.

(3) Notes on the meaning of different parts of the service and
on the method of performing it.

I. 1. THE GENERAL PREPARATION.

There is no break in the preparation service, nor is there
any authority for omitting part of it, such as the Ten Com
mandments and the Kyries. To do so is a distinct loss,
since they form a fit subject for personal self-examination and
confession in regard to different Christian duties. I trust
that you, my brethren, will set a good example by trying to
make the whole conduct of the service full of meaning, both
to yourselves and your flocks. I can hardly suppose that any
one of you could omit the Collect, Epistle, and Gospel, yet I
believe it is occasionally done in some Dioceses at early
celebrations or week-day celebrations. It is all the more
needful to insist on these things, since tlie practice of more
frequent Communion, now happily common, is not always
accompanied by, or even compatible with, the same careful
and extended preparation and meditation on Holy Scripture
which was usual a generation or two back. We want these
elements in our service more than ever.

The Lord s Prayer and the Collect for Purity are, as I
have said, a sort of preface to the service, the more sacra
mental and public part of which begins with the Let us pray
before the Collects. It is for this reason that the first Lord s
Prayer is generally, and perhaps always, said by the priest
alone. The general rubric at the beginning of the Lord s
Prayer, in the Morning Prayer, might, indeed, if strictly
interpreted, be supposed to command repetition aloud by the
people, since the expression, " wheresoever else it is used in

The General Preparation. Collects. 171

Divine Service," is of the most general character. Mr.
Scudamore holds that this applies to the present case. But
it does not seem worth while to disturb the prevailing custom.

The Lord s Prayer that follows the Communion is the
Lord s Prayer of the service, and there is only one in other
Liturgies. This is a good reason for treating our first Lord s
Prayer as preparation.

The Collects were originally the prayers said while the
people were collecting or gathering together in preparation
for the procession to the church where the station of the
day was to be held. 42 " Collecta," as a substantive, is a
doublet of Collectio, just as Missa is of of Missio one
signifying at first the beginning, the other the end of the
service but both have gradually enlarged their meaning.
Collect has come to mean any prayer complete in itself,
as opposed to a Litany, not necessarily a short one ; just as
Missa or Mass has come to mean a service, or a prayer or
series of prayers. The word Collect is not generally found
in the modern Latin Service Books, but Oratio is used
instead, as it was generally in the Sarum books. It is
curious that Collecta appears only in the York use in the
parallel rubric. It must, however, have been a term in com
mon employment, being found in the Book of Ceremonies.
written just before the Keformation, 43 and it is used occa
sionally in other Sarum rubrics.

In the old English uses, several collects were said in series
of three, five, or seven. One of these no doubt was often a
collect for the Sovereign. We cannot suppose that it was so
always in England, though a Scotch Council ordered it toge
ther with one for the peace of the Church, and Abp. Islep in
1359 issued a mandate " de exorando pro rege." 44

42 Of. Innocent III. de sacro alt. Myst. ii. 27, P. L. 217, col. 814,
" Orationes quae circa principium missse dicuntur collects vocantnr (lie
" then gives the popular reason) . . Proprie tamcn collects dicuntur,
" quae super collectam populi fiunt, dum colligitur populus, ut ad
" stationein faciendam, de una ecclesia procedant ad alteram."

43 Ap. Strype Eccl. Memorials, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 421, ed. 1822, and see
above, p. 149 note and Appendix I.

44 Condi Scoticanwn A.D. 1225 canon 70, Wilkins Cone. i. p. 617.

172 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

The Collect for the day follows that for the Sovereign, and
is itself followed by any memorial that may belong to the
season or to the festival in the octave of which it falls. If it
is desired always to say three Collects, one of the six which
are appended to the office, may of course be used, as it may
also be used in Morning or Evening Prayer, or in the Litany.
One very easy method of Liturgical enrichment would be to
add collects to the present appendix for various persons and
occasions, but until this is done I see no reasonable objection
to the use in this place (under special authority and on special
occasions) of any of the collects of the Prayer-Book, including
those supplementary to the Morning and Evening Prayer and
those in the occasional offices. The Church of Ireland has
set a good example of adding two to our six, one a commemo
ration of the departed, adapted from the Burial Service, and
the other for the Clergy, from the Ordination Service. The
collect Almighty Lord and Everlasting God which is from
the " Order of Confirmation " will naturally be used at the
first Communion of those who have been lately confirmed.

In giving out the Epistle or Gospel we are ordered to say
The Epistle is written, 1 The holy Gospel is written. We
often hear, The Epistle is taken, &c., but this is wrong.
The phrases are not identical. Taken would simply refer
to Church authority. Written reminds us that it is inspired
Scripture we are about to hear.

Before the Gospel it is customary to say Glory be to Thee,
Lord. This was not in the rubrics of any of our Sarum
books, though it was inserted in the first Prayer-Book of
Edward VI., and no doubt has been a custom from time im
memorial. The response after the Gospel, Thanks be to
Thee, Lord, or Thanks be to Thee, Lord, for this thy

The collect there mentioned begins with the words " Deus in cuius
manu corda sunt regum." It is undoubtedly the same as that which
appears among the " memoriae communes" of the Sarum Missal p. 828*
ed. Dickinson : " Deus in cujus manu sunt corda regum, qui es
" humilium consolator, et ndeliurn fortitudo, et protector in te speran-
" tiuni ; da regi nostro N". et reginse nostrse N. populoque Christiano
" triumphuni virtutis tuse scienter excolere ; ut per te semper reparentur
" ad veniam. Per Dorninum." For Islep see Wilkins iii., p. 42 foil,
and Johnson s English Canons, p. 417 foil. A. C. L. Oxford, 1851.

Epistle, Gospel, Creed. 173

holy Gospel (as we hear it often in the North of England)
does not seem to have so long a prescription, but it has a
sufficiently long one, and something of the kind is wanted to
separate the Gospel from the Creed. Praise be to thee, O
Christ, the Roman response, does not seem to have been in
use in England. In the Scotch office the Presbyter is directed
to say after the Gospel So endeth the holy Gospel, and the
people to answer Thanks be to Thee, O Lord. The words
So endeth the Gospel are not however found elsewhere, and
they were probably avoided in order to suggest the connection
between the Gospel and the sermon which followed. The
Creed as we have already implied (p. 52) was not used in this
place in the Western Church so early as in the Eastern, and
is by no means universally said in the Latin service now.
We should remember in saying it that it is the only part of
the service in which the word "Z" is used. Faith must be a
personal thing. No other man s or woman s faith, however
much it may help us, can justify and save us. Hence here
and in the Apostles Creed we are taught to say, all together,
Z believe in God. 45

The greater part of this Creed down to the first words
of the third part (the Holy Ghost) was drawn up by the
318 Bishops assembled at Nice or Nicsea, near Constan
tinople, at the first General Council, held in the year A.D.
325 by the authority of Constantine the Great, the first
Christian Emperor. The remainder of the third part (the
Lord and Giver of Life, &c.) was added at the second
General Council held at Constantinople in 381, and both
Creeds were ratified at Chalcedon in 451, at the Fourth
General Council. The words God of God, &c., mean God
born /row or out of God. The words, Being of one substance
with the Father, are of extreme importance, as showing the
reality of and completeness of Our Lord s Godhead. They
are the test words against Arianism, a heresy always ready to

45 We believe is found in the Acts of the Councils, but the Liturgies
called after St. Mark and St. James, and those of St. Basil and St.
Chrysostom read I believe. We believe is introduced into the Scotch
Evxo\6yiov, but does not seem to be an improvement.

174 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

rear its head again. The words in the third part, The Lord
and giver of life do not mean the Lord of life and the Giver
of life, but the Lord Jehovah, one of the three persons of the
Trinity, cp. 2 Cor. iii. 17, " Now the Lord is that [or the]
Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."
The words and from the Son, were added at the provincial
Spanish Council of Toledo, A.D. 589, and did not come into
regular and general use in the Western Church till the llth
century. It is to be regretted that this addition to the Creed
was made irregularly and without general consent. 46 The
words have never been received by the Eastern (Greek and
Russian) Church, but their truth is implied by St. Paul and
St. Peter, who speak of the Holy Spirit as " the Spirit of
Christ" (Rom. viii. 9 ; 1 Peter i. 11), and as " the Spirit of
His (i.e. God s) Son" (Gal. iv. 6). The use of the Creed
should remind us that the Communion is founded on a unity
in faith and in the truth, as well as in hope and love, and
that we have not only to examine ourselves as to keeping the

46 The nearest approach to a re-union of the Eastern and Western
Churches on this subject was made at the Bonn Conference of 1875,
held under the presidency of Dr. von Dollinger. See the Report on
the Resolutions of the Bonn Conference by the Committee of the
Lower House of the Canterbury Convocation, presented May 9, 1876,
in Chronicle of Convocation, and Reunion Conf. at Bonn, 1878, ed.
H. P. Liddon, p. 103 foil. This Conference accepted the teaching of St.
John of Damascus as its basis, and formulated it as follows :

1. The Holy Ghost issues out of the Father as the Beginning, the
Cause, the Source of the Godhead.

2. The Holy Ghost does not issue out of the Son, because there is in
the Godhead but one Beginning, one Cause, through which all that is in
the Godhead is produced.

3. The Holy Ghost issues out of the Father through the Son.

4. The Holy Ghost is the image of the Son, who is the image of the
Father, issuing out of the Father and resting in the Sou as. His
revealing power.

5. The Holy Ghost is the personal production out of the Father
belonging to the Son, but not out of the Son, because He is the Spirit
of the mouth of God declarative of the Word.

6. The Holy Ghost forms the link between the Father and the Son,
and is linked to the Father by the Son.

The definition of the Council of Lyons A.D. 1274 was " Fideli et
" dcvota professione fatemur quod Spiritus sanctus Eeternaliter ex Patre
" et Filio, npn tanquam ex duobus principiis, sed tanquam ex uno, non
" duabus spirationibus sed unica spiratione procedit,"

Creed. Banns of Matrimony. 175

Commandments, but also " Whether we be in the faith"
(2 Cor. xiii. 5), and to remember that it is part of our war
fare " earnestly to contend for the faith once delivered to the
saints" (Jude iii.), which faith is summed up in the Creed.

