v

 
 THE LIBRARY OF 
 
 LITURGIOLOGY tf ECCLESIOLOGY 
 
 FOR ENGLISH READERS

 
 JBcclesiologfcal Essays
 
 THE LIBRARY OF 
 
 LITURGIOLOGY &' ECCLESIOLOGY 
 
 FOR ENGLISH READERS 
 
 EDITED BY VERNON STALEY 
 
 PROVOST OF THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH OF 
 ST. ANDREW, INVERNESS 
 
 Volume 
 
 EcclesioloQical Essays 
 
 BY 
 
 J. WICKHAM LEGG 
 
 FELLOW OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS OF LONDON 
 
 CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF THE HENRY BRADSHAW LITURGICAL 
 TEXT SOCIETY 
 
 LONDON 
 
 ALEXANDER MORING LIMITED 
 
 THE DE LA MORE PRESS 
 
 32 GEORGE STREET, HANOVER SQUARE, W. 
 
 1905
 
 BUTLER & TANNER. 
 
 THE SELWOOD PRINTING WORKS. 
 
 FROME, AND LONDON.
 
 PREFACE 
 
 THIS seventh volume of The Library of Liturgiology 
 and Ecclesiology consists of a number of essays from the 
 pen of Dr. J. Wickham Legg, on subjects connected with 
 ecclesiology. The essays originally appeared in various 
 publications between the years A.D. 1895 and 1900 ; and, 
 as they treat of matters of considerable importance, it 
 has been thought well that they should be collected and 
 reprinted in one volume for greater security and readi- 
 ness of reference. 
 
 I beg to tender my acknowledgments to the Editor of 
 The Church Quarterly Review, The Council of the St. 
 Paul's Ecclesiological Society, and the Editor of The 
 Church Times, for their kind and ready permission to 
 reprint the following essays. I am specially grateful to 
 Dr. Legg for the great trouble he has taken in preparing 
 the work for the press and in supplying the Index, which 
 has been added by the kindness of a Sister of the Com- 
 munity of All Saints. 
 
 VERNON STALEY. 
 INVERNESS, N.B. 
 
 June 10, 1905. 
 
 vii
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 I. REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES . 3 
 
 II. MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL .... 27 
 
 III. ON TWO UNUSUAL FORMS OF LINEN 
 
 VESTMENTS 49 
 
 IV. ON THE THREE WAYS OF CANONICAL 
 
 ELECTION 59 
 
 V. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE TIME IN 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN LITURGY AT WHICH 
 THE ELEMENTS ARE PREPARED AND 
 SET ON THE HOLY TABLE ... 91 
 
 VI. NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE IN 
 
 THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. . 181 
 
 VII. THE LAMBETH HEARING: A CRITICISM 
 
 OF SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS . . 227 
 
 IX
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 PLATE PAGE 
 
 I. An Early Mediaeval Altar . . . . . -3^ 
 
 II. High Altar of the Primatial Church at Lyons . . 34 
 
 III. The Altar of the Church of St. Paul, Saragossa, in 1903 . 35 
 
 IV. Altar from Cceremoniale Parisiense, 1703 ... 36 
 
 V. A Chasuble-shaped Surplice, the grey Ames being thrown 
 
 over the Shoulder of a Canon .... 49 
 
 VI. A Chasuble-shaped Surplice, over which is worn the grey 
 
 Ames, in its Early Form and Use ... 49 
 
 VII. Baptism : The Clerk with Lighted Taper wears the Chas- 
 uble-shaped Surplice Blessing the Water : Both 
 Priest and Clerk wear Chasuble-shaped Surplices . 50 
 
 VIII. Mass, at the time of Communion : The Clerk with Torch 
 wears the Chasuble-shaped Surplice Visitation of the 
 Sick: The Clerk wears the Chasuble-shaped Surplice 51 
 
 IX. Procession in which nearly all wear the Chasuble-shaped 
 Surplice Communion is being given by a Priest in 
 Chasuble-shaped Surplice over which is a Stole . . 52 
 
 X. Old Men of the School of Saint Ambrose at Milan Old 
 Man in Cotta Old Man in " Fanon " bearing Obley 
 and Wine Cruet Hood worn over " Fanon " . 52 
 
 XI. Old Women of the School of Saint Ambrose at Milan 
 Old Woman in Special Dress Old Woman in 
 " Fanon " bearing Obley and Wine Cruet Veil worn 
 over " Fanon "....... 52 
 
 XII. Bishop and two Clerks 55 
 
 XIII. Cardinal's Voting Paper Recto. . . . . -7* 
 
 XIV. Cardinal's Voting Paper Verso. ..... 72 
 
 XV. The Mass of Saint Gregory, dated 1501 . . .126 
 
 XVI. Ritus Deferendi Oblata, Auzerre, 1738 . . . 140 
 XVII. Marriage with Veil ....... 193 
 
 xi
 
 IReviseb anb Sborteneb Services
 
 IReviseb anb Shortened Services 
 
 THE proceedings in both Convocations early in the year 
 1905 and the publication by Lord Hugh Cecil of a Church 
 Discipline Bill in the House of Commons make it clear 
 that the forces of disorganization are once more about to 
 make a vigorous attack upon the institutions and liturgy 
 of the Church of England. Under these circumstances 
 it may be well to recall some of the attempts, successful 
 and unsuccessful, which have been made of late years 
 upon the integrity and historical character of the Prayer 
 Book. One of the successful attempts, and also one of 
 the most deplorable wrongs inflicted upon us, was the 
 passing of the Act of Uniformity Amendment Act, com- 
 monly known as the Shortened Services Act of 1872. We 
 may notice the same want of liturgical knowledge in 
 Convocation then as now, and the same defiance of pre- 
 cedent. There seems to be abroad a firm belief that all 
 will be well if we are only sufficiently bold to disregard 
 altogether what experience may have taught us. We 
 are to look upon the Prayer Book and the Church of 
 England as vile bodies upon which experiments may be 
 tried. 
 
 When the Shortened Services Act was passed in 1872 
 some of us can remember how exultant many of the 
 friends of the Church were. We were told that liturgical 
 expansion and elasticity were gained at last ; " Dearly 
 beloved brethren " was not hereafter to be the only 
 spiritual pabulum which the Church of England had to 
 offer to hungry souls. Our services were now to be 
 bright and hearty, and all would throng to them. The
 
 4 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 wooden age was over ; the golden age had begun. There 
 were some who uttered a word of warning, neglected in 
 the general congratulation ; but even the more cautious 
 did not quite foresee the untoward results that were to 
 follow the passing of the Act. It has not drawn the 
 masses to church. It has discouraged the attendance of 
 the devout laity. It has encouraged idleness and care- 
 lessness ; and, further, it has led directly to the state of 
 liturgical anarchy that we now endure. Of this result 
 we will speak further on, but first of all we propose to 
 examine the lines on which Divine Service is constructed 
 in the Prayer Book, and to compare its unaltered services 
 with those offered to us by the Shortened Services Act. 
 
 If we look at that part of the preface to the Prayer 
 Book that has the heading " Concerning the Services of 
 the Church," we shall find that the term " Divine Ser- 
 vice " is limited, as it was in the middle ages, to the 
 choir offices, to the recitation of the Breviary or Psalter. 
 The ancient Fathers, it tells us, " so ordered the matter 
 that all the whole Bible (or the greatest part thereof) 
 should be read over every year," and the Psalms were 
 divided into seven portions, so that the whole Psalter 
 was read over once a week. When the Divine Service 
 was rearranged in the sixteenth century, this was the 
 ideal which was before the minds of the compilers of 
 the Book of Common Prayer ; but with two services 
 only in the day, Mattins and Evensong, they did not 
 attempt a weekly, but only a monthly, recitation of the 
 Psalter. All the psalms were to be recited, without 
 exception. Services giving the recitation of psalms in 
 their regular order and the reading of Holy Scripture in 
 a definite course were those which the reformed Church 
 of England aimed at, and in this aim she did but follow 
 in the steps of the earliest Christian practice, which we 
 find set forth by Mgr. Batiffol and Dom Suitbert 
 Baumer in their classical works on the history of the 
 Divine Service. 
 
 This being the case, let us see how far the authors of
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 5 
 
 the Shortened Services Act have kept before them the 
 aim of the Church of England in Divine Service. Instead 
 of three to five psalms at each service, permission is given 
 to recite only one. Instead of two lessons from Holy- 
 Scripture, one from the Old Testament, the other from 
 the New, permission is given to read only one lesson. 
 Instead of the large amount of orderly Scripture reading 
 nearly the whole Bible every year to listen to which 
 it was once the good fortune of those who attended 
 Divine Service daily, the amount of Psalter and Scripture 
 lesson is reduced to the smallest, and there is no guarantee 
 that the reading shall be continuous, so that the greatest 
 part of the Bible shall be read through in the year, as 
 designed in the Prayer Book. To-day, the one lesson 
 may be from the Old Testament ; to-morrow, or the 
 rest of the week, the lesson may be from the New ; 
 there may be one lesson only at Mattins, and two at 
 Evensong ; the course and amount of Bible reading are 
 at " the discretion of the minister." There can be no 
 denying that the Scriptural elements, which are the 
 really important parts of Divine Service, have been very 
 greatly reduced, and thereby has been injured the good 
 reputation of the Church of England as the great com- 
 munion of Christendom that feeds her children largely 
 and daily with the pure Word of God. To speak the 
 truth, the Prayer Book conception of the Divine Service 
 was destroyed in 1872. 
 
 Now, nothing would have been easier, if the draftsmen 
 of the Act had really wished it, than to retain the old 
 liturgical lines of Divine Service. They could have done 
 this, and yet shortened the service quite as much as, if 
 not more than, they have done. (We argue for the 
 moment on the supposition, which we should not willingly 
 accept, that it is desirable to shorten the daily service at 
 all.) They could have lopped off the beginning and 
 ending of the service, and yet left us the essence and 
 Scripture part. To show this : at Mattins they could 
 have begun with Venite and continued thence, in the
 
 regular order of the Prayer Book, to the Lord's Prayer 
 after the Creed. At Evensong they could have begun 
 with the psalms of the day, and so on through the lessons 
 of the same, ending with the Lord's Prayer. This would 
 have preserved the marrow of the service, all the psalms 
 and hymns, canticles and lessons, would have been 
 retained ; and privately by those who wished, there 
 could have been prefixed the preparatory part of the 
 service, confession, Lord's Prayer, and versicles ; and at 
 the end could have been added the prayers, or freces, 
 as they are called, collects, and intercessions. If this be 
 thought too bald, the introductory Lord's Prayer and 
 versicles might have been retained, and the prayers with 
 the three collects added at the end without greatly 
 increasing the length of time to be spent in prayer. 
 But the shortened services scheme shows small acquaint- 
 ance with liturgical studies. Nowhere can better evi- 
 dence of this be found than in this one point, viz. the 
 direction to omit Kyrie and the Lord's Prayer * in the 
 prayers (or lesser litany, as it is called) after the Creed. 
 This omission jars upon any one with a sense of antiquity. 
 The Lord's Prayer is the summing up of all the prayers 
 and praises just offered in the psalms and Scripture 
 lessons and canticles. To take it away from this place 
 is to destroy the very kernel of the Divine Service. The 
 Lord's Prayer comes at this place in all rites, ancient 
 and modern. Cardinal Tommasi was one of the first 
 ritualists, if not the very first, that the world has seen 
 since the Reformation, and in his scheme for shortened 
 
 1 Doubtless this omission was suggested by one who objected to repeti- 
 ms. But a real authority, the late Bishop of Oxford, writing in favour of 
 some variation in services, expresses himself as follows : I would not sur- 
 render one of the repetitions of the Lord's Prayer, for I never met a man 
 who, being asked whether in one, two, or three repetitions, he was really 
 oout that he had put his heart into every clause, and had asked with 
 spirit and understanding for everything that, when he really sets to work to 
 is wrapped up in those clauses, could reply that he had done so, 
 could dispense with a supplementary repetition." (W. Stubbs notation 
 ttaW, edited by E. E. Holmes, Longmans, ,904, p. \ 7 )
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 7 
 
 services to be used in country churches and the oratories 
 of lay confraternities, the Lord's Prayer was preserved at 
 the end of the service in the place of the collects. 1 His 
 plan was to remove from the Divine Service all that was 
 not taken from Holy Scripture ; all anthems, responds, 
 metrical hymns, even the collects, in place of which last 
 was to be recited the Lord's Prayer. The Divine Ser- 
 vice would consist of the psalms, hymns, 2 and lessons, 
 and nothing more. The course of the psalms was to be 
 strictly adhered to, proper psalms being recited only on 
 Christmas Day, the Epiphany, Easter Day, and the 
 like. And he gives a scheme of three Scripture lessons 
 based upon the old course of Isaiah in Advent and 
 Genesis in Septuagesima, with the outline of which we 
 are all familiar. There can be no doubt that Cardinal 
 Tommasi's plan of shortened services is infinitely better 
 than that which appears in the schedule of the Act of 
 1872. It is wholly Biblical ; it could not be objected 
 to by a Puritan, and yet nothing could be more primitive 
 and patristic. It is very much to be wished that some 
 Scriptural plan of this sort had been before the draftsmen 
 of the Act of 1872. 
 
 Another ancient feature has disappeared from the 
 scheme of the Shortened Services of 1872 : the invitatory 
 psalm to the services of the day, Venite, which is found 
 all over the West in the ancient rites ; its position as the 
 first psalm of Mattins was kept in the Continental reforms 
 of the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. 3 Then as to 
 Te Deum^ which in very early times appears to have been 
 
 1 Tbomasii Opera, Romae, 1754, ed. Vezzosi, vii. 62 : "De privato ecclesi- 
 asticorum officiorum Breviario extra chorum." As to the Lord's Prayer see 
 p. 67. The whole tract is well worth attention. It has Iately(i904) been edited 
 under the auspices of the Church Historical Society, and published by the 
 Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. 
 
 2 By hymns we mean Te Deum, Benedictus, Magnificat, as in the Prayer 
 Book, or the Scripture canticles at Lauds in the breviaries. 
 
 3 See a paper on " Some local Reforms of the Divine Service attempted on 
 the Continent in the Sixteenth Century" in Transactions oj the St. Paul's Eccle- 
 siological Society, 1901, vol. v. p. 17.
 
 8 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 said every day at Mattins, neither it nor its substitute 
 need ever be said on a weekday at all. Some authority 
 may be quoted for its omission from Septuagesima to 
 Easter, on Ember days, vigils, and other fasts, but its 
 omission on festivals is very unusual. Except by the 
 favour of " the officiating minister " we need not have 
 <Ie Deum on any weekday festival except Christmas Day 
 and Holy Thursday, not even Benedicite ; while the 
 draftsmen of the Act have been careful to protect us 
 from the repetition of Benedictus on St. John Baptist's 
 day. Truly they have here strained out the gnat and 
 swallowed a camel. 
 
 Again, except by favour of " the officiating minister," 
 Quicunque vult need never be heard except on Christmas 
 Day, Easter Day, Ascension Day, Whit-Sunday, Trinity 
 Sunday, or, by chance, on a Sunday upon which some 
 festival happens to fall to which the Athanasian Creed 
 is assigned. The prayers for the King, the royal family, 
 and the estates of the realm need never be said on a week- 
 day. Their omission is perhaps due to some unhistorical 
 notions about the " regalism " of the Prayer Book. 
 There may be no prayers for the sovereign in the Roman 
 liturgy, but this by no means proves that it is a Catholic 
 custom to omit them. Owing to the secular enmity 
 between the Pope and the Emperor, the prayers in the 
 Roman Missal " for kings and for all in authority " have 
 been reduced to nothing. The words " et rege nostro 
 N." have been expunged from the canon of the Mass ; 
 and, since the disappearance of the Holy Roman Empire, 
 the prayers for the Emperor on Good Friday and Easter 
 Even, though still printed, have ceased to be recited, 
 very much as the prayers for the King and Parliament, 
 though printed, have greatly ceased in our time to 
 be recited. The custom in England before the Norman 
 Conquest was to pray for the King daily four times at 
 Mass ; and the Benedictines, if no other order, recited 
 special psalms and collects at Mattins for the King, 
 Queen, and royal family. No remark is needed upon
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 9 
 
 the direction to omit " the prayer for all conditions of 
 men," or " the general thanksgiving." Its want of piety- 
 will be felt by every devout soul. 1 
 
 Evensong is treated in the same way, being usually 
 said without Magnificat, because that is longer than 
 Nunc dimittis. We often find the Act abused in a mis- 
 chievous way. Parochial gatherings are announced, 
 meetings of choirs, harvest festivals are to be held, and 
 with the announcement there appears the statement 
 that " shortened Evensong will be sung." This means 
 that the orderly system of the Prayer Book is broken in 
 upon, a mere section of Evensong recited, while elaborate 
 music is performed, made to last the best part of an 
 hour, the congregation (or shall we say the audience ?) 
 being invited to sit. 
 
 And when the service has been cut down to the limits 
 allowed by the Act, what has been attained ? It is a 
 shame to us to speak of having saved time. That cannot 
 be the gain. The layman who comes to join in the 
 praises of God in his parish church feels no happiness in 
 having the time which he proposes to devote to Divine 
 Service shortened by some poor five minutes. Punctu- 
 ality in beginning the service would please him more. 
 If the service, whether Eucharist or choir office, were 
 begun as the clock strikes, we should have a reform far 
 more acceptable to the layman than shortened services. 
 And to the conscientious clergyman the " shortened 
 services " are, indeed, no shortened services at all. He 
 is bound to recite the whole, " either privately or openly," 
 as it stands in the Prayer Book. So that, after attending 
 
 1 It is allowed by most that the reform of the Roman Breviary under 
 Pius V. in 1568 was not well done, for causes of which the Bishop of Lerida 
 forewarned the Tridentine Fathers. (See below, p. 18.) Yet both the seven- 
 teenth and eighteenth centuries saw several very important schemes of reform 
 of the Divine Service which might have afforded valuable hints to the drafts- 
 men of the Act of 1872. But no intimation is given that they were 
 acquainted with these schemes. At all events they were not heeded, and the 
 usual punishment for contempt of the lessons of experience has descended 
 upon such rejection. |
 
 one of these shortened and eviscerated services, he has to 
 begin his own service over again, and say it as it should 
 be said, with psalms and lessons intact. Shall we be 
 astonished when we hear that under such circumstances 
 lay folk, as well as clergy, discontinue daily attendance 
 at the parish church ? though we know it is always best 
 to recite the service in choir ; or, failing that, in com- 
 pany. 
 
 And now we come to the consideration of the second 
 part of our subject : the disastrous state of affairs to 
 which the working of this Act has led us this " unfortu- 
 nate and much perverted " Act, as an Archbishop of 
 Canterbury has called it, 1 a strong expression considering 
 the position of the speaker as Primate of all England, 
 and his authority as a private doctor in all matters of 
 liturgy. " Unfortunate " the Act is in many respects, 
 but not least in the licence that it has suggested if not 
 definitely allowed beyond the prescribed scope of the Act 
 itself. For example, one psalm only may be said : one 
 or more is the rubric. The whole of one psalm must be 
 said ; yet if a psalm at a service on a week-day be a little 
 long, these lovers of shortened services do not hesitate 
 to leave out the greater part of the psalm, say, of the 
 psalm at Evensong on the third, seventh, fifteenth, and 
 seventeenth days, or at Mattins on the thirteenth day. 
 On the other days they are, indeed, within the law in 
 reading only the shortest psalm, which is that usually 
 chosen ; and so all orderly recitation of the Psalter in 
 course is destroyed ; we no longer have all the psalms 
 recited once a month ; and we are thus reduced pre- 
 cisely to that state lamented in the preface of the Book 
 of Common Prayer, a state which the Reformation was 
 designed to remedy : " now of late time a few of them 
 have been daily said, and the rest utterly omitted." 
 
 It is bad enough to have these omissions practised on 
 
 1 Edward White [Benson], Archbishop of Canterbury, Fisters o. Men 
 London, 1893, p. 97 . (i v . Struggling Views.)
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 1 1 
 
 a week-day ; but when these mutilations are imposed 
 upon the faithful on a Sunday they are plainly illegal, 
 for the Shortened Services Act expressly excludes from 
 its action Sundays and a few great days. 1 The whole 
 of the service as set out in the Prayer Book must be 
 recited once on a Sunday if any regard be had to the law. 
 But we now begin to feel the evils of the indirect sug- 
 gestions of the Act, for who has not attended services 
 on Sunday in country places where Mattins or Evensong, 
 being the only Mattins or Evensong said in that church 
 on that day, has not been mutilated after the same 
 fashion that the Shortened Services Act directs on a 
 week-day ? 
 
 Worse lies before us. Grievous mutilations of the 
 Eucharistic Service have undoubtedly been suggested 
 
 1 In the Times of April 23, 1903, p. 10, col. vi., under the title of "Law- 
 lessness in the Church of England," Mr. F. C. Eeles thus describes his 
 experiences : " On the morning of Good Friday last I went to the parish 
 church of All Saints, Wandsworth, which I believe to be my parish church, 
 expecting to find the services prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer for 
 that occasion. Matins, Metrical Litany, Ante Communion (Special Exhor- 
 tation) were announced for 1 1 a.m., and the Prayer Book services were 
 mutilated in the following manner : 
 
 " (i) Penile was omitted. 
 
 " (2) Another second lesson was substituted for that appointed by the Prayer 
 Book. 
 
 " (3) The first of the three Good Friday collects was omitted. 
 
 " (4) A ' Metrical Litany ' was substituted for the Prayer Book litany 
 which is ordered for every Friday in the year. 
 
 "(5) In the 'Ante Communion' service the second two of the Good 
 Friday collects were omitted. 
 
 " (6) The officiant made certain alterations in reading the exhortation be- 
 ginning ' Dearly beloved ... I purpose through God's assistance,' etc., 
 one such alteration being ' let him come to some discreet and learned 
 Minister,' instead of ' let him come to me, or to some other discreet and 
 learned Minister," as in the Prayer Book. 
 
 "(7) After the alms had been collected he said, 'Let us pray,' omitting 
 the words 'for the whole Estate of Christ's Church militant here in earth* 
 and omitting the whole of the prayer itself. 
 
 " (8) In giving the blessing he omitted the first part. 
 
 "It is worth remarking that at the other church under the care of the 
 Vicar of Wandsworth (Holy Trinity) not one of the Prayer Book services 
 was announced on the printed bills for Good Friday."
 
 12 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 by this Act. The omission of the Ten Commandments 
 and of the Liturgical Collect for the King is bad. Both 
 of these omitted parts have excellent authority ; one is 
 the prophetical lesson, lost, indeed, by the modern 
 Roman Missal, but present to this day in the Ambrosian 
 and Mozarabic liturgies and in Eastern rites ; the Collect 
 for the King is a following of the Missa quotidiana pro rege 
 of the Gregorian Sacramentary. It would seem that 
 the omission of the prayer for the Church militant were 
 almost an impossibility ; yet it is practised ; and so also, 
 notoriously, are left out the Confession, Absolution, and 
 Comfortable Words. How much further mutilation 
 can go we cannot divine ; yet report tells us of other 
 and, if possible, more vital omissions still. Without the 
 Shortened Services Act we should have had none of 
 these scandals, scandals which, if Lord Hugh Cecil's bill 
 become law, may be condoned by Parliament. 
 
 How a clergyman who has made the solemn promise 
 to use the Book of Common Prayer, and none other, can 
 reconcile it to his conscience to do the things which are 
 unhappily now notorious, we do not understand. And 
 this disregard of the rules of the Prayer Book is, it must 
 be owned, not limited to any one school in the Church : 
 the Low Church and the Broad Church are as deeply 
 involved as the High Church. We read in the Guardian 
 of a Broad Church canon arraying himself in some gaudy 
 clothing, unknown in the second year of the reign of 
 King Edward VI., and then proceeding to mutilate the 
 address in the Marriage Service, the substance of which 
 goes back to the early days of Christianity, in order, we 
 may suppose, to spare the prudery of an age that has 
 invented the new woman and other marks of progress. 
 When men who ought to be bound by the rule of the 
 Church (as their name would imply) set this example, 
 how can we be surprised if the new-ordained priest 
 thinks it the right thing to mutilate the forms of sacra- 
 ments and sacramentals to the verge, or beyond the 
 verge, of invalidity ?
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 13 
 
 We have been told that it is now a common custom in 
 certain churches on Sunday mornings to say Mattins and 
 Litany, which are followed by a sermon ; and then, on 
 the withdrawal of the bulk of the congregation, the 
 priest begins at the offertory to celebrate the Eucharist. 
 By this means the reading of the Collect, Epistle, Gospel, 
 and Nicene Creed is avoided. It would seem certain 
 that, unless something can be done to stem this mania 
 of abbreviation, there will be nothing liturgical left to 
 our children. They will have to struggle even for the 
 valid administration of the sacraments. 
 
 In the same direction there has been a tendency in 
 the debates in Convocation of late years to throw too 
 much responsibility into the hands of the clergyman 
 who says Divine Service. A certain choice of collects 
 and other prayers there has been always, as we may see 
 in the ancient Sacramentaries, with their long lists Item 
 alia, but with the structure of the service denned and 
 mapped out with precision. Now, when we go into 
 church we sometimes do not know what sort of service 
 will be said. The psalms and lessons might, for us, be 
 chosen on the spur of the moment ; the modern church 
 services, indeed, are not unlike the extempore services 
 of the Puritans in their uncertain character. A great 
 reform would be the removal of this uncertainty. What 
 we really want is to be no longer at the mercy of " the 
 officiating minister." We want it to be clearly under- 
 stood that the bishop, as soon as he puts on his rochet, 
 or the parish priest his surplice, is no longer his own 
 master, but that he is the servant of the Church. An 
 encouragement of the spirit of obedience to the Book of 
 Common Prayer is an urgent need. 
 
 To add to our anxieties, a demand is now made for a 
 revision of the rubrics, apparently for the purpose of 
 giving greater licence to the officiant and increasing the 
 uncertainty of our services. Only a few years ago, and 
 it seems that we have now to face the danger again, 
 a Bill was introduced into the Upper House of the
 
 i 4 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Canterbury Convocation which threatened us with 
 changes which were the more alarming because we could 
 not see to what they would grow. It was proposed that 
 the alterations made by the two Convocations in the 
 rubrics should be laid upon the table of the Houses of 
 Parliament, and then, after a certain time, if no address 
 were presented against the alterations, they should, with 
 the consent of the Crown, have the force of law. What 
 a prospect of unlimited change was opened before us ! 1 
 And the kind of changes that we may well expect are to 
 
 1 In this connexion we extract from the Guardian of Feb. 26, 1896, a 
 letter from " Anglicanus " on the " Amendment of Rubrics " : 
 
 SiR, The genius for understanding the value and force of rubrics, with 
 which a more gifted generation than our own supplied us, the power of con- 
 structing Church services, or even a single satisfactory prayer, seems to have 
 been long lost to us. It was a venerable tradition of more religious and less 
 restless times. We might have kept the secret by using the material which we 
 have inherited in the Prayer Book. But we have been too busy in other 
 ways. 
 
 " Believing that there can be no fault in ourselves, we always seek for it in 
 the Prayer Book. Last week's ( Convocation was (not to speak disrespectfully) 
 considering whether an indulgent permission to the clergy to exercise their 
 private judgment upon the rubrics would not be desirable. It seems a great 
 power to put into the hands of men who are very unlikely to be more gifted 
 with wisdom and judgment than are men in general, and to show a startling 
 degree of confidence. And considering that it means the breaking down of 
 an intelligent, orderly ecclesiastical system, the subject was considered by 
 some persons to have been treated with too much self-complacency. 
 
 " Rubrics seem to be intended as a carefully arranged barrier against ignor- 
 ance and lawlessness. They are necessary for instructing men who are 
 mostly ill provided with ecclesiastical or even orderly instincts, which are far 
 more rare in this generation than many people imagine. Their value can 
 only be fully understood by those who realize with a real faith the majesty of 
 Him Whom they address in divine service, and the personal worthlessness of 
 themselves. To such men rubrics appear a most grateful help, to be handled 
 with reverence and thankfulness. An accommodation of them, or 'amend- 
 ment,' as it is called, means a revolution. In the spirit in which the attempt 
 is being made, it turns what has a divine reference into a something to be 
 treated by the clergyman as suits his own taste and convenience. Those who 
 need them most will use them least. We have already seen the result of 
 another 'amendment' movement in 'The Shortened Services Act.' As 
 might have been foreseen, that Act has been accepted as permitting mutila- 
 tions and shortening of services anyhow and anywhere, at the will of the 
 incumbent. Just the same would happen with the amended rubrics. It 
 would establish complete lawlessness. In noticing this fact as regards the
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 15 
 
 be seen in the rubrics of the Convocation Prayer Book, 1 
 published in 1880 by Mr. John Murray. The book 
 does not impress us very favourably ; the learning shown 
 in the various amendments is not such as we should 
 imagine we have a right to expect from the Convocation 
 of Canterbury ; and after some study of the book, the 
 conclusion is forced upon us that hardly any of the 
 changes proposed are necessary or called for. In the 
 alterations made by the Canterbury Convocation we 
 could wish for a far greater knowledge of the history of 
 the rubrics, of liturgy in general, and of the Prayer Book 
 in particular. The changes seem to have been made by 
 theologians rather than by rubricians, or ritualists, or 
 liturgical scholars, or whatever name may be given to 
 those who make the history of the Prayer Book their 
 
 shortened services, a very high ecclesiastical authority has spoken of this 
 Act as ' unfortunate and perverted.' It was a case of thoughtless legislation 
 for men who are not troubled with too scrupulous consciences. 
 
 " If it were otherwise desirable, such latitude as is implied by the amended 
 rubrics debate cannot be allowed to a largely untrained body of men, who are 
 hungering for a change in things of the value of which they are largely un- 
 aware, and for the possession of a personal power in connexion with divine 
 service, which must lower divine worship to the level of the meeting-house. 
 I say nothing of the unhappy and helpless position of the laity under such 
 an unlooked-for change from Church authority to that of an individual. 
 We have talked of late of the reunion of Christendom, but we are arranging 
 for a great disruption at home. 
 
 " The effort made by Bishop Blomfield for correcting lawlessness by a 
 demand for a loyal observance of the Prayer Book was deficient in firmness 
 of handling, and was, no doubt, somewhat premature and sudden, but it was 
 true in principle. The Prayer Book is our terra fi rma, which the sermon 
 preached by Mr. Gore at Cambridge on Quinquagesima Sunday seems to 
 point to. If so, it gives a welcome gleam of light in a dreary sky. The 
 work of recovery is no doubt to us a difficult one ; but to counter-work the 
 spirit of lawlessness and disorder which, for our sins, no doubt, has possessed us 
 is a divine work. It must have a blessing. For the Church of England 
 can only do the work which is laid upon her if she has the grace to do it 
 loyally, with the powers and weapons with which she has been providentially 
 endowed, trusting the future to God, with a firm faith. 
 
 " The Spectator of this week calls ' the state of anarchy which now pre- 
 vails in the Church of England almost sickening.' Is Convocation anxious 
 to legalise such anarchy ? " ANGLICANUS." 
 
 1 The new Accession service of 1901 gives fresh evidence of the incapacity 
 of a modern Convocation to deal with liturgy.
 
 1 6 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 study. We need not enter very far into the book before 
 we find evidence of this. First of all there is the Shortened 
 Services Act incorporated into the Prayer Book ; of the 
 value of this as a liturgical production we have already 
 expressed an opinion ; then comes a table of proper 
 psalms for sixteen days, and for the Sundays following 
 some of these days : the annual number is thus nineteen. 
 Surely history is written in vain for some theologians. 
 It was the overgrowth of days for which proper psalms 
 were appointed that led to the state of affairs in the 
 sixteenth century, which made all men cry out, even the 
 Council of Trent, for a reform of the Divine Service. 
 In the Prayer Book of 1662 we have just enough proper 
 psalms ; we need no more ; we could have even spared 
 proper psalms and lessons for Ash Wednesday, for in 
 accordance with ancient practice this day had no special 
 psalms, hymns, or lessons. The use of the seven peni- 
 tential psalms on this day is, however, very appropriate 
 to the beginning of Lent. Now, until the Shortened 
 Services Act was passed, we had the recitation of the 
 Psalter in order, daily, every psalm to his own day. An 
 increase of the number of days to which proper psalms 
 are assigned increases the evil done by the Shortened 
 Services Act, so that it will not be long before our people 
 will only be acquainted with some few of the psalms, 
 and as a whole the Psalter will be unknown to them. 
 This, we are told, is still the case with the modern Roman 
 Catholics, as it was before the sixteenth century : " Now 
 of late time a few of them have been daily said, and the 
 rest utterly omitted." 1 What we want to keep is 
 recitation of the entire Psalter at least every month, 
 and of the whole Bible once a year. 
 
 The state to which some advanced spirits would re- 
 duce our services is really this late mediaeval corruption. 
 They tell us that the psalms are no longer the manual of 
 Christian devotion that nineteen centuries have found 
 them, but that they must be selected for modern use, as 
 
 1 Preface to the Prayer Book.
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 17 
 
 all do not quite express the ideas of liberal Christianity. 
 And we are also told that the lessons from the Bible 
 are not fit for pious ears, but that some kind of legends 
 must be substituted for them in our services. 
 
 To continue our criticism of the Convocation Prayer 
 Book. The ornaments rubric, so far as it concerns the 
 ornaments of the ministers of the Church, is suppressed. 
 Permission is given, in the teeth of history, to use the 
 Easter anthem in place of Venite throughout Easter 
 week. Had the anthem been restored to its place before 
 Mattins, as in the first Edwardian book, so that Venite 
 should never be displaced, that restoration would have 
 been more in accordance with liturgical custom. We 
 find even technical words used in a strange sense. The 
 Roman expression office appears rather than the more 
 English word service. Offertory is positively used of a 
 mere collection of money ; altered, however, by the 
 York Convocation into collection of alms and other devotions 
 of the -people, a correction in which we may very likely 
 trace the hand of the Rev. T. F. Simmons, Canon of 
 York. Most of the alterations made by Canterbury 
 have very wisely been omitted by York ; the ornaments 
 rubric has been restored, and the like. We are indeed 
 grateful to the York Convocation for their action ; but 
 are we sure that we shall always have a rubrician and 
 historian among them like Mr. Simmons, able to control 
 the appetite of the theologians for change ? Shall we 
 always have the good fortune of being able to prevent, 
 as in 1879, tne disturbance of the settlement of 1662 ? 
 It is to be hoped sincerely that means will be taken, if 
 the proposed Bill should ever become law, to make it 
 impossible for us to be at the mercy of any sudden squall 
 of public opinion which will frighten Convocation into 
 some serious act that cannot be undone. We have seen in 
 1904 how much we can now trust the bishops of the 
 northern Province to guard the faith. Our dangers were 
 increased when the author of the proposed bill became 
 Archbishop of Canterbury.
 
 We must own that, as we read Dr. Randall Davidson's 
 speech in Convocation in 1896, we began to fear that the 
 spirit of Pius IX. and of Cardinal Manning was about to 
 find a shelter in the Church of England ; and that, in a 
 communion which exists by virtue of its appeal to history, 
 the appeal to history was now to be denounced as a 
 treason. " It is not to my mind," said the Bishop, 
 " quite satisfactory that, when we want to know about 
 some rule which is to be, or ought to be, enjoined, it 
 should be to archaeologists rather than to theologians 
 that we are bound to go." 1 Now, we know already the 
 likely result of an appeal to theologians from the 
 archaeologists, or rubricians, ritualists, liturgical scholars, 
 or whatever we call them. It is before us in the altered 
 rubrics of the Convocation Prayer Book. We can see 
 there the unintelligent way in which the rubrics have 
 been handled. And yet the advocates of the new Bill 
 desire to change the rubrics while refusing the warnings 
 that can be given by those versed in the study of history, 
 and while despising the checks offered by past experience. 
 The mere introduction of the Bill was alarming enough ; 
 but our alarm is not diminished when those who wish 
 to see the Bill become law tell us that they appeal from 
 the antiquary to the politician ; from the man of know- 
 ledge to the practical man ; from the scholar to the 
 Philistine. When the proposal to review the Roman 
 liturgical books was made at the Council of Trent, and 
 the papal party succeeded in their design of giving this 
 commission to the Roman See, it was not, however, until 
 they had been warned by the Bishop of Lerida that in 
 making liturgical corrections " there was need of an 
 exquisite knowledge of Antiquity, and of the Customs 
 of all Countries, which will not be found in the Court 
 of Rome ; where, though there be Men of exquisite Wit 
 and of great Learning, yet they want skill in this kind, 
 which is necessary to do anything commendably herein." a 
 
 1 Guardian, February, 1896, p. 291, col. iii. 
 
 3 Sir Nathanael Brent's translation of Father Paul's Historv q/ the Council
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 19 
 
 As at the court of Rome in the sixteenth century, there 
 may be excellent theologians, administrators, diplo- 
 matists, men of the world, and courtiers in Convocation 
 in the twentieth. Yet if those with " an exquisite 
 knowledge of Antiquity " be not allowed to speak, we 
 can expect nothing but disaster from a revision of the 
 rubrics under such circumstances. Instead of the 
 liturgical principles which have guided the Church from 
 the earliest times, and which are best known to the 
 archaeologist and historian, we are to consult our con- 
 venience ; hardly a commendable spring of action, even 
 if it be limited by being convenience " in the largest 
 and highest sense of the word." When the Prayer Book 
 was to be revised in 1661, it was not to convenience, 
 but to the ancient liturgies, that our fathers turned their 
 minds. 1 
 
 That this fear of the man with real knowledge is still 
 present with our authorities is shown in the exclusion 
 from the Royal Commission, now investigating disorders 
 in the Church, of any one possessed of a special know- 
 ledge of the history of the rubrics of the Book of Common 
 Prayer. It is even said that only those are examined by 
 the Commission who offer themselves as witnesses, an 
 unsatisfactory method for procuring sound and trust- 
 worthy information on which to base a report to the 
 Sovereign. It is a return to Dr. Davidson's policy 
 of consulting the politician or theologian, but not the 
 historian or the rubrician. 
 
 It is said that the Royal Commission has discovered 
 the most deplorable and widespread disorders in the 
 Church. That but few people obeyed the Book of Com- 
 
 of Trent, London, 1676, p. 747. The reform of the Breviary was done with 
 considerable haste, and the truth of the Bishop's forecast has been verified by 
 the attempts which have been made at amendment. (See Pierre BatifFol, 
 Histoire du Breviaire remain, ch. vi.) 
 
 1 The King's commission directs the Bishops " to advise upon and review 
 the said Book of Common Prayer, comparing the same with the most ancient 
 liturgies which have been used in the Church in the primitive and purest 
 times." (D. Wilkins, Concilia, London, 1737, vol. iv. p. 571.)
 
 20 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 mon Prayer was perfectly well known to all those who 
 had taken any pains to watch events : and it is also true 
 that the disorders are most widespread, not amongst the 
 members of the High Church party, but amongst those 
 in authority, and the Low Church and Broad Church. 
 Instead of doing justice to those who have carefully fol- 
 lowed the laws of this Church and Realm, it may very 
 likely be proposed (and Lord Hugh Cecil's Bill may only 
 be the forerunner of what our authorities will attempt) 
 that these disorders shall all be legalised. The principles 
 of the revision of 1661 are to be given up ; and one parish 
 may be allowed to worship according to John Knox's 
 directory ; another according to Dr. Samuel Clarke's 
 Arian Liturgy ; and a third according to the Roman 
 Mass. 
 
 To revise the Book of Common Prayer would be to 
 court disaster. It is not contended that the book has no 
 imperfections : but any change is full of danger. First, 
 because the Book of Common Prayer is that upon which 
 we are all agreed. It is not merely that which divides us 
 the least, as Thiers said of the French Republic ; it is 
 really that which binds us together the most. It is the 
 source of such unity as we possess. The average layman, 
 with no theological training, he who makes up the great 
 majority of the faithful, looks upon the Prayer Book as 
 the palladium of his religion. He would resist as sacrilege 
 any attempt to retouch it. 
 
 This view of the Prayer Book has lately been put before 
 us very forcibly by a professor in an institution not often 
 credited with great attachment to Establishments. 
 
 The Prayer Book is not a creed nor a battle-cry, and it 
 provokes the spirit of devotion rather than that of debate ; it 
 is religion and not theology. To it the Anglican Church owes 
 the hold she retains on the English people. They are not 
 attracted merely by the fact that the Church is established 
 by law ; it may be doubted whether her catholicity allures 
 the bulk of the laity, and assuredly her standard of preaching 
 is not the force which keeps men from joining other com-
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 21 
 
 munions. But the Book of Common Prayer is unique, a 
 KT?)fj,a e'<? da. Amid the fierce contentions of the churches 
 it gave the Church of England unity, strength, and a way to 
 the hearts of men such as no other church could boast. 1 
 
 Secondly, if it were desirable to make changes in the 
 Prayer Book, who is there among us able to undertake 
 such a burden ? Who is there qualified to revise the 
 prayers and collects, or rearrange the order of services ? 
 No doubt much attention has been paid of late years to 
 the study of liturgies, and there are probably at this 
 moment in England more students of liturgies than it 
 has ever seen before. But this does not of necessity 
 qualify our age to undertake the revision of a liturgy. 
 Knowledge does not of itself confer taste or judgment. 
 Knowledge may indeed save us from making some of the 
 prodigious errors which our authorities have made in our 
 time : from appointing a chapter of the Apocalypse as 
 the liturgical gospel ; from the destruction of the Divine 
 service wrought by the Shortened Services Act ; from 
 revision of the rubrics in the sense of the Convocation 
 Book ; and the like experiments of our age. But know- 
 ledge of liturgies will not always tell us how to revise 
 liturgies. We have seen what has been done to our 
 churches in the way of restoration or revision. Irre- 
 trievable damage has been done in the name of Mr. 
 Street or Mr. Butterfield, and all with the best inten- 
 tions. The same excruciating experiments will be re- 
 peated with the Prayer Book ; and when all is ruined we 
 shall begin to see what we have lost and what a mistake 
 has been made. 
 
 This is not the age in which the Prayer Book may be 
 retouched. No doubt our time is excellent in the 
 natural sciences, in engineering of all sorts, such as railway 
 making, tunnelling, bridge-making ; it can " annihilate 
 both time and space " ; but in the finer arts of life it is 
 wanting. Its record in literature will be that of journal- 
 
 1 Albert Frederick Pollard, Thomas Cranmer and the English Reformation, 
 Putnam, 1904, p. 223. End of Chap. vii.
 
 22 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 ism : clumsy, crude, unpolished,^ full of faults that its 
 haste does not permit it to perceive. 
 
 It is a note of our age that it is always in a hurry. It 
 is even considered a virtue, a thing one aims at and is 
 proud of, not to have a moment that one can call one's 
 own ; never to have any time for reflection or meditation, 
 or an hour in which one can possess one's soul. If such 
 a spirit of haste be allowed to enter into our services, 
 we may be sure that all devotion will be at an end. 
 This fatal desire to save time has brought us the mutila- 
 tions of the Shortened Services Act, or, if the services 
 be not mutilated, it has caused a rapidity of recitation 
 which is a complete bar to the edification of those that 
 come to church. Dr. Gore, the Bishop of Birmingham, is 
 not a writer who is given to over much blaming of the 
 methods of the nineteenth century ; yet he sees the 
 dangers of its hasty ways. " Everything in our modern 
 life, in our age of advertisement and journalism, tends 
 to make us prefer publicity to depth, speed to thorough- 
 ness, numbers to reality ; and to give way to that 
 tendency is to give way to death." It is this desire to 
 save time, to be getting on, even in our most sacred 
 occupations, which has led directly to the liturgical 
 anarchy which every true friend of the Church of England 
 deplores, and would remedy rather than extend. In 
 1896 Dr. Gore called for a return to discipline, though 
 it may be feared that his words have been impaired in 
 value by his leadership of the forces of indiscipline in 
 1904, and he hinted that it might be necessary to tighten 
 the bands of discipline by a new law : 
 
 The time is surely come when excrescences weakening to 
 the life of the whole body need to be pared off by the exercise 
 of a moderate but impartial discipline. Every now and then, 
 when hopes are stirred by the deep evidences of a recovering 
 unity amongst us and a fuller sense of corporate life, our hopes 
 are chilled by some utterance or act of what looks like de- 
 
 1 Sermon preached before the University of Cambridge upon Quinqua- 
 gesima, Guardian, 1896, p. 271, last three lines of col. iii.
 
 REVISED AND SHORTENED SERVICES 23 
 
 liberate lawlessness, deliberate repudiation of principles bind- 
 ing on us all, on which very often no corporate or authori- 
 tative judgment, in utterance or act, is allowed to fall." 
 
 Anything like a Coercion Act we should indeed grieve 
 to see necessary ; and our sorrow would be the greater 
 because we believe that the remedy is still in the hands 
 of the clergy themselves. The great majority are still 
 true to the principles and order of the Church of England, 
 and we feel sure that they could, by putting out their 
 influence, restrain the lawless and the foolish. Let the 
 clergy agree among themselves that they will see the 
 plain directions and rubrics of the Book of Common 
 Prayer impartially kept ; and if this were only under- 
 stood to be the general intention of the great body of 
 the clergy, the number of those who wilfully disregard 
 all rules but their own pleasure ought soon to be reduced 
 to a quantite negligeable. It would very greatly dis- 
 courage these lawless and foolish ones if they could no 
 longer appeal to the Act which has encouraged their 
 sloth and indevotion. The repeal of the Shortened 
 Services Act would be a notification that the source and 
 original of the clippings, mutilations, and excisions now 
 practised upon the services of the Book of Common 
 Prayer had been taken away, and that the state of anarchy 
 created by this Act was no longer recognized. 1 Church- 
 men would welcome warmly a repeal of the schedule of 
 the Act of Uniformity Amendment Act, the mischievous 
 schedule which has set up among us those eviscerated 
 services which are so little credit to the piety, the learn- 
 ing, or the liturgical instincts of the nineteenth century 
 synods of the Church of England. 
 
 1 To show what radical changes in the Sunday service may be carried out 
 under the cover of this Act, it may be mentioned that it has been proposed 
 to get rid of the recitation of the Athanasian Creed by allowing a hurried 
 Mattins to be said full early on the great festivals before the usual Sunday 
 congregation assemble ; and then at 1 1 to allow a mutilated Mattins to be 
 sung, in accordance with the Shortened Services Act. Thus the abolition ot 
 the Athanasian Creed is to be compassed, not by Church and State acting 
 together, but by a side wind of autocratic Episcopal authority.
 
 flfcebfaeval Ceremonial
 
 flfcebiaeval Ceremonial 
 
 [NOTE. The plates referred to in this paper are those contained in 
 Mr. W. H. St. John Hope's English Altars.] 
 
 IN 1899 we were asked by a speaker at the Church 
 Congress held in London why we were so inconsistent as 
 to object to mediaeval ceremonies taking place in churches 
 which are now, in accordance with the prevailing fashion, 
 all built in the mediaeval manner ? Surely, it is said, if 
 the building be mediaeval that which is done in the 
 building should be mediaeval too. For argument's sake 
 let us accept this method of reasoning and see to what it 
 will lead us. It may be that those who ask for mediaeval 
 ceremonies in mediaeval buildings have no very clear idea 
 of what mediaeval ceremonies were. It may be that what 
 they claim as mediaeval may bear no nearer relation to 
 that which history declares to be mediaeval than rococo 
 ornaments do to the mouldings of Westminster Abbey. 
 The word " mediaeval " is often used to express mere like 
 or dislike. By it some mean what is in their eyes perfect 
 or almost divine ; with others it is synonymous with what 
 is weak-minded and contemptible. Its meaning depends 
 greatly upon the value given it by him who uses the word. 
 To define our terms : if people really mean what they say 
 when they ask for mediaeval services, it is that they want 
 the services or ceremonies that were in use between A.D. 
 800 and A.D. 1500, though some elasticity is demanded 
 by certain historians as to the end of the period : some 
 place the end of the middle ages at 1450 abroad, while 
 others set it in England much later than 1500. What- 
 ever view be taken it will be seen that the word 
 " mediaeval " covers a very wide area of time. 
 
 A group of books published in one year, that of 1899, 
 may help us to answer the question : What is mediaeval
 
 28 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 ceremonial ? They all appeared within a very few months 
 of one another, yet apparently without any intention of 
 coincidence on the part of the authors. But they have 
 similar and important lessons to give to those willing to 
 learn what mediaeval services and ceremonies really were. 
 
 We may take first Mr. St. John Hope's English Altars, 
 published at the expense of the Alcuin Club. Both the 
 Alcuin Club and Mr. St. John Hope may be congratu- 
 lated on this beautiful collection of photographic repro- 
 ductions of English altars. We may be especially grateful 
 for two representations of altars of considerable interest, 
 which have not been reproduced before by photography. 
 One is the altar of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, from the 
 manuscript at Trinity Hall, only known to the world at 
 large by a somewhat imperfect plate in Dugdale ; the 
 other is the altar at Westminster in the Islip Roll, of 
 which the Society of Antiquaries some hundred years ago 
 produced a good and careful drawing, but still not to be 
 set in the same line for accuracy with the results given to 
 us to-day by photography. The other altars shown in 
 the series have not, indeed, the historic importance of 
 these two ; but the remainder form a series which begins 
 in the tenth century and ends in the sixteenth, showing 
 us the English altar through the greater part of the medi- 
 aeval period. 
 
 Such a series is simply invaluable to the student of 
 mediaeval ceremonial. No doubt it will astonish, if not 
 shock, those who are accustomed to the altars of a later 
 date. It will destroy a number of idols cherished in our 
 day, a work, it was understood at the time of its forma- 
 tion, which was to be the special function of the Alcuin 
 Club. 
 
 ^ As we look through the plates of the Alcuin Club, the 
 first thing that strikes us is the extreme unlikeness of the 
 altars to those that we are accustomed to see, not merely 
 in churches with an " advanced ritual," but in churches 
 which aim at moderate Anglicanism. In fact they re- 
 mind us a good deal of the altars that were to be ordin-
 
 2 9 
 
 arily seen about the year 1850, and which we were then 
 taught to look upon with horror. We have only to take 
 up an early volume of the Ecclesiologist to find that many 
 things there condemned have a good deal of authority 
 from the middle ages. The men of the Cambridge Cam- 
 den Society were in truth pioneers in their subject. 
 They cannot be blamed because they did not know all 
 that we know after many more years of study. We can 
 very readily sympathize with them in their position ; for 
 they were called upon to act before they had thoroughly 
 grasped the details of the principles upon which they were 
 acting, and thus of necessity they made mistakes, and 
 serious ones too. They seem to have thought that what- 
 ever they found existing in the Church of England about 
 1840 must be modern, while whatever they found on the 
 Continent must be ancient. Now we know that the 
 contrary is often really the case. What the early ecclesi- 
 ologists found and destroyed was usually some ancient or 
 mediaeval custom, that had come down at least three 
 hundred years, from a time before the days of Edward VI.; 
 while the continental practices which they brought in to 
 replace the old English things were less than two hundred 
 years old. Now, too, the mid-Victorian idea that what- 
 ever is foreign and modern is better than what is old and 
 English is, happily, not so prevalent. 
 
 Most of the things with which the early ecclesi- 
 ologists adorned their altars are not to be found in the 
 photographs of the Alcuin Club. Absolutely there are 
 no vases of flowers on the altars from the first to the last 
 of the series ; nor candlesticks of any sort. Even at the 
 obit of Abbot Islip of Westminster, where there is a pro- 
 fusion of candles on the hearse, there is not one candle- 
 stick on the high altar ; nor the thing that the early 
 ecclesiologists were so anxious to put on the altar to 
 support the candlesticks, and that they called the super- 
 altar : a name which showed how little they really knew ; 
 for the English superaltar is the small square hallowed 
 stone on which, set upon an unhallowed altar, the ele-
 
 3 o ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 ments for the Eucharist were consecrated ; nowadays the 
 shelf for the candlesticks is called by its foreign name 
 gradin, to show its foreign origin. Nor in the middle 
 ages were there seven lamps burning before the altar, a 
 practice that has become so fashionable within the last 
 forty years. In the few cases where a lamp is seen, there 
 is only one (PI. II. 3, IV. 2, V. i), and that probably was 
 only lighted during service time. Let it not horrify any 
 one that where the pyx is shown (PI. X. I, XIII.) there 
 is no lamp alight before it. 1 It need not be said that 
 there is no instance of a locker on the altar in which the 
 Holy Sacrament was kept, called by the moderns a taber- 
 nacle ; nor altar cards. 
 
 Another thing that would have vexed the early eccle- 
 siologists, one may be sure, is the mediaeval arrangement 
 of the altar frontal. One of the first things that these 
 good souls did was to get rid of the frontal in many folds : 
 that was most " incorrect," and a stretched embroidered 
 altar-cloth was invariably put in its place. The earliest 
 altar-cloths (PI. I. 2, II. 3) seem to be mere cloths, whether 
 of silk or linen, just thrown over the altar itself 
 and hanging to the ground. Very soon the frontlet 
 appears, the over-frontal (PL II. 2), where the frontal 
 hangs in vertical folds connected by festoons. This 
 arrangement may be seen in Plates III. and IV. ; and 
 Plate V. shows altar-cloths in festoons without any de- 
 finite arrangement. Later on we have altar-cloths in 
 pleats, like a lady's modern dressing-table (PI. VII. 2 and 
 3). These are of the fourteenth century, while on the 
 same plate (No. 5) and of much the same date, there is 
 the first instance of a frontal without folds or pleats, and 
 looking like the modern stretched frontal. The frontal 
 m pleats occurs again in Plate XII. in a drawing of the 
 the fifteenth century ; and this appearance may 
 
 somewhat indistinctly made out in the altars of West- 
 
 EuchTrlTJa's S"" **!, "I* 1 * ," ^ * S the sixteenth *J> * 
 t was often reserved without 1 eht (See Trart, /, A M u 
 
 End,",.- S *'y- .904, P. ,,5. D C lL;*?llJ r ^{"' ""T
 
 PLATH I] 
 
 [Tojacep. 31 
 
 AN EAKLY MEDIAEVAL ALTAR, 
 
 ShowinC the pleating of the frontal, the chalice, corporal, paten, and 
 
 corporas case on the altar ; but no gradin, lights, or cross. 
 
 (British Museum <x K. vi. fo. 246. b.)
 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 31 
 
 minster of 1532 shown in Plates XIII. and XIV. The 
 pleating of the altar frontal is plainly shown in Abbot 
 Lytlington's Mass-Book at Westminster, which is of the 
 fourteenth century. Two of these frontals have been 
 reproduced in collotype in the edition of the Westminster 
 Missal. 1 
 
 The practice of leaving the altar bare has but small 
 countenance from the middle ages. Even the early 
 ecclesiologists did not attempt this ; and it was not until 
 we began the practice of making expeditions into France 
 and Belgium 2 that bare altars were seen to any extent 
 in England. In these countries it may very likely be that 
 to this their poverty and not their will consents. A 
 frontal, of the colour of the Mass, is ordered in the Roman 
 Missal of to-day 3 ; it is an instance of the way in which 
 the rubrics of the Roman Missal are disobeyed ; which 
 ought not to be surprising to those who are accustomed 
 to see the plainest directions of the Book of Common 
 Prayer set aside. The custom of hiding the altar from 
 sight by a veil may be said to be almost universal in the 
 Church ; and at a time when so much is said of the 
 importance of following oecumenical custom it is a little 
 surprising that some Deans and Chapters should allow 
 themselves to be parties to the breaking of the Church 
 law, merely to fall in with the views of Italianizing archi- 
 tects. 
 
 It has sometimes been said that the cross in the middle 
 ages, carried in procession or on the altar, was never with- 
 out the figure of the Crucified. The statement is nega- 
 tived by the crosses shown in English Altars. Altar 
 crosses without figures are abundant. (PL I. 1,2, II. 2, 
 III. 2, IV. 2, V. 2, 4, IX., X. 2.) Still, crucifixes are 
 also seen. (V. I, VII. 3, 4, VIII. 4, X. 4, XIII. XIV.) 
 
 1 Missale ad Usum Ecclesie Westmonasteriensis (Henry Bradshaw Society, 
 1891). Fasc. I. plates i and 4. See plate i of this book. 
 
 2 Even in Belgium bare altars seem to be quite modern. " L'antependium 
 aux couleurs liturgiques persista, dans la Belgique, jusqu'a une epoque 
 recente." (Revue de f Art chrttien, 1886, f serie, t. iv. p. 459 note.) 
 
 3 Missale Romanum, Rubrics generates, xx. (Mechliniae, 1874.)
 
 32 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Riddells, which have lately come much into use among 
 us, do not appear early in the series. The first is of the 
 early fifteenth century. (PI. VIII. 2.) Once it seemed 
 a reasonable theory that the riddells and the dossal were 
 directly descended from the curtains of the ciborium of 
 the basilica ; but their late appearance in English pic- 
 tures tells rather against the idea that they are descended 
 continuously from altar curtains in pre-Norman England ; 
 they may have been imported from abroad in the fifteenth 
 century, or a little earlier. 
 
 The mention of the dossal brings us to the mediaeval 
 reredos. The early altars do not show any, and the 
 reredos begins early in the fifteenth century and con- 
 tinues to the end of the period. The reredos is not 
 higher than would be sufficient to conceal com- 
 pletely the head of the tallest priest at the altar. This 
 supports the opinion that the reredos and dossal are both 
 really the same : that is, part of the curtains which for- 
 merly surrounded the altar, and from the offertory to the 
 communion shrouded the priest from sight. 1 
 
 In Theodore's Penitential, steps before the altar are 
 forbidden, 2 doubtless with reference to Exodus 3 ; and 
 Durandus refers to the same prohibition. 4 In this series 
 of altars we may note that the altar is but rarely raised on 
 more than one step ; sometimes it stands without any. 
 There is in one case a flight of seven steps. (Plate VIII. 4.) 
 But the great altar at Westminster is (Plate XIII.) raised 
 only on two (Mr. Hope says three) steps ; the celebrant 
 would have only two steps to go up when he approached 
 the altar. Mr. Comper 5 points out that it is the tra- 
 dition of the English churches not to have many steps 
 
 1 See the late Mr. G. G. Scott's Essay on the History of Church Architecture, 
 London, 1881, p. 14, note c. 
 
 2 II. i. 6 : Gradus non debemus facere ante altare. (Haddan and Stubbs, 
 Councils, Oxford, 1 8 7 1 , iii. 191.) 
 
 3 Exodus xx. 26. 
 
 * Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, i. ii. 3. (Neapoli, 1859, P- 2 -) 
 5 J. N. Comper, The English Altar and its Surroundings, in Some Principles 
 and Services of the Prayer Book. Rivingtons, 1899, p. 112.
 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 33 
 
 up to the altar ; even in entering the chancel there may 
 be a step down to a lower level. This arrangement 
 followed upon the importance attached in mediaeval 
 England to the low sill of the East window. 
 
 All this we have to make out for ourselves. The 
 Alcuin Club does not draw these lessons, which lie on the 
 surface ; but it promises a work hereafter in which this 
 will be done. In the meantime, while waiting for this 
 tract, there came most opportunely an essay by Mr. 
 J. N. Comper, the well-known architect, which precisely 
 filled up the gap. By a different path Mr. Comper 
 arrived at results which completely accord with the les- 
 sons that we have found in the plates of the Alcuin Club. 
 He tells us of the necessity of the frontal, of the low rere- 
 dos or dossal, of taking away from the altar the gradin, 
 the vases of flowers, the six candles, the tabernacle, and 
 other modern disfigurements, if we are to return to any- 
 thing like mediaeval practice. He tells us (and here he 
 has our English churches built in the middle ages with 
 him) how opposed to precedents it is to wall up the 
 east window in an old church, or raise a reredos in a new 
 church so that the east window becomes diminutive or 
 even disappears altogether. No one who has paid much 
 attention to our old parish churches, before they were 
 " restored," will deny that in the vast majority of cases 
 the sill of the east window comes down close to the altar. 
 Now this is the key of the mediaeval position. If the sill 
 of the east window be only a foot or two from the altar, 
 it follows that there can be no high reredos or dossal ; 
 from this again it follows that the ornaments necessary 
 for the ceremonial of the altar must be kept low. They 
 must be only so high as just to reach the top of the rere- 
 dos or dossal. " To make them large," says Mr. Comper, 
 " destroys the scale of the church " x Be it also re- 
 membered that out of Mass no candlesticks were left 
 on the altar ; the frontal, frontlets, and sometimes the 
 
 1 J. N. Comper, op. cit. p. 92.
 
 34 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 linen remained, but the two candlesticks were taken 
 away. In our country we know this practice remained 
 in certain cathedral churches until our own time. The 
 candles were placed on the altar only at the time of the 
 celebration of the Eucharist or when they were lighted. 
 It was the same at Lyons in France until the middle of the 
 eighteenth century. 1 As Mr. Comper justly remarks, 
 " they were there as part of the ceremonial, rather than 
 as forming the decoration of the altar." The candle- 
 sticks were taken away just as the book or the chalice 
 was taken away. 
 
 Mr. Everard Green, Rouge Dragon, noticed in Spain 
 in 1903, the survival of the custom of taking away the 
 altar cross and candlesticks and the linen from the altar 
 as soon as service was over. He has been kind enough to 
 allow the following notes to be printed, and to lend a 
 photograph of the Church of St. Paul at Saragossa, show- 
 ing the denuded altar. (See plate III. of this book.) 
 
 When at Saragossa in Spain this Lent, I noticed after Divine 
 Service, in the two cathedral churches of La Seo and El Pilar 
 as well as in the collegiate church of San Pablo, that the altar 
 cross and candlesticks with tapers (two only in number), as 
 well as the altar linen, were all removed from these high altars, 
 which, in consequence, were left bare of all ornaments, the 
 frontals or antependiums (of the proper liturgical colour of 
 the office of the day) being alone left. 
 
 These high altars had no gradines, and the silver altar cross 
 and two silver candlesticks were placed on the altar linen, 
 and were of very moderate height, as were the two tapers 
 
 1 Morel de Voleine, De F Influence de la Liturgie catholique sur /' Architecture, 
 Lyons, iS6i, p. 15 : "L'autel etait une table rase et sans autres ornements 
 que ses parements d'etoffes. Ce ne fut qu'en 1746, que Ton prit Phabitude 
 d'y laisser les chandeliers et la croix, qu'auparavant on mettait pour la messe 
 et que Ton otait ensuite." (For a view of the High Altar at Lyons before 
 1718, see plate II. of this book.) It had only one step ; and the author 
 complains of the theatrical number of candles recently introduced ; of which 
 he says : " II est possible que cette illumination attire des curieux, mais &, 
 coup sur elle est fort opposee a 1'ancien esprit liturgique de la Primatiale, si 
 grave, li oppose aux petits precedes mis en usage pour produire de 1'effet." 
 
 2 J. N. Comper, op. cit. p. 93. .
 
 PLATE II] 
 
 [To face p. 34 
 
 HIGH ALTAR OF THE PRIMATIAL CHURCH AT 
 LYONS. 
 
 From [Lebrun des Marettes] Vcyages Litttrgques de France, 
 . . . par le Sieur de Moleon, Paris, 1718. 
 
 See note i on p. 34 of this work. It was only after 1746 that 
 
 the practice began of leaving the cross and candlesticks on 
 
 the altar out of service time. 
 
 Note the Royal Arms of France over the Archbishop's throne.
 
 Cu 
 
 X 
 
 u 
 
 K 
 p 
 ac 
 o 
 

 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 35 
 
 which were of use to the celebrant singing High Mass from 
 the altar missal. 
 
 On festivals, as the Annunciation, St. Joseph, etc., mov- 
 able wooden gradines, faced with silver, were placed on the 
 altar for reliquaries, and church plate of all descriptions, but 
 the altar cross and candlesticks (seven or six for great feasts, 
 four for ordinary Sundays, and two in Lent, even for high 
 mass) were placed on the altar linen, and frequently when 
 only two candlesticks were on the altar, instead of being 
 placed at the back of the altar, they were placed at each end 
 in front, so as to be of more use. 
 
 Flowers, real or counterfeit, seem to be unknown on these 
 high altars, and Spanish altar cards are reduced to a very 
 small scale. The centre one generally has only the words of 
 Institution and the prayer immediately preceding them, and 
 as the altar cross is on the altar and just before the eyes of the 
 priest, is not fussy with a picture of the Crucifixion, and the 
 silly custom of putting the altar card with the last Gospel of 
 St. John, when it is not said, is unknown in most of the great 
 churches of Spain, and where this is the custom the Lavabo 
 card is merely held before the priest as he washes his fingers, 
 and not placed on the altar. At times however two book- 
 stands are placed on the altar, and where this is the rule, the 
 last Gospel of St. John, and the Psalm Lavabo, are often 
 engraved on the missal book-stands. 
 
 At Gerona and Granada I noticed all through Lent the 
 white Lenten Veil, but at Seville and Toledo it is only 
 seen in Passiontide. 
 
 Mr. Everard Green, it will be noticed, writes as a 
 Roman Catholic. 
 
 The Alcuin Club gives us no help in telling the number 
 of lights set upon the altar in the middle ages, for the good 
 reason that not one of the plates in its book shows a 
 candlestick on the altar. Until late in the middle ages 
 the lights were not as a rule set on the altar, but a candle 
 was held in the hand of the clerk. But Mr. Comper is 
 able to help us in the number of lights ; and so, too, 
 does Mr. Cuthbert Atchley in an essay printed with Mr. 
 Comper's in the volume just noticed. Both Mr. Com-
 
 36 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 per and Mr. Atchley (whose exhaustive researches into 
 the ceremonial use of lights in the middle ages compel 
 admiration) agree that no more than two lights were set 
 on the altar for Mass. There were others, sometimes, 
 around the altar, according to the size and wealth of the 
 church, but on the altar there were not more than two. 
 The ceremonialists of a few years ago made a great mis- 
 take in introducing the custom of placing six lights on 
 the altar (or rather on the gradin x ) ; it is a mistake, 
 whether looked at from a legal, or historical, or politic, 
 or aesthetic point of view. If we are to return to medi- 
 aeval ceremonial the six lights on the altar must be the first 
 things to be laid aside, together with the seven lamps. 
 
 It is exceedingly interesting to follow Mr. Comper 
 with his proof that mediaeval customs lasted on long after 
 the decadence of the Renaissance. He gives a drawing 
 of an altar from the C&remoniale Parisiense of 1703, 
 where every mediaeval feature is retained though clothed 
 in classical form ; and, what is very noteworthy, even 
 the classical form fails to take from the altar its dignity 
 and simplicity. But at the end of the last century we 
 see the degradation to which rococo taste can lead in the 
 copperplate prefixed to the edition in 1777 of Le Brun's 
 Explication^ which, for some unknown reason, Dr. Rock 
 reproduced in his Hierurgia in 1833. He took away even 
 the solitary mediaeval ornament that remained in Le Brun, 
 the antependium. If Sir Thomas More could be brought 
 back to life he would hardly recognize Dr. Rock's 
 altar as Christian ; it would certainly not be like those 
 at which he was accustomed to worship. The surround- 
 ings of an old unrestored altar of 1830 would be to him 
 
 1 There is a curious legend, met with more especially amongst bishops and 
 archdeacons, that the Privy Council has forbidden the setting of the candle- 
 sticks directly on the altar without the intervention of a shelf. In the 
 Report, however, of the Committee of the Alcuin Club against the lawfulness 
 of the gradin they mention the opinion of Sir Walter Phillimore, which it 
 may be hoped will finally lay the ghost to rest. He says : " No Court has 
 decided that it is illegal to put candlesticks directly on the memo " (Alcuin 
 Club Tracts, i. 64.)
 
 PLATE IV] 
 
 [To face p. 36 
 
 ALTAR FROM OEREMONIALE PARISIEXSE, 1703. 
 
 Note the retention of the riddells. dossal, and altar frontal, the four pillars around the altar 
 the hangmg p,x ; only two steps, only one lamp, no candlesticks or cross on altar
 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 37 
 
 more familiar than the overdone furniture that we too 
 often see in a modern church. 
 
 Leaving the efforts of the Alcuin Club and of Mr. 
 Comper to recall us to the law of the Church of England 
 that the chancels shall remain as they have done in times 
 past, not as in the times of rococo ornamentation, we 
 may ask what services did the people attend in the middle 
 ages ? Did they have " devotions " ? or did they follow 
 the beaten track of the Church in Psalter and Eucharist F 
 No one who has paid any attention to the life of the 
 English people in the middle ages can doubt that the 
 Psalter took up the greater part of their public worship. 
 Mattins, Mass, and Evensong were the duty of every 
 Sunday and holiday. To quote one mediaeval author, 
 Piers the Plowman ; speaking of the business of each 
 class, he says : 
 
 ' Lewd [i.e. lay] men to labour ; and lords to hunt, 
 
 And upon Sundays to cease ; God's service to hear 
 Both mattins and mass ; and after meat, in churches 
 To hear evensong ; every man ought.' 
 
 And of holidays, he says : 
 
 Each holiday to hear wholly the service. 1 
 
 In an old English play, believed to have been written 
 about the year 1475 (lately edited by Mr. Alfred W. 
 Pollard), Nowadays tries to lead Mankind astray and 
 says to him : 
 
 On Sundays, on the morrow, erly be tyme, 
 
 Ye xall with ws to the alle-house erly, to go dyne, 
 
 A[nd] for-ber masse and matens, owres and prime. 2 
 
 1 The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman (ed. W. W. Skeat), 
 Oxford, 1886, i. 240, C. text. Passus X. lines 223-31. 
 
 2 Mankind, in the Macro Plays, Early English Text Society, 1904, p. 26. 
 This is fresh evidence besides what has been offered elsewhere that the whole 
 parish was accustomed to hear prime, and that no new departure was made in 
 1549 in the matter of Quicunque i vult. Yet doubtless when the next attack
 
 38 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 For Mankind it was the most natural thing in the 
 world when he wanted to say his prayers to turn to the 
 Divine Service : 
 
 I wyll here my ewynsonge here or I dysseuer. 
 And Titivillus, the devil, is pleased to interrupt him : 
 
 Mankynde was besy in hys prayere, yet I dyde hym aryse ; 
 He is conveyde (be Cryst !) from hys dyvyn seruyce. 1 
 
 And it must have been held to be a duty as late as the 
 times of Queen Mary ; for a Protestant writer could say 
 that the clergy taught that the first of deadly sins was 
 " losing of mass, mattins, and evensong," 2 while drun- 
 kenness was only venial. 
 
 If, then, we are to return to mediaeval services we must 
 every Sunday hear wholly the Mass, Mattins, and Even- 
 song, and the procession, which we now call Litany. It 
 would be no mediaeval practice to thrust Mattins and 
 Litany into a corner ; " mattins, evensong, and Mass " 
 were " goodly sung with pricksong and organs " 3 ; the 
 mere hearing of a Mass said in twenty minutes or half an 
 hour would have seemed to the mediaeval mind a most 
 inadequate performance of Sunday duty. And the popu- 
 lar prayers, the Hours of our Lady, and the like, all took 
 the form of the Divine Service, Psalms and Lessons. 
 There seems no authority from the middle ages for 
 getting through Mattins and Litany in a hurry on Sun- 
 is made upon the Athanasian Creed, the same old disproved arguments will 
 be brought forward without any regard to the facts of the case. Liberal 
 churchmen are as bigoted and hard to teach as any other kind of man. 
 
 1 See Mankind, pp. 20 and 21. 
 
 2 " A dialogue or familiar talke betnuene tnvo neighbours, concerning the 
 chyefest ceremonies, &c. From Roane, by Michael Wodde, the XX. of 
 February Anno Domini M.D.LIIII." Sheet B. iiii. b. The tract is said 
 to be rare. Its shelf-mark in the British Museum is C. 25. c. 26. 
 
 3 See A dialogue, Sec., Sheet D. i. b. By the Puritan organs were as much 
 disliked as anything. Edward VI. *s commissioners destroyed them as monu- 
 ments of idolatry and superstition ; and our Puritan Oliver in the tract 
 quoted above, after Nicholas has told him of the goodly singing with organs, 
 says : "Ye pipe him a dance on the organs."
 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 39 
 
 day morning with hardly any congregation ; and then 
 calling the people together for " solemn celebration " 
 after a perfunctory performance of the Divine Service. 
 The Mass and Divine Service seem to have been re- 
 quired of the parishioner both in the same degree. l The 
 discouragement in our own times of attendance by lay- 
 men on Divine Service has made some persons think that 
 such attendance was not enforced in the middle ages. 
 Quicunque vult was thus unknown to the laity, and 
 the Church of England made a new departure in 1549 by 
 causing Quicunque vult to be recited with Mattins of 
 Edward VI. 's first book. If it were the custom of the 
 layman " to hear wholly the service," he must have been 
 acquainted with Quicunque vult, and thus the recitation 
 of Quicunque vult before him was no new departure. 
 
 Nor will there be found in the middle ages much 
 authority for what may be called exact ceremonial, a 
 ceremonial in which every trifling position of fingers or 
 hands is prescribed with the utmost minuteness. In Dr. 
 Lippe's reprint of an early Roman Missal, 2 the first 
 edition known to us, such directions are really con- 
 
 1 This tradition persisted long among the English Roman Catholics. In 
 A Manual of Godly Prayers and Litanies, published at Rouen in 1614 by 
 C. Hamilton, at p. 146, under "a table of sinnes to help the ignorant or ill 
 of memory ; wherein, when they would be confessed, they may finde out 
 with little labour the manifold waies of offending God," we find the 
 question : Omitted to say my Mattins, Evensong or other devotions. This 
 continues in the Manual of Devout Prayers, by His Majesty's Command, 
 Lond. Henry Hills, 1688, p. 141. It has, however, disappeared in the 
 edition of 1733. It maybe quite the ultramontane modern idea to neglect 
 the Divine Service for the rosary, benediction, and other devotions ; but the 
 older English Roman Catholics knew better than this. What a handbook 
 of devotion the breviary was the following passage from one of Charles 11. 'a 
 letters will show. He is speaking of his wife, Queen Catherine of Braganza : 
 " She is not only content to say the greate office in the breviere every day, but 
 likewise that of our Lady too, and this is besides going to chapell," (Osmund 
 Airy, Charles II. Longmans, 1904, chap. iii. p. 207.) How much better 
 would it be if we could persuade the churchmen of our time to make the 
 Divine Service in the Prayer Book their handbook for a really solid devotion, 
 rather than the emasculated offices in the little books, too often taken direct 
 from foreign sources. 
 
 2 Missale Romanum, Mediolani, 1474, edited by Robert Lippe, LL.D., for 
 the Henry Bradshaw Society, 1899.
 
 4 o ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 spicuous by their absence to those accustomed to the 
 rules given in the Roman Missal of to-day. In the 
 Ordinary of the Mass of 1474 the rubrics are as " meagre " 
 as those of the Book of Common Prayer ; and before the 
 Ordinary there is just a page of general rubrics of no use 
 at all to those in search of exactness. Very likely during 
 the middle ages there was little of such exactness ; we 
 may see something of it among the early Dominicans ; 
 but a certain German, John Burckard, of Strassburg, held 
 a high place in the papal court under Alexander VI., 
 and Burckard brought out, in 1502, a book called Ordo 
 Missae, in the preface of which he complains how "in- 
 correct " many priests were in saying Mass, and that he 
 thought it unworthy of the Roman Church, the mother 
 and mistress of all others, not to set out a certain method 
 of saying Mass to be followed by all. He therefore pub- 
 lished his book, with a recommendatory letter from 
 Alexander VI. 1 These directions evidently became 
 popular ; later they appeared printed in Roman Mass 
 books, and in the reform of Pius V. in 1570, their sub- 
 stance was definitely prefixed to the Missal as the Ritus 
 servandus. 
 