The Creed is translated from the Latin version in use
before the Reformation with slight exceptions. The words
I believe are added before the article of the Church in the
third part, and the word holy is omitted in the description of
the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, but whether from
accident or design it is not quite certain. The design could
not, of course, have been to suggest that holiness was not a
mark of the Church, which is a preposterous idea in itself, and
is particularly inadmissible, since the word is in the Apostles
Creed. But it may have been a piece of critical revision,
since the word is not found in some at least of the ancient
copies of the translation of the acts of Chalcedon, and per
haps all of the acts of the third Council of Toledo. 47

After the Creed notice should be given of Holy-days, &c.
The rubric should continue, And then also (if occasion be)
shall notice be given of the Communion, and Banns of Matri
mony published : and Briefs Citations and Excommunications
read, &c. ; but the words and Banns of Matrimony published
have been omitted without authority by the printers since
1805, in order to bring it into supposed agreement with an
Act of Parliament, 26 George II., which provides for the
publication of Banns during Evening Service, after the Second
Lesson, in cases where there is no Morning Service. The
Rubric before the Marriage Service has also been altered

47 See Scudamore p. 284 and a fuller article in the Church Quarterly
Review for July, 1879, The Anglican Version of the Nicene Creed,
vol. viii. pp. 372 383. This article points out the books which might
have been used by the Reformers, and observes that in 1552 the clause
whose kingdom shall have no end was added to the English version,
having been omitted in 1549 as not being in the Nicene Creed proper.
For the versions of the Creeds of Nicsea and Constantinople accepted
by the III rd Council of Toledo A.D. 589 see Labb. Cone. v. 1000. The
latter contains the phrase ex patre et filio procedentem. It is
remarkable that our Reformers inserted ihefilioque also in the Litany :
see C.QK p. 382 for other possible traces of the influence of the
Toledo form.

176 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

without authority ; but the omission of the comma after
Evening Service would bring it into agreement with the Act.

2. THE OFFERTORY. The peculiarity of the Anglican rite
is, as we have seen, that it contains a presentation of the
alms as well as of the elements, made by the minister before
the General Prayer, which we usually call the Prayer for the
Church Militant (see p. 84 foil.) This presentation has
gradually grown up. At first, as we have seen (p. 145), the
offerings were placed by the people themselves in the poor men s
box. In 1552 the Churchwardens or their deputies were
directed to gather the devotion of the people and put it into the
box, and mention of the alms was made in the prayer. Finally
in 1662 the Deacons, Churchwardens or other fit person were
directed to receive the Alms for the poor and other devotions of
the people, in a decent bason . . . and reverently bring it
to the Priest, who shall humbly present and place it upon the
Holy Table. This direction was adopted from the Scotch
Liturgy, and is a valuable feature of our service, seeing that
it most strongly reminds us of the duty to consecrate our life
and all our wealth to God. I may remark that the rubric
implies that there is an offertory of alms and other devotions
every Sunday, for the question of there being a Communion
or not is not raised until the presentation of the alms is
provided for.

Then follows the placing of the bread and wine upon the
Holy Table, which certainly ought not to be done sooner,
nor, strictly speaking, ought the chalice to be placed upon the
Holy Table until this point in the service. Convenience, as
in the Koman Low-Mass, has made it almost universal to
place the empty chalice on the holy Table at the commence
ment of the office but this is less correct than the practice
of bringing it at the offertory. As I have said, if a mixed
chalice is used, it should now be taken from the credence or
brought in from the vestry (p. 164). The rule ordering the
presentation of the Elements was in the book of 1549. It
was omitted in 1552 and restored in 1662, when the verbal
oblation was added. That the words in our Prayer-Book to
accept our alms and oblations refer both to the alms and to the

The Offertory. Alms and oblations. 177

Elements is clear from a comparison of the previous books,
which simply had to accept our alms. The addition of the
words and oblations was clearly consequent on the coincident
direction then given for the first time since 1549 for the
priest to place upon the Table so muck Bread and Wine as he
shall think sufficient. If oblations had stood alone it would
have covered both. All alms are also oblations ; but there
are some oblations, like the bread and wine and the offerings
at a harvest festival, &c., which are not alms. 48 I have
already spoken at length (pp. 2732) of the meaning we
may fitly attach to these outward signs, as a consecration of
nature, as a consecration of human life in its different aspects,
and as connected with ancient sacrifice. It is well to bring
before God these thoughts in a practical manner by thinking
of our own daily lives, in all their simple detail, at this point
in the service, when there is generally a little time to spare.

I may also remind you of what has been said of the use of
intercessory prayers for the conversion of Israel, and the ex
tension of Christ s kingdom, before the general prayer for
the Church (pp. 70, 74).

Before actually saying the prayer, the minister may mention
the names of any for whom prayers are specially desired, as
we do in the Cathedral : Let us pray for the whole state of
Christ s Church militant here in earth ; adding Your prayers
are specially desired for N. and N. mentioning the cause,
sickness, or bereavement, or a dangerous journey, &c. When
such prayers are asked, a slight pause may be made (in reading
the prayer that follows) after adversity. If the minister has
received the names of those who have signified their intention
to communicate, as I hope will to a certain extent, especially
on week-days, become the custom, he should lay them open
before him on the holy table with the names of the sick as
Hezekiah laid the letter of Sennacherib before the Lord. It
would also be well to have a parochial or Church kalendar,

48 See an excellent argument on this point, which has been a good
deal controverted, by Canon T. F. Simmons in reply to Dean Howson
in the Churchman for June, 1882 headed Alms and Oblations. He
argues, I think conclusively, that oblations is an inclusive word.

178 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

with the names of the Founders and Benefactors and former
Incumbents of the Church, days of note in its history, &c.,
&c., to remind him of the causes for thanksgiving for all
those who are departed this life in God s faith and fear, as
well as for the living. Such " diptychs," as they were called
in ancient times, contained not only the names of the
departed and of living persons in authority, but also the
names of the Four General Councils, and the names of those
at whose request the celebration was held. They were at
first read aloud by the Deacons before the prayer began.
But afterwards this reading became inconvenient and un
interesting like the recitation of some of the names of
Saints in the Roman Canon and the commemoration became
chiefly mental. Each person may and should make his own.
But the sick and distressed of a congregation seem to have a
right, as I said, to be mentioned aloud before the Prayer, so
that all may know their wants. You should be very careful,
in asking for such prayers, not to introduce irrelevant or
debateable matter, such as may naturally divide the feelings
of a congregation.

3. THE PREPARATION OF COMMUNICANTS.

According to the letter of the Prayer-Book, two exJtortations
ought to follow the general prayer, but in practice the first is
often omitted. Up to 1662, as we have said, this exhortation
contained a " fencing of the table," which has now been
transferred to the first of the Exhortations in giving warning
for the celebration of the Holy Communion (p. 161). At the
same time, the Exhortation to those who neglect Communion
was placed on another Sunday, instead of being used at Com
munion times. This latter exhortation differed somewhat in
its form in 1552 and 1604, but in both books contained words
recommending " departure" rather than to " stand by as
gazers and lookers on them that do communicate," which were
omitted in 1662. No doubt we are to attribute the practice
of withdrawal at this point, of which I have spoken, to the
effects of this exhortation. But clearly this was not univer
sally considered the place for withdrawal, since Marmaduke

The two Exhortations. 179

Middleton, Bishop of St. David s, in 1583, enjoined on his
Diocese, 49 "when there is a Communion, that al the people
" whiche will not communicate ... be commaunded to
" departe for that tyme out of the Churche ; after the generall
" confession made, in the name of the communicantes, and
11 if any be so stubborne, that thei will no departe, then the
" Minister to procede no further in the Communion, but in
" the next consistorie court, complaine of them, as inter-
" rupters and troublers of God s divine service." This order,
however, seems to stand alone, and could hardly have been
carried out.

As regards the two Exhortations now used in the office
itself, the first would no doubt be more often read if it were
possible to omit or change in any way the words about
eating and drinking unworthily and those that follow. But as
it is difficult to obtain authority for such a change, it may
suffice to use the Exhortation less frequently say once a
quarter. It is so full of excellent doctrine, beautifully
worded, that it is a misfortune to lose it altogether, and a
few words of explanation would relieve most minds.

These exhortations presuppose that the communicants have
now gathered near to the Holy Table. The rubric before the
first speaks of them as " being conveniently placed for the
receiving of the Holy Sacrament," that is to say, it supposes
them to be standing in the chancel or choir of the Church
where they have come, according to old custom, to offer their
alms and perhaps also their oblations. 50 The second bids
them " draw near with faith" and take the Sacrament, i.e.,
kneel as near as may be before or round the holy table. In
many places I am glad to know that this custom still pre-

49 Second Report of the Ritual Commission, 1868, p. 426, No. 7.

50 The offering of the oblations by the people could hardly have been
among us a continuous survival from primitive times, but it is said that
it existed in this Diocese in the hamlet of Charlton in the Parish of
Donhead St. Mary, Wilts, up to 1638, when an agreement was entered
into by the rest of the parish, and confirmed and sealed by Bishop
Davenant, 25th May in that year, to supply the bread and wine for
Charlton, Combe and Ludwell. Cp. Scudamore p. 352. There
is a sort of guild of old men and old women at Milan Cathedral (the
Yecchioni ) for this purpose. I have often thought that it would be

M 2

180 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

vails, as it did in Westminster Abbey, at the early celebrations
when I was a boy. 51 I should be glad to see it carefully
preserved and extended. I cannot think that it is right for
people to scatter themselves all over the Church, kneeling
sometimes almost ostentatiously at the end of the nave.

The words in the shorter exhortation about our being in
love and charity with our neighbours take the place of the
old kiss of peace referred to in St. Paul s Epistles and by
St. Peter and described in the earliest accounts of the
Sacrament. They specially distinguish those who are com
municants from those who are not.

I have spoken already of the present position of the
Confession and the Absolution, and of the value of the
Comfortable Words, especially as leading us up to Sursum
cor da. We are to hear our Lord s own voice saying Come
unto me ; we are to think of Him as drawing us up to Him
self where He is ever interceding as our Advocate with the
Father and pleading His propitiation for our sins once offered.

II. THE CONSECRATION AND COMMUNION.

4. THE CONSECRATION. This begins, as in all ancient
Liturgies, with the words Lift up your hearts, and the
response, followed by the Preface and the Sanctus, Ter-
Sanctus, or Triumphal Hymn. This is sometimes called the
Trisagion, but that name is given more correctly to the other
more recent but still ancient hymn, " Sanctus Deus, Sanctus
fortis, Sanctus immortalis, miserere nobis."

The Sursum cor da and the Hymn in which we join as if
we were already members of the Church Triumphant and had
escaped from the bondage of the flesh to unite with angels
and archangels and with all the company of heaven, strike as
it were the keynote and interpret for us all that is to follow.

a good thing 1 to shew the connection of the alms and oblations by letting
the same Church officers bring up both, as is and lias long been done at
Brasenose College, Oxford, by two of the Fellows going out (after pre
senting the alms) into the ante-chapel, and returning with the elements.
There can be no objection to such a usage.