 How different this humanist or post-mediaeval mind 
 of Burckard's was from that of the early middle age 
 Mr. Edmund Bishop's tract plainly shows. 2 This was 
 read as a paper before a society which enjoyed Cardinal 
 Vaughan's protection, so that its freedom from any taint 
 of Anglicanism may be guaranteed. And yet Mr. 
 Bishop's results must come as an astonishment to many 
 
 1 Burckard does not seem to have enjoyed the best reputation among his 
 contemporaries. Paride de Grassi gives him this short character : Fuit 
 supra omnes bestias bestialissimus, inhumanissimus, iniiidiosissimus. (Mariano 
 Armellini, // diario di Leone X. di Paride de Grassi, Roma, 1884, notes, 
 p. 96.) The early Dominican ceremonial as well as John Burckard's Ordo 
 missae are printed in Tracts on the Mass, Henry Bradshaw Society, 1904. 
 
 2 Edmund Bishop, The Genius of the Roman Rite, being a paper read at the 
 Meeting of the Historical Research Society at Archbishop's House, Westminster, on 
 May %th, 1899. Second Edition, F. E. Robinson, 1902. This tract is now 
 included in Essays on Ceremonial, the fourth volume in the Library of Liturgi- 
 ology and Ecclesiology for English Readers (De La More Press, 1904).
 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 41 
 
 who have not made a study of Ordo Romanus /. and kin- 
 dred documents. 1 Mr. Bishop tells us that the character 
 of the ceremonial of the native Roman rite was extreme 
 simplicity, and this character is retained during the early 
 part of the middle ages. We see this simplicity when 
 Mr. Bishop has stripped off the accretions of the later 
 middle ages, which came from across the Alps. Such 
 are the Asperges, Confiteor, ludtca, and all the prayers 
 said by the priest until he ascend to the altar ; these are 
 " all non-Roman and of comparatively late introduction " 
 (p. 13). So also " the whole of the prayers accompanying 
 the acts of the offertory and the censing of the altar " 
 (p. 13) ; in fact, all from the Gospel up to the Secreta 
 are " of late mediaeval introduction." In like manner, 
 " the three prayers said before the Communion, and all 
 that follows the collect called the ' Post-Communion ' (ex- 
 cept Ite missa esf) are again late, and all borrowed." 
 (p. 14.) Mr. Bishop thinks Gloria in excelsis may have 
 come into the Roman Mass in the sixth century, the 
 Creed in the eleventh, Agnus Dei at the end of the 
 seventh, while the anthems at the Introit, between the 
 Epistle and Gospel, at the Offertory and Communion 
 are not of Roman origin, but were adopted by Rome as 
 soon as they arose elsewhere and began to spread. 
 
 What, then, is left to us of the pure Roman rite as it 
 existed in the early middle ages ? We may see by the 
 following table which has been constructed from Mr. 
 Bishop's tract. The elements of the pure Roman rite are 
 printed in Clarendon type, while the accretions are in 
 different type ; the late additions being in ordinary 
 Roman type ; and the early musical additions in Italic 
 capitals. 
 
 1 The reader may be reminded of a valuable help to his studies in the early 
 Roman liturgy and its ceremonies, which has lately appeared as the sixth vol- 
 ume of the Library of Liturgiology and Ecclesiology for English Readers. 
 Mr. Cuthbert Atchley has edited and translated Ordo Romanus Primus, and 
 the work is accompanied by important notes and excellent illustrations.
 
 42 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 ORDER OF THE MODERN ROMAN MASS. 
 
 Asperges. 
 
 ludica and Confiteor. 
 
 ANTHEM AT: THE INTROIT. 
 
 Kyrie eleison. (second half of fifth century.} 
 
 Gloria in excelsis. (sixth century.) 
 
 COLLECT. 
 
 EPISTLE. 
 
 GRADUAL. 
 
 BLESSING BEFORE THE GOSPEL. 
 
 GOSPEL. 
 
 Creed, (eleventh century F) 
 ANTHEM AT THE OFFERTORT. 
 
 All the prayers and the psalm at the Offertory, (twelfth century.) 
 OBATE PBATBES. 
 
 SECBET COLLECT. (suj*r otlata.) 
 
 PBEPACE. 
 
 CANON. 
 
 LOBD'S PBAYEB. 
 
 PAX DOMINI SIT SEMPEB VOBISCUM. 
 Agnus Dei. (end of seventh century.) 
 
 Prayers before Communion. 
 
 ANTHEM AT THE COMMUNION. 
 
 POST-COMMUNION COLLECT. 
 
 ITE MISSA EST. 
 All after he missa est. (tenth century and later.) 
 
 And the ceremonial seems to have been as simple as 
 the rite. 
 
 " In trying to figure to ourselves," says Mr. Bishop, " the 
 true and unadulterated Roman ceremonial of the Mass, we 
 must conceive ritual pomp as confined to two moments : first, 
 the entry of the celebrant into the church and up to the 
 altar ; secondly, in connexion with the singing of the Gos- 
 pel." (p. 17.) 
 
 Incense was used only at the two moments of entering 
 the church and of singing the Gospel.
 
 MEDIEVAL CEREMONIAL 43 
 
 All ideas of censing the altar, the elements for the sacrifice, 
 or persons, are alien to the native Roman rite, and have been 
 introduced into it from elsewhere in the course of centuries. 
 (P- I?-) 
 
 Some more of Mr. Bishop's statements disturbing to the 
 mind of a seminarist are that " the ceremonial parts of the 
 old Roman Mass are over, just as the sacrifice is about to 
 begin " (p. 18) and that, " what is considered most 
 picturesque, or attractive, or devout, or effective in a 
 word, what is most interesting . . . what some people 
 call the ' sensuousness of the Roman Catholic ritual,' 
 form precisely that element in it which is not originally 
 Roman at all." (p. 22.) These changes are traced by 
 Mr. Bishop to the introduction, in the twelfth and thir- 
 teenth centuries, of one single act : the elevation of the 
 host and chalice about the time of consecration, an act 
 which brought in its train great additions to the cere- 
 monial, " lights and torches, censings, bell ringings, and 
 genuflexions." (p. 16.) Before elevation came to be the 
 custom, the Canon must have been recited in profound 
 silence, broken only by Nobis quoque ; the exact moment 
 of consecration was not evident. Until the schoolmen 
 determined that consecration ensued upon the priest 
 reciting the words of institution, it was not reasonable to 
 elevate the host and chalice at this place. In England 
 the censings and genuflexions were long in making their 
 way. Only two churches are known in which censing 
 was practised at the elevation ; and no printed English 
 Missal has any rubric directing genuflexion at or after 
 the consecration. No more has the Roman Missal of 
 1474. Apparently genuflexion only makes its definite 
 appearance in the rubrics after the reform of I57O. 1 
 
 1 It is not an easy matter to find a pre-Pian edition o. the Roman Missal, 
 even with the resources of the British Museum at our disposal, that directs 
 the celebrant to genuflect at or after the moment of consecration. Some of 
 the Roman Missals printed at Paris before 1570 direct the priest to adore 
 cum mediocri inciinatione, but not more.
 
 44 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 It is likely enough that the demand for or condemna- 
 tion of mediaeval ceremonies is based upon a considerable 
 misconception of their nature and character. Many of 
 those who ask for or condemn mediaeval services, think 
 that mediaeval ceremonial means an almost exact replica 
 of the system pursued at the present moment at Farm 
 Street or the Brompton Oratory. 1 The Church Asso- 
 ciation evidently thinks this. So do many of the public. 
 A mediaeval service, they say, must of necessity be of the 
 nature of a pageant. And the Reformers of the sixteenth 
 century, never too scrupulous, did their best to foster 
 this idea. The changes brought about in divine worship 
 on both sides, Catholic and Puritan, have not yet been 
 properly realized. 2 The Protestants have exaggerated 
 the sensuous character of the mediaeval services ; while 
 the Papists have quietly assumed that the ceremonial all 
 through the middle ages was exactly that to be found 
 at the present time on the Continent. Mr. Edmund 
 Bishop, whose prejudices, if he have any, would be on one 
 side, tells us that the genius of the early mediaeval Roman 
 rite was " soberness and sense." 3 The modern ex- 
 travagance in the use of flowers and candles, of thea- 
 trical music, the fussiness of modern ceremonial, are all 
 opposed to soberness and sense. If we are to return to 
 mediaeval services there will have to be a radical change 
 made in the ceremonial adjuncts introduced within the 
 last twenty or thirty years. At the present moment it 
 
 1 If we attend the services at a church where " full Sarum Ritual " is 
 promised, we usually find nothing but the ordinary Roman ceremonial 
 grafted on to the service in the Book of Common Prayer. All that we 
 really know about the Sarum ceremonial is ignored. One simple test may 
 be applied. If the chalice be mixed at the offertory we know the ceremonial 
 cannot be Sarum. 
 
 2 The Cornish rebels of Edward VI. 's time seem to have thought the 
 First Prayer Book not sober enough as compared with the mediaeval service. 
 In their Eighth Article they say : " We will not receive the new service 
 because it is but like a Christmas game, but we will have our old service of 
 matins, mass,J evensong, and procession in Latin, not in English, as it was 
 before." (Nicholas Pocock, Troubles connected with the Prayer Book 0/1549 
 Camden Society, 1884, p. 169.) 
 
 3 Eilm. Bishop, op. cit.p. 34.
 
 45 
 
 is no longer authority or precedent i that dictates cere- 
 monial. It is mere hedonism what the parish will like 
 best, or what will draw the largest congregations, or what 
 will look prettiest. To use the words of Mr. Robert 
 Bridges, speaking of another church practice : it would 
 seem, if our ceremonial " is to stir the emotions of the 
 vulgar, that it must itself be both vulgar and modern ; 
 and that, in the interest of the weaker mind, we must 
 renounce all ancient tradition and the maxims of art, in 
 order to be in touch with the music-halls." There can 
 be no doubt that to be in touch with the music-halls is 
 the aim of a great deal of the ceremonial of the day. 3 The 
 wish is to draw people to church ; by what means, flower 
 services, egg services, doll services, lantern services, or 
 any other extravagance, does not very much matter ; 
 nor what they do when they are got to church. 4 The 
 worship of Almighty God passes into the background. 
 
 The call, then, to a greater severity and simplification 
 of our services is imperative. It is repeated by one who 
 is not often considered to be desirous of moderating the 
 enthusiasm of " ritualists." But Lord Halifax tells us 
 that " the perfection of western ritual (i.e. ceremonial) 
 was reached in the early middle ages," and that after the 
 
 1 Some ot the worst extravagances in ceremonial have arisen merely from 
 copying what is done in a neighbour parish. An " advanced " church takes 
 up some outlandish trick. Not to be behind the times, it is instantly 
 adopted in another parish, but no one is able to give any reason from 
 authority or precedent for what is done. Its source is imitation. One 
 parish discards altar frontals, or puts lace on its altar linen, lights up seven 
 lamps before the altar, or sets six candles on the altar. At once others begin 
 the same, law or tradition on the subject being left quite ignored. The 
 bishops take no heed of these things ; as the idea of making the ornaments 
 rubric an effective test does not seem to have yet established itself in the 
 episcopal mind. 
 
 3 Journal of Theological Studies, October, 1899, i. 48. The whole of Mr. 
 Bridges' essay may be studied at the present day with great profit. 
 
 3 About the year 1900 a congregation, protesting against some request 
 of a bishop, complained of being deprived of the " enjoyment " of the 
 use of incense ! 
 
 4 " II n'importe que les tables de Jesus-Christ soient remplis d'abomina- 
 tions, pourvu que vos eglises soient pleines de monde." (Blaise Pascal, Les 
 Provinciates, Lettre 16 ; 6d. Louandre, 1870, p. 313.)
 
 46 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 thirteenth century it " degenerated into over elabora- 
 tion." l We know the influence of Lord Halifax is 
 very great indeed with a certain number of Churchmen 
 whom the newspapers call " extremists." Let us hope 
 that his authority with these friends of his will be suffi- 
 cient to induce them to carry out this much needed 
 return to a mediaeval simplicity of ceremonial to which he 
 himself specially invites them. The removal of the post- 
 mediaeval ornaments and ceremonies that have been lately 
 introduced amongst us from abroad would also greatly 
 strengthen the position of the Church. We could then 
 appeal to the " plain law of the land " as set out in the 
 directions that the Chancels shall remain as they have 
 done in times past, and that such Ornaments shall be 
 retained and be in use as were in this Church of England 
 in a certain year. With the absolutely impregnable 
 position which the Ornaments Rubric gives us, if loyally 
 obeyed, we need never be ashamed when we speak with 
 our enemies in the gate. 
 
 1 Guardian, October 18, 1899, p. 1450, col. iii.
 
 n tTwo "Unusual jforms of 
 Xtnen IDestments
 
 PLATE V] 
 
 [To face p. 49 
 
 Cnamtuu RjyuLtrJt LlJjLii CalhtJraUi Jl 
 
 A CHASUBLE-SHAPED SURPLICE, THE GHEY AMES 
 
 BEING THROWN OVER THE SHOULDER 
 
 OF A CANON. 
 
 From C. Du Molinet, Figures des different habits des 
 Cltanoines regnliers, Paris, 1666.
 
 PLATE VI] 
 
 [To face p. 48 
 
 /tr Rtyit/.Je Ctaofienuulfra en./fustnc/if . 
 
 A CHASUBLE-SHAPED SURPLICE OVER WHICH IS 
 WORN THE GREY AMES, IN ITS EARLY 
 
 FORM AND USE. 
 
 From C. Du Molinet, Figures rf diffcrents habits des chanoines registers, 
 Paris, 1666.
 
 IN the March of 1892, I found myself at Aries ; and 
 wandering up into the cloister on the south side of 
 the church I found a sculptured figure of St. Stephen 
 at the north-east corner where the two walks join. 
 The sculpture is attributed to the beginning of the 
 twelfth century. 1 St. Stephen is dressed in what 
 I took at first for a chasuble. Deacons are not usually 
 represented in chasubles, but in tunicles ; but then we 
 know that they wear chasubles during a good part of the 
 year : as in Advent, from Septuagesima to Easter, on 
 Vigils, and on Ember days. I was then on my way to 
 Spain ; and a few days after I came to Valentia ; there 
 the clerks wore a curious kind of linen vestment, shaped 
 not unlike that of St. Stephen at Aries ; it came down 
 in front like a chasuble, pointed, the arms appearing on 
 each side of the pointed part, but each arm carried long 
 wings passing behind : behind, the vestment was cut 
 square, not pointed as in front. It reminded me at once 
 of some plates which may be seen in C. Du Molinet's 
 Figures des different* habits des chanoines reguliers, pub- 
 lished at Paris in 1666. Two are reproduced as 
 Plate V. and Plate VI. of this work. 
 
 One of these is a canon regular of the cathedral church 
 of Usez in France ; another is a canon regular from 
 Klosterneuburg in Austria ; and a third, of a canon 
 
 1 Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire rahonne- de I 'Architecture franfaise, Paris, 
 Morel, 1868, t. iii. p. 417. 
 
 E
 
 regular of the Holy Cross of Coimbra in Portugal. In 
 all these three the canon wears a surplice shaped like 
 a chasuble, over which the grey ames has been thrown, 
 and by which therefore the under vestment is marked 
 as a choir vestment. The Portuguese canon wears the 
 grey ames around both shoulders, just as our bishops 
 and canons wear their black scarf. 1 He has also a second 
 garment under the chasuble-shaped surplice, which may 
 very likely be a rochet. 1 
 
 Du Molinet speaks in his preface of these surplices 
 made like chasubles. He says that you may still see in 
 some places a sort of surplice without sleeves, that is 
 almost of the same form as the old chasubles in which 
 they used in former times to say mass. 2 English adver- 
 tisements and canons speak of the surplice as " with 
 sleeves," but it may be that this is intended to forbid 
 the parson to wear the rochet or surplice without sleeves, 3 
 of the parish clerk. 
 
 Looking further amongst the few books that I have, 
 I found one or two more instances of drawings of this 
 chasuble-shaped surplice. They were in books which 
 the moderns would call Rituale, that is, a book containing 
 
 1 Another figure of a canon from Du Molinet, wearing the grey ames in 
 this fashion over both shoulders, is reproduced in the Transactions of St. 
 Paufi Ecclesiological Society, vol. iii. p. 45. 
 
 3 "On voitencor en quelques endroits un espece de Surplis sans manches, 
 qui sont presque de la mesme forme que les anciens Chasubles, dont on se 
 servoit en la celebration de la Sainte Messe." (preface, p. 6.) 
 
 3 See the advertisements of 1566 (D. Wilkins, Concilia, Lond. 1737, vol. 
 iv. p. 248) and the canons of 1603. (No. Iviii.) They order a "comely 
 Surplice with sleeves." This order may, however, allude to the one rochet 
 of Ut parochiani (Lyndwode, Provincialejlib. iii. Antwerp, 1525. fo. clxxii. b). 
 The last edition of Ut parocbiani that I know is by Bishop Bonner in 
 1554. (Edward Cardwell, Documentary Annals of the Reformed Church oj 
 England, Oxford, University Press, 1844, vol. i. p. 151.) And it is also en- 
 quired, in the diocese of Exeter, " 2. Item Whether you have two faire and 
 fitting Surplesses with sleeves for your Minister, and another without sleeves 
 for your Clarke " and further on, " 63. Item Is your Parish Clark of the age 
 of twenty yeers at the least . . . and doth he usually weare his Surplesse 
 or Rochet in the time of Divine Service. " {Articles to be enquired ofivitbin 
 the Diocese of Exeter . . . anno Domini 1638, London, printed by Thomas 
 Harper, 1638.)
 
 PLATE VII] 
 
 [ To face f>. 50 
 
 BAPTISM : THE CLERK WITH LIGHTED TAPER WEARS 
 
 THE CHASUBLE-SHAPED SURPLICE. 
 
 N.B. The ample Surplice of the priest. 
 
 BLESSING OF WATER : BOTH PRIEST AND CLERK WEAR 
 
 CHASUBLE-SHAPED SURPLICES. 
 
 From Liber Catecliuiiwrinii iuxta ritnm sancte Komane ecclesie, 
 Venetiis, apud Petrum Bosellum. 1555.
 
 PLATE VIII] 
 
 [To face p. 51 
 
 MASS, AT TIME OF COMMUNION : THE CLERK WITH TORCH 
 WEARS THE CHASUBLE-SHAPED SURPLICE. 
 
 N.B. No gradin, ample linen cloth, no cross on altar, only two lights. 
 
 VISITATION OF THE SICK : THE CLERK WEARS THE 
 
 CHASUBLE-SHAPED SURPLICE. 
 
 Fi om Liber Catechuminonim iuxta ritum sancte Kotnane ecclcsie, 
 Venetiis, apud Petruni Bosellum, 1555.
 
 UNUSUAL LINEN VESTMENTS 51 
 
 the forms for the administration of those sacraments not 
 reserved to the bishop. These particular books came 
 from the north of Italy, and were printed in the latter 
 half of the sixteenth century and the beginning of the 
 seventeenth. 
 
 The first I may name is Liber Catechuminorum iuxta 
 ritum sancte Romane ecclesie^ Venetiis, apud Petrum 
 Bosellum, 1555. From this book I give four drawings. 
 (See Plates VII. and VIII.). 
 
 There are also more of the same chasuble-shaped 
 surplices to be found in a book with the title : Ordo 
 Ba-ptizandi et alia sacramenta administrandi, Venetiis, 
 apud luntas, 1592. The priest wears this chasuble- 
 shaped surplice at baptism (p. 7), the priest and clerks 
 wear it at the giving of communion (p. 26), at the 
 burial of the dead (p. 78), at the blessing of holy water 
 (p. 139), in procession at Candlemas (p. 188), and here the 
 surplice with sleeves is worn by the fellow of a clerk 
 who wears the chasuble-shaped surplice ; and further 
 on in the book the priest wears the latter while performing 
 the ceremony of exorcism (p. 253). 
 
 A third book in which I have found drawings of this 
 chasuble-shaped surplice is the Rituale Ecclesiae Veronen- 
 sis, Veronae, typis Bartholomaei Merli a Donnis, 1609. 
 I give two reproductions of the woodcuts in this book. 
 They may be found on Plate IX. 
 
 This chasuble-shaped surplice may be seen very 
 distinctly in one of the modern mosaics, probably of the 
 seventeenth century, at St. Mark's, Venice. It is in a 
 mosaic over one of the doorways on the right side of the 
 church facing the piazza. The employment of colour 
 makes it certain that we have to do with a linen, not a 
 silken, vestment. 
 
 I have no doubt that if a full search could be made, 
 a number of other instances would be found. Perhaps 
 enough has been said to establish the existence of a 
 linen vestment shaped like a chasuble in ages and places 
 far removed from each other.
 
 52 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 There is another form of linen vestment, if vestment 
 it may be called, to which I would ask attention, not so 
 much for its own sake, but because it is part of a ceremony 
 which is an interesting survival of an ancient custom. 
 The vestment is used by the old men who bring up bread 
 and wine at the time of the offertory in the metropolitan 
 church at Milan. These old men, and with them are 
 old women, are called the school of St. Ambrose, a sort 
 of guild, of the existence of which we are assured as 
 early as the twelfth century. 1 
 
 A writer on the Ambrosian Liturgy thus speaks of the 
 guild and its duties : The women wear a dress of black 
 wool, with a girdle and a white linen cap upon which 
 they have a veil of black silk, and they cover the neck 
 with another linen cloth in pleats. At the offertory 
 the two old men on duty wear over the cotta a pointed 
 hood which ends in a tassel, and the two old women a 
 piece of fine black silk over the white veil on their heads ; 
 both men and women have a large white linen cloth 
 covering their shoulders, arms, and hands, and coming 
 down to their knees. This linen cloth they call a fanon. 
 With that each one holds three obleys and a silver cruet 
 containing wine, for they must not touch the offerings 
 with naked hands, but only with the fanon. 2 The fanon 
 is I metre 20 cm. broad and 2 metres 60 cm. long : in 
 English measures, about four feet by nine and a half. 
 The upper of the long sides is sewn to its fellow, but so 
 as to leave a space through which the head of the wearer 
 can be passed, a sort of chasuble being thus produced, 
 full behind, an appearance which disappears when the 
 hands are joined in front, and the linen thus put on the 
 stretch. (See the illustrations on Plates X. and XI.) 
 
 Mazzuchelli points out that the word fanon is used 
 in this sense in Ordo Romanus II. The people are said 
 at the offertory to bring their oblations, that is, bread 
 and wine, with white fanons, first the men, then the 
 
 1 Marco Magistretti, Beroldus, Mediolani, 1894, p. 52. 
 
 2 Osservazioni di Pietro Mazzuchelli, Milano, 1828, p. 21.
 
 PLATE IX] 
 
 [To face p. 52 
 
 PROCESSION IN WHICH NEARLY ALL WEAR THE CHASUBLE- 
 SHAPED SURPLICE. 
 
 COMMUNION IS BEING GIVEN BY A PRIEST IN CHASUBLE-SHAPED 
 SURPLICE OVER WHICH IS A STOLE. 
 
 N.B. Clerk following with a cup of wine and water. Communion apparently given 
 from a square box. No candles on altar, but on brackets at ends. 
 
 From Ritnak Ecclfsiae Veronensis, Veronae, 1609.
 
 <-. 
 
 5 
 
 3- 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 E- 
 
 W 
 O 
 
 CQ 
 
 
 O 
 O 
 E 
 u 
 
 OJ 
 
 w 
 
 DC 
 
 O 
 ^ 
 
 w 
 s 
 
 Q 
 J 
 O
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 
 PQ 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 O 
 E 
 O 
 CO 
 
 w 
 rn 
 
 w 
 
 ^ 
 
 O 
 
 ^ 
 
 Q 
 J 
 O
 
 UNUSUAL LINEN VESTMENTS 53 
 
 women, last of all the priests and deacons ; but these 
 only offer bread. 1 Other instances of this use of the 
 word may be found in Georgi. 2 
 
 In the offerings, then, of these old men and old women 
 it would seem that we have a survival of the ancient 
 offertory, when the whole congregation offered in kind 
 instead of in money. It would not seem, however, that 
 these hosts and wine are now at Milan consecrated at 
 the mass at which they are offered, which was the ancient 
 practice, 3 but the obleys being provided by the sacristy 
 of the Metropolitan Church return thither, and they 
 are afterwards used at other masses ; while the wine, 
 although also provided by the sacristy like the obleys, 
 the Fecchioni have to their own use. 
 
 To return for a moment to the first of these vestments 
 that have been spoken of. There can be hardly a doubt 
 that an ornament made of linen and shaped like a chasuble 
 has been often worn as a surplice, and, in fact, that it is 
 nothing more than a surplice. The want of orphreys in 
 the linen ornament proves nothing, for, if we may trust 
 the monuments of the middle ages that have come down 
 to us, a large proportion of the mediaeval chasubles, 
 especially in England, had no orphreys whatever * ; even 
 as the English stoles and maniples had no crosses. The 
 
 1 J. Mabillon, Museum Italicum, Lut. Paris. 1724, t. ii. p. 46. 
 
 2 Dominici Georgii, de Liturgia Romani Pontificis, Romae, 1731, t. i. p. 268. 
 See also Durandus, Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, lib. IV. cap. xxx. 27. 
 Neapoli, 1859. p. 224. 
 
 3 Mazzuchelli (op. cit. p. 22) gives the following extract from an inedited 
 manuscript written by Bescapd de ritibus ecclesiae Mediolanensis in the 
 Ambrosian library at Milan (p. 30). " Sunt decem vetuli et totidem 
 vetulae, omnes ab archiepiscopo delecti, qui in coniugio non sint. Hi a 
 veteribus nostris, ut ex Beroldo apparet, appellati sunt schola sancti Ambrosii, 
 et quibusdam sacris officiis intersunt. Horum mares duo et totidem feminae 
 honesto et antique vestitu ad gradus presbyterii (Beroldus ait mares intrare 
 chorum) veniunt fanonibus hoc est mappis quibusdam candidis apte involuti, 
 et manibus panno ipso opertis, dextera oblatas, sinistra amulas cum vino 
 tenent : quae sacerdos illuc ab altari cum ministris descendens suscipit." 
 
 4 The absence of orphreys in the chasuble was very noticeable in the 
 exhibition of mediaeval pictures that was got together by the Society of 
 Antiquaries at Burlington House in the summer of 1896.
 
 54 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 question then arises how far does a priest really 
 obey the Ornaments' rubric if in celebrating the Eucharist 
 he wear one of these linen chasuble-shaped surplices ? 
 The intention may be thought to be good ; but to come 
 to the hard letter of the law, is he really obeying the 
 rubric ? Is he doing nothing more than wearing a 
 second surplice ? This wearing of a second surplice as 
 a eucharistic vestment I actually saw one summer in 
 Scotland at a chapel which I think is in the diocese of 
 St. Andrews. Apparently the celebrant wore an albe, 
 over which was a green stole ; and then over the stole 
 and albe was a surplice with sleeves. The surplice was 
 not very long ; it only reached the knee, and the ends 
 of the stole were plainly visible below the hem of the 
 surplice. Many of the wearers of linen chasubles would 
 doubtless be much amused at this array of the good 
 priest ; but I doubt if they themselves do not very much 
 the same thing when they wear linen chasubles. A 
 linen chasuble is only known to the Ornaments' rubric as 
 a possible vestment for the first four weeks of Lent. 
 The wearing of a linen chasuble at all times of the Chris- 
 tian year cannot be called an observance of the Ornaments' 
 rubric, if I may be allowed an opinion. This linen 
 ornament is only another surplice. 1 
 
 It would almost seem that the material, and not the 
 shape, determines the name of the vestment. The dal- 
 matic or tunicle when made of linen becomes the sur- 
 plice ; and the surplice, that is, a linen vestment, fitting 
 close to the body and coming down to the heels, with 
 
 1 Mr. Micklethwaite has reminded me of a circumstance in connexion with 
 this paper that some thirty or forty years ago a chasuble-shaped surplice was 
 in use in some parts of England. This recalled to my recollection that on 
 St. Peter's day, 1861, I had been at a service in St. Mary's, Crown Street, 
 then a curious old building that had been used for the services of the Greek 
 Orthodox community in London in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, 
 when the late Mr. Chambers, the incumbent, wore over his cassock this 
 round chasuble-shaped surplice, and over that a black stole. He was assisted 
 by the late Dr. Littledale as gospeller, who wore a surplice, with a stole 
 deaconwise ; and as epistler by one who I think was Mr. Vaux.
 
 PLATE XII] 
 
 [To face p. 55 
 
 BISHOP AND TWO CLERKS. 
 From a mosaic in San Vitale at Ravenna, set up^ about A.D. 547.
 
 UNUSUAL LINEN VESTMENTS 55 
 
 loose sleeves may be seen in the mosaics of Ravenna. It 
 is very likely that the name, surplice (superpelliceum) is 
 not to be found much before the twelfth century ; but 
 the thing is to be found as early as any distinctive vest- 
 ment, as early as the chasuble. Plate XII. (see opposite) 
 is one of the earliest representations known of the 
 Christian Vestments. It is a reproduction of a mosaic 
 at Ravenna, set up in the reign of the Emperor Justinian, 
 about A.D. 547. 
 
 We see the bishop with a cross in his hand, attended by 
 two clerks, one of whom carries a textus, the other a cen- 
 ser : both are tonsured. 
 
 The bishop wears three primitive vestments : the linen 
 under-vestment, corresponding to our surplice ; the 
 coloured over-vestment, which is the chasuble ; and the 
 pall, a white scarf thrown over the shoulders. 
 
 (a) The linen vestment is common to the bishop and 
 his clerks : it comes down to the feet, and the sleeves are 
 not tight to the arm, but wide, approaching those of the 
 more modern surplice. It will be seen that though the 
 word surplice is comparatively modern, yet the vestment 
 itself is as old as any. 
 
 (b) The chasuble (in Latin paenula) dark in colour, is, 
 in this mosaic and others at Ravenna, of an olive green. 
 It has no bands or orphreys, the absence of which may be 
 noticed in England as late as the end of the middle ages. 
 
 (c) The pall, the special episcopal ornament, is white 
 and fringed and marked with a cross. It is still given to 
 all bishops in the East, though now limited in the West 
 to those bishops to whom it is sent from Rome, usually 
 metropolitans. It is to the bishop what in later times 
 the stole was to the priest. 
 
 There is no appearance of the stole, the maniple, the 
 amice, or the dalmatic, in this mosaic. It confirms the 
 tradition as to the two chief vestments that the Roman 
 Mass book retains to this day : celebrans semper utitur 
 Planeta super Albam. 1 This also finds expression in the
 
 56 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 rubric of Edward VI. 's prayer book, which directs an alb 
 with a vestment or cope. 
 
 There is no resemblance in the chasuble and pall to 
 any of the Levitical vestments. The most ingenious per- 
 son can hardly detect any likeness between these. But 
 the white under-vestment has a certain kinship to the 
 linen under-vestment of the High Priest, " tunica linea," 
 and the best authorities say that this vestment was made 
 with tight sleeves, not with the wide open sleeves which 
 the mosaics at Ravenna show. The tightening of the 
 sleeves of the linen under-vestment and the adoption of 
 a girdle may have been part of the deliberate Judaising 
 of some of the Christian vestments which we know took 
 place in the early middle ages, mainly in the West. 1 The 
 wide sleeves may be seen in frescoes and mosaics much 
 later than those at Ravenna : for example, in S. Maria 
 Antiqua at Rome, in the apse of St. Agnes outside the 
 walls, and elsewhere. 
 
 I wish to take this opportunity of thanking my friend, 
 the Rev. Achille Ratti, Doctor of the Ambrosian Library 
 at Milan, for the assistance which he has given me in all 
 that relates in this paper to the School of St. Ambrose 
 in the Metropolitan Church. I fear that my questions 
 must often have been troublesome to him, but he has 
 nevertheless always been most ready to give me informa- 
 tion upon all matters, and especially upon the history 
 and character of the fanon. I am very grateful to him 
 for his help. And I am also under considerable obliga- 
 tions to the Master of the Ceremonies in the Metropolitan 
 Church, Dr. Marco Magistretti, for the trouble which he 
 took in arranging for the photography connected with 
 the representations of the members of the School of St. 
 Ambrose. 
 
 1 See the Introduction to J. Wickham Legg and W. H. St. John Hope, 
 Inventories of Christ Church, Canterbur>; Westminster, Constable, 1902.
 
 n the {Three Wa^s of 
 Canonical Election
 
 n the Ubree Wa^s of 
 Canonical Election 
 
 WHEN I became a fellow of the Royal College of Physi- 
 cians some thirty years ago, one part of the ceremonial 
 of that ancient foundation which particularly struck me 
 was the method used in electing the President. Every 
 year on Palm Sunday (in modern times it is the 
 day after) the fellows were to meet in college, and there 
 proceed to the election of a president. The election 
 is still on this wise. First of all, the Registrar reads out 
 the bye-law which governs the election of a president. 
 There is no formal proposal or nomination ; but each 
 fellow present writes down on a balloting paper the 
 name of the fellow for whom he votes ; if the fellow 
 add more than one name, the vote is null and void. The 
 voting papers are then collected in a large silver vessel 
 by the Junior Censor, and brought to the Senior Censor, 
 and by him read out in the presence of the college. If 
 two-thirds of the fellows present agree upon a particular 
 name, the bearer of that name is forthwith elected 
 president. But if not, the two names having the highest 
 number of votes are then again balloted for : in this 
 latter case a simple majority of those present, the more 
 part, determines the election. 1 
 
 One would not expect that anything connected with 
 " the Science and Faculty of Physic," as it is called in 
 the Act of King Henry VIII. establishing the College 
 of Physicians, 2 would lead one into the study of the 
 
 1 The Charter, Bye-laivs, and Regulations of the Royal College of Physicians 
 of London, 1892. Chap. IV. Bye-law xxix. p. 43. 
 * Ot>. cit. p. ii. 
 
 69
 
 60 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Canon Law. But it is so. This election of the Presi- 
 dent is an example of an election -per scrutinium, one of 
 the methods of election spoken of in the Constitution 
 Quia propter, 1 which occurs among the decretals of 
 Gregory IX. and is indeed a little older than this, for it 
 was published by Innocent III. in the fourth Council of 
 the Lateran, held in the year 1215. It may be convenient 
 to add here a translation of Quia propter : The title is : 
 on making elections by scrutiny or compromise. 
 
 " Whereas, by reason of the diverse forms of election 
 which some endeavour to find out, many hindrances 
 are caused and great dangers ensue to churches widowed 
 of their pastors ; we decree that when an election is to 
 be held, all shall there be who ought, wish, and are able 
 conveniently to be present. Then that three members of 
 the college shall be chosen to take the votes of all with 
 diligence, secretly, and one by one : and if the votes 
 have been written down, they shall immediately publish 
 the result, no further hindrance being thrown in the 
 way by appeal : when the votes have been compared, 
 he is to be accounted chosen, in whom all, or the more 
 part, or the more discreet part (pars sanior) of the chapter 
 agree. 
 
 " Or, indeed, the power of electing may be given to 
 a few fit persons ; who in the place of all may provide 
 a pastor for the widowed church. 
 
 " An election made in any other way is null and void, 
 unless perchance all agree by a sort of divine inspiration, 
 and then the election is perfectly valid. 
 
 " Those who shall attempt to make an election that 
 is not in agreement with these three forms shall be 
 deprived of their power of election for this turn." 
 
 To describe these three ways of election more at length ; 
 and taking the last spoken of in Quia propter to be men- 
 tioned first, there are 
 
 i. quasi per inspirationem : when the electors are all 
 agreed to elect the same person and there is not a single 
 
 1 See Appendix I.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 61 
 
 dissident. There is nothing miraculous claimed for 
 this. It is a mere method of recording the fact that all 
 are of one mind. 
 
 ii. 'per scrutinium : when the votes are given either 
 by word of mouth or in writing to persons appointed 
 to receive them ; " omnes vel maior et sanior pars," is 
 the rule given in Quia pro-pier ; but now the consent of 
 two-thirds of those present is in many cases necessary. 
 
 iii. 'per compromissum : when the society or college 
 agrees to depute the election to a small committee, such 
 committee to elect without reference back to the original 
 body. 
 
 There is a quaint account in English of the methods 
 of election in the Additions to the Rule of St. Saviour 
 and St. Bridget belonging to the nuns of Syon, a religious 
 house in the parish of Isleworth. 1 As it well expresses 
 the general plan of these elections, I will venture to 
 give it below. 
 
 Whan the day of the eleccion is com and dyuyne seruyse 
 that belongeth to them for to performe afore none is ended, 
 the brethren immediatly serial synge masse of the holygost, 
 solemply in stede of hygh masse in solempne aray as the 
 tyme asketh. Whiche ended, the chauntres with another 
 suster whom sche wyl take to her, schal begynne solempnly 
 the ympn Veni Creator Spiritus, whiche schal be songe to the 
 ende quyer to quyer, of the sustres. Whiche doon, the 
 priores in a lowe voyce with note schal say thys versicle 
 Emitte spiritum tuum and thes two collectes Deus qui corda 
 and Acciones nostras with Per Christum dominum nostrum 
 Amen bothe under one. 2 And whyles the sustres synge thys, 
 the confessour with hys brethren schal say the same with 
 the seyd versicle and collectes. 
 
 1 British Museum, Arundel MS. No. 146. fo. 30, Chapter xii. It has 
 been edited by G. J. Aungier, History and Antiquities of Syon Monastery, 
 Westminster, 1840, p. 287. 
 
 There is also a very full account of the three methods in Rituale Cisterciense, 
 Lib. viii. Capp. i. and ii. Lirinae, 1892, p. 434, a reprint of the editions of 
 1 688 and 1720. See also Martene, de antiquis monachorum ritibus, liber v. 
 cap. 5. 
 
 * Both under one : i.e. both under one termination per dominum, etc.
 
 62 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Thys done the brethren schal begynne ther sexte and the 
 sustres chapter belle ronge forthewithe, they schal spedely 
 come to the crates * of the eleccion where as they may speke 
 with the brethren and seculers togyder. 
 
 To the whiche crates also schal come the general con- 
 fessor with two of hys brethren confessours to the sustres 
 suche as he wyl take with hym for to assiste and be there than 
 as witnesses only, and not for to haue any voyce in the elec- 
 cion. And whan al be come, the xxiiii u article of the bulle 
 of pope Martyn the fyfte schal be redde whiche begynneth 
 thus, Obeuntibus vero vel cedentibus, et cetera. And this 
 article also is to be red amonge the sustres the day before 
 euery eleccion as it is expressed in the xi te chapter of these 
 addicions. 
 
 After thys, the constitucions of the thre formes of eleccion 
 schal be declared in englysch by some wele lerned manne in 
 the lawe of holy chirchebeyng with oute at the seyd crates 
 and a notary with hym. That is to say the wey of the holy- 
 goste the way of scrutyny and the wey of compromys. And 
 yf it plese the sustres to accepte and preferre the wey of the 
 holygoste, than the priores or any other suster may say thus 
 " What seme ye of such a suster N." expressynge her proper 
 name and syr name. " Me semethe that sche is an able per- 
 sone to thys office." And yf al answer it plesethe them for 
 to haue her abbes or geue any other answer hauynge the 
 strengthe of ful consente, thys wey is welle spedde yf so be 
 there were no trety nor no menes made before to chese her 
 abbes so that sche be of sufficient age and born in wedlok. 
 Nor it hurteth not thys eleccion thof sche so chosen assente 
 not to her nominacion. But yf any other do it or if any 
 trety or compacte be made tofore for to chese her, than is 
 this wey al to squatte. 2 If the wey of the holygoste preuayle, 
 the pryores schal say in thys wyse, In nomine patris, et filii, 
 et spiritus sancti. Amen. /, suster N. JV. priores of this 
 monastery of saynt saviour, and of sayntes mary the virgyn and 
 
 1 It will be noted that the nuns of Syon did not speak of their grille 
 but of their grate. Dr Johnson speaks of the nuns' grate at Paris. "Mrs. 
 Thrale got into a convent of English nuns, and I talked with her through 
 the grate." (James Boswell, Life of Samuel Johnson, London, 1900. Vol. 
 ii. p. 143. A letter dated Oct. 22. 1775.) 
 
 8 Squatte : Scat, broken, ruined, Cornw. (J. O. Halliwell, Dictionary 
 of Archaic and Provincial Words, London, 1872, seventh edition, s. <v. Scat.)
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 63 
 
 birgitte of syon, of the order of saynte austyn kleped of saynte 
 sauiour, of the diocyse of london. In the name and byhalue of 
 al vs chesers werkyng with vs the grace of the holygoste before 
 inwardly callyd and bysougbte, chese suche a suster, N. N. ex- 
 pressyng her proper name and her by name expresly professed 
 in this monastery beynge of sufficiente and lauful age fre of 
 birth and borne in wedlok wyse and discrete in to the abbes of 
 thys our monastery. 
 
 Of the wey of Scrutyny. If it happe by the demerites of the 
 chesers, that it pleseth not god to enspire them the wey of the 
 holygoste, than they schal go to the wey of scrutyny whiche 
 is the ordynary wey. To the lauful execucion whereof alle 
 the sustres moste name thre sustres for to serche and knowe 
 the wylles of alle. Whyche sustres so named in nowyse schal 
 lette any sustre be sygne or worde or be any other mene 
 that sche may not say and frely name whom sche wyll nor 
 reuele to any what other say or whom any of hem name 
 to be abbesse. And alle her wylles and nominacions 
 herde in the presence of the general confessour and of hys 
 two seyd brethren of the lerned man of lawe and of the seyde 
 notary, the same notary forthewith schal putte in wrytynge 
 as they come whom euery suster namethe to be abbes. And 
 sche than in the forme that foloweth schal be chosen in to the 
 abbes whom al the couente or elles the more and sadder party 
 haue named ther to so that the persone so named be eligible. 
 And yf it so fall that for the dyuersite of voyces dyuersly 
 dyrecte in to dyuers persones none suche persone yet is 
 founde, than schal they have recourse to a newe scrutyny 
 and neuer cese of suche recourse tyl the more and holer party 
 of them haue directe ther voyces in to a certayn persone able 
 to be chosen in to the abbes. 
 
 This done and publysched in general, one of thof 
 thre serches whom thei wyll assigne among themselfe 
 schal pronounce and chese that persone, in to whom the 
 couente or the more and holer party haue consentyd sayng 
 thus In nomine patris et filii, et spiritus sancti. Amen. I, 
 N. N. suche a suster professyd in thys monastery of seynte 
 sauyour and of sayntes mary the virgin and birgitte of syon of the 
 order of saynte austyn named of seynte sauyour of the dyocyse 
 of london one of the serches taken and made in the acte of thys 
 presente eleccion in al that I haue power as in thys acte and in
 
 64 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 the same -power of that other two serches and in ther name and in 
 the name of al our sustres of thys seyd monastery, chese in comen 
 suche a suster N.N. of this monastery expresly professed beyng 
 in sufficient and lawful age borne in matrimony fre wyse and 
 discrete, in to oure abbes of thys oure seyd monasterye. 
 
 Whiche eleccion thus execute and fynysched eyther be the 
 weye of compromys or be the weye of the holygoste, the 
 chauntres solempnly schal begyn forthwith thys psalme Te 
 Deum laudamus. Whiche psalme the sustres schal performe 
 with songe quyer to quyer to the ende. 
 
 It may be noticed that there are no particulars of the 
 way of compromise given by the nuns of Syon, though 
 they speak of it as one of the three methods. 
 
 I. To take first, elections quasi per inspirationem, by 
 way of the Holy Ghost, as we call it in English. In 
 ecclesiastical history we may remember elections some- 
 times said to be like this : such as the sudden acclamation 
 with which St. Ambrose was elected Bishop of Milan, 
 while not yet baptized ; or the case of the famous Hilde- 
 brand (Gregory VII.), though these are instances of 
 election by popular tumult rather than of election 
 according to the canon law. 
 
 Descending, however, to actual and undoubted cases, 
 there is a full account of an election, by way of the Holy 
 Ghost, of one of the last Abbots of Westminster, John 
 Islip. 1 The monks being assembled on Tuesday the 2yth 
 of October, A.D. 1500, a mass of the Holy Ghost was said 
 at the high altar ; and the bell being rung to chapter, 
 they heard in the chapter house a sermon on this text : 
 " Instead of thy fathers thou shalt have children whom 
 thou mayest make princes." 2 Sermon being ended, 
 Veni Creator^ with the usual versicle and collects, was 
 sung. Then the king's letters patent giving conge d?elire, 
 granting as they do a perfectly free election, were 
 
 1 Richard Widmore, An history Oj the church of St. Peter, Westminster, 
 London, 1751. Additional Instruments to Appendix, p. 234. 
 * Psalm xlv. 17. (Vulgate, xliv.)
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 65 
 
 exhibited and read in the chapter. All persons not 
 qualified to vote were warned off by the prior, who was 
 John Islip himself, and the constitution Quia propter 
 was read by Dan Edward Vaughan, the director of the 
 chapter. The same monk then asked the prior and 
 convent by what way they would proceed in this election. 
 To which they at once answered that they would proceed 
 by way of the Holy Ghost. Thereupon Dan William 
 Lambard stood up in his place and publicly, before the 
 director and the rest, named Dan John Islip for abbot ; 
 and immediately all the monks, with the exception of 
 John Islip, at once without any waiting, or discourse 
 among themselves, or any other deed, with one voice and 
 one spirit, declared the prior John Islip to be chosen 
 abbot. Te Deum was then sung and the elect conducted 
 to the high altar, where the election was duly published 
 to the clergy and people there present. 
 
 In the election of William Patten, whom we call 
 William Waynflete, Bishop of Winchester and founder 
 of Magdalen College, Oxford, we have very nearly the 
 same programme. 1 There is the same mass of the Holy 
 Ghost, and singing of Veni Cmztar, reading of constitution 
 Quia propter, and warning off of persons unqualified to 
 vote ; there is also a letter from the King, in which 
 document he tells them that though they " aught not 
 to procede unto thellect'on of a newe pastoure and fader 
 for the chirch of Wynchestre a foresayd, withoute oure 
 licence first had in that partie, yet natheles we aswel for 
 the greet love and affect'on that we bere unto the said 
 chirch " ' recommend William Waynflete for bishop. 
 Immediately then, without any debate, on a sudden, with 
 one accord, the monks of Winchester elected William 
 Waynflete for their bishop and pastor ; and as at West- 
 minster, so at Winchester, they began at once to sing 
 
 1 Richard Chandler, Lie Oj William Waynflete, London, 1811. Appendix, 
 p 305. No. 5. 
 
 2 See Chandler, Appendix, p. 299. No. i. 
 
 F
 
 66 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 1e Deum, and the election was published at the high 
 altar. 1 
 
 Thus in the middle ages was carried out an election 
 per inspirationem, by way of the Holy Ghost : and such 
 also is the manner in which at the present day the election 
 of bishops in England still usually takes place. I have 
 notes of recent elections at York from Dr. Raine, who 
 was one of the Canons, at Winchester, from Dr. Kitchin, 
 who was Dean, 2 and at Lincoln from Mr. Venables, who 
 was the Precentor. These gentlemen have been kind 
 enough to notice on my behalf the proceedings at the 
 elections, and from the printed materials and notes 
 which they have been so good as to send me, I gather 
 that the procedure in most cases remains mediaeval. 
 The mass of the Holy Ghost has disappeared, but even 
 the sermon remains at York, Veni Creator persists every- 
 where, so also the reading of the conge cFelire, that is, the 
 letters patent granting a free election (the letter 
 missive recommending the election of a particular doctor 
 being quite separate), the Dean asking his brethren if they 
 consent to the election of Dr. N. (just as at Syon we find 
 the prioress asking the consent, and at Westminster 
 Edward Vaughan), the immediate consent, the singing 
 of le Deum and the publication at the high altar. At 
 Lincoln the publication takes place at the choir gates, 
 under the bishop's throne, and at the high altar. At 
 
 1 The King seems to have been in a great hurry to get William Wayn- 
 flete elected. Cardinal Beaufort died on Tuesday, April iith. The King 
 must have heard of it at Windsor the same day, for the English letter just 
 quoted is dated April nth. The petition of the monks for the leave to 
 elect (congt d'tlire) is dated the i2th of April (p. 300) and the congi d'ilire 
 itself is dated April i5th at Canterbury, (p. 316) while the election took 
 place on the morning of that day, (p. 307). The congt d'Mre can hardly 
 have been received at Winchester from Canterbury before the election took 
 place, an irregularity which the King anticipates in a second English 
 letter, dated April i3th (p. 302), bidding the monks to proceed to election 
 on April i5th"in ai godely haast," and that the letters patent shall bear 
 date before, " having recommended in the moost specialle wise oure said clerc 
 maister William Waynflete." The King did not confirm the election until 
 April 27th. 
 
 2 Now Dean of Durham.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 67 
 
 York the Dean publishes the election in the nave, and 
 at the choir gates. (See below, p. 85, Appendix III.) 
 
 A recent election at Wells is perhaps an example to be 
 avoided rather than followed. One of the features of a 
 canonical election, it will have been noticed, is the 
 absence of debate ; but at Wells the garrulity of a 
 parliament seems to have invaded the chapter. Re- 
 porters were evidently admitted ; and instead of setting 
 soberly to business as soon as the conge Retire and the 
 letters missive were read, the doctor recommended to 
 the chapter by the crown was positively proposed and 
 seconded by two of the canons or prebendaries, and the 
 question put as if the chapter had been a public meeting. 
 It may be noticed that neither of the antiquaries of the 
 chapter, the Dean or the Sub-dean, was present ; and 
 this perhaps may account for the extraordinary confusion 
 of the proceedings. 1 In fact, the presence of shorthand 
 writers and of other persons unqualified to vote is a 
 serious irregularity ; for if we look upon Ayliffe as any 
 authority in English Canon Law, it may follow that there 
 is no bishop of Bath and Wells at this moment ; for, 
 after speaking of the threefold method of canonical 
 elections, and that the bishop must not be elected in any 
 other place but the cathedral church, otherwise the 
 election is invalid, this writer adds " That Laymen shall 
 not be present, and if they are, the Act shall be totally 
 annull'd." 2 
 
 The papal elections are now governed by the Bull 
 jEterni Patris of Gregory XV., and this document 3 
 mentions quasi per inspirationem as one of the permitted 
 methods of electing the pope. But though there are 
 several instances of the election of a pope by this method, 
 especially in the sixteenth century, one of the last being 
 Sixtus V., yet it does not seem to have been actually 
 
 1 The Guardian, Sept. 1894, p. 1409, col. iii. from the Wells Journal. 
 
 2 John Ayliffe, Parergon luris Canonici Anglicani, London, 1726, p. 243. 
 
 3 De electione Romani Pontificis, printed at length in Caeremoniale continent 
 ritus electionii Romani Pontificis, Romae, 1724. p. 37.
 
 68 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 used since the publication of the Bull JEterni Patris, 
 though distinctly permitted by this constitution. There 
 is an instance of it in the election of Clement VII. After 
 many days spent in fruitless balloting it was agreed to 
 elect the Cardinal de Medici : and the future pope 
 having come into the chapel, the Dean of the College of 
 Cardinals said to him : Most Reverend Lord, all the 
 most reverend Cardinals are well content that you be 
 pope ; and I now, as Dean, in the name of the most 
 reverend Lords, and in the name of the Holy Ghost 
 invoked by them, choose and pronounce you, the most 
 reverend lord Julius, Cardinal presbyter and Vice-Chan- 
 cellor of the Holy Roman Church, as Pope and Roman 
 Pontiff. Then all and singular the Cardinals standing 
 around him said the same thing unanimously, and with 
 a loud voice. 1 
 
 Thus began the disastrous pontificate of Clement VII., 
 to whom might be assigned the character of Reuben ; 
 " Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel." 
 
 II. To pass on to election per scrutinium. Nowadays 
 it is usually practised by means of voting papers ; in the 
 middle ages the vote was given by word of mouth to the 
 scrutineers : consequently one of the first things to be 
 done in an election by scrutiny was to appoint scrutineers : 
 scrutatores, of whom, according to Quia propter, there 
 were to be three. Of the electors a majority seems to 
 be sufficient for a valid election: he was to be elected 
 whom all, or the greater, and more discreet, part should 
 choose. But before Quia propter, in the constitution 
 Licet de Fitanda of Alexander III., A.D. 1180, it was 
 determined that in papal elections two-thirds of those 
 present thould join in one name. 2 
 
 An example of an election p#r scrutinium is set forth 
 at length in the process of the election of William de 
 
 1 J. B. Gattico, Acta selecta Caeremonialia sanctae Romanae Eccleriae, 
 Romae, 1753, p. 323. 
 
 8 Caeremoniale, just quoted, p. 5.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 69 
 
 Pickering to the Deanery of York in I3IO. 1 The votes of 
 canons present, and of those absent given by their 
 proctors, are recorded, names being given ; at the first 
 ballot there were twelve votes in favour of Robert de 
 Pickering, seven in favour of William de Pickering, and 
 two in favour^of John de Merkingf eld ; but Robert gave 
 way in favour of his kinsman William ; John de Merking- 
 feld also withdrew ; and so followed an unanimous elec- 
 tion of William de Pickering. 
 
 The procedure in the Convocation house in the 
 University of Oxford may recall to some of us in the 
 method of collecting the votes, (not in the making of 
 speeches,) the mediaeval method of election by scrutiny 
 expressed by word of mouth. The proctors are the 
 scrutineers : they demand the vote of the graduate, 
 which is recorded by pricking with a needle ; as the 
 King still appoints the sheriffs by pricking a roll opposite 
 the name of the sheriff. The votes of the graduates 
 being collected, the proctor announces : " Maiori parti 
 placet " or " Maiori parti non placet," as the case may be. 
 
 Of the " way of scrutiny " we have a well-known 
 example in the ordinary method of electing the pope. It 
 has been seen that the pope may be elected by way of 
 the Holy Ghost or by compromise, but scrutiny is the 
 ordinary way. And of the papal election we have so 
 many details given to us, the ingenuity of generations 
 of Italian minds having been applied to hinder fraud in 
 the voting, and the election itself is so famous and im- 
 portant, that we may dwell for a little on its particulars. 
 The literature of the papal election is very abundant, 
 but the modern details we may take from the constitution 
 of Gregory XV., published in i62i-22. 2 
 
 As in other elections, there is a mass of the Holy 
 Ghost, a sermon, and Veni Creator sung as the Cardinals 
 follow the papal cross into conclave. The first day 
 
 1 James Raine, Historians of the Church of York, Rolls Series, 1894. vol. iii 
 p. 227. 
 
 a See Caeremoniale already quoted, p. 50.
 
 7 o ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 nothing is done but the preliminary business ; in the 
 evening the conclave is definitely closed, and until the 
 conclave be shut up, no election can take place. On the 
 second day the cardinals proceed to election. Mass is 
 said in the Pauline chapel, at which all the cardinals 
 communicate, and they then determine by which of the 
 three methods the election shall take place. That $er 
 scrutinium is usually chosen. 
 
 In the account of a papal election written by James 
 Caietan, who died in the middle of the fourteenth cen- 
 tury, we are told that if the cardinals agree to proceed 
 by way of scrutiny they elect three scrutineers. 1 Then 
 three scrutineers of the scrutineers are chosen, who look 
 after the scrutineers and write down in duplicate the 
 votes as they are given. Each cardinal could vote for 
 more than one : though Caietan remarks that it is a bad 
 plan, but much practised in his day. Then the votes 
 being given they were all read out aloud by one of the 
 cardinal deacons with the name of the voter attached 
 to them. With this we may contrast the modern 
 system, where the greatest care is taken to prevent the 
 name of the voter transpiring. This open voting was 
 forbidden at the Council of Trent. 2 The votes recorded 
 by the scrutineers of the college being read, they then 
 proceed to read the votes in duplicate of the scrutineers 
 of the scrutineers ; and finally there is a comparison of 
 the number of votes received by each candidate : the 
 Cardinal of Ostia, so many ; the Cardinal of Tusculum, 
 so many ; just as they do in the present time, for 
 Mr. Hartwell D. Grissell has most obligingly shown me 
 some of the lists made out at the conclave in which 
 Leo XIII. was elected, with the number of votes given 
 for each cardinal. Caietan adds there is no comparing 
 of merit with merit, of zeal with zeal, but only of number 
 
 1 J. Mabillon, Musei Italici, torn. ii. Lutet. Parisiorum, 1724. p. 24.6. 
 Ordo Romanus XIV. 
 
 2 Canones et Decreta 55. (Ecumtnici Comilii Tridtntini, xxv. cap. vi.
 
 PLATE XIII] 
 
 [To face p. 71 
 
 Ego 
 
 Card. 
 
 Accedo Reverendiss. D. rneo 
 D. Card. 
 
 CARDINAL'S VOTING PAPER. Recto.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 71 
 
 with number. A majority of two-thirds was required 
 for a valid election. 
 
 It is clear that balloting papers were used in the time 
 of Caietan. Very good reproductions of the modern 
 balloting papers are given in the Caeremoniale which has 
 been quoted 1 ; but I owe to Mr. Grissell again the 
 opportunity of reproducing by photography one of the 
 balloting papers prepared for the conclave in which was 
 elected pope Leo XIII. (See Plates XIII. and XIV.) 
 
 Voting-papers are prepared by the masters of the 
 ceremonies. If the papers cannot be printed they must 
 be written by one hand ; and a stock of them is kept in 
 two basons on a table before the altar in the conclave, so 
 that the cardinals may take one as they come to vote. 
 
 The papers are ordered to be oblong, the breadth less 
 than the height ; that is, the latter is to be about a 
 palm, while the former is half a palm. The specimens 
 shown me by Mr. Grissell were about 5^ inches by 5, 
 or 147 millimeters by 125, so that in more modern times 
 the directions of Gregory XV. have not been closely 
 
 observed. At the top are two words only : I 
 
 Cardinal * (to be filled up with the Cardinal's name ; 
 say : I, John Henry, Cardinal Newman) and a little 
 below are two circles, upon which the seals are to be put. 
 In the midst follow these words in two lines in Latin : 
 choose as pope my most reverend lord, the lord cardinal 
 N. 3 Then at the bottom of the voting-paper there are 
 also two circles for the seals, as above, and a space for the 
 Cardinal's number and motto, called signa. At the back 
 of the voting-paper, where at the top the cardinal will 
 write his name, at the bottom his number and motto, 
 are ornamental designs called by the Italian printers 
 fregi. I believe the English printers call it " head- 
 
 1 See pp. 57 to 63 for reproductions of the balloting paper spread out, 
 verso and recto, or half folded, ready for voting. These are excellent repro- 
 ductions of these voting papers, showing the methods of folding, &c., in the 
 Appendix to Mr. H. D. Grissell's Sede Pacante, James Parker, 1903. p. 78. 
 
 2 Ego Card. 
 
 3 Eligo in Summum Pontificem R. D.
 
 72 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 piece " ; they are like the scrolls at the head of a chapter 
 in an eighteenth century edition. These are printed on 
 the back to hinder the writing on the front, the name 
 and signa, from showing through (see the facsimile), for 
 extraordinary pains are taken to prevent the name of 
 the voter becoming known to the scrutators. When the 
 cardinal is to vote he approaches the table or tables 
 where there are ink and pens and other apparatus, but 
 all arranged so that those who write may be seen, but 
 what is written not seen. The cardinal then fills up the 
 voting-paper in a disguised hand, and seals in the places 
 marked with red wax ; using not his own arms but a 
 seal with three numbers, or with three letters, or one 
 simple design. The seals can be seen by the scrutators : 
 but without breaking the seals the scrutators cannot read 
 the name or motto of the cardinal voting. This rule of 
 great secrecy makes the folding of the voting-paper a 
 serious affair. First, both top and bottom are folded 
 over so that the name and motto of the cardinal are 
 hidden and the ornamental designs only appear on the 
 back ; then the paper is folded again so as to reduce the 
 voting-paper to the length of a man's thumb. Then it 
 is folded again between the two lines of Latin printed in 
 the middle of the paper, and the voting-paper is then 
 ready to be carried to the altar and put into the chalice. 
 
 The cardinal then takes the voting-paper with his two 
 first fingers and openly carries it, raised on high, to the 
 altar where the scrutators are, on which there is a large 
 chalice covered with a paten. There kneeling he prays 
 for a short time, and rising says with a loud voice, reading 
 from a card set on the altar : " I call to witness Christ 
 our Lord, who is to judge me, that I choose him whom in 
 the sight of God I judge ought to be elected, and I will 
 answer for the same in accessus" Then he places the 
 voting-paper on the paten and thence puts it into the 
 chalice and bowing to the altar returns to his place. 
 
 All the cardinals having voted, the chalice is shaken 
 many times while it is covered with the paten, and the
 
 PLATE XIV] 
 
 [To face p. 72 
 
 c* 
 
 Signa. 
 
 Nomen. 
 
 CARDINAL'S VOTING PAPER. Verso.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 73 
 
 votes are then taken out and counted. If they do not 
 correspond with the number of the cardinals, the whole 
 set of papers is forthwith burnt, and a fresh balloting 
 begun. But if they correspond, the scrutineers take out 
 a voting-paper, show the seals intact, and read aloud the 
 name voted for, so that all the cardinals can hear, and 
 note in their papers on which are printed the names of 
 all the cardinals in conclave. The votes being counted, 
 the voting-papers are run on a file through the printed 
 word " eligo," and put aside. After this comes the 
 accessus, which is a repetition of the voting in the scrutiny, 
 but with different voting-papers. The voting-papers of 
 the scrutiny and accessus are then compared, the numbers 
 and mottoes at the lower parts of the voting-papers 
 being examined and found to correspond, but the upper 
 parts, however, with the names of the cardinals, as yet 
 preserve their seals unbroken. 
 
 Then the votes are counted. If one name do not 
 obtain two-thirds of the votes, whether in the scrutiny 
 alone or in the scrutiny and accessus combined, no pope 
 is elected. But if one name have two-thirds of the 
 votes, then they open the upper part of the voting-paper 
 of the cardinal with that name where the cardinal has 
 written his own name ; and if it appear that he voted 
 for another, the election is good ; but if he voted for 
 himself, null, on account of the lack of one vote : not, 
 however, if there be more than two-thirds voting for him. 
 
 The voting-papers, whether there have been an elec- 
 tion or not, are next examined by certain officers called 
 Recognitores, who see if the votes be really as given out 
 by the scrutineers. Last of all, the entire set of voting- 
 papers used in this ballot are burnt. 
 
 In the early statutes of the Colleges at Oxford 1 we 
 find methods of election of a head clearly based upon the 
 
 1 I have used the edition of the Statutes of the Colleges of Oxford, Stationery 
 Office, 1853, in three volumes. The statutes of each college have a separate 
 pagination ; thus the pages given belong] to the separate pages of the 
 statutes of each college spoken of.
 
 74 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Constitution Quia propter. At Balliol the statutes of 
 Sir Philip Somerville correspond in these particulars 
 with those of Robert Fitz-Hugh, Bishop of London. 
 The election is to be by scrutiny ; and the scrutineers are 
 to take the votes secretly, apparently by word of mouth, 
 and then write them down. Then they are faithfully 
 to announce the election ; and he is elected for whom 
 " maior pars communitatis consenserit": i.e. a bare 
 majority. If the votes be equal, then the " pars sanior " 
 is to have the casting vote : and the " pars sanior " is 
 denned to be the seniors and those who are well learned 
 men. 1 At Queen's College the election of the head was 
 always to be per scrutinium^ and the election was by the 
 majority. 2 At New College the fellows were to be 
 unanimous, if possible ; if not unanimous, then the 
 election was to be by a majority of those present. Five 
 scrutineers are ordered, one divine, another a canonist, 
 a third a civilian, and two masters of arts. It is expressly 
 stated that as soon as an absolute majority is obtained 
 the person backed by that majority is elected Warden. 3 
 At All Souls' the fellows choose two fellows whose 
 names are submitted to the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 who chooses one. 4 There was something like this at 
 Merton in 1274. Seven of the more discreet seniors 
 were to inquire of the " Scholars " who would be a good 
 warden ; of the names received in this inquiry the 
 seniors were to choose three who were to be named to 
 the patron, by whose authority one of these three would 
 be chosen. 5 At Lincoln the election of the head seems 
 to have been by a mere majority. 6 So also at Brasenose. 7 
 At Magdalen 8 and Cardinal College 9 we meet with an 
 unusual feature in these elections, the nomination of 
 candidates. Ordinarily, no one is proposed in an election 
 by scrutiny. 
 
 At Corpus Christi, in the early sixteenth century, 
 
 1 pp. ix. 4 . 2 p. 8. 3 p. 24. * p. 13. 
 
 " P- 33- 6 p. 15 7 P- 3- 8 p. 7- 
 
 9 pp.23, 156.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 75 
 
 balloting papers make their appearance. The election 
 of the President is to be by the seven senior fellows. 
 This reminds one of an election per compromissum and of 
 the seven " elects " at the College of Physicians. The 
 two eldest of these are the scrutineers ; they write down 
 their own votes upon a schedula secretly and privately, 
 and their own names as well. When they have given 
 their votes, then the rest of the electing body give theirs 
 secretly and privately. The election is by a majority ; 
 and in the statutes of this college appears the injunction 
 that you are not to vote for yourself. 1 At St. John's 
 (founded in the reign of Philip and Mary) we have the 
 voting-papers again. 2 I have been told that at this 
 college the chalice is used for the collection of the votes, 
 as it is in the papal election, but I have no certain infor- 
 mation of this. At Pembroke we have also a reminis- 
 cence of the papal election in the direction that as soon 
 as the votes have been counted and written down, the 
 voting-papers are to be burnt. 3 
 
 In nearly all these college elections it will be noticed 
 that a bare majority is enough, not two-thirds of the 
 voters, as at the College of Physicians, a proportion not 
 insisted upon in Quia -propter, though it has been neces- 
 sary in papal elections since the twelfth century. 
 
 What is the present method of electing heads of houses 
 at Oxford I have not taken the trouble to inquire. We 
 know that the Universities have been visited by com- 
 missions, each more ignorant than its forerunner of the 
 nature and constitution of a university, 4 so that next to 
 
 1 P. 3. 2 p. i 4 . 
 
 3 p. 4. See also the Rituale Cisterciense, 
 
 4 To show the care with which the new statutes have been framed and 
 the necessity there was for reform, I may say that in one college, where 
 there had never been any difficulty in electing a head from the middle ages 
 to the present time, the first election under the new statutes nearly ended in 
 a deadlock, and a deadlock out of which there was no way, though counsel's 
 opinion and the like measures were taken. It is not surprising therefore to 
 be told that many of the men who took a leading part in introducing these 
 " reforms " now express great sorrow for the share which they had in this 
 work of destruction.
 
 76 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 nothing of antiquity remains untampered with. " That 
 which the palmer worm hath left hath the locust eaten ; 
 and that which the locust hath left hath the canker 
 worm eaten ; and that which the canker worm hath left 
 hath the caterpillar eaten." These ancient institutions 
 have been looked upon as vile bodies upon which experi- 
 ments might be tried, or as subjects to be brought into 
 close conformity with the examining body in Burlington 
 Gardens, which itself has now happily disappeared. 
 
 We know too well that restoration, reform, and reno- 
 vation are only other names for ruin, and there is little 
 now left at the Universities but the buildings ; and even 
 these are being rapidly restored away. 
 
 III. The third method of election is by compromise, 
 that is, by a small committee. It seems an advantageous 
 way of settling the business when there is a large body to 
 consult ; and it prevailed at the College of Physicians 
 from Henry VIII. 's time to our own. By the Charter 
 there was a body called the elects, " from hence forward 
 to be called and cleaped Elects ; and that the same 
 elects yearly choose one of them to be President of the 
 said commonalty." This committee was abolished in 
 the general changes made in the constitution of the 
 college in the years 1858-60. The Bishop of London is 
 still often elected per compromissum* 
 
 Archdeacon Cheetham tells me of a very notable thing 
 that happens at Rochester when a bishop of that see is 
 elected. At the stage in the proceedings when the 
 chapter should be asked by what way they will proceed 
 to election, the Dean always proposes that the election 
 be per compromissum, to which the chapter agrees, but 
 the election is committed to the whole body present. 
 If all be not agreed to proceed per compromissum, 
 that method of election cannot be enforced. From a 
 document printed by Gattico it would appear that the 
 assent to proceed to the election of the pope per com- 
 
 1 Charter, Bye Laivs, &c., p. 10. 
 
 2 See below, Appendix iv. p. 87.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 77 
 
 promissum must be unanimous ; and that even if one 
 elector prefer per scrutinium, the election must be by 
 that way. 1 The number of the compromissors was 
 nearly always uneven, so that no dispute could arise 
 from equal voting. 
 
 As a mediaeval example of the way of compromise, we 
 may choose the election of Robert of Winchelsey as 
 Archbishop of Canterbury in 1292, because this election 
 is early and because we have abundance of documents 
 in Wilkins drawn up sede vacante? To take first the 
 document which records the appointment of the com- 
 promissors. The chapter being assembled, they were 
 first asked by what way they would proceed to election : 
 and it was agreed unanimously (nullo penitus reclamante) 
 that they would provide by way of compromise for the 
 church of Canterbury, widowed of its archbishop and 
 pastor. They then elected as compromissors Martin of 
 Clyve the penitentiary, G. de Romenal the precen- 
 tor, R. de Adersham sub-prior, J. de Welles treasurer, 
 R. de Celeseya, J. de Wy, and R. de Clyve, monks, that 
 is, seven of the monastery, four obedientiaries or officers 
 and three plain monks. They were to elect either 
 unanimously or by a bare majority (omnes vel maior pars 
 vestrum) and they might elect whom they chose, one of 
 the monks of Canterbury, or another : and whosoever 
 was chosen would be Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 The same day the compromissors met, and they did 
 then choose Robert of Winchelsey, Archdeacon of Essex, 
 and Doctor of Divinity, to be Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 We have also a very full account of the election by 
 compromise of Archbishop Stratford in I333- 3 The 
 
 1 Gattico, op. cit. p. 124. 
 
 2 David Wilkins, Concilia, Lond., 1737, t. ii. p. 189. 
 
 3 Wilkins, op. cit. p. 565. The documents connected with the election, 
 per compromissum, of Ralph de Bourne as Abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, 
 are given in full in Sir Edward Maunde Thompson's edition of the 
 Customary of that abbey. (Customary of the Benedictine Monasteries of 
 Saint Augustine, Canterbury, and Saint Peter, Westminster, Henry Bradshaw 
 Society, London, 1902. vol. i. pp. 16 et seq. and 43.)
 
 78 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 prior and chapter chose three monks : Robert of Dover, 
 sub-prior ; John of Sandwich ; and James of Oxeney ; 
 and gave to them power to take to themselves seven 
 more monks of Canterbury to be compromissors, four of 
 whom to be a quorum, and to elect a proper person as 
 archbishop. The three monks first mentioned then 
 proceeded to choose as compromissors Thomas Goldston 
 precentor, Hugh of St. Margaret's almoner, Richard 
 of Ichham, William of Coventry sacrist, Richard of 
 Wyllardseye, Edmund of Adesham cellarer, and Hugh 
 of St. Ives reader. 
 
 These compromissors going apart, after much talk 
 about many names, chose, by a unanimous vote, John, 
 Bishop of Winchester. After Te Deum the election was 
 published from the rood loft to a large number of the 
 faithful. 
 
 Sometimes there was only one compromissor to whom 
 the election was entrusted, and he might not be a member 
 of the Society. For example, Dr. Aidan Gasquet tells 
 me that the last abbot of Glastonbury was elected in 
 this fashion, Cardinal Wolsey being appointed " com- 
 promissor totaliter." By virtue of this commission 
 Whiting was appointed abbot. 1 He was one of the 
 victims of Thomas Cromwell. 
 
 The canonists seem to be agreed that in the case of 
 a sole compromissor he may not elect himself. It would 
 show that he was ambitious, and it would be a disgraceful 
 thing, and the like. 2 
 
 One of the most important elections in the history of 
 the English Church is that of Matthew Parker to the 
 See of Canterbury. This was by a sole compromissor ; 
 and the processus now printed shows the extraordinary 
 care taken to preserve even the unessential forms of a 
 canonical election. 3 The forms observed remind one 
 
 1 F. A. Gasquet, The last Abbot of Glastonbury, Lond. 1894. p. 33. 
 
 8 P. M. Passerini de Sextula, De electione canonica, Romae, 1661. 
 Cap. xxii. Qu. 8. p. 334. 
 
 3 Denny and Lacey, De Hierarchia Anglicana, Londini, 1895. Appendix 
 III. p. zoi.
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 79 
 
 very greatly of those used in the election of John Islip 
 at Westminster in 1500,* or of the other earlier elections 
 that have been described. 
 
 The bell being rung to chapter, they entered the 
 chapter house and the Queen's Letters patent (conge 
 d'elire) granting a free election were then read ; it does 
 not appear that any Letters missive nominating Matthew 
 Parker were exhibited. Then all unqualified persons 
 were warned off, and the chapter Quia propter read, and 
 on being asked by what way they would proceed to 
 election, the chapter unanimously decided that they 
 would proceed by way of compromise ; and they then 
 appointed Nicholas Wotton, the Dean, sole compromis- 
 sor, on condition that he would immediately proceed to 
 election, in the face of the chapter. Having accepted 
 the burden of the compromise, he gave his vote for 
 Matthew Parker. Then the chapter, leaving the chapter 
 house and entering the choir of their church, sang Te 
 Deum laudamus in English, and William Darrell, one of 
 the canons, authorized by the chapter, duly published 
 the election to the clergy and people. 
 
 Election per compromissum still goes on in our day. 
 We often see that a colonial bishopric is to be provided 
 for by the Archbishop of Canterbury and one or two 
 other compromissors. 
 
 At the election of a late Bishop of London (Dr. Temple) 
 the Chapter proceeded by way of compromise, the Dean 
 (Dr. Church) being appointed sole compromissor. (See 
 below, p. 87, Appendix IV.) 
 
 Of the election by way of scrutiny I can speak favour- 
 ably as a highly practical method of electing a head. 
 There is no proposing or seconding, and none of the 
 dreary speech making which makes the transaction of 
 business in modern England so unspeakably wearisome. 
 Election by way of compromise is really that practised 
 by many learned societies at the present day. The 
 council, as a matter of fact, elect the officers, the Society 
 
 1 See above, p. 64.
 
 8o ECCLESIOLOGIGAL ESSAYS 
 
 at large merely registering the decrees of the body to 
 which they have entrusted the nomination. We are 
 rarely sufficiently blessed in being all of one mind to make 
 election quasi per inspirationem frequent, without exter- 
 nal influence ; a fate lamented even in the middle ages, 
 for Prior Laurence in his life of Bishop Bateman of 
 Norwich tells us : Via eligendi per viam, quae dicitur, 
 spiritus sancti, quae modernis temporibus rarissime est 
 attrita. 1 
 
 This brings to an end the short sketch of the three 
 ways of election that were once prevalent in the middle 
 ages. These pages contain nothing that is at all new to 
 those who have paid some little attention to the canonical 
 methods of election. I only venture to print because 
 the diffusion of a little elementary knowledge may be 
 useful to those who have to conduct canonical elections. 
 They might be brought more into accordance with the 
 Canon Law which is still in force in this country, where 
 not contrary to the King's prerogative and the laws and 
 customs of this realm. The constitution Quia propter 
 was read, it has been seen, as the law of the proceedings, 
 at the election of Archbishop Matthew Parker in Queen 
 Elizabeth's time, and apparently it governed the mode of 
 election ; so that we have an excellent precedent for 
 conforming ourselves to its directions, and no reproach 
 of want of loyalty to established authority can be brought 
 against us if we follow its rules. 
 
 1 Peck, Desiderata Curiosa, Lond. 1735. v l- lib- vii. p. 2. 8. I am 
 indebted for this reference to Dr. E. C. Clark, Regius Professor of Civil Law 
 in the University of Cambridge.
 