51 See a letter in the London Guardian 10 Dec. 1890 p. 1997 b, where
a number of instances are quoted,

The Consecration. Invocations of the holy Spirit. 181

It is as belonging in hope and assurance to this company that
we can most fitly realise the presence of Christ. And if we
will remember this exaltation of the Church on earth, for the
time, to sit in heavenly places, as at the marriage supper of
the Lamb, we shall not perplex ourselves by the mystery of
how and when and where Christ s presence comes to us in the
Sacrament. He Himself discouraged such questions when
the Jews asked Him at Capernaum, " Rabbi, when earnest
thou hither?" (John vi. 25), and " How can this man give us
His flesh to eat ?" (ib. 52). Like His Incarnation, it is the
work of the Holy Spirit : for He says, "It is the spirit that
quickeneth ; the flesh " i.e., things of sense, space and
time, &c., " profiteth nothing."

We shall do well then to put up a prayer to God for this
quickening of the Holy Spirit somewhat as follows :
" Vouchsafe, Lord, so to bless and sanctify with Thy Word
and Holy Spirit these Thy gifts and creatures of bread and
wine that they may be unto us the body and blood of Thy
most dearly beloved Son." A prayer of this kind has always
been used by the Eastern Churches, and was long in use in the
West. It was in our first Prayer-Book (1549), and is in
those of the Scottish and American Churches : and is a safe
guard against the mistaken idea of a carnal presence.

It is interesting to notice that a similar prayer has been
introduced into the Scotch Evy^o\6yicv, which is used by
Presbyterians, as well as into the Liturgy of M. Bersier,
which is used in some of the French Reformed Churches.
It also finds a place in the Old Catholic service books of
Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. The form in the three
last cases is as follows:- 1 -" Send us therefore, we humbly
" pray Thee, Thy Holy Ghost, the giver of all life and all
" sanctification, and grant that these gifts of the earth may
" be hallowed to be heavenly, glorious, spiritual oblations ;
" so that the Bread that we break may be the Communion of
" the Body of the Lord, and the Cup that we bless may be the
" Communion of the Blood of Jesus Christ." In these five
cases the Invocation precedes the Institution as it does in our
Prayer-Book of 1549, and in the first Scotch office of 1637.

182 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

But in the present Scotch office of 1764, and in the American,
the Invocation follows the Institution as it does in the Liturgy
of St. Chrysostom at present in use in the Greek Church
(cp. pp. 102, 104). Authorities differ as to the proper place of
the Invocation. I do not myself feel strongly on the point,
but think that it is appropriate in either place. 52

We have spoken of the Prayer of Humble Access as an
addition in the English office made with the Comfortable
words in 1548, but partly taken from ancient models. It
was no doubt intended amongst other things to emphasise
Communion in both kinds which was restored at the Re
formation. It refers humbly to the words of the Syro-
Phoenician woman to our Lord about the crumbs under the
Master s table (Matt. xv. 27, Mark vii. 28) and to His own
discourse in the sixth chapter of St. John about eating His
flesh (that is His humanity passing through death) and
drinking His blood ; and reminds us that both are means of
grace to us, that the Body is given for the salvation and
cleansing of our bodies and the Blood for the washing of our
souls. This last thought is probably based on Leviticus xvii.
11, " For the life of the flesh is in the blood : and I have given
it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls ;
for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul" ;
or as in R.V. " that maketh atonement by reason of the
life." Those who communicate only in one kind say that the
whole Christ is in either species, the consecrated bread or the
consecrated wine, and that they " take" both the Body and
the Blood in the bread. But Christ ordered us both to " eat"
and to " drink," not only to " take," His Body and His

52 See Archdeacon Freeman Principles, vol. ii., pt. 2, pp. vii. and
399, 432, &c. ; and the Bishop of St. Andrew s Charge, 1862, p. 20 foil,
and his recent Charge, 1889, p. 9 foil., and his paper on Structural
Arrangement of Communion Offices, put out in 1890. Archdeacon
Freeman insisted on the propriety of the Invocation preceding the
Institution, and Bishop Charles Wordsworth agreed with him, but in
his last paper he says : " The American Church having adopted our
" present Scotch order, rather than that of the former Scotch and first
" English, it seems undesirable to attempt to alter it back again,
" especially as it is supported by Bishop Rattray s authority (see Pref.
" p. xi. and p. 25, seq. Note on St. Cyril}."

The Consecration. 183

Blood. It is therefore clear that those who communicate
only in one kind lose at least some of the grace of the Sacra
ment. We who have this great blessing of full communion
must pray earnestly to use the abundant grace that is given
to us, that our souls may be thoroughly cleansed and our
hearts warmed and .enlivened with the love of Christ, that
His heart may flow into our heart and give us a new heart
and a new spirit.

After this prayer is ended, the Priest rises and carefully
orders the bread and wine for the consecration. This may
remind us (as Bishop Beveridge says) " of God s eternal
purpose and determinate counsel to offer up His Son as a
sacrifice for the sins of the world. 53 Then follows the
Prayer of Consecration, which is said by the Priest alone,
but aloud, and is followed by the Amen of the people, whose
presence and co-operation is recognised throughout in the
words " our heavenly Father," " Hear us," " Grant that we,"
&c. It is said by him alone, for the sake of greater re
verence and solemnity, and as representing Him who trod
the winepress alone, who is the only means of our salvation,
and is now at the right hand of God, our only Mediator and
Advocate. But all must say the Amen fervently and devoutly,
as having their share in the commemoration and repre
sentation of Christ s sacrifice which is now specially made.
(Compare 1 Cor. xiv. 16.)

The consecration prayer consists of three parts (1) the
Introduction, which calls to mind God s love in the Atone
ment once made upon the cross, and never to be repeated
and our Lord s command to make a perpetual memory of it ;
(2) the Invocation, calling upon God the Father to hear us
and to grant that we, by reception of the bread and wine,
may be partakers of our Saviour s body and blood, 54 and (3)
the Commemoration, in which the acts and words of our Lord

53 The Necessity and Advantage of frequent Communion, Works
Yin. p. 603.

54 In saying the Invocation it seems natural to stretch ou.t~.the arras
in blessing what is on the Holy Table, as we usually do at grace before
meals. Cp. Eug. Bersier Liturgie p. 229.

184 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

at the last supper are recited and performed anew before God
and man. These acts and words of His, done once for all
long ago, were the beginning of all the power that is in the
sacrament now and for all time. When He blessed the bread
and gave thanks over the cup, and then delivered them with
the well-known words, He did not merely sanctify the par
ticular loaf and cup which He then held in His hands, but
He gave to bread and wine ever after, when rightly used in
commemorating His death, a new power of communicating
His strength and His love. Just as at His baptism in the
river Jordan He once for all " sanctified water to the mystical
washing away of sins," so at the last supper He once for all
sanctified bread and wine for holy communion of His body
and blood. We have seen that the Kecital of the Institution
has had too great a stress laid upon it, as if it was an abso^-
lutely necessary form (p. 103 foil.) But we cannot but feel
that any Liturgy in which it did not now occur would be de
fective and unsatisfying.

5. THE COMMUNION. We should warn our people to be
careful as they go up to the Holy Table not to be hasty nor
yet to linger behind, but to go as much as possible in the
order that is convenient to others as well as to themselves.
We should teach the young communicants to take care as
they kneel down and get up not to disturb those who are on
each side of them, and not to rise to return to their places
until after their next neighbour has received the cup. We
have spoken of the method of receiving (pp. 113 foil.) The
kneeling posture was at one time a great matter of controversy
and of deep feeling, 55 as is shown by the " Declaration on
kneeling," still appended to the office. Happily any adverse
feeling on this matter has now passed away, and no one can
doubt that experience has justified the order of the Church.
But it should be kneeling, not prostration. The clergy
cannot be expected to stoop in an unseemly way to reach
those who may be almost on the ground. On the other hand
the Clergy, on their part, must be careful not to introduce

55 See for an instance 1 the life of that excellent Irish Churchman,
Mr. Bonnell.

Consecration, Communion and Thanksgiving. 185

even slightly distracting gestures into their administration.
For this reason I prefer to deliver the cup quite steadily
rather than to make a cross in the air with it. We want our
communicants to rest upon the presence of the unseen High
Priest, and to lose consciousness of the visible Minister.

6. THE THANKSGIVING. This begins with the Lord s
Prayer said by all together. Now that our Saviour is espe
cially present with us, and has acknowledged us as His
brethren, through the Communion that He has given us, we
are more than ever bold to say Our Father. As "joint heirs
with Christ," and kneeling as it were side by side with Him,
" we cry, Abba, Father" (Rom. viii., 15, 17.) The Lord s
Prayer here follows the principal act of the service as in the
Services for Baptism, Confirmation, Burial, and others. The
first petition, Hallowed be Thy Name, is for the conversion of
the world, it means " may all men own Thee for their Father
and their God;" the second, Thy Kingdom come, is for the
right government and peace of the world by the submission of
all men to Thy rule, first in the Church militant and then in
the Church triumphant ; the third, Thy will lie done, is for
the sanctification of all men, in heart as well as in act, after
the pattern of the life of angels. Then follow petitions for
ourselves, for our daily bread, especially for our spiritual food ;
for forgiveness on the ground that we are in charity with all
men ; for preservation against too severe temptation, the
danger of which \ve are wise to recognise, even in the highest
moments of spiritual exaltation ; and for deliverance from evil,
especially from the snares of the Devil. The Lord s Prayer
ends with the Doxology/or Thine is the Kingdom, &c. (as in
the morning and evening service after the Absolution, and in
the Thanksgiving of Women) which has been used in the
Church ever since the first century.

We may regret that both the Thanksgivings that follow are
not ordered to be always said, since both are so beautiful.
A friend of mine, now an Indian Bishop, once said to me
that, after long study of Liturgies, all the change he wished
to make in our office was to change or into and in this place.
(See above, p. 147). One Thanksgiving will be read aloud;

186 The Communion Office of the Church of England.

we should say the other privately for ourselves. We have
spoken of the doctrinal importance of the first (p. 135)). It
is usually said on Sundays and great Festivals.

The second prayer is more distinctly one of Thanksgiving,
and is often used particularly on Saints Days as it recognises
the holy fellowship of the faithful in Christ s mystical body.
This is a specially English prayer first composed in 1549.

The Hymn, Glory be to God on High, generally called by
its first Latin words the Gloria in Excehis, now follows. It
was sung before the Reformation at the beginning of the office
before the Collect for the Day. But the necessity of pro
viding an office, part of which might be used without any
Communion, made it natural and proper to move it to another
position. The Lutheran usage of this and the Ter-Sanctus on
occasions when there is no Communion is certainly less
edifying. (See above pp. 127 and 134). The Gloria in
Excelsis is the old Greek morning hymn, based upon the
Song of the Angels at our Lord s nativity, and is as well
fitted to follow the triumphant celebration of Christ s love to
man as to go before it. It may remind us of our Lord s
words at the Last Supper : " Now is the Son of Man glorified,
and God is glorified in him ; if God be glorified in him, God
shall also glorify him in himself and shall straightway glorify
him. ... A new commandment I give unto you, that
ye love one another ; as I have loved you, that ye also love one
another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples,
if ye have love one to another." (John xi ii. 3135.)

The final Benediction consists of two parts The Peace
founded on Phil. iv. 7, and the Blessing. The Peace, which
is a form peculiar to the English service, may remind us
again of the kiss of charity, and should teach us to go forth
with an eager desire to do acts of love to our brethren and
sisters in Christ. (See above p. 147).

The Reformed Offices as used in France and Geneva end as
follows, after the Aaronic blessing : " Go in peace, remember
" the poor ; and may the God of peace be with you all ;" or
" with you and your families now and for ever."

187

APPENDIX I.

ON THE USE OF THE MlXED CHALICE, AND ON THE PLACE AND
TIME OF MIXING IT.

This subject has been touched upon on pp. 15 and 25, and
more fully 85 88, and 164, and it will not be necessary to
repeat what has been there said. Something may, however,
be added on

1. The Jeicish use of a mixed cup at meals and festivals.

2. The early evidence in the Christian Church.

8. The usage in the English Church before the Reformation.

1. The Jewish use of a Mixed Cup.

That our Lord Jesus Christ used a cup of wine mixed with
water is the tradition of nearly all Christian Churches and
the belief of nearly all theologians. This is not a question
which is connected with the possible uncertainty as to the
day on which the Lord s Last Supper took place and its
relation to the Passover as the dispute with regard to the
use of leavened or unleavened bread undoubtedly is. It was
the usual custom of the Jews in the time of our Lord to
mingle their wine with water, and therefore in the Tract of
the Mishna relating to Blessings, or, as we should say,
Graces at Meat and similar formulae, the mixture of the
cup is taken for granted. In Chapter 6 of the Tract
Berakhoth (ed. Surenhusius i. p. 20) the names to be given
to certain substances are discussed, and how they are to be
appended to the general formula, "Blessed art Thou, Jehovah,
" our God, Lord of the World, Who hast created [such and
" such a thing] ." We are told that for the fruit of trees we
are to say " Who hast created the fruit of the tree " except
in the case of wine, when we are to say " Who hast created
the fruit of the vine." So also for bread there is a special

188 Appendix I.

blessing, " Who bringest broad out of the earth. The
mention of the mixture occurs a little later, ch. 8, 2. The
question referred to is, as usual, one between the disciples of
Hillel and those of Shammai, and relates to the order of
certain acts at a supper. " The house of Shammai," we are
told, " first pour (water) on the hands and then mix the cup :
that of Hillel first mix the cup and then pour (water) on the
hands."

The later Talmud of Babylon recognises the use of unmixed
wine as a possibility, but incidentally shews how the " wine"
of the Mishna is to be understood, reserving the blessing
" Who hast created the fruit of the vine" to a mixed cup, and
extending the general blessing "Who hast created the fruit
of the tree" to a cup of pure wine (Berakhoth fol. 50 b.)

" In the rubric of the Feasts," says Lightfoot (Home
Hebraicae on Matt. xxvi. 27), " they always use the word
iniscju, they mix for him the cup." The possible use of
unmixed wine is, however, assumed, and no stress appears to
be laid upon the practice except incidentally as a matter of
temperance.

In any case the ordinary use of mixed wine by the Jews in
our Saviour s time cannot be called in question ; and it is
obvious that no inference can be drawn against His own use
of it from His words speaking of " the fruit of the vine,"
but rather that these words are in favour of it.

2. Tlic early evidence in the Christian Church.

This has been touched incidentally already. The Didachd
says nothing on the point, speaking only of the Cup and
the Vine of David. Justin Martyr s evidence is precise,
speaking three times of the water as brought with the wine
to the celebrant (1 Apol. 65, 67). St. Irenaeus, circa 180 A.D.,
speaks twice of the mixed cup (v. 2, 3, and 36, 3). In the
second place he uses it as a synonyme for fruit of the vine
speaking of the millenial resurrection : " For the Lord
also taught these things when He promised that He would
have a new mixture of the cup in His kingdom with His
disciples." Cp. Matt. xxvi. 29. St. Clement Pad. ii. 2,

The mixture of the Cup. 189

19, 20, certainly refers and gives a mystical sense to the
Eucharistic mixture.

From the time of St. Cyprian s letter to Caecilius, Ep. 63,
about A.D. 254, the opinion became prevalent among Christians
that the mixed cup was necessary, either as symbolizing the
union of the people with Christ, as St. Cyprian said, or, as
Gennadius (de Eccl. docjm. 75, P.L. 58, 998, circa A.D. 492),
on account of the flow of water and blood from His side.
The African Church attributed the command to use water to
our Lord Himself (Cone. Carth. III. canon 24, circa A.D. 397,
also in Cod. Canon. Afric. 37, Brims pp. 12G, 166). The
article Elements in Diet. Chr. Ant. i. p. 604, says : " All the
" ancient Liturgies either contain a direction for mixing water
" with the wine, or else in the canon the mixing is alluded
" to." The evidence is then summarised from the Clementine
Liturgy, from the Liturgies called by the names of St. James
and St. Mark, from those of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom,
from the Ethiopia and Nestorian and that of Severus as
well as the Western, Koman and Mozarabic.

On the supposed counter-evidence see Chr. Wordsworth
Hist. Notes on the Arcbbishop s Judgment, p. 7.

The interpretation of Origen that our Lord used " un
mixed" wine appears to stand alone. He was evidently
thereby drawing an inference from the text, in which the
mixing is not mentioned. See p. 85 n. 23.

On the Armenians see Scudamore N.E. p. 389 and note.

3. The usage in the English Church before the Reformation.

In the Oriental Churches the chalice is generally prepared
before the service. "In the Greek Church (says Scudamore
"p. 395) the Cup is mixed by the Deacon before the Liturgy
" at the table of Prothesis or Credence and generally in a side
chapel (Goar p. 61). The practice appears to be the same
throughout the East." See above p. 87.

In the local Roman Church, as we have seen, the mixture
was made during the service, probably in connection with the
offering by the people themselves (p. 87). This however was
by no means the universal use in the West, but directions

190 Appendix I.

are found of a varying and permissive character, shewing
that the general feeling was that it mattered little when and
where and with what ceremony the mixture took place pro
vided it were done. This is of course the reasonable view,
which would have been at once accepted among us but for
strange anxieties and misconceptions on the subject
propagated both by lawyers and churchmen. The evidence
is much more extensive than was at first supposed, and it
seems hardly worth while to give it all in detail. Several
instances of French usages illustrating this matter, and
bearing on Sarum usage, will however be found in Martene
de ant. eccl. rit. i. pp. 344 foil. 4 1700, e.g. at Auxerre
before putting on the amice, si velit : saltern ante evangelium
hoc faciat ; and from Chalon in Champagne (Catalaunensis
ecclesia) also before the amice. At Amiens a " parva
mensa . . a latere epistoloe" was used; at Soissons the
chalice was prepared behind the high altar ; at Chalon-sur-
Saone (Cabilonensis ecclesia) at the altar of St. Peter during
the singing of the gradual ; at Tours there was apparently in
Martene s time a solemn procession like the Eastern Great
Entrance (ibid. pp. 370, 371).

Duchesne speaks of such an entrance, Origines p. 195, as
generally characteristic of the Gallican Liturgy, quoting
Gregory of Tours Glor. Mart. 85 (really 86), who describes
a procession at Riom (in Ricomagensi vico civitatis Arvernse)
in which the "tower" containing the " mysterium dominici
corporis" flew out of the hands of an unworthy deacon
(P.L. 71 col. 781). Such a "tower" is also mentioned in a
benediction in the Appendix to the same volume col. 1185.
Although nothing is here said of the chalice, the parallel with
oriental rites makes it probable that it too \vas brought in the
procession.

But whether the mixture in all cases took place before the
entrance in the Gallican Church, as M. Duchesne supposes,
is not so clear, since St. Germanus, who speaks of the pro
cession of the " tower," explains the mixture in connection
with the offertory (Expositio P.L. 72, col. 91). That it
usually did so is I think most probable.

The mixture of the Cup. 191

With regard to the antiquities of the English uses, Dr.
Wickham Legg whose History of the Liturgical colours,
London, 1882, is well known has kindly furnished me with
the following important memorandum, to which I have
added a few passages in square brackets, being matters of
general knowledge, which he had purposely omitted in his
notes sent to me.

At the end of the middle ages there appears a disposition to look svith
indifference upon the time at which the chalice was to be made. For
example, at Milan Beroldus in the 12th century (about 1130) describes
the mixing as taking place after the Gospel, while Casola 1 in 1499 says
you may do it when you like : before Mass begins, between Epistle and
Gospel, or at the offertory : no n refert he adds. The same liberty was
given at Toledo 2 and Augsburg. 8 Also at Agram, 4 and here the time
of mixing depended on the weather; when it was very cold in the
winter, the mixing was to be put off to the offertory.

As to the custom of ROUEN, Martene (cle ant. eccl. rit. Lib. i. Cap iv.
Art xii. Orel, xxiv.) quotes from a Rouen book ab minis circiter 400
exarato, in which the bread was jjrepared and the chalice mixed, after
the rochet had been put on and the hands washed, but before the amice
was put on. The same custom is noted as late as 1499 in the Mass
book.

But John of Avranches, a neighbouring and suffragan see, describes
in the llth century the divine offices in a/ letter to the Abp. of Rouen
and would seem to indicate clearly the mixing as following the Gospel. 3

What then was the practice which came over to England with the
Normans P John and the Rouen MS. would seem both to be describing
High Mass, from the mention of the Deacon, clerics, incense, &c.

[The custom at High Mass in the SARUM use is described in the
Sarum Consuetudinary printed by W. H. Rich Jones in the Register
of St. Osmund vol. i. pp. 148 foil., Rolls Series, 1883. "After the
" introit of the Mass one of the taper-bearers shall bring bread and wine
" and water in a pyx and cruets solemnly to the place where the bread,
" wine and water are arranged for the ministration of the Eucharist ;
" the other taper-bearer shall bring basins with water and a towel."
Then follows the reading of the Epistle by the Subdeacon and the singing
of the gradual by two choir boys on the steps of the pulpit or ambo.

In the meanwhile the taper-bearers meet the acolyte at the door of
the presbytery. He has evidently gone out of the choir to the place
where the bread and wine and water were laid down and carries them.
He puts the corporals on the altar, and the elements somewhere else (in
loco debito). After the Epistle and therefore during the singing of
the anthem (the Gradual and Sequence or Tract) that followed it, the

I Casola, Rationale Cerimoniarum Misse Ambrosiane, Mediolani, 1499, fo. lOb.

2 Missal, 1561. 3 Missal, 1555. 4 Miss-tl, 1511?

6 [Joannes Abrincensis de off. eccl. P.L. 147 col. 35. John afterwards became
Abp. of Rouen himself. Later on he refers to the Communion of the people

II intincto pane col. 37.]