 APPENDIX I 
 THE CONSTITUTION QUIA PROPTER 
 
 The following is the Latin text of Quia propter, taken from Labbe and 
 Cossart, SS. Concilia, Paris, 1671. t. XI. pars i. col. 176, with the variations 
 inserted in square brackets, which are given by JE>. L. Richter, Corpus 
 luris Canonici, Lips. Tauchnitz, 1839. P ars " co ^- %S> i n ^ Decret. Greg. 
 ix. Lib. I. tit. vi. Cap. xlii. 
 
 CONCILIUM LATERANENSE IV. 
 
 Cap. xxiv. De Electione facienda per scrutinium vel compromissum. 
 
 Quia propter electionum formas diversas quas quidam invenire conantur 
 et multa impedimenta proveniunt, et magna pericula imminent ecclesiis 
 viduatis : statuimus ut cum electio fuerit celebranda praesentibus om- 
 nibus qui debent et volunt et possunt commode interesse, assumantur 
 tres de collegio fide digni qui secrete [secreto] et singulatim voces [vota] 
 cunctorum diligenter exquirant [inquirant] et in scriptis redacta mox 
 publicent [ea add.] in communi, nullo prorsus appellatione [appellationis] 
 obstaculo interiecto : ut is collatione adhibita [habita] eligatur, in quem 
 omnes vel maior vel [et] sanior pars capituli consentit [consenserit]. Vel 
 saltern eligendi potestas aliquibus viris idoneis committatur qui vice om- 
 nium, ecclesiae viduatae provideant de pastore. Aliter electio facta [Vel 
 electio facta] non valeat, nisi forte communiter [unanimiter] esset ab 
 omnibus quasi per [Dei add.] inspirationem Divinam [0m.] absque vitio 
 celebrata. Qui vero contra praedictas [praescriptas] formas eligere 
 attentaverint, eligendi ea vice potestate priventur. 
 
 Illud [autem, add] penitus interdicimus ne quis in electionis negotio 
 procuratorem constituat nisi sit absens in eo loco de quo debeat advocari 
 [vocari] iustoque impedimento detentus venire non possit : super quo, si 
 fuerit opus, fidem, faciat iuramento ; et tune si voluerit uni committat 
 de ipso collegio vicem suam. Electiones quoque clandestinas repro- 
 bamus, statuentes [statuimus] ut quam cito electio fuerit celebrata, sollem- 
 niter publicetur. 
 
 81
 
 APPENDIX II 
 THE FORM OF THE LICENCE TO ELECT OR CONGE D'ELIRE 
 
 It would appear that up to the time of St. Anselm the Kings of Eng- 
 land often appointed bishops by simple delivery of the crosier. St. 
 Anselm himself became Archbishop-elect of Canterbury when William 
 Rufus forced the crosier into the saint's unwilling hands. But in St. 
 Anselm's days some change in the manner of appointment took place, 
 possibly about the time of the Council of London, in uoy. 1 The late 
 Dr. Stubbs, Bishop of Oxford, considers that Roger of Salisbury was the 
 first bishop in England canonically elected, 2 and this election appears to 
 have taken place on April 13, 1103 or HO2, 3 which is thus several years 
 before the Council of London. The same distinguished authority quotes 
 Henry of Huntingdon to show that Stephen promised free elections to 
 the clergy ; in the constitutions of Clarendon it is agreed that the elec- 
 tions of prelates shall take place in the King's chapel. 4 
 
 But soon after, for election in the King's chapel, there seems to have 
 been substituted the conge cCelire. Certain canons were deputed by the 
 chapter to repair to the King's court and announce the death of the 
 bishop ; making supplication for leave to elect a new bishop. Of the 
 document in answer to this supplication we have an early instance in a 
 conge elire in the third year of King Henry III. directed to the Chapter 
 of Hereford. It is from the Public Record Office, Patent Rolls 3 Henr. III. 
 part 2. m. 4. 23 April, 1219. 
 
 Licencia eligendi. Rex capitulo Heref salutem. 
 
 Venerunt ad nos transmissi nobis ex parte vestra cum litteris vestris 
 viri discreti Th. Decanus ecclesie vestre H. Archidiaconus Salop, et 
 magister N. de Wulurunehamt' concanonici vestri nunciantes nobis 
 decessum H. bone [bone repeated and struck out] memorie qui vobis pastor 
 
 1 See David Wilkins, Concilia, Lond. 1737. t. i. p. 387. In this council it is 
 said of King Henry I. "investituras amodo ecclesiarum per annulum et baculum 
 remisit, electiones praelatorum omnibus ecclesiis libere concessit." See also S. R. 
 Gardiner (Student's History of England, i. 126) who tells us that it was in Anselm's 
 agreement with Henry I. that the chapters acquired the right to elect the bishop in 
 the king's presence. 
 
 1 W. Stubbs, Constitutional History, Oxford, 1878, iii. 296. Note 2. See also 
 iii. 302, 704 and i. 635. 
 
 3 Le Neve, Fasti Eccles. Anglic. 1854. Ed. Hardy. Vol. ii. p. 594. 
 
 * W. Stubbs, Select Charters, Oxford, 1870. p. 114. 
 
 82
 
 WAYS OF CANONICAL ELECTION 83 
 
 prefuit et petentes licenciam eligendi pastorem alium sibi et vobis con- 
 cedi. Quorum peticioni condescendentes concedimus vobis licenciam 
 eligendi vobis pastorem idoneum regno nostro utilem et nobis fidelem, 
 salvo in omnibus Jure regie dignitatis. 
 
 In some ten years later the form of the letters patent has altered a little, 
 and it has nearly crystallized into the shape which it has retained with 
 slight changes for six hundred years. 1 One may compare the letters 
 patent sent in 1894 to the Chapter of Wells with those sent in 1275 to 
 the same Chapter, and the form is very nearly the same, one being in 
 English and the other in Latin. The Latin document has been taken 
 from Prynne's Records. 2 
 
 Rex dilectis sibi in Christo Decano 
 et Capitulo Wellensi salutem. 
 
 Accedentes ad nos dilecti nobis 
 Henricus de Monteforti et Magis- 
 ter Robertus de Brandon, cum 
 literis Capituli vestri patentibus, 
 nobis humiliter ex parte vestra sup- 
 plicarunt, ut cum Ecclesia vestra 
 Wellensis et ecclesia Bathoniensis 
 sint per decessum bone memorie 
 Willielmi nuper episcopi vestri 
 pastoris solacio destitute, vobis et 
 Priori et Conventui Bathoniensi 
 alium eligendi episcopum licenciam 
 concedere dignaremur. 
 
 Nos igitur vestris in hac parte 
 precibus favorabiliter inclinati, licen- 
 ciam illam vobis et ipsis duximus 
 concedendam. 
 
 Mandantes quatinus vos una cum 
 ipsis talem vobis eligatis in episco- 
 
 Victoria, by the Grace of God, 
 of the United Kingdom of Great 
 Britain and Ireland Queen, De- 
 fender of the Faith, to our trusty 
 and well-beloved the Dean and 
 Chapter of our cathedral church of 
 Wells, Greeting. 
 
 Supplication having been hum- 
 bly made to us on your part, that 
 whereas the aforesaid church is now 
 void and destitute of the solace of 
 a pastor by the death of the Right 
 Rev. Father in God Doctor Arthur 
 Charles Hervey, commonly called 
 Lord 'Arthur Charles Hervey, late 
 Bishop of Bath and Wells, we would 
 be graciously pleased to grant you 
 our fundatorial leave and licence to 
 elect another Bishop and pastor of 
 the said see. 
 
 We being favourably inclined to 
 your prayers on this behalf, have 
 thought fit, by virtue of these pre- 
 sents, to grant you such leave and 
 licence. 
 
 Requiring and commanding you, 
 by the faith and allegiance by which 
 
 1 See the form sent to the Chapter of Salisbury in 1228. (W. H. Rich Jones, 
 fetus Registrant Sarisberiense, Rolls Series, 1884. vol. ii. p. 102.) 
 
 2 William Prynne, The third tome of an exact Chronological V "indication^ &c. 
 Lond. 1668. p. 165. (King Edward I. Chap. II.) Pat. 3. Edw. I. memb. 34. 
 Mr. C. Trice Martin, F.S.A., has very kindly read this and the preceding document 
 with the originals in the Public Record Office.
 
 84 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 pern et pastorem, qui Deo devotus, you stand bound to us, that you 
 regimini ecclesiarum predictarum elect such a person for your Bishop 
 necessarius nobisque et regno nostro and pastor as may be devoted to 
 utilis et fidelis existat. God and useful and faithful to us 
 
 and our Kingdom. 
 
 In cuius &c. In witness whereof we have 
 
 caused these our letters to be made 
 patent. 
 
 Teste Rege apud Oveston xx. die Witness ourself at Westminster, 
 Decembris. the twenty-fourth day of August in 
 
 the fifty-eighth year of our reign. 
 In warrant under the Queen's sign 
 manual. 
 
 MUIR MACKENZIE. 
 
 In the later conge d'elire the visit to the King's court of the deputation 
 of monks or canons is not spoken of, and in place of the visit there is men- 
 tioned only a letter in which supplication is made for leave to elect. 
 Further instances of this may be seen in the conge d'elire of William Wayn- 
 flete * and much later in that of Matthew Parker. 8 
 
 In England I have found no trace in the episcopal elections of a prac- 
 tice which is said to be followed by the new Roman Catholic chapters in 
 this country ; viz. that of submitting to the Roman Court three names 
 marked respectively dignus, dignior, dignissimus. The best approach to 
 it that I have noticed is in the election of a Warden of All Souls, where 
 two names are submitted to the Archbishop of Canterbury, from which 
 he chooses one. 3 But the rights of these chapters are not always re- 
 spected ; for it is taught by the canonists that as the pope is an autocrat 
 (summus Ecclesiae pastor, princeps, et monarcha *), he can revoke the 
 privileges conceded to the chapters of electing their own heads. This 
 was done in choosing a successor to Cardinal Wiseman. The name of Dr. 
 Errington, his coadjutor cum iure successionis, was sent to Rome as dignis- 
 simus, but all three names were disregarded, and Monsignor Manning 
 was appointed to the vacant place, while those who had voted for Dr. 
 Errington were severely punished. 5 From the point of view of the 
 chapters there would seem to be but little to choose between pope and 
 king. 
 
 1 Richard Chandler, Life of William Waynfiete, London, 1811. Appendix, p. 316. 
 
 2 Denny and Lacey, De Hierarcbia Anglicana, Londini, 1895. Appendix III. 
 p. 201. 
 
 3 Statutes, p. 13, in Statutes of the Colleges o f Oxford, Stationery Office, 1853. 
 vol. i. See also Merton, p. 33. 
 
 * P.M. Passerini de Sextula, De electione canonica, Romae, 1661, cap. i. 
 5 See E. S. Purcell, Life of Cardinal Manning, London, Macmillan, 1895, first ed. 
 vol. ii. p. 202, chap. x. The history of the Errington case is given in chap. v.
 
 APPENDIX III 
 
 Dr. Raine, one of the canons of York, has very kindly given to me a 
 copy of a notice printed at York at the time of the election of the present 
 Archbishop, Dr. Maclagan ; and it is here reproduced to show the order 
 of procedure that is common in many English cathedral churches. At 
 the top of the sheet is printed " York Minster," the crossed keys of St. 
 Peter dividing the two words. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS ON ELECTION OF AN ARCHBISHOP. 
 
 1. The Chapter assemble in the Zouche Chapel and proceed to the 
 Chapter House in procession preceded by the Choir singing " The 
 Church's one Foundation," verses I, 2. 
 
 2. The Choir halt and divide in the vestibule, the Chapter passing into 
 the Chapter House. 
 
 3. The President declares the Chapter open. 
 
 4. The Procession returns to the Choir, the Choir singing the remainder 
 of the Hymn. 
 
 5. The Dean gives an address on the subject of the assemblage. 
 
 6. The Litany is said. 
 
 7. The Veni Creator is sung. 
 
 8. The Chapter return to the Chapter House, the Choir remaining in 
 their seats. 
 
 9. The Apparitor is sworn to the Execution of the Citations, and makes 
 his call three times. 
 
 10. The Dean reads a Schedule declaring absent Canons contumacious. 
 
 11. The Writ of Cong6 d'&ire and the Letter Missive are read by the 
 Registrar. 
 
 12. The Vote is taken, and the Dean reads a Schedule expressing 
 consent. 
 
 13. The Dean undertakes to publish the Election. 
 
 14. The Dean and Chapter proceed to the Nave, and the Dean pub- 
 lishes the Election. 
 
 15. The Dean and Chapter return to the Chapter House. 
 
 1 6. The Election is decreed to be certified to the Queen and the Arch- 
 bishop-elect. 
 
 17. Proctors are appointed to exhibit the Letters certifying the Elec- 
 tion. 
 
 1 8. The Dean and Chapter return to the Choir. 
 
 m
 
 86 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 19. When the Dean reaches the Choir Gates he turns, and again pub- 
 lishes the Election. 
 
 20. The Dean and Chapter enter their stalls. 
 
 21. The Dean recites " We Praise Thee, O God," and the Choir pro- 
 ceed with the Te Deum. 
 
 22. The Prayers for the Queen and for the Archbishop-Elect, Bishops 
 and Clergy are said by the Succentor Vicariorum. 
 
 23. The Dean gives the Benediction. 
 
 24. The Dean and Chapter proceed to the Chapter House, the Choir 
 preceding them and singing Hymn 302, verses 1-3. 
 
 25. The Instruments of Election and the Proxies are read and decreed 
 to be Sealed. 
 
 26. The Dean and Chapter proceed to the Zouche Chapel where they 
 are Sealed, the Choir preceding them and singing Hymn 302 verses 4-6. 
 
 A. P. PUREY-CUST, Dean.
 
 APPENDIX IV 
 
 I am indebted to the late Rev. W. Sparrow Simpson, D.D. F.S.A. 
 Sub-dean and Cardinal of St. Paul's, for the courteous help which he gave 
 me in copying the following document, which was in his possession, and the 
 knowledge of which I owe to the Rev. William Russell, M.A. Mus. Bac. 
 late Minor Canon and Almoner of St. Paul's. 
 
 The document here printed is evidently of considerable antiquity ; 
 and it may be noticed that it appears to be the custom at St. Paul's to 
 elect the Bishop of London by way of compromise, the Dean being the 
 sole compromissor, or, as he is called at St. Paul's, the arbiter. 
 
 9th March, 1885. 
 FORM OF PROCEEDING 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Election of the Right Reverend Frederick Temple, Lord Bishop of 
 Exeter, to be Bishop of London. 
 
 The Dean and Chapter being assembled in the Chapter House at 
 Half-past Eleven o'clock on Monday, the 9th day of March, 1885 (the 
 Bell having been first rung) the Virger appears, and produces the original 
 Citatory Mandate, with a Certificate of the Service thereof endorsed 
 thereon, and a Schedule thereto annexed, containing the names of all the 
 Canons and Prebendaries cited by virtue of such Mandate ; the Chapter 
 order Her Majesty's Letters Patent and Letter Recommendatory to be 
 read ; which being done, the Canons and Prebendaries having or pre- 
 tending to have a right, voice, or interest in the Election, are called at 
 the Door to appear and proceed in such Election, if they think fit. 
 
 The Dean and the rest of the Chapter assume JOHN BENJAMIN LEE, 
 Notary Public, to be the Actuary, and also desire WILLIAM PRICE MOOR, 
 and HARRY WILMOT LEE to be Witnesses of the Election. 
 
 The Canons and Prebendaries as before mentioned being again called, 
 the Dean with the consent of the rest of the Chapter reads and signs the 
 first Schedule, pronouncing contumacious all the Canons and Preben- 
 daries cited to appear, and not appearing, and decreeing to proceed further 
 in the Business of Election, notwithstanding their absence. 
 
 The Dean, with the consent of the rest of the Chapter, reads and signs 
 the Monition and Protestation, or Second Schedule ; monishing all per- 
 sons suspended, excommunicated, and interdicted, or not having business 
 
 87
 
 88 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 with the said Election to depart from the Chapter House, and protesting 
 that the voices of such as are absent (if any hereafter shall intervene) 
 afford no assistance or do any prejudice to this Election, and pronouncing 
 the Canons and Prebendaries present to be a full Chapter. 
 
 The Dean then publicly declares the Chapter, and sets forth the three 
 Canonical ways of Election, viz. by acclamation, scrutiny, and compro- 
 mise. If the Chapter agree to proceed by way of scrutiny, the votes are 
 taken. If the Chapter agree to proceed by way of compromise, as here- 
 tofore used in Saint Paul's the Canons and Prebendaries agree upon the 
 Dean as Arbiter, upon condition that before he should go from the 
 Chapter House he should choose a fit and lawful man (to whom the major 
 part of the Chapter should seem to incline) as Bishop and Pastor, pro- 
 mising to accept him as Bishop whom the said Arbiter shall think fit to 
 elect. Whereupon the Arbiter accepting the said compromise, he gives 
 his vote and the votes of the rest of his Brethren the Canons and Pre- 
 bendaries aforesaid, for the Right Reverend FREDERICK TEMPLE, Doctor 
 in Divinity, now Bishop of Exeter, and thereupon reads and signs the 
 Schedule of Election. 
 
 The Dean and Chapter accepting the said Election, and person elected, 
 give power to the Dean to publish, declare, and make known to the Clergy 
 and People the said Election and Person elected, and then grant a proxy 
 to certain persons therein named, to certify the said election, as well to 
 the Lord Bishop elect, with request of his consent, as to our Sovereign 
 Lady the Queen, and also the Most Reverend the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury. 
 
 Lastly, the Dean duly publishes, declares, and makes known the said 
 Election and the person elected.
 
 H Comparative Stub\> of the 
 fn the Christian %iturg at 
 wbicb the Elements are 
 prepared anb Set on 
 the
 
 H Comparative Stub\> of the 
 in the Christian %ituro 
 at wbicb the Elements are 
 prepareb anb Set on 
 the Iboty 
 
 SOME years ago I was turning over the pages of J. B. 
 Tillers' Traite des Superstitions ; and in the tenth chapter 
 of the second volume there was a paragraph in which 
 we were told of a superstitious practice of certain priests 
 in town and country, who, to save time, made the obla- 
 tion of the bread and wine before they said the gospel 
 and while the choir was singing the grail ; or, after the 
 gospel, while the choir was singing the creed. Soon 
 after, I had occasion to travel in Spain ; and at Toledo 
 I saw the bread and wine prepared and set on the altar 
 at the very beginning of the service in the Mozarabic 
 Chapel. Like many others in England, it maybe, I had 
 knowledge only of liturgies in which the gifts were set on 
 the altar after the expulsion of the catechumens ; and an 
 interest was accordingly excited in practices that seemed 
 to me so unusual. I was thereby led to collect evidence 
 from liturgies and uses upon two points : first, the litur- 
 gical moment at which the gifts (or symbols as the French 
 ritualists call them) are prepared ; and next, the time at 
 which they are set on the altar, or offered. 
 
 As a result of these studies, the opinion was formed 
 that in the primitive liturgy the preparation of the bread 
 
 91
 
 92 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 and the wine took place at some time before the liturgy 
 began ; that they were both prepared at the same 
 moment, the preparation of the one not being separated 
 from the preparation of the other ; and that the time at 
 which the prepared gifts were set on the altar was imme- 
 diately before the anaphora and after the expulsion of 
 the catechumens, the setting of the gifts on the altar 
 being also closely connected with the kiss of peace. In 
 much later times this setting of the gifts on the altar went 
 before or followed the recitation of the creed. 
 
 The prosecution of the Bishop of Lincoln for certain 
 ceremonial practices caused much discussion about the time 
 in the Christian Liturgy at which the elements are pre- 
 pared ; and it seemed to me that it might be a useful 
 attempt to digest into a paper, even if imperfect, the 
 notes made before this discussion began, upon the time 
 of the preparation of the bread and wine, and of the 
 setting of these upon the altar. The criticisms upon 
 the Lincoln Judgement which appeared on its delivery 
 showed that in most cases the writers had no idea of the 
 facts of the case, and that elementary information might 
 serve a useful purpose if laid before those who had any 
 desire to learn. These notes, then, make no pretence at 
 a complete or exhaustive examination of the subject ; 
 but they represent what may be found in early printed 
 missals, as well as in some of the eastern service books, 
 and the commentators on them. Throughout the work 
 the need of much greater knowledge of the eastern books 
 and of more careful editions of these liturgies has been 
 borne in upon me : with the mediaeval missals, the 
 absence of full ceremonial details is very remarkable ; 
 and in several cases, the danger of drawing conclusions 
 from the absence of directions has been very well illus- 
 trated. In documents contemporaneous with one an- 
 other the directions omitted in some are given in full in 
 others.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 93 
 
 I. THE EASTERN LITURGIES. 
 
 The ceremonies connected with the celebration of the 
 Christian Eucharist are hardly spoken of by the writers 
 of the New Testament. A very early father, however, 
 St. Justin Martyr, gives a clear account, surprisingly full 
 when we consider the circumstances under which it was 
 written, of the main features of the Liturgy in the first 
 half of the second century. He speaks of the reading of 
 the prophets and apostles at the beginning of the Lit- 
 urgy, followed by instructions ; then of the prayers for 
 all men, and the kiss of peace ; in close connexion with 
 which last he speaks of bringing into the assembly, to the 
 president of the brethren, bread and a cup of wine mixed 
 with water. 1 This is the first mention in history of the 
 offertory, 2 and it may be noted that as first described the 
 ceremony takes place when the scripture readings and 
 prayers have been finished, and immediately after the 
 kiss of peace. The celebrant himself takes the elements ; 
 but the chalice would seem to have been already mixed 
 when it was brought into the assembly of the faithful. 
 
 St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his well-known lectures to 
 the new-baptized, does not speak of the preparation 
 of the elements, nor of their being offered, unless indeed 
 it be maintained that he does so by implication in quoting 
 St. Matthew v. 23. 
 
 Let us next examine the Liturgy which has been pre- 
 served in the Apostolical Constitutions, and which is 
 usually known by the name of the Clementine. It much 
 resembles in its arrangement the service described by 
 
 1 C. A. Swainson, The Greek Liturgies, Cambridge, 1884. p. 207. 
 
 2 The word offertory may be conveniently limited to the ceremonial set- 
 ting of the bread and wine on the altar. It seems as if this were its first 
 meaning. Antipbona ad Offerenda is the early expression, just as we have 
 antiphona ad introitum, and antiphona ad communionem. (See Tomasi, Opera 
 otnnia, ed. Vezzosi, Rome, 1750. t. v. p. 3.) The word is often used only of 
 an anthem, but it has a more extended meaning. " Das Offertorium begreift 
 alle Gebete und Ceremonien, die mit dem Erode und Weine vorgenommen 
 werden, bis man sie von der Prothesis auf den Altar tragt." (Georg Adam 
 Keyser, Kurzer Abriss der Russischen Kirche, Erfurt, 1788. p. 97.)
 
 94 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Justin Martyr. We find, after the dismissal of the cate- 
 chumens and the prayers, a direction in the Greek text 
 as follows : these things being done, let the deacons bring 
 the gifts to the bishop at the altar, and the presbyters 
 stand on his right hand and on his left, like disciples 
 around a master. 1 There is, however, no mention of the 
 preparation of the elements. 
 
 In the second book of the Apostolical Constitutions, 
 there is also an account of a liturgy ; but in this the setting 
 of the bread and wine before the celebrant, or on the 
 altar, is not described with any clearness. 2 It is even less 
 distinct in the Ethiopic Version, 3 though in the Coptic 
 Version, Dr. Swainson's reading is as follows : " After 
 the salutation and the kiss of peace, the deacons present 
 the offering to the newly-made bishop ; he puts his hand 
 upon it with the presbyters, and says the eucharistia." * 
 
 Then there is the liturgy described by Pseudo-Diony- 
 sius. He speaks of the reading of scripture, the expulsion 
 of the catechumens, and the setting of the holy bread and 
 cup of blessing upon the divine altar. He gives no 
 account of the preparation of the elements. It may be 
 noted that, in this liturgy, the kiss of peace follows the 
 setting of the bread and wine on the altar. 6 
 
 There appears to be no description of the offertory or 
 of the preparation of the gifts in the Sacramentary of 
 Serapion. 8 
 
 There would seem to be evidence in the liturgies of 
 
 1 Constitutiones Apostolicee, lib. viii. cap. 12. ed. Guil. Ueltzen, Suerini et 
 Rostochii, 1853. p. 206. 
 3 Lib. ii. cap. 57. p. 66. 
 
 3 Thomas Pell Platt, The Ethiopic Didascalia, London, 1834. Oriental 
 Translation Fund, p. 96. 
 
 4 Smith and Cheetham's Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, Lond. 1880. 
 vol. ii. p. 1 02 1. Dr. Tattam's translation is different from this in many 
 particulars. (Henry Tattam, The Apostolical Constitutions . . in Coptic, 
 London, 1848. Oriental Translation Fund, p. 32.) 
 
 6 Pseudo-Dionysius : in Claude de Sainctes, Liturgi<f, si<ve Miss*: sanctorum 
 Patrum, Antverpiae, Chr. Plantin, 1560, fo. 67. 
 
 6 F. E. Brightman, Journal of Theological Studies, 1899. vol. i. part i. p. 
 104. John Wordsworth, Bishop of Salisbury, Bishop Serapion' s Prayer-Book, 
 S.P.C.K. 1899. p. 38.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 95 
 
 the first four or five centuries that the setting of the 
 bread and wine on the altar followed the reading of por- 
 tions of the scriptures, and the expulsion of the cate- 
 chumens ; that it was closely connected with the kiss of 
 peace ; and immediately preceded the more solemn 
 eucharistic prayer or anaphora. In fact, this is the opin- 
 ion expressed by Renaudot in the dissertation prefixed 
 to his collection of liturgies, 1 and by Sir William Palmer. 2 
 It would seem, then, that even thus early, the time for 
 setting the elements on the altar is defined, that it was at 
 the beginning of the missa fidelium or anaphora ; while 
 on the other hand it may be noticed that we have at this 
 period but scanty information concerning the time of 
 the preparation of the elements. In the liturgies which 
 follow, this want is supplied ; but a considerable change 
 will be found in one or two families in the time at which 
 the gifts are set upon the altar or holy table. 
 
 All liturgical students are aware of the claim to great 
 antiquity which is made on behalf of the liturgy of St. 
 James. In this service, the gifts are brought in imme- 
 diately after the expulsion of the catechumens, and 
 therefore, after the reading of the scripture lessons and 
 the intercessory prayer. At this point, all the four texts 
 printed by Dr. Swainson, the earliest being the Messina 
 Roll 3 (A.D. 983) agree that the gifts are brought in and 
 the cherubic hymn is sung ; and that after the gifts have 
 been set on the altar or holy table, the priest says a certain 
 prayer, which is common to all the texts. I find nothing 
 in any of the texts which suggests a ceremony like that of 
 the prothesis, or of the great entrance at Constantinople. 
 I hardly feel inclined to agree with Mr. Hammond in his 
 
 1 Euseb. Renaudot, Liturgiarum Orlentaiium Collectio, Paris, 1716. t. i. 
 p. vij. 
 
 2 William Palmer, Origines Liturgies, London, 1845. 4^ ec ^- v l- > 
 p. 13. 
 
 3 C. A. Swainson, The Greek Liturgies, Cambridge, 1884. p. 238. Cf. 
 p. xxxv. of Introduction. The original of this part has now disappeared ; 
 and for a knowledge of it we are indebted to the notes made by Monaldini 
 for Assemani.
 
 96 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 view that this order does not represent the original order 
 of St. James' Liturgy, because the Syriac St. James is 
 different. 1 The prae-anaphoral parts of the Syriac 
 Liturgy have nothing in common with the Greek St. 
 James, nothing beyond the usual liturgical features, and 
 I do not see why the Syriac service should not be later 
 than the Greek. 
 
 The elder Assemani has printed a description of St. 
 James' Liturgy, written by James, of Edessa, a Mono- 
 physite bishop of the sixth century 2 ; but, unhappily, 
 there is in this no account either of the preparation or 
 of the offertory. 3 According to the treatise on the 
 Liturgy of St. James, ascribed to St. John .Maro, the 
 founder of the Maronites in the seventh century, but 
 ascribed by modern writers to Dionysius Barsalibaeus, 4 
 the bread and wine are placed on the altar after the 
 reading of the gospel and expulsion of the catechumens. 
 There can be no doubt that the bread was in small cakes, 
 and the wine mixed with water ; but at what point the 
 elements were prepared cannot be distinctly inferred. 5 
 
 In the Syriac liturgy of St. James there are two prae- 
 anaphoral forms, and in both the elements are prepared 
 and set on the altar before the beginning of the missa 
 catechumenorum. In the first, the priest having laid 
 aside his daily dress, and approached the altar, takes from 
 the deacon the eucharistic bread, signs it, recites a prayer 
 over it, multiplies it as much as may be needful, censes it, 
 and then offers it on the altar. The priest then pours 
 wine into the chalice, and after that a little water, censes 
 the two veils, and with them covers the chalice and the 
 paten. The mass of the catechumens then begins. 6 
 
 1 C. E. Hammond, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Oxford, 1878. p. 32, 
 note 3. 
 
 2 Smith & Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography, Lond. 1 882. vol. iii. p-328. 
 
 3 J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, Romae, 1719. t. i. p. 479. 
 
 4 Smith & Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography, Lond. 1882. vol. iii. 
 P- 357- 
 
 6 J. A. Assemani, Codex Liturgicus Ecclesia Universe, Romas, 1752. lib. iv. 
 pars ii. t. v. pp. 246 and 267. Seecapp. vi. xvi. xvii. xviii. of the Exposition. 
 8 Renaudot, op. cit. t. ii. p. i et seq.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 97 
 
 The description of Etheridge would lead one to be- 
 lieve that, in this first prae-anaphoral part, when the 
 priest lays aside his ordinary clothes and washes his hands, 
 he also takes the eucharistic vestments. 1 This is not, 
 however, the case in the second order. Here the priest 
 goes up to the altar and mixes the wine and water in the 
 cup. He then prepares the bread in the paten, washes 
 his hands, kisses the oblation, sets it in the paten, and 
 lifts up the chalice containing the wine and water. 
 After some penitential prayers, the priest lays aside his 
 daily dress, and takes the eucharistic vestments, and the 
 missa catechumenorum begins. 2 
 
 In the narrative of the papal envoy in the seventeenth 
 century, the Maronites are very distinctly said to offer 
 the bread and wine before they take the vestments. The 
 word offer would imply that the elements are set on the 
 altar at this time. There is no account of the prepara- 
 tion of the bread or of the chalice. 3 Martene, rather 
 strangely, favours the opinion that the Maronites offer 
 the elements after the epistle because, at this point, the 
 priest exclaims : Ferte oblationes* It seems, however, 
 that the sentence quoted by Martene is only another 
 version of the 8th and 9th verses of the 95th (Engl. 96th) 
 Psalm. 
 
 It must be owned that the history of the office of the 
 prothesis and of the great entrance in the liturgy of Con- 
 stantinople is sufficiently obscure. That the office of 
 the prothesis existed in the twelfth century, there can be 
 no doubt ; for we find it in the version made by Leo 
 Thuscus, though the prayers are much less developed 
 than at the present day. 6 How long before the twelfth 
 
 1 J. W. Etheridge, The Syrian Churches, London, 1846. p. 198. 
 
 2 Renaudot, op. cit. t. ii. p. 12. 
 
 3 Jerome Dandini, Voyage du Mont Lihan, traduit de Pltalien par R. S. P. 
 Ch. xxiv. Paris, 1675. p. no. 
 
 * Martene, de antiquis ecclesi<f ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. art. iv. x. Bassani, 
 1788. t. i. p. 136. 
 
 5 See Claude de Sainctes, Liturgite, si<ve Miss<e SS. Patrum, Antverpiae, 
 1560. fo. 49. 
 
 H
 
 9 B ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 century the custom of preparing the bread and wine at 
 the prothesis existed, we cannot exactly say. At the 
 present day, the bread and wine are set on the prothesis, 
 the priest and his ministers vest, and then go to the pro- 
 thesis, where they prepare the bread by cutting up the 
 holy loaf ; and afterwards the chalice by pouring wine 
 and water 1 into the cup. The prepared elements are 
 left upon the prothesis until the liturgy be so far ad- 
 vanced that the gospel has been said, and the catechu- 
 mens expelled. Then the cherubic hymn is sung, and 
 the priest and deacon bring the elements from the pro- 
 thesis, accompanied by incense and lights. They go 
 round the nave, pass into the bema by the holy doors, 
 and then set the gifts upon the Holy Table. 
 
 It may be here particularly noticed that in small 
 churches, or wayside chapels, the Holy Table itself serves 
 as a prothesis. " There is commonly but one poor Altar 
 or Table made up of Brick, or Stone, or Earth (and re- 
 pair'd against the day, if decay'd, or any part be broken 
 down) and that serves both for a Prothesis and a Holy 
 Table too. The Priest having first prepared the Ele- 
 ments and Portions upon it, and laid them in the Dish, 
 and put the wine and water in the Cup, he carries them 
 in the manner before said, and makes his procession from 
 
 1 There is not the least evidence that the water used in the office of the 
 prothesis is hot. It is hardly credible that anyone could possibly confound 
 the mixing of the chalice, which is part of the preparation of the elements, 
 with the addition of boiling water, that takes place after consecration in the 
 Greek rite. Yet Mr. Malan has done this. " Albeit the Greek and Romish 
 Churches with others of the East, use the mixed chalice, they yet quarrel 
 among themselves, as do the Greek and the Romish, about the quantity and 
 the temperature of water to be mixed with the wine : whether a few or 
 many drops, hot, warm, or cold ; while the Armenian Church and the 
 Jacobite Syrians use pure wine of the best sort to be had." (S. C. Malan, 
 The t*wo holy Sacraments, London, Nutt, 1881. note ii. pp. 259 and 268.) 
 The statement that the Jacobite Syrians do not use the mixed chalice is 
 admitted by Mr. Malan to be based upon an accusation of a bitter enemy 
 (p. 269), which the Jacobite Syrians themselves indignantly deny. It seems 
 so universally acknowledged at the present day that all communities of 
 Christians, with the exception of the Armenians, have used the mixed 
 chalice, that it is waste of time in this paper to give evidence for a fact so 
 surely established and so widely recognized.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 99 
 
 that Altar, fetching a Compass among the people to it 
 again." * And Mr. D'arcy has pointed out to me that 
 Renaudot, in a passage which may refer to the whole 
 East, speaks of the setting of the bread and cup on the 
 altar before the E'o-o^o? or great entrance as being 
 possible " in pauperrimis ecclesiis." 
 
 Of the ceremonies practised in the Armenian Liturgy 
 it is exceedingly troublesome to form any precise opinion 
 owing to the opposing statements made by writers on 
 this subject. From the time of Le Brun to the present 
 moment there has been considerable variation on this 
 head among liturgical writers ; and the only point on 
 which they seem to agree is that the Armenians do not 
 mix water with the wine in preparing the elements. 
 According to Mr. S. C. Malan, the gifts are brought by 
 a deacon to the credence table or table of oblation, and 
 prepared after the Confiteor and ludica which have been 
 introduced into this liturgy under Roman influence, and 
 before the priest approaches the Holy Table. The gifts 
 are left covered on the table of oblation until after the 
 expulsion of the catechumens, and they are brought to 
 the Holy Table at the beginning of the missa fidelium, 
 before the kiss of peace, 3 in an elaborate procession after 
 the manner of the great entrance. Much the same 
 account is given by Dr. James Issaverdens ; this writer 
 describes the credence as " the Niche on the left of the 
 sanctuary." * But in the extract given by Mr. Malan 
 from the Travels of Muravieff 5 the chief altar in the 
 
 1 John Covel, Some account of the present Greek Church, Cambridge, 1722 
 
 P- 34- 
 
 2 Renaudot, op. cit. ii. 56. 
 
 3 S. C. Malan, The Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Church, London 
 1870. p. 24. 
 
 4 James Issaverdens, Sacred Rites and Ceremonies 0, the Armenian Church 
 Venice, 1876. p. 48. The writer is an Armenian in communion wi 
 Rome. 
 
 5 Vol. ii. p. 77, quoted by Malan, op. cit. p. 4 of introduction. "What 
 is singular enough at that particular time, the chief altar served for a 
 credence table." During this preparation or oblation " a curtain, which 
 extends the whole length of the altar, is drawn."
 
 ioo ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 cathedral church of Etchmiadzin is spoken of as serving 
 on one occasion at least as the place of preparation. If 
 this be a correct description, it affords an interesting 
 parallel (only in a cathedral church) to the custom in the 
 Constantinopolitan rite described by Covel as existing 
 in poor country places where no prothesis exists. 
 
 To the three liturgies called Nestorian there seems to 
 be but one prae-anaphoral form, and in this there is no 
 account of the preparation of the elements, but the 
 liturgy begins at once with the miss a catechumenorum. 
 For an account of this preparation, I am indebted to the 
 Right Rev. A. J. Maclean, formerly Head of the Arch- 
 bishop's Mission at Urmi, but now Bishop of Moray and 
 Ross. I have drawn both from his printed 1 account of the 
 Customs of the Eastern Syrians, and from a letter which 
 he sent me, with great courtesy, in November 1887, in 
 answer to an application for information with which I 
 had troubled him. He writes : " There is a preparation 
 in the chamber 2 which is always by the side of the Kanke 
 (Sanctuary) in the East Syrian churches of the bread and 
 the wine for the Kourbana or Eucharist. It is before the 
 beginning of the Liturgy. The Priest himself takes the 
 dough, mixes leaven (supposed to be handed down from 
 the Last Supper 3 ), salt and olive oil with it, and bakes it 
 in a special oven, then makes it into little cakes, which he 
 stamps with a cross (with a wooden stamp) and puts on 
 the patten. The chalice is then mixed, and the priest 
 and deacon then proceed into the Kanke (Sanctuary). 
 The patten is placed on the north side of the Kanke in a 
 niche, the chalice similarly on the south side. The ele- 
 
 1 See Guardian, March 7, 1888. p. 342. 
 
 2 Compare the building on the north side of the Ethiopian churches used 
 or exactly the same purposes. (Francisco Alvarez, Narrative of the Portu- 
 guese Embassy to Abyssinia, ed. Lord Stanley of Alderley, Hakluyt Society, 
 
 1 88 1, ch. xii. p. 28.) 
 
 3 Compare the particle set on the altar from the last Mass in the old 
 Roman Rite. (Ordo Romanus I. in Mabillon, Museum Italicum, Lut. Paris. 
 1724. t. ii. p. 41.) Doubts are felt by some if this be a consecrated 
 particle.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 101 
 
 ments are placed on the altar after the expulsion of the 
 catechumens, but not immediately, as two prayers inter- 
 vene." The bread is baked, it may be noted, and the 
 chalice mixed at the same time ; and they are set in 
 niches hard by the altar before the missa catechumenorum 
 begins. All accounts agree in declaring that the elements 
 remain in these niches, and are not set on the altar until 
 some time after the gospel. But the authorities differ 
 as to the exact time after the gospel. According to Dr. 
 Badger, the chalice and paten are taken from the pro- 
 thesis by the priest immediately after the gospel, while 
 the deacon is reciting the ectene ; and after saying two 
 prayers, the priest sets the paten and chalice on the altar, 
 and with them it may be allowed to suppose the elements, 
 and then carefully covers them with a napkin. 1 The 
 expulsion of the catechumens takes place after this. 2 I 
 am informed that Dr. Badger's account represents the 
 present Chaldean customs. 
 
 In the translation of Renaudot the sexton and deacon 
 (not the priest, as Dr. Badger says) bring the paten and 
 chalice to the altar immediately after the expulsion of 
 the catechumens, and prayers are then said which speak 
 of the gifts ; but I do not find in Renaudot 3 the prayers 
 which Dr. Badger has printed, and to which Dr. Maclean 
 alludes. 
 
 The liturgy used by the Malabar Christians, before the 
 Synod of Diamper, is not exactly known to us. Mr. 
 Hammond tells us that " it was evidently all but iden- 
 tical with the liturgy of SS. Adaeus and Maris, of the 
 Nestorians of Mesopotamia." * Though this may be 
 true in most points, yet the setting of the bread and wine 
 on the altar is, in the " reformed " liturgy, in a different 
 place from that of the liturgy of SS. Adaeus and Maris, 
 as given by Renaudot and the other witnesses. 
 
 1 George Percy Badger, The Nestorians and their Rituals, London, i85z. 
 vol. ii. p. 218. 
 
 2 See p. 220. 3 Renaudot, op. at. ii. 586. 
 
 4 C. E. Hammond, Liturgies, Eastern and Western, Oxford, 1878. p. xxiii- 
 of Introduction.
 
 102 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 In this liturgy the ectene comes very early, as soon as 
 the opening psalm and prayer have been said : and while 
 the deacon recites the ectene (as in Dr. Badger's account 
 of the Syrian Liturgy) the priest, in the middle of the 
 altar, takes the paten and the chalice into his hands. It 
 does not appear where these vessels have been hitherto. 
 Then the chalice is prepared ; first, wine is poured into 
 the cup, then water, and again wine. The chalice is then 
 set on the altar towards the south. The priest then goes 
 to the north and takes the bread, which he puts upon the 
 paten, and raising it with both hands goes to the middle 
 of the altar, and takes the prepared chalice in his right 
 hand, and finally sets both elements on the altar. After 
 some versicles, the offerings are covered, and the priest 
 washes his hands. A prayer, in which the gifts are men- 
 tioned, is then said, and the expulsion of the catechumens 
 then follows. After the expulsion of the catechumens, 
 the scripture lessons are read with the creed. Immedi- 
 ately before the anaphora begins, the elements are un- 
 covered. 1 
 
 In dealing with this arrangement of liturgical parts we 
 must not forget the chance that a great dislocation may 
 have taken place when the liturgy was " reformed " about 
 the time of the Synod of Diamper, and that until we 
 succeed in recovering the ancient liturgy, speculation 
 will be more or less fruitless. It may be that the ectene, 
 and with it the offertory, was moved from the place which 
 they once had. In the earlier liturgy they may have had 
 a place as Dr. Badger describes them, but as de Glen and 
 Raulin print them now, they take place early, almost as 
 soon as the liturgy is begun. 
 
 In the Alexandrine liturgies, both in the Codex Rossa- 
 nensis (A.D. 1160) and the Rotulus Vaticanus (A.D. 1207), 
 
 1 I. B. de Glen, La Messe des anciens Chrestiens diets de S. Thomas, 
 Bruxelles, Rutger Velpius, 1609. PP- 81-89. Jo. Facundi Raulin, Historia 
 Ecclesief Malabaricte, Romae, 1745. PP- 293-312. Compare the later edition, 
 The Liturgy of the Holy Apostles Adai and Mart, Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge, 1893.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 103 
 
 printed by Dr. Swainson, the gifts are brought to the 
 altar, very near to the same time as in St. James' liturgy : 
 that is, immediately after the expulsion of the catechu- 
 mens, and while the cherubic hymn is being sung. 1 But 
 in the Rotulus Faticanus there are three prayers at the 
 beginning of the liturgy, Ei^ TW ir/oofleo-ewy, the first 
 of which is the same as one of those now said in the 
 Constantinopolitan rite, while the priest is dividing the 
 bread ; the second is a prayer of incense ; and the third 
 contains a distinct allusion to the bread and wine being 
 then present. 2 It would thus appear that at the time 
 in the history of the Alexandrine liturgy which corre- 
 sponds to the Rotulus Faticanus, there was an office of the 
 prothesis, and the Rotulus Faticanus would also seem to 
 represent a text earlier than the date of the manuscript. 
 
 In neither of these texts do the rubrics direct a mixing 
 of the chalice, but their directions for the treatment of 
 the holy gifts are very scanty. In the two other texts, 
 Canon Universalis Aethiopum and Liturgia Coptitarum 
 Sancti Basilii, there are prayers of proposition in which 
 it is implied that the chalice is already mixed : mistum 
 in hoc calice? 
 
 Somewhat like this last is the present practice of the 
 Copts. Mr. Butler points out as a vital distinction 
 between the Greek and the Coptic Sanctuary that the 
 Greeks have one altar and a prothesis ; and the Copts 
 have three altars in each sanctuary and apparently no 
 prothesis. 4 And the absence of a prothesis agrees with 
 their ceremonial. Before the celebration of the liturgy, 
 the altar is made ready ; and several loaves are brought to 
 the priest at the altar ; choosing one, 8 he prepares it and 
 
 1 Swainson, op. cit. p. 22 and pp. xviii. and xx. of the Introduction. 
 
 2 Swainson, op. cit. p. 2. 3 Swainson, op. cit. p. 7. 
 
 4 Alfred J. Butler, The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt, Oxford, 1884. vol. 
 i. p. 32. Mr. Butler's account of the liturgy (ii. pp. 282-288) agrees 
 closely with that of Lord Bute. 
 
 5 Compare the practice when the Pope celebrates pontifically of presenting 
 three hosts, one of which is taken ; the others are eaten by the sacrist, as a 
 precaution against poison. (Mabillon, Musei Italici, t. ii. Lutet. Paris. 1724. 
 In ordinem romanum commentarius, p. xlvi.)
 
 104 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 kisses it and lays it on the altar ; he sees if the wine be 
 good, and washes his hands. He takes the bread in a 
 silken veil, and walks once round the altar with it, pre- 
 ceded by one of the deacons carrying the vessel of wine. 
 Having finished the circuit, and reached the front of the 
 altar, he signs the bread and wine, and puts the bread 
 into the paten, and the wine into the chalice, adding a 
 little water. Next follow the lessons from Scripture, and 
 the prayers for all men ; then the kiss of peace, and the 
 anaphora ; but before this latter the priest uncovers his 
 head, and removes the great veil from the bread and 
 wine. 1 
 
 In the ^Ethiopic liturgy, during the sixteenth century 
 at least, the elements appear to have been set on the altar 
 at the outset of the service. After the altar and all things 
 have been prepared, there is a form for the offering of the 
 bread on the altar ; then a prayer when wine and water 
 are poured into the chalice by the deacon, and the chalice 
 has then the same form said over it as over the obley. 
 The liturgy begins. This is the part marked as missa 
 catechumenorum by Mr. Hammond 2 ; after a little, the 
 epistles, a lesson from the Acts of the Apostles, and the 
 gospel are read, followed by the prayers for all men, by 
 the creed and the kiss of peace. But before the preface 
 begins, I can find no other allusion to the elements, even 
 in so rudimentary a form as a direction to uncover them, 3 
 though this seems to be done immediately before conse- 
 
 1 John, Marquess of Bute, The Coptic Morning Service Jor the Lord's Day, 
 i88z. pp. 36, 38, and 77. The rubrics of Renaudot (Liturgiarum Orienta- 
 llum Col/ectio, Parisiis, 1716. t. i. pp. 3 and 13) give no account of the pro- 
 cession with the gifts round the altar, nor of the removal of the great veil, 
 with which, however, the gifts have been covered since the prayer of 
 proposition (p. 3). 
 
 2 Hammond, op. cit. p. 242. 
 
 3 Missa qua Ethiopes communiter utuntur, quee etiam canon universalis 
 appellatur, nunc primum ex Lingua Chaldea siwe Aethiopica in Latinam con<versa, 
 Romae, apud Antonium Bladum, 1549. The rubrics in this pamphlet leave 
 no doubt that the elements are set on the altar early in the service, and not 
 elsewhere ; in Renaudot (i. 499) the rubrics are less distinct.
 
 THE EASTERN LITURGIES 105 
 
 oration in the account of Francisco Alvarez. 1 He notes 
 the shortness of the service ; and indeed a very much 
 longer form of the prae-anaphoral part of the ^Ethiopic 
 service has been printed by Dr. Swainson from two 
 manuscripts taken at Magdala in 1868. In both, the 
 time of the setting of the bread and wine on the altar has 
 been preserved as in the time of Francisco Alvarez, though 
 one manuscript is of the seventeenth, and the other of 
 the eighteenth century. 2 In this the cover of the disc 
 is ordered to be taken away directly after the creed. 
 
 If we look back over these Eastern liturgies we shall 
 find, without exception where we have information, that 
 the preparation of both elements takes place simul- 
 taneously before the missa catechumenorum begins. In 
 the Byzantine liturgy the mixing of the chalice and the 
 division of the bread go on together, and are apparently 
 of equal importance. It is the same in the Syriac liturgy 
 of St. James. In the East Syrian the baking of the bread 
 and the mixing of the chalice take place together. 
 Amongst the Copts the bread is prepared and the chalice 
 mixed at the same time. It seems impossible to describe 
 the East Syrian practice as a ceremonial act ; and in the 
 other rites we see the preparation in its early and primi- 
 tive form, a mere preliminary breaking up of the bread, 
 and an adding of water to the wine, before the service 
 began. If one be rigidly ceremonious, the other must 
 be so too. 
 
 Now, although the elements are prepared at the be- 
 ginning of the service, yet they are not set on the altar 
 itself until after the expulsion of the catechumens, in the 
 earliest liturgies or accounts of them that have come down 
 to us ; yet in the later liturgies, which are derivatives 
 from the earlier, this time of setting the elements on the 
 altar is put forward in the service, and made to take place 
 
 1 Francisco Alvarez, Narrative of the Portuguese Embassy to Abyssinia during 
 the years 1520-1527, ed. Lord Stanley of Alderley, Hakluyt Society, 1881. 
 pp. 24-26. 
 
 2 Swainson, op. at. pp. 358 and lii.
 
 106 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 at the same moment as the preparation. This joining 
 together of two distinct liturgical acts is not particular 
 to the East. We shall see it again in many of the Western 
 uses. It does not seem to be a primitive practice. For 
 at a time when the expulsion of the catechumens was a 
 reality and the division between the missa catechumen- 
 orum and the missa fidelium marked, and the disciplina 
 arcani in full force, every care would be taken to hide the 
 prepared elements from the sight of the unbaptized. 1 
 Even now in the Constantinopolitan rite the preparation 
 of the elements is not seen by the general congregation ; 
 the chapel of the prothesis is divided from the nave by a 
 wall. Important in this respect is the account given by 
 Covel 2 of the custom of the Greeks of making the holy 
 table into a prothesis when no prothesis exists, as in 
 country places or wayside chapels, where there is not the 
 usual furniture of a well-provided church. The Greeks 
 in that case combine the two liturgical acts of preparing 
 the elements and setting them on the altar. It may be 
 that the present custom of the Maronites, Copts, and 
 Ethiopians has arisen from a like stress of circumstances. 
 No prothesis was at hand ; and the holy table itself was 
 used as a place of preparation ; and then the act first 
 suggested by convenience crystallized into a custom. 
 
 II. THE WESTERN LITURGIES TO THE 
 END OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 We may now turn to the liturgies of the West, of which 
 there are only two great families : the Gallican and the 
 Roman. 
 
 1 One of the Canons of the Council or Valentia in Spain, held in the 
 sixth century, would seem to imply that if the gifts be brought in early in 
 the service, the expulsion of the catechumens must also take place early, 
 before the gifts be brought in. See below, part II. p. 108. In the Armenian 
 service it has been seen that a curtain is drawn before the altar during the 
 preparation of the gifts. 
 
 2 See above, p. 98.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 107 
 
 The Galilean liturgy was used in Gaul and Spain, if not 
 elsewhere ; and in Gaul, our chief authorities for the 
 ceremonial of the early Gallican liturgy are the treatise 
 ascribed to St. German of Paris * and the collection of 
 allusions to the liturgy made from early writers by Ruin- 
 art. 2 Some details may also be found in the canons of 
 councils. 
 
 From the treatise of St. German it appears that the 
 dismissal of the catechumens took place before the gifts 
 were brought in ; that before the gifts were brought into 
 the church an anthem was sung ; that the bread (called 
 Corpus Domini, though not yet hallowed) was brought in a 
 vessel like a tower to the altar ; and very possibly in the same 
 vessel was the chalice. 3 They were brought to the altar by 
 deacons, and greeted by anticipatory adoration 4 ; it would 
 seem that some kind of procession like the great entrance 
 of the Eastern rites took place from the door of the church 
 to the altar. Water was mixed with the wine, but I have 
 been unable to find any direct documentary evidence for 
 the time at which the mixing took place. Mgr. Duchesne 
 tells us that the gifts were prepared before the celebrant 
 came in 5 : and though he does not give his authority for 
 this statement, it seems to be likely enough in itself. 8 
 Whatever evidence there is points, I would suggest, to 
 this view, and though each single piece of evidence may 
 not in itself prove much, yet taken together in all, their 
 weight can hardly be neglected. The pax was separated 
 from the offertory by the recitation of the names of the 
 
 1 Edm. Martene and Urs. Durand, Thesaurus no<vus Anecdotorum, Lutet. 
 Paris. 1717. t. v. p. 91. It has been often reprinted. 
 
 2 Ruinart, in Martin Bouquet, Scriptores rer. Gall. Paris. 1739. ii. 92. 
 A different interpretation may be given to the facts which Ruinart quotes to 
 prove his position that the expulsion of the catechumens took place after the 
 offertory. 
 
 3 Cf. F. J. Mone, Lateinische und Griechische Messen, Frankfurt a/M. 1850. 
 p. 5. 
 
 4 Gregory of Tours, de Gloria Martyrum, I. 86. 
 
 B L. Duchesne, Origines du culte chretien, Paris, 1889. p. 195. 
 6 See below the account of the Stowe Missal at beginning of part IV. 
 p. 147.
 
 io8 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 departed (diptychs), and followed by sursum cor da and the 
 rest of the liturgy. 
 
 If we compare the account given by St. Isidore of 
 Sevile with the treatise of St. German, we find certain 
 points of resemblance in the two ; and there can be no 
 doubt that St. Isidore describes a liturgy which has many 
 features in common with St. German's. The Isidorean 
 account begins with the offertory, and an anthem was sung 
 at this time as in Gaul ; but there is nothing said of the 
 gifts until the moment of communion is reached. The 
 mixed cup is here spoken of, but nothing is said about the 
 time or place of mixing, 1 or of the time of setting the 
 gifts on the altar. It would seem, however, that before 
 St. Isidore a movement had begun in favour of the prac- 
 tice of setting the gifts on the altar early in the service, a 
 practice which would cause an early expulsion of the 
 catechumens. For a council held at Valentia, in Spain, 
 in the sixth century, orders that the gospel shall be read 
 before the gifts are brought in, so that the catechumens 
 may hear the salutary precepts of the epistle, gospel, and 
 sermon. 2 
 
 From the seventh century to the end of the fifteenth 
 there is little information at hand upon the text of the 
 Spanish liturgy, or its accompanying ceremonies. Car- 
 dinal Ximenes published the first edition of the Moz- 
 arabic Missal in 1500, and though the manuscripts of this 
 liturgy are no doubt very important, yet hitherto very 
 little has been done for their editing. 3 In discussing the 
 preparation of the gifts in the Mozarabic rite, I am aware 
 that a subject is being dealt with on which varying views 
 
 1 Beatissimi Isidori quondam Archiepiscopi, de officiis ecclesiasticis, lib. i. 
 capp. 14-18. Ed. I. Cochleus, Venice, 1564. This treatise is exceedingly 
 well known to all liturgical students. It is conveniently printed in Hittorp's 
 collection of early tracts. 
 
 2 J. Saenz de Aguirre, Collectio maxima condliorum omnium Hispant*?, 
 Romae, 1753. Ed. Catalan!, t. iii. p. 175. See also Carl Joseph von Hefele, 
 Conciliengeschichte, Freiburg, 1873. 2 ' e ' Auflage, Bd. ii. S. 709. 
 
 3 There must be excepted the important work of Dom Marius Ferotin, 
 O.S.B. (Le Liber Or dinum, Paris, Firmin Didot, 1904, in Monumenta Ecclesiae 
 Liturgica, vol. v.).
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 109 
 
 have once been expressed. One cause of difference of 
 opinion has been, I think, a certain unfamiliarity with 
 the rite, which needs some study before its intricate 
 arrangements can be well understood ; and there is also 
 the fact that Ximenes and those editors which follow 
 him, print the invariable parts of the service in three 
 different places of the book. A sound opinion can hardly 
 be formed during a hasty examination of one particular 
 edition. 
 
 Taking Leslie's edition as the most convenient for 
 reference, we find at the beginning of the book the whole 
 service for the first Sunday of Advent, printed from the 
 officium (Roman introit) to the thanksgiving after com- 
 munion (pp. 1-7, line 75). Then much further on, from 
 p. 217, line 80 to p. 220, line 80, we have all the private 
 prayers of the priest, from the time that he enters the 
 vestry to the end of mass, given in consecutive order. 1 
 Immediately after the private prayers follow the prayers 
 recited publicly from the officium to the end of the service 
 (p. 220, line 80 ; to p. 234, line 1 8), called Missa omnium 
 offerentium. There is the division between the two 
 masses marked by Incipit missa (p. 224, line 63), when 
 the mass of the faithful begins. These three parts must 
 be read as if they were printed in parallel columns, one 
 by the side of the other. 
 
 It is among the private prayers of the priest that we 
 find the full directions for preparing the elements. After 
 the prayers at vesting, and approaching the altar, confiteor 
 and some collects, we have a prayer, ad extendendum cor- 
 poralia ; then follow prayers at wiping the chalice, for 
 pouring wine into the chalice, the blessing of the water, 
 
 1 It has been known rom the time of Pierre Le Brun, in 1715, if not 
 earlier, that these private prayers are borrowed from the Romano-Toletan 
 Missal. (Explication de la Messe, V e . Dissertation, Art. II. i, Paris, 1777. 
 t. iii. p. 301.) The ceremonies which they accompany are probably much 
 older than the prayers. Eugenio de Robles, who lived only a century after 
 Ximenes, tells us that the Cardinal added to the Mozarabic office confiteor, 
 the prayer to the cross, and the others said before the introit. (Eug. de Robles, 
 Compendia de la Vida . . . Ximenez, de Cisneros, etc. Toledo, 1604. p. 321-)
 
 no ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 and the setting of the host upon the paten (p. 219, lines 
 33-67). Then follow prayers to be said before the 
 gospel. Thus far I presume all would be agreed; that in 
 the days of Ximenes the preparation of the elements took 
 place some time between the approach of the priest to 
 the altar, and the reading of the gospel. No exact 
 moment for the preparation is given in the private 
 prayers. But in the third part (p. 223, line i) there is a 
 rubric between two of the lessons, directing wine to be 
 poured into the chalice while the epistle is read. From 
 this it has been inferred that the whole preparation al- 
 ways took place at this point in the service. Seeing that 
 in many other western rites the preparation took place 
 between the epistle and gospel it seems a very likely 
 opinion that the Mozarabic preparation, in some cases, 
 took place here. But we must not exclude the evidence 
 given to us by tradition, which places the prepar- 
 ation very much earlier in the service ; in fact follow- 
 ing close upon confiteor, and as soon as the priest goes 
 up to the altar. I may add the notes which I made 
 during the service at Toledo, in March, 1884. "After 
 confiteor, the host was brought ; then the priest mixed 
 the wine and water in the chalice, and set the vessels in 
 the middle of the altar ; then went to the epistle corner ; 
 a chaplain at the eagle afterwards read a lesson, another 
 the epistle, then the altar book was moved to the gospel 
 side to which the celebrant went, etc." 1 
 
 In the Mexican reprint by Lorenzana, the treatise pre- 
 fixed by him to the Missa Gothica plainly contemplates 
 the preparation of the gifts before the beginning of the 
 Missa omnium offerentium, as the priest goes up to the 
 altar ; and there is no mention of it between the lessons 2 ; 
 though in the text of the mass the direction remains. 
 The edition published at Rome, by Azevedo, for Loren- 
 zana, in 1804, speaks in the notes of the preparation 
 
 1 I am forced to use the modern expressions, " gospel side," " epistle side," 
 as the Mozarabic chapel does not orientate. 
 
 3 Missa Gotbica, Angelopoli, 1770. pp. 81 and 89.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES in 
 
 before the service only. 1 And in the later reprint of 
 Lorenzana, 2 the preparation of the elements is plainly 
 directed to take place immediately after confiteor ; and 
 the service then passes on to the officium. The direction 
 to pour wine into the chalice before the gospel is omitted. 
 The tradition at Salamanca is the same, 3 the other re- 
 maining Mozarabic centre in Spain. And Du Pin, the 
 author of the well-known treatise on the ancient Spanish 
 liturgy, sets down the moment before the officium or 
 introit as the place for the mixing of the chalice. 4 So 
 also Pierre Le Brun, but with the preparation at the 
 epistle given as an alternative practice. 6 
 
 It would seem plain, then, that in the Mozarabic Rite 
 there are two places at which the preparation of the 
 elements may take place ; one, while the epistle is being 
 read ; the other, before the service begins. According 
 to Hernandez de Viera, the first is associated with high 
 mass, the second with low mass ; and this is not an un- 
 likely statement, 6 for we shall presently see that this 
 distinction between the ceremonies of high and low mass 
 prevailed in several dioceses and monastic orders. 
 
 It has been said before that in the sixth century a 
 Spanish Council ordered that the gifts should be brought 
 in after the gospel, and this order could only have been 
 
 1 Missale Gotbicum, Romae, 1804, col. 
 
 2 Misste Gothics et Ojficii Muzarabici diludda expositio a D. D. Francisco 
 Antonio Lorenzana, editio novissima, Santos ab Arciniega, Toleti, Lopez 
 Fando, 1875. PP- 2 3 anc ^ 2 7- 
 
 3 Rubricas generates de la Mlssa Gothica-Muzarabe . . . por Don Fran- 
 cisco Jacobo Hernandez de Viera, Salamanca, T. G. Honorato de la Cruz, 
 1772, pp. xxxviii. and xliv. 
 
 4 loannes Pinius, Tractatus Historico-chronologicus de liturgia antlqua his- 
 panica, Cap. ix. x. 470, in Bianchini's edition of Thomasius, (Romas, 
 1741, t. i. p. xcii.) The treatise also appears in the Bollandist Acta, 
 July 25. 
 
 5 Pierre Le Brun, op. cit. p. 309. 
 
 6 " In Missis solemnibus Calix dum Prophetia canitur, cum vino, et aqua 
 praeparatur, et Hostia in Patena apponitur : at vero in privatis, primum 
 Calix prasparatur, et in Patena Hostia collocatur, ac deinceps Officium inco- 
 hatur ad Missam." (F. J. Hernandez de Viera, Rubricas generates de la 
 Missa Gothica-Muzarabe t Salamanca, 1772. p. LXXIV.)
 
 ii2 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 given because a practice of setting the gifts on the altar 
 early in the service had come in. But in Cardinal 
 Ximenes' time it would seem that this custom had be- 
 come fully established ; for, at whatever time the gifts 
 were prepared, whether before the introit, or during the 
 epistle, it seems plain that they were straightway set upon 
 the altar, a direction for unfolding the corporal being 
 printed before the directions for preparing the elements. 
 At the present day the elements are set on the altar at the 
 time of their preparation ; but after the gospel there are 
 directions for a verbal offering of the gifts, and the chalice 
 is directed to be then set on the ara. (p. 223, line 100.) 
 In Spanish Latin ara is the small square slab on which the 
 elements are consecrated, called in English the portable 
 altar, or superaltar. It would seem therefore that at the 
 offertory the paten and chalice were moved up from 
 another part of the altar to the place where the ara was. 
 This is still the custom with the Dominican friars, and 
 was a common custom in Spain before the end of the 
 sixteenth century. 
 
 It may be as well to mention here a theory that the 
 chalice was mixed after the offertory in the Mozarabic 
 rite, and after it was verbally offered. This view has its 
 foundation in a rubric which is found after the direction 
 for incense at the offertory (p. 224, line 4) : Hie acci-piat 
 aquam in manibus. I cannot but think that this is only 
 the ceremonial washing of the hands. I find that the 
 Mexican edition of Lorenzana adds ad lavandum manus x 
 to this rubric ; and the tradition at Salamanca is the 
 same ; at this point in the service the rubric of 1772 says : 
 in cornu epistoLf lavet manus? 
 
 So much then for the Mozarabic and Gallican liturgies. 
 We turn now to one of the most important of the living 
 rites, the liturgy of Rome. , 
 
 The Liturgy which has most influenced Western 
 Europe is beyond doubt that associated with the name of 
 
 1 Op. cit. p. 42. 2 Rubricas generates, p. LII.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 113 
 
 St. Gregory. This is not the place to discuss the origin 
 of this liturgy, if first formed in the neighbourhood of 
 Carthage and thence brought to Rome on the disappear- 
 ance of the Greek language there ; but we know that at 
 Rome and in Africa the kiss of peace was early separated 
 from the offertory, and has been given immediately before 
 communion, in striking contrast to its place in all other 
 liturgies. In like contrast we shall also see a marked 
 difference in the time of the preparation of the chalice, 
 which is made at the offertory, not, as in so many other 
 liturgies, before the service begins. 
 
 Of the exact moment at which the gifts were prepared 
 and set on the altar the Gregorian Sacramentary tells us 
 nothing, unless it be implied that they were offered while 
 the offertory was being sung. The earliest detailed 
 account that we have of the ceremonies of the Roman 
 liturgy is in the Ordo Romanus, printed first by Cassander, 1 
 afterwards by Hittorp, 2 later on by Muratori. 3 Many 
 of the Ordines Romani have been printed by Mabillon 4 ; 
 and it is from his edition that are taken the following 
 details of the first Ordo. They are not always perfectly 
 plain, but the ceremonial seems to be much as follows. 
 
 The deacon who has read the gospel returns to the 
 altar, where he meets an acolyte with a chalice and cor- 
 poral over it. The acolyte passes the chalice (calix) to 
 his left hand, and gives to the deacon the corporal, which 
 with the help of the second deacon is spread on the altar, 
 and the chalice placed upon it. Apparently it is taken 
 off the altar again by the subdeacon, who follows the 
 archdeacon with the empty calix. It should be noticed 
 that three chalices appear to be in use : one, calix maior, 
 
 1 Georgius Cassander, Ordo Romanus de officio miss*?, Colonise, hseredes 
 Arnold! Birckmanni, 1568, in 8. I owe the opportunity of consulting this 
 edition to the kindness of the late Rev. W. Cooke, Canon of Chester. 
 
 2 M. Hittorp, De di<vinis Catholic*- Ecclesia? ojficiis, Paris, 1610, col. i. 
 
 3 L. A. Muratori, Liturgia Romana fetus, Venetiis, 1748, t. ii. col. 973. 
 
 4 I. Mabillon, Mum Ita/ici, tomus II. Lutecias Parisiorum, 1724. Mr. 
 Cuthbert Atchley has recently edited Ordo Romanus Primus in this Library of 
 Liturgiology and Ecclesiology. 
 
 I
 
 ii4 ECCLESiOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 the larger chalice ; another, the scypbus, the ministerial 
 chalice ; the third, the chalice (calix) in which the con- 
 secration itself takes place. 1 
 
 The pope next comes down from his throne accom- 
 panied by certain officers ; and moving about from one 
 part of the church to the other, receives the breads offered 
 by the people. From the pope the regionary sub- 
 deacon takes the breads and gives them to the following 
 subdeacon, who puts them into a linen cloth which two 
 acolytes hold. After the pope also follows the arch- 
 deacon, and he receives the offered wine in cruets or 
 phials, which he pours into the larger chalice which is 
 held by the regionary subdeacon ; whom an acolyte 
 follows with a ministerial chalice above his chasuble ; and 
 as soon as the larger chalice is full, he pours its contents 
 into the ministerial chalice. When the offerings of bread 
 and wine have been collected from the faithful by the 
 pope and the archdeacon, the former returns to his throne 
 and washes his hands ; but the archdeacon washes his 
 hands standing before the altar. 
 
 Now the breads which the following subdeacon had 
 in his hands are brought by the regionary subdeacons to 
 the archdeacon, and he would appear to set them 
 on the altar. Then the archdeacon takes the cruet of 
 the pope from the oblationary subdeacon, and pours the 
 wine into what appears to be the chalice (calix} through 
 a strainer. 8 Then the subdeacon receives water from 
 the hands of the archparaphonista and gives it to the arch- 
 deacon, who pours it into the chalice, making with the 
 water a cross. 
 
 It should be noticed that, as far as we have information, 
 the bread and wine offered by the people remain in the 
 hands of the acolytes and subdeacons until they be set 
 
 1 See Mabillon, op. at. t. ii. p. 59, note a. 
 
 a There is a description of the strainer in Theophilus de di-versis artibus, 
 lib. iii. cap. Ivii. Lond. 1847. ed. Hendrie, p. 284. There is a drawing 
 of the colum in D. Georgii de Liturgia Romani Ponttfids, Roma?, 1731. t. i. 
 and a chapter on it (cap. vi. p. Ixxiii.).
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 115 
 
 on the altar. There appears to be no credence, or table 
 of proposition. Each one of the faithful brings his own 
 bread, which appears to have been made by himself or 
 herself, and there is nothing which at all corresponds to 
 the office of the prothesis of the Eastern liturgies. Fur- 
 ther it should be noticed that there is no account of any 
 preparation of the bread, which is so notable a feature 
 in the Eastern liturgies ; nor of the addition of water to 
 any but the one chalice, although it seems plain that two 
 others were used in receiving the offerings of the faithful. 
 There is also no trace of the prayers which form a verbal 
 oblation in the modern service. The archdeacon and 
 his assistants are to set (componere) on the altar the offer- 
 ings, and this action would seem to be taken as more 
 significant than any form of words would be. 
 
 The pope then comes down to the altar from his throne 
 and receives certain breads offered by the clergy : then 
 the archdeacon takes the breads offered by the pope from 
 the oblationary subdeacon and gives them to the pope. 
 When the pope has set these on the altar, the archdeacon 
 takes the chalice from the hands of the regionary sub- 
 deacon, and sets it on the altar next the bread offered by 
 the pope, the handles of the chalice being wound round 
 with the offertory veil. 
 
 This ends the ceremonies of the early Roman offertory. 
 When the canon is over, and the lay folk are to be com- 
 municated, the archdeacon pours a little of the conse- 
 crated chalice into the ministerial chalice (scyphus), the 
 contents of which were supplied by the offerings of the 
 faithful. It was a current opinion at that early time that 
 the addition of a small quantity of the consecrated species 
 to another chalice was enough to extend the virtue of 
 consecration to the whole of the contents of the second 
 chalice. 1 Now there is no record of an addition of water 
 
 1 With this we may compare the practice of adding ordinary water to the 
 water blessed for baptism, and of ordinary olive oil to the cream or holy oil, 
 if either of these should fail. We still find these directions in the modern 
 Roman Rituale. (Rituale Romanum Fault V. etc. De Sacramento Baptismi. 
 Mechliniae, 1876. pp. 14 and 18.)
 
 n6 ECCLESTOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 to this ministerial chalice at the offertory, or at any other 
 time. 1 It is unlikely that pure wine, to which no water 
 had been added, would be used in the celebration ; and 
 the question arises if the wine, when offered by the faith- 
 ful, had not already received a certain amount of water : 
 and that the water added at the offertory to the papal 
 chalice was merely added to make sure that some water 
 had been added. This suggestion is made by Brett 2 ; 
 and some support is given to his view by the direction in 
 Ordo Romanus VI. Here as soon as the deacon begins 
 to read the gospel, two acolytes receive the sacred vessels 
 from the keeper of the church in the vestry 3 ; and the 
 acolytes carry these into the choir, one bearing the chalice 
 covered with a corporal, and already containing wine 
 mixed with water ; the other carrying the paten. 4 Now, 
 although further on, there are directions for the straining 
 of the wine before the singing of the anthem of the offer- 
 tory, and for the receiving of the offerings in kind from 
 the faithful after, yet there is no further direction for the 
 addition of water to the wine. The mixing of the 
 chalice would appear, therefore, to have taken place in 
 the vestry, some time before the gospel was read. 
 
 In the Ordines Romani II. III. and V . which follow this 
 first, as printed by Mabillon, much the same account 
 is given in all the leading particulars of the ceremonies 
 of the offertory, and later, in the account which Inno- 
 cent III. gives of the celebration of mass, written, no 
 
 1 Cardinal Bona boldly solves the difficulty by saying that water was in 
 the ministerial chalice before wine was added. Sequitur cum scypho, con- 
 tinente scilicet aquam. (Rerum Liturg. I. xxv. 5. Antv. 1739. P- 2 93-) 
 But I do not know of any ancient instance in which the water was poured 
 into the chalice before the wine, except in the Irish tract of the Stowe 
 missal. 
 
 2 Thomas Brett, Collection" of the principal Liturgies, London, 1720, p. 149, 
 note. 
 
 3 Sacrarium, Secretarium, Diaconicum, Sacristia . Ducange. Throughout 
 these Ordines the word sacrarium nearly always has the meaning of 
 vestry. 
 
 4 Mabillon, op. cit. p. 73. Cf. the second Ordo Romanus of Hittorp. (De 
 di-vinis catholics ecclesia? officiis, Parisiis, 1610. col. 80.)
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 117 
 
 doubt, before his election as pope in 1198, we find that 
 the bread was set on the altar, as in the early rite, after 
 the offertory, and the chalice mixed immediately after, 
 but that the celebrant himself mixed the wine with water, 1 
 a practice which continued in the time of Durandus, 2 
 and is prescribed in Ordo Romanus XIV? This is said 
 to have been written by James Caietan, who died when 
 Clement VI. was pope ; that is, between 1342 and 1352. 
 In the beginning of the sixteenth century, however, Mar- 
 cellus tells us that the subdeacon added the water to the 
 chalice from a spoon, 4 and the subdeacon appears to have 
 continued to the present day in this office of making the 
 chalice. 
 
 To return to Ordo Romanus XIV . Between the early 
 Or dines and the Ordo Romanus XIV '., there is a great 
 interval of time, and a great difference in ceremonial had 
 sprung up. A ceremony not unlike that of the Greek 
 office of the prothesis is now met with, and a locus aptus 
 near the altar which must have had a certain likeness to 
 the modern credence. The collection of the offerings 
 from the people has also entirely disappeared. The 
 following are the directions : After the epistle, if there 
 be no sermon in the mass, the subdeacon washes his fingers 
 and makes ready the chalice in some suitable place near 
 the altar, pouring wine into the chalice, but, it should be 
 well noticed, no water as yet ; upon the chalice he sets 
 the paten with the bread, and covers all with a cloth. If 
 there be no suitable place near the altar, the chalice is 
 made ready on the altar itself. Then the subdeacon goes 
 and sits amongst the other ministers. When there is a 
 
 1 Innocentii III. de sacro altaris mysterio, II. Ivii. Sylvae-Ducum, 1846. 
 p. 167. 
 
 2 Durandus, Rationale di<vinorum officiorum, IIII. xxx. Venetiis, 1586. 
 p. 94. Sicardus, Mitrale, lib. iii. cap. vi. Ed. Migne 1855, col. 1208. 
 
 3 J. Mabillon, Museum Italicum, Paris, 1724. t. ii. p. 301. 
 
 4 Chr. Marcellus, Rituum Eccles. etc. Lib. iii. Venetiis, 1516, fo. cxxvii. 
 The reader may note the extraordinary precautions taken against poison at 
 the offertory. Cf". Dominici Georgii de Liturgia Romani Pontificis, Romse, 
 1744. t. iii. p. 578. The Ordo is said to be of the fourteenth century.
 
 n8 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 sermon, this preparation is put off until after the sermon. 
 
 In this ceremonial it is clear that we have passed from 
 Caroline times into the full middle ages. It is strange 
 that no traces of an early preparation of the gifts should 
 be met with before in the Roman Liturgy, and even now 
 the preparation is incomplete ; for though wine is poured 
 into the chalice, and it may be that the chalice is at once 
 set on the altar, yet water is not added until the time of 
 the verbal offering of the gifts. 1 It may be noticed that 
 the pope himself, and not an inferior minister, 2 puts the 
 water into the chalice with the prayer Deus qui humaiuz, 
 a Christmas collect, taken from the Leonine Sacrament- 
 ary, but marred by the senseless interpolation of words 
 designed to fit the collect for its new use. It appears in 
 this form in Menard. 3 
 
 It is also in this Ordo that we first meet with the verbal 
 oblation Suscipe Sancte Pater, etc., and the rest of the 
 prayers now said after the offertory, which are not Roman 
 in origin, but appear to come from Gallican sources ; of 
 which, besides the external evidence of Micrologus, 4 we 
 have the internal evidence of the prayer Suscipe Sancta 
 Trinitas, in which a recitation of the names of the saints 
 takes place, like the recitation of the Gallican diptychs. 
 
 We should further note that while in the first six 
 
 1 This ceremonial was preserved almost entire into the sixteenth century 
 by the Canons of St. Augustine. See Ordinarium Fratrum Canonicorum 
 Regularium Congregation}; S. Safoatoris, Ordinis S. Augustini, Romae, Ant. 
 Blad. 1549. capp. xxxix. and xli. And in a little Franciscan book, rather 
 private than liturgical (Liber familiarii clericorum, Venetiis, P. Liechtenstein, 
 1550. fo. 225 verso) the ceremonial is very much the same, only the chalice, 
 as soon as the wine is poured into it, is to be set on the altar, and the water 
 added at the verbal offering. This only applies to high mass ; at low mass 
 the wine may be poured into the chalice, and then set on the altar before the 
 service or at the verbal oblation, whenever the priest likes. 
 
 2 The Ambrosian ceremonial described by Beroldus (see below, p. 121) 
 may be compared with this. If the Archbishop of Milan were present, he 
 himself made the chalice ; if not, the subdeacon put wine and water into the 
 chalice in the vestry. 
 
 3 Hugh Menard, Di<vi Gregorii pap<e . . . Liter Sacramentorum, Parisiis, 
 1642, p. 270 of the first pagination. 
 
 * Micrologus, De eccles. observ. cap. xi. in Hittorp, De di<vinis catholic* 
 ecclesite ojpciis, Paris, 1610. col. 738.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 119 
 
 Ordines the elements are not set on the altar until after 
 the gospel or creed, in this fourteenth they may be set 
 on the altar itself so early in the service as immediately 
 after the epistle, if there be no suitable place near. This 
 is a distinct swerving from primitive customs, which did 
 not allow of the presentation of the elements on the altar 
 until after the expulsion of the catechumens, and the 
 beginning of the missa fidelium.* 
 
 It is commonly said that private or low mass came first 
 into general use about the time of Charles the Great. 
 By private mass is meant the celebration of the eucharist 
 without deacon and subdeacon, whether accompanied 
 by music or not makes no difference. There can be no 
 doubt that private mass was well known throughout the 
 middle ages ; but the first account of low mass at Rome 
 that I have met with is in the Ordo celebrandi missam of 
 
 1 Immediately after the gospel or creed, as the case may be, the priest say?, 
 and has said from very early times (Ord. Roman. II. in Mabillon, op. cit. ii. 
 46), Dominus <vobiscum and Oremus ; but this is followed immediately by no 
 prayer, only by the anthem of the offertory. An explanation of this is often 
 made by supposing that Oremus refers to the Secreta collect of the day ; but 
 the great interval between the invitation to prayer and the prayer itself 
 makes such an explanation unlikely. In the early Ordines, the whole cere- 
 monies of the offertory, the collection of the offerings of all orders of the 
 people, lay folk and clerks, comes between ; and in the modern service there 
 is still a long interval ; the setting of the bread and wine on the altar, the 
 preparation of the chalice, the censing of the gifts and the altar, the washing 
 of the hands, Orate fratres. Can it be that this Oremus after the gospel 
 marks the division between the two masses ? That the catechumens being 
 dismissed, the faithful are bidden to begin the more solemn part of the liturgy 
 by the salutation and invitation to prayer ? 
 
 It may be objected that this Oremus is said after the creed, which is a part 
 of the missa fidelium. But it should be remembered that the creed is of late 
 introduction into the Roman liturgy, and that sometimes it was sung before 
 the sermon, which is beyond all doubt a part of the missa catechumenorum, so 
 that in later times it would not seem that the line of division between the 
 two masses was very well recognized. 
 
 There is a good deal of mediaeval evidence that Oremus before the offertory, 
 was looked upon as the beginning of the missa fdelium, but I cannot go 
 further into the matter now. It may also be noticed that an Oremus is said 
 after Judica and Confiteor, as the priest goes up to the altar. It is true that 
 Aufer a nobis follows immediately ; but this is said secretly, while Oremus is 
 said with a loud voice. Is this Oremus the ancient beginning of the missa 
 catechumenorum ?
 
 120 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 John Burckard 1 of Strassburg, who was master of the 
 ceremonies in the Roman Curia at the end of the fifteenth 
 century. His work has often been reprinted ; and from 
 it is descended the Ritus Servandus, prefixed to the 
 Roman Missal since the time of Pius V. From this 
 account of John Burckard's it is clear that the host or 
 hosts at low mass were set upon the altar at the same time 
 as the vessels, that is, when first the priest went up to the 
 altar. But the chalice was made after the anthem of the 
 offertory and the prayer Susci-pe sancte 'pater. It is clear 
 that no wine was in the chalice before, because the priest 
 is bidden to wipe it carefully with the purificator and then 
 to pour in wine, saying nothing ; and after, water. 
 
 Most of the mediaeval writers on ceremonial to whom 
 I have access 2 give an account of the ceremonies of the 
 offertory which is practically the same as that described 
 in the Roman Ordo : to wit, that the chalice is made and 
 the elements set on the altar after the anthem of the 
 offertory. It may be noticed that Durandus speaks only 
 of the Roman practice : though as a Dominican friar he 
 must have been well acquainted with the custom of his 
 order, which is to make the chalice, and set the bread and 
 wine on the altar, at low mass, before the service, and at 
 high mass, between the epistle and gospel. The silence 
 of these writers must not then be taken as evidence of a 
 want of knowledge of the existence of other customs. 
 
 The Roman customs at the offertory would seem also 
 to prevail at Sienna in I2I3, 3 and at Aquileia in 1403, or 
 earlier. 4 At Modena, in the twelfth century, the host 
 and the chalice, perhaps already mixed, were offered 
 directly after the gospel. 5 
 
 1 John Burckard, Or Jo Missa-, Rome, 1502. Reprinted in Tracts on the 
 Mass, Henry Bradshaw Society, pp. 133 and 150. 
 
 2 See Hittorp's collection in his De divinis catholics ecclesia? officiis. I have 
 used the edition printed at Paris in 1610. Also Cochleus' Speculum Miss<f, 
 Venice, 1572. See also Dominico Georgi De liturgid romani pontificis, Roma?, 
 1744. iii. Appendix monumentorum. 
 
 3 J. C. Trombelli, Ordo Ojflciorum Ecclesite Senensis, Bononise, 1766. p. 459 
 
 4 J. F. B. M. de Rubeis, Dissertationes dute, Venetiis, 1754. p. 276. 
 
 5 L. A. Muratori, Liturgia Romana fetus, Venetiis, 1748. t. i. col. 90.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 121 
 
 For our knowledge of the early Ambrosian mass we are 
 indebted to Monsignor Ceriani, the distinguished Prefect 
 of the Ambrosian Library at Milan, " le savant le plus 
 verse dans 1'etude de la liturgie milanaise," says Mon- 
 seigneur Duchesne. 1 Monsignor Ceriani regards the 
 Ambrosian as a sister rite to the Roman, while Monseig- 
 neur Duchesne, if I understand him well, would rather 
 look upon Milan as the starting-point of the Old Gallican 
 liturgy. In Monsignor Ceriani's edition of the Biasca 
 manuscript there is no information upon the time of the 
 preparation and setting on the altar of the gifts, beyond 
 the position of the prayer super oblata, which is equivalent 
 to the Roman secreta. The earliest account of the cere- 
 monies of the Ambrosian mass is given by Beroldus, who 
 wrote about A.D. 1130, and there is a certain resemblance, 
 not exact at all points, between the ceremonies of the 
 offertory at Milan, and those of the sixth Or do Romanus. 
 When parcite fabulis and silentium habete have been pro- 
 claimed at the beginning of the gospel, an oblation of 
 bread and wine is received from the hand of the deacon 
 and subdeacon z on certain days by Custodes, or sextons. 
 After the gospel, the subdeacons return to the vestry, 
 and then follow Dominus vobiscum^ Kyrie, and the anthem 
 after the gospel. The prayer supra sindonem having 
 been said, the Cicendelarius hebdomadarius supplies the 
 hebdomadary subdeacon 3 with bread and wine from 
 the Archbishop's stores, and also with water. The sub- 
 deacon puts the bread on the paten, and wine and water 
 into the chalice, provided the archbishop be away. But 
 if the archbishop be present, he himself makes the chalice. 
 
 1 L. Duchesne, Origines du culte chrttien, Paris, 1889. p. 152, note. 
 
 2 MS. I. 152 (P. inf.) in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, f. xxxviij. I 
 am indebted to the Very Rev. Marco Magistretti, Master of the Ceremonies 
 in the Metropolitan Church, for a copy of a privately printed edition of this 
 MS., and for many acts of courtesy during my visits to Milan. 
 
 3 The Master of the Ceremonies at Milan has pointed out to me that the 
 subdeacon in the Ambrosian Rite performs functions closely akin to those 
 of the acolyte in the Roman Rite. Until the time of St. Charles Borromeo, 
 the subdeacon was hardly considered to be in holy orders, and there were no 
 canons subdeacons.
 
 122 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 The subdeacon then, with great reverence, carries the 
 bread in the paten, and the chalice with the wine from 
 the vestry to the altar ; and gives the gifts to the deacon, 
 and the deacon to the archbishop or priest. Then the 
 Offerenda is sung. After that the Vetuli and Fetulcs 
 offer bread to the archbishop or priest (the men only 
 enter the choir, the women remain outside 1 ), each offers 
 three breads, which the priest gives to the subdeacon ; 
 they offer wine to the deacon, and one of the lesser 
 Custodes takes it from the deacon and pours it into the 
 chalice of oblation, and returns the cruet to the Vetulus 
 whose it is. The archbishop or priest then returns to the 
 altar, and washes his hands ; the subdeacon then pours 
 the wine offered by the Vetuli^ through a strainer into 
 the golden chalice, which the deacon has taken off the 
 altar, and holds in his hands ; the deacon then replaces 
 the chalice on the altar, the archbishop makes the sign 
 of the cross, and the gifts are censed. The creed then 
 follows. 
 
 In the first printed Ambrosian Missal it would seem 
 plain that the chalice was made after the gospel, after 
 -pacem habete? There is also in the Ambrosian Library 
 at Milan another missal printed in 1522, which has been 
 prepared for the printer, and many of the rubrics struck 
 out. For example, after the prayer rogo te altissime there 
 comes this rubric, struck out : 3 Hie de dei misericordia 
 confidens : leuet et oculos ad celum et accendens ad 
 altare consecratum et paratum lumine : cruce : mappis. 
 calice cum uino, et aqua et patena cum hostia et syndone : 
 et tersitorio : ac missali et clerico : dicat secrete, etc. 
 On the verso of this leaf comes the following rubric, not 
 
 1 On Low Sunday, April 8, 1891, I saw that this separation of the sexes 
 was still made. 
 
 2 Missale Ambrosianum, Mediolani per Antonium Zarrottum, 1475. fo. 
 cvi. verso. The rubrics in this printed book are added by hand, and they 
 vary in the two copies in the Ambrosian Library, in their form but not 
 always in their substance. 
 
 3 Missale secundum morem s. Ambrosti, Mediolani per I. A. Seinzenzeler, 
 1522. fo. 127.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 123 
 
 struck out : Finita oratione super syndonem si calix non 
 fuerit apparatus : hie apparetur ponendo in eo uinum et 
 modicam aque. Et quando uinum imponit, etc. 
 
 In these two missals, 1 there are thus allowed two 
 various times for making the chalice ; in one, the chalice 
 is already made when carried to the altar with the bread ; 
 the other is at the offertory after the gospel : and this 
 leads to the consideration of a book by an Ambrosian 
 ritualist, Casola, who wrote in 1499. He shares, with 
 other rubricians of the end of the middle ages, an entire 
 indifference to the place in the service, up to the offer- 
 tory, at which the chalice might be mixed. The rubrics 
 of churches so widely separated as Milan and Toledo, 
 Augsburg and Agram, agreed in saying that it did not 
 matter when the chalice was made. Thus Casola, the 
 Ambrosian ritualist, speaking of the interval between 
 the epistle and gospel, says : " Sunt nonnulli qui his 
 peractis preparant calicem cum vino et aqua et hoc 
 arbitrarium est quia talis preparatio potest fieri etiam 
 ante inchoationem misse : et etiam ante oblationem : 
 et non refert." It was much the same at Toledo : 
 " Preparatio hostie et calicis potest fieri ante incoeptum 
 officium misse, vel ante Evangelium, vel ante offertorium, 
 quando voluerit sacerdos." 3 And at Augsburg : " Aliqui 
 preparant calicem ante Evangelium : alii post offer- 
 torium : alii vero sub minore canone post oblationem 
 panis. Tu vero prepara ilium cum volueris." * At 
 
 1 The Ambrosian Missal of 1560 follows in its main features the edition 
 of 1522. Neither, Monsignor Ceriani informs me, is a particularly good 
 edition. It may be useful to note that Martene's reprint of the Ambrosian 
 Ordinary (ed. Antwerp, 1736. t. i. p. 482) from the Ambrosian Missal of 1560 
 is not quite accurate ; gives pr&paratus instead of apparatus, leaves out words 
 that are repeated in adding the water to the chalice, and other small changes. 
 
 2 P. Casola, Rationale Cerimoniarum Misse Ambrosiane, Mediolani, 1499. 
 fo. lob. His indifference seems shared by F. Suarez ; see below, p. 162, n. 2. 
 
 3 Missale mixtum secundum ordinem alme primatis ecclesie Toletane, 1561. 
 Toleti, fo. cxiiii. 
 
 4 Missale secundum ritum augustensis ecclesie, Dilinge, Sebald Mayer, 1555. 
 fo. 147 verso. It would seem from F.A. Hoeynck (Geschichte der kirchlichen 
 Liturgie des Bisthums Augsburg, Augsburg, 1889. (p. 70) that this rubric 
 makes its first appearance at Augsburg in this edition.
 
 124 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Agram the priest might, if he liked, make the chalice 
 before the introit, or immediately before the gospel ; 
 but in winter, when the weather was very cold, immedi- 
 ately after the offertory. 1 The time at which the 
 mixing was to take place was so unimportant that it 
 might be determined by the weather ; if there was a 
 chance, perhaps, of the contents of the chalice becoming 
 frozen. It would even seem to have been thought by 
 some that the wine might be mixed with water while 
 it was still in the cask ; for in John de Lapide, whose 
 work was printed so often in the fifteenth and sixteenth 
 centuries, the question is asked if it be enough that the 
 water be added to the wine in the cask. It is replied 
 that it is not enough, because the mixture is sacramental, 
 and must not be done before the mysteries be begun, or 
 preparation made for beginning them. 2 Also in an 
 early printed work, De defectibus occurrentibus in Missa, 
 there occurs : " non autem sufficit quod aqua apponatur 
 quando vinum adhuc est in dolio quia hoc non significant 
 aliquid sed oportet quod imminente oblacione apponatur 
 sacramentum." 3 Alexander of Hales, an Englishman 
 of the thirteenth century, asks the question if it be 
 sufficient if the water be added in the cask, but unluckily 
 he does not decide it. 4 
 
 In the same way, at Paris, leave is given to the priest 
 to prepare the bread on the paten and to mix the chalice 
 as soon as the altar is got ready, and before he vests, if 
 
 1 Missale secundum chorum almi episcopatus Zagrabiensis, Venetiis, Liechten- 
 stein, i$oo+x. Ordo in divinis. Mr. Weale gives the date as 1511. (See 
 his Catalogue Missalium, Lond. 1886. p. 219.) 
 
 2 loan, de Lapide, Resolutorium Dubiorum, Cap. vii. Art. iv. 12. Venetiis, 
 1559. fo. 26. verso. With this Suarez agrees. See below, p. 162, note 2. 
 
 3 The book is in the University Library at Basle, without date, place, or 
 printer's name. On the cover there is written a reference to Hain, Repertor 
 bibliograph. Stuttgart, et Paris. 1826, vol. I. pars. i. *6oj2. 
 
 4 Etiam potest quaeri ; utrum sufficit, si admisceatur aqua in dolio. 
 Et videtur quod sic, quia ante inceptionem missae misceri potest ; et 
 sufficit quod tune admixta transmutetur in vinum. (Alexander of Hales, 
 Summa, Pars IV. Quaestio x. Membr. 4. Art. i. 5, according to edition 
 at Colonia Agrippina, 1622. p. 240.)
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 125 
 
 he should so wish : but at least the preparation was to 
 be made before the gospel. 1 
 
 Though the directions of Casola and others show such 
 want of carefulness for the time at which the chalice 
 should be made, yet they indicate the three places at 
 which the mixing is most common. In the first place, 
 ante inchoationem missce^ before the service ; next , 
 between the epistle and gospel ; and last, ante oblationem, 
 at the offertory. 
 
 These three great times may be divided again ; for 
 example, the making of the chalice at the offertory may 
 take place directly after the creed or gospel, before the 
 offering of the bread, or immediately before the chalice 
 itself is offered : and further subdivisions may readily be 
 made, if the reader be so minded. 
 
 Let us begin, then, with a consideration of the meaning 
 of ante inchoationem misscz. If we look at the Gregorian 
 Sacramentary, 2 we see that the introit was anciently 
 the beginning of the public service, even as it really is 
 now : for all that precedes the introit at this day is of 
 the nature of private preparation for the priest. Any 
 time, then, before the introit may be looked upon as 
 before the service. Or even as far as the collects, accord- 
 ing to Amalarius 3 and other mediaeval authorities, and 
 Claude de Vert,* more in our own time : for Kyrie is 
 
 1 Missale ad usum ecclesie Parisiensis, Th. Kerver, 1501. The same 
 directions run through the editions of 1541, 1543, and 1559. Pierre Le Brun 
 says the practice continued until 1615. (Explication . . . de la Messe, 
 Paris, 1777. t. iii. p. 306.) 
 
 2 L. A. Muratori, Liturgia Romana Fetus, Venetiis, 1748. t. ii. col. i. 
 Or C. E. Hammond, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Oxford, 1878. p. 364. 
 
 3 Amalarius, De eccles. offic. ii. 5 (in Hittorp's Collection). "Officium 
 quod vocatur introitus Missa;, habet initium, a prima antiphona quae dicitur 
 introitus, et finitur in oratione, quae a sacerdote dicitur ante lectionem." 
 See in the same collection,! Rupert of Deutz, De di*vitiis officiis, I. 31, de 
 collecta. "Hucusque Missae initium, quod dicitur Introitus." As late as 
 1745 at Soissons, where the chalice was made during Kyrie or Gloria, the 
 time of preparation is spoken of as before Mass (Calix paratur in Credentia 
 ante Missam, Missale Suessionense, Parisiis, 1745. Rubrics: generales, cap. 
 vi. p. 23). 
 
 4 Claude de Vert, Explication . . . des Ceremonies, Paris, 1713. t. iii.
 
 126 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 only the end of the Litany which once preceded the 
 Mass, and Gloria in excelsis is really an intrusion from the 
 divine service into the eucharistic office. 1 
 
 We may take then the period ante ince-ptionem misses 
 as extending from the time at which the priest first 
 washes his hands on coming into church to the saying 
 of the collects. When the chalice is mixed before the 
 service, or at any point before the collects, it sometimes 
 happens that the elements are also then set on the altar, 
 which becomes a kind of prothesis, the elements being 
 later on moved from the end where they are first set to 
 the middle part of the altar. 
 
 An illustration of this maybe seen in Plate XV., which 
 represents a pope at the moment of the elevation of the 
 host, showing it to the people. Nevertheless, the cruets 
 remain on the south side of the altar, with the incense 
 boat, showing that this end of the altar serves the pur- 
 poses of a credence table. 2 
 
 We may quote, as an example of this, one of the earliest 
 instances that we have : a book of Consuetudines of the 
 Cistercian monks, written at the end of the twelfth 
 
 p. 86. He points out that at Florence and Chartres the ringing for Mass 
 only stops during Gloria in excelsis. Just as in the ordinary Roman rite on 
 Maundy Thursday and Easter Even, the bells ring during Gloria to call the 
 people to Mass. This writer holds that bells are only rung to call the 
 faithful to church. The ringing at the consecration or Agnus is to call the 
 people to Sext, None, or Vespers, whichever of these offices immediately 
 follows : at Magnificat, to Compline : at Te Deum, to Lauds. 
 
 1 See also L. Duchesne, Origines du culte chrttien, Paris, 1889. p. 156. 
 " Chants preliminaires." 
 
 2 Plate XV. is a reproduction of a painting once attributed to Raffaelino del 
 Garbo, the original of which is in the possession of Mr. R. H. Benson, at 16, 
 South Street, Park Lane. It is dated 1501, and represents a very favourite 
 subject of that time, the Mass of St. Gregory. It is valuable to us because 
 it shows the Italian furniture and customs of the early sixteenth century, 
 which we may contrast with those now in vogue. There are only two 
 lights on the altar, and there are no flowers ; the mass-book is supported by 
 a cushion in accordance with the present rubric ; the altar is vested with an 
 embroidered antependium. The gradin or shelf which supports the candle- 
 sticks is the earliest instance that I have met with anywhere of such an 
 addition to the altar. The shape of the vestments may be profitably con- 
 trasted with that of the modern ornaments now worn at Rome.
 
 PLATE XV] 
 
 THE MASS OF J 
 
 DATE! 
 (From the original in the po
 
 [Between pp. 126 and 127 
 
 <JT GREGORY, 
 01. 
 
 in ot Mr. K. H. Benson.)
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 127 
 
 century and thus very soon after the foundation of the 
 order, directs the deacon, after saying Confiteor, to spread 
 the corporal on the altar ; and after rinsing the chalice 
 with water, to minister bread upon the paten and wine 
 in the chalice, the subdeacon helping him. Whoever 
 it be that does it, whether deacon or subdeacon, wine 
 is first to be poured into the chalice, and then the cruet 
 containing water is given to the priest when he is ready 
 for it ; and the priest pours water into the chalice. 
 Then the paten being set on the chalice and covered with 
 the offertory veil, he comes down below the step of the 
 altar on the right hand. 1 
 
 The time, however, at which the bread and wine are 
 to be ministered by the deacon to the priest would seem 
 to be not very strictly enjoined, provided that it be 
 about the time when the priest first goes up to the altar. 
 For example : if, while the deacon is ministering, the 
 priest begins to say Gloria in excelsis Deo or Dominus 
 vobiscum, the deacon must leave off ministering, and say 
 after the priest. 
 
 Much the same practice must have continued through- 
 out the middle ages, for these directions are also found 
 in a Cistercian book printed in 153 1, 2 but the book pub- 
 lished in 1617 shows only the usual modern Roman 
 customs. 3 
 
 This Cistercian practice we may take as a typical 
 instance of setting the bread and wine on the altar, 
 and mixing the chalice before the beginning of the ser- 
 vice. It would also seem that the bread and wine were 
 not set on the middle of the altar but at one of its ends, 
 for after the gospel or creed the deacon moves them to a 
 corporal on the middle of the altar. 4 
 
 1 Ph. Guignard, Les monuments primitijs de la regie dsterdenne, Dijon 
 1878. p. 142. Consuetudines, written between 1173-1191. 
 
 2 Liber usuum Cisterdensis Ordinis, Paris, Engelbert de Marnet, 1531. 
 
 3 Missale ad iisum sacri ordinis Cisterdensis, Lutetiae Parisiorum, Sebastian 
 Cramoisy, 1617. 
 
 4 Guignard, op. at. p. 144.
 
 128 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 This Cistercian custom probably represents one of the 
 earliest forms of the practice ante inceptionem missce ; for 
 it takes place as the priest goes up to the altar, where the 
 ancient service began with introit or collect. 
 
 When, however, we have to deal with setting the 
 elements on the altar or mixing the chalice before ludica 
 and Confiteor, such as we see in the Dominican low mass, 
 it may be said that they come from a time when ludica 
 and Confiteor had already been put in front of the ancient 
 service. Supposing this objection to be valid, which 
 seems doubtful, it cannot be made to the preparation of 
 the chalice before or during vesting, for this practice 
 may be as old as the custom of wearing any special 
 vestment at all for mass. 
 
 In order to give more at length an instance of the 
 preparation of the elements before vesting, the following 
 directions from a Verdun missal may be quoted. The 
 priest, having prepared himself by washing and drying 
 his hands and saying, kneeling before the altar, Veni 
 sancte spiritus with Da nobis quesumus, prepares the 
 elements : " Deinde extendat corporalia super altare 
 accipiatque calicem ac tergat cum sudario, panem ad 
 celebrandum super patenam calicis ponat, vinum deinde 
 fundat in calicem. Et benedicat cum signo crucis 
 dicendo ea que sequuntur. Dominus te benedicat de 
 cuius latere exivit, etc. Benedicat aquam Et aqua 
 baptismatis in remissionem peccatorum in nomine . . . 
 \-Amen. Quo facto, ponat patenam super calicem cum 
 pane : et cooperiat eum corporalibus. Deinde premisso 
 signo crucis, ponat amictum super caput suum dicendo 
 que sequuntur Pone domine, etc." * 
 
 The same direction to mix the chalice before vesting 
 is given in a little tract frequently printed in France 
 before 1550, Alphabetum (sen Instructio) Sacerdotum, 
 which Andre du Saussay tells us contains the order for 
 saying mass according to the custom of the Gallican 
 
 1 Missaie secundum usum . . . imignis ecclesie et diocesis Virdunensis, 
 Parisiis, Gul. Merlin, 1554. fo. cxxxj.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 129 
 
 Church. 1 The practices indicated by this Al-phabetum 
 were no doubt followed over a great part of the north 
 of France. 2 
 
 This practice of making the chalice after washing hands 
 and before beginning to take the mass vestments, is 
 prescribed in the ritual books of fourteen churches and 
 orders. (See the Table showing the Liturgical Moment 
 of the making of the chalice annexed to this paper.) 
 There are also six churches and orders where the chalice 
 was to be made while the priest was vesting, after taking 
 the stole and before taking the chasuble. 
 
 Then, to pass on to the practice of making the chalice 
 after vesting : there are directions for this in the treatise 
 de expositions misse, by William of Gouda. Not follow- 
 ing the rubrics of his own order, 3 he directs the priest to 
 make the chalice directly he has finished vesting, and 
 apparently some time before he says confiteor* It would 
 seem that the local practice of Germania inferior is being 
 described, though the friars minor have been always 
 known for their devotion to the ceremonial of the Roman 
 Church. In the annexed Table, the number of cases 
 where this practice is clearly ordered is but small. It 
 shows, however, a number of rites in which the chalice 
 was made early in the service ; from the time of approach- 
 ing the altar to the end of the collects, forming a cluster 
 which cannot so conveniently be thrown under one 
 heading as the preceding groups. 
 
 The next great time for the mixing of the chalice, is 
 the interval between the epistle and gospel. When the 
 
 1 Andreas du Saussay, Panoplia sacerdotalis, Lutet. Paris, 1653. p. 271, 
 pars. I. lib. viii. cap. xx. artic. v. 
 
 2 Alphabetum Sacerdotum has been reprinted in Tracts on the Mass, 
 Henry Bradshaw Society (1904), p. 30. 
 
 3 See the rubrics at the offertory in Missale secundum morem romane 
 ecclesie per f ratres minores de observantid accurate revisum, Nurmbergc, 
 1501 ; the priest is there bidden to make the chalice after the creed, in the 
 Roman fashion. 
 
 4 Tractates de expositione misse editus a 'ratre Guilhelmo de Gouda ordinis 
 minorum de obser<vantid, Colonie, per Henricum Quentell. The tract has 
 no date, but Quentell is said to have printed only between 1498 and 1500. 
 
 K
 
 130 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 chalice is mixed at this point in the service, there is no 
 fixed moment at which the elements may be set on the 
 altar ; they might be taken to the altar as soon as the 
 chalice was mixed, or remain on the credence until after 
 the gospel or creed, when they were then carried to the 
 altar. 
 
 An early instance of this preparation of the chalice 
 between the epistle and gospel, may be found in the 
 ritual book of Soissons, written between 1175 and 1207, 
 by order of Nivelon de Cherisy, bishop of that church. 
 The little objection to making an altar into a credence 
 may be noted again : " Post epistolam . . . super quod- 
 dam altare retro magnum ministret * subdiaconus diacono 
 panem et vinum et aquam." Then after the creed the 
 deacon washes his hands, " eatque ad mensam proposi- 
 tionis, ubi proposuit ea que ad opus sacrificii preparavit. 
 Tune cum summo honore offerat ea, cereo preferente 
 usque ad sacrosanctum altare, offeratque ea sacerdoti 
 manum illius deosculans. 2 
 
 At Soissons, then, in the twelfth century, the elements 
 were prepared at some place apart from the altar, and 
 kept there until the creed, when they were taken to the 
 altar, with a certain amount of pomp, a candle being 
 carried before them. It will be seen later on, in Part III., 
 that this sort of great entrance survived at Soissons into 
 the middle of the eighteenth century. 
 
 In other rites, the elements as soon as prepared were set 
 on the altar, but only at one end, as at Palencia in Spain, 
 where the chalice, as soon as made, and the paten with the 
 host were put on the altar, though extra aram, 3 that is, 
 not on the consecrated altar stone. 
 
 1 Rituale seu Mandatum insignis Ecclesite Suessionensis, ed. Poquet, Sues- 
 sione, 1856. p. 172. See also Edm. Martdne, De antiqun Ecclesiee ritibits, 
 Lib. i. Cap. iv. Art. xii. Ordo xxii. 
 
 2 Ministrare or Administrare in mediaeval Latin means to prepare the 
 elements for the celebration of mass, not merely to deliver them in the holy 
 communion. This can be shown by numerous quotations, if desired, from 
 the rubrics, references to which are given in the Table annexed to this paper. 
 I note this interpretation because I do not find it in Ducange, 
 
 3 Mtssale Pallantinum, etc., 1568. f. cccli.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 131 
 
 There are twenty-seven churches and orders in the 
 annexed Table, in which the chalice is made between the 
 epistle and gospel. 
 
 The third great time for the preparation of the chalice 
 is after the gospel or creed ; and of this the Roman 
 Liturgy, from the earliest times known, is the great 
 example. But even in those rites in which the making 
 of the chalice comes after the gospel, it does not follow 
 that it will take place after the offering of the bread on 
 the altar. The chalice may be made before the bread is 
 set on the altar, or its verbal oblation. At Rhemes, the 
 gospel being ended, wine and water were poured into the 
 chalice, and the offertory then said. The chalice was 
 next taken and lifted up ; immediately after, the host 
 was laid upon the corporal. 1 Very much the same was 
 practised at Bremen, 2 and in some other dioceses. The 
 monks of the Charterhouse apparently made ready the 
 elements during the creed, but the water was added to 
 the chalice during the singing of the offertory anthem, 
 and immediately after this both elements were set on 
 the altar. 3 
 
 At Seville, the chalice was made after the deacon had 
 received his blessing for the gospel, probably therefore 
 after the gospel itself, but before the corporal was spread 
 on the altar and before the host was offered. 4 At 
 Cambray, the priest washed his hands after the offertory 
 anthem and then mixed the chalice ; after this the 
 corporals were spread on the altar and the gifts offered. 5 
 Much the same was done at Eichstadt. 6 Other instances 
 may be noted in the Table annexed to this paper. 
 
 1 Missale secundum usum . . . ecclesie Remensis, Paris, 1542. f. xcvii. 
 verso. 
 
 2 Missale secundum ritum ecclesie Bremensis, Argent, 1511. 
 
 3 Repertorium Statutorum Ordinis Cartusiensis, Basileae, 1510, I. pars, 
 statut. antiq. ca. xliii. 22. 
 
 4 Missale secundum usum alme ecclesie hyspalensis, Hispale, Jacob Cron- 
 berger, 1507, and later edition Alfonso Mauriques, 1534. f. cxl. 
 
 5 Missale par*vum secundum usum venerabilis ecclesie Cameracensis, 1507. 
 f. cxxxj. 
 
 8 Missale secundum chorum ft ritum Eystetensis ecclesie, Nurnberg, 1517.
 
 132 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 In this Table there are some forty instances in which, 
 the chalice is made after the gospel, against some 
 sixty in which the chalice is made at a time before the 
 gospel. Besides these I have examined some forty mass 
 books in which I could discover no certain indication of 
 the time at which the chalice was made. 
 
 It may well be asked : How did they arise, these three 
 particular moments in the liturgy for the preparation of 
 the gifts ? and why did the setting on the altar of the 
 gifts by anticipation so often immediately follow their 
 preparation ? If the reason given for the anticipation 
 of the offertory in some Eastern liturgies be accepted, 
 viz., the want of a proper vestry or place of proposition 
 in which to prepare the elements, the same reason would 
 well apply in the Western rites. A place of preparation 
 would not be at hand in many mediaeval churches and 
 chapels, and the altar would suggest itself as convenient 
 for making the preparation ; and as soon as the prepared 
 gifts were once set on the altar, their oblation was made : 
 because it is the act of setting the gifts on the altar, not 
 the words said over them later on, which is the act of 
 offering. In former times, too, the mass vestments were 
 often spread on the altar and taken thence at the begin- 
 ning of mass, bishops retaining to this day the right to 
 such a practice. 
 
 Then the interval between the epistle and gospel 
 comes next as a place of preparation and offering. This 
 is peculiar to the Western rites ; with the exception of 
 the Maronites, it has not even been suggested that the 
 practice is known in the East ; and in the case of the 
 Maronites, it seems very clear that Martene misunder- 
 stood the words Ferte oblationes. 1 And in the Western 
 rites it would seem to be found where Gallican in- 
 fluences were strong. In the early Roman ceremonial of 
 Or do Romanus L for example, both the gifts are set on 
 the altar after the gospel, and no words of offering are said 
 over them. But in Ordo Romanus VI. the mixture takes 
 
 1 See above, Part I. p. 97
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 133 
 
 place in the vestry, and the gifts are brought into the 
 choir by acolytes as soon as the deacon begins to read the 
 gospel. In this Ordo we find also for the first time Veni 
 Sanctificator said over the gifts. 1 And further, in Ordo 
 Romanus XIV. we find the gifts might be set on the altar 
 as early in the service as after the epistle, and that cus- 
 toms foreign to the pure Roman liturgy, such as verbal 
 oblations after the gospel, and the recitation of prayers 
 during the mixing of the chalice, had come into use. 
 
 In the Irish tract which accompanies the Stowe missal 
 there are some Gallican customs enjoined, such as the 
 elaborate fraction of the host at the end of the canon ; 
 and in the Stowe missal itself, the diptychs are ordered 
 to be recited before the preface. 2 Side by side with 
 these Gallican ceremonies, we find others which we may 
 suspect to be of like origin : the preparation of the gifts 
 and the setting them on the altar before the service 
 began ; and also the curious practice of lifting the veil 
 from the chalice in the interval between the epistle and 
 the gospel. 3 The lifting of the veil at this moment from 
 the prepared gifts was the practice in England just 
 before the Reformation, in the diocese of Coutances in 
 Normandy, and St. Pol de Leon in Brittany. It is also 
 directed in the little tract Alphabetum Sacerdotum, which 
 was printed so often in France before the middle of the 
 sixteenth century, and which had so great an influence 
 on French ceremonial. Becon, in his profane way, says 
 it is to " look whether your drinke be there or no." The 
 explanation of the mixing of the chalice between the 
 epistle and gospel seems to lie in the fact that before the 
 middle ages had begun, it was the practice in Gaul to 
 look upon the missa fidelium as beginning with the 
 gospel. The Council of Valentia in Spain in the sixth 
 century directs that the gospel shall be read before the 
 
 1 See above, Part II. p. 116. 
 
 2 F. E. Warren, Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, Oxford, 1881. 
 pp. 233 and 257. 
 
 3 See below, Part IV. p. 147.
 
 134 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 gifts are brought in, so that the catechumens may hear 
 the salutary precepts of the epistle, gospel, and sermon. 1 
 And Amalarius says that in his days they expelled the 
 catechumens before the gospel. 2 So in Ordo Romanus 
 VII. the deacon bids the catechumens withdraw before 
 the gospel. 3 Thus the beginning of the missa fidelium 
 must in these cases have been in the interval between the 
 epistle and gospel ; and thus it might be regarded as 
 appropriate a time for mixing the chalice and bringing 
 in the oblations, as it was in those liturgies where the 
 missa fidelium began after the gospel and sermon. 
 Thus established, it remained and continued in many 
 churches, through the middle ages and after. 
 
 III. THE WESTERN LITURGIES AFTER THE 
 REFORM OF POPE PIUS V. 
 
 At the last sittings of the Council of Trent, towards 
 the end of 1563, a commission was given to the Holy See 
 to reform the missal and breviary.* Great speed was 
 shown in this work of reform, in fact, it might be called 
 haste, for the reformed breviary appeared in 1568, and 
 the reformed missal in 1570. In this latter book few 
 changes were made in the directions for the preparation 
 
 1 See above, pp. 106 and 108. 
 
 2 Araalarius, De ecclesiasticis officiis, III. lib. cap. 36 ; in Hittorp, De 
 divinis, etc. Paris, 1610. col. 436 B. 
 
 3 Ordo Romanus VII. in Mabillon, Museum Italicum, Paris, 1724. t. ii. 
 
 P- 79- 
 
 4 Canones . . . concilii Tridentinl. Sess. xxv. Continuatio sessionis die 
 iv. decembris. (Ratisbonae 1874, p. 193.) The fathers were not unanimous. 
 The Spanish Bishop of Lerida made a long oration to show that, in correct- 
 ing ritual books, " there was need of an exquisite knowledge of Antiquity, 
 and of the Customs of all Countries, which will not be found in the Court 
 of Rome ; where, though there be Men of excellent Wit, and of great 
 Learning, yet they want skill in this kind." (Sir Nathanael Brent's transla- 
 tion of Father Paul's History of the Council of Trent, London, 1676. p. 
 747.) The Bishop's remarks may find a wider application than to the 
 Court of Rome and the sixteenth century.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 135 
 
 of the elements. At high mass, the bread was set on the 
 altar after the anthem of the offertory ; the deacon then 
 pouring wine into the chalice, and the subdeacon water, 
 which the celebrant blessed immediately before. At 
 low mass, the mediaeval practice of carrying the bread to 
 the altar with the vessels was continued, even in the case 
 where a number of breads had to be consecrated 1 ; but 
 the chalice was to be prepared after the verbal offering 
 of the host, and its preparation was thus definitely 
 separated from that of the bread. 
 
 This separation of the preparation of the two elements 
 at Rome, the bread being prepared in the vestry before 
 vesting, and the chalice later on in the service at the 
 offertory, had the effect of destroying in a large number 
 of the Western dioceses and orders all trace of the earlier 
 custom of preparing the host and the chalice together ; 
 so that at the present moment the diocese of Lyons and 
 the Dominican order are almost alone in retaining the 
 primitive custom of preparing both elements together. 
 For, whether intended or not by its authors, the publica- 
 tion of the bull Quod a nobis of Pius V. accompanying the 
 reformed breviary had the effect of substituting the 
 Roman breviary and missal for the diocesan liturgies in 
 a large part of the West. The Sicilian rites were destroyed 
 almost at once. 2 The liturgy of Aquileia went in 1594 
 under a patriarch rightly named Barbaro. 3 The liturgies 
 of Spain disappeared in the time of Gregory XIII. In 
 Portugal, however, the local rites remained in some 
 
 1 A preparation of the bread in the vestry before it is set on the paten and 
 carried to the altar with the vessels is ordered soon after Pius V.'s time. 
 The celebrant is to put upon the purificator spread over the mouth of the 
 chalice, " Patenam cum hostia integra quam leviter extergit, si opus est, a 
 fragmentis." I meet with this direction for the first time in Missale 
 Romanum, Parisiis, 1605. In Missale Romanum, Antverp. 1599, the words 
 after hostia do not appear. It may thus be one of the corrections of 
 Clement VIII. 
 
 2 lohannis de lohanne, De divinis siculorum officiis tractatus, Panormi, 
 1736. p. 407- 
 
 3 Vincenzo Joppi, Archi<vio Peneto, 1886. t. xxxi. Serie ii. part i. p. n. 
 I owe this reference to the courtesy of Mr. Weale.
 
 136 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 churches, 1 as in that of the metropolitan see of Braga. 
 Mr. E. A. Allen, the courteous director of the public 
 library at Oporto, has been kind enough to tell me that 
 the preparation of the chalice continued to be made 
 between the epistle and gospel until the end of the 
 seventeenth century or later. 
 
 Though in Germany the work of entire destruction 
 was postponed till the middle of the seventeenth century, 
 yet the liturgies which survived were profoundly modified 
 under the influence of the Pian books. In the few 
 German diocesan missals which we find published in the 
 first half of the seventeenth century, the Pian directions 
 for the preparation are closely followed. There is, 
 however, a slight allusion to the possibility of the chalice 
 being mixed before the offertory at Triers in i6o8. 2 At 
 Mentz in 1602 the chalice is directed to be made after 
 the grail, alleluya, tract, or sequence, and both host and 
 chalice are then set on the altar. 3 
 
 Even in France, where the diocesan books survived 
 into our own time, the influence of the modern Pian 
 directions on the preparation of the chalice and the 
 offertory was felt at once. At Paris it has been seen that 
 the practice of making the chalice before the service or 
 before the gospel was followed in mediaeval times, in 
 common with the rest of the dioceses of France ; yet, 
 according to P. Le Brun, it was abolished in 1615,* in 
 order, as A. du Saussay tells us, 6 that the ceremonies of 
 Paris might approach nearer to those of Rome. I have 
 been unable to trace in the numerous French missals 
 and ceremonials printed since that date any return to 
 
 1 Dom Prosper Gueranger, approving of the destruction of the Spanish 
 Breviaries by the brief of 1573, is forced to own that several local cus- 
 toms existed to his certain knowledge in Portugal, even in his own days. 
 (Institution! liturgiques, chap. xv. Paris, 1840. t. i. p. 456.) 
 
 2 Missale Trevirense, 1608. Ritus celebrandi Missam. 
 
 3 Missale Moguntinum, Moguntias, 1602. Ritus celebrandi Missam. See 
 also p. 193. 
 
 4 Pierre Le Brun, Explication de la Messe, Paris, 1777. t. iii. p. 306. 
 
 6 Andreas du Saussay, Panoplia Sacerdotum, p. i. lib. viii. cap. xx. 5. 
 Lutet. Paris. 1653, p. 271.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 137 
 
 what Du Saussay thinks was once the practice of the 
 whole Gallican church : and soon after the Roman 
 custom was adopted at Paris it must have spread widely, 
 for the use of Paris has always had great weight with the 
 rest of France. For example, at Rouen, where the same 
 Gallican custom prevailed at least in 1499 and before, the 
 Pian customs were adopted altogether in the Missal of 
 1623. Sometimes some fragments of the mediaeval 
 customs remain at high mass ; but at Rouen, under 
 Francois de Harlay I., the preparation and offertory have 
 become purely Roman, nor do I find any return to more 
 ancient customs in the missals edited in the next century. 
 No doubt, the practice of preparing the chalice before 
 the service soon became extinct in France, for in the 
 missals printed in the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- 
 turies the Roman customs of the preparation and offer- 
 tory are nearly always found at low mass, even when the 
 older ceremonies have been retained at high mass. 
 And these latter were forgotten in the multitude which 
 adopted the Roman ceremonial ; so that, at the end of 
 the seventeenth century, even J. B. Thiers does not 
 recognize the ceremony as an old mediaeval custom. He 
 treats the oblation of the bread and wine before saying 
 the gospel, during the Gradual, Alleluia, Tract, or Prose, 
 as a superstition. 1 So also about the same time as 
 Thiers wrote, a Dominican writer had to clear his order 
 of a charge of introducing novelties into the celebration 
 of mass by their maintenance of the ancient custom, 
 always practised amongst the black friars, of making the 
 chalice before mass began. 2 If the mediaeval practice 
 were so entirely forgotten in the seventeenth century, 
 those who lived in the nineteenth ought not to have 
 
 1 J. B. Thiers, Trait? des superstitions qui regardent lei increments, t. ii. 
 chap. x. ix. Avignon, 1777. 4 ed. p. 444, Martdne and Durand saw 
 this done at Langres. (Voyage Itttiraire de deux religieux bin&dictins, 
 Paris, 1717, Partie i. p. 137.) But it was no longer done in 1775. (Ccrf- 
 monial du dioc&se de Langres, Langres, 1775. p. 125.) 
 
 2 Marcello de Cavaleriis, Statera sacra missam iuxta ritum ordinis pradica- 
 torum, etc. Neapoli, 1686, Titulus v. not. 165, p. 93.
 
 138 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 been surprised when it needed a judgment in the Court 
 of the Archbishop of Canterbury to make men aware 
 that such a practice ever existed in the West. 
 
 In a few churches, however, the practice remained of 
 mixing the chalice at high mass between the epistle and 
 gospel, even if the gifts were not immediately thereupon 
 offered on the altar. Of these few I would now speak ; 
 and after dealing with the diocesan churches, I would 
 speak shortly of the few religious orders in which the 
 practice lingered. 
 
 Taking first of all the church of Lyons. It is prima 
 sedes Galliarum ; and still, even since the onslaught of 
 Pius IX. upon the French diocesan liturgies, retains its 
 own rites and ceremonies. The rubrics of the early part 
 of the service in the missal of I487, 1 agree very closely 
 with those printed in the editions of 1510, 1556, and 
 1620. After the priest has approached the altar he says 
 confiteor with its followings, and a prayer Deus qui non 
 mortem. After this come directions for prayers over the 
 host, and at pouring wine and water into the chalice. A 
 blessing for the deacon before saying the gospel follows. 3 
 
 The next Lyons missal, that of 1737, claims to be the 
 first book in which the ceremonies of the Church of 
 Lyons were printed ; and there is but little change in 
 these ceremonies in the later editions of 1771, 1825, and 
 1866. The edition of 1866 is that now in use in the 
 diocese of Lyons, and it bears an augmented title : 
 Missale Romano- Lugdunense, with the approval of the 
 holy see. At the end of the book is the old Lyonnese 
 Ritus in Missa solemni servandus. The ceremonies of 
 the preparation and offertory 3 are contained chiefly in 
 capp. v. and vi. 
 
 1 Missale sub ritu et usu dicte ecdesie lugdunemis, Lugduni, lo. aletnan- 
 nus de mogontia, 1487. f. cxxvi. 
 
 ^'Missale Lugdunense, 1 5 1 o. f. lcxiii.[thus, for Ixxiii]. The two editions of 1 5 5 6, 
 spoken of by Mr. Weale, appear to be only one. The colophon runs : excude- 
 bat Lugduni Cornelius a Septemgrangiis expensis heredum Jacobi Giuntas. 
 
 3 Missale Romano-Lugdunense, Parisiis et Lugduni, 1866. p. 79.* In this
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 139 
 
 At high mass, in the churches of the diocese of Lyons, 
 the epistle 1 and grail being said, the deacon and sub- 
 deacon go to the credence ; there the deacon, laying his 
 hand on the bread placed in the paten, says a certain 
 prayer ; he then pours wine into the chalice, and the 
 subdeacon water, without any blessing, only saying the 
 words prescribed in the ordinary ; this done, the sub- 
 deacon spreads the corporal on the altar, and the deacon 
 proceeds to sing the gospel. 
 
 This ceremony with the deacon and subdeacon takes 
 place only outside the cathedral church, where the 
 sacrist (chori matricularius), not the deacon, prepares the 
 gifts at the credence ; and the sacrist thence takes them 
 to the altar of St. Spiratus, while the gospel is sung. 2 
 The same officer forthwith takes the corporal with the 
 purificator to the high altar. 
 
 It is certainly remarkable that an inferior officer, who 
 might be a mere layman, 3 should at the high mass in the 
 cathedral church of Lyons be directed to prepare the 
 elements. This circumstance does not favour the views 
 uttered of late in certain quarters upon the " rigidly 
 ceremonious " nature of the mixing of the chalice ; and 
 some may also notice that the Lyonnese practice has now 
 received whatever authority may be given to it by an 
 approbation of the see of Rome. 
 
 The bread and the wine mixed with water at the 
 offertory during Lent, and then presented to and blessed 
 by the celebrant, do not seem to be used for the celebra- 
 
 edition the variables have undergone immense changes ; but the ordinary of 
 the mass remains much the same. 
 
 1 It may be noticed that at Lyons the epistle is read by the subdeacon, 
 sitting, and everyone else also has to sit : " Dicto Amen post ultimam Collec- 
 tam, subdiaconus sedens in erecto stallo, distincta et elevata voce cantat 
 Epistolam, sedentibus omnibus, stallis sine fragore demissis," p. 78,* cap. iii. 
 
 19- 
 
 2 This altar appears to be behind the high altar: "Durant que le diacre 
 chant 1'evangile au jube, on prepare la matie're du sacrifice derridre 1'autel." 
 (Martdne and Durand, Voyage littfraire, Paris, 1717. Pt. i. p. 238.) 
 
 3 See Ducange, Glossariunt, sub v. " Matricularii in Ecclesiis Cathedralibus 
 et Collegialibus ex ordine Clericorum et Laicorum erant."
 
 1 40 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 tion of the eucharist, and need not therefore be further 
 considered here. 1 
 
 At Auxerre, the ceremonies of preparation and of 
 offering on the altar were exceedingly interesting and 
 curious. The following account is taken from the 
 Missal of I738. 2 
 
 Directly after the chief subdeacon has sung the 
 epistle, he goes to the credence, and there takes away the 
 veil from the chalice, setting the paten and the host on 
 one side. He then takes the chalice by the knot, wipes 
 it with the purificator, and pours into the chalice the 
 wine from the cruet, which the secondary subdeacon 
 ministers to him. The chief subdeacon then puts the 
 chalice on the paten with the host, and fixing both 
 vessels with his left hand, and accompanied by his assis- 
 tants, the first of whom bears the water cruet, he carries 
 them to the celebrant. He and the deacon have been 
 sitting in the two easternmost sedilia to hear the epistle ; 
 they now rise ; and in winter throw back the amice, in 
 summer uncover their heads, and the celebrant blesses 
 the water ; which done, the chief subdeacon pours a 
 little of the water into the chalice. The subdeacon and 
 his assistants then return to the credence, where the 
 chalice is put down, covered with the paten and host, and 
 the palla or small corporal laid over it. The subdeacon 
 then immediately spreads the corporal on the altar. 
 
 1 Op. cit. t. 8 1,* cap. vi. ii. At Bourges, certain breads and unmixed 
 wine were also brought in at the beginning of the epistle, followed by incense 
 bearers censing continually ; but these offerings do not seem to have been 
 used for the Eucharist. (Missale Bituricense, Avarici Biturigam, 1741, Ritus 
 in missa servandus, cap. v. p. xiii.) The offering of bread and wine during 
 the Eucharist for other purposes than that of its celebration, is a very interest- 
 ing study ; but this paper is already too long to allow of such a subject being 
 dealt with at the present moment. Nor can I deal with ceremonies like 
 those at Rouen, in 1759, when between the epistle and gospel, the sub- 
 deacon brought in the breads, and the acolyte, the cruets ; and, if there 
 were no credence, the unprepared gifts were immediately set on the altar. 
 (Missale Ecclesie Rotomagensis, Rotomagi, 1759, Rubricae generates, p. 13.) 
 
 2 Missale sanct<e Autissiodorensis Ecclesief, Trecis, apud Viduam Petri 
 Michelin, 1738, Ritus Missas majoris in Ecclesia cathedrali, p. 16.
 
 rS ,ii^a 
 
 CU \^^^S
 
 SI 
 
 "V^ -^ 
 
 o I 
 
 Q 5 
 Z > 
 
 w .: 
 
 I, 
 
 OS
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 141 
 
 It should be noticed that both elements are taken to 
 the priest, as in the Dominican rite, although the bread 
 is not inspected as it is by the friars. The water is 
 poured into the chalice, not at the credence, but while 
 the chalice is in the hands of the subdeacon, standing 
 before the celebrant and deacon, at the sedilia, which, 
 as the accompanying illustration shows, are a little to 
 the east of the credence, but on the same side of the 
 church. 
 
 We may pass now to the ceremonies of the offertory, 
 which preserve a most interesting resemblance to the 
 great entrance of Constantinople. As soon as the cele- 
 brant says OremuSj the* three subdeacons go to the 
 credence, where the chief subdeacon takes the chalice 
 and the host ; and then, carrying the sacred vessels on a 
 level with his face, he passes round the back to the front 
 of the altar ; the two secondary subdeacons on his right 
 hand and left, two candle-bearers before him, and a 
 censer bearer following him, censing continually until 
 the gifts be placed on the altar. 1 (See Plate XVI.) 
 
 The celebrant and deacon turn round to receive the 
 gifts, which are given to the deacon by the subdeacon. 
 The celebrant takes the chalice from the deacon and 
 
 1 The plate shows the celebrant, a bishop, standing in the middle of the 
 altar, and turned to the people ; in front of him are the three deacons, and 
 on the step below are the two cross-bearers in copes ; below them on the 
 gospel side is the crocer ; opposite to him a canon in surplice, with a grey 
 amyss over his left arm ; and a clerk carrying the mitre. All the ecclesiastics 
 in copes wear bands. 
 
 Advancing towards the altar, is the procession with the gifts, which has 
 come from the credence-table round the back of the altar. 
 
 In this illustration, there is also an opportunity of comparing the furniture 
 of an eighteenth century altar with that of a modern altar. In the first place, 
 it may be noticed that there is a real reredos, not an enormous erection 
 behind the altar, throwing the last into insignificance. Then there is no 
 tabernacle on the altar, but a hanging pyx over it ; there is no gradin ; 
 and there are no flowers ; the candles actually on the altar are only four in 
 number, and of no very great height. There is plainly an embroidered 
 frontal, which is therefore most likely of silk ; at all events, the altar is not 
 left naked. There are two textus on the altar, just as we can remember in 
 the cathedral churches of our youth, but which the restorers have banished. 
 There are riddells partly drawn, at the ends of the altar.
 
 H2 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 turns to the altar, setting the chalice first outside the 
 corporal. The candle-bearers then go back to the 
 credence, and put down their lights on it, and the censer- 
 bearer retires to the right horn of the altar. Then the 
 deacon gives the paten and host to the celebrant, and 
 after that the chalice, and they are then set on the 
 corporal with certain prayers. 
 
 At Soissons, in 1745, there appears to have been a 
 ceremony not unlike that at Auxerre. While Kyrie is 
 being said (or if not during Kyrie, at some time before 
 the gospel) the deacon makes the chalice at the credence 
 himself, saying a prayer over the water and pouring it 
 into the chalice. If there be no credence, this is done at 
 the altar. At the offertory the deacon brings the gifts 
 to the altar, and he is preceded by two candle-bearers 
 and two incense-bearers, these last two walking back- 
 wards, and censing the gifts until they be set on the altar. 
 All ministers at the altar, including the " curati cardi- 
 nales," turn their face to the gifts. If, however, the 
 gifts be prepared at the altar before mass, there is no such 
 ceremonious procession ; the deacon merely presents the 
 gifts to the priest. 1 
 
 At Le Mans, as late as 1835, the chalice was mixed at 
 high mass by the subdeacon between the epistle and 
 gospel. 2 At Narbonne, the deacon poured the wine 
 into the chalice at this moment, but the water was not 
 added until the offertory. 3 
 
 In the diocese of Laon, during the eighteenth century, 
 the preparation and offertory seemed to have been much 
 as follows. 4 While the celebrant is saying Kyrie the 
 
 Missale Suessionense, Parisiis, 1 74.5, Rubrics? generales, capp. iii. and vi. 
 pp. 1 6 and 23. 
 
 2 Missale Cenomanense, Cenomani, 1835. p. 356. 
 
 3 Missale Narbonense, Narbonae, 1778. Rubricae generales, p. 9. 
 
 4 The account is taken from rubrics of the Ritus in missa ser<vandns pre- 
 fixed to the Laon Missals, published in 1702 and 1773. These two accounts 
 are practically the same. In Missale ad usum laudunen. Ecclesie, Paris, 1491, 
 fo. preserved in the Communal Library of Laon, the host and chalice are 
 prepared between the taking of the stole and chasuble ; or before the gospel. 
 But Antoine Bellotte, in his well known book on the rites of Laon, gives a
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 143 
 
 deacon makes the altar ready, and the subdeacon brings 
 from the credence the chalice and purificator, the paten 
 with the bread, covered with the pall, veil, and burse ; 
 the deacon then sets the vessels on the left side of the 
 altar (i.e., the left of the crucifix on it) ; then, having 
 spread the corporal in the middle, he puts the vessels 
 covered with the veil upon it, and returns to his place. 
 
 The collects having been sung, the deacon uncovers 
 the chalice, and puts the paten with the bread on it at 
 the edge of the corporal ; wine and water being brought 
 by a clerk, the deacon then pours wine into the chalice, 
 as much as the celebrant wishes ; the clerk then asks the 
 celebrant (who is standing all this time at the epistle 
 corner) to bless the water, and then the water is poured 
 into the chalice by the deacon. The deacon then sets 
 the chalice on the corporal, and covers it with the pall. 
 
 In the cathedral church there was a more elaborate 
 ceremony. While the epistle was being sung, the senior 
 boy brought in the chalice and paten, covered with a 
 silk veil ; the boy next in age, the bread, contained in a 
 box carried on a rod ; and the third in age, the cruets of 
 wine and water ; the deacon, standing at the steps of 
 the altar, took the bread from the boy, mixed the chalice, 
 and then immediately set both bread and chalice on the 
 altar. 
 
 It has been seen (see Table annexed to this paper) that 
 at Verdun, in 1554, the chalice was made before vesting. 
 In 1699 the chalice is made at the offertory at low mass, 
 but at the high mass there are ceremonies which may 
 be ancient, and are certainly noteworthy. 1 When the 
 
 different account, and makes the preparation of the chalice and setting of the 
 gifts on the altar to take place after the offertory. (In ritus Laudunensis . . . 
 observationes, pars iii. 19, Parisiis, 1662. p. 101.) So also does a thir- 
 teenth or fourteenth century ordinary of Laon, edited by U. Chevalier. 
 (Ordinaire! de FEglise cath&drale de Laon, Paris, 1897. p. 14.) 
 
 1 Missale Virdunense, Virduni, 1699. Ritus servandus, cap. vi. in missa 
 maiori. In 1717 Martdne and Durand describe the making of the chalice 
 as at the beginning of mass (Voyage Iitt6raire t Paris, 1717, Partie ii. p. 94), 
 and that this was also retained at the collegiate church of St. Mary Magda- 
 lene. Verdun was the home of ancient customs at the time of their visit.
 
 H4 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 collects are finished the deacon goes up to the altar, and 
 carries the mass-book and its cushion to the gospel end. 
 Then he puts the chalice at the epistle end, spreads the 
 corporal, and puts upon the altar the paten with the 
 bread, then mixes the wine and water in the chalice (the 
 water having been just blessed by the priest in his sedile, 
 and having been brought by an acolyte), and sets the 
 chalice on the corporal in the midst of the altar ; the 
 paten with the bread on the chalice and the palla upon 
 all, and then returns to his own sedile on the left of the 
 celebrant. 
 
 In the missal of 1829 the mixing takes place at the 
 offertory both at high and low mass. 
 
 At Tours, when the archbishop was present, the chalice 
 was brought to him by the deacon as soon as the priest 
 had gone up to the altar. The archbishop then himself 
 poured the wine and water into the chalice, but we are 
 not told whether the chalice is then set on the altar or on 
 a credence. 1 
 
 At Noyon, while Kyrie was being said, 2 the subdeacon 
 takes the chalice to the deacon, who is saying Kyrie at 
 the altar on the right of the priest, and the deacon then 
 pours in wine ; and after the water has been blessed by 
 the celebrant, the subdeacon pours some of it into the 
 chalice, which is then taken away to the credence until 
 the offertory ; though from a rubric later on 3 the chalice 
 may, in some cases, at once have been set on the altar.* 
 
 Like this was the practice described by Martene at 
 
 1 [Le Brun des Marettes] Voyages liturgiques de France . . . par le sieur 
 de Moleon, Paris, 1718. p. 115. The cruets were of silver, and each held a 
 pint a-piece. Compare those in use at the high altar at Durham before the 
 Reformation : " Two gilt Cruitts that did hold a quart a peece parcell gilt 
 and grauen all over." (Kites of Durham, edited by J. T. Fowler, Surtees 
 Society, 1903. p. 9.) 
 
 2 Missale No<viomense (de Broglie episcopo) 1770. Ritus in missa maiori. 
 Pars iii. cap. iii. 
 
 3 See cap. vii. de offertorio, p. xliii. 
 
 4 I have examined the Missal of 1631, but do not find directions for the 
 mixing at any time ; the elements would seem to be ready prepared when 
 the anthem of the offertory is sung.
 
 THE WESTERN LITURGIES 145 
 
 St. Wast in the Low Countries, where the acolytes set 
 down their candlesticks during Kyrie and then go to the 
 altar to prepare the matter of the sacrifice ; obleys for 
 those who are to communicate, and they then pour the 
 wine into the chalice, which done, they carry it at once 
 behind the altar. 1 At the abbey of St. James at Liege 
 the deacon and subdeacon prepared the matter of the 
 sacrifice at the credence during Kyrie* 
 
 This ceremony at the abbeys of the Low Countries 
 brings us to the religious orders. Though here and there 
 at places like St. Wast, these ancient customs may have 
 held their ground, yet in the greater number of the 
 religious houses which accepted the missale monasticum 
 of Paul V. the Roman ceremonies of preparation and of 
 oblation must have been adopted as well ; that is, at low 
 mass, where in monasteries the preparation of the host 
 and chalice in the vestry were so often combined, the 
 preparation of the two species was now separated, one 
 being made in the vestry, the other at the altar after the 
 offertory. 
 
 The Dominicans, however, have held their old customs 
 to this day. At low mass they still continue to mix the 
 chalice as soon as they approach the altar and before 
 they have said the preliminary prayers before the introit. 
 At high mass, after the epistle, the elements are brought 
 by the subdeacon to the priest and deacon sitting in 
 their seats near to the altar ; the host is first looked at, 
 and then put on the paten ; wine and water are then 
 poured into the chalice, in the hands of the subdeacon, 
 who then carries the vessels to the epistle end of the 
 altar, where they remain covered with a silk veil until 
 after the offertory anthem ; then they are moved to the 
 midst of the altar. These ceremonies can be seen readily 
 enough by any one who will take the pains to attend a 
 high mass in a chapel attached to a Dominican convent, 
 
 1 Mart6ne and Durand, Voyage Utt&ralre de deux religleux btntdictins, 
 Paris, 1724. Second voyage, partie iii. p. 68. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 174.
 
 146 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 and secure a favourable place for witnessing what is done. 
 They correspond with those described in a Dominican 
 missal published at Rome in 1705, and with what I myself 
 have witnessed at Rome many times in the church of 
 S. Maria sopra Minerva. 
 
 The Carmelites or White friars had a liturgy very like 
 that of the Dominicans, and their ceremonies were also 
 closely akin. At low mass the preparation and offering 
 of the elements before service took place just as in the 
 Dominican rite ; at high mass, the ceremonies were also 
 very much the same, only the celebrant appears to have 
 stood at the altar while the chalice was mixed, and the 
 elements, as soon as prepared, were set on the middle 
 of the altar. These ceremonies were retained into the 
 middle of the seventeenth century * ; there seems to be 
 some evidence that in 1678 these ceremonies had dis- 
 appeared. 2 It is certain that they are now no longer 
 practised. 
 
 IV. ENGLISH LITURGIES. 
 
 The penitential formerly put forward as the work of 
 Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury from 669 to 690, 
 which contains a direction that in the Eucharist wine 
 shall be mixed with water, does not seem now to be 
 allowed by scholars as genuine, 3 though it is no doubt of 
 great age. Even if admitted as the work of Theodore, it 
 teaches nothing about the time in the liturgy at which 
 the chalice was mixed ; and the same remark applies to 
 
 1 Missale Ordinis Fratrum Beatissima Dei Genitricis Maries de Monte 
 Carmelo, Romae, 1640. An approbation by Gregory XIII. dated 1583, 
 is prefixed. 
 
 2 Ordinarium seu Caeremoniale Fratrum Discalceatorum B. Virginia Maries 
 de Monte Carmelo, Bruxellis, 1678, cap. iv. iii. p. 107. 
 
 3 A. W. Haddan and W. Stubbs, Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents, 
 Oxford, vol. iii. p. 173.
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 147 
 
 the laws published under the name of King Edgar and 
 Aelfric. 1 
 
 These documents give us no sort of hint of the time 
 at which the chalice was made. In the Irish tract on 
 the Mass which accompanies the Stowe missal there is 
 indeed very important imformation about the time of 
 the mixing of the chalice, and of the time at which the 
 gifts were set on the altar. Earlier commentators on the 
 Stowe missal seem to have formed the opinion that the 
 mixed chalice was not used because they found no 
 directions therefor in the Latin text. But Mr. Whitley 
 Stokes' translation of the Irish tract, 2 which accompanies 
 the Latin text, has made it very clear that the mixed 
 chalice was used, and that the time of mixing was before 
 the service. I will give the words of the Irish tract in 
 Mr. Whitley Stokes' version. It is a mystical explanation 
 of the Mass, and, after speaking of the altar, the tract 
 reads : 
 
 " Water, first, into the chalice, and this is chanted 
 thereat : Peto te Pater, deprecor te Fili, obsecro te Spiritus 
 Sancte, to wit, the figure of the people that was poured 
 forth into the church. 
 
 " The Host, then, upon the altar, to wit, the turtle 
 dove. This is chanted thereat, to wit, Jesus Christus, 
 Alpha et Omega, hoc est principium et finis. A figure of 
 
 1 B. Thorpe, Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, Record Commission, 
 1840. pp. 304, 398, 471. 
 
 2 Whitley Stokes, The Irish Passages in the Stonve Missal, published in 
 Zeitschrift fur vergleiche nde Sprachjorschung, Berlin, 1882, Bd. xxvi. pp. 497- 
 519, in English. This tract was also privately printed at Calcutta. See also 
 Charles Plummer, in the same Journal, 1884, Bd. xxvii. pp. 441-448, for 
 important comments on the Irish fraction. For these references I am indebted 
 to Mr. Whitley Stokes. There is also a valuable paper by the Rev. Dr. B. 
 MacCarthy, in the Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin, vol. 
 xxvii. p. 245. The interpretation of the Irish tracts given by Dr. 
 MacCarthy is, from a liturgical point of view, identical with that of Mr. 
 Whitley Stokes. A fresh version of the Irish tracts has lately appeared in 
 Whitley Stokes and John Strachan, Thesaurus Palceo-hibernicus, Cambridge, 
 1903. vol. ii. p. 252, and it will be reprinted by the authors' permission in 
 the forthcoming edition of the Stowe Missal to be issued by the Henry 
 Bradshaw Society.
 
 148 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Christ's Body which was set in the linen sheet of Mary's 
 womb. 
 
 " Wine then for water into the chalice, 1 to wit, Christ's 
 Godhead for his Manhood and for the people at the time 
 of [his] begetting : this is chanted hereat : Remittit 
 Pater, indulget Filius, miseretur Spiritus Sanctus. 
 
 " What is chanted of the Mass thereafter, both introit 
 and prayers and addition, as far as the lesson of the 
 Apostles [the epistle] and the psalm of degrees [the 
 gradual] that is, a figure of the law of nature," etc. 
 
 It is clear enough, then, that the chalice was made 
 before the introit was sung ; and all will notice the singu- 
 lar manner in which the mixing is made ; first, water is 
 poured into the chalice, and, as another Irish tract tells 
 us, 2 in three portions, with the invocation of the three 
 persons of the Holy Trinity. Then the bread is set on 
 the altar ; and, last of all, the wine, also in three portions, 
 is poured into the chalice with a like invocation. It 
 seems clear that the gifts were set on the altar before the 
 beginning of the service. 
 
 By the text of the Stowe missal we know that between 
 the epistle and gospel there was a partial uncovering of 
 the chalice. There is also a Latin rubric : Hie elevatur 
 lintiamen de calice. 3 This ceremony should be borne in 
 mind, for we shall meet with the same custom in England 
 and elsewhere just before the Reformation. 
 
 There is no doubt that the Stowe missal contains a 
 Roman canon ; one of those early recensions that may be 
 found before the text of the canon had become crystal- 
 lized. But at the end of this canon a fraction takes 
 place, which at once recalls the Mozarabic fraction, 
 
 1 Dr. MacCarthy translates : " Wine afterwards upon water in the 
 chalice." (p. 246.) 
 
 2 Whitley Stokes, op. cit. p. 511, translation of Lebar Brecc. I have not 
 heard of any other ancient rite in which the water is first poured into the 
 chalice. 
 
 3 See F. E. Warren, Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, Oxford, 1881. 
 p. 230. The Stowe Missal is about to be edited by Dr. G. F. Warner, of 
 the British Museum, for the Henry Bradshaw Society, in collotype.
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 149 
 
 though the Mozarabic is indeed much simpler. It may 
 be that in Ireland, or perhaps in Britain, the Gregorian 
 canon was inserted into Hispano-Gallican rites and cere- 
 monies, as we know was the case with the Gallican 
 liturgy shortly before its abolition. 1 The missal itself 
 contains such a well-known Hispano-Gallican formula 
 as vere Sanctus ending in Qui pridie, which introduces 
 the consecration. Mr. Whitley Stokes has rendered a 
 signal service to liturgy by his translation of these two 
 Irish tracts, and by bringing out the existence of Gallican 
 customs in Ireland, where they have been long suspected. 
 The preparation of the gifts before the beginning of the 
 service corresponds with Mgr. Duchesne's account of 
 the Gallican Liturgy. 
 
 With these Irish practices of preparing the gifts and 
 setting them on the altar before the service, and of 
 uncovering them between the epistle and gospel, we may 
 very well compare similar customs elsewhere. Thomas 
 Becon, a profane and obscene writer indeed, describes 
 the English low mass before the Reformation, but in his 
 book he gives information which cannot be had elsewhere : 
 " Ye come unto the altare with your mass-booke, cor- 
 porasse, chalice and bread, with such other trynckettes." 2 
 Now, this makes it plain, according to Becon, that one 
 of the gifts, the bread, was set on the altar at the begin- 
 ing of the service ; and it is highly probable that the 
 chalice also contained, at the time that it was brought to 
 the altar, the necessary mixture of wine and water ; for 
 after the epistle this writer says : " Ye go to the other 
 ende of the altare to rede the gospel. But first of all ye 
 uncover the chalice, and looke whether youre drynke be 
 
 1 Mabillon, Museum Ifalicum, Lut. Paris, 1724. t. i. p. 279. 
 
 2 Thomas Becon, The Displayeng of the Popysh Masse, contained in collected 
 edition of his Works, 1563. part iii. fol. xxxviii. verso. When Becon gets 
 beyond his own field of observation, the following passage on the same 
 page will show how trustworthy he is : "The Grekes . . . use also wyne 
 onely in their cuppe, whereas the Latin Chirch customably mingle water." 
 And I must own, that even on his own ground, I do not not feel the con- 
 fidence in Becon's statements that I once did.
 
 150 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 there or no, lest ye should chaunce to be deceaved when 
 the tyme of your repast come." 1 This is the precise 
 moment of the half-uncovering of the Stowe missal. 
 And it is plain also that the " drynke " which the honey- 
 tongued Becon calls " a sponeful of wyne mingled with 
 water," 2 was in the chalice before the uncovering took 
 place. 
 
 Becon's words run almost like a translation of a rubric 
 from the Coutances missal of 1557. The priest, in this 
 rite, prepares the bread and makes the chalice before 
 vesting, and it would seem that he takes the gifts with 
 him to the altar when he begins the service ; for after the 
 epistle the rubric begins to speak of " Evangelium. 
 Quod lecturus deferat librum ad sinistram partem altaris. 
 Et visitet an sit vinum et aqua in calice, discoperiendo 
 (sic) calicem et levando patenam et panem super positum 
 et respiciendo intra calicem," etc. 3 
 
 There was a like uncovering of the chalice in a Breton 
 rite, that of St. Pol de Leon, an episcopal town on the 
 north coast of Brittany. But it does not appear certain 
 that the chalice had been prepared. " Amoto corporali 
 desuper calicem, antequam incipiat evangelium." 
 
 In the important little French tract, Al-phabetum 
 Sacerdotumf the same visitation of the chalice before the 
 gospel is ordered. 
 
 Thus in the North of France, in England, and in 
 Ireland, this uncovering of the chalice between the 
 epistle and gospel takes place ; and it would seem to 
 bring with it as an almost necessary consequence the 
 
 1 Fo. xxxix. verso. 
 
 2 Fo. xl. verso. 
 
 3 Missale cunctis sacerdotibus iuxta Constantien. diocesis etc. Impressum 
 Rothomagi, 1557, fo. See the reprint of the Ordinary in Tracts on the Mass, 
 Henry Bradshaw Society, 1904. p. 58. 
 
 4 Ex ms. missali A. de Longeuil episcopi Lioniensis, in Marte"ne, De 
 antiquis ecclesiee ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. art. xii. Ordo xxxiv. Bassani, 1788. 
 t. i. p. 238. Antoine de Longueil was bishop of St. Pol de Leon from 1484 
 to 1500. (Gams, Series Episcoporum, Ratisbonae, 1873. p. 622.) 
 
 5 See the reprint in Tracts on the Mass, Henry Bradshaw Society, 1904. 
 P- 39-
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 151 
 
 preparation and setting of the elements on the altar 
 before the service. 
 
 To turn back again from the time just before the 
 Reformation to the introduction of the Norman liturgies 
 into England, which took place soon after the Conquest. 
 There is evidence, for example, that the diocese of 
 Lincoln adopted the liturgical books of Rouen, 1 and there 
 is a tradition that in the reform attributed to St. Osmund, 
 the ceremonies of Rouen were adopted at Sarum. Other 
 Norman dioceses are also thought to have influenced 
 the English rites. 2 Mr. Henry Bradshaw thought the 
 Bayeux ceremonies exceedingly important 3 ; and we 
 have just had an instance of the conformity of one of the 
 ceremonies of the diocese of Coutances with an English 
 practice. But there is no direct evidence of the time of 
 the mixing of the chalice in England ; immediately after 
 the Conquest though, as to the time of setting the gifts 
 on the altar, it would appear, from the Constitutions of 
 Lanfranc, that they were put on the altar after the 
 gospel, and the wine was then in all likelihood already 
 mixed with water before it was given to the priest * ; 
 water certainly was mixed with the wine, for it was the 
 duty of the sexton daily to prepare wine and water for 
 the mass. 6 Lanfranc himself must have known the use 
 of Bee ; and at Bee it was the custom to mix the water 
 with the wine before the priest vested for mass. 6 The 
 same custom prevailed at Rouen. 7 At Bee it is not 
 certain that this was the practice at high mass ; but at 
 Rouen it is clear that the ceremonies of high mass are 
 
 1 Statuta Ecdesice Cathedralis Lincolniensis, Londini, 1873. Edidit Chris- 
 tophorus [Wordsworth] divina permissione Episcopus Lincolniensis, p. 3. 
 
 2 But the examination of the Norman books in the collation undertaken 
 for the notes to the Westminster Missal, edited for the Henry Bradshaw 
 Society, did not confirm this tradition as to the rites. 
 