192 Appendix I.

subdeacon assisted by the acolyte prepares the elements for the ministra
tion of the Eucharist "in the place of its administration" (in loco
ipsius administrationis). This must have been away from the altar,
at some place answering in its use to our altar-rails. After the com
mencement of the creed the elements are handed by the acolyte to the
subdeacou, by the subdeacon to the deacon, by the deacon to the priest,
first the hostia on the paten, and then the chalice, and finally placed on
the altar. The priest has nothing to do with the mixture of the chalice.

No credence is mentioned, but I imagine that the use was to have a
table which was more detached than, a credence usually is, and to use
both for the preparation of the elements and for the communicants
afterwards to kneel at. The forms, covered with linen cloths, still used
in Wimborne Minster may perhaps be a survival of such a table or tables.
Such a table is mentioned at Amiens by Martene parva mensa in
latere epistoloe above p. 190.

Dr. Legg writes, " At one time I thought that the locus adminis-
" trationis might be the south end of the altar, as the Dominicans"
" make it to this day, and as it used to be in some French rites. (The
" Monks [as opposed to the Friars and Seculars.] seem to have been
" the chief ones to use credence tables.)"

The Sarum rubrics as given by Maskell, from editions before A.D.
1500, are as follows. Post introitum vero missce unus ceroferariorum
panem vinum et aquam quce ad eucharistice ministrationem dispo-
nuntur defer at ; reliquus vero pelvim cum aqua et manutergio portet.
There is no description of the preparation. The next rubric is after
the offertory. Post o/ertorium vero porrigat diaconus sacerdoti
calicem cum patena et sacriftcio : et osculetur manum eius utraque
vice. Ipse vero accipiens ab eo calicem : diligent?r ponat in loco SULO
debito supra medium altar e, &c. He then says the prayers " Suscipe
Sancta Trinitas" and " Acceptum sit," holding the chalice. Then
follows Dicta oratione reponat calicem et cooperiat cum corporalibus :
ponatque panem super corporalia decenter, ante calicem vinum et
aquam continentem, &c. This shows that in the Sarum rite the
manner of the mixture was considered comparatively speaking of no
importance.

Most of the later editions, as followed by Forbes and Dickinson, have
this rubric after the Epistle: Dictoque Graduali Alleluia vel Se-
quentia vel Tractu a sacerdote privatim cum suis ministris, accipiat
subdiaconus panem et vinum et aquam cum calice, et ea prceparet ad
eucharistice ministrationem; benedictione prius aquae a Sacerdote
petita hoc modo Benedicite ; Sic respondeat Sacerdos, Dominus. Ab
eo sit benedicta, de cujus latere exivit sanguis et aqua. In nomine
patris, &c. Sacerdos vero interim sedeat in sede sua. Then follows
the Gospel.]

As to the actual practice [at low mass] in England, the materials for
forming an opinion seem scanty. Thomas Becon is a scurrilous and
coarse-minded writer, it is true, but he served an English parish before

6 The Dominican custom has often been referred to in treating this question.
It is described at length in their Missal, of which I have a copy, Missale Sacri
Ordinis P&lt; dedicator urn Juxta exemplar Boma? impressum anno 1705, Paris 1721.
See p. vi. for an account of the mixture, which is made by the priest at the south
side of the altar before the service begins, i.e. before his private prayers and before
the Confiteor, &c.

The mixture of the Cup. 193

the Reformation, and the information, that he gives is most valuable.
" Ye come to the Altar with your Masse-book, Corporasse, Chalice and
bread with such other trinkets." (Displaying of the Popish Masse.
Parker Society, Prayers, &c., p. 262). The bread then is taken ;to the
altar at the beginning of the service, as it is at Rome to this day, and
he says nothing about the contents of the chalice ; but from what he
says further on, it would seem likely that the chalice when taken to the
altar already contained wine and water (" a spoonful of wine&gt;nd two
or three drops of water"), for between the epistle and gospel he says
" yee uncover the chalice, and look whether your drinke bee there or no
" least you should chance to bee deceived, when the time of your repast
" come" (ib. p. 264).

A visitation of the chalice between the epistle and gospel was not
unheard of. At Coutances (Missal 1557), before the gospel ; " Et
" visitet an sit vinum et aqua in calico, dis coperiendo (sic.) caliceni et
" levando patenam," &c. Of. also Martene (same place, but Ordo
xxxiv.) for Leon in Brittany, where the chalice was looked at, but it does
not seem certain that it had been prepared : " amoto corporali desuper
" calicem antequam Bvangelium dicat." Cf. "Warren, Liturgy and
Ritual of Celtic Church, p. 230.

Then there is the evidence quite in the opposite direction of the Boole,
of Ceremonies. Strype Ecclesiastical Memorials, Oxf. 1822, vol. 1.
partii., p. 422 [287] No. cix. Then followeth the offertory ....
" at which time the Minister, laying the bread upon the altar, maketh
" the chalice, mixing the water with the wine."

[This may, of course, be a description of the Hereford use, or may
shew the author s Roman leanings in matters of ceremony. The author
of the Book is unknown. It is generally dated A.D. 1539 43. It was
never published or authorised in any way. though apparently prepared
for Henry Ylllth s use. At least two MSS. of it exist, one at Lambeth,
no. 1107 fol. 167 foil., and one in the British Museum, Cotton Cleopatra
E. 5 fol. 259 285. The tendency is in the direction of the six
articles, and therefore in opposition to Cranmer.]

At YORK there really appears to be no certain information as to the
place or time of mixing : the chalice at the offertory appears to be
already mixed.

The writer in the Ecclesiologist on the Credence (viii. 152) says that
the elements were clearly on the altar at York before the offertory.

Mr. Edmund Bishop gives me a note from his MS. of St. Mary s
Abbey, York, that in this church the chalice was made at the offertory
(in the Roman place) at High Mass ; but before the service at Low Mass.

This would also seem to have been the place at HEREFORD ; but the
words of the rubric are not so clear as to put the matter beyond all
doubt. The Dean of Carlisle tells me that there was a liturgical revolu
tion in 1310 (or thereabouts) and the books of Hereford after that day
are new. The rubric, as we have it [which directs the mixture to
be made after the offertory] only applies to High Mass, and we know
nothing of Low Mass.

At WESTMINSTER (Abbot Lytlyngtoii s Mass Book, in the custody
of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster) the mixing is very distinctly
made between the taking of the stole and of the chasuble.

[J. Wickham Legg, M.D., 47 Green-street, Park-lane, London, 24th
May, 1891.]

194 Appendix I.

To sum up the evidence in a practical form. The custom
of the Sarum High Mass was for the subdeacon to mix the
chalice between the Epistle and the Gospel, and apparently
not at the altar. When presented ceremonially to the Priest
it was certainly already mixed. The custom of the Sarum
Low Mass was apparently to bring the elements already pre
pared (in the Vestry) and place them on the Altar at the
beginning of the service, as the Romans now place the Bread.
Our practice when the mixed chalice is used should be to
prepare it in the Vestry, or at the Credence or elsewhere,
before the service begins, and to leave it in one or other of
those places, so that it may be presented, as ordered by the
rnbric, after the alms have been placed on the holy table.
Cp. pp. 88 and 164.

195

APPENDIX II.

ON THE JEWISH PRAYER AGAINST HERETICS.

(See pp. 6567.)

The following is a translation from the Talmud of Baby
lon, Tract Berakhoth, fol. 28 b and 29 a, ed. Cracow, which
I owe to the kindness of Mr. Keichardt and Canon Kings -
bury :

" Our Rabbis have taught that Shimeon the cotton- merchant
(Happiqoli) arranged in order the Eighteen Benedictions before Rabban
Gamaliel in Jabneh. Rabban Gamaliel then said to the wise men :
Is there no man here who is able to compose (from taqen, ordinare, com-
ponere. prseparare) a Prayer (literally Benediction) against the heretics
(minim ; the editions made under censors have the Sadducees) ? Then
arose Samuel the Little and composed it. In the following year he
had forgotten it."

[Fol. 29a.] " And he bethought himself thereupon for two or three
hours without being able to remember it, and none brought it to his
memory. Rabbi Jehudah then said, Many that err in all the other
Benedictions should not be removed (or superseded) ; but if any err in
the Prayers against the Minim he must be removed, because he falls
under the suspicion of being secretly a Min. But with regard to Samuel
the Little, who had composed the same, there is no doubt that he had
changed his mind."

Then follows a discussion as to the case of Samuel the Little who
was not superseded as Reader, and on the question whether a man
righteous in the beginning can fall away (cp. Ezek. xviii. 24). The
whole ends : " If this be so why did they not interrupt Samuel ? The
case of Samuel the Little was different from the rest, inasmuch as he
was the composer of the prayer."

The Talmud of Jerusalem touches the same tradition, but
without going into so much detail. It varies in the following
point :

Samuel the Little stood before the Lectern and omitted some things
in reciting the Prayer against the heretics. He looked at his brethren,
but they only said to him " The wise have not so determined it."

There are two opinions amongst scholars as to the
date of this occurrence. The Talmud itself seems to place

196 Appendix II.

it before the taking of Jerusalem, and in the time of
Gamaliel I. :

" Both Talinuds," writes Mr. Reichardt, " agree that the Prayer
was composed in Jabueh, or Jamuia as it is called by Greek writers, a
city situated on the Mediterranean, 1 inhabited principally by Jews, and
loyal to the Roman Government which was then the seat of the
Sanhedrm. It seems that, owing to the continued strife between the
Jewish authorities in Jerusalem and the converts from Judaism to
Christianity, the Roman Government had interfered with the free
deliberations of the Sanhedrm and curtailed their power and authority.
Hence we are informed by Jewish writers that, forty (lunar) years
before the destruction of Jerusalem, the Sanhedrm migrated from that
place and went from one town to another till they settled at Jabneh, and
there Samuel the Little composed the curses upon the Christians
before Rabban Gamaliel the Elder. Thus speaks Rabbi Abraham
Zakut in his important work on Jewish history, called Sepher Jucliasin
page 20 ed. Hershel Filipowski. Rabbi D. Gaus relates the same in his
valuable Jewish history, called Zemach David, no. 788, fol. 25, col. 2.
Hence we have reason to suppose that the time of the composition of
this imprecation was between the years 34 45 A.D.

Mr. Reichardt also refers to the Babylonian Talmud, Tract
RosJi-Jta-shanah, fol. 31 b; Sanhedrin, fol. 41 a ; Shabbath,
fol. 15 a; Avoda SaraJi, fol. 8 b, for the migrations of the
Sanhedrin beginning on the curtailment of their power by the
Romans forty (lunar) years before the destruction of Jeru
salem. He connects this curtailment with the death of St.
Stephen and of James the Lord s brother ; and observes that,
according to Jewish tradition, Samuel the Little was a dis
ciple of Gamaliel the Elder and died before the destruction of
Jerusalem.