 3 G. W. Prothero, A Memoir of Henry Bradshaw, London, 1888. p. 283. 
 * Wilkins, Concilia, Lond. 1737. vol. i. p. 355. 
 
 5 Wilkins, Ibid. p. 349. 
 
 6 Edm. Martene, De antiquis ecdesite ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. art. xii. Ordo 
 xxxvi. Bassani, 1788. t. i. p. 242. 
 
 7 Idem, Ordo xxvi. p. 228.
 
 152 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 being described, as the deacon, the clerks, and incense 
 are spoken of. At Bayeux the mixing took place between 
 the epistle and gospel at high mass. 1 At Avranches, in 
 the eleventh century, the mixing certainly took place 
 after the gospel at high mass, at the same time as the 
 setting of the bread and wine on the altar. 2 
 
 In Normandy, then, we find all the three places usual 
 for making the chalice : before mass, between the epistle 
 and gospel, and after the offertory. It would be inter- 
 esting if we could make out which of these was the most 
 common in England in the centuries before the Reforma- 
 tion ; but it is not easy. 
 
 At the Sarum high mass the elements were brought 
 into the church after the introit, and put in the place 
 assigned for them. A credence, or table of proposition, 
 is not expressly named. The chalice was brought in 
 during the epistle, and taken to the place of administra- 
 tion, 3 and the corporals spread on the altar by the acolyte. 
 The epistle over, the subdeacon, after washing his hands, 
 made ready the bread and wine, with the aid of the 
 acolyte, in the place of administration. Up to this 
 point the Consuetudinary 4 is our authority, but the 
 Missal adds that the subdeacon makes ready the bread, 
 wine, and water, after the grail and other liturgical 
 formulae have been said privately by the priest, the water 
 being first blessed by the priest, apparently while he is 
 sitting in the sedilia. 6 After the anthem of the offertory, 
 
 1 Idem, Ordo xxiv. p. 225. Cf. Instrucfiones perutiles of the Missal of 
 
 '545- 
 
 2 loannes Abrincensis episcopus, Liber de officiu ecclesiasticis, 66. Migne's 
 ed. col. 35. 
 
 3 The place of administration I take to be simply the place of pre- 
 paration, be it altar or credence. (See above, Part II. p. 130, note 2.) 
 
 4 The Register ofS. Osmund edited by W. H. Rich Jones, Rolls Series, Lond. 
 1883. Vol. i. pp. 148-52. 
 
 6 Missale ad usum insignis et preeclarce Ecclesice Sarum, Burntisland, 1861- 
 83. Ed. F. H. Dickinson, coll. 587, 589, 593. The rubric in a manuscript 
 Sarum missal of the first third of the fifteenth century (British Museum, Harl. 
 3866, fo. 135) is as follows : Lecta uero epistola cantetur Graduale et Alleluia 
 uel tractus uel Sequencia. et interim illis dictis : a sacerdote cum suis ministris. 
 diaconus abluens manus corporalia in altare inferat. apponens panem. uinum
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 153 
 
 the elements are given to the priest, who places them in 
 the middle of the altar, according to the Missal. 
 
 It thus seems that the rubrics of Sarum may be 
 explained on either hypothesis : that the locus adminis- 
 trationis was a modern credence table ; or some part of 
 the altar, the south end of which would be most con- 
 venient. 
 
 At Wells the customs would seem to have been identical 
 with those at Sarum in the preparation of the elements 
 at the locus ministrationis ; but there appears to be no 
 mention of the exact moment of the mixing of the 
 chalice ; the Wells Ordinale follows almost word for word 
 in this matter the Sarum Consuetudinary, which is also 
 silent. 1 
 
 At York there are no means in the Missal for forming 
 a decided opinion. It would seem not unlikely, how- 
 ever, that the elements were ready on the altar when the 
 priest said the anthem of the offertory. 2 
 
 At Hereford, after the anthem of the offertory, the 
 things needful for the Sacrament were ministered to the 
 priest, and apparently at this place the water was mixed 
 with the wine in the chalice. 3 These directions rather 
 favour the view that at Hereford the setting of the bread 
 and wine on the altar did not take place until after the 
 anthem of the offertory. 
 
 Much more is known about the ceremonies of Lincoln, 
 especially since the publication of Messrs. Wordsworth 
 
 et aquam in calicem infundens. ministrante sibi subdiacono. benedictione 
 aque prius a sacerdote petita hoc modo Benedicite . . . Sacerdos uero interim 
 sedeat in sua sede. The variation between the manuscript and the printed 
 missals is thus marked ; and the same direction that the deacon shall prepare 
 the chalice is found in several other manuscripts, but they do not always add 
 that the subdeacon is to help him. In a Bodleian MS. (Rawl. Liturg. c. 2, fo. 
 iii b} it is "acolito sibi ministrante." 
 
 1 Herbert Edward Reynolds, Wells Cathedral, 1881. Ordinale et Statuta, 
 Lambeth MS. 729, p. 36. 
 
 2 Missale ad usum insignis ecclesiae Eboracensis, Surtees Society, 1874. Ed. 
 Henderson, vol. i. p. 171. 
 
 3 Missale Helford. Rothomag. 1502. See also Dr. Henderson's edition 
 of 1874, p. 117.
 
 154 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 and Reynolds' edition of the ceremonial portion 
 (consuetudines circa divinum officium) of the Liber Niger, 
 written about the middle of the thirteenth century. 
 The Mass has gone so far that the priest has said the 
 collects, epistle, gradual, alleluia, and sequence, and is 
 now in his sedile, saying certain prayers : 
 
 Lecta epistola in pulpito, recedet subdiaconus [these two 
 words over an erasure] principalis ex sinistra parte chori, 
 socio suo prenotato precedente et librum portante, 
 
 et cum venerit ad hostium chori obuiabit eis turi- 
 ferarius, accipiendo librum et diacono portando. 
 
 Eant tune in vestiarium et ibi dabitur eis calix cum 
 corporali et pane per manus Sacriste, siue sui clerici, et 
 tune secundarius mundabit calicem ab omni sorde 
 
 et dabit principali suo calicem predictam in manibus, 
 
 et sic portabunt cum sudario quodam 
 
 et ille secundarius portabit corporale cum sudario 
 quodam : et sic eant coniunctim ad altare : Et cum 
 venerint ad gradum superiorem altaris, ibi genubus fiexis 
 dicant. Aue Maria et cetera, 
 
 et surgant, et ponent calicem super altare. 
 
 Deinde portabit principalis subdiaconus calicem sacer- 
 doti, [et] secundarius phiolas cum vino et aqua : 
 
 Et ibi infundet sacerdos primo vinum ; secundo aquam 
 modicam ; tamen quod stet per substanciam et colorem 
 vini. Deinde portabit calicem retro altare aliquo loco 
 ydoneo et decente, 
 
 et displicet diaconus secundarius corporale super altare 
 predictum. 1 
 
 After the creed, there is, strange to say, no mention 
 of the chalice and host being brought to the priest, but 
 there is a direction to cense the chalice and corporal 
 immediately after the Creed. The corporal is said to 
 
 1 Consuetudinarium de Divinis Officiii Ecclesie Lincolniensis, tempore Richard! 
 de Gravesend Episcopi (A.D. 1258-1279). Ed. Chr. Wordsworth and H. E. 
 Reynolds, 1885 ; no place, p. 13. Mr. Wordsworth has, with his usual 
 kindness, compared the above with Mr. Henry Bradshaw's transcript from 
 the original " Black Book," so that I am able to give exactly the spelling of 
 the earliest extant copy (circ. 1400).
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 155 
 
 be spread on the altar. Where was, then, the chalice 
 retro altare ? Is the fit and proper place, retro altare, on 
 the altar itself ? 
 
 So much for the mediaeval diocesan customs of England 
 that are known to us. But the monastic uses may not 
 be neglected, especially as each considerable monastery 
 had a use of its own, which may throw much light upon 
 that of the diocese in which it was. We may take 
 Westminster first, as one of the chief English convents ; 
 and its mass book, written between 1382 and 1384, has 
 been preserved in the library of the Dean and Chapter. 
 
 The mixing at Westminster took place at a very note- 
 worthy moment, between the taking of the stole and 
 the chasuble ; and the evidence of the kind of service is 
 as much in favour of high mass as of low mass. After 
 washing his hands, the priest about to celebrate puts on 
 the mass vestments, the alb, girdle, maniple, and stole ; 
 then comes this direction : Quando miscendo vino aquam 
 fundit in colic em hostia -prius su-per patenam de center 
 prelocata. Deus qui humane substancie. 1 It will be 
 noted that a sort of preparation of the bread takes place 
 at the mixing of the cup, in accordance with a sound 
 tradition that the bread and cup should be prepared at 
 the same time. 2 It is possible also that the prepared 
 gifts were not set on the altar until after the offertory ; 
 for before the single prayer of the oblation, which was 
 only to be said if the priest liked, he is to set the chalice 
 and host on the corporals. 3 It may of course be that the 
 
 1 Missale ad usum Ecclesie fPestmonasteriensts, MS. in the Chapter Library, 
 fo. 147. Henry Bradshaw Society, fasc. ii. col. 488. 
 
 2 The Westminster books in all likelihood have preserved for us something 
 of the usages of the diocese of London ; for religious societies were accus- 
 tomed on their foundation to adopt the rites and ceremonies of the diocese 
 in which they found themselves. There is a notable instance in the case of 
 the Dominicans in Lombardy who, not many years after their establishment, 
 must have thrown aside their own liturgy, and adopted the Ambrosian because 
 they found themselves in the diocese of Milan. The Franciscans at Milan 
 had also to abandon their Roman liturgy for the Ambrosian. (Pietro Maz- 
 zuchelli, Osservazione . . . sopra ilrito ambrosiano, Milano, 1828. p. 139.) 
 
 3 Fo. 151 (in printed ed. fasc. ii. col. 500).
 
 156 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 elements were only moved from one part of the altar to 
 another. 
 
 I am indebted to Mr. Edmund Bishop, who, with Dom 
 Aidan Gasquet, is editing the Consuetudinary of St. 
 Mary's Abbey, York, for the information that at high 
 mass there the chalice was made after the offertory, but 
 at low mass before the service. 
 
 The Black Canons at Barnwell, Cambridgeshire, made 
 the chalice at high mass between the epistle and gospel. 
 It was the business of the subdeacon to make ready the 
 obleys, the wine and water, and the corporals ; and of 
 the deacon to choose the obleys and give the chalice with 
 the wine and water to the priest, if he pleased. At 
 morrow mass the mixing might be made during the 
 collects. 1 
 
 Thus far only liturgical books have been quoted. We 
 may now turn to evidence offered by writers on liturgical 
 subjects, among whom it has already been necessary to 
 mention Thomas Becon. Unpleasant as it is to bring 
 such a witness to the notice of decent folk, yet his evidence 
 is important, and the ceremonies which he describes may 
 hardly be explained except on the theory that in the 
 English mass the chalice was made in the vestry, or before 
 the service, and brought with the bread and set on the 
 altar when the priest came up to say mass. It seems 
 reasonable to hold that Becon describes the common 
 practice at low mass all over England. 2 
 
 1 Harl. MS. 3601. fo. 202 verso : It has been edited by Mr. J. W. Clark, 
 Registrary of the University of Cambridge. (The Observances in use at the 
 Augustinian Priory of S. Giles and S. Andrew at Barn*well, Cambridgeshire, 
 Cambridge, Macmillan and Bowes, 1897. p. 114. cap. xxiii.) 
 
 2 Mr. Christopher Wordsworth has pointed out to me that The Storie q, 
 the Masse in Caxton's Golden Legend contains a passage which distinctly 
 describes the making of the chalice after the host has been offered. " The 
 hoost . . . offreth it to god the fader, sayeng suspice sancte pater . . . after the 
 preest makyth comyxcyon of wyne and water to gyder " (fo. ccccxxxvii. 
 " Westmestre, 1483, by me Wyllyam Caxton.") But although the Storie is 
 in English, yet the prayers of the offertory are not to be found in any English 
 rite that I know of as yet ; and one comes to the opinion that Caxton is 
 merely giving a translation of a description of a foreign rite, probably the 
 Roman.
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 157 
 
 With The Book of Ceremonies the period of reform is 
 clearly reached, although still of a conservative reform. 
 In this the chalice is mixed at the offertory. " Then 
 followeth the Offertory ... at which tyme the Mynyster 
 laying the brede upon the aulter, maketh the chalice, 
 myxyng the water with the wyne." 
 
 What is the exact value of this book as an exponent of 
 mediaeval practice ? Most likely it is not very great ; it 
 is rather the first attempt at reform, suggestions for the 
 future more than descriptions of the present. 
 
 This future came about in Edward VI. 's time, when a 
 liturgy for the whole Church of England was first pub- 
 lished, and with the title : The Supper of the Lord and 
 the Holy Communion, commonly called the Mass. One 
 great reform was made in this liturgy ; all anticipation 
 of the offertory was forbidden, and accordingly all verbal 
 oblation became unnecessary, and the Gallican prayers 
 which are still retained in the Roman missal disappeared. 
 But apparently it was not yet possible to separate the 
 idea of oblation from preparation, and accordingly the 
 chalice was directed to be made at the same time that 
 the elements were to be set on the altar. 2 
 
 With the second book, published at one of the most 
 shameful periods of English history, all directions for 
 preparing the elements or even for setting them on 
 the altar disappeared. Whether by design or accident, 
 there is certainly a resemblance between the arrangement 
 of parts in the second Prayer Book of Edward VI. and 
 the Mozarabic service and the Old-Gallican ; and in one 
 of these two ancient liturgies there seems, as I have said, 
 
 1 Cotton MSS. British Museum. Cleopatra, E. 5. fo. 280. (John Strype, 
 Eccles. Memorials, Oxford, 1822. vol. i. part ii. p. 422.) 
 
 2 Up to this date each diocese had its own liturgy, appointed by the Bishop 
 with the consent of the Chapter, and in several dioceses the Bishop and Chapter 
 had agreed to the use of the Sarum. But there was no liturgy for the Church 
 of England. The first liturgy of the Church of England was Edward VI. 's 
 first book. I am aware that in Henry VIII. 's time the Convocation of Canter- 
 bury had ordered its clergy to recite the Sarum Breviary ; but it should be 
 noticed that this was only the breviary, and apparently the order only con- 
 cerned the private recitation of Divine Service.
 
 158 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 much evidence that the preparation of the elements, and 
 their setting on the altar, took place before the service 
 began. 
 
 With the death of Edward VI. England breathed 
 again. With Queen Mary came a return of the mediaeval 
 service books ; and with them, no doubt, the preparation 
 of the gifts before the service, and anticipation of the 
 offertory. In this matter things were hardly mended 
 under Queen Elizabeth, for in her book no directions 
 were inserted for the preparation of the gifts or for the 
 time at which they should be set on the altar. In all 
 likelihood they were, in most cases, set on the altar 
 before the service began, as in the mediaeval service. We 
 have mainly negative evidence as to the preparation. 
 Thomas Bilson, writing in Queen Elizabeth's time, says, 
 " We forbid no man to temper his wine with water if 
 hee find either himselfe annoied with the use of meere 
 wine, or the wine of it selfe to bee heady and strong." 
 It will be seen that this writer can hardly be quoted in 
 support of a ceremonial mixture being practised in his 
 day. 
 
 With King James I. an improvement visibly sets in. 
 He was the first of the English sovereigns to foe crowned 
 with a vernacular service, which, it may be noted, is 
 little more than a translation from the old Latin. In 
 this order, after the offertory, the King offers the bread 
 and wine for his communion and a mark of gold. 2 It 
 seems likely that the mixing of the chalice was an ordinary 
 custom in the Chapel Royal of this king. Lancelot 
 Andrewes was appointed Dean of the Chapel Royal in 
 1619, and it is asserted that " the practice of Mingling 
 Wine and Water in the Chalice had place in His Majesties 
 Chap-pel Royal all the time that Bishop Andrews was 
 
 1 Thomas Bilson, Warden of Winchester College, afterwards Bishop of 
 Winchester, The true difference between Christian subjection and unchristian 
 rebellion, Oxford, 1585. p. 666. 
 
 2 J. Wickham Legg, Coronation Order of King James I. London, F. E. 
 Robinson, 1902. p. 40.
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 159 
 
 Dean." l Furthermore, on the eve of the departure of 
 the Prince of Wales for Madrid, the King gave, amongst 
 others, these instructions to the chaplains that attended 
 him : " That the communion be celebrated in due form, 
 with an Oblation of every Communicant, and admixing 
 Water with the Wine, the Communion to be as often 
 used as it shall please the Prince to set down : Smooth 
 Wafers to be used for the Bread." 
 
 Though a mixed cup was to be used, yet no information 
 is given us when it was mixed. But there can be no 
 doubt that the time at which Bishop Andrewes mixed the 
 cup was in the interval between the prayer of humble 
 access and the prayer of consecration. The bread was 
 also prepared at the same moment as the cup. But it is 
 not clear when the elements were set on the holy table. 
 They may have been put on the altar before the prayer 
 for the church militant, but a separation was clearly not 
 made until just before the prayer of consecration. 3 That 
 this was the case is rendered more likely by the directions 
 for the consecration at Abbey Dore. The bread and 
 wine were in this service offered after " Let your light " ; 
 then other oblations were presented and the prayer for 
 the church militant said : but in the interval before the 
 prayer of consecration the bread was laid on the paten, 
 and the wine poured into the chalice and a little water 
 added. 4 Archbishop Laud, we know, used a credence, 
 
 1 The Primitive Rule of Reformation according to the First Liturgy of 
 K. Ednuard VI. London, Mary Thompson, 1688. p. 20. 
 
 2 Jeremy Collier, An Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain, London, 1714. 
 vol. ii. (Part ii. Book viii.) p. 726. 
 
 3 Lancelot Andrewes, The Form of Consecration Oj a Church or Chappel, etc. 
 London, T. Garthwait, 1659. p. 83. "Lotisque manibus, pane fracto, vino 
 in Calicem effuso, et aqua admista, stans ait Almighty God our Heavenly 
 Father." See also Andrewes' Works in Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology. 
 (Oxford, 1854. p. 157.) Before prayer of consecration, but after that of 
 humble access : " Postea panes e canistro in patinam ponit : dein vinum e 
 doliolo [dolio : MS. B.M.] adinstar Sanguinis erumpentis [dirumpens : MS. 
 B.M. erumpens : MS. Lambeth] in calicem haurit ; turn aquam e Triconali 
 [triclinari : MS. B.M.] scypho [cypho MS. B.M.] immiscet, etc. 
 
 4 John Fuller Russell, The Form and Order of the consecration of the parish 
 church of Abbey Dore, London, 1874. pp. 27-30.
 
 160 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 for it was confessed at his trial 1 : and Brett tells us that 
 he restored the use of the mixed chalice at All Hallows, 
 Barking. But Laud was not minister of All Hallows' 
 Barking, though he may have influenced his nephew. 
 
 Laud's influence upon the Scottish book of 1637 may 
 perhaps have been overrated ; but it should be noticed 
 that in this book we first find directions for setting the 
 bread and wine on the altar at the offertory in words 
 which clearly foreshadow the rubric of 1662. Nothing 
 is said, however, about the mixed chalice. 
 
 With the Restoration of King Charles II. came the 
 revision of the liturgy, and a direction to set the bread 
 and wine on the holy table at the offertory was now 
 added. But nothing is said about the preparation of 
 the gifts ; and though there is evidence that the mixed 
 chalice continued in use, yet we have singularly little 
 evidence of the time at which it was mixed. Bishop 
 Wilson, in the edition of Sacra Privata which has been 
 restored according to the manuscript in the bishop's own 
 hand, gives private devotions " Upon placing the bread 
 and wine and water upon the altar." Nothing, how- 
 ever, is said of the time at which the chalice was mixed ; 
 a regret is expressed later on that the rubric in the Prayer 
 Book is so rarely observed, and it may be feared that, if 
 a plain direction like this were not observed, a practice 
 even of venerable antiquity like the mixed chalice would 
 hardly become very general. Brett speaks of it as done 
 in the Church of England, but as if there were but few 
 who did it. " It may perhaps be said that the Church 
 of England has not prohibited a mixed cup ; she has only 
 not enjoyned it ; that in some of the publick Parish 
 
 1 William Laud, Works, vol. iv. p. 210, 1854 (Library oj Anglo-Catholic 
 Theology). Dr. Haywood confessed (as it was urged) "that he fetched the 
 elements from the credential (a little side table as they called it), and set 
 them reverently upon the communion table." 
 
 2 Thomas Brett, A Collection of the Principal Liturgies, London, 1720. 
 Dissertation, 41, p. 357. 
 
 3 Thomas Wilson, Bishop of Sodor and Man, Keble's Edition in Library 
 of Anglo-Catholic Theology, vol. v. p. 74.
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 161 
 
 Churches the Priest does put Water into the sacramental 
 Wine, and that we do not find any have been censured 
 for it." The priests who used the mixed cup seem to 
 have been few in number. A controversial writer speaks 
 of " the few Clergy who have followed this Practice " ; 2 
 and John Johnson, favourably disposed towards it as he 
 may have been, says, " All learned Charitable Christians 
 will judge favourably of the Church of England for using 
 none " ; 3 that is, no water in the sacred cup. If, then, 
 according to Bishop Wilson, there were but few who 
 followed the plain direction of the Prayer Book to set the 
 bread and wine on the altar at a particular moment of 
 the service, it is likely enough that there were but few 
 who would follow a custom less distinctly commanded 
 than the former. 
 
 But these few were no doubt increased in number 
 after the controversy raised by the Nonjurors on this 
 point, and which controversy passed from mere discussion 
 into practice on the publication of the Nonjurors' liturgy 
 in 171 8. 4 In this order the chalice is directed to be 
 mixed at the offertory, with an addition that I have 
 never seen in any other liturgy before 1718 : " putting 
 thereto, in the view of the People, a little pure and clean 
 water." The same particular direction may be found in 
 the liturgy 5 attributed to Thomas Deacon, who was a 
 bishop among the Nonjurors : " The Priest [or Deacon, 
 p. 318] ... shall mix the Wine and Water openly in the 
 
 1 Thomas Brett, A Collection of the Principal Liturgies, London, 1720. 
 Dissertation concerning the preceding Liturgies, 26, p. 225. 
 
 2 No Necessity to alter the Common Prayers, London, John Morphew, 1718. 
 p. 3. 
 
 3 John Johnson, The Unbloody Sacrifice, London, 1718. Part ii. (chap. i. 
 sect, iv.) p. 59. 
 
 4 A Communion Office taken partly from Primitive Liturgies and partly from 
 the First English Reformed Common Prayer Book, etc. London, James Bettenham, 
 1718, 8vo, no pagination. There is no direction for the mixed chalice in 
 the earlier attempt : The Liturgy of the Ancients represented as near as nve/l 
 may be in English Forms, London, 1696, privately printed, p. 13. 
 
 6 A compleat Collection oj Devotions both publick and private, London, 1734. 
 PP- 74, 8 5 3i8. 
 
 M
 
 1 62 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 view of the People," immediately before the gifts are set 
 on the altar at the offertory, notwithstanding that an 
 opportunity of preparing the elements at " the prothesis " 
 before the liturgy is given, as the deacon is ordered to set 
 bread, wine, and water on " the prothesis " before the 
 introit. It seems to have been thought of considerable 
 importance that the water should be added to the wine 
 in the sight of the people, and at the offertory, when the 
 missa fidelium was beginning. It may perhaps be thought 
 that this is evidence that some in the Church of England 
 from which the Nonjurors had seceded mixed the cup 
 not in the sight of the people. In our time we have met 
 with a feeling like this ; and no less a ritualist than Mr. 
 Maskell has given expression to it. He says : " If this 
 mixture be not public as of old, and explained to the 
 people, the purpose of it must be lost." x Mr. Maskell, 
 when he wrote, can hardly have been aware of the number 
 of rites " of old " in which the mixture was not in the 
 sight of the people ; and if the meaning of this mixture 
 be not explained to them, whose fault is that ? 2 
 
 1 William Maskell, The Ancient Liturgy of the Church of England, Second 
 edition, London, 1846. Preface p. cxxxv. It is the second, not any later 
 edition that must be consulted. 
 
 2 At the time of the publication of the Lambeth Judgment, much was said 
 of the importance of the mixing of the chalice in public and of the " rigorously 
 ceremonious " nature of that mixing. If we regard the opinion of Francis 
 Suarez, whose authority is recognized in the Roman Church, the lights of which 
 some among us wish us most carefully to follow, we shall see that the time of 
 the mixing of the chalice was, to him, almost a matter of indifference. His last 
 sentence quoted below is specially worthy of notice, as he tells us that he who 
 follows the local custom will not be far wrong. He has previously insisted 
 upon the mixture being made in the chalice and at the time of the celebration 
 of the eucharist, not in the flagon or the day before, and he adds : De toto 
 autem tempore a principio missae usque ad oblationem nulla est praecepti 
 necessitas. Soto et Sylvester magis probare videntur, quod in initio missae 
 fiat, quia est maior mora temporis, ut aqua in vinum convertatur. Alensis 
 vero dicit in missis solemnibus fieri post Evangelium ; in privatis vero solere 
 antea fieri. Contrarium autem a multis servatur, scilicet, ut in privatis missis 
 fiat post Evangelium, in solemnibus autem antea. In missali tamen Romano 
 dicitur fieri deberepost Evangelium, facta hostiae oblatione ; et hie mod us est 
 satis tutus et sufficiens. Denique in hoc, qui secutus fuerit suae Ecclesiae 
 consuetudinem, non errabit. (F. Suarez, Opera omnia, ed. C. Berton, Parisiis, 
 1860. t. xx. p. 827. De Sacramentis Qu. Ixxiv. art. viii. iii.)
 
 ENGLISH LITURGIES 163 
 
 The influence of the Nonjurors upon the disestablished 
 Church of Scotland is well known, and it is very likely- 
 due to the liturgy of 1718 that in the Church of Scotland 
 the preparation of the gifts was, after the middle of the 
 last century, deferred to the time when they were about 
 to be set on the altar at the offertory. Before and after 
 the revolution it would appear from an important 
 memorandum, drawn up by Bishop Rattray, and lately 
 printed by the Bishop of Edinburgh, " that it was the 
 custom in many places to mix a little pure and clean water 
 with the Sacramental Wine, not indeed at the Altar, but 
 in preparing the elements before. This custom was 
 almost universal throughout the North, perhaps from 
 the very time of the Reformation." For this last 
 suggestion I can find no indication of the time of mixing 
 in the Scottish missals that have come down to us, 2 
 except, of course, in the Stowe missal, the directions of 
 which may have been known to the Irish missionaries 
 who preached the gospel in Caledonia, and retained 
 when St. Margaret made so many other changes. 
 
 The close connexion of the American Church with the 
 disestablished Scottish Church is well known. Bishop 
 Seabury reprinted, for the use of his own diocese in 
 Connecticut, an edition of the Scottish Communion 
 Office, in which one of the few changes made was a 
 direction to mix the chalice at the offertory, but this is 
 not ordered to be in the sight of the people. 3 In the 
 American Common Prayer Book, which appeared in the 
 year following after Bishop Seabury's publication, there 
 is no direction to mix the chalice at all ; the rubric is 
 simply a reproduction of that of the English book of 
 1662. 
 
 1 John Dowden, An historical account of the Scottish Communion Office, 
 Edinburgh, 1884. pp. 53, 326. 
 
 2 The Arbuthnott Missal, edited in 1864, at the Pitsligo Press, Burntisland, 
 by the late Dr. Alexander Forbes, Bishop of Brechin. 
 
 3 Bishop Seabury's Communion Office, 1786, p. 8 ; reproduced in fac -simile 
 by the Rev. Samuel Hart, New York, 1883, second ed. I am indebted to 
 the courtesy of the learned editor for a copy of this most interesting work.
 
 1 64 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 A TABLE SHOWING THE LITURGICAL MOMENT 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE IN CERTAIN 
 WESTERN RITES BEFORE 1570. 
 
 OF 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Angers. 
 
 Coutances 
 
 Autun. 
 
 Auxerre 
 
 Monks of 
 Bee. 
 
 Monks of 
 Cluny. 
 
 Monks of 
 Hirschau. 
 Marbach. 
 
 Verdun. 
 
 Missale ad usum insignis ecclesie 
 Andegavensis, Rothomagi, 1523, fo. 
 cxxii. 
 
 Missale cunctis sacerdotibus iuxta 
 Constantiensis diocesis etc. Rotho- 
 1557. 
 
 Sacrorum codex (vulgo Missale 
 nuncupates) iuxta ritum ecclesie 
 Heduensis, Hedue, 1556, fo. cxxxix. 
 
 Ex antique missali ecclesiae 
 Autissiodorensis. (Edm. Martene, 
 de antiquis ecdesiae ritibus, lib. i. 
 cap. iv. art. i. xiii.) 
 
 Ex ms. codice Beccensis monas- 
 terii. (Ibid. lib. i. cap. iv. art. xii. 
 Ord. xxxvi.) 
 
 [Marguard Hergott] Fetus Dis- 
 ci-plina Monastica, 1726. Const. 
 Cluniac. I. Ixxii. p. 263. 
 
 Ibid. p. 454. 
 
 Eusebius Amort, Fetus Disciplina 
 Canonicorum,Venetns, 1747, p. 407 
 Constitutions of Austin canons of 
 1 2th century, received in Germany. 
 
 Missale secundum usum . . . insig- 
 nis ecclesie et diocesis Firdunensis, 
 Paris, 1544, fo. cxxxj. 
 
 After wash- 
 ing hands 
 and before 
 vesting. 
 
 P? 
 
 P? 
 
 P?
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 165 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Mis sale secundum usum Gebennens 
 Lugd. Gul. Huyon, 1521. Scibile 
 ac Promptuarium sacerdotibus neces 
 
 sarium. 
 
 Missale ad usum ecclesie Paris- 
 iensis, Th. Kerver, 1501. 
 
 After wash- 
 ing hands 
 and before 
 vesting. 
 
 After wash- 
 ing hands 
 and before 
 vesting, or at 
 least before 
 gospel. 
 
 Idem. 1541, fo. clxxii. verso. 
 Idem. 1543. 
 Idem. 1559. 
 
 Missale ad usum Insignis ecclesie 
 Beluacensis, Paris and Beauvais, G. 
 de Pre and Charles Fabre, 1538, fo. 
 cxlviii. verso. 
 
 MS. Ordo of 1 3th century (Mar- 
 tene, de antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, lib. 
 i. cap. iv. art. xii. ordo xxvi. Bassani, 
 1788, t. i. p. 228.) 
 
 Missale secundum usum insignis 
 ecclesie Rothomagensis, 1499. 
 
 Breviarium diocesis Aurelianensis, 
 .farisiis, J. Kaerbriand ; Aurelii, 
 Vlartinet, 1542. 8 pars hyemalis. 
 
 After taking 
 rochet and 
 
 washing 
 
 hands, but 
 
 before taking 
 
 mass, 
 vestments.
 
 1 66 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 t Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Monks of 
 West- 
 minster. 
 
 Monks of 
 Ainay, 
 Lyons. 
 
 St. Denis. 
 
 Macon. 
 
 Laon. 
 
 Chalons- 
 
 sur-Marne. 
 
 German 
 Benedic- 
 tines. 
 
 Erfurt, St. 
 Peter's. 
 
 Abbot Litlington's Missal, in 
 Chapter Library, written between 
 1382 and 1384, fo. I47&. (Edited 
 by Henry Bradshaw Society, fasc. ii. 
 col. 488). 
 
 Missale secundum usum monasterii 
 Sancti Martini Atbanaci, 1531. 
 
 Breviarium iuxta ritum regalis 
 Cenobii cbristi martyris Arecfpagite 
 Dionysii, nunc -primum accuratissime 
 Parisiis excussum. 
 
 Missale secundum usum insignis 
 ecdesie Mat isconensis, Lugduni, 1532 
 fo. cxxzix. 
 
 Missale ad usum laudunen. ecdesie, 
 Paris, I. de Pre, 1491, fo. 
 
 Missale ad usum ecdesie Catha 
 launensis, Parisiis, 1489, fo. ccli. 
 
 Ed. 1543. At end of book 
 Modus celebrandi fo. xxxii. verso. 
 
 Missale denuo diligentissime casti- 
 gatum et revisum O. S. B. nigrorum 
 monachorum 'per Germanium, Hage- 
 noie, 1517, fo. cxxxiii. 
 
 British Museum, Add. MS. 10,927 
 
 fo. 112. 
 
 During vest- 
 
 ng, between 
 
 stole and 
 
 chasuble. 
 
 During vest- 
 ing, between 
 
 stole and 
 
 chasuble ; or 
 
 at least 
 
 before 
 
 gospel. 
 
 Before vest- 
 ing with 
 amice. 
 Between 
 
 vesting and 
 Judica.
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 167 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Palencia. 
 
 Milan. 
 
 Canons of 
 
 St. Victor 
 
 at Paris. 
 
 Chartres. 
 
 Astorga. 
 
 Calagorra. 
 
 Cistercian 
 Monks. 
 
 Missale Pallantinum, 1568, fo. 
 ccclj. 
 
 Missale Ambrosianum, 1560, fo. 
 1 54 recto. 
 
 Missale Canonicorum regularium 
 O.S.A. secundum ritum insignis eccle- 
 sie Sancti Fictoris ad muros Parisien- 
 ses, Paris, Prevost. 1529. 
 
 Missale . . . Carnotense, 1534. John 
 Kerbriant, alias Huguelin, fo. cxliiii, 
 recto. 
 
 Missale Asturicensis Ecclesie, 
 Astrucie, 1564. 
 
 Missale secundum consuetudinem 
 Calagurritanensis et Calciatensis ec- 
 clesiarum, 1554, ^ 
 
 Consuetudines, written between 
 1173 and 1191. (Ed. by Ph. Gui- 
 gnard, Les monuments -primitifs de la 
 regie cistercienne, Dijon, 1878, p. 
 142.) 
 
 Liber usuum Cisterciensis Ordinis, 
 Paris, Engelbert de Marnet, 1531. 
 
 Before mass 
 begins. 
 
 After vesting 
 
 and before 
 
 approaching 
 
 altar. 
 
 After con- 
 
 fiuor and 
 
 kissing of 
 
 textus, and 
 
 before gos- 
 
 pel. 
 
 After Aufer 
 
 a nobis and 
 
 kissing of 
 
 altar ; or 
 
 better 
 
 after epistle. 
 
 After con- 
 
 fiteor but 
 
 before in- 
 
 troit. 
 
 After con- 
 
 fiteor ; and 
 
 if possible 
 
 before priest 
 
 says Dominus 
 
 vobiscum.
 
 168 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Canons 
 Regular 
 of St. 
 Denis at 
 Rhemes. 
 
 Sicily. 
 
 Agram. 
 
 Siguenza. 
 
 St. Ouen, 
 Rouen. 
 
 Carcas- 
 sonne. 
 
 Constitutiones particulars Manas- 
 terii canonicorum regularium Sancti 
 Dionysii Remensis. (Edm. Martene, 
 op. cit. appendix ad antiques ecclesite 
 ritus, t. iii. p. 298.) 
 
 Missale Gallicanum ad consuetudi- 
 nem Ecclesiarum Siculorum et precipue 
 Messanensis accommodatum, Venetiis, 
 apud Juntas, 1568, f. 99 recto. 
 
 Missale secundum chorum almi 
 episcopatus Zagrabiensis, Venetiis, 
 Liechtenstein, 1511. 
 
 Missale ad usum ecclesie Se gun tine, 
 Seguntie, 1552, f. cxix. 
 
 Ex veteri Breviario ad usum 
 
 iotomagensis S. Audoeni monasterio 
 
 edito. (Edm. Martene, de antiquis 
 
 ecclesite ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. art. xii. 
 
 rdo xxxvii.) 
 
 Missal, fo. 182 b. MS. 5698 in 
 iibliotheque de la Ville, Carcas- 
 onne, dated 1472. 
 
 At Dominus 
 vobiscum 
 
 After begin- 
 ning introit 
 and spread- 
 ing corporal 
 
 Before 
 
 introit, if 
 
 priest so 
 
 please : or 
 
 immediately 
 
 before gospel 
 
 or in cold 
 
 weather, after 
 
 offertory. 
 
 Before 
 
 introit. 
 
 After censing 
 
 altar at 
 
 introit and 
 
 before 
 
 gospel. 
 
 After introit 
 
 and before 
 
 gospel.
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 169 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Colen. 
 
 Praemon- 
 
 stratensian 
 
 Canons. 
 
 Toledo. 
 
 Bursfeld 
 Benedic- 
 tines. 
 
 Cordova. 
 
 Mis sale Diocesis Coloniense, Par 
 rhisiis, Nicolas Prevost and Arnold 
 Byrckman, 1525. Preparament 
 sacerdotum ad missam, pp. 2 and 3 
 The writer of Die Liturgie dei 
 Erzdiocese Koln, Koln, 1868, p. 27 
 gives this as custom from 1494 to 
 1626, and considers that the mixing 
 took place before Kyrie. 
 
 Breviarium ordinis candidissimi 
 Premonstraten. Paris, Th. Kerver, 
 1507, Sign, small gothic a. viii. b. 
 
 Missale Toletanum, Burgis, 1512 
 Regule sacerdotales, fo. crviii. 
 
 Ordinarius diuinorum nigrorum 
 monachorum de obseruancia Burs- 
 feldensi, printed by the brothers of 
 the common life at Marienthal, 
 about 1475, capp. xliii. xlvi. 
 
 Ceremoniee nigrorum monachorum 
 0. 5. B. de observantia Bursjeldensi 
 . . A.D. 1502. Kal. lanuarii. 
 aris, 1610, cap. xlii. p. 114. 
 
 Missale Cordubensis ecclesie, Cor- 
 iube, Simon Carpintero, 1561 and 
 rdinarium missa, Sign. Oii. at end 
 >f book. 
 
 After introi 
 
 and before 
 
 gospel. 
 
 Between 
 approaching 
 
 altar and 
 reading the 
 
 gospel, or 
 
 before the 
 deacon sings 
 the respond. 
 
 Before 
 
 Dominus 
 
 Vobiscum 
 
 or at end of 
 
 collect. 
 
 Between 
 
 Kyrie and 
 
 Gloria. 
 
 After 
 
 gradual 
 
 and before 
 
 gospel. 
 
 S&P. 
 
 P.
 
 170 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Palencia. 
 
 Hierony- 
 mite 
 Friars. 
 
 Freising. 
 
 Plasencia 
 (Spain). 
 
 Carmelite 
 Friars. 
 
 Dominican 
 Friars. 
 
 Bordeaux. 
 
 Braga. 
 
 Burgo de 
 Osma. 
 
 Missale Pallantinum, 1568, fo. cccli. 
 
 Missale Romanum secundum con- 
 suetudinem fratrum ordinis sancti 
 Hieronymi, Caesaraug. Georg.Cocus, 
 1510. 
 
 Directorium sen Index divinorum 
 officiorum : secundum ritum ecclesie 
 et diocesis Frisingensis, Venetiis, 
 P. Liechtenstein, 1516. At end of 
 this is Or do secundum rubric am 
 frisingen. Not paged. Directions 
 on verso of fo. 2. 
 
 Missale secundum consuetudinem 
 alme ecclesie Placentine, Venetiis, 
 Spinelli, 1554, ^- *"* 
 
 Missale ad usum Carmelitarum, 
 Lugduni, 1516, Rubrica xli. 
 
 Missale predicatorum, Venetiis, 
 Giunta, 1504. De officio minis- 
 trorum altaris. 
 
 Missale insignis ecclesie Burdiga- 
 lensis, 1543. Stephen Tholouze 
 and Lodovic Rostelin. 
 
 Letter from Mr. E. A. Allen, 
 Director of Public Library at 
 Oporto. (Practice continued to end 
 of seventeenth century.) 
 
 Missale mixtum ad usum et con- 
 suetudinem sancte ecclesie Oxomensis, 
 Burgo Osmensi, Didicus a Corduba, 
 1561, fo. Ordinarium Misse. 
 
 During 
 gradual. 
 
 After 
 gradual. 
 
 Between 
 
 epistle and 
 
 gospel. 
 
 S. 
 
 P.&S
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 171 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Rituale sen Mandatum insignis 
 ecdesice Suessionensis, ed. Poquet, 
 Suessione, 1856, p. 172. (Written in 
 time of Nivelon de Cherisy, Bishop 
 from 1175 to 1207.) 
 
 Ex ordinario MS. insignis ecclesiae 
 cabilonensis. Edm. Martene, de 
 antiquis ecclesie ritibus, lib. i. cap. 
 iv. art. xii. ordo xxix. 
 
 Edm. Martene, op. cit. lib. i. cap. 
 iv. art. v. x. 
 
 Ordo misse secundum morem ecclesie 
 Ratisponensis. (Early i6th century ? 
 British Museum, 3366, c. 30.) 
 
 Ex MS. ordinario insignia ecclesiae 
 Baiocensis. (Ed. Martene, ibid, ordo 
 xxiv. Also U. Chevalier, Ordinaire 
 et Coutumier de FEglise cathedrale de 
 Bayeux, Paris, 1902, p. 28.) 
 
 Ordo missalis secundum consuetu- 
 dinem ecclesie Baiocensis, 1545, In- 
 structiones perutiles, after calendar. 
 
 Missale ad usum insignis et pres- 
 clares ecclesiee Sarum, Burntisland, 
 1861. Ed. Dickinson. Col. 587. 
 
 Consuetudinarium ecclesie Lincol- 
 niensis, temp. R. de Gravesend epi. 
 (1258-1279). Ed. Chr. Words- 
 worth, 1885. 
 
 Between 
 
 epistle and 
 
 gospel. 
 
 S. 
 
 s. 
 
 S. 
 
 s. 
 
 Between 
 
 gloria in 
 
 excelsis and 
 
 gospel. 
 
 Between 
 
 epistle and 
 
 gospel. 
 
 P? 
 
 S. 
 
 S.
 
 172 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 at Solemn 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Wells. 
 
 Black 
 Canons of 
 Barnwell, 
 Cambridge 
 shire. 
 
 Lyons. 
 
 Siguenza. 
 Calagorra. 
 
 Meaux. 
 
 Monks of 
 Casale. 
 
 Gran. 
 
 Ordinale et Statuta, p. 36. (Ed 
 by H. E. Reynolds, in Wells Cathe- 
 dral, etc. 1 88 1.) 
 
 Libellus de observanciis regularibus 
 canonicorum regularium de Barnwelle, 
 xxiii. Harleian MS. 3601, fo. 202. 
 ch. xxiii. (edited by J. W. Clark, 
 Observances in use at the Augustinian 
 Priory . . . Barnwell, Cambridgeshire, 
 Cambridge, 1897, p. 114). 
 
 Missale sub ritu et usu dicte ecclesie 
 lugdunensis, Lugduni, lo. Alemann 
 de Magontia, 1487, fo. cxxvi. 
 
 Do. 1510, fo. Icxiii [Ixxiii.] 
 Do. 1556, fo. cii. 
 
 Missale ad usum ecclesie Se gun tine, 
 Seguntie, 1552. 
 
 Missale secundum consuetudinem 
 Calagurritanensis et Calciatensis 
 ecclesiarum, 1554, ^- c ^ vl - 
 
 Missale opus ecclesie Meldensis, 
 Lutetie, Jo. Bonhomme, 1556, fo. 
 clvi. verso. 
 
 Edm. Martene, de antiquis mona- 
 chorum ritibus, lib. ii. cap. iv^| ii. 
 art. xxi. and lib. ii. cap. vi. art. 
 xxxvii. 
 
 Missale secundum chorum alme 
 ecclesie Strigoniensis, 1501, p. Ixxxvi. 
 
 Between 
 
 epistle and 
 
 gospel. 
 
 Between 
 epistle and 
 gospel at 
 high mass : 
 
 at missa 
 matutinalis 
 
 during 
 
 collects. 
 
 Before 
 gospel. 
 
 S.&P. 
 
 S. 
 
 S.&P. 
 
 S.&P.
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 173 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Friars of St. 
 Paul. 
 
 Sens. 
 
 Cambray. 
 
 Eichstadt. 
 
 Rheims. 
 
 Amiens. 
 
 Missale novum : iuxta ritum 
 modumque sacri ordinis fratrum 
 eremitarum Dim Pauli, Venetiis, 
 lunta, 1537. 
 
 Breviarium secundum verum et 
 integrum preclare ecclesie Senonen 
 usum, Th. Kerver, Parisiis, 1546, 
 Sign. A. i. 
 
 Missale parvum secundum usum 
 venerabilis ecclesie Cameracensis, 
 1507, fo. cxxxj. 
 
 Missale Eystetense, Eichstadt, 1486, 
 Michael Keyser, fo. clvi. verso. 
 
 Missale secundum chorum et ritum 
 Eystetensis ecclesie, 1517, Nurnberg, 
 Hieronymus Holtzel, fo. civ. 
 
 Missale secundum usum . . . ecclesie 
 Remensis, Paris, 1542, fo. xcvii. 
 verso. 
 
 Sacrificale itinerantium subnotata 
 tenens Oppenheim, in officina lacobi 
 Koebel, 1521. 
 
 Victor de Beauville, and Hector 
 Josse, Pontifical Amiens -public 
 d'apres un MS. original du xi' siecle, 
 Amiens, 1885, p. 7. 
 
 Before 
 gospel. 
 
 After gospel 
 
 and before 
 
 creed. 
 
 After offer- 
 torium, but 
 
 before 
 
 spreading 
 
 corporal 
 
 and setting 
 
 host on 
 
 altar. 
 
 After creed, 
 
 but before 
 
 setting host 
 
 on altar. 
 
 After gospel, 
 but before 
 offertorium. 
 
 After gospel. 
 
 ?P
 
 174 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Bremen. 
 
 Seville. 
 
 Praemon- 
 stratensian 
 Canons. 
 
 Lund. 
 Toul. 
 
 Monks of 
 the Char- 
 terhouse. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Missale secundum ritum ecclesie 
 Bremensis, Strassburg, 1511. 
 
 Missale secundum ordinem alme 
 ecclesie Hispalensis, Hispali, 1507. 
 
 Idem, Hispali, Varela, 1534, fo. 
 cxl. verso. 
 
 Missale candidissimi ordinis pre- 
 monstratensium ad unguem recognitum. 
 Parisiis, 1530, fo. cxv. verso. 
 
 Missale secundum ritum et ordinem 
 sacri ordinis Pr&monstratensium, 
 Paris, J. Keruer, 1578, fo. 136. 
 
 Missale Lundense, Paris, 1514. 
 
 Ex missali Tullensi annorum cir- 
 citer 300. (Edm. Martene, de 
 antiquis ecclesice ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. 
 art. xii. ordo xxxi.) 
 
 Missale Tullensf, 1551. 
 
 Repertorium Statutorum Ordinis 
 Cartusiensis, Basileae, 1510, I. pars 
 stat. ant. cap. xliii. 22. 
 
 Missale secundum ordinem Carthu- 
 siensium, Venetiis, L. A. Giunta, 
 1509, fo. ciiii. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 After creed, 
 but before 
 offertorium. 
 
 Probably 
 
 after gospel, 
 
 but before 
 
 spreading 
 
 corporal 
 
 on altar. 
 
 Before 
 
 offering 
 
 host 
 
 After gospel. 
 
 After creed. 
 
 During 
 singing of 
 offertory. 
 
 After gospel, 
 
 but before 
 offering host, 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass.
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 175 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Monks of 
 the Char- 
 terhouse. 
 
 S. Gatianus 
 at Tours. 
 
 Monks of 
 Moysac. 
 
 Gregors- 
 miinster 
 inAl- 
 satia. 
 
 Jumieges. 
 
 Monks of 
 Cluny. 
 
 Monks of 
 Hirschau. 
 
 Valence in 
 Gaul. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Missale Carthusiense, Th. Keruer, 
 1541, fo. Ixxiiii. 
 
 Missale secundum ordinem Cartu- 
 siensium, ex officina Carthusias 
 papiensis, 1562, fo. 99. 
 
 Ex MS. Codice insignis ecclesiae 
 S. Gatiani Turonensis annorum 
 circiter 800. (Edm. Martene, de 
 antiquisecclesiczritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. 
 art. xii. ordo vii.) 
 
 Ex MS. lib. Sacramentorum 
 Moysacensis monasterii. (Edm. 
 Martene, ibid, ordo viii.) 
 
 Ex MS. Monasterii Sancti Gre- 
 gorii in Valle Gregoriana diocesis 
 Basileensis annorum circiter 300. 
 (Edm. Martene, ibid, ordo xxxii.) 
 
 Ex MS. missali Gemmeticensi, 
 secundum usum ecclesiae Ebroicen- 
 sis, ante anno 300 exarta. (Edm. 
 Martene, ibid, ordo xxviii.) 
 
 [Marquard Hergott.] Fetus dis- 
 ciplina Monastica, 1726, p. 220. See 
 also Luc d'Achery, Spicelegium, 
 Paris, 1723, t. i. p. 679. 
 
 Ibid. p. 451. 
 
 Missale ad usum ecclesie Valen- 
 tinensis, Valentie per lohannem 
 Belon, 1504, fo. ci. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 After gospel, 
 
 but before 
 offering host. 
 
 After gospel, 
 but before 
 offertory. 
 
 Before 
 
 offertory. 
 
 After gospel. 
 
 After creed. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 S.
 
 176 A TABLE OF THE TIME FOR 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Narbonne. 
 
 ArraB. 
 
 Camal- 
 dulese 
 
 Monks. 
 
 Aquileia. 
 
 Tarrazona. 
 
 Flaccus 
 Illyricus. 
 
 Salzburg. 
 
 Stable. 
 
 Lyons. 
 
 Missale secundum usum sanctae 
 Narbonensis ecclesie, Lugduni, Const. 
 Fradin, 1528, fo. cliii. 
 
 Missale ad usum ecclesie Atre- 
 batensis, Jean Dupre, 1491, fo. cxiii. 
 
 Missale Monasticum secundum 
 ordinem Camaldulensem novissime 
 impressum, Venetiis, Liechtenstein, 
 1567, fo. Ixvii. 
 
 Missale Aquileyensis Ecclesie, 
 Venetiis, Liechtenstein, 1517, fo. 
 8 1 verso. 
 
 Missale secundum ritum ac con- 
 suetudinem insignis ecclesie Tiras- 
 sonensis, Caesaraugust. Georgii Coci, 
 1529. 
 
 Missa Latina qua olim ante 
 Romanam, etc. Argentina, Mylius, 
 
 1537. P- 53- 
 
 Ex MS. Pontifical! Salisbergensi. 
 (Edm. Martene, de antiquis ecdesice 
 ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. art. xii. ord. 
 xiii.) 
 
 Ex MS. Stabulensis monasterii. 
 (Edm. Martene, ibid, ordo xv.) 
 
 Ex antique Ordinario ecclesiae 
 Lugdunensis ante annos 400, manu 
 exarato. (Edm. Martene, ibid. lib. 
 i. cap. iv. art. xii. ordo xx.) 
 
 After creed 
 
 After 
 offertory. 
 
 After 
 offertory.
 
 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 177 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Monks of 
 Monte 
 Cassino. 
 
 Regular 
 Canons 
 of the 
 Congre- 
 gation 
 of St. 
 Saviour, 
 Order 
 of St. 
 
 Augustine. 
 
 Vienne in 
 Gaul. 
 
 Friars 
 Minor de 
 Obser- 
 
 vantia. 
 
 Aix-en- 
 Provence. 
 
 Marseilles. 
 
 Aries. 
 
 Missale Monasticum secundum 
 morem et ritum Casinensis congre- 
 gationis alias sancte lustine, Venetiis, 
 de Giuntis, 1515. 
 
 Ordinarium Fratrum Canonicorum 
 Regularium Congregationis 5. Salva- 
 toris Ordinis 5. Augustini, Romse, 
 Ant. Bladium, 1549. Capp. xxxix. 
 and xli. 
 
 Ex MS. ordinario insignis ecclesiae 
 Viennensis in Gallia. (Ed. Mar- 
 tene, op. cit. Lib. i. cap. iv. art. xii. 
 ord. xxx.) 
 
 Missale secundum morem romane 
 ecclesie -per fratres minor es de obser- 
 vantia accurate revisum, Nurmberge, 
 loh. Meurl, 1501, fo. 
 
 Missale secundum usum Metropoli- 
 tane ecclesie Aquensis, Lugduni, D. 
 de Harsy, 1527, fo. cli. 
 
 Missale secundum usum ecclesie 
 cathedralis Massiliensis nunquam ante 
 impressum, Lugduni, D. de Harsy, 
 1530, fo. ci. 
 
 Missale secundum usum et con- 
 suetudinem sancte Arelatensis ecclesie 
 (? 1530 Lugd. D. de Harsy), fo. 
 xciii. b. 
 
 After 
 offertory.
 
 178 THE MAKING OF THE CHALICE 
 
 Name of 
 
 Church or 
 
 Order. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Time in 
 Liturgy. 
 
 Whether 
 
 at Solemn 
 
 or Private 
 
 Mass. 
 
 Saragossa. 
 
 Gerona. 
 
 Spires. 
 
 Cordova. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 Magde- 
 burg. 
 
 Milan. 
 
 Missale secundum consuetudinem 
 metropolitan Ecdesie Cesaraugus- 
 tane, 1522. Geo. Cocus, 4. fo. cciii. 
 
 Missale secundum laudabilem con- 
 suetudinem diocesis Gerundensis, 
 Lugduni, heredes de Septemgran- 
 giis, 1557, 4' ordo servandus ; de 
 offertorio cap. viii. 
 
 Missale Spirense, Spire, Pet. 
 Drach, 1500. Fo. cxxiii. verso. 
 
 Missale Cordubensis ecclesiae, Cor- 
 dubae, 1561, fo. clxxiii. b. 
 
 Missale ad usum percelebris 
 Ecclesiae Herfordensis, ed. Hender- 
 son, 1874, p. 117. 
 
 Missale . . . Magdeburg, 1480. 
 British Museum. 1C. 10902, fo. 144^. 
 MS. note of the early sixteenth cen- 
 tury. 
 
 Missale Ambrosianum, Mediolani, 
 per Antonium Zarottum, 1475. 
 
 After 
 offertory. 
 
 After pacem 
 
 babete, and 
 
 before 
 
 offering 
 
 host.
 
 179
 
 IRotes on tbe Marriage Service 
 
 in tbe Booh of Common prater 
 
 of 1549 
 
 THE essential part of marriage is the consent given by the 
 bride and bridegroom in the presence of witnesses. 1 
 Other ceremonies may be instructive and desirable, but 
 they are not necessary. Such, for example, are the 
 joining of the right hands, the giving of a ring with other 
 tokens of espousage, the blessing of these by the priest ; 
 even the blessing of the marriage itself by the priest is not 
 essential. 2 Other customs there are which are old, but 
 not considered by us necessary or even important. Such 
 are the wearing of crowns, the holding of a veil over the 
 bride and bridegroom while a blessing is pronounced, the 
 
 1 Verum matrimonium non fit sine consensu animorum verbis vel aliis 
 signis pertinentibus expresse (sic). 1. de Burgo, Papilla oculi, partis viii. caput 
 iij. Argent. 1514. fo. cxxv.b. A. 
 
 This essential consent being mental, it follows that there is no outward and 
 visible sign in matrimony, as indeed no less an authority than Dr. Ign. von 
 Dollinger confesses. "Marriage became a link in the chain of the Church's 
 means of grace, though no outward sign or vehicle, as of laying on hands, 
 oil, or water, or the like, was ordained for it." (The First Age of Christianity 
 and the Church, translated ^by H. N. Oxenham, London, 1866. Vol. ii. 
 p. 221.) 
 
 2 A deacon, as well as a layman, may be the witness to a marriage which 
 is perfectly valid ; but he cannot bless the marriage as a priest can. In fact 
 a deacon can do no more than the civil registrar does, that is, be a witness 
 to the expressed consent of the two parties. It is unfortunate in the interests 
 of history that Dr. J. H. Blunt should have given currency to the reverse of 
 the opinion of Chief Justice Tindal. (Annotated Book of Common Prayer, 
 Lond. 1884. p. 450.) Dr. Blunt's notes always need the strictest scrutiny 
 before they be accepted. (See Guardian, Jan. nth, 1893. p. 60.) 
 
 181
 
 1 82 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 giving to the bride and bridegroom of sops and a cup of 
 wine hallowed by the priest, the nuptial kiss, and other 
 practices. 
 
 All these ceremonies differed widely in different dio- 
 ceses ; and the Council of Trent, which one might have 
 thought little favourable to the preservation of diocesan 
 varieties, " earnestly hopes " * that they may be retained. 
 Yet in the first reformed book of the English Church 
 some of the old English ceremonies were abolished ; others 
 changed ; and others, new to England, introduced. 
 
 Let us pass rapidly over some of the non-essential 
 ceremonies connected with marriage. And first the be- 
 trothal ; in foreign liturgical books the betrothal took 
 place some days before marriage, and consisted in a 
 mutual promise to marry within a short time ; then the 
 priest dismissed the man and woman ; and during the 
 time between the betrothal and the marriage, usually forty 
 days, the banns were published. 2 For this ceremony 
 before marriage there appears no service in the English 
 books printed by Dr. Henderson ; nor is there any trace 
 of it in the book of 1549. We know of course that be- 
 trothal did take place in England, as the rubrics of the 
 Sarum manual speak of it, and it is mentioned elsewhere. 3 
 
 Wheatly, however, considers the question put to the 
 bride and bridegroom at the beginning of the service as 
 
 1 "Vehementer optat." (Canones et Decreta SS. (Ecum. Concilii Tridentini, 
 xxiv. cap. i. Ratisbonae, 1874. p. 139.) 
 
 3 Instances of this betrothal will be found in Martene, De antiquif Ecclttue 
 ritibus, lib. I. cap. ix. art. v. ordines ix. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. Bassani, 1788. t. 
 ii. pp. 134, etc., and of a later date in the Rouen Sacerdotale of 1640 and 
 others (see below). 
 
 3 Wilkins, Concilia, Lond. 1737, vol. ii. p. 135. Synod of Exeter 1287. 
 Cap. vii. de matrimonio. B. Thorpe, Ancient Laws . . . England, Public 
 Records Commission, 1840. p. 108. Laws of King Edmund of betrothing 
 a woman. It is most likely betrothal that Shakespeare describes in Twelfth 
 Night, Act V. Sc. I. line 150. 
 
 A contract of eternal bond of love, 
 Confirm'd by mutual joinder of your hands, 
 Attested by the holy close of lips 
 Strengthen'd by interchangement of your rings 
 And all the ceremony of this compact 
 Seal'd in my function, by my testimony.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 183 
 
 " remains of the old form of Espousals, which was different 
 and distinct from the office of Marriage and which 
 was often performed some weeks or months, or perhaps 
 years before." 1 And Wheatly's authority has caused 
 other writers to express the same opinion. But the 
 questions put in the book of 1549 exac ^7 correspond to 
 questions in the same place in rites which have a distinct 
 service for the betrothal or espousals. It is so at Amiens 
 in Ordo IX. printed by Martene, at Autun, in 1544, at 
 Rouen in 1640, at Cambray in 1562, at Bourdeaux in 
 1728, Triers in 1574, Bamberg in 1587, and Augsburg in 
 I764, 2 and many others. In fact at the espousals there 
 is merely a promise to marry at some future time (verba 
 de futuro}. At the celebration of matrimony it is the 
 marriage itself (verba de presenti). This is evident from 
 the old English books ; whether in the vernacular or in 
 the Latin, the question is in the present tense, not in the 
 future : vis habere and wilt thou ? which is : art thou now 
 willing ; not wilt thou be ready hereafter. 
 
 And here one may just note another assertion of 
 Wheatly : that the woman is told to stand during the 
 marriage on the left hand of the man " by the Latin and 
 Greek and all Christian Churches," and that the Jews are 
 the only persons who act otherwise. 3 As a matter of fact 
 even the English dioceses varied among themselves in this 
 point, and there is no settled rule in the West. In the 
 Orthodox Greek Church, 4 if the comment of Goar be 
 correct, they would seem to have really done as Wheatly 
 says ; the man being on the right, the woman on the left 
 
 1 Charles Wheatly, A rational illustration of the Book of Common Prayer, 
 chap. x. sect. 4 5. Cambridge, 1858, ed. Corrie, p. 494. 
 
 1 In order to avoid constant repetition of the same references, the authori- 
 ties for the local customs are brought together under one heading, at the end 
 of the paper, where it is hoped the reader may readily find the reference to the 
 book of the church or monastery spoken of in the text. (See below, p. 221.) 
 
 3 Wheatly, op. cit. chap. x. sect. ii. 4. 
 
 * Jac. Goar, Euchologion, Lut. Paris. 1647. pp. 380 and 384, note 5. See 
 also Simeon of Thessalonica, Opera omnia, De matrimonio, cap. cclxxviii. 
 Migne, col. 507.
 
 1 84 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 of a spectator entering the church. But the Copts put 
 the bride on the right hand of the man, which is the 
 reverse. 1 
 
 Wheatly's statement is true of the Sarum printed books, 
 of York, Exeter, and No. IX. of Dr. Henderson's collec- 
 tion ; but the woman stands during marriage on the 
 right of the man in the manuscript Sarum Manuale? 
 at Hereford, and in No. X. (St. Asaph) of Dr. Hender- 
 son's collection. Further, during the nuptial mass the 
 position of the man was reversed at Sarum, York, and 
 Exeter, the bridegroom kneeling on the left of the bride. 
 Care must therefore be taken to notice what part of the 
 service the rubric is dealing with. 
 
 Nor is Wheatly more fortunate with the customs of 
 the Church of Rome. From the early printed Sacer- 
 dotalia of this church, it would appear that a custom 
 exactly opposite to that which he affirms to be universal 
 prevailed at Rome during the sixteenth century. The 
 woodcuts in the marriage service show the bridegroom 
 standing on the left of the bride ; and the Rituale Roma- 
 num of Gregory XIII. directs this position. The early 
 Italian pictures of marriage show this. Several instances 
 are collected together in a note to p. 210 below. 
 
 While the spousal mass is being said the Sacerdotalia 
 direct a change to be made in position, as the Sarum and 
 York books do, and the bridegroom kneels on the right 
 of the bride. In the Pian Missal and the Pauline Rituale 
 there are no directions of any kind upon these points. 
 
 As instances of the variations the following may be 
 taken : At Lyre the woman knelt at the mass on the right 
 of the man. At Limoges during the marriage, and at 
 Aries during the nuptial mass, which contained the mar- 
 riage service, she stood at the left of the man. At Verona 
 in 1609 she stood during the marriage on the left of the 
 man, and the woodcuts corroborate the directions. At 
 
 1 H. Denzinger, Ritus Orientialium, Wirceburgi, 1863. t. if. p. 365. 
 
 2 See p. xviii. of the preface to Dr. Henderson's Edition of the York 
 Manual.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 185 
 
 Avranches in 1769, the same. In the churches of Poland 
 in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the priest 
 put the bridegroom on his own right and the bride on his 
 own left for the marriage. At Salamanca in 1532, the 
 bride heard the spousal mass kneeling at the left of the 
 bridegroom. The French print reproduced on Plate XVII. 
 shows the bridegroom kneeling on the left of the bride. 
 
 But in some books, though a direction is given, yet its 
 meaning cannot be known with certainty at the present 
 day. For example, at Rouen in 1640, the man during 
 the betrothal is directed to stand on the left of the 
 priest ; but during the nuptial mass he is to kneel to- 
 wards the piscina, which in England is always on the 
 south side, but its place at Rouen I do not know. So, 
 too, at Bourdeaux in 1728 it is said that the man is to be 
 on the right, and the woman on the left, during the 
 marriage ; and this is the direction given in many of the 
 ritual books : but whether the right of the priest is 
 meant, or the right of one looking at the altar, is not said. 
 At Augsburg in 1764 appears the same indefinite direc- 
 tion, with a sort of complaint that in some churches the 
 opposite is followed. 1 
 
 The prayer for the blessing of the ring, found in all the 
 old English books, has disappeared entirely from the 
 book of I549- 2 But, as before, the ring is put upon the 
 book with gold and silver, called tokens of spousage. 3 It 
 
 1 Stante <viro ad dexteram, muliere <vero ad sinistram (contra quam in 
 nonnullis Ecclesiis sinistrissime foeminas ad dexteram ponunt). Rituale 
 Augustanum, Aug. Vindel. 1764. p. 255. 
 
 2 It may be noticed that according to Goar (op. cit. p. 384, note 3) there 
 is no prayer for the blessing of the ring among the Greeks. It is sufficient 
 that it has been laid upon the Holy Table. Several of the early German 
 Agenda also contain no prayer for the blessing of the ring, as the ring in 
 Germany was not a constant gift at marriage. The Rev. Dr. Achille Ratti, 
 one of the Doctors of the Ambrosian Library at Milan, has been kind 
 enough to make for me a special search amongst the manuscript and printed 
 copies of the Ritualia Sacramentorum of the Church of Milan, and he finds 
 no blessing of the ring in the marriage service before the time of St. Charles. 
 
 3 These words were left out in the second book. Bishop Cosin proposed 
 to restore them in this fashion : " a ring and other tokens of spouseage, as 
 gold, silver, or bracelets." (Correspondence of John Cosin, D.D., Surtees
 
 1 86 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 is right that the ring should be associated with the gold 
 and silver ; for it, ike the coins, is a gift from the bride- 
 groom to the bride. It is only one of the arrhtz, which 
 may be any jewel or precious ornament, as the Roman 
 Rituale of Gregory XIII. edited by Cardinal Severina in 
 1584, testifies. 1 They are really the gifts with which 
 the wife is purchased (coemptio). If this view be right 
 there would seem no impropriety in giving more than 
 one ring ; and accordingly we find in some foreign books 
 a formula for the blessing of rings, in the plural, intended 
 to be given to the bride. At Rouen, as printed by 
 Martene, the rubric expressly says : Let the ring remain 
 on the third finger of the bride with any others that the 
 man may please to give her : and rings in the plural are 
 spoken of in the Rituale of Gregory XIII. J. B. Thiers, 
 however, speaks of this practice with the greatest severity, 
 considering that it favours the institution of polygamy, 2 
 and it was forbidden at Paris in 1786. In some rites the 
 jewels or coins are held by the bride in her hand while the 
 ring is put upon her finger. (Limoges, Bourdeaux, 1728. 
 Paris, 1786. Rhemes, 1821.) It is no uncommon thing 
 in some of the German Agenda to find that a ring is not 
 held necessary and is spoken of as a local custom. There 
 is no delivery of a ring ordered in the book printed by the 
 Jesuits at Nangasaki for the use of the Japanese in the 
 early seventeenth century. 
 
 Society, 1872, part II. p. 74). The Bishop elsewhere tells us that "it is a 
 general custom still to observe this order [the practice of giving gifts of gold 
 and silver] in the north part of the kingdom." (The Works of . . . John 
 Cosin, Oxford, 1855, Lib. of Anglo-Catholic Theology, vol. v. p. 493). But 
 Hooker speaks of it as " already worn out " in his time. (Of the Laives of 
 Ecclesiastical Politie, Book V. 73, Lond. 1632. p. 398.) 
 
 1 In this Rituale as soon as the sign of the cross has been made upon the 
 new-married couple and they have been sprinkled with holy water comes : 
 " De benedictione arrharum. Si sit consuetude in sponsalibus . . . bene- 
 dicendi arrhas ut armillas, monilia, zonas, fascias pectorales, inaures, gemmas, 
 margaritas, aut alias res, facit ibi deferri eas ab uno ex Acoluthis vel Clericis 
 in aliquo vase vel linteolo, et alter Acoluthus vel Clericus aderit. uno vasculo 
 et aspersorio aquae benedictae, ut supra," etc. 
 
 2 J. B. Thiers, Traitt des Superstitions qui regardent les Sacremens, Livre X. 
 chap. iv. ix. 4th ed. Avignon, 1777. t. iv. p. 455.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 187 
 
 At Triers we note that coins or arrhce are delivered to 
 the spouse in the place of the ring. It would seem that 
 the arrives generally include ring and gifts ; just as in the 
 Prayer Book the expression " oblations " includes both 
 the sacramental bread and wine and any other gifts that 
 may be made at the same time. 1 One of the gifts among 
 the Jacobite Syrians is a golden cross; so also amongst the 
 Copts, where clothes are given as well, especially a girdle, 
 which with them is a token that the wearer is a Christian. 2 
 
 Two rings, of gold and silver, one for the bride and the 
 other for the bridegroom, are in use amongst the Ortho- 
 dox Greeks, according to Goar 3 ; and in some Latin 
 dioceses in the eastern parts of Europe at the present 
 moment (Gran, Colocza) two rings for the same purpose 
 are blessed. At Bourdeaux in 1596,* Toledo in 1673, an< ^ 
 Salamanca in 1532, Aquileia in 1575, there was the same 
 custom. 
 
 At Freising the priest wears a violet stole for the bless- 
 ing of the rings. At Bologna the curate was vested in 
 a cope. 
 
 Pliny tells us that in his days the ring given to the 
 woman was of iron, 5 but Tertullian 6 and Clement of 
 Alexandria 7 speak of it as golden. Simeon of Thessa- 
 lonica, who died in 1429, speaks of the iron ring being 
 
 1 See the Bishop of Salisbury's (Dr. John Wordsworth) The Holy Com- 
 munion, sec. ed. Oxford and London, 1892. p. 263. 
 
 2 H. Denzinger, Ritus Orientalium, Wirceburgi, 1863. t. i. p. 174 : t. ii. 
 pp. 364 and 385. 
 
 3 Jacobi Goar, Euchologion, Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1647. p. 380. See also 
 G. V. Shann, Book of Needs, London, 1894. p. 52. Mr. W. J. Birkbeck 
 tells me that in Russia they nearly always have the name of the betrothed 
 engraved inside. 
 
 4 J. B. Thiers, op. at. viii. p. 454. 
 
 5 C. Plinii Secundi, Nat. His. lib. xxxiii. cap. 4. Lond. 1826. t. viii. 
 p. 4306. "Etiam nunc sponsas muneri ferreus annulus mittitur, isque sine 
 gemma." 
 
 8 Tertullian, Apologeticus, cap. 6 (Opera, Migne, I. col. 302), " cum 
 aurum nulla norat praeter unico digito quern sponsus oppignerasset pronubo 
 annulo." The difference between Pliny and Tertullian has been explained 
 by supposing that one is speaking of the betrothal ring, the other of the 
 marriage ring. 
 
 7 Clemens Alex. Paedagog. lib. iii. cap. xi. Migne t. i, coll. 631-634.
 
 1 88 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 given to the woman and a golden ring to the man. 1 In 
 the middle ages in the West the marriage ring had be- 
 come one of the precious metals. 2 It is directed to be 
 silver in the mediaeval orders of Lyons, Paris, 3 Auxerre, 
 and Rouen, printed by Martene ; also in No. IX. of the 
 English orders printed by Dr. Henderson, where it is 
 further directed to be without gold or any sort of pre- 
 cious stone.* In the St. Asaph order (No. X. of Dr. 
 Henderson) it is said to be of gold. " Wyth this gold 
 ryng y ye wedde." 
 
 At first the coins given to the bride were of current 
 money ; later on they became small medals struck for 
 the purpose. Mr. H. A. Grueber, F.S.A., secretary of 
 the Numismatic Society, tells me that in Lima these 
 
 FRENCH MARRIAGE JETON 
 
 small medals are still struck for many weddings and 
 thrown to the persons who attend the marriage. Traces 
 of the custom are even now to be seen in the bronze and 
 silver medals which are distributed at Royal marriages. 
 
 In France there seems to have been a variety of these 
 coins in common use. Mr. Grueber has had the good- 
 ness to show me one of them in the British Museum, 
 
 1 Simeon, loc. cit. 
 
 2 Postmodum vero pro ferreis sunt aurei constitute et pro adamante gem- 
 mis ornati. (Durandus, Rationale, lib. I. cap. 9, 10, -.Venetiis, 1568.) 
 Early in the fourteenth century Dante speaks of a gem in the marriage ring. 
 "Disposata m'avea con la sua gemma." (Purgatorio, Canto v. last'line.) 
 
 3 It was to be of silver at Paris as late as 1786, without precious stone, 
 engraving, or letters. 
 
 4 Brit. Mus. Harl. 2860, fo. 31. The words are distinctly : Sine auro et 
 sine lapide aliquo.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 189 
 
 among the French jetons in silver, of which the accom- 
 panying cut is a representation. Mr. Grueber attributes 
 it to the later half of the seventeenth century. Martene 
 gives a drawing of one which bears the legend Denier 
 tournois pour epouser ; and several others are reproduced 
 by De Fontenay. It was the custom for the bridegroom 
 to give to the bride thirteen of these little pieces, either 
 in a purse, as at Bourdeaux in 1728, or in a box of silver 
 or enamel. 1 In France thirteen was the common num- 
 ber. It was so at Autun in 1545, at St. Omer in 1606, 
 at Bourdeaux in 1728 ; and in the ancient orders at 
 Limoges and Amiens printed by Martene. Thirteen, 
 Martene says, was also the number at Rhemes in 1585, 
 of which ten were reserved for the priest. At Amiens 
 three were reserved, with the rest the priest did what he 
 pleased. At Bourdeaux in 1728 the priest kept one piece, 
 the others were given to the bride. At the monastery 
 of Lyre the coins were to be divided amongst the poor. 
 At Salamanca in 1532 thirteen denarii and one obolus were 
 to be given to the bride. In England we find that the 
 coins were sometimes given away. In No. IX. of Dr. 
 Henderson's collection the money is given to the clerks 
 or poor according to the custom of the country ; and in 
 No. VII., after the money has been given to the bride, 
 they do what they like with it. There would thus seem 
 to be medieval authority for the rubric in the second 
 book of Edward VI. that the ring shall be laid upon the 
 book "with the accustomed duty to the priest and 
 clerke." 
 
 After the delivery of the ring, the printed edition of 
 the York Manual, and a manuscript of the Sarum Manual 
 direct the bride to fall at her husband's feet ; and the 
 Sarum book further orders that she shall kiss his right 
 foot. 2 The York book directs this courtesying to take 
 
 1 De Fontenay, Manuel de f 'Amateur de jetons, Paris, 1854. p. 103. At 
 Bourdeaux the French rubric speaks of the Benediction des erres ou trezain, a 
 meaning of treizain not noticed by Littre. 
 
 8 I have looked through all the printed editions of the Sarum Manual in 
 the British Museum but do not find this direction in them.
 
 i 9 o ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 place only when the bride has received land as her dower. 
 This ceremony was known elsewhere ; for in Ordo IF. of 
 Martene the bride falls at her husband's feet at the same 
 time in the service as in the Samm and York books. 
 Giles Fletcher, who was ambassador from our Queen 
 Elizabeth to Russia at the end of the sixteenth century, 
 says : " So the marriage knot being knitte by the Priest, 
 the Bride commeth to the Bridegroome (standing at the 
 end of the altar or table) and falleth downe at his feete, 
 knocking her head upon his shooe, in token of her subjec- 
 tion and obedience. And the Bridegroom again casteth 
 the cappe of his gowne or upper garment over the Bride, 
 in token of his duetie to protect and cherish her." 
 
 Bodenstedt says that among the Armenians the bride 
 kneels at the feet of the bridegroom when she meets her 
 future husband on the day of the marriage. 2 
 
 The falling at the feet of the husband does not appear 
 in the book of 1549. ^ Cranmer had but the printed 
 Sarum Manualia and Missalia before him, this circum- 
 stance might account for the discontinuance of the prac- 
 tice ; for though all are well aware of his Lutheran and 
 even Zwinglian opinions, yet it does not appear that he 
 was inclined to follow the innovators in their slack teach- 
 ing on the subject of matrimony. The modern up- 
 holders of the rights of women would never endure this 
 ceremony for one moment : and I fancy that pride, not 
 superstition, has a great deal to do with a practice which 
 J. B. Thiers denounces : the bride was accustomed to 
 let the ring fall from her finger as soon as it was put on. 3 
 Necessarily she would stoop to pick up the ring, or make 
 some attempt at this, and so a reason would be given for 
 her bending or courtesying at her husband's feet, and the 
 appearance of worship paid to him would be got rid of. 
 
 1 G. Fletcher, Of the Russe Common Wealth, Lond., Thomas Charde, 1591. 
 chap. 24, fo. 101. 
 
 2 F. M. Bodenstedt, Bin Tamend und em Tag, Berlin, 1850, quoted by 
 Denzinger, op. cit. t. ii. p. 471. 
 
 8 J. B. Thiers, op. cit. xi, p. 457.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 191 
 
 It is to be feared that St. Augustine is inclined as little 
 as St. Paul to favour modern ideas : for he says that one 
 of the characters of a good mater jamilias is that she is not 
 ashamed to call herself the servant (ancilld] of her hus- 
 band. 1 
 
 In the Ely Pontifical (No. V. of Dr. Henderson's col- 
 lection) both bride and bridegroom are directed to kneel 
 at the priest's feet immediately after the giving of the 
 ring, as the rubric in the book of Common Prayer since 
 1662 has commanded. 
 
 The joining of the right hands in marriage is very 
 ancient and widespread amongst Christians and heathen. 
 Tertullian, one of the early fathers, speaks of the joining 
 of hands as practised at marriages. 2 In some English 
 books (York, Sarum, Hereford, Exeter) the joining of the 
 right hands took place while the man and woman plighted 
 their troth, as in the book of 1549 : but at Westminster 
 and in No. IX. of Dr. Henderson's collection the priest 
 joined both hands at the very opening of the service, 
 while at Evesham there is no mention of such ceremony 
 in the original text, though added in the later hand. In 
 none of the older English books, however, is the ceremony 
 so striking as in the book of 1549, accompanied as it is by 
 impressive words of which there will be more to say here- 
 after. 
 
 The early Roman Sacerdotalia direct the priest to join 
 the right hands together directly the man and woman 
 have given their consent, saying : ego vos coniungo in 
 matrimonium, and he wraps the hands in the stole folded 
 in the form of a cross. Much the same directions are 
 given in the Rituale of Gregory XIII., but in the Roman 
 book of 1606 the stole is no longer ordered to be put over 
 the right hands of the new married couple, and the same 
 
 1 S. Augustini episcopi Sermo xxxvii. cap. vi. (Opera, Migne, t. v. col. 
 225.) " Agnoscat, inquam, se ancillam, nee timeat conditionem." 
 
 2 Tertullian, de virginibus velandis, cap. xi. Migne, Opera omnia, t. ii. 
 col. 904.
 
 1 92 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 omission is also made in the Rituale of Paul V. In a large 
 number of the foreign diocesan books, however, the cov- 
 ering of the joined hands with the ends of the stole is still 
 ordered, notwithstanding the omission of the ceremony 
 in the Rituale of Paul V. There seems no evidence that 
 it was ever done in England. 
 
 At Prague in 1848 instead of the ends of the stole, 
 there was an alternative custom of putting a u rose " 
 upon the hands of the new married couple. " Ubi con- 
 suetudo est quod rosa ponatur super junctas manus 
 sponsorum sacerdos dicit : Matrimonium etc." From en- 
 quiries made by the late Count I. eon de Mniczech of the 
 Countess von Blome, it would seem that this custom is 
 now entirely unknown in Bohemia, so that at this moment 
 it cannot be ascertained what the " rose " was. Nor in a 
 visit which I paid to Prague in the year 1898 could I 
 find any ecclesiastic who could tell me anything of the 
 custom. 
 
 The joining of hands and covering with the stole 
 remain in the manual printed by the Jesuits for use in 
 Japan, although there is no indication of the use of a ring. 
 Mr. W. J. Birkbeck tells me that the Russians consider 
 the sacrament to be accomplished when the priest joins 
 the hands of the bride and bridegroom, not when they 
 give their consent to one another. The joining of hands 
 takes place some time after the mutual consent has been 
 given. 1 
 
 A very ancient practice was the holding of a veil, called 
 in English the care-cloth, over the new married couple ; 
 but it has disappeared in the book of 1549. In the 
 English pre-Reformation books it is to be found in those 
 of Sarum, York, Hereford, Exeter, Westminster, Evesham, 
 and the Welsh order No. X., supposed by Dr. Henderson 
 to be of St. Asaph ; with the exception of the York and 
 Exeter books, the care-cloth was apparently to be held 
 over the heads of the new married couple from Sanctus 
 
 1 Goar, op. cit. p. 394, note i.
 
 X
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 193 
 
 in the spousal mass to Pax just before Communion. 1 
 This veil or canopy is held over them by clerks in sur- 
 plices ; four, according to Sarum and Exeter ; two 
 according to York ; while at Hereford four clerks held the 
 veil over their backs. At Lyre the veil was held by four 
 persons ; at Lyons, and Soissons in modern times by two 
 persons only, as in the accompanying copy of the print 
 lent by Mr. J. N. Comper (Plate XVII.). 
 
 In the Roman Sacerdotalia, the veil is put over the 
 head of the bride, but only over the shoulders of the 
 bridegroom, apparently to avoid covering his head while 
 in church. It was the same at Aries. At Rouen in 1640 
 there is a curious direction to cover the children with the 
 veil (if any have been born before matrimony) at the 
 same time as their parents, so as to ensure that the off- 
 spring be made legitimate by the ceremony. 2 By the 
 Canon Law, as at the present day in Scotland, though 
 not in England, marriage later on makes legitimate the 
 children born before marriage. 
 
 This nuptial veil seems to be of very great antiquity, 
 part of the heathen customs of the Roman common- 
 wealth. The bride was there veiled with a flammeum, 
 so called on account of its red or flame-like colour ; later 
 on this veil began to be put over the bridegroom as well 
 as the bride, as in the printed Roman Sacerdotalia show ; 
 and in England and elsewhere merely held by the clerks 
 over the heads of the new married couple. The veil is 
 spoken of not only in the early printed Roman Sacerdotalia, 
 but also in the Rituale Romanum of 1584. This book was 
 published after the Roman Missal of Pius V. in 1570. 
 Now this missal contains no note of the use of the nuptial 
 
 1 I cannot help thinking that the Exeter direction is the more reasonable : 
 Post Sanctus prosternant se sponsus et sponsa ad gradum altaris : in oracione 
 dominica [dominica is omitted in Sarum and others} extenso pallio super eos, 
 etc. In some churches, as Auxerre, Aries, and Triers, it is said that the new 
 married are not to be covered with the veil until the blessing is ready to be 
 given. 
 
 2 From Littre (Dictionnaire, s. v. poele) this would seem to have been a 
 recognised custom throughout France. 
 

 
 i 9 4 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 veil, nor do I find it spoken of in any later edition. There 
 is also no mention of the veil in the Roman Ordo Bapti- 
 zandi, etc., of 1606, nor in the Rituale of Paul V., from 
 which we may infer that the practice had been given up as 
 an ordinary custom at Rome, just as it was given up in 
 England in 1549. Indeed so forgotten was the custom 
 in Italy that when in 1789, at the marriage of a prince of 
 the house of Savoy, the practice was restored, it was 
 denounced as an innovation, and a pamphlet had to 
 be written in proof of its antiquity. 1 It continued, 
 however, in France into the last century. Mr. J. N. 
 Comper has allowed me to reproduce a French print 
 made apparently immediately after the Restoration, in 
 which two children standing on stools hold the veil over 
 the heads of the new married couple. Not many years 
 ago at a marriage in London a blue silk veil was held over 
 the heads of the bride and bridegroom by four clergymen 
 in surplices during the benediction by the celebrant. 
 
 There may be a relic of this veil at Bologna in 1593. 
 The curate is to put upon the neck of the bride and 
 bridegroom a white veil made like a fillet after the fashion 
 of a stole, and he is then to join them together in matri- 
 mony. 2 At Aries the priest was to put a veil over the 
 shoulders (scapulas) of the bridegroom and the head of 
 the bride, and then a jugalis 3 over the shoulders (humeros) 
 of both. So, too, at Salamanca in 1532 the minister at 
 the spousal mass covered the new married couple with a 
 linen cloth, covering the man's shoulders and the woman's 
 head, as in the Roman Sacerdotal* spoken of above ; and 
 over the linen there was put around them a hallowed 
 girdle (cingido benedictd) and the minister of the mass said 
 
 1 Matthaei Gianolio, De antique ecdesiee ritu expandendi -velum super 
 sponsos in benedictione nuptiarum, Vercellis, 1789. Ex Patrio typographeo. 
 
 " II Curato . . . ponga al collo de sposi la benda bianca di velo & guisa 
 di stola, e li congiunga in matrimonio," p. 83. The practice is spoken ot 
 by Selden, Uxor Ebraica, cap. xxvi. 
 
 3 I do not know what a jugalis is, whether different from the care-cloth or 
 the same as that already put on the new married couple. This is the only 
 instance that Ducange cites.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 195 
 
 to them : lugum enim meum suave est : et onus meum 
 leve. There is perhaps a play upon the word jugalis. 
 
 What the hallowed girdle was I do not know. There 
 may be an allusion to it in St. Isidore of Seville, who 
 speaks of the new married persons being bound by the 
 deacon 1 after the blessing with a fillet purple and white 
 in colour. The crowns amongst the Greeks, considered 
 by them so important a part of the marriage ceremonies, 
 are, according to Goar and Smith, made of olive branches 
 " stitched over with white silk and interwoven with 
 purple," 2 the two colours of the fillet described by St. 
 Isidore. 
 
 The Armenian bride wears a veil, of red colour, which 
 covers her from head to foot, says a writer at the end of 
 the last century. 3 And the red colour would seem to 
 show its descent from, or affinity with, the Roman 
 flammeum. The purple of the Christian veil mentioned 
 by St. Isidore had most likely its source in the red of the 
 pagan flammeum. At Toledo in 1554 the veil was either 
 purple or white. 
 
 In modern times the veil seems to have been wholly 
 white. It was so at Paris in 1786, at Lyons, Soissons, and 
 Lisieux. In the Rituale Romanum of Gregory XIII. 
 where the veil is mentioned for the last time in a Roman 
 Rituale, it is to be of silk or linen. This was also the 
 material of the care-cloth in English inventories. 4 
 
 In England according to Polydore Vergil the bride wore 
 a garland of wheat on her head or carried it in her hand, 
 as she returned home ; and wheat was thrown upon her 
 
 1 " Nubentes post benedictionem a Levita invicem uno vinculo copulantur " 
 (B. Isidori . . . de officiis, lib. ii.>cap. xix. Venetiis, 1558, fo. 38 b), but 
 Hittorp's ed. (Paris, 1610) reads benedictionem vitae (? vittas) uno invicem 
 vinculo. It may thus mean either that the fillet is blessed, or that the 
 minister binds the two persons together. 
 
 2 Goar, Euchologton, Paris, 1647. p. 397. Thomas Smith, Account of the 
 Greek Church, London, 1680. p. 189. 
 
 3 Giovanni de Serpos, Compendia storico . . . della nazione Armena^ 
 Venezia, 1786. t. iii. p. 166. 
 
 * See Dr. Murray's New English Dictionary, s.v. care-cloth.
 
 196 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 head also on entering the house as an omen of fruitful- 
 ness. 1 In Chaucer's Clerk of Oxenforde's Tale they dress 
 a crown on patient Grissel's head when she is to be 
 married ; but it should be noted that she is to marry a 
 marquis. 2 In Russia also Giles Fletcher tells us they 
 fling corn out of the windows on the new married pair in 
 token of plenty. 3 
 
 The Sarum, Hereford, Exeter, Westminster, and Eves- 
 ham books direct that at the end of mass the priest 
 should bless bread and wine, or some other drink, in a 
 suitable vessel, and give them to the bride and bride- 
 groom. Probably the bread was put into the liquor and 
 made a sop of. This was no longer ordered in 1549, but 
 it appears to have continued as an ancient custom. 
 Shakespeare, no doubt describing an Elizabethan marriage 
 in The Taming of the Shrew* speaks of the drink brought 
 at the end of the ceremony and of the sops in it. The 
 drink was muscadel, upon which Howard Staunton 
 comments that the custom of taking wine and sops was 
 almost universal, and " the beverage usually chosen was 
 Muscadel, or Muscadine, or a medicated drink called 
 
 1 Polydore Vergil, he. cit. 
 
 2 Line 185. Richard Morris ed. vol. ii. p. 290. 
 
 3 G. Fletcher, op. cit. fo. 102. 
 
 When the priest 
 
 Should ask, if Katherine should be his wife, 
 " Ay, by gogs-wouns," quoth he ; and swore so loud, 
 That, all amazed, the priest let fall the book; 
 And, as he stoop'd again to take it up, 
 This mad-brain'd bridegroom took him such a cuff, 
 That down fell priest and book, and book and priest; 
 " Now take them up," quoth he, " if any list." 
 Tranio. What said the wench when he rose again ? 
 Gremio. Trembled and shook ; for why he stamp'd and swore, 
 As if the vicar meant to cozen him. 
 But after many ceremonies done, 
 He calls for wine : " a health ! " quoth he ; as it 
 He had been aboard, carousing to his mates 
 After a storm : quaff d off the muscadel, 
 And threw the sops all in the sexton's face. 
 
 Taming of the Shrew, III. ii. 155.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 197 
 
 Hippocras" l This we have seen is in accordance with 
 the Sarum rubric which speaks of " Vinum vel aliud quid 
 potabile in vasculo." 
 
 Of this vessel we have an account given to us by Poly- 
 dore Vergil, who lived in England at the end of the 
 fifteenth century, and described some of our marriage 
 customs. He says that on their return home from 
 church, there is borne before the new married couple, 
 instead of a torch, 2 a vessel of gold or silver. 3 Such a 
 vessel there would seem to be still at Kidderminster, 
 though called by some a chalice or communion cup. 
 This cup was given to the town of Kidderminster in 
 Elizabethan times to be carried before the bride and 
 bridegroom. It is therefore, most likely, such a vessel 
 as Polydore Vergil says was carried in England a hundred 
 years before ; and there can be no profanity in using it 
 as a loving cup, for which indeed it was at first intended. 
 It seems to be no sort of chalice or communion cup. 
 Brand speaks of " two Masers that were appointed to 
 remayne in the Church for to drynk yn at Brideales," 
 being in an inventory of the church at Wilsdon in 1547, 
 and of " a fair Bride Cup of silver gilt, carried before 
 her," i.e. the bride, at Newbury. 4 
 
 The early printed Roman Sacerdotalia, with a host of 
 foreign books, direct the same blessing of the bread and 
 wine that is to be given to the new married couple. At 
 some churches only wine is given, as at Amiens ; and in 
 
 1 Howard Staunton, The Plays of Shakespeare, Lond. 1858. vol. i. p 276. 
 John Brand (Observations on Popular Antiquities, London, 1813. vol. ii. 
 p. 63), notes from Leland's Collectanea that " wyne and sopes were hallowed 
 and delyvered " to Philip and Mary at their marriage at Winchester ; and 
 he refers to Robert Armin's History of the Two Maids of Moreclacke, 1609, 
 for the use of muscadine. Nearly all the learning on this subject that has 
 appeared since 1813, is to be found in Brand's book. 
 
 And with hir fuyrbrond in hir hond aboute 
 Daunceth bifore the bryde and al the route. 
 
 Chaucer, The Marchaunde's Tale, 483-4. 
 
 3 Polydori Vergili de rerum inventoribus, lib. i. cap. iv. Basileas, 1570. 
 p. 24. 
 
 4 Brand, op. cit. pp. 45 and 64.
 
 198 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 some German books the wine is called Amor S. Johannis 
 in some connexion with the legend of the casting out of 
 the serpent from the cup by St. John Evangelist. (Augs- 
 burg, 1499. Salzburg, Wurzburg, and many others.) 
 
 At Paris in Cardinal Bourbon's time, according to 
 Martene, the blessing of the bread and wine took place 
 at the door of the house before the new married entered. 
 At Limoges, at the end of mass, the priest broke a hal- 
 lowed host (hostiam benedictam) and gave to each of the 
 new married couple his or her part in token of marital 
 love. This " host " was in all likelihood an obley or 
 singing bread, not consecrated in the canon of the mass ; 
 but the expression raises a question about which there 
 has been some debate. The same may be said of a rubric 
 at Triers in 1574, which directs the priest to break the 
 bread on the altar and give one part to the bridegroom 
 and the other to the bride, with wine. Does this mean 
 that the blessed bread and wine are substitutes for com- 
 munion, or are they the relics of a love-feast after com- 
 munion ? That the new married people were to receive 
 communion at the time of their marriage seems shown 
 by the fact that the earliest marriage services in the 
 Roman sacramentaries are nuptial masses. 1 In the 
 pontifical of Aries printed by Martene the marriage itself 
 takes place after the Canon of the Mass, before the Pax. 
 At Soissons in 1753 it is after the offertory. In the book 
 of 1549, ^ was therefore only a return to primitive 
 custom to order that " the new married persons (the 
 same day of their marriage) must receive the holy com- 
 munion." At the same time it would seem that in these 
 days it would be impossible to enforce the rubric. Still, 
 even if it be a counsel of perfection, it should be kept 
 before the eyes of Christians. In the Rituale Romanum 
 of Gregory XIII. printed in 1584 it seems to be taken 
 for granted that the new married communicate in the 
 
 1 In the Gelasian Sacramentary there is " Pax vobiscum. Et sic eos com- 
 municas." (H. A. Wilson, The Gelasian Sacramentary, Oxford, Clarendon 
 Press, 1894. p. 267.)
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 199 
 
 nuptial mass, directly after the priest ; and in the later 
 editions of the modern Roman mass book (not in the 
 earlier Pian) a suggestion is made of the same thing, that 
 the new married shall communicate in the nuptial mass 
 immediately after the priest ; and when the marriage is 
 to be blessed by a prelate the pontifical assumes that they 
 shall do so. 1 The Ambrosian Rituale directs that com- 
 munion shall be offered (praebetur) to them. According 
 to Goar,mass is said before the marriage among the Greeks 
 and it might be thought that the bride and bridegroom 
 would naturally be communicated in this mass 2 ; though 
 this seems inconsistent with what is said later on that 
 communion with the presanctified species is given after 
 the crowning, and before the cup of wine hallowed by the 
 priest is given to them to drink. Ordinarily in Russia, 
 Mr. W. J. Birkbeck tells me, marriages take place before 
 vespers, that is three o'clock in winter and four o'clock 
 in summer. But amongst the rich, evening weddings 
 are very common. The stricter people still marry im- 
 mediately after mass ; and the Eastern ritualists acknow- 
 ledge that it was the earlier custom to marry before mass, 
 in order that the new married might communicate. 3 
 
 The accompanying of the bridal party to church with 
 instruments of music, etc., seems to have been as great a 
 nuisance in England as in France. The Puritans com- 
 plain of the bagpipes and fiddlers who disturb the con- 
 gregation, 4 and J. B. Thiers quotes numerous Ritualia 
 
 1 J. Catalan!, Additamenta ad Pontificate Romanum, tit. iv. de benedictione 
 nuptiarum, in Pontificate Romanum, Parisiis, 1852. t. Hi. p. 471. It should 
 also be noted that the bride and bridegroom are themselves to say Amen after 
 the words said in giving them communion. This is the only instance in the 
 Roman rite that I know of at the present 'day where the communicant is 
 told to answer Amen; as he does still at Milan, and used to do at Paris and 
 elsewhere. In the Church of Scotland it is still ordered. 
 
 2 lac. Goar, Euchologion, Lut. Par. 1647. pp. 380, 392, 394, note c. 
 
 3 There is no recommendation of communion at the time of marriage in 
 the American Book of Common Prayer, either in the earlier edition, or in 
 the revised edition of 1892. 
 
 4 John Whitgift, Works, vol. iii. p. 353, Parker Soc., quoted in Philip 
 Stubbes' Anatomie of the Abuse* in England, New Shakespeare Society, 1877-91 
 p. 39-
 
 200 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 and decrees of Synods forbidding music within the 
 church at the time of marriage, even so much as to sing 
 Credo and O Salutaris Hostia at the mass. 1 The Charivari 
 used at second marriages, as a sort of insult, is quite a 
 different thing from orderly music, and it is repeatedly 
 forbidden by councils and ritual books both in the middle 
 ages and in more modern times. 
 
 Having thus glanced at some of the middle age cere- 
 monies of marriage, there are three changes in the 
 marriage service of 1549 to w ^i cn I should like to draw 
 more particular attention. First, the address at the 
 beginning of the service. Secondly, the direction to put 
 the ring on the left hand. Thirdly, the addition of the 
 words : " Those whom God hath joined, etc." 
 
 I. Some years ago when I was working at the history 
 of the relations of the breviary of Cardinal Quignon to 
 the Book of Common Prayer, I asked Dr. Ince, the Canon 
 of Christ Church at Oxford, who as Regius Professor of 
 Divinity is the keeper of the Allestree Library, to ex- 
 amine for me the copy of the Book of Common Prayer, 
 preserved in that library, which is enriched with a num- 
 ber of manuscript notes by Dr. Lloyd, Bishop of Oxford, 
 once upon a time Dr. Ince's predecessor in the Divinity 
 Chair. I cannot mention Dr. Lloyd's name without 
 expressing some of the gratitude which I feel for his great 
 services to the study of liturgy in this country. To Dr. 
 Lloyd may be traced the first beginnings of the revival 
 of these studies which marked the last sixty years of the 
 nineteenth century. When a young man Dr. Lloyd 
 served a parish in the north of London in which lived a 
 number of French clergymen, driven from their homes 
 by the French Revolution. The emigres were noticed 
 by him to assemble at stated times for the recitation of 
 the breviary. He was led to inquire into the book ; and 
 he found that its structure reminded him of the Mattins 
 
 1 J. B. Thiers, op. cit. f xv. p. 462.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 201 
 
 and Evensong of the Book of Common Prayer. 1 Later on 
 Dr. Lloyd became Regius Professor of Divinity in the 
 University of Oxford ; and to illustrate his lectures on 
 the Prayer Book breviaries were brought down from the 
 library and shown to his class. 2 Amongst his hearers 
 were several of the writers of Tracts for the Times ; and 
 Dr. Lloyd's teachings were delivered to a larger circle 
 when Tract No. 75 was published by J. H. Newman ; 
 and a permanent monument of Dr. Lloyd's influence was 
 raised when Palmer's Origines Liturgies appeared. Mr. 
 Goldwin Smith regards " the French Revolution as the 
 greatest calamity in history " : 3 and a Christian worthy 
 of the name can hardly be expected to look upon its mad 
 work with favour : yet here is a somewhat surprising 
 result out of such a disaster : the starting of a fresh study 
 of a part of Christian antiquity, which has had great 
 influence in directing the thoughts of men to a region 
 of history that the authors of the revolution would have 
 done their best to obliterate. 
 
 I have often thought that Cardinal Newman may have 
 drawn his knowledge of the connexion of the Quignon 
 breviary with the Book of Common Prayer from the 
 lectures which Dr. Lloyd delivered at Oxford. Dr. 
 Ince was unable, however, to gain further support for 
 this opinion from the manuscript notes made by Dr. 
 Lloyd ; but Dr. Ince found in the comments on the 
 marriage service that Dr. Lloyd had noticed a very close 
 relation between the address at the beginning of the 
 present English service and that in the same place in a 
 seventeenth century Paris Rituale. Dr. Ince's discovery 
 greatly interested me ; and when passing through Paris 
 
 1 I do not mean to say that Dr. Lloyd discovered this point. It was 
 known even to correspondents of the Gentleman's Magazine in 1795 (vol. 
 65. Sept. p. 727). 
 
 2 For the knowledge of this fact I am indebted to the late Dr. Liddon, 
 Canon of St. Paul's. 
 
 3 Goldwin Smith, Nineteenth Century, Sept. 1886. p. 316. Mr. Goldwin 
 Smith can hardly be said to be a person prejudiced against revolution ; he 
 gave up his chair of history at Oxford to live in America rather than dwell 
 under the shadow of the old institutions of a country like England.
 
 202 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 in May 1892 I was enabled by the courtesy of Monsieur 
 Leopold Delisle to examine all the editions of the Pari- 
 sian Ritualia now in the national library at Paris. In 
 only one edition did I find an address which corre- 
 sponded with that in the Prayer Book, viz. in that printed 
 by order of Archbishop de Gondy in the middle of the 
 seventeenth century. None of the others showed an 
 address like this. Now the wording of the address of the 
 Paris book follows that of the English book of 1549 vei 7 
 closely. Both begin by stating that matrimony was 
 ordained of God in paradise and adorned by the first 
 miracle at Cana, and they then both state the three ends 
 of marriage : First, the procreation of children ; secondly, 
 the avoidance of sin ; and thirdly, the mutual help and 
 comfort that one ought to give the other. The resem- 
 blance between these two addresses is so great that one 
 is forced to entertain one of two opinions ; either that 
 the French book has copied from the English book ; or 
 that both have drawn from a common source. It seems 
 unlikely that the Archbishop of Paris would copy the 
 English service : and the opinion that both draw from 
 a common source is strengthened by the fact that similar 
 addresses, going over the same ground, though the word- 
 ing may be more diffuse, are to be found in many diocesan 
 books. For example in the Pastorale of St. Omer in 
 1606, the address is very like the English, but somewhat 
 longer. The Rouen Sacerdotale of 1640 contains the 
 mention of the institution of marriage at the beginning 
 of the world, and of the three ends of matrimony. So, 
 too, are there addresses in the German Agenda like those 
 in the English and Parisian books : amongst which we 
 may note that of Mentz, the primatial see of Germany, 
 in 1551, which speaks of the institution of marriage in 
 paradise and the miracle of Cana, together with the 
 three ends of marriage. So also the Wurzburg Agenda 
 of 1564, the Salzburg Agenda of 1557, and Manuale of 
 1582, the Strassburg Agenda of 1590, the Mechlin Pas- 
 torale of 1588, the Passau Pastorale in 1608, the Sacerdo-
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 203 
 
 tale of Brixen in 1710. The Rituale of Augsburg as late 
 as 1764 contains an address like that of the English book, 
 but it leaves out the mention of the miracle at Cana. 
 The Manuale printed by the Jesuits for use in Japan in 
 1605, gives an address with the mention of the institution 
 of marriage in Paradise, the miracle at Cana, and the 
 three ends. 
 
 A late English Roman Catholic book for the adminis- 
 tration of the Sacraments gives in its appendix an address 
 before marriage which begins by speaking of the institu- 
 tion of matrimony in paradise, and its being honoured by 
 the first miracle at Cana, and it then sets forth the three 
 ends of matrimony, as the procreation of children, a 
 remedy against concupiscence, and the benefit of con- 
 jugal society. 1 
 
 It is clear then that the materials out of which the 
 English and Parisian addresses were made were known to 
 many. Cranmer does not seem to have taken that of the 
 book of 1549 from any English service book 2 ; probably 
 
 1 Ordo Adminhtrandi Sacramenta et alia qutedam officla Ecclesiastica rife 
 peragendi in Missione Anglicand. Appendix, chapter III. p. 19. No place 
 or printer, but the date 1759 appears on title of appendix. 
 
 2 Cranmer had two manuscripts of John de Burgo's Papilla Oculi in his 
 library (see Mr. Burbidge's article in A Dictionary of Book Collectors) and in 
 the part which treats of matrimony (Partis viii. cap. i. sect. C) may be 
 found two of the ends of matrimony procreatio prolis and remedium sanctitatis 
 contra peccatum with mention of its institution in Paradise. The third is not 
 so clearly expressed, though the grace conferred is shortly spoken of in 
 sect. D. 
 
 There is something also in Chaucer's Marchaundes Tale, verses 198-211, 
 like the three ends of marriage : 
 
 Ther spekith many man of mariage, 
 That wot no more of it than wot my page 
 For whiche causes man schulde take a wyf. 
 If he ne may not chast be by his lif, 
 Take him a wif with gret devocioun, 
 Bycause of lawful procreacioun 
 Of children, to thonour of God above, 
 And not oonly for paramour and for love ; 
 And for thay schulde leccherye eschiewe, 
 And yeld oure dettes whan that it is due ; 
 Or for that ilk man schulde helpen other 
 In meschief as a suster schal to the brother, 
 And lyve in chastite full hevenly. 
 
 Ed. Morris, vol. ii. p. 324.
 
 204 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 therefore it has some German origin. Mr. Procter 1 has, 
 indeed, pointed out that the three ends of marriage are 
 to be found in John a Lasco : and I find more than these ; 
 viz. the mention of the institution of matrimony and of 
 the miracle at Cana in the long address of twelve octavo 
 pages which precedes the setting forth of the three ends 
 of marriage. 2 But the three ends of marriage (proles, 
 fides 'puiicitice, sacr amentum solationis) are by no means 
 particular to John a Lasco. They may be found fully 
 set out in a number of diocesan ritualia which do not give 
 any address to the bride and bridegroom, but contain 
 preliminary rubrics which deal with the nature of matri- 
 mony, and the like. 3 Also they may be found in several 
 mediaeval writers, schoolmen like St. Thomas 4 and Peter 
 Lombard, 5 and may be traced up to St. Isidore of Seville 6 
 and even to St. Augustine himself. 7 
 
 1 Francis Procter, A History of the Book of Common Prayer, Loncl. 1892, 
 Occasional Offices, p. 438 note. 
 
 2 Jo. a Lasco, Opera, Ed. Kuyper, Amstelodami, 1866. vol. ii. pp. 251- 
 263. I find nothing like it in Osiander and Brenz' book (A. L. Richter, 
 Die e>-vangelischen Kirchenordnungen, Leipzig, 1871, Bd. i. S. 209). 
 
 3 See especially the Catechism of the Council of Trent, published first, I 
 believe, in 1566. De matrimonii Sacramento, cap. VIII. 10-14. It 
 would no doubt have great influence on the teaching of the post-Tridentine 
 Ritualia. In the Rituale Romanum of Gregory XIII. (p. 505) we read : 
 " Cumque Matrimonium a Deo sit institutum, turn praecipue ad sobolem 
 procreandam, quae ad Dei cultum educetur ; turn etiam in remedium incon- 
 tinentia?, et ad vitandum fornicationem, sancte illo post modum uti, religiose 
 colere, honestum ducere, honorifice pertractare, se ipsos mutuo diligere, et 
 fidem sibi dederint inviolatam usque ad mortem perpetuo servare debebunt." 
 In the Brixen Sacerdotale the three ends are given as : " susceptio prolis, 
 remedium concupiscentiae, mutua conjugum obsequia." The curate is told 
 to give an address on these three heads in the Ordo celebrandi matrimonium of 
 St. Charles Borromeo. (Acta Ecclesite Mediolanensis, Mediol. 1599, Pars iiii. 
 P- 554-) 
 
 * St. Thomas, Terti<e partis summee theologies Supplementum, Quasstio 
 XLI. art. i. and XLII. art. i. (Opera, Paris, 1873, t. vi.) 
 
 5 Petri Lombardi .... Sententiarum, lib. iv. Distinct, xxxi. De tribus 
 bonis conjugii. Venetiis, 1572. fo. 401 b. 
 
 6 Beati Isidori Hispalensis, De officih Ecclesiasticis, lib. ii. cap. 19. 
 Venetiis, 1 559. p. 39. This is a reprint of Cochleus' edition, and it mentions 
 Cranmer in the preface. "Nuptialia autem bona tria sunt, proles, fides, 
 sacramentum." 
 
 7 St. Augustine, De genesi ad litteram, lib. ix. cap. vii. Matrimonii triplex 
 bonum . . . fides, proles, sacramentum. (Opera, Parisiis, 1680. t. iii. col. 247.)
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 205 
 
 According to Covel the Greeks also teach the three 
 ends of marriage to be : i. Procreation of children ; ii. 
 to avoid incontinency ; iii. mutual comfort and society. 1 
 
 Cranmer, in all likelihood then, drew up his address at 
 the beginning of the marriage service from materials 
 given him, if not by John a Lasco, perhaps by some other 
 German refugee, inspired by the ancient Agenda of his 
 country. These Agenda again drew their ideas from the 
 writers on the Canon law and the schoolmen, ideas which 
 may be traced far back into Christian antiquity. Cran- 
 mer inserted these foreign materials into the middle of 
 the old Sarum address, retaining its beginning and its 
 ending, 2 and making it substantially the form which we 
 now have. He also added an address to the bride and 
 bridegroom beginning, / require and charge you, for al- 
 though in the Sarum and Hereford books the priest is to 
 ask the man and woman if they know of any impediment, 
 yet no formula is given. In the York book a formula 
 is given, and like that in the book of 1549, the day of doom 
 is mentioned to heighten the solemnity of the appeal. 
 
 1 John Covel, Some account of the present Greek Church, Cambridge, 1722, 
 
 p. 221. 
 
 2 There is a little more than the old Sarum address left in the early edition 
 of the American Book of Common Prayer. In that of 1892 the remem- 
 brance of the institution of marriage in the time of man's innocency and ot 
 the miracle at Cana has been put back ; but it may be supposed that modern 
 prudery would have been shocked by the mention of the ends of marriage. 
 It is hard to be patient with those who are horrified by a little plain speaking 
 in church, but who suffer their families to read modern novels which an 
 elder generation would have thrown out of the window, or better, into the fire. 
 With a diminishing birthrate, and the evident desire of many to avoid the 
 responsibilities of marriage in the procreation of children, and the bringing up 
 of children virtuously to lead a godly and a Christian life, it is really important 
 that duties of this kind should be set plainly before those about to be married. 
 
 Dr. John Henry Blunt (Annotated Book of Common Prayer, Loud. 1884, 
 p. 45 1 note) complains of " unnecessarily coarse words " which " were erased 
 by Cosin in his revised Prayer Book." There is nothing in the edition of 
 Cosin's Prayer Book published by the Surtees Society (Correspondence of John 
 Cosin, 1872, part ii. p. 73) that justifies Dr. Blunt's statement that Cosin 
 erased the words " like brute beasts which have no understanding." St. 
 Charles Borromeo, whose piety no one can impeach, inserts the words 
 from Ps. xxxii. [31 Vulgate] sicut equus et mulus quibus non est intellectut 
 in his Instructions before Marriage. (Acta Ecclesite Mediolanensis, Mediol. 
 1599. parsiiii. p. 550.)
 
 206 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 II. Happening one day to show to Dr. Aidan Gasquet 
 at the British Museum the address in the Paris Rituale, 
 he suggested to me that there was another point in the 
 marriage service that should be worked out : the hand 
 on which the ring was placed, whether right or left. I 
 was then too busy with other pursuits to follow out the 
 learned Benedictine's suggestion ; but later on the 
 opportunity occurred of considering the question a little 
 more fully. 
 
 Now in England before 1549 it would seem that the 
 ring in marriage was put upon the right hand of the bride. 
 Polydore Vergil, living in England towards the end of 
 the fifteenth century, tells us that the bridegroom put 
 the ring on the ring finger of the right hand of the bride. 1 
 In the Sarum manual and in the Evesham book the 
 bridegroom leaves the ring on the fourth finger (that is, 
 counting the thumb as the first finger) of the right hand. 
 
 But in the book of 1549 the bridegroom is directed to 
 put the ring on the fourth finger of the woman's left 
 
 1 Polydori Vergilii op, cit. lib. V. cap. v. p. 409. Apud Anglos . . . vir 
 annulum insignem . . . sponsae digito qui minimo dextras manus proximus 
 est indit. 
 
 From the English monumental effigies I have not been able to gather 
 decided evidence in favour of the right or left hand. Some married women 
 have rings on all the fingers of both hands, or wear rings on the ring finger 
 of both hands. The following are the cases most to the point that I have 
 noticed. Alice, Duchess of Suffolk, who died in 1475, wears rings on the 
 middle or third finger of the right hand. (T. and G. Hollis, Monumental 
 Effigies, Westminster, 1840-2. part vi. No. 7.) Margaret, wife of Sir John 
 Talbot, about 1550, wears rings on both forefingers, the ring finger of the 
 right hand and the little finger of the left. (Ibid, part vi. No. 10.) Lady 
 Crosby, who died at the end of the fifteenth century, wears rings on the 
 little and forefingers of the right hand. (Stothard, Monumental Effigies, Lond. 
 1817, p. 99.) The most marked instance is that of the Countess of Essex 
 in Little Easton Church. The ring is on the ring finger of the right hand. 
 (J. G. and L. A. B. Waller, A Series of Monumental Brasses, Lond. 1864.) 
 If both hands could be seen in the effigy of Andrew Effyngar and his wife 
 in All Hallows, Barking, the evidence would be in favour of the left hand ; 
 for the woman has a ring on the ring finger of the left, the man on ring 
 finger of the right, hand. 
 
 In the portrait of Queen Mary Tudor in the Library of the Society of 
 Antiquaries, two rings adorned with gems are on the ring finger of the left 
 hand, none on the right. It may be remembered that this queen was married 
 after 1549.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 207 
 
 hand ; and the same direction has been retained in the 
 various revisions of the prayer book ever since. 
 
 A great number of the older books, like St. Isidore of 
 Seville, 1 do not tell us upon which hand the ring is to be 
 placed ; though the ring is usually ordered to be left on 
 the fourth ringer, which is called medius or medicus. 2 
 When the hand is indicated in the old books it is nearly 
 always the right. 
 
 But there are a few instances in which a direction is 
 given to place the ring on the left hand. At Lyre, a 
 monastery in the Norman diocese of Evreux, the ring was 
 in the end put on the left hand : and the directions are 
 so curious that they are worth giving at length from 
 Martene : 
 
 " Here the bridegroom takes the ring, and together 
 with the priest puts the ring upon the first three fingers 
 of the right hand of the bride, saying at the first finger, 
 in the name of the Father ; at the second, and of the Son ; 
 at the third, and of the Holy Ghost. And then let him set 
 the said ring upon one of the fingers of the left hand, 
 and leave it there, so that from henceforth the bride may 
 wear it on the left hand for a difference between her 
 estate and the episcopal order, by whom the ring is pub- 
 licly worn on the right hand as a symbol of full and entire 
 chastity." Now John Stephen Durant, who died in 
 1589, according to Zaccaria, says that the bishop should 
 wear his ring on the ring finger of the left hand, and 
 that the same finger is adorned in marriage with a ring ; 
 though a few sentences after he seems to say that the 
 bishop should always wear his ring on the fore finger of 
 
 1 Loc. cit. 
 
 2 There can be no doubt that medius and medicus are often the same : we 
 have the authority of Ducange for the opinion. But it was not always so 
 understood in the middle ages. The Exeter Pontifical (ed. Ralph Barnes, 
 Exeter, 1847. p. 259), speaking of the finger on which the ring is to be left, 
 says : " non in medio sicut in pluribus libris scriptum est ; sed in quarto 
 digito." And in some places, as at Westminster, I doubt if they counted 
 the thumb as the first finger. See also the Autun book, p. 112, where 
 medius seems to be the longest finger.
 
 2o8 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 the right hand. 1 The Roman Pontifical from 1520 to 
 the present day directs that the ring shall be put on the 
 bishop's right ring finger at his consecration. 2 
 
 The words of William Durand, Bishop of Mende, who 
 died in 1296, are usually understood to mean that the 
 bishop wears his ring on the index finger. 3 Gavantus 
 reconciles the statements of Durand and the rubric of the 
 Pontifical by saying that out of mass the bishop wears the 
 ring on the index finger, but when saying mass he wears 
 it on the ring finger, of the right hand. 4 
 
 The King of England has the ring at his coronation 
 put upon .the fourth or ring finger of his right hand. 5 It 
 is the same with the King of France. 8 
 
 St. Charles Borromeo in the fourth provincial council 
 of Milan is particular to say that the ring must be put on 
 the left hand of the bride, not the right 7 ; and this lan- 
 guage would make one think that an alteration was being 
 made, though the Rev. Dr. Achille Ratti of the Ambro- 
 sian Library at Milan tells me that in the Ambrosian 
 books before the time of St. Charles he has been unable 
 to discover any particular direction as to the hand on 
 which the ring in marriage is to be put. The custom 
 ordered by St. Charles has I find continued in the Am- 
 brosian books to this day. 
 
 1 J. S. Durand, De ritibus ecclesiee catholic*?, lib. ii. cap. ix. 37, Lugd. 
 1606. p. 268. Cf. Macri, Hierolexicon, sub <voce annulus, Venetiis 1712. 
 p. 36. 
 
 2 Pontificate secundum ritum SS. Ecclesie romane, Venetiis, L. A. de giunta, 
 1520. The same finger is ordered in the benediction of nuns and 
 abbesses. 
 
 3 " Porro secundum quod capiti, scilicet Christo convenit anulus digiti, 
 donum significat sancti Spiritus. Digitus enim articularis atque distinctus 
 Spiritum sanctum insinuat." (Gul. Durandi, Rationale, lib. III. cap. xiv. 
 Venetiis, Perchacinum, 1568.) 
 
 4 Bartholomaei Gavanti, Thesaurus Sacrorum Rituum, pars II. tit. I. 
 August. Vindelic. 1763, ed. Merati, t. i. p. 152. 
 
 5 Archaeological Journal, 1897. vol. liv. p. 8 ; and The Coronation Order 
 of King James I. London, F. E. Robinson, 1902. p. 94. 
 
 8 Le sacre et couronnement de Louys XIV. Reims, 1654, sheet E. leaf 8. 
 7 Acta Ecclesia- Mediolanensis, Mediolani, P. Pontius, 1582. pars I. fo, 
 84 b.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 209 
 
 At Salamanca in 1532 the ring was put on the left hand 
 of the bride, but on the right of the bridegroom. At 
 Aquileia in 1575 the hand of the bride is not indicated, 
 but the bridegroom's ring is put upon the ring ringer of 
 the left hand. At Ferrara in 1608 the ring was to be put 
 on the left hand of the bride. 
 
 To return to the books which order the ring to be put 
 upon the right hand. The Greeks, according to Goar, 
 put the rings upon the right hand both of the bride and 
 the bridegroom. 1 The Copts put a golden ring upon 
 the right hand of the bride, and the prayers which accom- 
 pany the putting on of the rings amongst the Jacobites 
 would almost justify the belief that it is the right hand 
 with them. 2 
 
 In the West, the ring is directed to be put on the right 
 hand in the ancient Ordines printed by Martene from 
 Rennes, Limoges, Rhemes, and Liege ; in the early 
 printed Agenda of Colone in 1521, Noyon in 1546, in the 
 Manuale of Cambray in 1562, in the post-Tridentine 
 books of Ghent in 1576, Mechlin in 1589, Bologna in 
 1593, Perugia in 1597, St. Omer in 1 606, Rouen in 1640, 
 Toledo in 1673, Ypres in 1693, Poland in the seventeenth 
 and eighteenth centuries, and Soissons so late as 1753. 
 Thiers says it was the right hand at Bourdeaux in I596. 3 
 It was also the right hand with the Jesuits in Paraguay 
 in 1721. Even at the present day it is the right hand at 
 Gran, the primatial see of Hungary, and at Colocza, 
 another archiepiscopal Hungarian church. Also in the 
 early printed Roman Sacerdotalia from 1535 to 1579, and 
 in the Rituale Romanum of Cardinal Severina in 1584 
 the ring is directed to be put on the right hand. This 
 is also the direction in a book claiming to be Roman, 
 Ex decreto sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini, printed at 
 Paris in 1594.* 
 
 1 Goar, op. cit. p. 382. G. V. Shann, op. at. p. 56. 
 
 2 Denzinger, op. cit. t. ii. pp. 365 and 389. 
 
 3 J. B. Thiers, op. cit. viii. p. 455. 
 
 * The early Italian paintings do not give a unanimous answer to the 
 question whether the ring were put upon the right hand of the bride, or if 
 
 P
 
 210 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 But before the seventeenth century had well begun 
 the Roman books had made a change, and the hand on 
 which the ring is to be put was altered to the left. I 
 find this first in a Roman book for the administration of 
 the sacraments printed in I6OO. 1 The same appears in 
 the Rituale of Paul V. published in 1614, which is the 
 authorized book of the Roman Church at this moment. 
 It might be looked for that the publication of this book 
 would have a great influence on the diocesan ritualia pub- 
 lished after 1614. And this is the case. With few ex- 
 ceptions the more modern French and German books 
 direct the ring to be put upon the left hand. The 
 English Roman Catholic books, which in James II. 's time 
 resisted the change, 2 have abandoned the Sarum and 
 adopted the Roman custom in this particular, at least 
 since 1759. 
 
 We may remember that Cranmer did not think it 
 beneath the dignity of the Primate of the Church of 
 England to invite the opinion of a foreigner upon the new 
 published book of Common Prayer ; and that Bucer was 
 graciously pleased to pass a favourable judgement, on the 
 
 during the marriage she stood on the left of the priest. The bride extends 
 her right hand to receive the ring and stands on the left of the priest, who 
 faces the spectator in the following pictures of the marriage of the Virgin : 
 Agnolo Gaddi (who died 1387) in the Duomo at Prato, Giotto in the 
 Arena Chapel at Padua, Bernardino Luini at Saronno, Lorenzo di Viterbo, 
 Pietro Perugino in the church near Spello. In the marriage of St. Francis 
 with poverty, the same. 
 
 The opposite is the case in the marriage of the Virgin by Ghirlandajo in 
 S. Maria Novella, Florence. Our Lady extends her left hand and stands on 
 the right hand of the priest. In the marriage of St. Cecilia by Francia at 
 Bologna, the same. In the Sposalizio by Raphael in the Brera at Milan, 
 Blessed Mary stands on the right of the priest, and extends the right hand. 
 There are thus seven in favour of the right hand in Italy : two in favour of 
 the left. 
 
 I have taken these facts from the drawings of the Arundel Society and 
 from photographs which Mr. Dewick has been kind enough to show me. 
 
 1 Ordo baptizandi et alia Sacramenta administrandi ex Romano? Ecclesia? 
 ritu, Venetiis apud Juntas, 1 600. I am indebted for this reference to the 
 Rev. E. S. Dewick. Also I find the same direction in one of my own books 
 with the same title, published at Venice by Sessas, 1606. fo. 93. 
 
 a Ordo baptizandi aliaque Sacramenta administrandi . . . pro Anglia 
 Hibcrnia et Scotia, Londini, Hen. Hills, 1686. p. 32.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 211 
 
 whole, upon the new marriage service. His opinion is 
 so favourable that it raises the suspicion that perhaps he 
 may have had some share in the work. Bucer says that 
 from the ring finger of the left hand there is a nerve which 
 passes to the heart. 1 Now the question arises : Did 
 Bucer or John a Lasco introduce from Germany the new 
 opinion that an anatomical peculiarity lay in the ring 
 finger of the left hand, not of the right ? and did Cran- 
 mer, not to be behind the times, change the right hand 
 of the old English manual into the left hand, favouring 
 the desire for reckless and wanton shiftings and changes 
 which nowadays we call the spirit of progress ? It would 
 have been well for Cranmer's reputation if he had made 
 experiments in matters of no greater importance than the 
 hand on which the marriage ring is to be worn. 
 
 Putting Bucer and the foreigners aside, there may 
 have been these reasons for the change of hand. Aulus 
 Gellius 2 and Alexander ab Alexandra 3 state that the 
 ancients wore the marriage ring upon the left hand. 
 Now both of these authors are to be found in Cranmer's 
 library, for a catalogue of which, so far as known, we are 
 indebted to the Rev. Edward Burbidge, Prebendary of 
 Wells. 4 So that if Cranmer had become acquainted 
 with these opinions he might have thought it well to 
 return to the practice of putting the ring on the left 
 hand, and thus to follow the old Greek and Roman 
 customs, as the general humanist tendency of his time 
 would bid him. And the same influence from classical 
 
 1 Martini Buceri Censura super libra sacrorum, etc., Cap. XX. in Scripta 
 Anglicana fere omnia, Basileae, 1577. fo. p. 489. " Ita annuli insertionem in 
 proximum minimo digitum manus sinistrae : in quo digito aiunt nervum 
 quendam prodeuntem de corde finiri." 
 
 2 Aulus Gellius, Noctes Attic. Lib. X. cap. x. Lond. 1824, t. i. p. 561. 
 " Veteres Grascos annulum habuisse in digito accepimus sinistrae manus, qui 
 minimo est proximus. Romanes quoque homines aiunt sic plerumque 
 annulis usitatos." 
 
 3 Alexander ab Alexandro, Genialium Dierum, lib. ii. cap. xix. Paris, 
 1532. fo. 44 b. " Quern quidem prior aetas in sinistra ferebat." 
 
 4 In A Dictionary of Book Collectors. I owe a separate copy of the cata- 
 logue to the courtesy of Mr. Burbidge.
 
 212 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 antiquity may have been at work with St. Charles Borro- 
 meo and the authorities of the Roman See in determining 
 that the left hand rather than the right should have the 
 ring put on it. The latter would also probably be not 
 unwilling to establish some difference between the ring 
 of matrimony and that of bishops and nuns. 
 
 How firmly the opinion was held that there was some 
 anatomical peculiarity in the fourth finger, whether it 
 were of the right or left hand, may be gathered from the 
 writers on Canon Law and from liturgical books. 1 In 
 these it is nearly always given as a reason for setting the 
 ring on the fourth finger that thence a vein proceeds to 
 the heart. Other writers say that it is a nerve or an 
 artery. Sir Thomas Browne, in his Vulgar Errors, has 
 seriously to refute the opinion that there is any anato- 
 mical peculiarity in the ring finger. 2 Vicary, who was 
 probably known to Cranmer, for he was Sergeant Surgeon 
 to four English Sovereigns in succession, published his 
 book on anatomy in 1548, and even at that day he speaks 
 of no anatomical peculiarity of the fourth finger, or of its 
 special connexion with the heart. 3 So that if Cranmer 
 had been content to take the advice which lay near to 
 him, that of his own countryman Vicary, he would have 
 been saved the reproach that can now be brought against 
 him of being ready to listen to vain imaginings on a level 
 with those of a Low-German astrologer like Lemnius, 4 
 
 1 I notice that the last edition of the Ambrosian Rituale (1885) omits the 
 words about the ring finger, " nam et in eo digito vena qusedam esse dicitur 
 quae ad cor usque pervenit," which Dr. Achille Ratti tells me are in all the 
 earlier editions. The Armenians in 1807 g' ve this reason for the fourth 
 finger (Denzinger, op. cit. t. ii. p. 451). 
 
 2 Sir Thomas Browne, Pseudodoxia Epidemica, book 4, chap. iv. London, 
 sec. ed. 1650. p. 157. 
 
 3 Thomas Vicary, The Anatomie of the Bodie of Man, chap. vii. Early 
 English Text Society, 1888. p. 53. 
 
 4 Levini Lemnii Medici Zirizaei Occulta nature miracula, lib. ii. cap. xi. 
 Antverp. Gul. Simonem, 1559, fo. 123 b. The title to the chapter is : 
 Digiti sinistrae manus qui infimo proximus est praestantia. He tells us how 
 the doctors always use the ring finger of the left hand to stir up their drugs : 
 and makes other statements, equally true, no doubt, of the great cures that 
 he has wrought by rubbing this particular finger.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 213 
 
 and to sacrifice to foreigners the existence of an old Eng- 
 lish custom, of no great importance, perhaps, but still 
 English, one, indeed, the prevalence of which amongst 
 the Greeks with other Orientals as well as the Latins, 
 would almost seem to have a right to be called Christian. 
 
 It is wonderful that the Puritans made no onset against 
 this change of the ring from the right to the left hand ; 
 they had a text ready from the Old Testament, always 
 more to their taste than the New, from the prophet 
 Jeremiah, quite as much to the point as many of their 
 quotations in favour of " scriptural " customs. " Though 
 Coniah the son of Jehoiakim King of Judah were the 
 signet upon my right hand yet would I pluck thee 
 thence/' (xxii. 24). Here it is clearly the " scriptural " 
 custom to wear the ring on the right hand. The Puri- 
 tans, however, were too bent on making frivolous objec- 
 tions to the Book of Common Prayer to be able to detect 
 any of the real flaws in it. 
 
 In many of the mediaeval books the ring is put first on 
 the thumb of the bride, with the words in nomine patris ; 
 then on the second or forefinger with the words Et filii ; 
 then on the third or middle finger with the words Et 
 spiritus sancti : last of all on the fourth or ring finger 
 with Amen. This was the rule at Sarum, York, Here- 
 ford, and the Welsh Manual No. X. in Dr. Henderson's 
 collection. But at Evesham and in No. VII. and IX. of 
 Dr. Henderson's collection the ring is not put on the 
 middle or third finger, which is passed over. At West- 
 minster it would seem that the marriage ring was left on 
 the middle or third finger : the words run : " ad tercium 
 et spiritus sancti amen." At Liege, Mechlin, Tournay, 
 and Colone (1626) it was to be on digito annulari . . . aut 
 alii secundum morem loci. 
 
 It would be too tedious to review in like manner the 
 other mediaeval formulae ; but there are one or two 
 which seem worthy of being noted. At Amiens the 
 bridegroom puts the ring on the thumb and little finger 
 together at In nomine patris : on the fore and middle
 
 214 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 finger at et filii ; and on the ring finger at et spiritus 
 sancti. In one of the forms used at Limoges the ring 
 was put on the fore finger at in nomine patris, and so on. 
 
 In 1549? these changings of the ring from one finger to 
 the other were omitted, and the bridegroom was directed 
 to put the ring at once " upon the fourth finger of the 
 woman's left hand." Now this alteration made the 
 English ceremony like that practised at Rome ; for in the 
 Roman Sacerdotale of 1537 the bridegroom puts the ring 
 at once on the fourth finger of the bride saying in nomine, 
 etc., and the rubric is continued in the books printed 
 down to the Rituale of Paul V. in which no change is 
 made in this matter. 
 
 The same direction as at Rome is given in all the 
 modern Ambrosian Ritualia that I have seen. Most of 
 the French diocesan books printed after the publication 
 of the Rituale of Paul V. also conform to its directions, 
 even at Rouen as early as 1640. 
 
 The English Roman Catholics have retained the Sarum 
 customs in this respect down to the present time. In 
 an edition of the Roman Rituale, adapted for England, 
 printed in 1892, 1 see that the Sarum practice is retained 
 in this respect, though the ring is put on the left hand, 
 not the right. 
 
 III. A third change may be found in the marriage 
 service of 1549. The priest, on joining the right hands 
 of the bride and bridegroom, says : Those whom God 
 hath joined together let no man put asunder. It would 
 seem that this important addition of words taken from 
 the Gospel was suggested by the book of Herman, Arch- 
 bishop of Colone. Of this an English translation 
 appeared as early as 1547, but I will quote from that 
 which was published in I548, 1 said to be the better. 
 
 " Than if perchaunce they haue ringes, lette them put 
 
 1 A simple and religious Consultation of Us, Herman by the grace of God 
 Archbishop of Colone, etc., London, John Daye and William Seres, 1548. 
 fl Of blessynge of manages, fo. CCXXVI. b.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 2 1 5 
 
 them one vpon an others finger, and so lette the ministr 
 (sic) ioine their ryght handes to gether and saye that, 
 that God hath ioyned, lette no man disseuer. And lette 
 the pastour saye more ouer wyth a lowde voice, that maye 
 be hearde of all men. 
 
 ** For asmuche as than thys John N. desireth thys 
 Anne to be hys wyfe in the Lorde, and this Anne desireth 
 thys John to be hyr husband in the Lorde, and one hath 
 made the other apromisse of holie, and Christian matri- 
 monie, and haue nowe boeth professed the same openly, 
 and have confirmed it with giuinge of ringes ech to other, 
 and ioyning of handes, I the minister of Christ and the 
 congregacion pronounce that they be ioyned to gether 
 wyth lawfull and Christian matrimony, and I confirme 
 this theyr manage in the name of the father, the sonne, 
 and the holie Goste. Amen." 
 
 The versicle from the Gospel, Those whom God hath 
 joined, etc., is not to be found in the early Colone Agenda 
 of 1521. And in none of the early English books edited 
 by Dr. Henderson do I find any trace of these words. 
 Some few foreign books have them. Amongst the 
 Armenians, in the East, we find that, after the marriage 
 has been blessed, and the bride and bridegroom are 
 returned to the house of the bride, the priest joins their 
 right hands together and says a prayer which ends with 
 these words of the gospel. 1 At Gnesen in Poland in 1549 
 the priest said immediately after assent had been 
 given : Q[u]os deus coniunxit ; homo non separet. Et 
 ego vos coniungo, etc. They still remain in Ritualia 
 for the whole kingdom of Poland, which were printed 
 between 1639 and 1730. At Salamanca in 1532, the 
 priest was told that he might say if he liked after the 
 consent was expressed, though he is warned that the 
 words are not of the substance of the rite : Ego ex parte 
 dei omnipotentis et sancte matris ecclesie vos sponso et 
 hoc sacramentum inter vos firmo in nomine patris et filii 
 
 1 Denzinger, op. cit. t. ii. p. 458.
 
 2i 6 ECCLESIOLOCICAL ESSAYS 
 
 et spiritus sancti. amen. Quos deus coniungit homo 
 non separet. Dios os haga bien casados. 
 
 At Limoges, in the collection of Martene, the words 
 Quod Deus conjunxit, etc., are pronounced as soon as the 
 ring has been given : at Milan, as soon as the bride and 
 bridegroom have given their consent ; and the words may- 
 be found in the Ambrosian books from the time of St. 
 Charles to the present day : at Lyons, Rouen, Soissons, 
 Coutances, Lisieux, Seez, Avranches, and Belley, after 
 the priest had said Ego vos in matrimonium conjungo. 
 The declaration would seem to be an addition made to 
 these French books during the reforms of the eighteenth 
 century. The Rouen book of 1640, for example, does not 
 contain it, whilst that of 1 740 does. At Prague in 1 848, 
 the words precede Ego conjungo vos. 
 
 I do not find the words in any of the early printed 
 Roman books ; but in the Rituale of Gregory XIII., 
 edited by Cardinal Severina in 1584, they appear in the 
 same place as at Milan. As soon as the man and woman 
 have given their consent, the priest joins their right hands 
 and says the words Quod Deus coniunxit, homo non separet. 1 
 
 It may perhaps be noticed that in the marriage of a 
 King of the English, yEthelwulf (the father of Alfred the 
 Great), with Judith, daughter of Charles the Bald, in the 
 year 856, these words were pronounced at the giving of 
 the ring : " Accipe annulum fidei et dilectionis signum 
 atque conjugalis conjunctionis vinculum, ut non separet 
 homo quos conjungit Deus, qui vivit, etc. 2 
 
 1 These words were retained in the American Prayer Book of the last 
 century and in the late edition of 1892, for a copy of the standard edition of 
 which I am indebted to the courtesy of the General Convention through 
 Dr. Huntingdon. Though the marriage office has been greatly curtailed, 
 yet these important words remain. In shortness the American office almost 
 rivals some of the mediaeval rites, but it is not so short as that of the Con- 
 stanz Agenda of 1570, which begins with In principle erat <verbum and a 
 short address in German, followed by the mutual contracts and the collect 
 Deus qui potestate, which ends the service. 
 
 2 Etienne Baluzc, Capitularia Regum Francorum, Parisiis, 1780. t. ii. 
 col. 309.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 217 
 
 If we look over the changes made in the marriage service 
 of 1549 an d tr X to balance our loss and our gain, what do 
 we find ? 
 
 In the first place we have lost the old English rule of 
 blessing the ring and of placing it on the right hand, 
 together with a custom, not very intelligible, of putting 
 the ring on several of the fingers before leaving it finally 
 on the fourth. If the ring be only part of the gifts given 
 by the man to the woman, in purchase of her as his wife, 
 there does not seem any good reason why the ring should 
 be blessed, or any of the other arrhcz. In the second of 
 these changes, we have been followed by the authorities 
 of the Roman Court and of all who bow to Rome ; in the 
 third we have merely adopted the old Roman practice 
 which has since, it would seem, prevailed over the old 
 diocesan custom everywhere, except among the English 
 Roman Catholics. 
 
 Secondly ; although the mediaeval custom of giving 
 pain beni and drink to the new married couple was dis- 
 continued, yet a much more serious duty was insisted 
 upon, that of receiving the Holy Communion on the day 
 of marriage. 
 
 Thirdly ; the address at the beginning of the service 
 has had inserted into it passages drawn from the school- 
 men, and even from a remoter antiquity, sources which 
 give greater authority to the address. 
 
 Fourthly ; the joining of the right hands, though still 
 accompanying the words of consent, has been repeated;, 
 and made into a striking ceremony, accompanied by a 
 declaration that those whom God hath joined no man 
 may put asunder. The importance of this addition, 
 especially in these days when Christian law and parlia- 
 ment law are in direct antagonism, cannot be overrated. 
 A declaration like this goes far to reconcile one to the 
 loss of the more unimportant mediaeval customs : and 
 we may almost come to the conclusion that on the whole 
 we have gained by the revision of the service. For this 
 we cannot be too thankful, even if we be a good deal
 
 2i 8 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 surprised ; remembering that Cranmer's love of foreign 
 novelties seems to have been as great as that of a modern 
 curate just returned home from an ecclesiological tour 
 in France and Belgium.
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 In this Appendix are printed in part two of the addresses spoken of 
 in the foregoing paper, see above, p. 202. The German address is put 
 first, as it was printed only two years after the first book of Common 
 Prayer ; and it seems likely that from some similar document Cranmer 
 took his idea of the exhortation. One of the proposals laid before the 
 Council of Trent was that the administration of every sacrament should 
 be preceded by an address setting forth its nature and benefits. The 
 French address is that copied by Dr. Lloyd, Bishop of Oxford, in his notes 
 on the prayer book in the Allestree collection. Dr. Ince has had the 
 kindness to show me the original book in the Allestree Library, and the 
 copy of the Parisian Ritual from which Dr. Lloyd took these notes. 
 
 The word " Paradise " which appears in the first line of both addresses 
 was only left out of the prayer book at the last revision in 1662. In 1549 
 it ran : " an honorable estate instituted of God in paradise." In " die 
 gemeyne unnd vihische vermischung " of the Mentz address there appears 
 a reminiscence of " sicut equus et mulus quibus non est intellectus " in 
 the Instructions of St. Charles Borromeo, and of " like brute beasts which 
 have no understanding " in our Prayer Book. 
 
 Agenda Ecdesies Moguntinensis, per . . . Sebastianum, Archiepiscopum 
 Moguntinum, etc., Moguntiae excudebat Franciscus Behem Typographus, 
 
 A.D. 1551. 
 
 Fo. LXXII. Ordo ad introducendum sponsum. 
 
 Ubi Matrimonio iungendi ad fores Ecdesie peruenerint, Sacerdos in 
 foribus templi consistens, ad eos conuersus exbortationem facial in hunc 
 sensum. 
 
 . . . Dann ja Gott den Ehestandt im Paradiss selbst eingesetzt, unnd 
 mit sondern genaden befestigt hat, das er nit durch die Erbsiindt ver- 
 wiistet, unnd durch die straff der Siindtfluss nit vertilget worden ist. 
 
 Unnd als dieser stand volgender zeit bei Jiiden und Heyden, in miss- 
 brauch geratten war, hat Christus Gottes Son, unser Heiland, den 
 Ehestand von allem missbrauch reinigen, unnd in seine vorige rechte 
 unnd gebiirliche ordnung wider einbringen, unnd unter menschlichem 
 geschlecht, und bey seinen Christen biss ins endt erhalten wollen, unnd 
 er selbst sampt seiner werden Mutter und lieben Jungern die hochzeit 
 in Cana, mit seiner gegenwertigkeit und 'erstem wunderzeichen verehret, 
 wie auch der Apostel den Ehestand ehrlich rhiimet, und den Eheleuten 
 die saligkeit zusagt, wo sie im Glauben unnd heiligung bleiben. Daher 
 dann alle Christen diese Gottes einsatzung nit gering, sender hoch unnd 
 heilig achten unnd halten sollen, unnd auss Gottes wort vernemen, das 
 Gott den Ehestand furnemblich umb diese ursachen eingesetzt hat. 
 
 Erstlich, das der Ehestand ein ehrliche beywonung unnd beste, unnd 
 volkomenste vereinigung eines Mans unnd Weibs sein solt, auff das die
 
 220 APPENDIX 
 
 gemehrung unnd erhaltung menschlichs geschlects auff erden, und die 
 Kinder zucht in gewissen zeilen behalten, unnd sonst die gemeyne unnd 
 vihische vermischung verhiitet wiirde. Damit Gottfiirchtige Eheleut 
 in einer rechtmessigen beywonung kinder gewinnen, und die selben in 
 Gottes forcht, mit gemeynem fleiss auffziehen, unnd also nit allein iren 
 zeitlichen gutern gewisse erben, sender auch unserm Gott wol abgerichte 
 Gotssfiirchtige diener und Christen nach inen auff erden verlassen 
 mochten. 
 
 Zum andern, das sonst verbottene Bulerey, schandt und unzucht 
 vermeidet, und die blodigheit der Natur, durch die behiilff der Ehe vor 
 siinden erhalten wiirde. 
 
 Zum dritten und furnemblich, hat Gott vonanfang in erschaffung der 
 menschen, den Ehestand eingesetzt, das er in verpflichtung des Mans 
 und weibs, ein gros Sacrament, und eigentlich zeichen geben wolt, der 
 wunderbarlichen unnd aller genadenreichsten vereinigung, so Christus 
 mit seiner KIRCH ER annemen, und der hefftigsten liebe, die er an seiner 
 Kirchen erweisen wiirde. 
 
 Darauss dann Eheleut u.s.w. 
 
 Rituale Parisiense ad Romani formam expressum authoritate illustrissimi 
 et Reverendissimi in Christo Patris D.D. Joannis Francisci de Gondy 
 Parisiensis Archiepiscopi editum, Parisiis, Cramoisy et Clopegan, 1654. 
 
 P. 293. De sacramento Matrimonii rite administrando. 
 
 P. 318. Form of betrothal. 
 
 P. 321. Ordo celebrandi Sacr amentum Matrimonij. 
 
 P. 324. Exhortatio ad sponsum et sponsam de Sacramento Matrimonii. 
 
 Le mariage a este institue de Dieu au Paradis terrestre ; du dupuis 
 honore par la presence de lesus-Christ nostre Sauueur ; et en la nouuelle 
 Loy par luy esleue a la dignite du Sacrement, qui con fere la grace a ceux 
 qui le recoiuent auec les dispositions requises et necessaires. Or il y a 
 trois fins pour lesquelles il a este institue, qu'il importe que vous scachiez. 
 La premiere, c'est pour auoir des enfans, et prendre vn soin particulier 
 de les instruire des mysteres de nostre foy & ne les esleuer a la vertu & 
 crainte de Dieu, afin qu'ils puissent donner gloire sur la terre, et puis 
 estre vn iour du nombre des esleus (sic) dans le Ciel. La seconde est 
 pour s'entr'aider 1'vn 1'autre a supporter toutes les incommoditez & 
 tribulations de cette vie ; car Dieu ayant cree Adam au Paradis terrestre, 
 dit : // n'est pas bon que rhomme soil seul, faisons luy vn aide semblable a 
 luy ; d'ou nous apprenons que la femme doit seruir d'aide a 1'homme, 
 & 1'homme pareillement doit seruir d'aide a la femme auec laquelle il est 
 marie. La troisieme fin est pour eviter fornication & toute espece de 
 luxure, comme aussi pour seruir de remede a la concupiscence ; suiuant 
 la doctrine de Saint Paul, au septieme chapitre de la premiere Epistre 
 aux Corinthiens. 
 
 C'est pour ces fins seulement, et non pour d'autres que vous deuez 
 contracter mariage, &c.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 221 
 
 LIST OF THE LITURGICAL BOOKS REFERRED TO IN THE 
 FOREGOING PAPER. 
 
 Alet : Rituel Romain . . . d'Alet, Paris, 1667. 
 
 Ambrosian : see Milan. 
 
 Amiens : Martene, Ordo IX. 
 
 Aquileia : J. F. B. M. de Rubeis, Dissertationes Dux, Venetiis, Simon 
 
 Occhi, 1754. Diss. II. Cap. xxx. p. 393. 
 Aries : Martene, Ordo V. 
 Autun : Institutio eorum, quibus incumbit minis tr are Sacramenta . . . 
 
 lacobi Hurault Episcopi Heduensis. Lugduni, Sebast. Gryphius, 
 
 1545- 
 
 Augsburg : Obsequiale sive benedictionale secundum ecclesiam Augustensem, 
 
 Aug. Vindel. Erhard Ratdolt, 1489. 
 
 Rituale Augustanum, Aug. Vindel. Labhart, 1764. 
 
 Auxerre : Martene, Ordo VI. 
 
 Bamberg : Agenda B amber gen* Ingolstadii, David Sartorius, 1587. 
 
 Belley : Rituel du diocese du Belley, Lyon, Pelagaud et Lisne, 1838, 
 
 3* ed. t. ii. 
 Bologna : Rituale Sacramentorum . . . ad usum Ecdesiee Bononiensis, 
 
 Bononiae, Victor Benatio, 1593. 
 Bourdeaux : Rituel Romain . . . pour Vusage du diocese de Bordeaux, 
 
 Bordeaux, de la Court, 1728. 
 
 Brixen : Sacerdotale Brixinense, Brixinae, Schuechegger, 1710. 
 Cambray : Manual? sive offiicarium curatorum insignis ecdesits Camera- 
 
 censis, Cameraci, F. Brassart, 1562. 
 Canosa : J. M. Giovene, Kalendaria Fetera MSS. aliaque monumenta, 
 
 Neapoli, 1828, p. 101. 
 Chalons-sur-Marne : Martene, Ordo XI. 
 
 Clermont : Rituel du diocese de Clermont, Clermont-Ferrand, 1733. 
 Colocza : Rituale Romano-Colocense, Budae, typ. univ. Pest. 1838. 
 Colone : Agenda ecclesiastic a. . . secundum diocesim Culoniensem, 
 
 Coloniae, Peter Quentel, 1521. 
 
 Missale Coloniense, Colonise, G. Greuenbruch, 1625. 
 Como : Sacramentarium Palriarchale secundum Morem Sanctte Comensis 
 
 ecclesice, Mediolani, 1557. 
 Constanz : Agenda seu obsequiale . . . ecclesite et episcopatus Constan- 
 
 ttensis, Dilingae, Sebald Mayer, 1570. 
 
 Coutances : Rituale Constantiense, Constantiis, Tanquerey, 1846. 
 Evesham : Officium Ecclesiasticum Abbatum, Henry Bradshaw Society, 
 
 1893, ed. by the Rev. H. A. Wilson. 
 Exeter : Liber Pontificalis of Edmund Lacy, edited by Ralph Barnes, 
 
 Exeter, M. Roberts, 1847. 
 Ferrara : Sacramentale Sancta Ferrariensis Ecdesiee, Ferrariae, Victor 
 
 Baldinus, 1608. 
 Freising : Rituale Frisingense, Monachii, J. Jaecklin, 1673.
 
 222 LIST OF BOOKS REFERRED TO IN 
 
 Ghent : Liber ecdesice Gandavensis, Gandavi, Petrus Clericus, 1576. 
 Gnesen : Agenda sine obsequiale secundum rubricam ecdesice metropolitans 
 
 Gnezensis, Cracovie, H. Scharffenberg, 1549. [British Museum, 
 
 3365, b. 25.] 
 
 Gran: Rituale Strigoniense, Budae, typ. univers. 1858. 
 Henderson : W. G., Manuale et Processionale ad usum insignis ecdesice 
 
 Eboracensis, Surtees Soc. 1875, pp. 25, 17,* 157.* 
 
 Hereford : Missale ad usum -percelebris ecdesice Herfordensis, ed. Hender- 
 son, Leeds, McCorquodale, 1874, p. 437. 
 Japan : Manuale ad Sacramenta Ecdesice ministranda D. Lodouici Cer- 
 
 queira Japonensis Episcopi, Nangasaquii, In collegio laponico 
 
 Societatis lesu, 1605. 
 Liege : Martene, Ordo XIV. 
 
 - Parochiak, 1592, p. 185, quoted at length in John Selden's Uxor 
 
 Ebraica, cap. xxvi. Opera, Lond. 1726, vol. ii. col. 672. 
 Limoges : Martene, Ordo XII. 
 
 Rituale seu Manuale Lemovicense, Lemovicis, Martial Barbou, 
 
 1678. 
 
 Lisieux : Rituale Lexoviense, Paris, J. B. Coignard, 1744. 
 Lyons : Martene, Ordo VIII. 
 
 Rituel du diocese de Lyon, Lyon, Aime de la Roche, 1787. 
 
 Lyre : Martene, Ordo III. 
 
 Martene, Edm. De antiquis ecdesice ritibus. Lib. I. cap. ix. artt. iii.-v. 
 
 Bassani, 1788, t. ii. p. 124. 
 Mechlin : Pastorale, Canones, et Ritus Eccles. Antverpiae, Chr. Plantin, 
 
 1589. 
 
 Mentz : Agenda Ecdesice Moguntinensis, Moguntiae, Spengel, 1551. 
 Milan : Rituale Ambrosianum, no date or place, about 1480. [Bodleian 
 
 Library, Oxford, Auct. vi. Q. vi. 39.] 
 
 Acta Ecdesice Mediolanensis, Mediolani, 1599, Pars. IIII. p. 554. 
 
 Rituale Sacramentorum ad usum Mediolanensis Ecdesice, Mediolani, 
 
 1645. 
 
 Idem, Mediolani, Benj. de Sirturis, 1736. 
 
 Idem, Mediolani, Agnelli, 1885. 
 
 Noyon : Manuale Insignis Ecdesie Noviomensis, Parisiis, P. Attaignant, 
 
 1546. 
 Paraguay : Manuale ad usum Patrum Societatis lesu qui in Reductionibus 
 
 Paraquarice versantur ex Rituali Romano ac Toletano decerptum, 
 
 Laureti, typ. PP. Soc. lesu, 1721. 
 Paris : Martene (Cardinal Bourbon), Ordo X. 
 
 Rituale Parisiense ad Romani formam expressum, Paris, P. Targa, 
 
 1646. 
 Idem, Parisiis, Cramoisy et Clopejan, 1654. 
 
 Pastorale Parisiense, Paris, Cl. Simon, 1786, in three volumes. 
 
 Passau : Pastorale ad usum Romanum accommodatum . . . in Dicecesi 
 
 Passaviensi, Monachii, N. Henricus, 1608.
 
 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 223 
 
 Perugia : Liber ritualis pro recta sacramentorum et sacramentalium ad- 
 ministrations ad parochos Dicecesis Perus nee, Perusiae, V. Colum- 
 barius, 1597. 
 
 Poland : Rituale Sacramentorum ac aliarum Ecclesice C&rimoniarum ex 
 decreto Synodi provinci. Petricovien. ad uniformem Ecclesiarum 
 Regni Polon. usum editum, 1639. 
 
 - Rituale Sacramentorum . . . pro ecclesiis Regni Poloniee, etc. 
 
 Thorunii, Joh. Can. Lauririus, 1691. The colophon gives : 
 Gedani, loh. Zach. Stollius, 1700. 
 
 Rituale Sacramentorum ac aliarum ecclesiasticarum Cceremoniarum 
 
 ex Majori Romano, turn Rudniciano et Radzieiowiano Rituali 
 
 ad Uniformem Ecclesies et Cleri Farmiensis et Sambiensis usum. 
 
 Typis Collegii Brunsbergensis Soc. lesu anno 1730. 
 Praemonstratensian Canons : Rituale Prcemonstratense, Paris, F. Leonard, 
 
 1676. 
 
 Prague : Manuale Ritualis Pragensis, Pragae, 1848. 
 Regensburg : Rituale Ratisbonense, Salisburgi, J. B. Mayr, 1673. 
 Rennes : Martene, Ordo II. 
 Rhemes : Martene, Art. iii. iv. 
 
 - Manuel pour V administration des Sacramens, Charleville et Reims, 
 
 Raucourt, 1821. 
 