The other opinion is that the Gamaliel referred to is the
second of that name, grandson of Gamaliel the First, and that
the prayer was therefore composed after the destruction of
Jerusalem. This is the opinion of J. Hamburger in his
Encyclopadie, s. v. Schemone-Esre, p. 1095, and he wishes
to render Pthaqqen " to amend," "revise " (verbessern, um-
gestalten), supposing that the reading " Sadducees " is
genuine, and that the object was to turn a curse against the

1 Mentioned in 2 Chron. xxvi. 6 as a town of the Philistines, cp. Joshua xv.
11 (Jabneel). See A. Neubauer Gdogr. du Talmud p. 74, who says that it had
probably established its reputation as an abode of learned men before the
destruction of the Temple, and that R. Johananben Zakai after having predicted
to Vespasian that he should become Emperor asked his favour for Jabneh and
its learned men (Talm. Bab. Qittin 66a). It lies between Ascalon and Joppa.

The Jewish Prayer against Heretics. 197

Sadducees into one against the "Minim." He also wishes
to interpret "Minim" as sectaries, within the pale of Juda
ism, not as Nazarene deserters from it.

Schiirer also adopts the later date.

I have no means of forming a sufficient opinion on the sub
ject, but I incline to think that the early date is, at least, as
probable as the later one, and to see in this prayer an attempt
made to stop the flow of converts from Judaism to Christian
ity, which was quite as likely to be attempted early in the
rivalry between the Synagogue and the Church as later in
the century.

An ingenious suggestion was made by Gustav Zeltner
Birchath hamminim sen frag mentum Pauli, Altdorf, 1713 (as
I learn from Mr. Reichardt) that Samuel the Little and Paul
the Apostle were the same person. This might be possible if
it was composed in the time, and at the request, of his
master, Gamaliel the Elder. It is obvious that "the Little "
Paulus, and it is remarked that the expression, " Let there
be no hope," has a Pauline ring, and that, in 1 Sam., i. 28,
Shaul, " lent, "is a synonyme for Samuel, in Hannah s words
to Eli : " Therefore also I have lent him to the Lord : as
" long as he liveth he shall be lent (Shaul or Saul) to the
"Lord. "Certainly, such a cryptogram "Samuel shall be Saul"
would be exactly suited to the Rabbinical mind, if it was
desired to hand down the secret of the authorship of the
prayer to the initiated, without stating it in so many words.

This opinion appears to be adopted also by Biesenthal, Gesch.
der Christlichen Kirche,p. 26, Berlin, 1850, who says : " Gama-
" liel, St. Paul s Jewish teacher, was, like him, a Benjamite.
" . . . The mildness of his attitude in the beginning
"towards Christianity brought him into difficulties with the
" rival school (that of Shammai) when the new doctrine

" began to spread and take root in Palestine To

" avert the suspicion of his favouring the new sect of Chris-
" tians, Gamaliel caused his disciple, Samuel haccaton (the
" little one, IlavAoc, Paulus) to compose a prayer against
" all heretics (minim) which is still extant. (Tract Bera-
" choth, 28b, 29.)" I owe this last and other references to
the kindness of Canon Kingsbury.

198

APPENDIX III.

DIOCESAN STATISTICS, 1890.

Partly taken from the returns made to myself, partly from those for the
Church Tear Book, by the kindness of Canon Burnside.

A. PERSONAL.

Population of Diocese Wilts (1881), 178,380 ; Dorset (1891), 194,487.

Total, 372,867.
Total number of Parishes making returns to myself, 506 ; to the

Church Tear-book, 490.

Number of Sittings Free, 104,730 ; appropriated 49,308 ; total, 154,038.
Churches open for daily prayer, 137 ; for private prayer, 201.

Staff of Clergy

Baptisms Infants, 6192 ; adults, 84 ; total, 6276.
Confirmations 1888. Wilts Males, 549 ; Females, 674
Dorset 614 712
1889. Wilts 548 572
Dorset 2245 ,. 2495
1890. Wilts 1748 2074
Dorset 509 575

623

6213

7102

total, 1223
1326
1120
4740

3822
1084

13,315
4438
32,560

Average for three years . . . 2071 2367

Communicants, as returned for the Church Tear- book . . .
(estimated), as returned to myself,

Wilts, 16,681 ; Dorset, 27,46044,141

Celebrations Daily ... Wilts, 1 ; Dorset, 2 ; total, 3\

Weekly ... Wilts, 100 ; Dorset, 73 ; total, 173
Fortnightly, &c. 56 58 114 506
Monthly "... 73 125 198
Less frequently 6 12 18,
Children attending Elementary Schools belonging to the Church, 43,725
Sunday Schools 36,744

Religious instruction is given by the Clergy in Day Schools,
in 179 parishes in Wilts and 172 in Dorset, total, 351.

Church Workers. Total.

1. Sidesmen, 377 ; parochial councillors, 122 ... 499

2. Lay Readers Licensed, 16 ; unlicensed, 29 ... 45

3. Bell Ringers 1528

4. Deaconesses, 6 ; nurses, 39 ; mission women, 7 52

5. District Visitors Male, 24 ; Female, 993 1017

6. Sunday School Teachors Male, 858 ; Female, 2548 . . . 3406

7. Members of Choirs Male, 5431 ; Female, 2135 ... 7566

8. Other helpers Male, 188 ; Female, 140 328

Diocesan Statistics. 199

B. FINANCIAL.

Voluntary Contributions for Church Work. Total figures for the
Diocese for the year 1890.

1. For the maintenance of Assistant Clergy and Church Expenses.
For Assistant Clergy &. d.

Paid by Incumbents 12,17418 6

From other sources parochial ... ... 3,484 5 9

For lay helpers and general church expenses ... 14,983 Oil

2. Maintenance of Schools (Day and Sunday)

By voluntary subscriptions 18,373 14 4

From interest on endowments 2,27511 3

3. Collections for Home Missions 2,02312 2

Foreign Missions 4,45819 3

Diocesan Funds 96411

General Funds 1,071 2

The poor and local charities . . . 14,236 2 4

Total ... 74,045 15 8

From the returns it would appear that

283 parishes contributed last year to Home Missions.
297 parishes to Foreign Missions.

II. Church Building and Restoration, Burial Grounds, Endowments,
Parsonage Houses, Schools, &c.

1. Church Building and Restoration

On fabric ... 15,873 10 1

On fittings ... 6,099 12 9

2. The enlargement of burial grounds ... ... 823 1 4

3. The endowment of benefices ... 302 7

4. Building and enlargement of parsonage houses ... 9,749 18

5. Enlargement of schools, &c. 10,001 2

Total 42,849 11 2

Gross total of Voluntary Contributions raised in the Diocese for one
year, 1890 :

I. For general church work 74,045 15 8

II. For exceptional expenditure on church

building, &c 42,84911 2

Total 116,895 6 10

C. OBITUARY OF CLERGY SINCE THE TRIENNIAL
VISITATION OF 1888.

1888.

Thomas Hammond Tooke, 15th April, formerly Rector of Monkton

Farley.

Henry Hinxman Duke, 5th May, Rector of Brixton Deverill.
Lionel William Digby Dawson Darner, 2nd July, Prebendary of Yet-

minster Secunda and formerly Rector of Canford Magna.
John Rowlands, 21st September, Rector of Newton Toney.

200 Appendix III.

Robert Francis Wilson, 8th October, Prebendary of Beminster Prima.
Thomas Henry Tait, 14th November, Prebendary of Netheravon and

Rector of Hilperton.
Alfred Octavius Hartley, 27th November, Vicar of Steeple Ashton and

formerly Rural Dean.
George Allen Yander-Meulen, 3rd December, Rector of West Knoyle.

1889.

Thomas Maurice Patey, 3rd March, Rector of Hampreston.
Alfred Edersheim, 16th March, formerly Vicar of Loders.
Thomas Thornburgh, 2nd April, Vicar of Heywood.
John George Du Boulay, 21st April, formerly Curate of Haselbury

Bryan.

Lewis Gidley, 28th April, Chaplain of St. Nicholas Hospital, Salisbury,
Henry William Atkinson, 25th May, Rector of West Coinpton.
Ven. Thomas Sanctuary, 27th May, Archdeacon of Dorset, Canon

Residentiary of Salisbury, and Vicar of Powerstock.
Nathaniel Bond, 20th July, Prebendary of Hurstborne and Burbage,

and Rector of Steeple with Grange and Tyneham.
Edward George Griffith, 22nd July, Rector of Wiiiterbome Gunner.
George Peloquin Graham Cosscrat, 28th July, Rector of Winfrith

Newburgh.
John Parr, 9th August, formerly Vicar of S. Mary s, Marlborough, and

Prebendary of Shipton.
Martin Johnson Green, 17th September, Prebendary of Alton Borealis

and Rector of Winterborne Steepleton.
James Hicks, 28th December, formerly Vicar of Piddletrenthicle.

1890.

Thomas Law Montefiore, 13th January, Vicar of Chideock.
Marlborough Sterling Berry, 16th January, Vicar of West Ash ton.
Henry Francis Smith, 19th January, Rector of Folke.
Augustus Kemp, 23rd January, formerly Vicar of Worth Matravers.
Henry Cave-Browne-Cave, 4th February, Vicar of Edington.
Wcllesley Pole Pigott, 27th February, Rector of Fugglestoue with

Bemerton, and Rector of Fovant.
Robert White Fiske, 28th March, Rector of Stockton.
John Herbert Plowman, 28th March, Vicar of Burbage.
William Appleford, 20th April, formerly Vicar of Portland St. Peter.
Charles Tower, 12th June, Prebendary of Gillingham Major.
Henry Newport, 1st August, Rector of Tarrant Hintou.
John Blennerhassett, 5th September, Rector of Ryme Intrinseca.
de Courcy Meade, 26th September, formerly Rector of Tockenham Week.
Thomas Taylor, 30th September, Rector of Boscombe.
John Bridge Woodman, 25th October, Rector of Glanvilles Wootton.
Edward Arthur Dayman, 30th October, Prebendary of Bitton and

Rector of Shillingstone.
Richard Payne, 8th November, Prebendary of Warminster and formerly

Vicar of Downton.

Robert William Fairbank, 29th November, Curate of Hilmarton.
Thomas Henry Roper, 5th December, formerly Rector of Piddlehinton.
William Marshall Sargent Babington, 30th December, Curate of

Abbotsbury.

Obituary. Church Building.

201

1891.