 Rome : Libri sacerdotalis de officio sacerdotis curati . . . secundum ritum 
 Sancte Romane et apostolice ecclesie, Venetiis, V. a Rabanis, 1537, 4". 
 
 Sacerdotale iuxta s. Romane ecclesie, etc. Venetiis, apud heredes 
 
 Petri Rabani, 1554, 4. 
 
 Liber Catbecuminorum [sic] iuxta ritum sancte Romane ecclesie . . . 
 
 et aliis officiis, Venetiis, apud Petr. Bosellum, 1555, 8 . 
 
 Sacerdotale, etc. Venetiis, D. Nicolinus, 1579, 4. 
 
 Rituale Sacramentorum Romanum Gregorii XIII. ed. Card. Severina. 
 
 Romae, 1584, 4. 
 
 Sacra Institutio Baptizandi aliaque Sacramenta . . . iuxta ritum 
 
 Sanctes Romanee Ecclesia. Ex decreto SS. Concilii Tridentini 
 restituta. Parisiis, apud Societatem Typographicam Librorum 
 Officii Ecclesiastic, ex decreto Concilii Tridentini, via Jacobaea, 
 
 1594- 
 
 Rituale Romanum Pauli V . Coloniae Agripp. loan. Kenchius, 1620. 
 
 Rituale Romanum Pauli V . Romas, de Romanis, 1816. 
 
 Rouen : Martene, Ordo VII. 
 
 Sacerdotale seu Manuale Ecclesies Rothomagensis, Rothomagi, Laur. 
 
 Maurey, 1640. 
 
 Ordo ministrandi sacramenta iuxta usum Ecclesia Rotomagensis, 
 
 Rotomagi, le Boullenger, 1740. 
 St. Omer : Pastor -ale j Ecclesiee Audomarensis, Audomaropoli, Belle t, 
 
 1606. 
 Salamanca : Manuale secundum consuetudinem dime ecclesie Salmanticensis, 
 
 Salmantie, loan. lunta. 1532.
 
 224 NOTES ON THE MARRIAGE SERVICE 
 
 Salzburg : Libellus Agendarum circa sacramenta . . . secundum antiquum 
 usum Metropolitans Ecclesics Salisburgensis, Salisburgi, I. Bauman, 
 
 1557- 
 
 Manuale Parocborum . . . -pro provincia Salisburgensi, Ingolstadii, 
 
 D. Sartorius, 1582. 
 
 Sarum : Manuale ad usum Sarum,p. 17* of Appendix to Manuale et 
 Processional* ad usum insignis Ecclesite Eboracensis, Surtees Soc. 
 1875, ed. Dr. Henderson. 
 
 Missale ad usum insignis et -preeclarce ecclesice Sarum, Burntisland, 
 
 ed. F. H. Dickinson, 1861-83, col. 830.* 
 Seez : Rituale Sagiense, Sagii, Jul. Valin, 1834. 
 Soissons : Rituel du diocese de Soissons, Paris, A. Boudet, 1753, t. i. 
 Spires : Agenda Spiren [ ? Spires, Peter Drach.] 1512. [British Museum, 
 
 3366, b. 22.] 
 Strassburg : Agenda Ecclesiee Argentinensis, Coloniae, Gerv. Calenius et 
 
 haeredes loan. Quentel. 1590. 4. 
 
 Ritual Argentinense, Argentina, I. F. Le Roux, 1742. 
 
 Toledo : Manuale Sacramentorum secundum usum alme Ecclesie Toletane, 
 1554. 8. 
 
 Rituale seu Manuale Romanum . . . appendice ex Manuali Toletano, 
 
 Antverpiae, Moret, 1673. 
 Toulon : Rituel Romain, pour Fusage diocese de Toulon, Lyon Perisse, 
 
 1778. 
 Tournay : Manuale Pastorum . . , per civitatem et Dioecesim Torna- 
 
 censem, Lovanii, Laurence, 1591. 
 Triers : Libri officialis sive Agenda Ecclesics Trevirensis par prior, 
 
 Aug. Trevirorum, J. Rotaeus, 1574. 
 Verona : Rituale Ecclesies Veronensis, Veronae, B. Merli a Dounis, 1609. 
 
 Rituale Ecclesiee Veronensis, Veronae, J. A. Tumerman, 1756. 
 
 Westminster : Bodleian Library, Oxford. (Rawl. c. 425.) Fasc. II. of 
 
 Missale Westmonaster. edited for the Henry Bradshaw Society, 
 
 1897. 
 Wurzburg : Agenda Ecclesiastica secundum usum Ecclesits Wyrzburgensis, 
 
 no place, Jo. Baumann, 1564. 
 York : Manuale et processionals ad usum insignis Ecclesiee Eboracensis, 
 
 Surtees Soc. ed. Henderson, 1875. 
 
 Ypres : Manuale Pastorum . . . ad usum Episcopatus Iprensis, Ipris, 
 Ant. de Backer & J. B. de Moerman, 1693.
 
 ILambetb Ibearing: 
 H criticism on some of tbe 
 arguments*
 
 ZTbe Xambetb Ibearing : 
 
 H criticism on some of the 
 
 arguments* 
 
 [In 1899 the Archbishops of Canterbury (Dr. Temple) and 
 of York (Dr. Maclagan) held an informal Court at Lambeth, 
 which they called a Hearing. The Bishop of London at that 
 time was Dr. Mandell Creighton. On neither side was there 
 much display of real knowledge ; and the Opinion of the 
 Archbishops was thought by some to be not equal to the high 
 reputation of the Church of England for sound learning and 
 scholarship. The following criticism of the counsels' argu- 
 ments appeared in the Church Times for December, 1899.] 
 
 DURING the Hearing at Lambeth in 1899, at which the 
 Bishop of London appeared as one party in the discussion 
 whether the use of incense be legal or not, some stress 
 was laid in the episcopal argument upon the evidence 
 afforded by Daniel Barbaro, who was Venetian Am- 
 bassador in England from 1548 to 1550. 
 
 Attention was soon after called to the fact that the 
 passage as quoted before the Archbishops varied in 
 several important words from the text of the original 
 manuscript in the archives at Venice. It was pointed 
 out that this variation seemed to affect materially the 
 value of the statement made at the Hearing. Neverthe- 
 less, the argument advanced at the Hearing is still main- 
 tained ; for The Case Against Incense 1 has been pub- 
 lished, and in it appears the same contention as that made 
 
 1 J. S. Franey, The Case against Incense, 1899, Spottiswoode, p. 137. 
 See Life and Letters of Mandell Creighton, Longmans, 1904, vol. ii. p. 370, 
 
 aar
 
 228 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 at the Hearing. So, without looking upon a statement 
 as final made in the midst of a verbal discussion and con- 
 troversy, yet its reappearance in print may perhaps justify 
 the presumption that the episcopal argument has now 
 taken the shape in which it is intended that it should 
 continue. 
 
 Barbaro's Report, it tells us, is a " very important piece 
 of evidence." The Relazioni of the Venetian Ambassa- 
 dors " give better and more generally trustworthy his- 
 torical information than almost any other class of 
 documents. They were extremely careful, and ex- 
 tremely minute in their inquiries, and they had a way of 
 getting to know everything that was going on. There- 
 fore the historical value of their reports is very great 
 indeed." 
 
 In dealing with a document of the character here 
 ascribed to Barbaro's report, in which the ambassador is 
 supposed to have weighed his words, it is of some moment 
 to ascertain, if possible, the exact words of the writer. In 
 the present instance this can be done ; and I have had 
 transcribed for me all that part of the report of Barbaro 
 which relates to ecclesiastical matters in England. 
 
 This transcript will be found below, as an appendix to 
 this paper ; and it will be worth while to compare it with 
 the text which was printed by Eugenio Alberi * upon 
 which by some oversight Mr. Rawdon Brown based his 
 translation. 2 He may have done as he tells us he 
 did with another report in the archives. By the pub- 
 lished work of Alberi, he says, he has " been enabled to 
 correct some mistakes in the copy " in the archives. 3 
 If so, the passage quoted before the Archbishops is an 
 illustration of this kind of " correction." But it is plain 
 to any one that the copy in the archives at Venice is the 
 
 1 Eugenio Albdri, Relazioni degli Ambasciatori Peneti al Senate, Firenze, 
 1840, Serie I. volume ii. p. 225. 
 
 2 Calendar of State Papers , , , of Venice, London, 1875. vol. v. 1534 
 554- P- 338. 
 
 3 Of at. p. 36, note,
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 229 
 
 better text, and indeed, I need not labour the point, for 
 it is admitted to be the original. 1 f 1 ^ 
 
 The variations of the original from the text printed by 
 Alberi and translated by Mr. Rawdon Brown are neither 
 few nor unimportant. To take a passage immediately 
 before that quoted at the Archbishops' Hearing. Mr. 
 Rawdon Brown has : " On holidays they read a compen- 
 dium of the litanies without commemoration of saints." 
 This seems hard to understand ; the English Litany was 
 said on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, which last 
 two days are not holidays at all. The Venetian original 
 is more easy. " On the greater holidays they have 
 different lessons and psalms [apparently the proper psalms 
 and lessons for Christmas, Easter, etc., are referred to]. 
 They read litanies which have been shortened, but are 
 without any commemoration of saints, except at the 
 end." This is not an inexact statement, if we leave out 
 the four last words, which I confess I cannot explain. 
 
 Then follows immediately the passage quoted before 
 the Archbishops, from Mr. Rawdon Brown's translation : 
 " They use bells and organs, but neither altars, nor 
 images, nor water, nor incense (non acqua, non fuoco), nor 
 other Roman ceremonies." In the Venetian text it is 
 rather this : " They use bells, organs, but not altars nor 
 images, nor crosses, non aque, non fuocbi [words which I 
 will not venture here to translate] nor other ceremonies 
 of the hands." Romani is certainly in the text of Alberi, 
 
 1 Case against Incense, p. 137, note. 2 Calendar, etc. p. 348. 
 
 3 The Italian is as follows : " Usano campane, organi, ma non altari, non 
 imagini, non croci, non aque, non fuochi, non altre ceremonie delle mani." 
 This is the Venetian text, and it is authoritative ; but it may be desirable to 
 mention that independent copies do not agree with Alberi. For example, 
 the copy in the Ambrosian Library at Milan (S. 96, Sup. f. 217) reads 
 exactly as it has been given above. And in the National Library at Paris 
 one copy (MS. italien, 1368 olim Coislin, fol. 29) has the same reading, 
 excepting the word aque which becomes singular, acqua. But another 
 copy (MS. italien 1425, fol. 230) gives the same as the Venetian text, omit- 
 ting the words non aque, non fuocbi. 
 
 I am indebted for these notes to Monsignor Ceriani, the Prefect of the 
 Ambrosian Library, and to Monsieur Henri Omont, the Chief of the 
 Department of Manuscripts, in the National Library at Paris.
 
 230 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 not delle mani as in the original ; and Alberi has " crosses " 
 in his text, which word Mr. Rawdon Brown omits. As 
 to Mr. Rawdon Brown's translation, it seems a bold thing 
 to translate fuoco by incense ; but it is bolder still to 
 translate fuochi by incense. 
 
 In the very next sentence Mr. Rawdon Brown's trans- 
 lation has led some to think that there is testimony to the 
 introduction of the King's arms and whitewashing into 
 churches as an innovation of the Edwardian Reformation. 
 He says : " In all the churches on the walls which are 
 whitened for this purpose, below the royal arms, they 
 inscribe certain Scriptural sayings." The original at Venice 
 is rather this : " Everywhere are the arms of the king, 
 and certain letters with some texts of Scripture are on the 
 walls, which are whitened for this end." This is nothing 
 new ; it might very well be said of English churches in 
 the reign of Henry VII or earlier. 
 
 The original text of Barbaro's report is on the whole 
 more intelligible and more in accordance with some of 
 the ascertained facts than the printed Italian or English 
 texts of the report, ordinarily quoted as representing his 
 evidence. But even with the actual statement of the 
 ambassador before us, there seems to be room for doubt 
 whether it really merits the praise bestowed upon it 
 quoted above, in The Case against Incense ; or the confi- 
 dence reposed in it as a basis of argument. Is Barbaro 
 accurate in cases about which we have clear evidence 
 from other sources ? Let us examine one or two points. 
 
 His dates. One of Barbaro's statements is that Ed- 
 ward VI .'s First Book was printed in 1548. This is in- 
 accurate. It was printed in 1549. And the Order of the 
 Communion of 1548 cannot be meant ; for he gives, in a 
 somewhat inexact fashion it is true, the title of the first 
 book, which he says is the -public prayers and administra- 
 tion of the sacraments and the ceremonies. Of course the 
 real title is : The Book of Common Prayer and Administra- 
 tion of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the 
 Church, and it bears the date of 1549. Another instance
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 231 
 
 of want of exact information is shown when he is speaking 
 of the new ordinal. This, he says, appeared (mandate in 
 luce} in 1549. ^ ' 1S true tnat tne date printed on the 
 book is 1549, but the book was not " devised " until the 
 first months of 1550, and could not have been printed till 
 that year. A man with exceptionally good sources of in- 
 formation would have known this. Messrs. Gasquet and 
 Bishop have endeavoured to save Barbaro's reputation 
 for accuracy by adding to the dates given by him the real 
 date ; thus instead of 1548 they print 1548-49 ; and in- 
 stead of 1549 they print I549-5O. 1 But I do not know 
 what authority they have for this addition. In Mr. 
 Rawdon Brown's translation, which they are supposed to 
 be quoting, it is '48 and '49, 2 and both Alberi and the 
 Venetian original give the same date. 
 
 His English. We have just seen that Barbaro is not 
 good at translating the title-page of an English book. 
 Does he redeem his character in translations of other 
 parts of the Prayer Book ? In the litany of the First 
 Prayer Book of Edward VI. it is well known that this peti- 
 tion occurs : " From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome 
 and all his detestable enormities . . . good Lord deliver 
 us." Barbaro translates this : " Dalle insidie et tirannie 
 de Vescovo di Roma, libera nos Domine." Insidie means 
 snares, as the Latin word does ; it is no translation of 
 detestable enormities. 
 
 At the offertory in the First Prayer Book the rubric 
 runs thus : Then shall the minister take so much bread and 
 wine, as shall suffice. . . . And putting the wine into the 
 chalice, or else in some fair or convenient cup, prepared for 
 that use (if the chalice will not serve) putting thereto a little 
 pure and clean water. This Barbaro renders as : " they 
 take so much bread and wine as shall suffice, and if the 
 wine be not enough they mix a little pure water." 
 
 Here Barbaro has quite misunderstood the rubric, 
 
 1 Gasquet and Bishop, Ednuard VI. and the Book of Common Prayer, 
 London, 1890. pp. 271 and 274. 
 
 2 Calendar, etc. pp. 348 and 349.
 
 232 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 which merely directs the addition of a little water to the 
 wine in the chalice. Apparently he has imagined that 
 the words in brackets (if the chalice will not serve) govern 
 in some way the -putting thereto a little -pure and clean water. 
 
 His information. There is really little trustworthy in- 
 formation in the whole of the report on Church matters 
 that may not be gathered from Edwardian Acts, or the 
 Book of Common Prayer itself . The rules about fasting 
 seem borrowed from 2 and 3 Edw. VI. cap. xix. enlarged 
 by a little gossip. The Edwardian Act of Uniformity 
 supplies a good deal of what is said. The Prayer Book is 
 sometimes ill translated, sometimes inexactly rendered, 
 exact statements being mingled with inexact. For ex- 
 ample, he says that all the psalms were read twelve times 
 a year. This is exact ; but he tells us immediately that 
 both Old and New Testaments, except some chapters of 
 the Apocalypse, are read once a year. This is not exact. 
 The New Testament was read three times a year, and the 
 whole of the Revelation of St. John omitted, except 
 chapters I and 22, which were read on St. John Evangel- 
 ist's Day. This rule lasted to our own time. What 
 Barbaro is trying to reproduce is, no doubt, the first and 
 second paragraphs of the Order how the rest of Holy Scrip- 
 ture (beside the Psalter) is appointed to be read in Edward 
 VI. 's First Book, which says distinctly that the New Tes- 
 tament " shall be read over orderly every year thrice, . . . 
 except the Apocalypse, out of the which there be only 
 certain Lessons appointed upon divers proper feasts." 
 Barbaro's investigations do not go deep enough to arrive 
 at the fact that only two chapters of the Revelation were 
 read as lessons in the Divine service, the other lessons 
 " upon divers proper feasts " being the Epistle upon 
 Innocents' and All Saints' Days and the like. 
 
 His remarks on the Litany, it has been pointed out, are 
 also a mixture of exact with inexact. What the com- 
 memoration of Saints at the end of the English Litany 
 may be is yet unknown to me on any reasonable hypo- 
 thesis.
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 233 
 
 When speaking of the Communion, the statement is 
 made that the priests then put on surplices. It is well 
 known that other vestments were ordered under the 
 First Book. In fact, Barbaro contradicts himself ; for 
 towards the end of his report on ecclesiastical matters, 1 
 he says they wear sacerdotal garments. 
 
 His trustworthiness as a liturgical expert. It is claimed 
 for Barbaro that his observations on Church matters are 
 " careful and minute," being an ecclesiastic, who likewise 
 became Patriarch of Aquileia (not Venice, as the The Case 
 against Incense says) immediately after his return. In those 
 days the Patriarchate of Aquileia seems to have been a 
 sort of family living, shared between the great houses of 
 Barbaro and Grimani. From the end of the fifteenth to 
 the end of the sixteenth century there were four patri- 
 archs called Barbaro, and five or six, Grimani. The 
 impression given by Mazzuchelli 2 is that Daniel Barbaro 
 was a sort of humanist, a writer of elegant letters, and of 
 sonnets addressed to ladies ; a man who dabbled in philo- 
 sophy, rhetoric, architecture, and perspective, in whose 
 life the Church took up but little space. Probably he 
 received the promotion to Aquileia as a reward for his 
 political services. What they are who receive bishoprics 
 as a reward for political services is known to-day in this 
 country, and how little such persons are acquainted with 
 the rudiments of their profession. What would be the 
 value of a report upon the liturgy celebrated, say, at a 
 Charterhouse, or in the Church of Milan, written by 
 a modern English bishop, who is a politician first and a 
 Churchman afterwards ? Very likely it would be as in- 
 accurate as Barbaro's. It seems hard to believe that 
 Barbaro could have so misunderstood the ceremony of 
 mixing the chalice at the offertory, which is commanded 
 in the First Prayer Book, if he had known a like practice 
 elsewhere. And yet the sixteenth century Mass Book of 
 
 1 Calendar, etc. p. 349. 
 
 2 G. Mazzuchelli, Git Scrittori d'ltalia, Brescia, 1758. vol. ii. parte i. 
 p. 247.
 
 234 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 the Church of Aquileia has a rubric directing the mixing 
 of the chalice at the offertory. So also he is astonished 
 at the rubric in the Prayer Book which tells the sick man 
 that if he be legitimately hindered from receiving the 
 sacrament, he may yet receive communion spiritually. 
 We may not be surprised at his want of knowledge of the 
 Sarum and York rubrics ; yet it seems strange that he 
 does not remember crede et manducasti. 
 
 His criticisms also on the new Ordinal are not those of 
 a very acute ritualist. He notices the oath renouncing 
 the Pope's supremacy ; but the other changes in the 
 Ordinal are very little understood, and they are dismissed 
 in a couple of lines. " They read certain lessons, and 
 give books of Scripture with the authority of the minis- 
 try." At Communion he notices the long homily, per- 
 haps " Dearly beloved in the Lord," as said before the 
 General Confession, though really separated by the offer- 
 tory, preface, and canon from one another. His 
 observations seem to be of things that would strike the 
 average looker-on, not the ecclesiastic of any acquaintance 
 with, or care for, his profession. 
 
 To return to the passage quoted before the Arch- 
 bishops. It is true that in 1550 in England many images 
 and altars had been destroyed. So far Barbaro's in- 
 formation seems good ; but he likewise asserts that the 
 English have retained the use of organs. 
 
 Now, had he known of the attacks made upon Church 
 music, he could hardly have said this without some 
 qualifying statement. The Commissioners of 1549-50 
 destroyed the organs with altars and images in college 
 chapels at Oxford, because they were monuments of 
 superstition and idolatry. Yet Barbaro seems to think 
 that they were being retained without any exceptions. 
 And bells in college chapels as well as in parish churches 
 were removed by Edward's commissioners. So that this 
 Venetian ambassador, for once, does not seem to have 
 had such " a way of getting to know everything that was 
 going on," as we have been told, and the information
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 235 
 
 that he offers to his senate can hardly be called com- 
 plete. 
 
 So, too, his statement that crosses were no longer in 
 use in 1550. This was not brought before the Arch- 
 bishops, because too great confidence was placed in Mr. 
 Rawdon Brown's translation. The word " crosses " 
 omitted by Mr. Rawdon Brown, certainly appears in 
 Alberi and the original, and Barbaro thus stands com- 
 mitted to the statement that crosses were no longer in 
 use. To say that crosses were no longer used in 1550 is 
 rather a wide statement ; for it covers the use of all 
 kinds of crosses ; those inside and outside of churches, on 
 the altar, or on ornaments, or carried in procession, or the 
 sign of the cross made by the hand. Yet in Edward VI. 's 
 First Book there are the well-known " little black crosses " 
 in the canon, and the priest is directed to make the sign 
 of the cross on the breast and head of the catechumen, as 
 Barbaro himself reports. One who carefully weighed his 
 words would hardly have made so large a statement with- 
 out some qualification. And in the same way it is not 
 wholly true that all " ceremonies of the hands " were 
 discontinued. The mere direction to make the sign of the 
 cross in Baptism is enough to disprove this. 
 
 An examination, then, of Barbaro's report leads us to 
 believe that he was no very careful observer or writer, and 
 that his information was not specially good ; what he 
 says can hardly be accepted without confirmatory evi- 
 dence. Even if fuochi be admitted on all hands to mean 
 incense (and Italian scholars tell us that it means some- 
 thing different), a better witness than Barbaro must be 
 brought into court to prove the contention that the 
 English did not use incense in 1550. The evidence of 
 Sandys has been rather contemptuously dismissed when 
 he speaks of the first and second years of King Edward. 
 And to be consistent, the evidence of Barbaro must be 
 treated in the same way, even if a very dubious meaning 
 be allowed for his expression fuochi. 
 
 With the disappearance of Barbaro's evidence it must
 
 236 ECCLESIOLOCICAL ESSAYS 
 
 be owned that the greater part of the historical argument 
 in The Case against Incense falls to the ground. The rest 
 of the evidence is too slight to prove anything of the dis- 
 continuance of the use of incense in England in the con- 
 fusion of the evil days of Edward VI. It may still be said 
 that there is a " conspiracy of silence " on this matter ; 
 and, like many other points in the history of incense, we 
 are forced, unwillingly, to confess that we know but little 
 of what are the real facts of the case. 
 
 Another argument, which may be called the argument 
 from omission, may now be spoken of. It evidently had 
 much weight, not only with counsel, but also with the 
 Archbishop of York. Counsel declared it to be " a 
 matter of first-rate importance." The argument seems 
 to be something like this : In the Sarum Missal there 
 were directions for the use of incense. In the First Book 
 of King Edward these had all disappeared ; " not only 
 are the prayers left out, but the whole piece of the ser- 
 vice ; the whole context in which incense is used is left 
 out at each of those three points." Thus it would seem 
 to be suggested that the use of incense was clearly discon- 
 tinued under the first book of Edward VI. 
 
 Let us apply this argument to other cases. 
 
 What Englishmen call the Revolution presents some 
 points of resemblance to the times of Edward VI. Both 
 were eras of the triumph of Protestantism. The corona- 
 tion service of William and Mary underwent changes 
 which may not improperly be compared with the changes 
 made by the First Prayer Book. To one of these I would 
 now call attention. 
 
 For some centuries the Kings of England had been 
 accustomed to receive, at their consecration, and imme- 
 diately after their anointing, certain ornaments which 
 have been called sacerdotal vestments. In the language 
 of the Church they go by the name of the alb or rochet, 
 tunicle, stole, and cope. Prayers were said at the de- 
 
 1 The Case against Incense, p. 59.
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 237 
 
 livery of these ornaments at the Coronation of Kings 
 James I. Charles I. and II. and James II. O God the 
 King of Kings was said with the delivery of the alb (colo- 
 bium sindonis) and Receive this armil with the delivery of 
 the stole. 1 
 
 In the Order for the Coronation of William and Mary 
 these ornaments (with the exception of the cope) have 
 disappeared altogether. The prayers have gone, as well 
 as the directions to invest the king with these ornaments : of 
 which there is no mention in the Order. 2 The prayers 
 are gone, and their context is gone : so if we use the argu- 
 ment of the Bishop of London's counsel we must con- 
 clude that these ornaments were disused. What is more 
 likely ? They were doubtless looked upon as supersti- 
 tious and ungodly; and it would be only natural for 
 them to be discontinued, considering the opinions, not 
 only of the king, but of those about him. 
 
 But, however easy it may seem to jump to such a con- 
 clusion, the conclusion would in this case be clearly 
 unwarranted. All these four vestments, the " colobium 
 sindonis of fine linen," the " supertunica," the " armilla 
 in fashion of a stole made of cloth of gold," and a " pall 
 of cloth of gold in fashion of a cope " are ordered by the 
 Committee of the Privy Council to be prepared, as we 
 find in their report to King William III. immediately 
 before the coronation ; and in the accounts of the Great 
 Wardrobe they are duly charged and paid for, even with 
 the cloth that covered them when they were taken to the 
 Abbey. 3 In later coronation orders, one of the prayers 
 is restored, and sometimes a vestment is directed to be 
 put on ; and all the four that were delivered to Queen 
 
 1 J. Wickham Legg, The Coronation Order of King James I. London, 
 F. E. Robinson's Stewart Series, 1902, pp. 27 and 29. For the cere- 
 monies at the coronation of the other Stewart kings, see L. G. Wickham 
 Legg, English Coronation Records, Westminster, Archibald Constable, 1901, 
 pp. x. and xi. 259, 301, 302. 
 
 2 Three Coronation Orders, Henry Bradshaw Society, 1900, p. 22, 
 
 78-
 
 238 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 Victoria at her coronation in 1838 were preserved at St. 
 James' Palace in I894- 1 
 
 It may be urged that all the rites and ceremonies with 
 which the Kings of England are now consecrated are 
 illegal. It is not at present important to deny that they 
 are ; but it is desired to show that the argument from 
 omission as a mere historical argument may not always 
 lead us aright. 
 
 Before leaving the subject of coronations it may be 
 noted that it is a satisfaction to find a puzzle that for- 
 merly existed now solved by counsel. For some years I 
 have failed to reconcile the official accounts bearing the 
 imprimatur of the Earl-Marshal with the contemporary 
 engravings. The latter have in most parts been plainly 
 copied from Sandford's engravings of the coronation of 
 James II. In the official account of James II. 's corona- 
 tion, edited by Sandford, the groom of the vestry (ap- 
 parently a sort of sacrist of the King's chapel) walks with 
 the organ blower, immediately in front of musicians with 
 two sackbuts and a double courtal, doubtless accom- 
 panying the singing of anthems by the surpliced choir, 
 who go in the procession from Westminster Hall ; and in 
 the midst of the singers comes the groom of the vestry 
 with the incense, and the musicians. Counsel are pleased 
 to call these church musicians trumpeters 2 and to say 
 that the groom of the vestry (a " gentleman ") was not in 
 the procession with the clergy, though he really was in 
 the midst of the surpliced choir that was followed imme- 
 diately by the Dean and Chapter of Westminster in rich 
 copes. Further, we are told that the burning of per- 
 fumes in a perfuming pan (doubtless the perfuming pan 
 of iron which, we know, was kept in the king's vestry 3 ) 
 
 1 These ornaments were photographed by the gracious permission of the 
 late Queen. They are reproduced in collotype in Archaeological Journal, 
 1894. vol. li. accompanying a paper on the Sacring of the English Kings. 
 
 2 The Case against Incense, p. 8 1 . 
 
 3 Edgar Sheppard, Memorials of St. James' Palace, Longmans, 1894, 
 vol. ii. p. 329. "There was a 'Perfuming Pan of Iron ' in old days, which 
 was always used in the Chapel Royal upon special occasions " : and a refer-
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 239 
 
 from Westminster Hall to the quire door of the Abbey 
 Church, in the midst of the clerks, by an official whose 
 very name shows his connexion with Church matters "had 
 not much ritual significance." 
 
 The evidence that perfumes were burnt in a perfuming 
 pan in the procession to the coronation of James II. seems 
 satisfactory. 1 But I must own that until I was assured 
 by counsel that the same thing took place in George III.'s 
 procession, I had not felt quite convinced of the con- 
 tinuance of the ceremony at the coronation of George III. 
 It is true that we see in engravings, purporting to be 
 representations of the processions of George III. and 
 George II. the groom of the vestry, with the perfuming 
 pan in his hand ; and we also see the two sackbuts and the 
 double courtal ; in the official accounts, though the 
 groom of the vestry still walks with the organ blower, the 
 mention of perfumes burnt by him has entirely disap- 
 peared. Here there seems to be again a fair ground for 
 counsel to apply the argument from omission, and to con- 
 clude that no incense was burnt at these coronations. For 
 the evidence supplied by these later engravings is not 
 authoritative. They are contained in books, issued at 
 one coronation after another, which are merely unauthor- 
 ised revisions of Sandford's work, and of which the text 
 does not always accurately represent the order used in 
 the particular coronation which has been the occasion of 
 the publication. 
 
 I have one before me now, printed in 1838, with the 
 perfuming pan, sackbuts, double courtal, and all ; even 
 the prayers, said last at the coronation of King James II. 
 are printed as if they were used for Queen Victoria. Yet 
 counsel have accepted this strange kind of evidence at a 
 
 ence is given to John Evelyn. (Diary, March 30, 1684, ed. H. B. Wheatley, 
 London, Bickers, 1879. vol. ii. p. 430.) In the King's Chapel on Easter 
 Day he writes : " Note, there was perfume burnt before the office be- 
 gan." 
 
 1 F. Sandford, The . . . Coronation of . . . James II. in the Savoy, 
 1687. See the seventh plate of the procession.
 
 240 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 time when they might reasonably have exercised a little 
 wholesome scepticism. 
 
 Another instance (doubtless many of the same kind can 
 be found) of the uncertain character of the argument 
 from omission may be found in the first edition of the 
 Roman Missal. It will be granted that Kyrie eleison has 
 for some hundreds of years been sung at the beginning of 
 the Roman Mass, and it is so still. Yet in the first edition 
 of the Roman Mass Book it is not to be found. The 
 argument from omission would lead us to infer that no 
 Kyrie eleison was sung according to the Roman rite in 
 1474.* And if we had only the ordinary of the West- 
 minster Missal, the same conclusion would be arrived at 
 as to the use of Westminster in the second half of the 
 fourteenth century. A farced Kyrie is, however, found 
 in other parts of the book, which by chance have been 
 preserved to us. 2 
 
 Another argument has been used in The Case against 
 Incense* which shows a want of familiarity with the his- 
 tory of the rubric (that prefixed to the Churching of 
 Women in the Prayer Book), with which counsel were 
 attempting to deal. The point is one on which Dr. A. J. 
 Stephens might have been consulted with advantage 4 ; 
 and I venture to say that the argument ought not to 
 have been used. The words decently apparelled were 
 only inserted in 1662. Therefore the Judges in the 
 reign of James I. could not have construed decently ap- 
 parelled into anything, because the words did not then 
 exist. There was no direction to come decently appar- 
 
 1 Missale Romanum, Mediolani, 1474, Henry Bradshaw Society, 1899. 
 vol. i. p. 198. Edited by Dr. Lippe. 
 
 2 Missale ad usum ecclesite Westmonasteriens'is, Henry Bradshaw Society, 
 1893, fasc. ii. col. 490, for omission in the ordinary of the mass. See fasc. 
 i. col. 298, 354, for instances of appearance \ntemporale. 
 
 3 The Case against Incense, p. 53. 
 
 4 A. J. Stephens, The Book of Common Prayer . . . with notes, Ecclesi- 
 astical History Society, 1854. vol. iii. p. 1755, note on Decently apparelled. 
 These words are interlined in ihe black-letter Book of Common Prayer used 
 by the Revisers of 1 66 1. (Facsimile of the Black-letter Prayer Book, London, 
 1871.)
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 241 
 
 elled in the Prayer Book in the reign of James I. and 
 therefore, when the Judges asked the advice of the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop could not then 
 have said that decently apparelled meant wearing a veil. 
 The case is so important that it may be best to give it in 
 full, as it stands in Gibson. 
 
 In the Reign of King James I. an Order was made by the 
 Chancellor of Norwich, that every Woman, who came to be 
 Churched, should come covered with a White Vail : A 
 Woman, refusing to Conform, was excommunicated for Con- 
 tempt, and pray'd a Prohibition ; alledging, that such Order 
 was not warranted by any Custom or Canon of the Church of 
 England. The Judges desired the Opinion of the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury, who convened divers Bishops to consult there- 
 upon ; and they certifying, that it was the ancient Usage of 
 the Church of England, for Women who came to be Churched, 
 to come Veiled, a Prohibition was denied." * 
 
 The woman who wished to be released from excom- 
 munication may seem to many to have had hard measure 
 dealt out to her. There is not one word about being 
 decently apparelled in the rubrics of the Prayer Book of 
 her time, nor in Edward VI .'s First or Second Book, nor 
 in the rubrics of any of the editions of the Sarum Manual 
 in the British Museum that I have examined, save in the 
 Douai editions of 1604 and 1610, which most likely were 
 not known to the Bishops when they gave their opinion. 
 Even in the Douai editions the statement that, according 
 to the ancient custom of England, the woman's head 
 is covered with a white veil, is not contained in the 
 rubrics, but appears in notes at the end of the volume. 2 
 
 1 Edm. Gibson, Codex luris Eccles. Oxford, 1761, p. 373. This 
 and the documents on which it is based are given in full by Mr. Frere in 
 Appendix E. p. 138, of The Case for Incense, Longmans, 1899. 
 
 2 Sacra Institutio Baptizandi . . . iuxta usum insignis Ecclesiae Saris- 
 buriemis, Duaci, Laur. Kellam, 1604. Annotationes, p. 9. Mulier ad 
 purificationem accedens, caput habeat secundum antiquam Angliae consue- 
 tudinem, coopertum velo albo, in manu portet candelam accensam, et sit 
 media inter duas matronas. See also Manuale Sacerdotum, . . . iuxta 
 usum insignis Ecclesiae Sarisburiensis, Duaci, Laur. Kellam, 1610. Annota- 
 tiones, p. 282, for the same note.
 
 242 ECCLESIOLOGICAL ESSAYS 
 
 This one instance will help us to understand how little 
 of ceremonial was contained in the pre-Reformation 
 service books. The rites are given in full : but the cere- 
 monies used with the rites we commonly have to seek 
 in other sources. Those familiar with the unreformed 
 books will not think the destruction of the old books 
 " exceedingly important and exceedingly strong " l evi- 
 dence against the continuance of the old ceremonies, 
 because they know how few of these old ceremonies were 
 contained in mediaeval ritual books. 
 
 The churching cloth is known from inventories, not 
 from ritual books, to have been in common use in the 
 Church of England before the Reformation, and I have 
 myself found it in the inventories of Christ Church, 
 Canterbury, even in the middle of the eighteenth cen- 
 tury. 2 
 
 Nevertheless, this unwritten custom of the Church of 
 England, with no statute, or canon, or rubric of any kind 
 to support it, was enforced by the Judges, even to excom- 
 munication. The case is certainly of great importance 
 in determining the interpretation of the law as to the 
 mediaeval customs of the Church of England ; and there 
 need be no wonder at the efforts made to evacuate it of 
 significance. 
 
 It was not the poorer classes, as counsel tell us, 3 but the 
 Puritan classes, who objected to the veil. It was because 
 of the Puritans that, in 1636, Dr. Matthew Wren, Bishop 
 of Norwich, renewed the order in the diocese that the 
 woman should be " veiled according to the custom, and 
 not covered with a hat," 4 and that, in 1662, the words 
 
 1 The Case against Incense, p. 32. 
 
 3 J. Wickham Legg and W. H. St. John Hope, Inventories of Christ 
 Church, Canterbury, Westminster, Archibald Constable, 1902. pp. 293, 299. 
 
 3 The Case against Incense, p. 52. 
 
 4 Edward Cardwell, Documentary Annals of the Reformed Church o, 
 England, Oxford University Press, 1839. vol. ii. p. 204, 10. These 
 "Orders" are dated 1636, when Dr. Wren was Bishop of Norwich. Shortly 
 after he became Bishop of Ely, and a question in the spirit of this order was 
 there placed amongst his visitation articles : 
 
 "Doth any maried woman within your Parish, after child-birth
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 243 
 
 " decently apparelled " were added to the rubric before 
 trie office. 
 
 Before I close I would point out that, while the histori- 
 cal argument of The Case against Incense seems to break 
 down in several important matters, it cannot be said that 
 the argument of The Case for Incense is one of much 
 strength. The whole subject of the use of incense in 
 church needs to be very thoroughly examined. This has 
 not yet been done ; and in the absence of the certain 
 knowledge which such an inquiry may supply, it seems 
 unwise to elevate into a point of vital importance the use 
 of a custom which is still under discussion. 
 
 neglect to come to Church according to the booke of Common Prayer to 
 giue thanks to God for her safe deliuerance, vailed in a decent manner, as 
 hath been anciently accustomed ? " (Articles to be inquired of nuithin the 
 diocesofEly in the first 'visitation of the R. Reverend Father in God, Matthew 
 [Wren]. Printed at London, by Richard Badger, 1638, chap. 7, 10.)
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 The following paragraphs are printed from a transcript made direct 
 from Daniel Barbaro's Relazione in the Venetian Archives. Only such 
 passages are here given as bear upon Church matters. To facilitate com- 
 parison with Eugenio Alberi's Relazioni, the numbers of the pages of this 
 latter work, containing parallel passages to those now printed, have been 
 prefixed to each paragraph. 
 
 VENICE. ARCHIVIO DI STATO. SENATO SECRETA, RELAZIONI. 
 BUSTA 17. 
 
 p. 225. Relatione del Clarissimo Messer Daniel Barbaro, che fu poi 
 eletto d'Aquilegia della legatione sua d' Inghilterra, detta nell' Ecc mo 
 Senato del mese di Maggio, 1551. 
 
 p. 238. " E ancora un' altra Congregatione appresso gl' Inglesi, che si 
 chiama, conuocatione doue entrano i Vescoui, et le persone ecclesiastiche 
 ne si tratta in quella se non di cose pertinent! alia Religione ; et quello, che 
 ivi e determinato si chiama constitutione provinciale ; et nel proponere 
 et trattare le cose si usa quell' istesso ordine che si usa nel Parlamento, et 
 quello che propone le cause si chiama Prolocutore della Conuocatione." 
 
 p. 242. " La religione e come il cuor dell' huomo, da cui depende la 
 vita, essendo quella uno ottimo mezo come si e veduto in tutte le Repub- 
 liche et governi et massime nei principii, per moderare gli animi et farli 
 conoscere Dio donatore degli stati et delle uittorie, il che non puo 
 auuenire agl' Inglesi, perche niuna cosa e piu inconstante delle' decreti 
 loro circa la religione, perche hoggi fanno una cosa et dimane un' altra, 
 et non stanno fermi in un proposito ; il che da hormai da dire anco a 
 quelli, che hanno accettato la nuoua legge, et al resto incresce somma- 
 mente, come si ha uisto per le sollevationi del 49. et in uero, se hauessero 
 capo, con tutto che siano stati acerbamente castigati, non e dubio, che di 
 nuovo si solleueriano. Vero e che quelli di Londra sono piu disposti ad 
 osseruare quello glieni viene commandato dal superiore, che gli altri, 
 essendo piu alia corte uicini. Hora io dico che errano circa le opinioni 
 della fede, circa le ceremonie della chiesa, et circa 1'obedienza del Ponte- 
 fice. L'origine di tanti mali ha hauuto capo da Henrico ottavo, padre 
 del presente Re." 
 
 p. 245. " Questo mal animo contra il Papa, e cosi anco confirmato al 
 tempo presente che non e alcuno della uecchia ne della nuoua Religione, 
 che uoglia sentir nominare il Papa, anzi ne' letanie, che si cantano in 
 
 344
 
 THE LAMBETH HEARING 245 
 
 chiesa, dicono nella loro lingua, Dalle insidie et tirannie del Vescouo di 
 Roma, libera nos Domine." 
 
 " Mangiano pero pesce il Venerdi, et il sabbato, et la Quadragesima per 
 dar da uiuere alii pescatori, et pouer' huomini, come dicono ; doue per 
 non fare all' usanza di Roma hanno intentione di mutare il Venerdi et il 
 Sabbato in due altri giorni della settimana." 
 
 p. 246. " Delle ceremonie ueramente molte ne hanno lasciate, molte 
 introdotte di nuouo et escusandosi che la natura de i tempi porta cosi, non 
 biasimano gli altri che hanno cura delle loro chiese a prouedere et intro- 
 durre altre ceremonie secondo la natura de' tempi, perche dicono, che 
 molte sono state introdotte con buona intentione ma poi col tempo sono 
 state mutate in idolatrie, et superstitione perche i pastori non hanno 
 aperto gli occhi alia prima. Del 1548 adunque e stato stampato un libro 
 in lingua Inglese composto per commandamento del Re da molti Vescoui 
 et letterati, il quale e' poi stato confirmato nel Parlamento ; il qual libro 
 e intitolato le preghiere publiche et 1'administratione de' sacramenti, et 
 le ceremonie. Dapoi e stato commandato che secondo gli ordini del 
 detto libro si debba in Anglia, Walia et a Cales seruare un modo istesso 
 nelle chiese, dico in queste parti, perche in Irlanda, et nelle Isole di 
 quella giuridittione doue non si intende la lingua Inglese, non ui e posto 
 alcuno oblige. Ben e vero che doue sono Studii et uniuersita, come in 
 Oxonia et Cantabrigia, si puo leggere le preghiere in lingua Greca, Latina 
 et Hebrea per eccitare gli studiosi, ma la cena del Signore, come essi 
 chiamano, non si legge, se non in lingua Inglese in ogni luogo. Officiano 
 adunque nelle Chiese la sera, et la mattina, in modo che tutti i Salmi si 
 leggono dodici uolte 1'anno, 1'uno et 1'altro testamento una uolta, eccetto 
 alcuni capitoli dell' Apocalipse. Ben danno differenti lettioni et salmi 
 ne i di solenni ; leggono le letanie raccolte in brevita senza commemo- 
 ratione de' Santi, se non in ultimo. Usano campane, organi, ma non 
 altari, non imagini, non croci, non aque, non fuochi, non altre ceremonie 
 delle mani. Per tutto sono le arme del Re, et certe lettere con alcuni 
 detti della Scrittura nei muri biancheggiati a questo fine ; 
 
 " Finita la institutione dell' omciare nelle chiese vengono al titolo della 
 administratione de' Sacramenti. Vogliono che'l battesimo si faccia nelle 
 chiese la Dominica et le feste, presenti i compadri, alii quali il ministro 
 fa alcuni parole, essortandoli a pregare per colui, che si deue battezare, 
 et rispondere per esso. Fanno la croce nel petto, et nel capo, et tre fiate 
 1'attuffano nell aqua, et 1'ungono, ma Poglio non e sacro ne in questo, ne 
 in altro Sacramento. In caso di necessita si puo battezare in casa. 
 Non danno la communione prima che la confirmatione, che non si fa con 
 oglio santo. La purificatione delle donne, dopo il parto uinti giorni, si fa 
 nella chiesa doue le donne uanno a ringratiar Dio. Chi si deue communi- 
 care, il giorno precedente alia communione, o quell' istesso, inanzi, o 
 subito doppo 1'officio matutino e obligate di andare al Prete, et auisarlo 
 di quanto egli uuol fare j et, se la uita de colui e infame, nota, et scandalosa,
 
 246 THE LAMBETH HEARING 
 
 il prete 1'ammonisse, che egli non uada alia communione se prima egli non 
 havera dechiarata la sua penitenza et affermato di emendarsi, et sodisfare 
 a gli offesi, o prometta di farlo. Questo e commandato nel libro ma non 
 si osserua, perche e stato fatto per una certa apparenza. Quando fanno 
 la communione, i Preti si uestono con le cotte, mandano fuori di choro chi 
 non si communica, prendeno tanto pane, et uino, quanto puo bastare ; 
 et se'l uino non basta nel calice, gli mescolano alquanto d'aqua pura. II 
 pane e pui grosso di quello si usa qui, et e di forma rotonda senza imagine. 
 Si fa la confessione generate dopo longhissime parole. Vogliono, che 
 per ogni casa la Dominica uno si communichi doue alcuni mercanti se la 
 pigliano in burla, et mandano per usanza alcuno de' suoi seruitori, et 
 questo fanno i Preti delle contrade per la elemosina, et anco danno la 
 forma solenne del matrimonio da esser fatto nella chiesa dal Prete presenti 
 li sposi. Quiui e lecito, che li Preti si maritano, et il principale di loro, 
 che e 1' Arciuescouo di Conturberi e maritato. Questo e tolerato anco 
 nelli forestieri, come e Fra Bernardino da Siena, che pur 1'anno passato 
 hebbe un figliuolo. Nell 'estrema ontione usano 1'oglio semplice, et se il 
 pericolo astringe dicono all' ammalato, che se egli si pente di cuore et 
 conferma che Christo sia morto per lui, che egli spiritualmente e communi- 
 cato, se bene con la bocca non prende il Sacramento. Danno pena arbi- 
 traria a chi manca di questi ordini le due prime uolte, ma chi e conuinto 
 a terza uiene dato a perpetua prigione. Queste et altre simili cose sono 
 state ordinate 1'anno del 1548. Ma poi del 1549 fu per auttorita regia 
 Imandato in luce un' altro libro confirmato nel Parlamento, che contiene 
 la forma di dare gli Ordini sacri ; ne dalli nostri alii loro ui e differenza 
 se non che danno sacramento di rinonciare alia dottrina et auttorita del 
 Pontefice. Leggono alcune lettioni ; gli danno i libri della scrittura con 
 1'auttorita del ministerio. Usano le vesti sacerdotali, et pero hanno con- 
 dannato ultimamente il Vescouo Uper [Hooper] il quale non consent! ne 
 al sacramento ne agli habiti, dicendo, che sono ceremonie del testamento 
 uecchio, et seruitu hebraica et idolatrie del nouo, et cosi mettero fine alle 
 ceremonie."
 
 INDEX 
 
 ABBEY DORE, preparation of elements 
 
 at consecration of, 159. 
 Accessusin papal elections, 72, 73. 
 Accession Service of 1901, i$n i. 
 Actiones nostras, at election of Abbess, 
 
 61. 
 Ac ape annulum fidei etc. at marriage, 
 
 216. 
 Acolyte, functions of, in the Roman 
 
 Mass, 121/73. 
 Act, shortened services, i^ni. 
 
 repeal of, desirable, 2 3 . 
 
 Address in marriage service : 
 in Prayer Book (1549), 202. 
 
 Cranmer's work, 203- 
 
 205. 
 
 sources of, 205. 
 
 in Prayer Book (1662), 202, 
 
 217. 
 in Agenda of Mentz, Wiirz- 
 
 burg, Salzburg, Strassburg, 202. 
 in Manuale (Jesuit) for Japan, 
 
 203. 
 in Pastorale of St. Omer, 202 ; 
 
 of Mechlin, Passau, 202. 
 
 Rituale of Augsburg, 203. 
 
 in Sacerdotale of Rouen, 202 ; 
 
 of Brixen, 203. 
 in English Roman Catholic 
 
 books, 203. 
 in American Book of Common 
 
 Prayer, 2O52. 
 
 Administrare, meaning of, i3o2. 
 Aeterni Patris, papal bull, 67. 
 Aethelwulf and Judith, marriage of, 
 
 216. 
 Aethiopic Liturgy, preparation of 
 
 elements, 104, 106. 
 
 Agenda : 
 
 Colone, right hand for marriage 
 
 ring, 209. 
 Constanz, marriage service, 
 
 2 1 6i. 
 German, ring not necessary, 
 
 i852, 186, 205. 
 no prayer for blessing the 
 
 ring, 185. 
 
 marriage service, 202. 
 
 on marriage, 205. 
 
 Noyon : right hand for mar- 
 riage, 209. 
 Salzburg : marriage service, 
 
 202. 
 Strassburg: marriage service, 
 
 202. 
 
 Agnes, St., outside the walls, mosaics 
 
 in, 56. 
 Agram, making of the chalice, 123, 
 
 1 68. 
 Ainay, monks of, making the chalice, 
 
 166. 
 
 Agnus Dei, 41. 
 Aguirre, J. Saenz de, Council of 
 
 Valentia, io82. 
 Aix-en-Provence, making the chalice, 
 
 177. 
 
 Alb, coronation ornament, 236. 
 Alcuin Club, 28, 29, 33, 35. 
 
 committee of, on Gradin, $6ni. 
 
 Alexander III., Licet de fitanda, 68. 
 
 Alexander VI., 40. 
 
 Alexander ab Alexandro, marriage 
 
 ring, 211. 
 
 Alexander of Hales, 124. 
 Alexandrine Liturgies, 102, 103. 
 Allen, Mr. E. A., 136. 
 
 347
 
 248 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Allestree Library, 200, 219. 
 
 All Hallows, Barking, mixed chalice, 
 
 1 60. 
 All Saints', Wandsworth, mutilation 
 
 of services at, i in. 
 All Souls' College, Oxford, elections, 
 
 74- 
 Alpbabetum Sacerdotum, making the 
 
 chalice, 128. 
 
 lifting the veil, 133. 
 
 uncovering the chalice, 
 
 150. 
 
 Alsatia, making the chalice, 175. 
 Altar, bare, 31. 
 
 cards, 30. 
 
 in Spain, 35. 
 
 cloth or frontal, 30, 33. 
 
 curtains, 32. 
 
 used as a credence, 996, 100, 
 
 I262. 
 
 one only with Greeks, 103. 
 
 Altars, English, Mr. St. John Hope 
 
 on, 28. 
 
 destroyed by Puritans, 234. 
 
 three in Coptic Sanctuary, 103. 
 
 Alvarez, Francisco, Aethiopic 
 
 Liturgy, 105. 
 Amalarius, meaning of officium, 
 
 125*3. 
 
 expulsion of catechumens, 134. 
 
 Ambrose, St., election of, 64. 
 
 school of, 52. 
 
 Ambrosian books on marriage ring, 
 
 208. 
 
 Mass, ceremonies of, 121. 
 
 Missal, making the chalice, 122, 
 
 123- 
 
 Rituale, communion for the 
 
 new-married, 199. 
 
 formula for putting on mar- 
 riage ring, 214. 
 
 Amendment of rubrics, difficult, 
 1401. 
 
 Amen, said by all communicants, 
 199*21. 
 
 said by bride and bridegroom 
 
 after communion, i99i. 
 
 American Church, 163. 
 
 Common Prayer Book, 163, 
 
 2C-52. 
 
 Amiens, service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 Amiens, coins given to the bride, 189. 
 
 wine only given to the new 
 
 married, 197. 
 formula for putting on the 
 
 marriage ring, 213. 
 
 making the chalice, 171, 173. 
 
 Amor S, Johannis, wine given to the 
 
 new married, 198. 
 Amys worn over both shoulders, 
 
 5OKI. 
 
 Anarchy, liturgical, 4. 
 Ancilla, the bride is, 191. 
 Andrewes, Bishop, preparation of the 
 
 elements, 158, 159. 
 Angers, making the chalice, 164. 
 Anglicanism, modern, no antiquity 
 
 about, 28. 
 Anglicanus, amendment of rubrics, 
 
 Anselm, St., appointment of, 82. 
 
 Antependium, see frontal. 
 
 Ante inceptionem missae, meaning of, 
 
 128. 
 
 Antiphona ad offerenda\ 
 ' - ad in trot turn ^93*2. 
 
 - ad communionem ) 
 Antiquity, knowledge of, needed, 19. 
 Anthems, removal of from Divine 
 
 Service, 7. 
 
 Anticipation of offertory, 132. 
 Antiquaries, Society of 28, 534- 
 Apostolical constitutions, 94. 
 Aquileia, Daniel Barbaro, patriarch 
 
 of, 233. 
 -- Roman customs at the offertory, 
 
 I2O. 
 
 - making the chalice, 176, 234. 
 
 - two rings blessed for marriage, 
 187. 
 
 -- rite abolished, 135. 
 Aquinas, marriage, 204. 
 Ara, (Spanish Latin), 1 1 2. 
 Argument from omission untrust 
 
 worthy, 236, 240. 
 Aries, making the chalice, i 77. 
 nuptial veil, 193, 194. 
 ---- mass, 198. 
 -- position of bride and bride- 
 
 groom, 184. 
 
 -- figure of St. Stephen at, 49. 
 Armenian Liturgy, 99.
 
 INDEX 
 
 249 
 
 Armenian bride kneels before bride- 
 groom, 190. 
 
 bride's veil, 195. 
 
 ring, 2I27U. 
 
 joining of hands of bride and 
 
 bridegroom, 215. 
 
 Armenian Church, the chalice, 98;; i. 
 Liturgy, preparation of the 
 elements, 99, 1067/1. 
 
 Armilla, a coronation vestment, 237. 
 
 Armin, Robert, muscadine at mar- 
 riages, 1977/1. 
 
 Arras, making the chalice, 176. 
 
 Arrhae, 186. 
 
 in place of a ring, 187. 
 
 not of necessity blessed, 217. 
 
 Asperges in Roman mass, 41, 42. 
 
 Assemani, 95723, 96723, 5. 
 
 Astorga, making of the chalice, 167. 
 
 Atchley, Mr. Cuthbert, altar lights, 
 
 35. 36. 
 
 Athanasian Creed, 8, 237/1, 39. 
 
 Attacks on Prayer Book, 3. 
 
 Attendance on Divine Service by 
 laymen, 4, 39. 
 
 Augsburg, making the chalice, 123. 
 service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 position of bride and bride- 
 groom, 185. 
 
 wine given to the new married, 
 
 198. 
 
 Rituale, marriage service, 203. 
 
 Augustine, St., character of a mater- 
 familias, 191. 
 
 on marriage, 204. 
 Augustine's St., Canterbury, altar, 
 
 28. 
 
 election of abbot, 777/3. 
 
 Augustinian Canons of St. Saviour, 
 making the chalice, 177. 
 
 Aulus Gellius, marriage ring, 211. 
 
 Aungier, G. J., History and Antiqui- 
 ties ofSyon Monastery, 61. 
 
 Autun, making the chalice, 164. 
 service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 coins given to the bride, 189. 
 
 Auxerre, preparation of the elements, 
 140. 
 
 offering the elements, 141. 
 
 making the chalice, 164. 
 
 silver wedding ring, 188. 
 
 Auxerre, nuptial veil, 1937/1. 
 Avranches, making the chalice, 152. 
 position of the bride and bride- 
 groom, 185. 
 
 Quos deus coniunxit &c., 216. 
 
 Ayliffe John, on elections, 677/2. 
 
 BADGER, DR., on the Nestorian 
 
 Ritual, 101, 102. 
 Baeumer, Dom Suitbert, Roman 
 
 Breviary, 4. 
 Balliol College Statutes and Elections, 
 
 74-_ 
 
 Balloting paper for papal elections, 
 717/1. 
 
 Balloting papers, 7 1 . 
 
 Baluze, Etienne, Capitularia Fran- 
 corum, 2167/2. 
 
 Bamberg, service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 Banns of marriage, 182. 
 
 Baptism, surplice for, 5 1 . 
 
 Barbaro, Daniel, patriarch of 
 Aquileia, Venetian ambassador, 
 227. 
 
 report of, 227, 228. 
 
 in Italian, 244. 
 
 inaccuracies and mis- 
 translations of, 226-231. 
 
 untrustworthy on liturgical 
 
 matters, 233. 
 
 on organs, images, altars, 234. 
 
 on English ordinal and com- 
 munion office, 234. 
 
 Barbaro, Francis, patriarch of 
 Aquileia, destroyed its liturgy, 
 
 J 35- 
 Barnwell, Canons of, making the 
 
 chalice, 156, 172. 
 Batiffol, Mgr., History of Roman 
 
 Breviary, 4, i82. 
 Bayeux, making the chalice, 151, 
 
 152, 171. 
 
 Beauvais, making the chalice, 165. 
 Bee, monks of, preparation of the 
 
 chalice, 151, 164. 
 Becon, Thomas, 133, 1497/2, 156. 
 Belgium, bare altars, 31712. 
 Belley, <$uos deus coniunxit, etc., 216. 
 Bellotte, Antoine, 1427/4. 
 Bells, Edward VI. confiscates, 234. 
 Benedicite, omission of, 8.
 
 2 5 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Benedictines of Bursfeld, making the 
 
 chalice, 169. 
 German, making the chalice, 
 
 166. 
 Bengdictus, a hymn, "jnz. 
 
 omission of, 8. 
 
 Benson, Dr. E. W., on Shortened 
 
 Services Act, 10. 
 Beroldus, ceremonies of Ambrosian 
 
 Mass, 121. 
 Bescape, 553- 
 Betrothal, in Sarum Manual, 182. 
 
 service for, 183. 
 
 Bilson, Thomas, 158/11. 
 Birkbeck, Mr. W. J., Russian mar- 
 riages, 192, 199. 
 Bishop, Mr. Edmund, Genius of the 
 
 Roman rite, 40-44, 156. 
 Bishops appointed by the King, 82. 
 
 of the northern province, 17. 
 
 Bishop of London, election of, 76. 
 
 Rochester, election of, 208. 
 
 of Lerida, on f reform of the 
 
 breviary, 13 3/14. 
 Seabury's Communion Office. 
 
 163. 
 
 Serapion's Prayer Book, 94. 
 
 Bishop's ring, finger for, Durand, 
 
 208. 
 
 Roman Pontifical, 208. 
 
 Gavantus, 208. 
 
 vestments in Ravenna mosaics, 
 
 55- 
 Black Canons of Barnwell, making 
 
 the chalice, 156, 172. 
 Blessed bread and wine given to the 
 
 new married, 198, 217. 
 Blessing of the marriage, 1 8 1 . 
 
 of the marriage ring, 185, 187. 
 
 of bread and wine for the new 
 
 married, 196, 197. 
 
 of holy water, surplice for, 5 1 . 
 
 Blomfield, Bishop, loyalty to the 
 
 Prayer Book, i$m. 
 Blunt, Dr. J. H., on marriage, 1 8 1 nz. 
 Bodenstedt, on Armenian wedding, 
 
 190. 
 
 Bologna, blessing of the rings, 187. 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 nuptial veil, 1 94. 
 
 Bonner, Bishop, ut parochiani, 
 
 Bona, Cardinal, ii6wi. 
 
 Book of Ceremonies, 157. 
 
 Book of Common Prayer, see 
 Common Prayer. 
 
 Book-stands on the Altar, 35. 
 
 Bourdeaux, service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 position of bride and bride- 
 groom, 185. 
 
 jewels held by the bride, 186. 
 
 two rings blessed, 187. 
 
 coins given to the bride, 189. 
 
 making the chalice, 170. 
 
 Bourges, offerings during the Euchar- 
 ist, i4oi. 
 
 Bourne, Ralph de, election of, 77/23. 
 
 Bradshaw, Mr. Henry, 151, i54i. 
 
 Bradshaw, Henry, Society, 3 OKI, 
 3ii, i483, i505, J5IH2, 155, 
 
 237/12. 
 
 Braga, preparation of chalice at, 136. 
 
 making the chalice, 170. 
 
 Braganza, Catherine of, devotion to 
 
 the breviary, 39/11. 
 Brand, John, bride cup, 197. 
 Brasenose College, elections, 74. 
 Bread and wine given to the new 
 
 married couple at Evesham, Exeter, 
 
 Hereford, Sarum, Westminster, 
 
 196. 
 Bremen, making the chalice, 131, 
 
 174. 
 Brent, Sir Nathaniel, History of the 
 
 Council of Trent, i82, 134^4. 
 Brett, Thomas, on the chalice, 116, 
 
 1 60. 
 Breviary, recitation of, 4. 
 
 a handbook of devotion, 39^1. 
 
 reform of, ordered, 134. 
 
 reform of, under PiusV., 9/11, 
 
 l82. 
 
 Bride's courtesy to bridegroom, York 
 Sarum, 189. 
 
 Armenia, 190. 
 
 veil, colour, and material of, 
 
 Armenian, 195. 
 
 at Lisieux, Lyons, Paris, 
 
 Soissons, Toledo, 195. 
 in Rituale Romanum, 
 
 Gregory XIII., 195.
 
 INDEX 
 
 251 
 
 Bride's wreath, 195 
 
 Brideales, 197. 
 
 Bridecup of silver gilt, 197. 
 
 Bridges, Mr. Robert, on music, 45. 
 
 Brigittine Nuns, election of abbess, 
 
 6!. 
 
 Brittany, uncovering the chalice, 
 
 *33- 
 Brixen Sacerdotale, marriage service, 
 
 202, 2O43- 
 Brompton Oratory, 44. 
 Brown, Mr. Rawdon, translation of 
 
 Barbaro's report, 228-230, 235. 
 Browne, Sir Thomas, 212. 
 Bucer, on marriage service of the 
 
 Prayer Book, 210, 211. 
 Bull, Aeterni Patris, 67. 
 Obeuntibus -vero <vel cedentibus, 
 
 61. 
 
 Quod a nobis, 135. 
 
 Burckard, John, Ordo celebrandi 
 
 mifsam, 40, 119. 
 
 character of, 407* i. 
 
 Burgo, I. de, consent necessary for 
 
 marriage, 1 8 i i . 
 Burgo de Osma, making of the 
 
 chalice, 170. 
 
 Burial of the dead, surplice at, 5 1 . 
 Bursfeld Benedictines, making of the 
 
 chalice, 169. 
 Bute, Marquess of, Coptic Liturgies, 
 
 104*1. 
 Butler, ancient Coptic churches of 
 
 Egypt, 103. 
 Butterfield, Mr., 21. 
 Byzantine Liturgy, preparation of 
 
 elements in, 105. 
 
 Caeremoniale Parisieme (1703), 36. 
 Cajetan, James, on the papal election, 
 
 70. 
 on preparation of the 
 
 chalice, 117. 
 Calagorra, making of the chalice, 
 
 167 172. 
 Calix, 114. 
 
 maior, 113. 
 
 Camaldulese Monks, making the 
 
 chalice, 176. 
 
 Cambray, making of the chalice, 
 
 i3* !73- 
 
 -- service for betrothal, 183. 
 Cambridge Camden Society, 29. 
 Candlemas procession, surplice at 
 
 5 1 - 
 
 Candles on the altar, 33. 
 Candlesticks on the altar, 29, 33, 
 
 36i. 
 
 ---- at Lyons, 34. 
 --- at Saragossa, 34. 
 Canones et decreta SS. Oecumenici 
 
 Concilii Tridentini, 70/12. 
 Canonical election, 59-88. 
 Canons of St. Denis, Rhemes, 
 
 making the chalice, 168. 
 
 - of St. Victor, Paris, making the 
 chalice, 167. 
 
 -- Regular of St. Augustine, 
 
 making the chalice, 1 18. 
 -- of St. Saviour (Augusti- 
 
 nian) 177. 
 
 - Praemonstratensian, making 
 the chalice, 169, 174. 
 
 -- Black, of Barnwell, making 
 
 the chalice, 172. 
 Canon Uni<versalis Aethiopum 
 
 presentation of the gifts, 103. 
 Carcassonne, making of the chalice, 
 
 168. 
 Cardinal College, Oxford, elections, 
 
 74- 
 
 Care-cloth, material of, 195. 
 -- at Sarum, York, Hereford, 
 
 Exeter, Westminster, 192. 
 Carmelites, making the chalice, 146, 
 
 170. 
 Casale, Monks of, making of the 
 
 chalice, 172. 
 Case against Incense, 227, 236, 240, 
 
 243. 
 Casola, on making of the chalice, 
 
 123. 
 Cassander, Georgius, on Ordo 
 
 Romanus, ii^ni. 
 Catalani, J., on communion of the 
 
 new married, 199. 
 Catechism of Council of Trent on 
 
 marrage, 
 Catechumens expelled before the 
 gospel, 133.
 
 2 5 2 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Catherine of Braganza, Queen, use 
 of the breviary, 39i. 
 
 Cavaleriis, Marcello de, on Domini- 
 can customs at making the chalice, 
 i372. 
 
 Cecil, Lord Hugh, 3. 
 
 Censing at elevation rare in Eng- 
 land, 43. 
 
 of the altar, prayers at 41. 
 
 Ceremonial, exact, 39. 
 
 Early Dominican, 40;* i. 
 
 of native Roman rite, 41. 
 
 simplicity of ancient, 42. 
 
 additions to, 43. 
 
 absence of details for, in earlier 
 
 Roman books, 242. 
 
 Ceremonies at the offertory, medi- 
 aeval, 120. 
 
 Ambrosian, 121. 
 
 early Roman, 113. 
 
 in 2nd century, 93. 
 
 mediaeval Roman, 1 1 6. 
 
 Dominican Friars, 120. 
 
 Ceremony of joining hands in mar- 
 riage, 191. 
 
 Ceriani, Monsignor, on Ambrosian 
 Rite, 121. 
 
 Chaldean custom in presentation of 
 the elements, i o i . 
 
 Chalice, used for collecting votes in 
 elections, 75. 
 
 mixed, use of, 98i, 160. 
 
 elevation of, at Mass, 43. 
 
 in Ordo Romania, 113, 114. 
 
 making of (a) before the service, 
 
 128, 129, 143, 164-169. 
 
 (b) between the Epistle 
 
 and Gospel, 125, 129, 130, 170- 
 
 '73- 
 (c) after the gospel or 
 
 creed, 125, 131, 173-178. 
 
 made by the Pope, 1 1 8 . 
 
 the celebrant, 117. 
 
 a layman, 139. 
 
 publicly, 162x2. 
 
 see elements. 
 
 Chalons-sur-Marne, making of the 
 
 chalice, 166. 
 Chalons-sur-Saone, making of the 
 
 chalice, 171. 
 Chancels, 46. 
 
 Chandler, Richard, Life of William 
 
 Waynflete, 6$ni2, 84;! i. 
 Change of hand for the marriage 
 
 ring, 210. 
 Changes in Marriage Service of 
 
 1549, 200. 
 First Prayer Book of Edward 
 
 VI., 236. 
 Chapel Royal of James I., making 
 
 the chalice, 158. 
 Charivari forbidden, 200. 
 Charles the Great, introduction of 
 
 low mass, 119. 
 I., ornaments delivered to, at 
 
 coronation, 237. 
 II., ornaments delivered to, at 
 
 coronation, 237. 
 Borromeo, St., Ordo celebrandi 
 
 matrimonium, 
 
 instructions on marriage, 
 
 2O52, 219. 
 
 on finger for marriage 
 
 ring, 208, 212. 
 
 Charterhouse monks, preparation of 
 
 elements, 131. 
 making the chalice, 1 74, 
 
 '75- 
 Chartres, making of the chalice, 
 
 167. 
 
 ringing a bell for mass, 125^4. 
 
 Chasuble, bishop's vestment, 55. 
 
 shaped surplice, 49. 
 
 Chaucer, bride's crown, 196. 
 
 torch borne at marriages, 
 
 i972. 
 
 the ends of marriage, 2O32. 
 
 Cheetham, Archdeacon, on election 
 of bishop of Rochester, 76. 
 
 Cherisy, Nivelon de, ritual of 
 Soissons, 130. 
 
 Chevalier, Ulysse, ordinary of Laon, 
 
 Chart matriculariui (sacrist) prepares 
 
 the gifts, 139. 
 Christ Church, Canterbury, church- 
 
 ing cloth, 242. 
 Christianity, liberal, 17. 
 Church Discipline Bill, 3, 
 Churches, restored, 33. 
 Churching cloth, 242. 
 - veil ordered, 24Z. 
 
 23-
 
 INDEX 
 
 253 
 
 Churching veil, Puritan objection to, 
 
 242. 
 Cicendelarius bebdomadarius at Milan, 
 
 presents the gifts, 121. 
 Cingulum benedictum for the new 
 
 married couple, 194. 
 Cistercian customs at the offertory, 
 
 126, 127. 
 
 making the chalice, 167. 
 
 Clarke, Dr. Samuel, Arian Liturgy, 
 
 20. 
 Clarendon, Constitutions of, on 
 
 elections, 82. 
 Clement of Alexandria on marriage 
 
 ring, 187. 
 
 VII., election of, 68. 
 Clementine Liturgy, 93. 
 
 Clerks hold veil over new married 
 
 couple, 193. 
 
 Club, Alcuin, 28,29, 33, 35, ^6ni. 
 Cluny, monks of, making the chalice, 
 
 75- 
 
 Cochleus, Speculum Missae, i2O2. 
 
 Codex Rossanensis, presentation of 
 gifts, 102, 103. 
 
 Coemptio, 186. 
 
 Coercion Act deprecated, 23. 
 
 Coins given to the bride, 188. 
 
 by the bridegroom, 189. 
 
 away at weddings, 189. 
 
 College elections, reform of, 754- 
 
 of Physicians, election of Presi- 
 dent, 59, 75, 76. 
 
 Collier, Jeremy, making the chalice, 
 i592. 
 
 Colobium sindonis, coronation, 237. 
 
 Colocza, two rings blessed, 187. 
 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 Colone, Agenda, 209. 
 
 making of chalice, 1 69. 
 Colum, strainer for wine at the 
 
 Eucharist, 1 142. 
 Commandments, omission of, 12. 
 Commission, Royal, on present 
 
 disorders, 19. 
 Common Prayer, Book of : 
 
 (1549), Blessing of the marriage 
 
 ring, 185. 
 
 Bride's courtesy to the 
 
 bridegroom, 190. 
 
 Common Prayer, Book of: 
 
 Communion for the new married 
 
 prescribed, 198. 
 ---- Address in marriage 
 
 service, 200-205 
 ---- Ring put on the left 
 
 hand, 206-214. 
 ---- "Those whom God hath 
 
 joined, &c.," added, 214-216. 
 ---- general view of changes 
 
 in marriage service, 217. 
 -- (1662) Attacks on, 3. 
 -- -- Conception of Divine 
 
 Service, 4, 5. 
 
 --- Regalism of, 8. 
 -- - Mutilation of services, 
 
 -- -- Rules of, disregarded, 12. 
 
 ---- Preface to, 1 6. 
 
 -- - Recitation of Psalter in, 
 
 16. 
 
 --- Proper Psalms in, 16. 
 ---- An aid to unity, 20, 
 ---- Puritan objections to, 
 
 213. 
 
 - (Convocation), Criticism of, 
 17- 
 
 -- changes in exemplified by 
 rubrics, 15, 18. 
 
 - (American), 163. 
 Communion for the new married, 
 
 Ambrosian Rituale, 199. 
 -- in Prayer Book of 1549, 
 
 198. 
 --- not in American Prayer 
 
 Book, 1997/3. 
 Comparison of earlier and later 
 
 Or dines, 119. 
 Comper, Mr. J. N., 32-35, 37, 193, 
 
 194. 
 
 -- the English Altar, 32, 33. 
 Compromise, election by way of, 
 
 61, 76. 
 Confiteor in Roman Mass, 41, 
 
 - Lyons Missal, 138. 
 Cong6 a" 6lire, 64, 66ni. 
 -- form of, 82. 
 
 of William Waynflete, 66i, 
 
 84. 
 
 of Matthew Parker, 84.
 
 254 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Constantinople, liturgy of, 97. 
 Constanz, Agenda, marriage service, 
 
 zi6ni. 
 
 Constitutiones Apostolicae, 94. 
 Constitutions of Clarendon on 
 
 elections, 82. 
 Constitution Quia propter, 65, 74, 
 
 75, 81. 
 
 Constitutions ofLanfranc, 151. 
 Consuetudinary of Sarum, 152. 
 of St. Mary's Abbey, York, 
 
 156. 
 
 Consuetudines (Cistercian), 126. 
 Continental Reforms of i6th 
 
 century, 73. 
 Convocation of Canterbury, 15, 
 
 i572. 
 
 1 9S> 3 *3 *4- 
 
 Prayer Book, 17. 
 
 rubrics of, 15, 18. 
 
 of York on the offertory, 17. 
 
 Cope for blessing of marriage rings, 
 187. 
 
 coronation vestment, 236. 
 
 Copts, position of bride and bride- 
 groom in marriage service, 184. 
 
 cross and girdle given to the 
 
 bride, 187. 
 
 Coptic Liturgy, preparation of ele- 
 ments, 103, 106. 
 
 Sanctuary, 103. 
 
 Cordova, making of the chalice, 
 169, 178. 
 
 Corn at weddings in Russia, 196. 
 
 Coronation ring, finger for in Eng- 
 land and France, 208. 
 
 service of William and Mary, 
 
 236, 237. 
 
 James II. (Sandford's 
 
 engravings), 238. 
 
 vestments, 236. 
 
 Corpus Christi College, Oxford, 
 
 elections, 75. 
 Cosin, Bishop, on marriage, 2057:2. 
 
 on marriage ring, 1857*3. 
 
 Courtesy of bride to her husband, 
 
 discontinuance, 190. 
 Coutances, making the chalice, 150, 
 
 164. 
 
 inspection of the chalice, 133. 
 
 S^uos deus coniunxit, &(., 2 1 6. 
 
 Covel, John, Greek marriages, 205. 
 Covering the hands of the new 
 
 married with a stole or rose, 192. 
 Cranmer, marriage service, 203,205. 
 change of hand for marriage 
 
 ring, 211. 
 omits the bride's courtesy to the 
 
 bridegroom, 190. 
 
 love of novelties, 218. 
 
 Credence, used by Archbishop Laud, 
 
 159- . 
 
 chief altar used for, 99^5. 
 
 Credo, singing of, forbidden at mar- 
 riage, 200. 
 
 Creed, of late introduction in Roman 
 Liturgy, 119111. 
 
 Creighton, Dr. Mandell, Lambeth 
 hearing, 227. 
 
 Cross, absent from English stoles and 
 maniples, 53. 
 
 in procession or on the altar, 
 
 3- 
 
 given to the bride at the mar- 
 riage, 187. 
 
 Crosses, "little black," 235. 
 
 Daniel Barbaro on use of, 235. 
 
 Crowns, worn at marriage, 1 8 1 . 
 
 nuptial, of olive, 195. 
 
 Crucifix in procession, 3 1 . 
 
 on the altar. 
 
 Cruets, large, 144711. 
 
 silver, 144711. 
 
 gilt, 14477 1. 
 
 Curates, their love of novelties, 218. 
 
 Cushion for mass book, 1267/2. 
 
 Custodes at Milan, 121, 122. 
 
 Customary of St. Augustine's, 
 Canterbury, elections, 77713. 
 
 Customs of the Eastern Syrians at 
 preparation of gifts, 100. 
 
 Cyril, St., of Jerusalem, on liturgy 
 93- 
 
 DALMATIC OR TUNICLE, LIKE A SUR- 
 PLICE, 54, 55. 
 
 Dandini, Jerome, Maronite liturgy, 
 97713. 
 
 D'arcy, Mr., on offering the gifts in 
 the East, 99. 
 
 Davidson, Dr. Randall, on interpre- 
 tation of rubrics, 18.
 
 INDEX 
 
 2 55 
 
 Davidson, Dr. Randall, his policy, 19. 
 
 Deacon merely witnesses a marriage, 
 181 n 2. 
 
 Deacon, Thomas, liturgy of, making 
 the chalice, 1 6 1 . 
 
 Decently apparelled, meaning of, 240. 
 
 added in 1662, 243. 
 
 De expositione missae ; directions for 
 making the chalice, 129. 
 
 De Fontenay : coins given to the 
 bride, 189. 
 
 Denier tournois pour ipouier : on 
 wedding ring, 189. 
 
 Denny and Lacey, congt d'6lire, 
 84/22. 
 
 Denziger, H., Coptic marriage cus- 
 toms, 184, 187, 209. 
 
 Armenian marriage customs, 
 
 215. 
 
 Description of Liturgy in Apostoli- 
 cal Constitutions, 94. 
 
 by Pseudo-Dionysius, 94. 
 
 Deus qui corda at elections, 6 1 . 
 
 Deus qui humanae : introduced at 
 offertory, 1 1 8 . 
 
 in Westminster Missal, 155. 
 
 Deus qui non mortem : Lyons missal, 
 138. 
 
 Deus qui potestate in marriage service 
 of Constanz, zi6m. 
 
 "Devotions" of the middle ages, 37. 
 
 Diamper, Synod of, 101, 102. 
 
 Dignus, dignior, dignissimus, 84. 
 
 Dionysius Barsalibaeus, on the Litur- 
 gy of St. James, 96. 
 
 Disciplina arcani, 106. 
 
 Discipline, Dr. Gore on, 22. 
 
 Divine Service, meaning and con- 
 struction of, 4. 
 
 Scriptural elements in, 5. 
 
 Prayer Book conception 
 
 of, 5- 
 
 Lord's Prayer in, 6. 
 
 required of laymen, 397*1. 
 Council of Trent desired 
 
 reform of, 16. 
 
 Dollinger, Dr. Ign. von, on matri- 
 mony, l8l7M. 
 
 Dominicans, exact ceremonial of, 40. 
 
 presentation of the elements, 
 
 112, 120. 
 
 Dominicans, making the chalice, 145, 
 
 170. 
 
 missal of, 146. 
 
 adoption of Ambrosian liturgy 
 
 by, i552. 
 Dorsal, 32, 33, 
 Douai editions of Sarum Manual, 
 
 241. 
 
 Double Courtal represented in coron- 
 ation processions, James II., 238. 
 
 George II. and III., 239. 
 
 Victoria, 239. 
 
 Dowden, John, mixed chalice in 
 
 Scotland, 163. 
 Ducange, preparation of elements by 
 
 a layman, 139. 
 
 jugalis used at Aries, 194/23. 
 
 meaning of medius, 2077/2. 
 
 Duchesne, Mgr. : on preparation of 
 
 gifts, 107. 
 
 on Mons. Ceriani, 121. 
 
 Durand, William, finger for bishop's 
 
 ring, 208. 
 Durant, John Stephen : finger for 
 
 marriage ring, 207. 
 Durham, cruets large and gilt, 1447*1. 
 Dickinson, F. H., Sarum Missal, 
 
 152. 
 Du Pin, J., mixing the chalice in 
 
 Mozarabic rite, in. 
 
 EAST SYRIAN CHURCHES, preparation 
 
 of the elements, 100. 
 East window, importance of, 33. 
 Eastern Liturgies, preparation of the 
 
 elements, 93-106. 
 
 (See also Elements). 
 Ectene in Malabar liturgy, 102. 
 Edmund, King, Laws of, betrothal, 
 
 1827*3. 
 Edward VI's. Prayer Book, 230-234. 
 
 Vestments, 56. 
 
 making the chalice, 157. 
 
 crosses in, 235. 
 
 Eeles, Mr. F. C. Lawlessness in the 
 
 Church of England, uni. 
 Ego ex parte del omnipotentis, marriage 
 
 service of Salamanca, 215. 
 Ego <vos coniungo in matrimonium : 
 
 Roman Sacerdotalia, 191. 
 Eichstadt, making of the chalice, 173.
 
 256 INDEX 
 
 Election :perinspiratjonem,6$, 67,80. 
 
 per scrufinium, 60-63, 68, 70, 
 
 79- 
 
 per compromissum, 61, 79. 
 
 by committee, 76. 
 
 of Popes, 67, 69. 
 
 Gregory VII., 64. 
 
 Clement VII., 68. 
 
 Leo XIII., 70, 71. 
 
 of Archbishops. 
 
 S. Anselm, 82. 
 
 Stratford, 77. 
 
 Robert of Winchelsey, 77. 
 
 Parker, 78, 79. 
 
 Maclagan, 85. 
 
 of Bishops. 
 
 Roger of Salisbury, 82. 
 
 William Waynflete, 65, 66wi. 
 
 Dr. Temple, 79, 87. 
 
 of London, 76, 87. 
 
 of Rochester, 76. 
 
 by chapter, 82 n i. 
 
 Dean. 
 
 William de Pickering, 69. 
 
 Abbot Islip, 64, 79. 
 Whiting, 78. 
 
 of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, 
 
 773- 
 
 Heads of Colleges. 
 
 All Souls, 74-84. 
 
 Baliol, 74. 
 
 Brasenose, 74. 
 
 Cardinal College, 74. 
 
 Corpus Christi, 74. 
 
 Lincoln, 74. 
 
 Magdalen, 74. 
 
 Merton, 74. 
 
 New College, 74. 
 
 Pembroke, 75. 
 
 Queen's, 74. 
 
 St. John's, 75. 
 
 Royal College of Physicians, 
 
 59, 75. 7<5- 
 
 Publication of, 66, 88. 
 
 Recent, at York, Winchester, Lin- 
 coln, 66. 
 
 at Wells, 67. 
 
 Elements : preparation and presen- 
 tation of 
 
 Aethiopic Liturgy, 94, ioo2, 
 
 104, 1 06, 
 
 Elements : preparation and presen- 
 tation of 
 
 Agram, 123, 168. 
 
 Alexandrine Liturgies, 102, 
 
 103. 
 
 American Church, 163. 
 Ambrosian rite, ii8z, 
 
 122. 
 
 Apostolical Constitutions, 93, 
 
 94- 
 
 Aquileia, 120, 234. 
 
 Armenian Liturgy, 99. 
 
 Augsburg, 122, 123. 
 
 Auxerre, 140. 
 
 Avranches, 152. 
 
 Barn well, 156. 
 
 Bayeux, 151, 152,171. 
 
 Bee, 151, 164. 
 
 Braga, 136, 170. 
 
 Bremen, 131. 
 
 Byzantine Liturgy, 105. 
 
 Cambray, 131. 
 
 Chaldean Liturgy 101. 
 
 Charterhouse monks, 131. 
 
 Cistercians, 126, 127, 167. 
 
 Clementine Liturgy, 93. 
 
 Constantinopolitan rite 97, 
 
 106. 
 Coptic Liturgy, 94, 103, 105, 
 
 106. 
 Dominican Friars, 112. 
 
 East Syrian Liturgy, too, 105. 
 
 Gallican Liturgy, 107, 128, 
 
 129. 
 
 Germania inferior, 129. 
 
 Gregorian Sacramentary, 113. 
 
 Hereford, 153. 
 
 LeMans, 142. 
 
 Liege, 145. 
 
 Lincoln, 153, 154. 
 
 Lyons, 135, 138, 139, 172, 
 
 176. 
 
 Malabar Liturgy, i o i . 
 
 Maronites, 106. 
 
 Mentz, 136. 
 
 Modena, 120. 
 
 Mozarabic rite, 108, 109, in, 
 
 112. 
 
 Nestorian, 100. 
 
 Non-Jurors' Liturgy, 1 6 1 . 
 
 Noyon, 144.
 
 INDEX 
 
 257 
 
 Elements : preparation and presen- 
 tation of 
 
 Ordines Romani, 113-9. 
 
 Palencia. 130. 
 
 Paris, 123, 165. 
 
 Pseudo-Dionysius, 94. 
 
 Reformed Roman Missal, 135. 
 
 Religious Orders, 145, 146. 
 
 Roman, 131. 
 
 Rouen, 151, 165. 
 
 Salamanca, 112. 
 
 Sarum, 151, 15 2, 171. 
 
 Scottish Church, 163. 
 
 Seville, 131, 174. 
 
 Soissons, 130, 142, 170, 171. 
 Spanish Liturgies, see Mozara- 
 
 bic. 
 
 St. James' Liturgy, 95. 
 
 St. James' Abbey, Lidge, 145. 
 
 St. Mary's Abbey York, 156. 
 - St. Wast, 145. 
 
 Stowe Missal, 147, 149. 
 
 - Toledo, 123, 169. 
 
 - Tours, 144. 
 
 - Triers, 136. 
 
 Verdun, 128. 
 
 - Wells, 153. 
 
 Westminster, 155, 166. 
 
 - York (S. Mary's Abbey), 156. 
 
 (See also pp. 164-78.) 
 
 Elements prepared together by Dom- 
 inicans, 135. 
 
 and at Lyons, 135. 
 
 Elevation, introduction of, 43. 
 
 Elizabeth, Queen : Prayer book of, 
 158. 
 
 Eligo in summum pontificem, at Elec- 
 tion of Pope, 71*13. 
 
 Ely Pontifical : direction for kneel- 
 ing in marriage service, 191. 
 
 Emigres, French, recitation of brevi- 
 ary by, 200. 
 
 Emperor, prayers for, 8. 
 
 English marriage customs, 189-97. 
 
 litany, Daniel Barbaro, on, 229. 
 
 altars, Mr. St. John Hope, 28. 
 
 liturgies, making the chalice, 
 146-1 63. 
 
 (See Elements.) 
 
 English Roman Catholic books ; 
 hand for marriage ring, 210, 214. 
 
 Entrance, great, Liturgy of Constan- 
 tinople, 97. 
 
 at Auxerre, 140-42. 
 
 Epistle, subdeacon sits and reads, at 
 Lyons, i39i. 
 
 Erfurt, St. Peters : making of the 
 chalice, 166. 
 
 Etchmiadzin, altar used as credence, 
 100. 
 
 Etheridge, J. W., Syrian ritual, 96, 
 
 97- 
 
 Ethiopian churches, place of pre- 
 paration of gifts, IOOK2, I 06. 
 
 Ethiopic Didascalia on presentation ot 
 the gifts, 94. 
 
 Eucharist reserved without light, 30 
 ni. 
 
 Eucharistic Service : mutilation of, 
 12. 
 
 Evelyn, John, use of incense, 238 
 
 3- 
 
 Evening weddings in Russia, 199. 
 
 Evensong, shortened, 9. 
 
 Evesham, joining of hands in mar- 
 riage, 191. 
 
 nuptial veil, 192. 
 
 bread and wine given to the 
 
 new married, 196. 
 
 marriage ring, placing of, 206, 
 
 213. 
 
 Exact ceremonial, 39. 
 
 Exeter, clerk's surplice, 50713. 
 
 joining of hands in marriage, 
 
 191. 
 
 nuptial veil held by four clerks, 
 
 192, 193. 
 
 placing of bride and bride- 
 groom at marriage, 184. 
 
 bread and wine given to the 
 
 new married couple, 196. 
 
 Pontifical, placing of the mar- 
 riage ring, 2072. 
 
 Exorcism, surplice for, 5 1 . 
 
 Extra aram, elements placed, 130. 
 
 FANON, Ambrosian, 52. 
 Farm Street, ceremonial, 44. 
 Ferte oblationes in the mass, 97, 132. 
 Fiddlers at weddings, 199. 
 Fillet, purple and white, for the new 
 married, 195. 
 
 S
 
 INDEX 
 
 Finger for bishop's ring, Gavantus, 
 
 208. 
 
 Roman pontifical, 208. 
 
 Durant, 207. 
 
 for coronation ring, 208. 
 
 for marriage ring, Ambrosian 
 
 books, 208. 
 
 St. Charles Borromeo, 208. 
 
 Sarum manual, 206. 
 
 Prayer Book, 206, 212. 
 
 anatomical peculiarity in 
 
 fourth, 212. 
 First reformed Prayer Book, changes 
 
 in marriage ceremonies, 182. 
 First Prayer Book of Edward VI., 
 
 making the chalice, 157. 
 Flaccus Illyricus, making the chalice, 
 
 176. 
 
 Flammeum : bride's veil, 193, 195. 
 Fetcher, Giles, on Russian weddings, 
 
 196. 
 Florence, bells rung during Gloria in 
 
 excelsis, 125124.. 
 Flowers on altar, 33, 126722, 141 
 
 wi. 
 
 unknown at Saragossa, 35. 
 
 Forbes, Dr. Alexander, making the 
 
 chalice in Scotland, 163. 
 Formula for putting on the marriage 
 
 ring, 213. 
 
 at Amiens, 213. 
 
 at Westminster, 213. 
 
 in Rituale (Paul V.), 214. 
 
 Franey, J. S., The Case against In- 
 cense, 227721. 
 Franciscan friars adopting Ambrosian 
 
 liturgy, i552. 
 Fregi, on voting papers, 7 1 . 
 Freising, making of the chalice, 
 
 170. 
 
 blessing of marriage rings, 187. 
 
 Friars, Carmelite, making the chalice, 
 
 170. 
 Dominican, making the chalice, 
 
 170. 
 Hieronymite, making the 
 
 chalice, 170. 
 Minor de Observantia, making 
 
 the chalice, 177. 
 
 of St. Paul, making the 
 
 French 6migr&s, recitation of breviary, 
 200. 
 
 Revolution, 201. 
 
 Frontal, altar or antependium, 30, 34, 
 
 I4IHI. 
 
 Frontlet or over frontal, 30. 
 Fowler, J. T., Cruets used at Dur- 
 ham, 144721. 
 
 GALLICAN LITURGY, Dismissal of the 
 
 catechumens, 107. 
 
 Presentation of gifts, 107. 
 
 St. Isidore of Seville on, 
 
 108. 
 prayers at the offertory omitted 
 
 in the prayer book of Edward VI., 
 
 157- 
 Gardiner, S. R., election of bishops 
 
 by chapters, 82721. 
 Garland, bride's, 195. 
 Gasquet and Bishop on the Book of 
 
 Common Prayer, 231. 
 Dom Aidan, election of Abbot 
 
 Whiting, 78. 
 
 making the chalice, 156. 
 
 ring in marriage, 206. 
 
 Gatianus, St., at Tours, making the 
 
 chalice, 175. 
 Gattico, J. B., election of popes, 76, 
 
 77- 
 
 of Clement VII., 68. 
 
 Gavantus, finger for bishop's ring, 
 
 208. 
 Gelasian Sacramentary, nuptial 
 
 masses in, 198. 
 
 Geneva, making the chalice, 165. 
 Genuflexion, introduction of, 43. 
 George II., coronation procession of, 
 
 239- 
 George III., coronation procession 
 
 of, 239. 
 
 German Agenda, marriage service, 
 202 et seqq. 
 
 Benedictines, making of the 
 
 chalice, 166. 
 
 St. of Paris, on the liturgy, 
 
 107. 
 
 chalice, 173. 
 
 Germania inferior, making the chalice,. 
 
 129. 
 
 Gerona, making the chalice, 178. 
 white lenten veil, 35.
 
 INDEX 
 
 259 
 
 Ghent, right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 Gianolio, Matthaei, antiquity of 
 
 nuptial veil, 1 94. 
 Gibson, Edmund, on churching veil, 
 
 241. 
 
 Gifts, preparation of, see Elements. 
 Giving of a ring in marriage, 1 8 1 . 
 Girdle, marriage, 195. 
 Glen, I. B. de, Malabar Liturgy, 
 
 102. 
 Gloria in Excelsis in Roman mass, 41, 
 
 126. 
 Gnesen, Quos deus coniunxit, etc., 
 
 215. 
 Goar, on marriage rings, 185, 187, 
 
 209. 
 on marriage crowns, 195. 
 
 communion of the new mar- 
 ried, 199. 
 - Greek marriages, 183, 195, 
 
 '99- 
 
 Gold, wedding ring of, 187. 
 Gondy, de, marriage address, 202. 
 Gore, Dr., on discipline, 22. 
 Gradin, absence, 30. 
 
 to be removed, 33. 
 
 at Saragossa, 34. 
 
 no court decided in favour of, 
 
 first appearance of, 1267*2. 
 
 none at Auxerre, 1 4 1 n \ . 
 Granada, white lenten veil, 35. 
 Gran, making of the chalice, 172. 
 
 two marriage rings blessed, 187. 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 Grassi, Paride de, character of Burck- 
 
 ard, 407*1. 
 
 Grate for grille, 627*1. 
 Great entrance, 95, 97, 141. 
 Greek nuptial crowns, 195. 
 
 marriages, 199. 
 
 two rings blessed for marriage, 
 
 187. 
 
 church, teaching on marriage, 
 
 205. 
 Green, Mr. Everard, altar ornaments, 
 
 34, 35- 
 
 Gregory of Tours, anticipatory ador- 
 ation of the elements, 107. 
 
 Gregory XIII. (Rituale), directions 
 for joining hands in marriage, 191. 
 
 communion of the new mar- 
 ried, 198. 
 
 two marriage rings blessed, 1 86. 
 
 bride's veil, 195. 
 
 XV., constitution of, papal 
 
 elections, 69. 
 Gregorian Sacramentary, preparation 
 
 of gifts, 113. 
 
 place of the introit, 125. 
 
 mass for the king, 12. 
 
 Gregorsmiinster, making the chalice, 
 
 i?5- 
 
 Grille, 62711. 
 
 Grissell, Mr. Hartvvell D., papal 
 elections, 70, 71. 
 
 Groomofthevestryatcoronation,238. 
 
 Grueber, Mr. H. A., medals for wed- 
 dings, 1 8 8, 189. 
 
 Gueranger, Dom Prosper, Portuguese 
 local customs, 1367/1. 
 
 Guignard, Ph., Cistercian customs at 
 the offertory, 127. 
 
 HADDAN & STUBBS, Penitential of 
 
 Theodore, 146. 
 
 Halifax, Lord, on ceremonial, 45, 46. 
 Hallowed host given to the new 
 
 married, 198. 
 Hammond, Mr. C. E., liturgies, 
 
 Syriac, 96. 
 
 Malabar, 101. 
 Aethiopic, 104. 
 Hand for marriage ring, 206-214. 
 Hands joined in marriage, 191. 
 Hart, Rev. Samuel, Bishop Seabury's 
 
 communion office, 1637*3. 
 Hearing at Lambeth, the, 227-246. 
 Hedonism in ceremonial, 45. 
 Hefele, von, presentation of the gifts, 
 
 IO87Z2. 
 
 Henderson, Dr., order v., marriage 
 
 rubric, 191. 
 order viii., coins distributed at 
 
 marriage, 189. 
 
 order ix., coins distributed at 
 
 marriage, 188, 189. 
 
 joining the hands in marriage, 
 
 191. 
 
 x., nuptial veil, 192.
 
 260 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Hereford use, 1537*3. 
 
 Hereford, position of bride and bride- 
 groom, 184. 
 
 joining of hands in marriage, 
 
 191. 
 
 bread and wine given to the new 
 
 married, 196. 
 
 nuptial veil held by four clerks, 
 
 192, 193. 
 
 placing of marriage ring, 213. 
 
 marriage service, 205. 
 
 making the chalice, 153, 178. 
 
 Herman, Archbishop, marriage ser- 
 vice of 1549, 214. 
 
 Hieronymite Friars, making of the 
 chalice, 170. 
 
 Hierurgia, Dr. Rock (183 3), 36. 
 
 Hippocras, given to the new married 
 couple, 197. 
 
 Hirschau, monks of, making the 
 chalice, 175. 
 
 Hispano-Gallican rites, 149. 
 
 Hittorp, M., Roman liturgy, 113. 
 
 Roman ceremonial, 120. 
 
 Hoeynck, F. A., Augsburg missal, 
 1237*4, 
 
 Holy Scripture, reading of, 4. 
 
 in Divine service, 5. 
 
 Holy Trinity, Wandsworth, Good 
 Friday services, 1 1 n i . 
 
 Hooker, on gifts in marriage, 1857*3, 
 
 Hope, Mr. St. John, English altars 
 
 28, 32. 
 Host, hallowed, given to the new 
 
 married, 198. 
 
 elevation of, 43. 
 
 Hour for marriage in Russia, 199. 
 Hours of our Lady, 3 8 . 
 Huntingdon, Dr., American Prayer 
 
 Book, 2167*1. 
 Hymns, meaning of, 72. 
 
 IMAGES, destruction of, in England, 
 
 234. 
 
 Imitation in ceremonial, 45i. 
 Ince, Dr., on morning service, 201. 
 Incense at mass, 42 
 Influence of classical custom, 212. 
 Innocent III., on celebration of mass, 
 
 1 1 6, 117. 
 Introit, anthem at, 41. 
 
 Inventories of Christ Church, 
 Canterbury ; churching cloth, 242. 
 
 / require and charge you, added to 
 marriage service, 205. 
 
 Irish customs in preparation of gifts, 
 149. 
 
 Iron wedding ring, 187. 
 
 Isidore of Seville, on the Liturgy, 108. 
 
 on marriage girdle and veil, 195. 
 
 on marriage, 204. 
 
 on hand for marriage ring, 207. 
 
 Islip, Abbot, election of, per inspira- 
 tionem, 64, 65. 
 
 obit of, 29. 
 
 Islip roll, altar in, 28. 
 
 Issaverdens, Dr. James, on the 
 Armenian rites, 99. 
 
 Italian furniture for altar in six- 
 teenth century, 1267*2. 
 
 paintings, showing ring finger, 
 
 2107*4. 
 
 Isleworth, Brigittine Nun's election, 
 
 61. 
 Ite, missa est, in Roman mass, 41. 
 
 JACOBITE SYRIANS, the mixed chalice, 
 
 9801. 
 Cross given to the bride, 
 
 187. 
 
 James I., coronation service of, 158. 
 use of mixed chalice in his 
 
 Chapel Royal, 158. 
 
 ornaments at coronation, 237. 
 
 James II., Coronation procession or, 
 
 238. 
 
 ornaments delivered to, 237. 
 
 Japan, see Jesuit. 
 
 Jesuit Manuale for Japan, marriage 
 
 service in, 203. 
 
 joining of hands pre- 
 scribed, 192. 
 
 no ring ordered, 186. 
 
 lohanne, lohannes de, Sicilian rites, 
 
 1357*2. 
 John Maro, St., on the Liturgy of 
 
 St. James, 96. 
 Johnson, John, on the mixed chalice, 
 
 161. 
 Johnson, Dr., grate of the nuns, 
 
 6zni.
 
 INDEX 
 
 261 
 
 Joining of hands in marriage, 181, 
 
 191, 192, 217. 
 Jones, W. H. Rich : Sarum custom 
 
 at the offertory, 152. 
 Joppi, Vincenzo, liturgy of Aquileia, 
 
 lutiica, in Roman Mass, 41. 
 Iitgalis, over the new married couple 
 
 at Aries, 194. 
 lugum enim suave tst, in Salamanca 
 
 marriage service, 195. 
 Jumieges, making the Chalice, 175. 
 Justin Martyr, St., on the early 
 
 liturgy, 93. 
 
 KANKE, sanctuary of the East Syrian 
 
 churches, 100. 
 Keyser, Georg Adam, meaning of 
 
 offertory, 9 3 HZ. 
 
 Kidderminster, marriage cup, 197. 
 King, offers elements for Com- 
 
 munion, 158. 
 King, prayers for, in Prayer Book, 8. 
 
 -- in Roman Missal, 8. 
 --- in Mattins of Bene- 
 
 dictines, 8. 
 ---- in Gregorian Sacramen- 
 
 tary, i 2. 
 King's coronation ring, finger for, 
 
 208. 
 King's Commission on the Prayer 
 
 Book revision, 1661, 19. 
 Knox, John, his directory, 20. 
 Kourbana, eucharist of East Syrian 
 
 Christians, i oo. 
 Kyrie eleison, not in first edition of 
 
 Roman mass book, 240. 
 -- in Roman Mass, 42. 
 -- omission of in mass, 240. 
 ---- at Mattins and 
 
 Evensong, 6. 
 
 LAMBETH HEARING, 227-246. 
 
 - Judgment in Lincoln case, 92 
 
 138. 
 
 Lamps before the altar, 30. 
 Lanfranc, Constitutions of, 151. 
 Langlande, laymen's duty in 
 
 worship, 37. 
 Laon, making of the Chalice, 142, 
 
 166. 
 
 Lasco, John a, on marriage, 204, 
 
 211. 
 Laud, Archbishop, used credence, 
 
 i59- 
 ---- his influence on Scottish 
 
 Prayer book, 160. 
 Laws of King Edmund, betrothal, 
 
 Laymen's attendance on Divine 
 
 Service, 39. 
 
 Le Brun, Pierre, antependium, 36. 
 - preparation of chalice, in, 
 
 125,136. 
 Lectures on the Prayer Book, Dr. 
 
 Lloyd, 20 1. 
 Left hand for marriage ring, Rituale 
 
 (Paul V.), 210, 212. 
 
 Prayer Book (1549), 207. 
 
 Ferrara, 209. 
 -- Lyre, 207. 
 
 Salamanca, 209. 
 
 , J. Wickham, coronations, 
 
 i582, 2377*1. 
 Legg, L. G. Wickham, coronations 
 
 of Stewart Kings, 237111. 
 Leland : hallowed wine and sops 
 
 given to Philip and Mary at their 
 
 marriage, i97i. 
 
 Lemnius, on the ring finger, 212714. 
 Le Neve, election of Roger of Salis- 
 
 bury, 82. 
 
 Lenten Veil, at Gerona, 35. 
 -- Granada, 35. 
 -- Seville, 35. 
 - Toledo, 35. 
 Lerida, Bishop of, on Reform, 18, 
 
 Letters patent at elections, 83. 
 
 (See Conge d'elire.) 
 Levitical Vestments, 56. 
 Liberal churchmen, 372. 
 - Christianity, 17. 
 Liber Catechuminorum iuxta ritum 
 
 sancte Romans ecc/esie, surplices, 5 1 . 
 Licence to elect, form of, 82. 
 Licet de Vitanda (A.D. 1180), 68. 
 Liddon, Dr., on Dr. Lloyd's lectures, 
 
 201. 
 
 Lifting the veil from the Chalice, 133. 
 Lidge : Abbey of St. James, prepara- 
 
 tion of elements, 145.
 
 262 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Lie"ge, right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 Lights upon the Altar, number of, 35. 
 in mediaeval ceremonial, 
 
 36, I262. 
 
 Limoges, position of the bride and 
 
 bridegroom, 184. 
 
 jewels held by the bride, 186. 
 
 coins given to the bride, 189. 
 hallowed host given to the new 
 
 married, 198. 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 formula for putting on the 
 
 marriage ring, 214. 
 Quos deus coniunxit, etc., in 
 
 marriage service, 216. 
 Lincoln Judgement, 92, 138. 
 
 making the chalice at, 153, 154. 
 
 use of, influenced by Rouen 
 
 liturgy, 151. 
 Lincoln College, Oxford, elections, 
 
 . 74> 
 Linen chasuble, 54. 
 
 vestments, 49. 
 
 Lippe, Dr., Roman missal, 39. 
 Lisieux, bridal veil, 195. 
 
 Quos deus coniunxit, etc., in 
 
 marriage service, 216. 
 Litany, English, 38, 229. 
 Litlington, Abbot, Mass book, 31, 
 
 X 5i> I55-. 
 
 Littre, nuptial veil in France, 1937*2. 
 
 Liturgia Coptitarum Sancti Basilii, 
 preparation of gifts, 103. 
 
 Liturgiarum Orientalium Collectio 
 (Renaudot), 957/1. 
 
 Liturgies, Eastern and Western (Ham- 
 mond), 96711. 
 
 Liturgy of the Church of England, 
 First, 1577*2. 
 
 Liturgy, Aethiopic, 104. 
 
 Alexandrine, 102, 103. 
 
 of Apostolical Constitutions, 
 
 94- 
 
 Clementine, 93, 94. 
 
 Mozarabic, 108. 
 
 Nestorian, 100. 
 
 Non Jurors, 1 6 1 . 
 
 Old Gallican, 121. 
 
 Roman, see Ordo. 
 
 Liturgy, of SS. Adaeus and Maris, i o i . 
 
 of St. Cyril, of Jerusalem, 93. 
 
 St. James, 95. 
 
 St. Gregory, 113. 
 
 Syriac, St. James, 96. 
 
 description of, by Pseudo- 
 
 Dionysius, 94. 
 
 St. Justin Martyr on, 93. 
 
 Liturgies, Eastern and Western, 967/1. 
 Norman, introduced into 
 
 England, 151. 
 Liturgical elasticity, 3. 
 Lloyd, Dr., bishop of Oxford, 
 
 Lectures on the Prayer Book, 200, 
 
 201. 
 Locker, for the Holy Sacrament, see 
 
 Tabernacle. 
 
 Locus adminntrationis at Sarum, 153. 
 Locus aptus, in Ordo Romanus XI7., 
 
 117. 
 
 Lombard, Peter, on marriage, 204. 
 London, bishop of, election, 76. 
 Longueil, Antoine de, inspection of 
 
 the chalice, 150. 
 
 Lord's Prayer in Divine Service, 6. 
 Lorenzana on the preparation of 
 
 gifts, 1 1 o, in. 
 
 Low Mass, introduction of, 119. 
 Loyalty to the Prayer Book, 147/1. 
 Lund, making the chalice, 174. 
 Lyndwode, rochet, 507*3. 
 Lyons, prima sedes Galliarum, 138. 
 Missal of, rubrics for offertory, 
 
 138, 139. 
 
 candles on the altar, 34. 
 
 one step to the altar, 34721. 
 
 making the chalice, 133, 166, 
 
 172, 176. 
 
 missals, 138. 
 
 sitting during the epistle, 
 
 1397/1. 
 
 silver wedding ring, 188. 
 
 nuptial veil held by two per- 
 sons, 193. 
 
 bridal veil, 195. 
 
 Quos deus coniunxit, etc., in 
 
 marriage service, 216. 
 
 Lyre, position of the bride and bride- 
 groom, 184. 
 
 wedding coins, 189. 
 
 nuptial veil, 193.
 
 INDEX 
 
 263 
 
 147, 
 
 Lyre, hand for marriage ring, 207. 
 Lytlington, Abbot, mass book, altar 
 
 frontal, 31. 
 making of chalice, 151, 155. 
 
 MABILLON, J., preparation of the 
 elements, 53, 113, 116, 114. 
 
 elections, 70. 
 
 Gallican liturgy, 149. 
 
 MacCarthy, Stovve missal, 
 
 Maclean, Right Rev. A. J., prepara- 
 tion of the elements among Eastern 
 Syrians, 100. 
 
 Maclagan, Dr., election of, 85. 
 
 Lambeth hearing, 227. 
 
 Macon, making the chalice, 1 66. 
 
 Magdalen College, elections, 74. 
 
 Magdeburg, making the chalice, 178. 
 
 Magistretti, Dr. Marco, school of 
 St. Ambrose, 52, 56. 
 
 functions of the sub- 
 deacon in Ambrosian Rite, 1217*3. 
 
 Magnificat, a hymn, 77*2. 
 
 omission of, at evensong, 9. 
 
 Making the chalice. See chalice. 
 
 Malabar liturgy, 101. 
 
 Malan, S. C., Armenian liturgy and 
 mixed chalice, 98, 99. 
 
 Mankind, laymen's use of the divine 
 service shown in, 37, 38. 
 
 Manning, Cardinal, obscurantist, 18. 
 
 his appointment, 84. 
 
 Manual of Godly Prayers and 
 Litanies, duty of laymen to say the 
 divine service, 397*1. 
 
 Marcellus, Chr., chalice made by 
 subdeacon, 117. 
 
 Margaret, St., of Scotland, changes 
 in customs by, 163. 
 
 Maria, St., antiqua, frescoes in, 56. 
 
 sopra Minerva, customs at the 
 
 offertory, 146. 
 Marriage, essential part of, 1 8 1 . 
 
 blessing of, by a priest, not 
 
 essential, 181. 
 
 St. Augustine on, 204. 
 
 St. Isodore of Seville on, 204. 
 
 St. Thomas on, 204. 
 
 Peter Lombard on, 204. 
 
 Marriage Customs connected with, in 
 middle ages, 1 8 2-200. 
 
 hour for, in Russia, 199. 
 
 taking place before the mass, 
 
 199. 
 
 198. 
 
 taking place after the offertory, 
 
 taking place after the canon, 
 198. 
 
 Service of 1549, changes in, 
 
 200-218. 
 
 Service, mutilation of, 12. 
 
 of King Aethelwulf and Judith, 
 
 216. 
 
 (See Address, Ring, Veil.) 
 Maro, St. John, on liturgy of St. 
 
 James, 96. 
 Maronite liturgy, presentation of 
 
 gifts, 97. 
 Maronites, preparation of elements 
 
 by, 1 06. 
 
 Marriage service, 1 8 1 . 
 Marseilles, making the chalice, 177. 
 Marline, methods of election, 61. 
 
 making the chalice, 130, 151. 
 
 betrothal, 1827*2. 
 
 offering the elements, 97. 
 
 and Durand, Gallican liturgy, 
 
 1077/1, 1377*1. 
 preparation of elements at 
 
 Lyons, 139. 
 preparation of elements at 
 
 Verdun, 143. 
 
 preparation of elements at 
 
 St. Wast, 145. 
 
 Mary Tudor, Queen, two rings on 
 ring finger of the left hand, 206711. 
 
 return of mediaeval ser- 
 vice books under, 158. 
 
 Masers, for the Brideales at Wilsdon, 
 197. 
 
 Mass book of Abbot Litlington, 3 1 . 
 
 Mass, early Ambrosian, 121. 
 
 private, or low, introduced, 119. 
 
 pope's pontifical, io35. 
 
 of St. Gregory, i262. 
 
 Mattins, mutilated, 237*1. 
 
 Mazzuchelli, Pietro, the fanon, 52. 
 
 vetuli, 537*3. 
 
 Ambrosian liturgy adop- 
 ted by the Franciscans, 1557*2.
 
 264 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Mazzuchelli, Pietro, his opinion of 
 Daniel Barbaro, 233. 
 
 Meaux, making of the chalice, 172. 
 
 Mechlin, Pastorale, marriage service, 
 202. 
 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 Medals given to the bride, 188. 
 
 Mediaeval ceremonial, 27-46. 
 
 buildings, 27. 
 
 services, 28. 
 
 service books restored in Eng- 
 land, 158. 
 
 missals, absence of detailed 
 
 ceremonial, 92. 
 meaning of, 27. 
 
 Medius or Medicus, fourth finger for 
 
 marriage ring, 2O72. 
 Menard, Hugh, sacramentary, 118. 
 Mensa, candlesticks on, -$6ni. 
 Mentz, marriage service, address in, 
 
 202. 
 
 Messina roll, offering the gifts, 95. 
 Merton College,Oxford, elections, 74. 
 Micrologus, Gallican origin of 
 
 Suscipe Sancte Pater, etc., 118. 
 Milan, making of the chalice, 167, 
 
 168. 
 
 Ministrare, meaning of, i3o2. 
 Missa Catechumenorum, 96, 97, 100, 
 
 106, 1 i gwi 
 Missa fidelium, 106, 109, 119, 133, 
 
 134- 
 
 Missa omnium ojferentium, 109, no. 
 Missa quotidiana pro rege, Gregorian 
 
 sacramentary, 12. 
 Missal, reform of, ordered by Council 
 
 of Trent, 134. 
 
 Missals, German diocesan of seven- 
 teenth century, 136. 
 French diocesan of seventeenth 
 
 century, 136, 137. 
 Modena, offering the elements, 120. 
 Modern Roman Mass, order of, 42. 
 Molinet, C. Du, Vestments of canons 
 
 regular, 49, 50. 
 
 Monaldini, the Messina roll, 95i. 
 Monks, of Ainay, making the 
 
 chalice, 166. 
 of Bee, making the chalice, 
 
 164. 
 
 Monks, Black, making the chalice, 
 
 U7- 
 Camaldolese, making the 
 
 chalice, 176. 
 of Casale, making the chalice, 
 
 172. 
 Charterhouse, making the 
 
 chalice, 173, 174. 
 Charterhouse, preparation of 
 
 elements, 131. 
 
 Cistercian, making the chalice, 
 
 167. 
 
 Cluny, making the chalice, 
 164, 175. 
 
 Hirschau, making the chalice, 
 
 164, 175. 
 
 Lyons, making the chalice, 
 166. 
 
 Monte Cassino, making the 
 chalice, 177. 
 
 Moysac, making the chalice, 
 
 '75- 
 
 Westminster, making the 
 
 chalice, 1 66. 
 Monte Cassino, monks of, making 
 
 the chalice, 177. 
 Monthly recitation of the Psalter, 
 
 4, 16. 
 More, Sir Thomas, altars in the 
 
 time of, 36. 
 Moysac, monks of, making the 
 
 chalice, 175. 
 
 Mozarabic missal, 108, 157. 
 preparation of gifts, 108, 
 
 iii. 
 
 making the chalice, 1 12. 
 
 ceremonial washing of the 
 
 hands, 112. 
 
 fraction of the host, 148. 
 
 Muravieff, altar used as credence, 99. 
 
 Murray, Dr., material of the care- 
 cloth, 195*74. 
 
 Muscadel or Muscadine, given to the 
 new married couple, 196. 
 
 Music at marriages, 199. 
 
 forbidden, 200. 
 
 Mutilation of Prayer Book services, 
 i IHI. 
 
 eucharistic service, ir, 12, 13. 
 
 marriage service, 1 2 . 
 
 mattins, 23771.
 
 INDEX 
 
 265 
 
 NANGASAKI, marriage customs, etc., 
 1 86. 
 
 Narbonne, making the chalice, 142, 
 176. 
 
 Nestorian liturgy, preparation of 
 elements in, 100. 
 
 ritual, 100, 101. 
 
 Newbury, bride cup used at, 197. 
 
 New College, Oxford, elections, 74. 
 
 Newman, Cardinal, Quignon brevi- 
 ary and Common Prayer, 201. 
 
 Non-essential marriage ceremonies, 
 181, 182. 
 
 Nonjuror's liturgy, mixing of the 
 chalice in, 161. 
 
 Normandy, uncovering the chalice, 
 
 '33- 
 Norman liturgies introduced into 
 
 England, 151. 
 Northern province, 17. 
 Noyon, making the chalice, 144. 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 Nuptial kiss, 182. 
 Nuptial mass in Aries Pontifical, 
 
 198. 
 in Roman sacramentaries, 
 
 198. 
 
 antiquity of, 198. 
 
 Nuptial veil, in English pre-reforma- 
 
 tion books, 192. 
 in Roman sacerdotalia, 
 
 193. 
 in Rituale Romanum 
 
 (1584), 193. 
 
 disappears from later 
 
 Roman ritualia, 193. 
 
 restored in Italy, 194. 
 see Care-cloth. 
 
 at Rouen, 193. 
 
 at Bologna, Aries, Sala- 
 
 manca, 194. 
 
 at Paris, Lyons, Soissons, 
 
 Lisieux, 195. 
 
 in England, see Care- 
 
 cloth. 
 
 OBEDIENCE to the Book of Common 
 
 Prayer required, 13. 
 Obley, hallowed, given to the new 
 
 married couple, 198. 
 
 Obeuntibus -vero <vel cedentihus, etc., 
 
 bull of Martin V., 62. 
 Observance of Prayer Book rubrics, 
 
 14/21. 
 Offering of the gifts or elements, see 
 
 Elements. 
 Offertory, meaning of word, 17, 
 
 9 32. 
 ceremonies of early Roman, 
 
 113-115. 
 O God the King of Kings at English 
 
 coronations, 237. 
 Old Gallican Liturgy, 121, 157. 
 Olive, crowns of, at Greek marriages, 
 
 '95- 
 Omission no argument for disuse, 
 
 236, 240. 
 
 Omont, M. Henri, 2293. 
 Open voting forbidden at the 
 
 Council of Trent, 70. 
 Oratory, Brompton, ceremonial at, 
 
 44- 
 Order of the modern Roman Mass, 
 
 42. 
 Order for the coronation of William 
 
 and Mary, no ornaments for 
 
 the sovereign, 237. 
 Ordinal, Daniel Barbara on English, 
 
 234. 
 Ordinary of the Mass, Rubrics in, 
 
 40. 
 
 Ordo Missae (Burckard), 40. 
 Baptizandi et alia sacramenta 
 
 administrandi (1592) chasuble- 
 shaped surplice, 5 1 . 
 
 etc. (1606), no nuptial 
 
 veil, 194. 
 
 aliaque sacramenta 
 
 administrandi -pro Anglia, Hiber- 
 nia et Scotia, ring and finger, 
 
 2IO. 
 
 celebrandi matrimonium of St. 
 
 Charles Borromeo, 204713. 
 missam, John Burchard, 
 
 119. 
 
 Romanus, presentation of gifts 
 
 in, 113. 
 /., presentation of gifts, 
 
 IOOHI, 132. 
 //., ceremonies at the 
 
 offertory, 52, 1 16.
 
 266 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Or do Miss* (Burckard). 
 
 Romanus III., ceremonies at 
 
 the offertory, 1 1 6. 
 17., ceremonies at the 
 
 offertory, 1 1 6. 
 bride's courtesy to the 
 
 bridegroom, 190. 
 A7., ceremonies at the 
 
 offertory, 1 1 6. 
 
 T., catechumens with- 
 
 draw before the gospel, 134. 
 
 XIP., preparation of the 
 
 chalice, 117. 
 presentation of the gifts, 
 
 133. 
 
 Oremus, after the gospel or creed, 
 
 1 197/1. 
 
 after confiteor, 1 19/21 . 
 
 Organs, destroyed by the Puritans, 
 
 387/3. 
 
 Daniel Barbaro, on, 234. 
 
 Origines Liturgicae, Palmer, 201. 
 Orleans, making the chalice, 165. 
 Ornaments of the altar, 33, 34, 457/1. 
 delivered to the sovereign at 
 
 coronation, 236. 
 
 Rubric, 17, 457/1, 54. 
 
 Orphreys absent from mediaeval 
 
 chasubles, 537/4. 
 Orthodox Greek Church, position of 
 
 bride and bridegroom during 
 
 marriage service, 183. 
 rings for bride and 
 
 bridegroom, 187. 
 O Salutaris forbidden at nuptial 
 
 masses, 200. 
 
 Outward and visible sign in matri- 
 mony not defined, 181. 
 Oxenham, H. N., marriage in the 
 
 early church, 1 8 1 n i . 
 
 PAENULA (CHASUBLE), 55. 
 
 Pain bini for the new married dis- 
 continued, 217. 
 
 Palencia, preparation of the elements, 
 130. 
 
 making the chalice, 167, 170. 
 
 Pall, vestment of a bishop, 55. 
 
 coronation vestment, 237. 
 
 Palmer, Sir William, on Liturgies, 
 95> 201 - 
 
 Papal elections, 67-73. 
 
 voting papers for, 7 1 . 
 
 method of voting in 72. 
 
 Paraguay, Jesuit custom for marriage 
 
 ring, 209. 
 Partite fabuli s in Ambrosian liturgy, 
 
 1 20. 
 Paris, making the chalice, 123, 136, 
 
 165. 
 Amen said by communicants, 
 
 1987*1. 
 
 jewels held by the bride, 186. 
 
 silver wedding ring, 188. 
 
 bridal veil, 195. 
 
 blessing of bread and wine 
 
 for the new married, 198. 
 Rituale, marriage service in, 
 
 201, 206. 
 Parish clerk, rochet or surplice for, 
 
 50. 
 Parker, Matthew, election of, 78, 
 
 79- 
 Pascal, Blaise, worldly spirit in the 
 
 church, 457/4. 
 Passau Pastorale, marriage service 
 
 in, 202. 
 Pastorale of Mechlin, marriage 
 
 service, 202. 
 
 Passau, marriage service, 202. 
 
 St. Omer, marriage service, 
 
 202. 
 
 Patten, William, election of, 65. 
 Paul V. (Rituale} omits ceremony of 
 
 joining hands in marriage, 192. 
 
 Missale monasticum, 145. 
 
 Peck on election per inspirationem, 
 
 80. 
 Pembroke College, Oxford, elections, 
 
 75- 
 Penitential of Archbishop Theodore, 
 
 32, 146. 
 Per compromissum, election, 61, 76, 
 
 79- 
 
 in College of Physicians, 
 
 76. 
 
 in election of Robert of 
 
 Winchelsey, 77. 
 in election of bishop of 
 
 London, 76, 88. 
 in election of Bishop of 
 
 Rochester, 76.
 
 INDEX 
 
 267 
 
 Perfuming pan at the coronations of 
 James II. and George III., 238. 
 
 Per inspirationem elections, 60, 64, 
 67, 76. 
 
 Prior Laurence on, 80. 
 
 Per scrutinium, elections, 61, 63, 68, 
 
 77- 
 
 elections example of, 68. 
 
 election of pope, 70. 
 
 Perugia, right hand for the marriage 
 ring, 209. 
 
 Peter Lombard on marriage, 204. 
 
 Phillimore, Sir Walter, candlesticks 
 on the altar $6m. 
 
 Physicians, Royal College of, 59. 
 
 Pius V., Reform of, 40. 
 
 !^uod a nobis, 135. 
 
 IX., obscurantist, 18. 
 
 attack of, on French dio- 
 cesan liturgies, 138. 
 
 Plasencia (Spain), making the chalice, 
 1 70. 
 
 Platt, Thomas Pell, on Ethiopic 
 version of Apostolical Constitu- 
 tions, 94. 
 
 Pliny, on marriage ring, 187. 
 
 Pocock, Nicholas, on the Prayer 
 Book of 1549, 44^2. 
 
 Poland, position of bride and bride- 
 groom, 185. 
 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 <$uos deus coniunxit in marriage 
 
 service, 215. 
 
 Pollard, A. W., laymen's devotions, 
 
 37- 
 Albert Frederick, the Book of 
 
 Common Prayer unique, 20, 21. 
 Polydore Vergil, English marriage 
 
 ring, customs, 197. 
 hand for the marriage 
 
 ring, 206. 
 
 the bride's wreath, 195. 
 
 Pontifical, Roman, finger for 
 
 bishop's ring, 208. 
 Pope, election of, 67-73. 
 
 preparation of the chalice by, 
 
 118. 
 
 pontifical mass, io35. 
 
 Portions, in liturgy of Constantinople, 
 
 98. 
 
 Portuguese local customs remaining, 
 
 i35> J 3 6 - 
 Position of bride and bridegroom at 
 
 marriage, Augsburg, 185. 
 
 Avranches, 185. 
 
 Bourdeaux, 185. 
 
 Exeter, 184. 
 
 Greek Church, 183. 
 Hereford, 1 84. 
 
 Limoges, 184. 
 
 Lyre, 184. 
 
 Poland, 185. 
 
 Rouen, 115. 
 
 Sarum Manuale, i 84. 
 
 St. Asaph, 184. 
 
 Rituale Romanum, 184. 
 
 Rouen, 185. 
 Verona, 1 84. 
 
 York, 184. 
 among Copts, 1 84. 
 
 among Jews, 183. 
 Post-Communion, 41. 
 Praemonstratensian Canons, making 
 
 the chalice, 169, 174. 
 Prague, a " rose " placed upon the 
 
 hands of the new married couple, 
 
 192. 
 Quod deus coniunxit, etc., in 
 
 marriage service, 216. 
 Prayer Book, see Common Prayer, 
 
 Book of. 
 
 Preparation of elements, see Elements. 
 Presentation of elements, see 
 
 Elements. 
 Primitive liturgy, preparation of 
 
 gifts, 91, 92. 
 presentation of gifts, 91, 
 
 92. 
 Prayers for the King, omission of, 
 
 uncatholic, 8. 
 
 in Roman Missal, 8. 
 
 Benedictine use of, 8. 
 
 Preces at mattins and evensong, 6. 
 Preface to the Prayer Book, 16. 
 Pre-Reformation service books, 
 
 ceremonial in, 242. 
 
 Care-cloth, 192. 
 
 Prima sedes galliarum (Lyons), 138. 
 Prime said by whole parish, 37^2. 
 Private devotions for churchmen, 
 
 39*1.
 
 268 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Private mass, introduction of, 119. 
 Privy Council, committee on 
 
 coronation vestments, 237. 
 Procession at coronations, 238, 239. 
 Procter, Francis, on address in 
 
 marriage service, 204. 
 Proper Psalms in Prayer Book of 
 
 1662, 16. 
 
 in Convocation Prayer Book, 
 
 16. 
 
 in Tommasi's scheme, 7. 
 
 Prophetical lesson in ancient 
 liturgies, 12. 
 
 Proposed revision of rubrics, 13. 
 
 Protestant exaggerations, 44. 
 
 Prothero, G. W., on Mr. Henry 
 Bradshaw's opinion of Bayeux 
 ceremonies, 151. 
 
 Prothesis in small churches, 98. 
 
 in Greek sanctuary, 103. 
 
 office of in Liturgy of Con- 
 stantinople, 97. 
 
 in liturgy of the non-jurors, 
 
 162. 
 Prynne, William, form of letters 
 
 patent, 83. 
 Psalter, Tommasi's, 7. 
 
 monthly recitation of, 4, 16. 
 
 in public worship, 37. 
 
 Pseudo-Dionysius description of 
 
 liturgy, 94. 
 
 Publication of elections, 66, 67. 
 Punctuality in beginning services 
 
 necessary, 9. 
 Purcell, E. S., appointment of 
 
 Cardinal Manning, 84. 
 Puritans dislike organs, 383- 
 
 music at weddings, 199. 
 
 object to the Book of Common 
 
 Prayer, 213. 
 
 to churching veil, 242. 
 
 Purple veil for the bride, 195. 
 Pyx for the reserved sacrament, 30, 
 141*1. 
 
 QUEEN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD, elec- 
 tions, 74. 
 
 Quia propter, published by Innocent 
 III, 60. 
 
 text of, 8 1 . 
 
 translation of, 60. 
 
 68. 
 
 propter, read before election, 65. 
 provides for scrutators, 
 
 -- requires bare majority, 75. 
 -- governed college elec- 
 
 tions at Oxford, 74. 
 Qnicunque --vulf, see Athanasian 
 
 Creed. 
 Quignon breviary, connexion of 
 
 with Book of Common Prayer, 
 
 201. 
 
 Quod a nokis, Bull of Pius V., 135. 
 Quos deus coniunxit, marriage, 215, 
 
 216. 
 
 RAINE, JAMES, election of William 
 
 de Pickering, 69 
 -- election of Dr. Maclagan, 
 
 85. 
 Ratti, Rev. Dr. Achille, marriage ring 
 
 in Ambrosian rite, 1 857*2, 208, 
 
 2I2HI. 
 
 Ravenna, mosaics at, 55. 
 Reading of Holy Scripture, 4. 
 Receive this armil at coronations, 237. 
 Recitation of Breviary, 4. 
 Recognitores in papal elections, 7 3 . 
 Red veil for the bride, 195. 
 Reform of Roman Breviary (1568), 
 9i, 134. 
 
 - Roman Missal (1570), 134. 
 Reforms of Divine Service of six- 
 
 teenth century, 7/73 . 
 -- of seventeenth and eight- 
 
 eenth centuries, 9i. 
 Reformed Roman Missal : Prepara- 
 
 tion of elements, 135. 
 Reformers of the sixteenth century 
 
 and ceremonial, 44. 
 Regalism of Prayer Book, 8 . 
 Regensburg, making of the chalice, 
 
 171. 
 Regular Canons of St. Denis, making 
 
 the chalice, 168. 
 --- of St. Saviour (order of 
 
 St. Augustine), making the chalice, 
 
 177. 
 Relazione of Daniel Barbaro, 244. 
 
 - of Venetian ambassadors, 228. 
 Religious Orders, preparation of the 
 
 elements, 145, 146.
 
 INDEX 
 
 269 
 
 Renaissance and mediaeval customs, 
 
 36. 
 Renaudot : Preparation of the gifts 
 
 in early liturgies, 95. 
 in Syriac liturgy of St. James, 
 
 9 6 > 97- 
 
 in Eastern liturgies, 99. 
 
 in East Syrian liturgy, 101. 
 
 Rennes, right hand for the marriage 
 
 ring, 209. 
 
 Repeal of Act of Uniformity Amend- 
 ment Act desirable, 23. 
 Report of Daniel Barbaro examined, 
 
 228-235. 
 
 Reredos, 32, 14.1711. 
 Restoration of mediaeval service books 
 
 in Queen Mary's reign, 158. 
 Restored churches, 33. 
 Responds removed from Tommasi's 
 
 scheme, 7. 
 Revision of Prayer Book 1661, 19. 
 
 of rubrics, proposed, 13, 15. 
 
 Revolution, changes in coronation 
 
 service at, 236. 
 Rhemes, making the chalice, 131,168, 
 
 173- 
 
 jewels held by the bride at mar- 
 riage, 1 8 6. 
 
 coins given to the bride at 
 
 marriage, 189. 
 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 Riddells, 32, 141 ni. 
 Right hand for marriage ring, 206. 
 Ring, marriage, not prescribed in 
 
 some German Agenda, 186. 
 not prescribed by Jesuits 
 
 for Japanese, 186. 
 
 of silver at Lyons, Paris, 
 
 Auxerre, Rouen, 187. 
 
 of gold at St. Asaph, 187. 
 of iron to the woman and 
 
 gold to the man, 187. 
 of plain silver (Paris), 1 887*3. 
 put on fingers in succes- 
 sion, 207, 213. 
 
 right hand for, 209. 
 
 left hand for, 206, 209, 
 210, 212. 
 
 blessing of, see Blessing. 
 
 Rings given to the bride, 186. 
 
 Ringing of bells in the Roman mass, 
 
 1257*4. 
 Rifuale Ambrosian, Communion for 
 
 the new married, 199. 
 formula for putting on 
 
 the marriage ring, 2 1 4.. 
 Rituale Romanum (Gregory XIII.), 
 
 position of bride and bridegroom, 
 
 184. 
 marriage ring and arrhae, 
 
 186. 
 
 directions for joining the 
 
 hands in marriage, 191. 
 
 bride's veil, 195. 
 
 Communion of the new 
 
 married, 198. 
 
 <$uod deus coniunxit, etc., 
 
 216. 
 
 nuptial veil, 193. 
 
 (Paul V.), addition to 
 
 water for baptism and of oil to 
 
 the cream, 1 1577.1. 
 
 no direction for the posi- 
 
 tion of bride and bridegroom, 1 84. 
 omits ceremony of joining 
 
 the hands in marriage, 192. 
 
 no mention of nuptial 
 
 veil, 193. 
 
 ring, 210. 
 
 left hand for marriage 
 
 3. 
 
 formula for putting on 
 the ring, 214. 
 
 Ritus serv andus (1570), 40. 
 
 Ritus in Missa solemni ser<vandus 
 (Lyons), 138. 
 
 (Laon), 142774. 
 
 Ritual, Sarum, 44771. 
 
 early Roman and modern 
 
 Roman, 44. 
 
 Robles, Eugenio De, Mozarabic lit- 
 urgy, 109771. 
 
 Rochester, bishop of, election, 76. 
 
 Robert of Winchelsey, election of, 
 
 77- 
 
 " Rose " given to the new married in 
 Bohemia, 192. 
 
 Royal College of Physicians, 59. 
 
 election of President, 75, 76. 
 
 Rochet, vestment given to the Sove- 
 reign at coronation, 236. 
 
 for parish clerk, 50.
 
 270 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Roman Breviary reform of, 97*1, 
 
 i82, 134. 
 
 Liturgy, 106, 131. 
 
 MassBook, modern,Communion 
 
 for the new married, 199. 
 Missal, rubrics of, 31. 
 
 (I474-), 43- 
 
 (1570), 4. '93-. 
 
 Prayers for the king, 8 . 
 
 Offertory, ceremonies of, in Or- 
 
 dines Romani, 113115. 
 
 Pontifical, finger for bishop's 
 
 ring, 208. 
 
 Rituale, see Rituale. 
 
 -- Sacerdotale, Ceremony of put- 
 
 ting on the marriage ring, 214. 
 Roman commonwealth, nuptial veil 
 
 in, 193. 
 Rome, position of bride and bride- 
 
 groom at marriage service, 184. 
 Rock, Dr., the English altar, 36. 
 Rotulus Vaticanus, presentation of 
 
 gifts, 1 02, 103. 
 Rouen, making the chalice, 137, 152, 
 
 165. 
 -- customs at the offertory, 137, 
 
 -- service for betrothal, 183. 
 - position of bride and bride- 
 
 groom at marriage, 185. 
 -- rubric on rings for the=bride, 1 8 6. 
 silver marriage ring, 188. 
 
 nuptial veil, 193. 
 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 Rouen Sacerdotale, service for be- 
 trothal, l822. 
 
 marriage service, 202. 
 
 Royal Commission, disorders, 19. 
 
 Rubeis, J. F. B. M., de, Roman 
 customs at Aquileia, 1207/4. 
 
 Rubrics, disregarded, 12. 
 
 value and importance of, i4.ni. 
 
 proposed revision of, 13. 
 
 should be observed, 23. 
 
 of the Roman Missal dis- 
 obeyed, 3 1 . 
 
 Ruinart, offering the gifts in Gallican 
 liturgy, 107. 
 
 Rule of St. Saviour and St. Bridget, 
 election of abbess, 6 1 . 
 
 Russell, Rev. William, election of 
 Bishop Temple, 87. 
 
 Russell, John Fuller, consecration of 
 Abbey Dore, 159. 
 
 Russia, essence of marriage, 192. 
 
 communion at weddings, 196. 
 
 hour for weddings, 199. 
 
 bride's courtesy to the bride- 
 groom, 190. 
 
 SACERDOTAL vestments given to the 
 
 Sovereign at coronation, 236-238. 
 Sacerdotalia (Roman), position of the 
 
 bride and bridegroom in marriage 
 
 service, 184. 
 direction for joining the hands 
 
 in marriage, 191. 
 
 nuptial veil, 193. 
 
 blessing of bread and wine for 
 
 the new married, 197. 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 formula for putting on the mar- 
 
 riage ring, 214. 
 Sacerdotale (Brixen) marriage service, 
 
 202. 
 -- (Rouen) service for betrothal, 
 
 marriage service, 202. 
 
 Sackbuts at coronation of James II., 
 
 238. 
 --- of George II. and George 
 
 III., 239- 
 Sacramentary, Gregorian, preparation 
 
 of gifts, 113. 
 -- the introit begins the 
 
 mass, 125. 
 
 Sacramentary of Serapion, 94. 
 Sacramentaries, alternative collects in, 
 
 13- 
 
 Sacrarium (vestry) in Ordines Romani, 
 
 Sacrist, prepares the elements at 
 
 Lyons, 139. 
 Salamanca, preparation of the chalice, 
 
 in. 
 -- position of the bride and bride- 
 
 groom, 185. 
 -- two rings blessed in marriage, 
 
 187. 
 - coins given to the bride, 189.
 
 INDEX 
 
 271 
 
 Salamanca, nuptial veil, 194. 
 
 Ego ex parte dei, etc., optional, 
 
 215. 
 
 Salisbury see Sarum. 
 Salzburg Agenda, marriage service, 
 
 202. 
 
 Manuale, marriage service, 202. 
 
 making the chalice, 176. 
 
 wine given to the new married, 
 
 198. 
 Sanctuary, Greek, 103. 
 
 Coptic, 103. 
 
 Saragossa, making the chalice, 178. 
 
 altar bare of ornaments, 34. 
 
 Sarum, adopted Rouen, 151. 
 
 preparation of elements, 152, 
 
 171. 
 nuptial veil, 192, 193. 
 
 joining hands in marriage, 191. 
 blessed bread and wine given 
 
 to new married, 196. 
 Breviary, 1577/2. 
 
 Consuetudinary, customs at 
 offertory, 152. 
 
 Ceremonial, 44/1 1 . 
 
 Manual, Douai editions of, 
 241. 
 
 service for betrothal, 
 
 182. 
 
 206. 
 
 hand for marriage ring, 
 bride's courtesy to bride- 
 
 marriage ring put on 
 
 ringers in succession, 213. 
 
 Missal, preparation of the 
 
 elements, 152. 
 
 Sandford, engravings of coronations, 
 238, 239. 
 
 Sandys, evidence of, inaccurate, 235. 
 
 Saussay, Andre du, on making the 
 chalice, 128, 129, 136. 
 
 Scapulae, veil put over the, at Aries, 
 194. 
 
 Scarf worn by English bishops, 50. 
 
 Schedula used in elections, 75. 
 
 Schemes of reform of Divine Service, 
 9*1. 
 
 School of St. Ambrose, 52. 
 
 Scott, Mr. G. G., Church Architec- 
 ture, 32. 
 
 Scottish Church, preparation of the 
 
 gifts, 163. 
 
 Prayer Book of 1 6 3 7, 1 60. 
 
 Amen said by communi- 
 cants, 198;;!. 
 Scrutators, 68. 
 
 in Convocation in University of 
 
 Oxford, 69. 
 Scrutiny, election by way of, 61, 63, 
 
 68-73. 
 Scyphus (ministerial chalice), 114, 
 
 115. 
 Seabury, Bishop, Communion office, 
 
 163. 
 
 Secreta in Roman mass, 41. 
 Seez, Quos deus coniunxit, etc, in mar 
 
 riage service, 2 1 6. 
 Selden, nuptial veil, 1 947/2. 
 Sens, making the chalice, 173. 
 Separation of the preparation of the 
 
 two elements in Rome, 135. 
 Serapion, Sacramentary of, 94. 
 Serpos, Giovanni de, Armenian bride's 
 
 veil, 195. 
 Service books, mediaeval, restored, 
 
 158. 
 
 Service, Divine, Prayer Book concep- 
 tion of, 4, 5. 
 
 Scriptural elements in, 5. 
 
 Service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 Severina, Cardinal, on Roman 
 
 Rituale, 186. 
 Seville, making the chalice, 131, 
 
 i74- 
 Shakespeare, wine given at marriages, 
 
 196. 
 
 service for betrothal, 1827/3. 
 
 Shortened evensong, 9. 
 
 psalms, 10. 
 
 Shortened Services Act (1872) 3-16, 
 
 22, 23. 
 Act, repeal of, desirable, 
 
 23- 
 Tommasi's scheme for, 6, 
 
 7- 
 Shorthand writers, invalidate elections, 
 
 67. 
 
 Sicily, making the chalice, 168. 
 Sienna, Roman customs at the offer- 
 tory, 1 20. 
 Signa on voting papers, 7 1 .
 
 272 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Siguenza, making the chalice, 168, 
 
 172. 
 Silentium habete in Ambrosian liturgy, 
 
 121. 
 Simeon of Thessalonica, on marriage, 
 
 Stowe Missal, diptychs, 133. 
 making the chalice, i i6ni, 
 
 Simmons, Rev. T. F., 17. 
 
 Simpson, Rev. W. Sparrow, election 
 
 of the Bishop of London, 87. 
 Simplification of services, 45. 
 Sion, Nuns of, election of abbess, 61- 
 
 64. 
 Sixtus V. Pope, election of per 
 
 inspirationem, 67. 
 Smith, Mr. Goldwin, on French 
 
 revolution, 201. 
 Sops given to the bridegroom, 182, 
 
 196. 
 Soissons, preparation of the elements, 
 
 130. 
 
 - making the chalice, 171. 
 -- offering of the elements, 142. 
 
 - nuptial veil, 193. 
 -- bride's veil, 195. 
 
 -- marriage after the offertory, 198. 
 -- right hand for marriage ring, 
 209. 
 
 - <$uos deus coniunxit, etc., at 
 marriage, 216. 
 
 Spanish liturgy, preparation of gifts, 
 108. 
 
 - disappearance of, 135. 
 Spanish custom of presenting the 
 
 elements, 112. 
 
 Spires, making the chalice, 178. 
 Spousage, tokens of, 185. 
 Squatte, ( = broken, ruined), 622. 
 Stable, making the chalice, 176. 
 Staunton, Howard, on bridal sops, 
 
 196. 
 Stephens, Dr. A. J., meaning of 
 
 decently apparelled, 240. 
 Steps before the altar, 32. 
 Stokes, Mr. Whitley, Stowe Missal, 
 
 i47 i49- 
 Stole, given to the sovereign at coron- 
 
 ation, 236. 
 -- violet, for blessing of the mar- 
 
 riage ring, 187. 
 - laid on hands of new married, 
 
 192. 
 
 163. 
 
 Mr. W. Stokes on, 147. 
 preparation of gifts, 147- 
 
 149. 
 
 Strainer, wine poured into the chalice 
 
 through, 114, 122. 
 Strassburg Agenda, marriage service, 
 
 202. 
 
 Stratford, Archbishop, election of, 77. 
 Street, Mr., 21. 
 Stubbs, Bishop, on the repetitions of 
 
 the Lord's Prayer, 6i. 
 
 on canonical elections, 8 2 . 
 
 St. Asaph, golden wedding ring, 188. 
 
 nuptial veil, 192. 
 
 St. Denis, making the chalice at, 166. 
 canons of, at Rhemes, making 
 
 the chalice, 168. 
 St. John's College, Oxford, elections, 
 
 75- 
 St. Mary's, Crown street, vestments, 
 
 54- 
 St. Omer, coins given to the bride, 
 
 189. 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 
 209. 
 
 marriage service, 202. 
 
 St. Ouen, Rouen, making the chalice, 
 
 168. 
 St. Paul, Friars of, making the 
 
 chalice, 173. 
 St. Peter's, Erfurt, making the chalice, 
 
 166. 
 St. Pol de Leon, uncovering of the 
 
 chalice, 133, 150. 
 St. Saviour, canons regular of, making 
 
 the chalice, 177. 
 St. Victor, canons of, making the 
 
 chalice, 167. 
 
 St. Wast, making the chalice, 145. 
 Stephen, St., figure of, at Aries, 49. 
 Suarez, Francis, on making the 
 
 chalice, 16282. 
 
 Subdeacon, functions of, in Ambro- 
 sian rite, 1 2 17*3. 
 Sunday duty of laymen, 38. 
 Superaltar, 29. 
 Superpelliceum (surplice), word late 
 
 55-
 
 INDEX 
 
 2 73 
 
 Super-tunica, coronation vestments, 
 
 237. 
 Surplice, shape of, 50. 
 
 chasuble-shaped, 5 1 . 
 
 for parish clerk, 50723. 
 Suscipe Sancte Pater at the offertory, 
 
 1 18, 120. 
 Suscipe Sancta Trinitas of gallican 
 
 origin, 118. 
 Swainson, C. A., on preparation of 
 
 gifts in early liturgies, 93. 
 in liturgy of St. James, 
 
 95- 
 
 in Alexandrine liturgies, 
 
 103. 
 
 in Aethiopic liturgy, 105. 
 
 Synods, forbid music at marriages, 
 
 200. 
 
 SyriaC liturgy, 96. 
 Syrian Jacobites, cross given to the 
 
 bride, 187. 
 Syrian, east churches, preparation of 
 
 gifts, 100. 
 
 TABERNACLE for the Holy Sacrament, 
 
 absence of, 30, 141711. 
 Tarragona, making the chalice, 176. 
 TeDeum, at mattins, 7. 
 omitted from mattins, 7, 8. 
 
 at elections, 65, 66, 78, 79, 86. 
 Temple, Dr., election of, 79, 87. 
 
 Lambeth hearing, 227. 
 
 Temperature of water for the chalice, 
 
 987*1. 
 
 Ten commandments, omission of, 12. 
 Tertullian on marriage ring, 187. 
 joining of hands in marriage, 
 
 i 9I . 
 
 Textui on the altar, 1 4 1 i . 
 Theodore, archbishop, 146. 
 penitential of, steps before 
 
 the altar forbidden, 32. 
 Thiers, J. B., on practices at the 
 
 offertory, 91. 
 on presentation of the gifts, 
 
 i$7- 
 
 on marriage rings, 186, 187. 
 
 on bride's courtesy, 190. 
 
 on music at marriages, 199. 
 
 on right hand for marriage 
 
 ring, 209. 
 
 Thomas, St., on marriage, 204. 
 Thompson, Sir Edward Maunde, 
 
 election of Abbot of St. Augustine's 
 
 Canterbury, 77773. 
 
 Thorpe, B., Ancient Laws and Insti- 
 tutes of England, 147721. 
 Those 'whom God hath joined, etc., 
 
 added in 1549, 214. 
 
 not in early English books, 215. 
 importance of this addition, 
 
 217. 
 Three hosts at the Pope's pontifical 
 
 mass, 103775. 
 Tindal, chief justice, valid marriage, 
 
 181722. 
 
 Tokens of spousage, 185. 
 Toledo, preparation of the elements, 
 
 9 1 - 
 
 making the chalice, 122, 123, 
 
 169. 
 
 two marriage rings blessed, 187. 
 
 right hand for marriage ring, 
 209. 
 
 bride's veil, 195. 
 
 Tommasi, Cardinal, scheme for 
 
 shortened services, 6, 7. 
 
 on the offertory, 93712. 
 
 Toul, making the chalice, 174. 
 Tours, making the chalice, 144, 175. 
 Trent, Council of, desired reforms, 
 
 1 6, 1 8. 
 ordered reform of missal 
 
 and breviary, 134. 
 
 on marriage customs, 182. 
 
 catechism of, on marriage, 
 
 204773. 
 
 forbids open voting, 70. 
 
 Triers, making the chalice, 136. 
 
 service for betrothal, 183. 
 
 arrhae in place of a ring, 187. 
 
 nuptial veil, 193771. 
 
 blessed bread and wine given to 
 
 the new married, 198. 
 Trombelli, J. C., ceremonies at the 
 
 offertory, 120773. 
 Tunicle given to the sovereign at 
 
 coronation, 236. 
 
 UNANIMOUS election of William de 
 Pickering, 69. 
 
 T
 
 274 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Uncovering the chalice between the 
 
 epistle and gospel, 149, 150. 
 Uniformity, Act of, Amendment Act. 
 (See Shortened Services Act.) 
 
 VALENCE (in Gaul), making the 
 
 chalice, 175. 
 Valentia, Council of, offering the 
 
 gifts, io6ni, 108, in, 134. 
 Vaughan, Cardinal, 40. 
 Veccblom at Milan, 53. 
 Veil of the chalice lifted, 133. 
 Veni Creator at elections, 61, 64, 65, 
 
 66, 69, 85. 
 Vtni sancte spiritus at the offertory, 
 
 128. 
 Peni Sanctificator at the offertory, 
 
 133. 
 Venice, S. Mark's, surplice in 
 
 mosaic, 51. 
 Venite, Invitatory Psalm, 7. 
 
 in ancient rites, 7. 
 
 in Book of Common Prayer, 
 
 17, 18, 26. 
 in Edward VI. First Prayer 
 
 Book, 17. 
 in Convocation Prayer Book, 
 
 17- 
 
 in Continental reforms, 7. 
 in Roman breviary, 26. 
 
 Verha de future, for espousals, 183. 
 Verba de presenti for marriage, 183. 
 Verdun, making the chalice, 128, 
 
 143, 164. 
 Vergil, Polydore, on bride's wreath, 
 
 195. 
 on hand for marriage 
 
 ring, 206. 
 
 bridal wine cup, 197. 
 
 Verona : position of bride and 
 
 bridegroom, 184. 
 Vert, Claude de ; the beginning of 
 
 the mass, iz$n. 
 Vessel for marriage wine, 197. 
 Vestments for mass spread on the 
 
 altar, 132. 
 Vestments of a bishop in Ravenna 
 
 mosaics, 55. 
 of priests in England, remarks 
 
 by Barbaro, 233. 
 
 Vestments, for coronation ordered by 
 the Privy Council, 237. 
 
 delivered to the sovereign, 236. 
 
 delivered to Queen Victoria, 
 238. 
 
 fetuli, njetulae at Milan, 122. 
 
 Vicary, anatomist, 212. 
 
 Victoria, Queen, coronation vest- 
 ments, 237, 238. 
 
 Vienne, making the chalice, 177. 
 
 Viera, Don Francisco, preparation of 
 gifts, in Gothic missal, 1 1 1 . 
 
 Vinum <vel aliud potabile, for mar- 
 riages, 197. 
 
 Violet stole for blessing the marriage 
 ring, 187. 
 
 Visitation or inspection of the 
 chalice, 150. 
 
 Voleine, Morel de, no ornaments on 
 altar out of mass, 34/11. 
 
 Voting papers, description of, 71. 
 
 WAFERS used at the Eucharist, 159. 
 Wainflete, William, election of, 65, 
 
 66. 
 Warren, F. E., Gallican customs in 
 
 the Stowe Missal, 133. 
 
 uncovering the chalice, 148. 
 
 Water before wine in chalice, 148. 
 mixed with wine universal, 
 
 98*21. 
 Wells, Ordinale, making the chalice, 
 
 153. 172- 
 Welsh order No. x., nuptial veil, 
 
 192. 
 Western Liturgies, preparation of 
 
 the elements, 106-146. 
 
 (See also Elements). 
 Westminster ; altar at, 28, 31. 
 Westminster, rites of, making the 
 
 chalice, 155, 166. 
 books showing the use of 
 
 London diocese, 15 5^2. 
 joining of hands in marriage, 
 
 191. 
 
 nuptial veil, 192. 
 
 bread and wine given to the 
 
 new married, 196. 
 marriage ring placed on the 
 
 third finger, 213.
 
 INDEX 
 
 275 
 
 Wheat, bride's garland of, 195. 
 
 strewn over the bride, 195. 
 
 Wheatley, C., on espousals, 182, 
 
 183. 
 Whitgift, Archbishop ; music at 
 
 marriages, 199. 
 White veil for the bride, 195. 
 for the churching of 
 
 women, 241. 
 
 Whiting, Abbot, election of, 78. 
 Widmore, Richard : election of 
 
 Abbot Islip, 64. 
 Wilkins, D. (Concilia), Revision of 
 
 the Prayer Book (1661), 19. 
 surplice, 50. 
 election of Robert of Win- 
 
 chelsey, 77. 
 appointment of the Archbishop 
 
 of Canterbury, 82. 
 
 making the chalice, 151. 
 
 betrothal, 182. 
 
 William de Pickering, election of 
 
 69. 
 William of Gouda, making the 
 
 chalice after vesting, 129. 
 Wilsdon, bride cup, in inventory of, 
 
 197. 
 Wilson, Bishop, the mixed chalice, 
 
 160. 
 Wilson, H. A., nuptial masses in 
 
 Gelasian Sacramentary, 198. 
 Wine given to the new married, 182, 
 
 196, 197. 
 Wodde, Michael, laymen's duty of 
 
 devotion, 38. 
 Wolsey, Cardinal, sole compromissor, 
 
 78. 
 Wordsworth, Bishop Christopher, 
 
 Rouen books adopted by diocese 
 
 of Lincoln, 151. 
 Wordsworth, Bishop John, Bishop 
 
 Serapion's Prayer Book, 94. 
 meaning of " oblations," 
 
 187. 
 
 Wordsworth, Mr. Christopher, mak- 
 ing the chalice, 1567*2. 
 Wordsworth and Reynolds, Lincoln 
 
 customs at the offertory, 1 54. 
 Wren, Dr. Matthew, churching veil 
 
 restored by, 242. 
 Wurzburg Agenda, wine given to the 
 
 new married, 198. 
 
 marriage service, 202. 
 
 XIMENES, CARDINAL, 
 Missal, 1 08. 
 
 Mozarabic 
 
 YORK CONVOCATION, 17. 
 
 York, preparation of the elements, 
 
 153- 
 
 bride's courtesy to the bride- 
 groom, 189. 
 
 position of bride and bride- 
 groom at marriage, 184. 
 
 joining the hands in marriage, 
 
 191. 
 
 nuptial veil held by two clerks, 
 192, 193. 
 Book : marriage service in, 
 
 205. 
 
 ring put on fingers in succes- 
 sion, 213. 
 
 St. Mary's Abbey, making the 
 chalice, 156. 
 
 Ypres, right hand fo the marriage 
 ring, 209. 
 
 Cutler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Froine, and London.
 
 
 

 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 305 De Neve Drive - Parking Lot 17 Box 951388 
 
 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed.
 
 A 000 1 23 926 8 
 
 l>