Thomas Hammond House, 3rd January, Vicar of Wmterborne Anderson.
Francis John Kitson, 28th January, Rector of Chilton Foliatt.
Christopher Flood Cooke, 16th February, Yicar of Enford.
John Sinclair Stewart, 14th May, Yicar of Winterborne Stoke.
William Henry Robert Brickmann, llth June, Vicar of Road Hill.
Joseph Henry Maclean, 14th June, Rector of Chilfrome,

D. CHURCH BUILDING.
CHURCHES REPAIRED, ENLARGED, OR IMPROVED.

1888.
Ryme Intrinseca

1889.

Warminster
Holt (Dorset)
Shaw

Milton Abbas
Leigh

Lyrne Regis
Shillingstone
Hermitage
Netheravon
Winsley
Woodsford
Hilperton

18881891.

1890.

Moor Crichel
Wimborne St. Giles
Holt (Dorset)
Pewsey
Shroton
Yetminster

Winterborne Anderson
Wootton Bassett
Minterne
T arrant Gunville
Ch. Ch. Melcombe Regis
Newton Toney
Poulshot
Iwerne Minster
Chardstock All Saints
Bradford Abbas
Bulford

1891,
Fleet

Charlton All Saints
Horton
Wyke Regis
Bradford- on- A von
Great Durnford
Lytchett Mat ravers
Puncknowle
Upwey
Great Toller

CHURCHES AND CHAPELS DEDICATED AND CONSECRATED.

1888. St. John Baptist, Broadstone (ded.)

1889. St. Clement s, Newtown.

,, (St. John Evangelist, Kiiisou, Dio. Winton).

1890. Holy Trinity, Solway Ash.

,. Holy Trinity, Bothenhamptoii.

1891. St. Katherine, Holt, Wilts (New Chancel).

,, Sturminster Newton Union Workhouse Chapel
(ded.)

WORKS IN PROGRESS.

Edington. Winterbome Stickland.

Ramsbury. Froxfield.

Corsley. Stratton.

Wimborne Minster. Hilton.

202

Appendix III.

I a

q
s

S i

a i

i |

a -

^ -F

^ &

o sr

&lt;i P

fe ^r

S S

^ ^

o ^

PH -4

pa M
E

fro

the C
Saru

-
i

"5
& I

U I

* i

"S i

-S &

-S ,J3
*J

g
.2,*

o t

fe ^5

Faculties.

203

.g w, g S

l^lgi

* 1*1*3

I s

03 o
?H Q3

-2 ;

I ,

j ^H _T 08 3

^ g* | 3 &gt;
*l8l a :l s - -

^So3t&gt;g:Swia5

& V

P CP a
^c ^ OH

t-,
-2

"^ J ^ ^c ^

S
2

&lt;

fl ^J rt i ^ 03

s ill |

03
0)

J bo

"S - s

(H ^

204

Appendix III.

205

APPENDIX IV.

ADDITIONAL NOTE TO PP.- 107 if. ON THE USE OF THE LORD S
PRAYER IN CONSECRATION.

Since writing these addresses I have had the advantage of
reading Mr. F. H. Chase s learned essay On the Lord s Prayer,
which is, I believe, to appear in the next number of the
Cambridge " Texts and Studies," edited by J. Armitage
Robinson, M.A.

Mr. Chase draws attention, on pp. 25 38, to the existence
of a petition for the coming of the Holy Spirit in some forms
of the first half of the Lord s Prayer. St. Gregory of Nyssa
read it in St. Luke in the form, May Thy Holy Spirit come
upon us and cleanse us, instead of the petition, Thy Kingdom
come (de or. dom. p. 60, ed. Krabinger). So did Maximus,
an orthodox writer against the Monothelites in the first half
of the seventh century (Migne P.O. 90, p. 884 f.) Marcion,
as quoted by Tertullian, and probably Tertullian himself,
were familiar with such a petition as a substitute for Thy will
be done (Tert. adv. Marc. iv. 26). In quoting St. Matthew
it is to be noticed that Tertullian arranges the petitions in a
peculiar order, Sanctificetur nomen tuiim, Fiat roluntas tua,
Veniat reynum tuum (de oratione 4).

It is also to be remarked that some early (Western ?) texts
seem to have read in St. Luke xi. 2, May Thy Name be
hallowed upon us. This is the text of the Codex Bezae
(Latin super nos), and is naturally compared with the gloss
found both in Tertullian and St. Cyprian : " We ask that it
maybe hallowed in us in nobis" (de oratione 3 ; de or. dom.
12). Cp. also St. Cyril. Hierosol. Cat. Myst. v. 12.

The two references to the Lord s Prayer made by St. Paul

Appendix IV. 206

in Gal. iv. 6 and Rom. viii. 15, also touch upon the gift of
the Holy Spirit.

It is difficult to account in detail for these facts ; but they
certainly seem to point to varying forms of the praver, when
it was used for sacramental and ritual purposes, as well as for
ordinary daily wants.

The Doxology is an instance of its enlargement for ordinary
purposes (see e.g. the DidacJti viii. 2) ; the later Embclismus
of its liturgical expansion. The passages quoted by Mr. Chase
pp. 28, 29 imply that it was used in baptism either as, or in
company with, an invocation (perhaps mental) of the Holy
Spirit. St. Dionysius Alex. (ap. Eus. H.E. vii. 2) may
possibly mean that it was the only baptismal prayer.

Mr. Chase does not discuss the question, touched in my
address, as to the use of the Lord s Prayer as the chief
element in Eucharistic consecration, though he conies near to
doing so. It is obvious that if the form used by Justin had
a petition for the coming of the Holy Spirit either worded
like that of Gregory of Nyssa, or as referred to by Tertullian,
or slightly varied so as to refer to the gifts lying before the
Lord it would naturally seem much more complete, as a
consecration prayer, than it does to us, who are only familiar
with the critical editions of Gospel MSS. Mr. Chase s
essay supplies other instances of variations, shewing that the
Church did not shrink from adapting the sacred words to her
wants as the spirit prompted her.

207

APPENDIX Y.

The following bibliography, though incomplete, may help
to shew the varied literary activity of our Diocese during the
past few years, in which I trust that both Wiltshire and
Dorset men will take pride. Besides the books and pamphlets
here set down there are many excellent papers in the recent
volumes of the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History
Magazine (especially by our much regretted friend Canon
Jackson), the Transactions of the Salisbury Field Club, the
Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Antiquarian
Field Club, and the Somerset and Dorset Notes and Queries,
which it is impossible to register here. The 45th volume of
the Archceological Journal, 1888, should also be consulted,
and the local newspapers, especially those of Salisbury and
Dorchester, and the periodical called Saint Osmund, of which
five numbers were published at Parkstone April 1885 July
1886.

Barnes, William (Rector of Winterborne Carne). A Glossary of the
Dorset Dialect, with a grammar of its word-sharpening and
wording, 1886. Dorchester : M. and E. Case. See also Leader
Scott.

Barrow, E. B. (Rector of Chclderton, Wilts). Parish Notes (a short
Parochial History on a simple plan), 1889. Salisbury : Brown
and Co.

Bell, C. G. (Master of Marlborough College and Canon of Salisbury).
The Increase of Faith, a Sermon preached in the Cathedral Church
of Salisbury on Trinity Sunday, June 5th, 1887. Salisbury :
Brown and Co.

Besant, Walter. The Eulogy of Richard Je/eries, 1888. Chatto and
Windus.

Bouverie, Hon. B. P. (Rector of Pewsey, Wilts). A Feiv Facts Con
cerning the Parish of Pewsey, in the County of Wilts, 1890.
Skeffington and Son.

An Order of Service for Children, with Metrical Litanies,
arranged for the Christian Seasons, 1891. Skeffington and Son.
Also a larger edition of the same, with music.

208 Appendix V.

Boyle, G. D. (Dean of Salisbury). Characters and Episodes of the
Great Rebellion, selected from the History and Autobiography of
Edward, Earl of Clarendon, 1889. Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Four Great Prebendaries of Salisbury (Richard Hooker, John
Pearson, Isaac Barrow, Joseph Butler), a series of articles in the
Churchman, 1890. London : Elliot Stock.

Buchanan, T. B. (Archdeacon of Wilts, and Rector of Poulshot). A
Charge 1890. Devizes : Gazette Office.

The Claims of our brother Churchmen: a Sermon 1890. Dor
chester : " Dorset County Chronicle" Printing Works.

Sermons on the Epistles, 20th to 25th Sundays after Trinity in
Sermons for the people. S.P.C.K.

Caillard, Miss E. M. (Wingfield House, Trowbridge). Electricity : the
Science of the Nineteenth Century, a sketch for general readers,.
1891. London : Murray.

Codd, Alfred (Canon, R. of Stockton and formerly Vicar of Beamiuster).
A Farewell Sermon preached at the Parisli Church, Beaminster
Nov. 2, 1890. Bridport : W. and E. Frost,

Colley, Dr. Addenda to the Visitation of Dorset, 1623, edited by
the Rev. Dr. C. from a MS. in the Dorchester Museum, 1888.

D Aeth, C. H. Hughes (Rector of Buckhorn Weston, Dorset) See
Hunt, J.

Dale, W. C. The Lepidoptera of Dorset, 1886.

Duke, E. (Vicar of Wilsford and Woodford-cum-Lake). The Age of
Stonehenge, 1888. Salisbury : Brown and Co.

Ellis, John Henry (Rector of Stourton). The Registers of Stourton,
County Wilts, from 1570 to 1800. London : Mitchell and Hughes
Wardour-street, 1887.

Graham, H. (Major 17th Lancers, Late Adjutant, Wilts Yeomanry).
The Annals of the Yeomanry Cavalry of Wiltshire, being a com
plete history of the Prince of Wales Own Royal Regiment from
the time of its formation in 1794 to October, 1884 Devizes
H, P. Bull.

Hamersley, Mrs. (Hon.) An Address to the Women of Wilts and
Dorset on the Women s Union, 1890. Salisbury : Brown and Co.

Holgate, C. W. (Secretary to the Bishop of Salisbury). Winchester
Commoners, 3836 1890, A register of Commoners who have
entered Winchester College from the commencement of Dr.
Moberly s headmastership to the present time, 1891. Salisbury :
Brown and Co.

Hunt, J. ( Vicar of Fifehead Magdalen). Dourotrigum Stoura. Trans
lated into English Verse by W. C. H. Hughes D Aeth, M.A.,
Rector of Buckhorn Westou, Dorset, 1891. Oxford : Blackwell.

Jefferics, Richard. Field and Hedgerow, being the last essays of R. J.
Collected by his widow, 1889. London : Longmans.

Jones, Canon W. Rich. Reminiscences of thirty-jive years : a
paper read at the meeting of the Bradford.* Melksham, and Trow
bridge Clerical Society. 1886. Trowbridge: W. Collins. See
also Rolls Series.

Kennard, R. B. (Rector of Marnlmll, Dorset). A manual of Confirma
tion, being a practical explanation of the Church Catechism
1889. London : Kegan Paul.

Diocesan Bibliography. 209

Lear, F. (Archdeacon of Sarum, Canon Residentiary, and Rector of
Bishopstone). Charges to the Clergy and Churchwardens of the
Archdeaconry of Sarum in 1886, 1887, and 1889.

Macleane, D. (Rector of Codford St. Peter, W ilts )- Tne Coat without
seam torn, a plain appeal to the Holy Scriptures on behalf of unity
among English Christians in the One Apostolic Church (n.d. but
published in 1889). London : Griffith, Farran and Co.

Haddock, P. B. (late Vicar of Staverton, Wilts). A few words to
the members of my choir. 3rd edition. Trowbridge : W. Collins.

Mansel-Pleydell, J. C. (President of the Dorset Natural History and
Antiquarian Field Club). The Birds of Dorsetshire. A contri
bution to the natural history of the County, 1889. Dorchester :
M. and E. Case.

Mayo. C. H. (Vicar of Long Burton). The Parish Register of Buck-
land Newton. Dorchester : " Dorset County Chronicle" Printing
Works, 1889.

The Municipal Records of the Borough of Shaftesbury. A con
tribution to Shastonian History. 1889. Sherborne : J. C. Sawtell.
Annals of the Clerical Society established at Yetminster, 1887.
Ry/ri- Decanal Registers, Suggestions to Rural Deans, with a
specimen return from Long Burton and Holnest, Dec., 1886.
Salisbury : Brown and Co.

[Moberly, Miss A.] On Prayer for Special Occasions. London :
Percival and Co., 1891.

Moberly, G. H. (Canon, R. of Monkton Farley, Wilts). The life of Wil
liam of WyJceham, sometime Bishop of Winchester, and Lord
High Chancellor of England, 1887. Winchester ; Warren and
Sons.

Nightingale, J. E. The Church Plate of the County of Dorset, 1889.
Salisbury : Bennett Brothers.

Pitt-Rivers, Lieut.- Gen., F.R.S. King John s House, Tollard Royal,
Wilts, 1890. Printed privately.

Excavations in Cranborne Chase, near Rushmore, on the
borders of Dorset and Wilts. Printed privately. Vol. i. 1887,
vol. ii. 1888.

Royal Archaeological Institute. Annual meeting at Salisbury,
under the Presidency of Gen. Pitt-Rivers, 1887. General notes
upon the places visited during the meeting, 1887. Salisbury :
Bennett Brothers.

Preston, T. A. (Rector of Thurcaston, Leicester). The Flowering
Plants of Wilts, with sketches of the Physical Geography and
Climate of the County, 1888. Published by the Wiltshire
Archaeological and Natural History Society. Devizes : H. F. Bull.

Ravenhill, H. E. (Canon, V. of Buckland Newton cum Plush) . Minterne,
its connection with the Churchills and Digbys. A paper read on
the lawn at Minterne, 28th June, 1888. Dorchester: "Dorset
County Chronicle" Printing Works, 1889.

Rolls Series, Public Record Office. Charters and Documents illus-
trating^ the History of the Cathedral, City, and Diocese of Salis
bury, in the tivclfth and thirteenth centuries, selected from the
Capitular and Diocesan Registers by the late Rev. W. Rich Jones
M.A., F.S.A., and edited by the Rev. W. Dunn Macray, M.A., r S.A.
London, 1891.

210 Appendix V.

Rylands, J. P. Visitation of the County of Dorset, taken in 1623,

edited by J. P. B. (vol. xx. of the publications of the Harleian

Soc.), 1885.
Scott, Leader [Mrs. Baxter, daughter of the poet.] The Life of William

Barnes, poet and philologist, 1887. London : Macmillan.
Simpkinson, W. H. (Marlborough College). Marlborough College

Richard Clay and Sons.
Slow, Edward (Wilton). Third Edition, Wiltshire Rhymes. A series

of poems in the Wiltshire Dialect, 1885. Salisbury : Frederick

A. Blake. The fourth series of Wiltshire Rhymes, containing

twenty-five new poems in the Wiltshire Dialect, &c. N.D.

Salisbury : Frederick A. Blake.
Smith, A. C. (Rector of Yatesbury, Wilts). The Birds of Wiltshire,

comprising all the periodical and occasional visitants, as well as

those which are indigenous to the county, 1887, Devizes :

H. F. Bull,
Smith, R. (Canon, R. of W. Stafford). Reunion among Christians,

What are the limits assigned by God s Word within which we may

labour and pray for it, &c., 1890. London : Cassell and Co.
Steward, Edward (Canon and Principal of the Training School.)

Salisbury Diocesan Training School : its Annals and Register.

Bennett Bros. [1891.]
Swayne, W. S. (formerly curate of Stalbridge, Dorset.) Our Lord fs

Knowledge as Man, an inquiry, 1891. Longmans.

The History and Antiquities of the Parish of Stalbridge, in

Dorset, 1889. (No name of publisher.)
Watson, E. W. (member of the Society of St. Andrew). Ashmore,

County Dorset, a History of the Parish, with Index to the

Registers, 1651 to 1820. 1890. Gloucester : John Bellows.
Webb, Edward Doran (architect). The History of the Hundred of

Ramsbury, part I., The Parish of Ramsbury. Salisbury : Bennett

Bros., fol. 1890.
Wheeler, W. A. Sarum Chronology, a brief record of the most salient

events in the history of Salisbury. 1889. Salisbury : Brown and Co.
White, H. J. (Vice-Principal of the Theological College, Salisbury, and

member of the Society of St. Andrew). The Codex Amiatinus

and its Birthplace ; an article in Studia Biblica et ecclesiastica.

Vol. II., Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1890.
Novum Testamentum Domini nostri lesu Chmsti Latine. See

Wordsworth.
Wordsworth, Chr. (Preb. of Lincoln and Rector of Tyneham, Dorset.)

Historical Notes on the Archbishop s Judgment, particularly in

reference to Mr. J. T. Tomlinson s pamphlet, 1891. Longmans.
Wordsworth, John, Bishop of Salisbury.

A Pastoral Letter to the Clergy and Laity, issued after consul
tation with the Greater Chapter, Nov. 5th, 1885. Salisbury:

Brown and Co., &c.

A Pastoral Letter. &c., Nov. 4th, 1886. ibid.

A Pastoral Letter on preparation for the Lambeth Conference,

Visit to the Old Catholics, &c., Advent, 1887. ibid.

Four Addresses to the Clergy and Churchwardens at his Primary

Visitation, April and May, 1880. ibid.

Diocesan Bibliography. 211

Self -discipline in Charity, a sermon for Clergy-Orphan Schools,
May 30, 1886. London : Rivingtons.

Bristol Bishopric Endowment Fund, a sermon, June 27, 1886.
Bristol : J. E. Chilcott.

England Helped by Helping her Daughter Churches, a sermon
at Winchester, Oct. 21, 1886. S.P.G.

Union of Human Freewill and Divine Grace, a sermon at
Radley College, June 29, 1887. Oxford : Parker and Co.

Freedom through the Truth, a sermon at Lincoln, Oct. 2, 1890.
Lincoln : G. Gale.

A Form of Prayer for the Reopening of a Church after
Restoration, 1885. Salisbury : Brown and Co.

Form of Service at the Reopening of a Tower after Restoration,
1886. ibid.

The Form of Prayer and Ceremonies to be used at the Conse
cration of the Chapel of St. Michael and All Angels, Marl-
borough College, 1886. ibid.

The Form of Prayer and Ceremonies used at the Consecration
of Churches, Chapels and Burial Grounds in the Diocese of
Salisbury. By authority, 1887. ibid.

The Form of Consecration of a Churchyard or Place of Burial,
1887. ibid.

The Office for tli3 Institution, or Licensing of a Cleric to the
Cure of Souls in the Diocese of Salisbury, with the ceremony of
Induction, &c., 1889. ibid.

The Commemoration of the Founders, Benefactors, and Wor
thies of the Cathedral Church, 5th Nov., 1889. Salisbury : Bennett
Brothers.

The same, second edition, by authority, 1890. ibid.

Account of the Commemoration, &c., with Sermon, 1889. Salis
bury : Brown and Co.

Prayers for use in College. Second Edition, 1890. Oxford :
Parker and Co.

Manual of the Salisbury Diocesan Communicants Guild, 1891.
Salisbury: Bennett Brothers.

The One Religion : Truth, Holiness, and Peace desired by the
Nations and revealed by Jesus Christ : being the Bampton
Lectures for 1881. Second Edition, 1887. Oxford: Parker
and Co.

Old Latin Biblical Texts, no. I. The St. Germain St. Matthew
(gj), 1883. Oxford : Clarendon Press.

Old Latin Biblical Texts, no. II. The Bobbio Fragments of St.
Mark and St. Matthew, &c. (k, n, o, p, a , st), with Dr. Sanday
and Rev. H. J. White, 1886. Ibid.

The Corbey St. James (ff ) and its relation to other Latin versions
and to the original language of the Epistle in Studia Siblica,
Vol. I. Oxford: 1885.

Novum Testamentum Domini Nostri lesu Christi Latine,
secundum editionem sancti Hieronymi, ad codicum MSS. fidein
recensuit Johannes Wordsworth, S.T.P., in operis societatem
adsumto Henrico Juliano White, A.M. Fasc. I. II. Evangelium
sec. Mattheum, Evangelium sec. Marcurn, 1889 1891. Oxford ;
Clarendon Press.

212 Appendix V.

Latin and Greek Versions of the Encyclical Letter of the
Lambeth Conference 1888. See The Lambeth Conferences of 1867,
1878 and 1888, ed. by Randall T. Davidson [now Bp.of Rochester].
London : S.P.C.K. 1889, pp. 47 and 376414.

De Successione Episcoporum in Ecclesia Anglicana Epistola.
A letter on the succession of bishops in the Church of England ;
in Latin and English, addressed to the most reverend John
Heykamp, Archbishop of Utrecht, &c., 1890. [Berkeley, Pater
noster Row, for Anglo-Continental Society.]

On the Seals of the Bishops of Salisbury, 1888. Salisbury :
Brown and Co. Also in the Archaeological Journal, vol. 45, p. 22
foil. 1888, and Wilts Arch.Mag. vol. 220 foil.

On the Roman Conquest of Southern Britain, particularly in
regard to its influence on the County of Wilts, 1889. Salisbury :
Brown and Co. Also in W. A. M. vol. 25 p. 191 foil.

Tlie Bishop s Palace at Salisbury. A Lecture delivered at
the Blackmore Museum, Salisbury, Jan. 27, 1890. Salisbury :
Brown and Co. Also in W. A. M. vol. 25 p. 165 foil.
Worth, R. N. Tourist s Guide to Dorsetshire : Coast, Rail and Road.
Second Edition, 1889. London : Stanford.

Tourist s Guide to Wiltshire : its Scenery and Antiquities, 1887.
London : Stanford.

BV Wordsworth, John

823 The Holy Communion

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY