ON 
 
 EUCHARISTICAL ADORATION. 
 
 THIED EDITIOK. 
 
 WITH CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 SUGGESTED BY A 
 
 LATE PASTOKAL LETTER (1858) ON THE DOCTRINE 
 OF THE MOST HOLY EUCHARIST. 
 
 BY THE LATE 
 
 KEV. JOHN KEBLE, M.A., 
 
 M 
 VICAR OF HURSLEY. 
 
 " IT pleased GOD the WORD to unite the created Flesh which is of Us without 
 blemish unto Himself: therefore It is adored, with GOD the WORD, inasmuch as He 
 hath deified It." Anon. ap. Chrys., ed. Sav., vi. 962. 
 
 " Grant, O LORD, that in reading Thy Holy Word, I may never prefer my private 
 sentiments before those of the Church in the purely ancient times of Christianity." 
 BISHOP WILSON, Sacra Privata, p. 135, ed. 1853. 
 
 JAMES PAEKEE AND CO. 
 
 1867. 
 
. : 
 
 : 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 THE second of the following Treatises having in a manner 
 grown out of the first, it has seemed well to publish the two 
 in one volume; which thus contains the matured views of 
 the Author the most decided expression of his thoughts 
 on the subject of the Holy Eucharist. 
 
~p. O LOED JESUS CHEIST, the same yesterday, to-day, and /or 
 ever. 
 
 ty. Preserve us from being carried about with divers and 
 strange doctrines. 
 
 Almighty, everliving FATHEE, Who hast promised unto Thy 
 faithful people life by Thine Incarnate SON, even as He liveth by 
 Thee ; Grant unto us all, and especially to our Bishops and Pastors, 
 and to those whom Thy Providence hath in any wise entrusted 
 with the treasure of Thy holy doctrine amongst us, Thy good 
 SPIEIT, always so to believe and understand, to feel and firmly to 
 hold, to speak and to think, concerning the Mystery of the Com- 
 munion of Thy SON'S Body and Blood, as shall be well-pleasing to 
 Thee, and profitable to our souls ; through the same our LOED 
 JESUS CHEIST, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of 
 the same SPIEIT, One God, world without end. Amen. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 WISH here to say a few words, by way of explaining why 
 
 this little book re-appears with only such slight changes, 
 as will be found on comparing the present with the First 
 Edition. 
 
 Besides correcting a few oversights, more, however, and 
 less excusable than I could have wished, those changes are 
 mostly confined to that portion of the work which deals with 
 the intention of the final revisers of the Prayer-book ; on 
 which point, as far as I have gone hitherto, all additional 
 researches have tended only to strengthen our case. 
 
 I could not be without misgivings, when I found that 
 some of those, whom I am bound on all accounts deeply to 
 respect, thought the treatise incorrect in reasoning, and 
 (what indeed I should most exceedingly deprecate) its 
 conclusions, if not its general spirit, alien to those of the 
 English Church. 
 
 I have therefore re-considered it to the best of my leisure 
 and ability ; and can only hope that it is not mere self- 
 deceit which makes me feel unable to plead guilty to either 
 of these very serious charges. 
 
 It has been said that the two first chapters of the Essay 
 are irrelevant, that they proceed on an ignoratio elenchi, 
 because they do not, it is conceived, of themselves prove, that 
 our Lord's Person is to be adored as present in the Eucha- 
 rist by a Real Presence of His Body and Blood, the In- 
 ward Part of that Sacrament. Waiving the question how far 
 the negative is correct, the places there alleged will not, 
 
VI PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 I imagine, seem irrelevant, if taken together they constitute 
 a reasonable presumption in favour of that Presence, and the 
 worship resulting from it : just as the fact, that everywhere in 
 the Holy Scriptures we are encouraged to pay all honour and 
 devotion to our Lord, and nowhere warned against excess in 
 so doing, would constitute a strong presumption in favour of 
 His proper Godhead, though there were no express texts to 
 assert it; and is a strong reason for interpreting doubtful 
 texts and ambiguous sayings of the Church in the higher 
 rather than in the lower sense concerning Him. This is, 
 indeed, all that those two first chapters profess 8 ; and if 
 they do carry us so far, I cannot allow that they are irrele- 
 vant to the main argument ; which, in this aspect, may be 
 stated thus : 
 
 If the general presumption from Scripture and from Natu- 
 ral Piety be in favour of Eucharistical Adoration, then doubt- 
 ful passages in Scripture, in Fathers and Liturgies, and in 
 our own Formularies, should be construed in that sense. 
 But such presumption does exist, unquestionably, to a very 
 great amount. Therefore such should be our rule of inter- 
 pretation. 
 
 Proceeding to Christian Antiquity, the treatise alleges 
 certain undeniable facts. 1. Writers of high credit in the 
 fourth and fifth centuries affirm it to have been the custom 
 of the whole Church in their time to worship in the Eucha- 
 rist the Flesh which Christ took of the Virgin Mary. 2. 
 They mention it as a primitive universal tradition. 3. They 
 account for it by the Incarnation, and by the Eeal Spiritual 
 Presence in the Sacrament. 4. The Christian world, during 
 the whole time of which that worship is affirmed, had with 
 one voice, both in Church and out of Church, been declaring 
 its faith in such a Presence as no man could believe without 
 adoring b . (This I do not profess to demonstrate, but accept 
 
 See the last section of cbap. ii. and I hope it will be borne in mind 
 
 b At ^ least in heart; for I have all along, that nothing external is 
 
 stated in the outset of the argument, necessarily implied ; nothing indeed 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. Vll 
 
 it as demonstrated by Dr. Pusey and others.) So that the 
 historical statement is just what one might expect from the 
 doctrinal : and there is nothing in antiquity to contradict 
 either of them ; and very much, as we have seen, both in 
 Scripture and in man's natural heart, to bespeak our favour- 
 able acceptance of them. 
 
 It is thought, however, that men may safely disregard the 
 historical evidence to the fact of Eucharistical Adoration, 
 (a.) because, as here exhibited, it is comprised in only four 
 or five passages; or, (j3.) because these passages are re- 
 ferred to by Roman Catholics for the same purpose : and as 
 to the doctrinal statements of the first five centuries, con- 
 curring as they do entirely with the historical testimonies, 
 it is by some replied, (y.) that the Fathers and Liturgies 
 teach a Virtual Presence but Real Absence of the Body 
 and Blood of Christ : by others, not so many, (S.) that there 
 is indeed full testimony to the Presence, but that the wor- 
 ship does not follow, seeing that His Body and Blood may 
 be present apart from His Divine Person, (e.) Cases (and 
 they are very numerous) to which neither of these state- 
 ments can be made to apply, are presently disposed of with 
 the remark, That the Ancients were writing rhetorically, 
 not theologically, and would have expressed themselves 
 otherwise had they been aware of the errors which should 
 one day arise in the Church. On each of these solutions 
 I will say a few words, just to indicate why they do not 
 appear satisfactory. 
 
 (a.) To a public matter of fact, such as the custom of 
 Adoration, four or five contemporary witnesses, circum- 
 stanced as those Fathers were, would be held by most his- 
 torians amply sufficient ; unless there were strong counter 
 evidence, or an overpowering degree of intrinsic improba- 
 
 new or strange, nor more than pious No need to start back, as if one were 
 
 Church people (unless they have been teaching some new thing, instead of 
 
 embarrassed by theories) habitually only helping Christians to approve to 
 
 practise, though it may be with some- their own judgments what they have 
 
 thing of ignorance or indistinctness, always felt devoutly in their hearts. 
 
viii PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 bility in their statements; neither of which can here be 
 alleged. All that has been said comes to, "There might 
 have been more evidence than there is." 
 
 (ft.) A moment's thought will shew that the mere use of 
 a doctrine or an interpretation by the Horn an Catholics is no 
 reason why we should reject it ; unless we are prepared to 
 reject all points in our common Creed, which they prove, as 
 we do, by Scripture and Antiquity. 
 
 (7.) The question between a Real and Virtual Presence 
 can only be decided (as far as it depends on Ancient Con- 
 sent) by a thorough critical induction of passages. For the 
 groundwork of such a process, and something more, a person 
 may well avail himself of Dr. Pusey's work above mentioned ; 
 and the Liturgies, which do not enter into Dr. Pusey's plan, 
 are happily being made accessible through the series in 
 course of publication by Mr. Neale. To these and other 
 like helps the readers of this Essay are referred : the Essay 
 itself, taking generally the doctrine of the Real Presence for 
 granted, tries to illustrate and enforce from it, and from the 
 Prayer-book which teaches it, the moral and devotional duty 
 of Adoration. I have used advisedly the term " Virtual 
 Presence but Real Absence," believing, the two phrases to be 
 so connected, that they who limit themselves to the former 
 do in effect teach the latter, however many of them may 
 shrink from owning it to themselves ; thereby giving a 
 blessed token that their loving hearts believe more than 
 their pre-occupied reason discerns in this miracle of mercy. 
 "They feel that they are happier than they know." But 
 this does not hinder the ill effect of such inadequate 
 doctrine upon the average sort of those who teach and 
 hear it. 
 
 In order to maintain their view, they are obliged to make 
 out that those sayings of the Fathers, comparatively very 
 few, which seem to deny the Real Presence, are the staple 
 of the whole ancient doctrine. The Eucharistical thoughts 
 and words of the great theologians, the very Anaphora of 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. IX 
 
 the primitive Liturgies, are to be toned down till they are 
 in unison with that one saying of S. Augustine, " Sacra- 
 ments, from their resemblance to the things of which they 
 are the Sacraments, receive for the most part the names even 
 of the things themselves ;" and accordingly, whenever our 
 Lord's Body and Blood is so spoken of as to imply a Real 
 Presence, we are to understand it, if we can, of the outward 
 sign only, called by the name of the Inward Part : which 
 appears to me no more reasonable than for a Socinian to 
 insist upon such a text as " I have made thee a god to 
 Pharaoh," by way of warrant, for explaining away all the 
 declarations of our Lord's proper Divinity. It is a sad 
 habit of thought for a theologian to train himself up in, 
 that of instinctively adopting, out of various expositions, the 
 most earthly and least supernatural. The least harm that 
 can be said of it is, that it is just contrary to what we should 
 have looked for from the known analogies of God's suc- 
 cessive dispensations ; it is more in harmony with Jewish 
 than with Christian interpretations of the Old Testament. 
 I fear that the Church is too likely to experience more and 
 more of this. 
 
 (S.) In the face of such a tendency on the one hand, and 
 of the pressure from Rome on the other, it is neither sur- 
 prising nor uninstructive to find persons learned in the 
 Liturgies especially, unable to hide their eyes from the 
 unquestionable and unquestioning acknowledgement of a 
 Real Presence there everywhere to be found, but equally 
 unable to reconcile themselves to the inevitable corollary of 
 that tenet, Adoration. And so they are driven, as I have 
 said, to imagine such a Real Presence of our Lord's crucified 
 Body and Blood shed, as shall not involve a peculiar Pre- 
 sence of His Divine Person. An imagination which every 
 one, who will consider the force of the word abicuperos in 
 Church decrees on our Lord's Incarnation, will allow to be 
 untenable, since in logical consequence it could not stop 
 short of plain Nestorianism. 
 
X PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 (e.) There remains the common and popular allegation, 
 that the Fathers (to whom must be added the compilers of 
 the Liturgies) spoke rhetorically, not exactly, and would not 
 have so taught had they known what was coming. It is not 
 speaking too strongly to say, that this statement, in order to 
 be effectual, must dispose of nearly the whole of what An- 
 tiquity has left us on the subject. Applied on such a scale, 
 it sounds (I do not say is meant to be) very disparaging to 
 the Fathers and to their authority. In itself it is most im- 
 probable. Considering the endless variety of individuals and 
 of circumstances, comprehended in the one term, Christian 
 Antiquity, it was very unlikely that with one consent, being 
 left to themselves, all Churches and all writers should err 
 in the same direction by over-statement. 
 
 Compare, in this point of view, the patristical remains 
 with the series of our own standard divines since the 
 Reformation. You will find in those ancients little or 
 nothing, as among us on this topic, of variety arising from 
 school or section, from the fancy, temper, or feelings of 
 the several men. The plain inference is, that the Church, 
 they thought, had settled the point for them. 
 
 We cannot (as has been alleged) account for this uniform 
 tenor of their language, by the supposition that in those 
 days there was no tendency to deny or forget the Real 
 Humanity of our Mediator. For all through those ages, 
 from the Docetse to the Monophysites, from S. John to the 
 Fourth (Ecumenical Council, the Church had to deal dis- 
 tinctly with that particular phase of false doctrine. If 
 the idea of a Real Substantial Presence does indeed con- 
 tradict the truth of Christ's Body, certainly the times of 
 those dreamy Oriental heresies required especial care in the 
 Church, not to encourage that idea by glowing language, 
 as in S. Chrysostom and the Liturgies. 
 
 And here it must be asked, Have people seriously con- 
 sidered what a thing it is to set down the Prayer-books of 
 the ancient Church as incorrect vehicles of sacred truth; 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. XI 
 
 to separate, in this case, the "Lex Credendi" so entirely 
 from the " Lex Supplicandi ? " It is just what gave so 
 great offence eight or ten years ago, when the doctrine of 
 Baptism was disturbed by the sentence of the Privy Coun- 
 cil in a certain cause. Is it not indeed somewhat shocking, 
 for a person saying his prayers to be told that he is not 
 to understand them exactly as they speak? that in the 
 highest act of Divine communion, both God's words spoken 
 to him, and the words put into his mouth by the Church 
 whereby to pour out his devotion to God, are to be taken 
 as it were at a discount ? that instead of lifting up his belief 
 and feeling to his prayers, the truth requires him to lower 
 his understanding of the prayers to something else, which 
 ought to be his feeling and belief? Yet so it was, according 
 to this hypothesis, with all Christians who at any time have 
 worshipped with the ancient Church in her Liturgies : to 
 say nothing of our own. They have had to keep them- 
 selves on their guard, lest they should be misled by the 
 Formularies in which they were joining with the whole 
 Church. Would not S. Chrysostom have dismissed such 
 a thought at once with an'^Traye "away with it it can- 
 not be c ?" 
 
 But the mischief goes even deeper, if possible, than this. 
 If on this one doctrine the Fathers and the whole undivided 
 Church, not excepting the great (Ecumenical Councils, are 
 to be regarded as habitually overstating the truth, either 
 unadvisedly, in a kind of enthusiasm, or (for so it has been 
 stated) advisedly, by way of counteracting the irreverence 
 to which heathen converts had been accustomed in cele- 
 
 c The same topic has been applied word irpocr<f)epo/j.v in the Liturgies 
 
 to the construction of the Scottish must be limited to that particular 
 
 Communion Office : which is supposed moment in the Service in which it 
 
 to negative the Real Presence, be- first occurs : unsuitably, as it seems 
 
 cause, in common with most of the to me, to the natural force of the 
 
 normal Liturgies of antiquity, it word in such a case, and also to the 
 
 places the Offering before the Invo- fact that the word is repeated again 
 
 cation. But this argument assumes and again after the consecration is 
 
 what ought to be proved, that the undoubtedly completed. 
 
Xll PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 brating sacrifices, who shall warrant us that the same 
 authorities are to be trusted, even in their general consent, 
 on other doctrines and interpretations coming under dis- 
 pute ? And what then becomes of the Consensus Patrum, 
 the rule of primitive Tradition, hitherto supposed to be ac- 
 cepted by our branch of the Church, in contradistinction 
 to all developments, as God's special gift for helping us to 
 the right and Scriptural conclusion on every point needful 
 to the integrity of the Gospel of our salvation ? Here is an 
 absolute unsettling of the standard of faith, especially as 
 between us and Rome. If we should say, "The ancients 
 mistook our Lord's meaning when He said, ' This is My 
 Body;' or however, knowingly or unknowingly, they pro- 
 mulgated a mistaken interpretation of it;" why might not 
 a Romanist say the same of " On this Rock I will build My 
 Church ? " or of " The fire shall try every man's work ? " 
 why not some Calvinist or Zuinglian of " Ye must be born 
 again of water and of the Spirit ? " why not some bolder 
 speculator, of the Nicene Creed itself, or of the Inspiration 
 of the very Scriptures of God? No language, as it seems 
 to me, can exaggerate the evil tendency of all this, espe- 
 cially under present circumstances. In itself, though not 
 so intended, it is far more undutiful than demurring to the 
 authority of this or that Anglican divine ; or even (should 
 it so chance) of all. For it is disturbing the whole basis 
 of the Anglican system; it is cutting our cables and set- 
 ting us all adrift, each one to find his own separate course 
 as he may. 
 
 We must claim, therefore, for our mother the Church of 
 England, as well as for each of her sons, however unworthy, 
 to have whatever is ambiguous in her doctrinal sayings in- 
 terpreted in the sense most agreeable to primitive Antiquity; 
 Holy Scripture, of course, being paramount over all. And 
 we may feel sure that such interpretation, though not, per- 
 haps, so put forth as to exclude every other, was intended 
 at least to be tolerated within our pale. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. Xlll 
 
 The fourth section of the following Essay is an attempt 
 to apply this principle to the Rubric touching Adoration 
 at the Holy Communion ; and the drift of the quotations 
 there made from Anglican divines, more or less concerned 
 in the adoption of that Rubric, is simply to shew that, at 
 the very least, they could not have intended to exclude from 
 the Church of England and her ministry persons adoring 
 Christ as the Inward Part of that Sacrament. This has not 
 always been adverted to by objectors. They have cited pas- 
 sages from some of the revisers themselves, or from others 
 of like authority, really or apparently taking the opposite 
 view, as if such citation were fatal to the argument : whereas 
 the most that can be inferred from both sorts taken together 
 is, that the matter was not understood to be positively and 
 expressly ruled either way. And the fifth section assigns 
 a reason why such "neutrality" (so to call it) should not 
 be regarded as damaging our claim to be a true living por- 
 tion of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Under these circumstances, I see no disingenuousness in 
 adopting words, from Ridley (e.g.) or any other, to express 
 one's own view, without stopping to enquire whether, on 
 other occasions, the same author might not have employed 
 different or even contradictory language. 
 
 But, indeed, when we have deducted from the testimonies 
 of Anglican writers alleged against us, such as in reality 
 touch only (1.) Transubstantiation, or (2.) the notion of 
 a gross carnal Presence d , or (3.) the Ubiquity maintained 
 by some Lutherans, or (4.) the necessity of believing not 
 only in the fact but in the mode of the Real Presence 
 ("whether Trans, Sub, Con," &c.), or (5.) the Adoration 
 of the outward Elements : and when we have duly weighed 
 those many sayings of theirs, both controversial and devo- 
 tional, which tell entirely on our side; the remainder of 
 
 d I may perhaps be excused for tian Year :" " present in the heart, 
 exemplifying this by the expression not in the hands :" cf. S. John vi. 63 
 son.etimes quoted from the " Chris- 1 Cor. xv. 50. 
 
X iv PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 difficulties we have to deal with in that kind will be found 
 in comparison very moderate ; nothing, nothing at all, to 
 the work we should have in reconciling any other doctrine 
 than ours with the Liturgies and standard writers of the 
 holy Church from the beginning. This is our conviction, 
 only the more confirmed when we come to examine care- 
 fully the Catena put forth from time to time against us. 
 
 But be our Anglican authorities many or few, nay, were 
 there (as we have been lately told) no instance at all, since 
 the last Review, of an English Divine teaching exactly the 
 tenets now so keenly opposed, we should still have a claim 
 to be tried, not by any partial development, domestic or 
 foreign, but by our own Formularies, interpreted by Scrip- 
 ture and Antiquity. And if those standards did not con- 
 demn us, we might justly feel ourselves acquitted before 
 God and man. 
 
 Such I believe to be our position, such our appeal. I will 
 venture to add one word more on the real extent of the 
 question. 
 
 Unless I am greatly mistaken, the real point at issue in 
 most of the controversies which have troubled us all along 
 in the Reformed English Church, might be expressed in 
 words like the following : " Is the Church, mingled as we 
 see it of good and bad, a supernatural body, separated off 
 from the world to live a supernatural life, begun, continued, 
 and ended in miracles miracles as real as any of those 
 which befel the Israelites in the wilderness as real, but 
 infinitely more gracious and awful? or is it only a body 
 providentially raised up to hold the best and purest philo- 
 sophy helped as all good things are from above, but in 
 itself no more than the heroical and Divine phase of this 
 present life?" It is plain at first glance which side of 
 this alternative brings with it the more intense obligation 
 to holiness, and represents sin as " more exceeding sin- 
 ful;" which, therefore, would be most hated and dispa- 
 raged by the Hater of God and goodness : unless, indeed, 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. XV 
 
 he can persuade those who hold it to contradict it in their 
 lives. It is plain also that the doctrine of the Real Pre- 
 sence in the Holy Eucharist is strictly in unison with the 
 supernatural view; whereas that of a Virtual Presence and 
 Real Absence might be accepted by one who believed that 
 miracles invisible, as well as visible, have entirely ceased. 
 
 Here is a prima facie reason why religious and reverent 
 persons should be slow to accept that or any other theory 
 which interferes with simple acquiescence in the words of 
 Scripture and of the ancient Church : and here is also 
 (if possible) a yet stronger reason why those who profess 
 such acquiescence should be more and more on their guard 
 against all that is unmeet for His Presence, more and 
 more fearful as they " enter into the cloud." 
 
 So be it : and may our good Lord forgive whatever may 
 have been here or elsewhere written, said, or thought un- 
 worthily of this His most holy and ineffable Mystery; and 
 may He grant this to be the last time that the present 
 writer shall have to deal with It in a controversial way ! 
 
 HTJHSLEY, 
 Conversion of S. Paul, 1859. 
 
ON EUCHABISHCAL ADORATION; 
 
 OK, THE WORSHIP OF OUR LORD AND SAYIOUR IN 
 THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY COMMUNION. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PROMPTINGS OF NATURAL PIETY. 
 
 1. THE object of this Essay is to allay, and, if possible, CHAP. L 
 to quiet, the troublesome thoughts which may at times, and 
 now especially, occur to men's minds on this awful subject, 
 so as even to disturb them in the highest act of devotion. 
 For this purpose it may be well to consider calmly, not 
 without deep reverence of heart, First, what Natural Piety 
 would suggest; Secondly, what Holy Scripture may appear 
 to sanction ; Thirdly, what the Fathers and Liturgies in- 
 dicate to have been the practice of the Primitive Church ; 
 Fourthly, what the Church of England enjoins or recom- 
 mends. 
 
 2. For the first : is it not self-evident that, had there 
 been no abuse, or error, or extravagance connected with the 
 practice, all persons believing and considering the Real Pre- 
 sence of our Lord in Holy Communion, in whatever man- 
 ner or degree, would in the same manner or degree find it 
 impossible not to use special worship ? the inward worship, 
 I mean, and adoration of the heart : for that, of course, is 
 the main point in question ; the posture and mode are se- 
 condary and variable, and may and must admit of dispen- 
 sation. 
 
 The simple circumstance of our Lord Christ declaring Him- 
 self especially present would, one would think, be enough 
 for this. Why do we bow our knees and pray, on first enter- 
 
 B 
 
2 Three Grounds of Special Adoration : 
 
 I. ing th^Lord's house? Why do we feel that during all our 
 
 ^ there we should be, as it were, prostrating our 
 fct hearts before Him? Why is it well to breathe a short prayer 
 when we begin reading our Bibles, and still as we read to re- 
 collect ourselves, and try to go on in the spirit of prayer? 
 And so of other holy exercises : in proportion as they bring 
 with them the sense of His peculiar presence, what can the 
 believer do but adore? I firmly believe that all good Chris- 
 tians do so, in the Holy Sacrament most especially, what- 
 ever embarrassment many of them may unhappily have been 
 taught to feel touching the precise mode of their adoration. 
 
 And this may well be one of the greatest consolations, in 
 the sad controversies and misunderstandings among which 
 our lot is cast. It is as impossible for devout faith, contem- 
 plating Christ in this Sacrament, not to adore Him, as it is 
 for a loving mother, looking earnestly at her child, not to 
 love it. The mother's consciousness of her love, and her 
 outward manifestation of it, may vary ; scruples, interrup- 
 tions, bewilderments may occur ; but there it is in her heart, 
 you cannot suppress it. So must there be special adoration 
 and worship in the heart of every one seriously believing 
 a special, mysterious presence of Christ, God and man, ex- 
 pressed by the words, This is My Body. 
 
 3. I say a special adoration and worship, over and above 
 what a religious man feels upon every occasion which helps 
 him to realize, what he always believes, that God is " about 
 his path, and about his bed, and spieth out all his ways;" 
 that in Him he " lives, and moves, and has his being." And 
 this for very many mysterious and overpowering reasons. I 
 will specify three, the most undeniable and irresistible. First, 
 the greatness of the benefit offered ; next, its being offered 
 and brought home to each one personally and individually ; 
 thirdly, the deep condescension and humiliation on the part 
 of Him who offers the benefit. 
 
 4. When Joseph went out over all the land of Egypt, 
 <e they cried before him, Bow the knee." When Moses de- 
 livered the first message from God to the Israelites in Egypt, 
 concerning their deliverance, and the second message, con- 
 
The Greatness of the Benefit. 
 
 cerning the Passover, "the people bowed their heads-: afacl/ CHAP. 
 worshipped." Would it not have been very strange, ^f^wljeov 
 the great promises were realized before their eyes/ and* they 
 actually saw the token of the Lord's Presence, the fire coming 
 down and consuming their first offering, that fire which 
 continued until it was quenched by their sins before the first 
 captivity, they had scrupled to own His Presence by like 
 adoration ? They did the same, and much more, when. 
 Aaron, for the first time after his consecration, "lifted up 
 his hand toward the people and blessed them, . . . and the 
 glory of the Lord appeared unto all the people. And there 
 came a fire out from before the Lord, and consumed upon 
 the altar the burnt-offering and the fat: which when all the 
 people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces a ." There was 
 no one at hand, to say to them, " Take care : people will call it 
 fire-worship." And just in the same way did they acknow- 
 ledge the finishing of the old dispensation by the building of 
 the Temple. When David had completed his preparations, 
 he said to all the congregation, " Now bless the Lord your 
 God. And all the congregation blessed the Lord God of 
 their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped 
 the Lord, and the king b ." When, upon the day of consecra- 
 tion, " Solomon had made an end of praying, . . . and when all 
 the children of Israel saw how the fire came down, and the 
 glory of the Lord upon the house, they bowed themselves 
 with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and wor- 
 shipped, and praised the Lord c ." The outward act of worship 
 was more lowly, and no doubt in religious hearts the inward 
 adoration was deeper and more fervent, as the mighty bless- 
 ing made its approach more manifest. 
 
 5. So, and much more, in the Christian Church. If we 
 kneel, and bow the knees of our hearts, to receive a blessing in 
 the Name of the Most High from His earthly representatives, 
 Father, Priest, or Bishop, how should we do other than adore 
 and fall prostrate, inwardly at least, when the Son of Man 
 gives His own appointed token that He is descending to bless 
 us in His own mysterious way ? And with what a blessing ! 
 " the remission of our sins, and all other benefits of His 
 
 Levit. ix. 2224. b 1 Chron. xxix. 20. c 2 Cliron. vii. 1, 3. 
 
4 The Nearness of the Blessing 
 
 J* "Paisibn'K His Flesh, which is meat indeed, and His Blood, 
 ; \ \yhich [is'-drirrk indeed ! mutual indwelling between Him and 
 us ; we'livirig by Him, as He by the Father ! Surely these are 
 gifts, at the very hearing of which, were an angel to come 
 and tell us of them for the first time, we could not choose 
 but fall down and worship. And now it is no Angel, but the 
 Lord of the Angels, incarnate, coming not only to promise, 
 but actually to exhibit and confer them. 
 
 6. Further, the Eucharist is our Saviour coming with 
 these unutterable mysteries of blessing, coming with His glo- 
 rified Humanity, coming by a peculiar presence of His own 
 divine Person, to impart Himself to each one of us separately, 
 to impart Himself as truly and as entirely as if there were 
 not in the world any but that one to receive Him. And this 
 also, namely, the bringing home of God's gifts to the particu- 
 lar individual person, has ever been felt by that person, in 
 proportion to his faith, as a thrilling call for the most unre- 
 served surrender that he could make of himself, his whole 
 spirit, soul, and body : i.e. of the most unreserved Worship. 
 
 Look at the Saints of God from the beginning. God made 
 a covenant with Abraham, He promised to give him a son of 
 Sarah, and both times Abraham " fell on his face d ." His 
 servant Eliezer " bowed the head and worshipped," when he 
 found that he was miraculously guided to the person whom 
 God had chosen to be Isaac's wife; and again, when her 
 kinsmen had consented to the marriage e . God descended in 
 the cloud on Mount Sinai, and stood with Moses on the 
 mount, in token that he had found favour in His sight, and 
 He knew him by name : Moses " made haste, and bowed his 
 head toward the earth, and worshipped f ." 
 
 The captain of the Lord's host appeared unto Joshua, and 
 Joshua " fell on his face to the earth, and did worship s." 
 The angel of the Lord went up in the flame of Manoah's 
 altar, and Manoah and his wife looked on it, and "fell on 
 their faces to the ground h ." When young Samuel was so- 
 lemnly " lent to the Lord," Eli performed a solemn act of 
 adoration, and Hannah accompanied it with an adoring 
 
 Gen. xvii. 3, 17. e Gen. xxiv. 26, 52. f Exod. xxxiv. 8. 
 
 if Josh. v. 14. h Judges xiii. 20. 
 
a Ground of special Worship. Examples : 5 
 
 hymn 1 . The Shunammite, when her child had been raised by CHAP. I. 
 Elisha, " fell at his feet, and bowed herself to the ground k ." 
 
 7. If we go on to the New Testament, and take a few in- 
 stances out of many, we shall still find that it is the nearness 
 as well as the greatness of the blessing which prompts the 
 special worship or thanksgiving. "Whence is this to me, 
 that the mother of my Lord should come unto me ?" " Mine 
 eyes have seen Thy salvation." The leper worshipped Him, 
 saying, "Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean. 
 And Jesus put forth His hand and touched him." On 
 His walking on the sea, and quieting the storm, after the 
 miracle of the loaves, those who were in the ship came and 
 worshipped Him ; so did Jairus, so did the woman with the 
 issue of blood : some of them before, some after the mercy 
 received. So did the woman of Canaan ; so the father of the 
 demoniac, after the transfiguration; so the poor slave, over- 
 whelmed with debt, in the parable of the unmerciful servant ; 
 so the mother of Zebedee's children, asking the great wish 
 of her heart ; so the holy women, holding Him by the feet, 
 when, being risen, He met them, and said, All hail! so the 
 eleven, meeting Him by appointment in Galilee. So S. Peter, 
 after the draught of fishes, "fell down at Jesus' knees 1 ," the 
 more overpowered by the greatness of the miracle, because 
 of the nearness of Him who wrought it ; coming into his 
 boat, and directing him where and when to cast the net. 
 So Magdalene, drawn to Him by His presence in the Phari- 
 see's house; so the grateful leper, turning round to Him 
 before He was out of sight ; and the eager, rich young man. 
 So Zaccheus, at His coming into his house; so the blind 
 man in S. John ix., "'Thou hast both seen Him, and it is 
 He that talketh with thee' .... and he worshipped Him." 
 So S. Thomas, on His specially addressing him ; (for in- 
 voking Him as his Lord and God was surely an act of wor- 
 ship;) so Cornelius to S. Peter; so the jailor to S. Paul and 
 Silas ; so S. John to the Angel. 
 
 8. But three cases there are, which bring out this law of 
 devotion (so to call it) in a peculiar and very wonderful way. 
 
 1 1 Sara. ii. 1. k 2 Kings iv. 37. Cf. 2 Chron. xx. IS; Dan. ii. 19. 
 
 1 S.Lukev. 8. 
 
6 The Magnificat has the Tone of Eucharistical Worship. 
 
 CHAP. I. To Mary of Bethany it was said, "The Master is come, and 
 calleth for thee ;" for thee in particular, for thee by name : 
 what else can Mary do but hasten and throw herself at 
 Jesus' feet? Not so Martha, who had not been sent for. 
 And again, either of the same holy woman, or of another 
 very like her, we read, te Jesus said unto her, Mary :" it was 
 that, His calling her by name, His coming to herself per- 
 sonally and individually, which had the thrilling effect upon 
 her. She had heard before that He was risen, she had 
 heard of Him "by the hearing of the ear," but now she 
 heard Him actually speaking, and speaking to her; and so 
 her eye, which before only saw without resting on Him, came 
 clearly to discern Him. It was the personal application to 
 her by name which drove away for ever her melancholy 
 dream that He was absent, and caused her to turn herself 
 and cry out " My Master I" with an adoring voice and ges- 
 ture, as the context shews; for the saying, "Touch Me 
 not/' implies an attempt on her part to embrace His knees, 
 or hold Him by the feet, or some such action : and even if 
 it had not been written, who could have doubted it ? 
 
 And may we not here, too, remember that other Mary, her 
 whom all generations shall call Blessed, when she not only 
 saw and heard the Angel declaring the message of salvation 
 to her, and to us all, but knew in herself that the Holy 
 Ghost was come upon her, and the Power of the Highest 
 overshadowing her, and that the Holy Thing that should be 
 born of her was to be called the " Son of God ?" What her 
 feelings were we partly know by that hymn in which, as we 
 may reverently believe, she even now joins with the Church 
 continually : which hymn is surely as perfect an act of 
 adoration as ever was performed on earth by any but her 
 divine Son Himself. We know that her Magnificat begins 
 with owning the Lord and God as her Saviour; with amaze- 
 ment that He had regarded the "lowliness of His hand- 
 maiden;" that He had marked her out for a perpetual 
 blessing, and had done to her great things. In respect of 
 the Incarnation itself, then, it was not only the immensity 
 of the Gift, but its inconceivably near approach also to the- 
 Receiver, which she was taught of the Holy Ghost adoringly 
 
No Gift so great or so near as the Eucharist. 7 
 
 to acknowledge. Why or how should it be otherwise in re- CHAP. I. 
 speet of that which divines have truly called " the extension 
 of the Incarnation/' the participation of the Incarnate One 
 by His true members, in and through the spiritual eating 
 and drinking of His present Body and Blood ? 
 
 9. Thus it would appear that God's holy Word from be- 
 ginning to end abounds in examples to sanction those natu- 
 ral instincts of the devout and loving heart, which prompt 
 to deeper and more intense adoration, in proportion to the 
 greatness of the gift, and the directness with which it comes 
 straight to the receiver from Almighty God. 
 
 Now the gift in the Holy Eucharist is Christ Himself all 
 good gifts in one ; and that in an immense, inconceivable de- 
 gree. And how can we conceive even Power Almighty to bring 
 it more closely and more directly home to each one of us, 
 than when His Word commands and His Spirit enables us to 
 receive Him as it were spiritual meat and drink ? entering into 
 and penetrating thoroughly the whole being of the renewed 
 man, somewhat in the same way as the virtue of wholesome 
 meat and drink diffuses itself through a healthful body : only, 
 as we all know, with this great difference, (among others,) 
 that earthly meat and drink is taken up and changed into- ^>ct 
 
 parts of our earthly frame, whereas the work of this heavenly 
 nourishment is to transform our being into itself; to change * 
 us after His image, "from glory to glory," from the fainter 
 to the more perfect brightness ; until " our sinful bodies be 
 made clean by His Body, and our souls washed through His 
 most precious Blood; and we dwell evermore in Him, and 
 He in us :" " we in Him," as members of " His mystical 
 Body, which is the blessed company of all faithful people;" 
 "He in us," by a real and unspeakable union with His 
 divine Person, vouchsafed to us through a real and entirely 
 spiritual participation of that. Flesh and Blood which He 
 took of our Father Adam through the Blessed Virgin Mary ; 
 wherewith He suffered on the Cross, wherewith also He now 
 appears day and night before His Father in heaven for us. 
 So that a holy man of our own Church was not afraid thus 
 to write of this Sacrament : 
 
8 All Grounds of Worship made intense in the Eucharist : 
 
 CHAP. I. " By the way of nourishment and strength 
 
 Thou creep'st into my breast, 
 Making Thy way my rest, 
 And Thy small quantities my length, 
 Which spread their forces into every part, 
 Meeting sin's force and art. 
 
 " Thy grace, which with these elements comes, 
 
 Knoweth the ready way, 
 
 And hath the privy key, 
 Opening the soul's most subtle rooms" 1 ." 
 
 10. The sum is this. Renewed nature prompts the Chris- 
 tian, and Holy Scripture from beginning to end encourages 
 him, to use special adoration to Almighty God at the receiv- 
 ing of any special gift ; adoration the more earnest and in- 
 tense as the gift is greater, and the appropriation of it to the 
 worshipper himself more entire and direct. So it is with all 
 lesser, all partial gifts ; how then should it not be so when 
 we come to the very crown and fountain of all, that which 
 comprehends all the rest in their highest possible excellency, 
 and which is bestowed on each receiver by way of most un- 
 speakable participation and union, that gift which is God 
 Himself, as well as having God for its Giver? " Christ in us," 
 not only Christ offered for us ; a " divine nature" set before 
 us, of which we are to be made " partakers." Must we cease 
 adoring when He comes not only as the Giver, but as the 
 Gift; not only as the Priest, but as the Victim; not only 
 as "the Master of the Feast," but as "the Feast itself 11 ?" 
 Nay, but rather this very circumstance is a reason beyond 
 all reasons for more direct and intense devotion. 
 
 11. This brings us to the third circumstance, mentioned 
 above as an obvious motive of adoration in the Holy Eucha- 
 rist. For consider, to take the lowest ground first, when 
 men are receiving a favour from a superior, is not a sense 
 of his condescension a natural ingredient in their loving 
 acknowledgments ? and if there is anything generous and 
 
 m G. Herbert's Remains, p. 99, ed. n Bp. Taylor, Holy Living: Works, 
 1826. iv. 310, Heber's edition. 
 
Especially that of God's deep Condescension. 9 
 
 grateful in their hearts, do they not honour and revere him CHAP. I. 
 the more for every suffering, humiliation, debasement, in- "~ 
 dignity which he may have incurred in doing them good? 
 and can they well endure to hide and repress their venera- 
 tion for him? are they not the more hent on avowing it, 
 the more they see him slighted by others, possibly on this 
 very account, that he had not spared so to demean himself 
 for their sake ? 
 
 Caleb "stilled the people before Moses," when the spies 
 were setting them against him . Joshua was jealous for 
 Moses' sake, when some appeared to be prophesying with- 
 out commission from him p . It is plain that their loyalty 
 to him was quickened by the reproach they saw him endur- 
 ing. So all the dark feelings and speeches of the unhappy 
 Saul concerning David, served but to settle Jonathan's heart 
 in loving and honouring him more than ever. So Shimei's 
 ursing David in his affliction kindled the zeal of his soldiers 
 and servants. 
 
 And our Master, when He was with us in the flesh, more 
 than once gave token of especial approbation and blessing 
 to those who confessed Him the more unreservedly for the 
 wrong that was done Him; as to the sinful woman, who, 
 unconsciously or not, supplied the Pharisee's discourtesy by 
 a washing, anointing, and salutation of her own ; to Simon 
 Peter, speaking out before the rest, to own as the words of 
 eternal life those sayings about Holy Communion, which 
 had just driven away many of the disciples in disgust; and 
 very significantly to the man born blind, when he in dutiful 
 and pious gratitude had stood up for Christ, his Restorer, 
 against the Pharisees, and had incurred their scorn and 
 hatred. " Thou wast altogether born in sin, and dost thou 
 teach us ? and they cast him out. Jesus heard that they had 
 cast him out; and when He had found him, He said unto 
 him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? he answered and 
 said, Who is He, Lord, that I might believe on Him ? And 
 Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen Him, and it is He 
 that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And 
 lie worshipped HimV The Pharisees' reviling of Christ, 
 
 Numbers xiii. 30. * Numbers xi. 28. S. John ix. 3438. 
 
10 The Penitent Thief a Model of Eucharistical Worship. 
 
 CHAP. I. and of himself for Christ's sake, led him not only to belief, 
 but to adoration. 
 
 And what shall we say of the Thief on the Cross ? It may 
 appear by the tenor of the sacred history, that the provi- 
 dential instrument of his conversion was the revilings of the 
 crowd and of his fellow-malefactor, in which he himself at 
 first ignorantly joined, so meekly and majestically borne 
 by the Holy Jesus. When he saw that, he perceived at once 
 that " This Man hath done nothing amiss ;" and he became 
 the first to know and own Christ, "and the power of His 
 resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being 
 made conformable unto His death r ." The deep veneration, 
 he had conceived for our Lord, as for an innocent Man re- 
 ceiving the due reward of such wicked deeds as his own, 
 was rewarded with an adoring faith in Him as Lord and 
 Judge of the whole world; and he became the first example 
 of those who should be saved by the blessed Cross. And 
 beholding his Lord's glory through the veil of His extreme 
 humiliation, and taught from above to understand that for 
 that very humiliation's sake he was to surrender himself en- 
 tirely to Christ, to worship Him with all the powers of his 
 soul, he became also a pattern for all who would be worthy 
 communicants. For what is that which we remember spe- 
 cially, and on which we fix our mind's eye in Holy Com- 
 munion, but the same which he then saw with his bodily 
 eyes? the Body and Blood of Christ, i.e. Christ Himself, 
 offered up by Himself for that thief and for each one of 
 us? And if he worshipped, and was blessed, why not we? 
 
 We seem to have been drawn up unawares, by this enu- 
 meration of examples, from the contemplation of a high 
 moral sentiment to that of a cardinal principle in the king- 
 dom of heaven ; for such undoubtedly has ever been the 
 rule of acknowledging Christ's Incarnation, and all His con- 
 descensions and humiliations consequent upon it, by special 
 and express acts of homage and worship, inward and out- 
 ward, according to the time and occasion. 
 
 But this topic may better be referred to the second and 
 
 r Philipp. iii. 10. 
 
The Antecedent Presumption is in favour of Worship. 11 
 
 third heads of our proposed enquiry, What are the more CHAP. I. 
 direct bearings of Holy Scripture, and ancient Church testi- 
 monies, on the practice of worshipping Christ in the Eu- 
 charist ? 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 SUGGESTIONS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE. 
 
 1. AFTER what has been alleged, it will not, I think, 
 be assuming too much, if we turn to those passages of ou r 
 Bibles which more immediately relate to the Eucharist and 
 the great theological verities connected with it, in the ex- 
 pectation of finding the worship of Christ in that Sacrament 
 rather enjoined than discouraged ; seeing that therein are 
 combined and concentrated, in a manner and degree past 
 human imagining, the several reasons and occasions of spe- 
 cial worship, such as, in minor instances, natural piety points 
 them out to us, and as they are everywhere recognised by 
 Holy Scripture and the Church. There is (1.) a peculiar 
 Presence of the Most High ; (2.) bringing with it an awful, 
 an infinite blessing; (3.) appropriating it, moreover, to each 
 one of us in a way inconceivably near and intimate ; and 
 (4.) with a measure of condescension and humiliation on His 
 part, such as could not have entered into the heart of man 
 to conceive. Surely if, notwithstanding all this, our Lord's 
 will is that we should not so adore Him, we might expect to 
 find somewhere a distinct prohibition of the practice. The 
 onus probandi lies upon those who would restrain us. We 
 may require them, in legal phrase, to "shew cause" from 
 the Word of God, as understood always, everywhere, and by 
 all, why we should do violence to so many instincts of our 
 nature. As Bishop Taylor has taught us to ask, " If Christ 
 be there, why are we not to worship?" I say again, Accord- 
 ing to all sound rules of argument, it is rather our right to 
 call upon those who censure the practice to cite some text 
 forbidding it, than it is theirs to call upon us for one ex- 
 pressly enjoining it. 
 
 It has been repeated over and over again, that neither our 
 
12 Worship due to Christ's Manhood, 
 
 CHAP. II. Lord in the words of institution, nor S. Paul in his inspired 
 comment on them, has said anything about worshipping 
 Christ there present "under the form" (or "outward part") 
 " of Bread and Wine ;" and therefore, that to abstain from 
 such worship is the safer way. " If it be not commanded, 
 it is virtually forbidden." Perhaps the foregoing considera- 
 tions may lead some to invert the argument, and say rather, 
 " If not forbidden, it is virtually commanded." 
 
 I proceed to point out in Holy Scripture what appears to 
 me a very strong additional argument for the practice, 
 a complete justification, even if it do not amount to an im- 
 plicit recommendation of it. 
 
 2. Carrying on the idea with which the former section 
 ended, may we not say, that throughout Holy Scripture, as 
 afterwards throughout the traditions of the Catholic Church, 
 is discernible an evident anxiety (so to speak) to preserve, 
 and encourage, and impress on all believers this portion 
 especially of the sacred doctrine of the Incarnation, That 
 "the Manhood is taken into God?" the human nature abid- 
 ing in our Lord's Person, true and entire, from the very 
 moment of His Incarnation; and thenceforth eternally re- 
 ceiving from the Divine Nature, to which it is inseparably 
 united, all such properties and perfections as it might en- 
 joy without losing its reality and ceasing to be human. The 
 manifestation, indeed, of these properties and perfections, 
 the "Beams of Deity," restrained and enlarged themselves 
 according to the exigencies of the marvellous work in pro- 
 gress, known only to the great Ruler thereof; but in deed 
 and in truth the Communication itself of the properties of 
 the higher nature to the lower, (to use a comparatively late 
 ecclesiastical form,) was complete within the limit above- 
 mentioned, from the very moment that the Second Person 
 of the Trinity became Man. 
 
 3. With regard especially to that property to which the 
 present enquiry relates, the Epistle to the Hebrews ex- 
 pressly declares, "When He bringeth in the First-begotten 
 into the world, (els rrjv olKov/j,evr]v } ) He saith, And let all the 
 Angels of God worship Him 8 ." What is els rrjv 
 
 Heb. i. 6 ; from Ps. scvii. 7, and Deat. xxxii. 43. LXX. 
 
as taken into God. 13 
 
 " Into the created and inhabited world :" (such is the con- CHAP. II, 
 stant use of the word in Holy Scripture). Therefore the 
 saying, "Introducing the First-born into the world," literally 
 means " causing Him to become one of the creatures, one of 
 the inhabitants of the world which God had made ;" as He 
 describes Himself, " These things saith the Amen, the faith- 
 ful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God V 
 or as the Holy Ghost describes Him by S. Paul, He is " the 
 Image of the invisible God, the First-born of every crea- 
 ture";" "the First-born among many brethren V the First- 
 born, not in time, but in rank, and in the counsel of God. 
 
 Of course, when our gracious Lord began to be of the 
 number of God's creatures, i.e. at the time of His incar- 
 nation and birth, He began to be the First-born in this- 
 sense. To that moment, and to no other, we may with 
 some confidence affirm, the Apostle carries us back, as the 
 prophet David, whom he by the Holy Ghost is interpreting, 
 carries us forward, in the words, " And let all the Angels of 
 God worship Him." The prophecy we know was literally 
 fulfilled : to the Hebrew Christians, to whom the Apostle was 
 writing, it was matter of well-known history. At the very 
 time that the blessed Yirgin Mary brought forth her First- 
 born Son, the Angel appeared to the Shepherds with the 
 good tidings of great joy ; but the multitude of the heaven!}' 
 host, with their full hymn of praise, did not appear until the 
 words of deeper humiliation were added, " Ye shall find the 
 Babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger." A 
 thing which has been often observed, and which is surely 
 much to our present purpose : it has a doctrinal as well as 
 a moral meaning. Read by the light which is thrown back 
 upon it by the Apostle's saying to the Hebrews, it looks like 
 a proclamation from the Great King, This is He whom I 
 delight to honour, " worship Him all ye gods," all that is 
 called God in heaven and in earth; let the highest of 
 Created beings adore Him with a special worship by reason 
 of His unspeakable humiliation, now that He is made man, 
 " wrapped in swaddling clothes, and laid in a manger ;" let 
 them understand that on this day the Father of all by the 
 * Rev. iii. 14. u Coloss. i. 15. x Kom. viii. 29. 
 
14 The Angels commanded to adore Christ's Manhood. 
 
 CHAP. II. Holy Ghost hath become the Father of the Man Christ 
 Jesus, in that sense in which Christ vouchsafes to be " the 
 Beginning, the First-born of every creature ;" in that sense 
 in which it is said to Him, "Thou art My Son, this day 
 have I begotten Thee y ." God never said so to any of the 
 Angels, but He said it to Christ, when He " glorified Him to 
 become an High-priest ;" anointing the human nature that 
 was in Christ with the Holy Ghost, without stint or measure 2 . 
 That was at the moment of His Incarnation, for from that 
 moment it pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness 
 dwell " all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. " To that, 
 and not to anything added by the Holy Ghost which had 
 just descended upon Him, the word spoken from heaven at 
 His baptism evidently refers : " Thou art My beloved Son, 
 in Thee I am well pleased." 
 
 So also, I venture to think, does the quotation of S. Paul 
 in Acts xiii. 33 ; although our translation would seem rather 
 to connect it with the resurrection : " "We declare unto you 
 glad tidings, how that the promise made unto the fathers, 
 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that 
 He hath raised up Jesus, [avacrTrjo-a^ 'Irjaovv] : as it is also 
 written in the second Psalm, f Thou art My Son j this day 
 have I begotten Thee/ ' That this, not "raised up again" 
 is here the more natural rendering of the word avacmjcras, 
 may appear from the texts cited below a . The leading idea 
 seems to be that of " raising up a seed unto David to sit 
 on his throne," and also (as in the text last cited below), 
 to be a Priest as well as a King. And this will account 
 for the repetition of the word with express reference to the 
 resurrection in the following verse : " As concerning that 
 He raised Him from the dead, now no more to return to 
 corruption, He saith on this wise, ' I will give you the 
 sure mercies of David.' " 
 
 That is the decree, the law, which the Father in the second 
 Psalm declares, and the Son in the fortieth Psalm accepts 
 " in the midst of His heart." Henceforth for ever the Son 
 
 y Heb. v. 5. Jer. xxiii. 5 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 23 ; Acts 
 
 * S. John iii. 34. ii. 30 ; S. Mattb. xxii. 24 ; Rom. xv. 
 
 , * Deut. xviii. 15 ; 2 Sam. vii. 12 ; 12, from Isaiah xi. 10 ; Heb. vii. 11. 
 
They did so at His Birth, and after His Baptism. 15 
 
 is made perfect Man, and as Man is to be adored with special CHAP. II. 
 adoration by all the Angels of heaven. 
 
 4. Observe again, according to this interpretation, the 
 deep significance of that which is written by two Evangelists 
 out of three in their report of our Lord's temptation. In 
 S. Matthew we read, "The devil leaveth Him, and behold 
 Angels came and ministered unto Him." But in S. Mark, 
 from the condensation of, the narrative, the lesson of adora- 
 tion is brought out in a still more striking manner : " There 
 came a Voice from Heaven, saying, Thou art My beloved Son, 
 in whom I am well pleased. And immediately the Spirit 
 driyeth Him into the wilderness. And He was there in the 
 wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan ; and was with the 
 wild beasts; and the Angels ministered unto Him V 
 
 There is a mysterious correspondence, if I mistake not, 
 between the order of these events and of those which hap- 
 pened on Christmas night. First, in both cases alike, Angels 
 and men are called upon to take notice that the human 
 presence of our Lord is the presence of the Only-begotten 
 Son : with this difference, however, that at Bethlehem it was 
 the actual Incarnation of the Word, His taking to Himself 
 a natural body ; by the river Jordan, it was His taking to 
 Himself His mystical body, typified in His baptism, to which 
 the Voice from the excellent glory referred. So we are in- 
 structed by one of the earliest fathers, S. Clement of Alex- 
 andria : " Unto the Lord at His Baptism sounded out from 
 heaven a Voice, the Witness to the Beloved, ' Thou art My 
 Son, this day have I begotten Thee/ .... Whether these 
 people will or no, must they not confess that the perfect 
 Word, Offspring of the perfect Father, was perfectly regene- 
 rated by way of economy and prefiguration ? . . . . Now this 
 same happens also to us, of whom our Lord became the re- 
 presentation. In baptism we are illuminated, in illumination 
 adopted, in adoption perfected, in perfection immortalized. 
 His word is, ' I said, ye are gods, and children of the 
 Highest, all of you V ' Angelical service follows in both, but 
 in neither immediately. The hymn of congratulation at our 
 Lord's birth, and the lowly ministry and homage after the 
 
 b S. Mark i. 1113. c Psedag. i. 25, 26. 
 
16 Angelical Homage to our Lord in His Agony. 
 
 CHAP. II. proclamation at His baptism, (the former of which we know 
 was accompanied with adoration; and how can we doubt it 
 concerning the other?) were each of them reserved, as it 
 were, until His mysterious humiliation had been announced 
 by additional circumstances. The multitude of the heavenly 
 host did not sing Gloria in Excelsis until they had heard of 
 the swaddling bands and the manger; the Angels did not 
 come and minister unto Him who was declared the only- 
 begotten and beloved Son until He had been cast out into 
 the wilderness, had abode there forty days fasting, with no 
 companions but the wild beasts, and (most mysterious and 
 fearful self-abasement,) Satan tempting Him. Then, not 
 before, they were allowed to shew themselves at hand with 
 their adoring homage, homage paid as to Him whom they 
 knew to be their Lord and their God, and accepted by Him 
 just after He had re-affirmed the rule, binding alike on angel 
 and man, " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him 
 only shalt thou serve/' 
 
 5. The same words were once again uttered by the 
 same voice at our Lord's transfiguration : an earnest, no 
 doubt, of His glory after His resurrection ; but as they were 
 not then accompanied by any special humiliation, so neither 
 was there any response of angelic praise and worship. 
 
 6. But the next occasion on which we do read of such 
 ministration being accepted by our Lord after the flesh, is 
 when He was in the lowest and saddest of His agony : " His 
 sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to 
 the ground. And there appeared an Angel unto Him from 
 heaven, strengthening Him d ." S. Luke, who singly relates 
 this, had omitted the homage of the Angels in his account of 
 the temptation, but had added, that the devil's then depart- 
 ing from our Lord was but "for a season;" i.e. until the 
 moment came which in the same Gospel is described as the 
 " hour " of Christ's enemies, " and the power of darkness." 
 As though the good and bad spirits stood watching in their 
 several ways for each new step in the process whereby He was 
 " emptying Himself of His glory ;" the one to indulge in their 
 despairing fierceness, the other to pour themselves out in 
 d S. Luke xxii. 4144. 
 
How our Lord was "seen of Angels ." 17 
 
 adoring love and duty. Thus both the one and the other CHAP. II; 
 sort became witnesses the one willing, the other unwilling 
 of His condescension, and of the victory thereby achieved ; 
 as the same Father again writes: "The Lord after His 
 baptism is tossed as witn a tempest for a type of us, and 
 Cometh first to be with wild beasts in the wilderness; then 
 having overcome these and their prince, He, as now a true 
 King, is ministered unto by Angels. For He who in the 
 flesh overcame Angels, good reason is it that Angels should 
 now be His servants 6 ." 
 
 There were Angels attending, too, on Christ's resurrec- 
 tion, but employed chiefly, as far as we are told, in guard- 
 ing His tomb and grave-clothes, and other tokens of hu- 
 miliation, and by them declaring His glory to those who 
 came seeking Him. 
 
 7. Thus from the moment of His Incarnation, while yet 
 in this world under the veil of His flesh, as well as afterwards, 
 now and unto the end of the world, while He is being "jus- 
 tified in the Spirit f ," shewn all holy and righteous by the 
 dispensation of the Holy Ghost, Jesus Christ was and is 
 < seen of Angels ;" or rather, as holy writers take it, " hath 
 appeared unto Angels." For, " that is said to appear which 
 hath it in its own power to be seen or not to be seen, and is 
 not under the power of the person seeing. Thus we say not, 
 ' The stone appears to me/ but f I see the stone/ If, there- 
 fore, an Angel had it in his own nature or power to see the 
 Word, it would not be said that the Word ' appeared* unto 
 him, but rather that he himself saw the Word when he would. 
 And therefore the Apostle saith, ' He appeared unto Angels/ 
 because in their own nature they saw Him not. And true it 
 is that from the beginning He appeared unto the Angels, 
 when upon their turning towards Him He made them par- 
 takers of a divine nature ; but when He was made flesh,, 
 many mysteries became known to the Angels which they had 
 not known before g ." These are the things which they stoop 
 down from heaven "to look into," the sufferings of their 
 Lord and ours, and the glories that follow : the sufferings. 
 
 S.C1 m. Alex. Fragm., series i. 85. f 1 Tim. iii. 16. 
 
 * Aquin. in 1 Ep. ad Tim. c. iii. 16. 
 
18 Good and bad Angels wailing on the Eucharist, 
 
 11. first, and then the glories ; in that order " the manifold 
 wisdom of God" is "made known by the Church to the 
 principalities and powers in heavenly places ;" and whatever 
 may be said of us fallen creatures, with them, we are sure, 
 to know is to worship. 
 
 8. Just as, on the other side, the evil Spirits, " the princes 
 of this world V* came to know by degrees the " wisdom" 
 which the gospel "speaks among them that are perfect;" 
 a kind of " wisdom not of this world," but the " wisdom of 
 God in a mystery ;" a wisdom which they knew not at first, 
 for " had they known it, they would not have crucified the 
 Lord of Glory ;" and as they knew more of it, they hated 
 and scorned it more and more, as it is written, " The devil 
 is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he 
 knoweth that he hath but a short time." So from the be- 
 ginning the Church taught, "There were three mysteries 
 unknown to the prince of this world the virginity of Mary, 
 her lying-in at Bethlehem, and the true account of our 
 Lord's death; three mysteries most worthy to be proclaimed 
 aloud, yet wrought in the silence of God 1 ;" and the spite 
 and maKce of the devil was as discernible in regard of each 
 of these mysteries, when he came to know them, as was the 
 joy and salutation of the Angels ; Herod, and the Pharisees, 
 and Judas, being his instruments. 
 
 . 9. That which, according to the same authority, takes 
 place in the spiritual world among the good and bad Angels 
 invisibly attending on every Holy Communion, is but another 
 step in the same process. From the beginning it has been 
 understood that the blessed Angels are ever at hand attend- 
 ing on the Christian altar, taking part in our hymns and 
 thanksgivings, and wafting upward in a mysterious way all 
 our dutiful prayers and offerings. S. Paul k makes this well- 
 known fact a principle on which Christians ought to regulate 
 all their demeanour, even their dress, in doing God service. 
 "A woman ought to have power," i.e. some mark of her 
 being under power and authority, " on her head, because of 
 the Angels :" that everything may be done decently, and in 
 order, in the presence of those glorious beings. And on the 
 
 h 1 Cor. ii. 68. S. Ignatius ad Ephes. c. 19. v 1 Cor. xi. 10. 
 
a Token of our Lord's adorable Presence. 19 
 
 other hand, Satan was waiting at the very first Eucharist of CHAP. II. 
 nil to enter into Judas Iscariot ; and we know what great and 
 peculiar danger there is of his entering in and re-possessing 
 unworthy communicants. 
 
 Why are the Angels so especially present, why is Satan 
 so to be feared as near at hand, in Holy Communion, more 
 than in other Church ceremonies? Surely because the Gift 
 is greater and nearer, and more distinctly applied to each one, 
 and that with more unreserved condescension on the part of 
 the Giver, than on any other occasion in the Christian life. 
 Surely because it is the Word made Flesh, personally pre- 
 sent and revealed in the truth of His human nature, and 
 offering thereby to make His own partakers of His divine 
 nature also : and " wheresoever the Carcase/' the holy slain 
 Body is, " thither will the eagles be gathered together ;" the 
 good, and saintly, and angelical Spirits to feed on it, the 
 Judases and enemies of Christ to mangle and to scorn it. 
 
 10. All this is no more than Holy Scripture, as in- 
 terpreted by the ancient Church, plainly teaches; and all 
 this plainly implies a Heal objective Presence of the Body 
 and Blood of Christ, and that to be both eaten and wor- 
 shipped, in Holy Communion. It implies such an union of 
 condescension and power for the deification (so termed by 
 the Fathers) of each one of us x , as the very Incarnation and 
 Cross exhibited for the salvation and redemption of all man- 
 kind. Therefore, as our Lord newly incarnate, and nailed 
 to His Cross, was to be specially adored by men and Angels, 
 so also in this Sacrament. 
 
 11. Other scriptural facts and associations tending to 
 the same conclusion are, First, The reverence ordained to be 
 paid, and always paid from the beginning, to the Name of 
 Jesus above all other names ; to the sign of the Cross above 
 all other signs ; to the Gospels above other portions of Holy 
 Scripture; and to Nazareth, Bethlehem, Calvary, above all 
 other places. 
 
 Secondly, The peculiar significancy and use of the term 
 Son of Man. 
 
 Cf.2S.Pet.i.4. 
 
SO Jesus a Name of Humiliation, therefore honoured 
 
 CHAP. II. Thirdly, The ways in which believers, while He was yet on 
 earth, found themselves gradually and instinctively drawn to 
 worship Him present in the flesh, and the manner in which 
 He received that worship. 
 
 Fourthly, and above all, The account constantly given of 
 the rationale of the Holy Eucharist itself, both as a sacrifice,, 
 and as a sacrificial feast. 
 
 12. As the Body of Jesus during His earthly sojourn 
 was marked out to be honoured by the holy Angels, so 
 afterwards was the Name of Jesus also; and, as we may 
 reverently believe, for a like cause. The Body was to be 
 especially glorified, as being the inferior part of Christ's in- 
 ferior nature ; the very footstool, as the Psalmist speaks, of 
 His feet m ; the " heel" of the Seed of the Woman, which was 
 to be "bruised." In like manner, because Jesus is (humanly 
 speaking) the name given to Him by a poor man as to a poor 
 woman's child, the name by which He was ordinarily known 
 when supposed to be a mere man among men; because peo- 
 ple called Him by that name while He went up and down as 
 a carpenter's son, and Himself a carpenter, in the despised vil- 
 lage of Nazareth ; because it was a name associated in the 
 minds of all His acquaintance, during the first thirty years of 
 His life, with the tasks and cares, and the very tools, of that 
 ordinary trade; with recollections, indeed, of a most blame- 
 less and devout demeanour, but not as yet with anything 
 transcendent, supernatural, or divine : because it was the 
 name which, being connected with Nazareth, (out of which 
 town, it was taken for granted, no good thing could come,) 
 proved afterwards through His whole ministry a most effec- 
 tual stumbling-block to those who were unwilling to believe : 
 because it was the name whereby He was described as a 
 Nazarene, the name which His enemies in mockery wrote 
 upon His cross, as contrasting most signally with His high 
 and sacred claims : because it was the name whereby He 
 should be named in scorn among all generations of the un- 
 believing, (whether worldly-minded Romans, who could not 
 endure to be told "that there is another King, one Jesus;" 
 or bigoted Jews, exasperated by the notion that "this Jesus. 
 
by Angels, good and bad; instrumental in Miracles. 21 
 
 of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and change the customs CHAP. II. 
 which Moses delivered/ 7 and convinced therefore, with Saul, 
 that they ought to do the most they could contrary to His 
 name ; or apostate Mahometans and heretics, in the East or 
 in the West, delighting to call Him by that one of all His 
 titles which they take to be merely of earth :) in one word, 
 because it is the name most expressive of His humiliation, 
 therefore His thoughtful servants would instinctively select 
 it in preference to all His other names for especial honour 
 and reverence. 
 
 13. And so we see they did, prompted not by their 
 feelings only, but by the special inspiration of God's Holy 
 Spirit, whose will it was that in this way the dignity of Christ 
 the Son of God, and His most true incarnation, might never 
 want a witness. The Angels called Him by that name to 
 His honour, remembering, no doubt, how they had brought 
 it from heaven, " Be riot affrighted ; ye seek Jesus of Naza- 
 reth, which was crucified n ;" and the evil Spirits in their tor- 
 menting dread of Him, " What have we to do with Thee, 
 Jesus, Thou Son of God ?" " What have we to do with Thee, 
 Thou Jesus of Nazareth ?" "What have I to do with Thee, 
 Jesus, Thou Son of the most high God p ?" By that name, 
 in preference to all others, the disciples proclaimed Him after 
 His death 1, and the Apostles after His ascension r . In that 
 name they wrought their miracles s : " In the Name of Jesus 
 Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk ;" " .ZEneas, Jesus Christ 
 maketh thee whole;" "I command thee in the name of 
 Jesus Christ to come out of her." By that name the forgers 
 of lies pretended to cast out evil spirits: "I adjure thee/' 
 they cried, " by Jesus, whom Paul preachethA" To the 
 N^ame of Jesus were annexed all saving as well as healing 
 powers ; " By the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom 
 ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by Him 
 doth this man stand here before you whole : neither is there 
 salvation in any other; for there is none other name under 
 heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved u ." 
 
 " S. Mark xvi. 6. r Acts ii. 22. 
 
 S. Mark i. 24. * Acts iii. 6; ix. 34; xvi. 18. 
 P S. Mark v. 7. * Acts xix. 13. 
 
 1 Luke xxiv. 19. u Acts iv. 10, 12. 
 
22 Prerogatives of the Name of Jesus : 
 
 CHAP. IT. Therefore to the Name of Jesus, rather than to any other, 
 ~~ are to be referred the many promises made by God Almighty 
 concerning His Name; whether things are said to be done 
 TO) ovo^a-Tiy "by the use and instrumentality of it," as in 
 S. Matt. vii. 22, " Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in 
 Thy Name? and in Thy Name have cast out devils? and 
 in Thy Name done many wonderful works ?" or eV TW QVQ- 
 fjLari, implying that it is He, not the visible agent, who 
 doeth the work, or obtaineth the blessing, as in S. Mark 
 xvi. 17, "In My Name they shall cast out devils;" and 
 S. Luke x. 17, "Lord, even the very devils are subject unto us 
 through Thy Name ;" and especially in the gracious promises 
 near the end of S. John's Gospel, "Whatsoever ye shall ask 
 the Father in My Name, He will do it v ;" or els TO ovopa, 
 when in a mystery men are made or accounted partakers of 
 the name, or of Him who is named, as in S. Matt, xviii. 20, 
 " Where two or three are gathered together in My Name ;" 
 xxviii. 19, (et? TO ovopa,) "Unto the name of the Father, 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" and S. John i. 12, 
 " But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to 
 become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His 
 Name;" which three texts declare respectively the virtue of 
 the communion of saints, of baptism, and of faith, for the 
 uniting of us to Christ ; or eVl TW ova'pari, " for the pro- 
 nouncing or profession of it ;" as in S. Matt, xviii. 5, " Who- 
 soever shall receive one such little one in My Name, receiveth 
 Me;" and xxiv. 5, "Many shall come in My Name, saying, 
 I am Christ;" and S. Luke xxiv. 47, "Remission of sins 
 should be preached in His Name;" and Acts ii. 38, "Be 
 baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ ;" or Sia TO ovopa, 
 "because of the Name" outwardly called on them, and 
 ma-de a ground of persecution, as in S. Matt. xxiv. 9, "Ye 
 shall be hated of all men for My Name's sake;" and in 
 S. John xv. 21, "All these things will they do unto you fop 
 My Name's sake." 
 
 ]4. The Apostle, gathering together in one all these 
 and the like promises, and the manifold daily fulfilments of 
 
 v In one instance the same form of tion of persons in the Godhead itself; 
 speech seems to indicate the distinc- S. John xiv. 26. 
 
Rule of Bowing at it; Mystical Allusions to it. 23 
 
 them to which he was witness, did by the Holy Ghost enact CHAP. II. 
 and pronounce this canon, for the inward and outward wor- 
 ship of all God's reasonable and understanding creatures, not 
 only in time, but in eternity, That " at the Name, of Jesus 
 every knee should bow x ." Why at the Name of Jesus, rather 
 than at that of Christ, or Immanuel, or Saviour, or any other 
 of His good and great names? Why should Jesus be alone 
 specified, as the Name which is above every name? Surely, 
 if the Scripture did not expressly inform us, yet, from its in- 
 direct notices, such as have now been exemplified, a sufficiently 
 probable answer might have been given to this question ; but 
 now we are not left in the smallest doubt. It was because, 
 "being in the form of God," He "thought it not robbery to 
 be equal with God : but made Himself of no reputation, and 
 took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the 
 likeness of men : and being found in fashion as a man, He 
 humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the 
 death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted 
 Him, and given Him a Name which is above every name : 
 that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things 
 in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth ; 
 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is 
 Lord, to the glory of God the Father." As if he should 
 say, Jesus is His title of humiliation ; therefore by that title 
 He is evermore to receive especial homage. 
 
 15. From Angels, both good and bad, He does receive it, 
 as we have seen. In their several ways they bow, and ever 
 will bow, their knees to the Name of Jesus. And the Holy 
 Church from the beginning has venerated this Name above 
 the rest, in affectionate reverence encouraging her children 
 to refer to it on all occasions, in preference to any other of 
 our Lord's names; as the very sayings of her enemies suffi- 
 ciently prove, who cannot contain themselves for scorn at 
 the cold, and strained, and forced allusions to that Name 
 (so appearing to them) which the writers of the first ages 
 are continually finding or inventing, both in Holy Scripture 
 and in the course of nature and of Providence. A single in- 
 stance will sufficiently explain what is meant. S. Clement 
 
 * Philipp. ii. 10. 
 
24s Testimonies of Reverence to the Name of Jesus. 
 
 CHAP. II. of Alexandria, in the course of an essay in which he traces 
 out the mystical tenor of each of the ten commandments, as 
 indicated by the number which marks its place, says of the 
 collective meaning of them all?, "The Decalogue taken alto- 
 gether doth, by the letter I (==10) signify the blessed Name, 
 setting before us JESUS, Who is the Word." 
 
 If you ask why this Name is set forth in preference to any- 
 other of His names, S. Augustine will answer for the rest 
 - " Jesus has one meaning, Christ another : Jesus Christ our 
 Saviour being one only; Jesus, nevertheless, is His proper 
 Name. As Moses, Elijah, Abraham, were so called by their 
 proper names, so our Lord, for His proper Name, hath the 
 Name Jesus ; whereas Christ is His sacramental Name 2 ;" or, 
 as S.Augustine goes on to explain, His name of office, "as 
 if you should call a man prophet or priest." That is why 
 the Church has always distinguished the Name of Jesus 
 above all other names, because it is His very own Name; 
 the Bride delights in it, because it is the very own Name of 
 Him whom her soul loveth ; His own Name, which He as- 
 sumed as the token of His taking her to Himself for ever, 
 and of the infinite, inconceivable condescension of His being 
 made man in order to that union. 
 
 Therefore, as a distinguished mediaeval commentator wit- 
 nesses, "There is a common and laudable custom of the 
 Church, whereby the Name JESUS is even more honoured 
 than the Name GOD. For which cause, when the Name of 
 JESUS is heard, the faithful people either bow the head OF 
 bend the knees; which they do not on hearing the Name 
 of GOD a ." 
 
 S. Bernard gives a testimony such as one might expect 
 from the author of the " Jesu, dulcis Memoria" Preaching 
 on Canticles i. 3, Thy Name is oil poured out, he says b , " I 
 shew you a Name which is fitly compared to oil; how fitly, 
 I will explain. Many titles of the Bridegroom you read here 
 and there in every page of God's Book, but in two I will em- 
 brace them all for you. You will not, I think, find one which 
 
 y Strom, vi. 145. * Abulensis, in Corn, a Lapide oa 
 
 z S. Aug. in 1 Ep. Johannis, tr. iii. Philipp. ii. 10. 
 6. b Serm. xv. 1, 3, 4. 
 
Honour to the Name Jesus, medieval and Anglican. 25 
 
 sounds not either of the grace of Mercy, or the power of CHAP. IL 
 Majesty. . . These two things I have heard, that POWER be- 
 longeth unto God, and that Thou, Lord, art MERCIFUL. E.g. 
 * The Lord our righteousness' is a name of power; 'Em- 
 manuel/ of mercy. Now the name of majesty and power 
 is in a certain way poured over into that which is of mercy 
 and grace ; and the latter is poured out abundantly by Jesus 
 Christ our Saviour. . . "Run, ye nations: salvation is at 
 hand, the Name is poured out, which whosoever will call 
 on shall be saved." . . "I recognise the Name of which I 
 have read in Isaiah, He will call His own servants by another 
 name, wherein whosoever is blessed upon the earth, shall be 
 blessed in the Lord. O blessed Name ! O oil poured out 
 in all directions ! Where will it stop? From heaven it 
 runneth out upon Judsea, and thence over all the earth; 
 and from the whole world the Church crieth out, Thy Name 
 is oil poured out, poured out, indeed, so that not only hath 
 it imbued heaven and earth, but hath sprinkled also the un- 
 seen world, so that at the Name of Jesus every knee should 
 bow, of things in heaven, and in earth, and under the earth, 
 and every tongue confess and say, Thy Name is oil poured 
 out." 
 
 It would appear that there was no need of enforcing this 
 reverence by synodical enactment until one hundred years 
 after S. Bernard ; but in the second Council of Lyons, 1274, 
 the Church uttered this among other most impressive warn- 
 ings : " ' Holiness becometh the house of the Lord ;' it is 
 becoming that He whose abode hath been made in peace, 
 should be worshipped in peace with due veneration. Where- 
 fore let men's entrance into churches be humble and devout. 
 Let their demeanour therein be quiet, well-pleasing to God, 
 .composed in sight of men, such as not only to edify, but 
 to soothe thoughtful observers. When they come together 
 in that place, the Name which is above every name, besides 
 which there is none other under heaven given unto men, where- 
 in believing they must be saved, i.e. the Name of JESUS 
 Christ, who saved His people from their sins, that Name 
 let them exalt by manifestation of especial reverence. And 
 that which is written concerning all, that ' in the Name of 
 
26 English Canons for Bowing at the Name of Jesus. 
 
 CHAP. II. Jesus every knee should bow/ the same let each for his own 
 part fulfil in himself, (especially while the sacred mysteries 
 of the Eucharist are being celebrated,) by bowing the knees 
 of his heart at every mention of that glorious Name, and in 
 witness thereof at least inclining his head c ." 
 
 16. Neither has the reformed Church of England ever 
 had any scruple in continuing so dutiful a ceremony ; only 
 it appears by the 52nd Injunction of Queen Elizabeth, 1559, 
 that there was need to enforce it, not as a new thing, but 
 as an ancient custom in more or less danger of disparage- 
 ment. " It is to be necessarily received, . . . that whensoever 
 the Name of JESUS shall be in any lesson, sermon, or other- 
 wise in the Church pronounced, due reverence be made of all 
 persons both young and old, with lowness of courtesy, and 
 uncovering of heads of the men kind, as thereunto doth ne- 
 cessarily belong, and heretofore hath been accustomed d ." 
 
 In what quarter, and from what spirit, the necessity for 
 this injunction arose, we may gather from the following pas- 
 sage of Cartwright's first Admonition 6 : " When JESUS is 
 named, then off goeth the cap, and down goeth the knee, 
 with such a scraping on the ground, that they cannot hear 
 a good while after, so that the word is hindered ; but when 
 other names of God are mentioned, they make no curtesy 
 at all; as though the names of God were not equal, or as 
 though all reverence ought to be given to the syllables." 
 
 "What Hooker, on the part of the Church, replies to this, 
 will be cited presently. Whitgift, affirming also the primi- 
 tive origin of the ceremony, adds, in substance, the same 
 account of it : " One reason that moved Christians in the 
 beginning the rather to bow at the Name of Jesus than at 
 any other name of God, was because this name was most 
 hated and most contemned of the wicked Jews and other 
 persecutors of such as professed the Name of JesusV 
 
 The royal injunction, as everyone knows, was confirmed 
 a few years afterwards by synodical authority : " When in 
 time of divine service the Lord Jesus shall be mentioned, 
 
 c Hard. vii. 716. c Abp. Whitgift, Defence, &c., 749. 
 
 d Cardwell, Documentary Annals, * Hooker, Eccl. Pol., V. xxx. 3, and: 
 i. 198. note. 
 
Bowing at Jesus' Name warrants Eucharistical Worship. 27 
 
 due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present, CHAP. IL, 
 as it hath been accustomed, testifying by these outward cere- 
 monies and gestures, their inward humility, Christian reso- 
 lution, and due acknowledgment that the Lord Jesus Christ, 
 the true eternal Son of God, is the only Saviour of the world, 
 in whom alone all the mercies, graces, and promises of God 
 to mankind for this life, and the life to come, are fully and 
 wholly comprised"/' And this regulation seems generally 
 to have been acquiesced in, so far, at least, as that the Pres- 
 byterian divines in the Savoy Conference make no mention 
 of bowing at the holy Name as one of the points which then 
 disturbed men's consciences in the Prayer-book. 
 
 17. Now all the reasons alleged from the beginning, and 
 accepted by the universal Church and our own, for the hon- 
 ouring the Name of Jesus above all other names, hold with 
 as great or greater force for special adoration of our Lord in 
 the holy Eucharist, and make it still more imperative upon 
 the prohibitors to produce some irresistible authority from 
 Holy Scripture, or express Church law, if they would bring 
 their prohibition home to a Christian man's conscience. Was 
 Jesus the Name, among all His names, most expressive of 
 His deep humiliation? So are the sacramental elements 
 among all the means of grace, both as being in themselves 
 so cheap and ordinary, and as representing especially His 
 Death and Passion. Was Jesus our Lord's proper Name, 
 brought from heaven, with a command that by It above 
 other names we should make mention of Him ? So was the 
 holy Eucharist divinely ordained, that by it above all other 
 rites we should make memorial of Him. Is Jesus His Name 
 as a Man one of ourselves? So is the holy Eucharist that 
 by which He, the Wisdom of the Father, delighteth to be 
 among the sons of men h . Is the Name of Jesus especially 
 connected everywhere with the healing, saving works of the 
 Son of God, and expressly made adorable both by men and 
 angels ? Yet no promise associated with it can surpass what 
 He, who is Truth, has annexed for ever to the eating His 
 Flesh and drinking His Blood. Has the reverence due to 
 this Name been ever cherished in the Church, as one great 
 
 s 18th Canon, 1603. h Prov. viii. 31. 
 
28 So does standing up at the Gospel. 
 
 CHAP. IT. safeguard of the faith of His true Incarnation ? So we know- 
 that against ancient heretics one topic for effectually assert- 
 ing that same faith in its integrity was the analogy between 
 it and the doctrine of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, 
 testified by our adoration. 
 
 It should seem, then, that whatever can be alleged for 
 peculiar devotion to the holy Name, the same, and much 
 more, can be alleged for peculiar devotion to the holy Thing 
 received in the Sacrament; with this single exception, that 
 we have no distinct form of words commanding us to adore 
 in Holy Communion, as we have commanding us to bow at 
 the Name of Jesus. But we have (as I hope presently to 
 shew) declarations of our Lord fully equivalent to any such 
 form of words. In the meantime, the simple fact that ado- 
 ration is commanded at the mention of Christ's human 
 Name might well warrant the Church in claiming it for the 
 Heal Presence of His holy Humanity. 
 
 18. The same principle is recognised in the rubric which 
 .enjoins standing up while the Gospel is read; not, of course, 
 as though it were more truly and entirely God's Word than 
 the Epistle and other Scriptures are, but because it is that 
 portion of God's Word in which He most abases Himself, 
 hiding His Divinity and Majesty beneath that humble and 
 lowly veil. So universal was this custom, that Sozomen, 
 writing in the middle of the fifth century, knew but of one 
 exception to it, and that was in the Church of Alexandria, 
 -where the Bishop continued sitting even- at that time 1 . The 
 Apostolical Constitutions k , which, in such matters, may pro- 
 bably be taken as representing the general mind of the 
 Church, direct as follows : " When the Gospels are in 
 reading, let all the priests and deacons, and all the people, 
 stand up in great quietness ; for it is written, ' Be still, and 
 hearken, O Israel/ And again, f But do thou stand here and 
 .listen 1 /" S.Chrysostom on the beginning of S. Matthew 
 says, " Let us not therefore with noise and tumult enter in, 
 but with the silence due to mysteries ; for if in a theatre, 
 when a great silence hath been made, then the letters of 
 the king are read, much more in this city must all be 
 
 1 ii. 57. k ii. 57. ' Deut. v. 31. 
 
So does the Primitive Custom of Crossing. 29 
 
 posed, and stand with soul and ear erect. For it is not the CHAP. II. 
 letters of any earthly, master, but of the Lord of angels, 
 which are presently to be read." 
 
 The rationale of this, as of bowing at the Name, is ex- 
 pressed by Hooker in words which it would be wrong to omit, 
 because they contain in them the principle of all that has 
 been now alleged : " It sheweth a reverend regard to the Son 
 of God above other messengers, although speaking as from 
 God also. And against Infidels, Jews, Arians, who derogate 
 from the honour of Jesus Christ, such ceremonies are most 
 profitable." As if he should say, "Behold God Himself 
 coming close to us, and humbling Himself to do so: so- 
 much the more ought we to adore Him." 
 
 19. By the same rule that the Name of Jesus is to be 
 honoured above all other names, the sign of the Cross has 
 been set apart from the beginning to be honoured above 
 all other signs. I say, " from the beginning," for such un- 
 doubtedly is the case : it is not here as in some other Church 
 usages : the further we go back in Christian antiquity, the 
 more distinctly and unequivocally does this devotion appear. 
 If we look to the employment of it in baptism, and in almos^ 
 every other holy ceremony, as well as in the practice of 
 ordinary life, we have the well-known witness of Tertullian m . 
 If to the instinctive use made of it in emergencies and 
 dangers, spiritual or temporal, we have the allusion of S, 
 Cyprian", the statement of Origen , and the earnest exhorta- 
 tion of S. Chrysostom p . If to the practical and mystical 
 
 m De Corona Mil. c. 4. ap. Hooker, adds which Origen refers to. Ap. 
 
 V. Ixv. 2. Oper. Hieron. v. 95 ; Origen, ed. Be- 
 
 n ii. 125. "Muniatur frons, ut sig- ned. iii. 424. 
 
 nuin Dei incolume servetur." P 21 Horn, de Statuis, t. vi. 611 ; 
 
 Fragm. from Origen on Ezeldel " When thou art on the point of step- 
 
 ix. 4 (after mentioning two other per- ping over the threshold of thy door, 
 
 sons, with their interpretations): "A utter this word first, * I renounce thee r 
 
 third, professing to have believed in Satan, and thy pomp, and thy ser- 
 
 Jesus, said that in the ancient alphabet, vice; and I enrol myself under Thee, 
 
 Thau resembles the sign of the cross, O Christ.' And do thou never go out 
 
 and that the prophecy relates to the without this word. This shall be to 
 
 sign made among Christians on the thee a staff, a shield, an impregnable 
 
 forehead, which all believers employ tower. And with this word form thou 
 
 at the commencement of any transac- also the cross upon thy forehead : for 
 
 tion whatever, but especially of prayers so, nob only no man meeting thee, but 
 
 and holy readings/' It is the Sama- not even the devil himself shall be 
 
 ritan Thau so the editor of S. Jerome able to hurt thee at all." 
 
30 The Cross a warrant for honouring the Eucharist. 
 
 CHAP. II. way of detecting allusions to it in nature, we have S. Justin 
 Martyr referring the very heathen to ijt <J. If, lastly, we look 
 to their expositions of Holy Scripture, we find among those 
 early writers a consent all but universal and unhesitating; 
 the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, from beginning to end, 
 disclosing to their Christian instinct anticipations of the 
 blessed Cross : and, chiefest of all, we find them with a won- 
 derful accord interpreting our Lord's own solemn prediction, 
 " Then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven r ," 
 of some mysterious appearance of the sign of the Cross. And 
 it cannot be denied that our Lord's own words give coun- 
 tenance to the interpretation, in that from a very early period 
 of His ministry, from the very first mission of the Apostles, 
 He spoke to them of the Cross as of that which must be 
 taken up in order to follow Him ; thus making it His badge, 
 apparently, long before they could know His meaning s . And 
 it is plain that by the time S. Paul wrote his Epistles to the 
 Corinthians and Galatians, the ''preaching of the Cross" had 
 come to be understood as equivalent to the preaching of 
 Christianity ; the whole Gospel being denominated from that 
 outward and visible thing, which He made the providential 
 instrument of the most awful and mysterious fact revealed 
 in it. In a word, the exaltation of the Cross above all other 
 Christian signs is the most pregnant, or rather the crowning, 
 instance of the rule, " He that humbleth himself shall be ex- 
 alted," and would lead us to anticipate some signal honour as 
 likely to be accounted due to the holy Eucharist, associated 
 as that Sacrament inseparably is with what took place on the 
 
 i 1 Apol. 55. may repent and mourn, and we may 
 r S. Matt. xxiv. 30. On which verse exult/' And S. Chrysostorn, Horn, in 
 Origen (iii. 866) says : " The sign of Matt. liv. : " Be not thou ashamed of 
 the Son of Man will then appear, so great a good, lest Christ be ashamed 
 wherehy have been made heavenly, of thee, when He cometh with His 
 the things which were in heaven, and glory, and the sign appeareth before 
 which were in earth ; i.e. the wonder Him more brilliant than the very sun- 
 wrought by the Son hanging on the beam. For indeed the Cross is then 
 tree : and in heaven more especially coining, uttering a voice by the very 
 His sign shall be bright." And S.Cyril sight of it/' &c. And Horn. Ixxxvi. : 
 of Jerusalem (Catech. xiii. 45) : " This " Then shall appear the sign, i.e. the 
 sign shall appear again with Jesus from Cross, being brighter than the sun; 
 beaven. For the King's trophy shall since it appears when the sun is dark- 
 lead the way; that seeing Him whom ened, and hiding itself." 
 they pierced, and by the Cross recog- S. Matt. x. 38; cf. xvi. 22; S. 
 nising the dishonoured One, 1 he Jews Luke xviii. 34. 
 
Special Honour due to Bethlehem, Nazareth, Calvary. 31 
 
 Cross, and with the further humiliation, that He who made CHAP. II. 
 and filleth all things doth vouchsafe to veil Himself under 
 symbols so cheap and ordinary, (" a little bread and wine *," 
 as speaks a devout writer,) and thereby to submit His blessed 
 Body to so many reproaches and indignities. 
 
 20. The Name of Jesus being thus honoured above the 
 rest of our Lord's Names, and the sign of the Cross above all 
 other His Signs, the Vine, the Lamb, the Fish, the Branch, 
 and the like ; no wonder that among the places made holy 
 by His earthly abode or mighty works, those have ever been, 
 most venerated which saw most of His humiliation and suf- 
 ferings ; and before all the rest, Nazareth, Bethlehem, and 
 Calvary. In the honour paramount to all others, which 
 Christendom has ever paid to those three places, we perceive 
 an instinctive acknowledgment of our Lord's true Incarna- 
 tion and Atonement. Had He been but the chief of men, 
 the places of His conception, birth, and death would have 
 been indeed exceedingly interesting ; but the interest would 
 not have been comparable to what would have been felt in. 
 visiting Capernaum and the other great scenes of His minis- 
 try. The constant feeling of Christians on this subject has 
 been a witness from age to age of their belief in Him, God 
 made Man, and of their yearning to express that belief in 
 all holy ceremonies, religious pilgrimage being one. If, 
 through the changed circumstances and habits of the Chris- 
 tian world, we are in a way precluded from this or any other 
 form of devotion, it is but natural that we should cling the 
 more earnestly to those modes and forms which Providence 
 still leaves within our reach ; jealously guard them, and 
 scrupulously make the most of them. If we cannot be pil- 
 grims, we will at least, please God, be humble worshippers, 
 in the holy Eucharist. 
 
 21. Why, again it may be asked, is the term " Son of 
 Man " beyond all others His own chosen title, whereby He 
 speaks of Himself, and whereby His beloved disciple u , and 
 first martyr v no others are permitted to speak of Him? 
 Not, surely, for love's sake only, and to signify how that it is 
 
 1 DC Imit. Christi, IV. ii. 5. n Key. i. 13; xlv. 14. T Acts vil. 56. 
 
32 Doctrinal Import of the Title, Son of Man. 
 
 CHAP. IT. His delight to be with the sons of men; but for truth's sake, 
 and for doctrine's sake ; or rather, in this question, love, 
 and truth, and doctrine are all one. From His first assuming- 
 of the title when He spake to Nathanael, within three or four 
 days of the beginning of His Ministry, until the last applica- 
 tion of it in Holy Scripture, when S. John saw sitting on a 
 cloud " one like unto the Son of Man," forty-two instances, 
 or thereabouts, we do not find one which is not emphatically* 
 marked as conveying this lesson, that all our participation 
 of God, or of any good thing, is by way of virtue flowing out 
 from Christ's holy Humanity, which is therefore to be spe- 
 cially loved, and adored, and trusted in by us, with an infi- 
 nite love, trust, and adoration : that saying of the wise man 
 being eminently appropriate here ; " When ye glorify the 
 Lord, exalt Him as much as ye can ; for even yet will He far 
 exceed : and when ye exalt Him, put forth all your strength, 
 and be not weary ; for ye can never go far enough x ." 
 
 To take a few signal instances : As the Son of Man He re- 
 opens the miraculous intercourse between heaven and earth, 
 now in a manner suspended for many generations. Heaven 
 is seen opened, and " the Angels of God ascending and de- 
 scending upon the Son of Man." As the Son of Man He is- 
 in such sense one with God, His Person being truly divine, 
 that He is at the same time in heaven and in earth, having 
 come down from heaven. He "hath power on earth to for- 
 give sins " " authority " is given Him of the Father " to- 
 execute judgment ;" He is " Lord of the Sabbath " He will 
 one day " confess^" His own " before the Angels of God ;" it 
 is He who " soweth good seed " in the world ?. 
 
 But most remarkably is this title connected with His 
 office at the last judgment. The Son of Man will be glo- 
 rified, will sit on the throne of His glory, will come in the 
 glory of His Father with His angels ; His sign will appear 
 before Him in heaven ; we shall see Him coming in a cloud 
 with power and great glory. His martyrs even now see Him 
 by faith at the right hand of God ; His friends, in vision 
 among the golden lamps, which are His Churches ; and both 
 
 * Ecclus. xliii. 30. ix. 6; S. John v. 27; S. Matt. xii. 8; 
 
 y S. John i. 52; iii. 13; S. Matt S. Luke xii. 8; S. Matt. xiii. 37. 
 
Christ's Miracles taught Reverence for His Body. 33 
 
 friends and enemies will see Him ere long on the cloud, which GgA.p. n< 
 is His throne, about to reap the harvest of the earth z . 
 
 All these wonders are His work, as He is Son of Man ; 
 and by the same title He claims to Himself all His marvel- 
 lous and mysterious sufferings : He hath not where to lay 
 His head; He cometh eating and drinking, to incur the 
 Pharisees' reproach; He veileth His greatness, so that a word 
 against Him may be forgiven; He is buried three days in 
 the heart of the earth ; He must suffer many things, and be 
 set at nought, and will not endure that His disciples should 
 disbelieve it; He must be lifted up, for He is not come to 
 destroy men's lives, but to save them ; not to be ministered 
 unto, but to minister; He must be betrayed, and go as it is 
 written of Him ; betrayed by Judas, betrayed with a kiss a . 
 
 " I, the Son of Man b ," such is the title which from the 
 first He had taken to Himself in preference to all others ; 
 signifying thereby to thoughtful hearts, that He was the 
 very seed of the woman, the second Adam promised to undo 
 what the first had done. And each successive application of 
 the title, whether in the way of power or of endurance, may 
 be seen to bring out more and more fully this His gracious 
 remedial office. 
 
 We shall see presently how devotion to the title, Son of 
 Man, is by His own word connected with- devotion to His 
 blessed Body. But to appreciate this duly, we must go back 
 to the beginning of our Lord's ministry, and consider at 
 large what the Gospels record, be it much or little, of things 
 said or done by Him, in a way to teach or encourage this 
 latter devotion. 
 
 22. Now as we have seen that to the angels our Lord's 
 humiliation in the flesh was a mystery, which they had to 
 learn by degrees, so to His disciples and friends on earth 
 was the exaltation of that flesh ; and they were trained by 
 their experience of the virtue which went out of it in the 
 way of corporal and physical miracles, to believe in and 
 
 S.John xii. 23; S. Matt. xix. 28, ib. 40, xvii. 22, xx. 18; S. John xii.. 
 xvi. 27, xxiv. 30; Acts vii. 56; Rev. 35; S.Luke ix. 56; S. Matt. xx. 28, 
 i. 13, xiv. 14. xxvi. 24, ib. 45 ; S. Luke xxii. 48. 
 
 S. Matt. via. 20, xi. 19, xii. 32, b S. Matt. xvi. 13. 
 
34 Christ healed commonly by Touching. 
 
 CHAP. IT. adore its wonder-working presence, when it should be made- 
 known to them as the very food and medicine of their souls. 
 The Forerunner himself declared that he did not at first know 
 our Lord. His Person he probably knew, for in the flesh he 
 was near akin to Him ; he knew so much of Him before He 
 came to be baptized, as to decline, if it might be, performing 
 such an office for one so far his superior ; but he knew not 
 as yet the fulness of the divine economy, for which Jesus 
 came into the world ; he knew not that this was the very 
 Son of God, who was to baptize with the Holy Ghost, ac- 
 cording to John's own announcing, and so, i.e. by a dispen- 
 sation of sacraments, to fulfil all righteousness, in the justi- 
 fication and sanctification of His elect c . 
 
 All this John came to know by the marvellous course of 
 our Lord's baptism, and from henceforth he referred tis 
 disciples directly to our Lord ; and our Lord, accepting their 
 implicit faith, promised them, through Nathanael, immediate 
 confirmation of it by miracles : and the very next day was 
 the first miracle, in Cana of Galilee, Nathanael's home; 
 a miracle best explained, surely, as a symbolical preaching 
 of the new heaven and the new earth, to be brought into 
 being by that participation of Christ whereof Wine was to- 
 be a principal instrument. 
 
 Then followed that course of miracles in Jerusalem, about 
 the time of the first Passover, which brought Nicodemus to 
 be instructed, and concerning which He signified to the 
 Jews, that they were but the earnest of a greater miracle, 
 whereby His body should be proved to be a true Temple 
 a living Temple the personal abode of the Word made 
 Flesh and dwelling among us. 
 
 23. For the three years afterwards during which "He 
 went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed 
 of the devil," it will be found on examination that His ordi- 
 nary miracles, by far the greater part of them, were wrought 
 not without some visible touch of His Body. There seems 
 an incongruity in measuring and counting such things, 
 " the works of God, who maketh all;" yet since He has con- 
 descended to set down for our learning a certain number of 
 c See this proved by S. Augustine, in Job. tr. v. 
 
Exception in the case of Demoniacs. 35 
 
 them, it cannot be wrong to take notice of that number ; CHAP. II. 
 and so it is, that if you reckon up the miracles of healing 
 especially recorded as wrought by Christ in the flesh, you 
 will, I believe, find that two-thirds, twenty-two out of thirty- 
 three, were wrought, as was said, by the Touch, immediate 
 or virtual, of His Body. 
 
 24. The exceptions are, first, Five instances in which 
 He had to do with unclean spirits ; for, whatever were the 
 reason, it does seem that He never laid His hand upon de- 
 moniacs. The distinction is strongly marked in one of the 
 first instances, towards the beginning of the Gospel: "In 
 the Synagogue," at Capernaum, "there was a man which 
 had a spirit of an unclean devil d ," who did as it were chal- 
 lenge and defy the Holy One ; him Jesus rebuked, " saying, 
 Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the devil 
 had thrown him in the midst, he came out of him, and hurt 
 him not. And they were all amazed, and spake among 
 themselves, saying, What a word is this ! for with authority 
 and power He commandeth the unclean spirits, and they 
 come out e ." Presently after, on leaving the synagogue, He 
 went "into Peter's house, He saw his wife's mother laid, 
 and sick of a fever. And He touched her hand, and the 
 fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them f ." 
 The evil spirit He cast out with a word; the sick woman He 
 took by the hand and lifted her up. 
 
 These two miracles, occurring in the middle of the day, 
 were followed the same evening by multitudes in each kind ; 
 in all of which, as we learn by comparison of the several 
 accounts, the same difference was observable. S. Matthew 
 says, "When the even was come, they brought unto Him 
 many that were possessed with devils : and He cast out the 
 spirits with His word, and healed all that were sicks;" and 
 S.Luke adds how these latter were healed: "He laid His 
 hands on every one of them, and healed them 11 ." As to the 
 unclean spirits, he mentions them apart in the next verse ; 
 "and devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, 
 Thou art Christ the Son of God 1 ." _ 
 
 d S. Luke iv. 33. e Ibid. 35, 36. < S. Matt. viii. 14, 15. 
 
 * Ibid. 16. * S. Luke iv. 40. * Ibid. 41. 
 
36 Probable meaning of the Exceptions. 
 
 CHAP. II. Again, at the great manifestation of Himself which ac- 
 companied the ordination of the twelve, we are told by an- 
 other Evangelist nearly in the same words, " He had healed 
 many; insomuch that they pressed upon Him for to touch 
 Him, as many as had plagues. And unclean spirits, when 
 they saw Him, fell down before Him, and cried, saying, 
 Thou art the Son of GodJ." 
 
 The only case recorded of His touching a possessed person 
 is that which occurred just after the Transfiguration. "When 
 Jesus saw that the people came running together, He rebuked 
 the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, 
 I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him. 
 And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of 
 him : and he was as one dead ; insomuch that many said, 
 He is dead. But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted 
 him up; and he arose V This, however, it will be presently 
 seen, is no exception, but critically confirms our allegation. 
 The devil was cast out by His mere word; when He touched 
 the sufferer's hand, and lifted him up, it was but to revive 
 him from his exhaustion, the dispossession being before 
 complete. 
 
 We may reverently ask, why this distinction? and we 
 seem to have an answer, if we may assume the course of our 
 Lord's miracles generally to be symbolical of the greater in- 
 visible miracles which He was to work by His Spirit in His 
 Church; i.e. of His holy sacramental system; according to 
 His most true promise, " Verily, verily, I say unto you, He 
 that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also ; 
 and greater works than these shall he do ; because I go unto 
 My Father 1 ." On that hypothesis, the spiritual exorcism 
 which must go before the spiritual touch of Christ, so dis- 
 tracting and agonizing, sometimes, even in its outward and 
 visible effects, may well be represented by the spirit's cry- 
 ing out, tearing and rending the poor patient, at the very sight 
 of his Deliverer, and much more at the command to " come 
 out of the man ;" and the purifying, strengthening, refresh- 
 ing grace of the two great Sacraments, whereby we are made 
 participators of Christ, answers to His loving and powerful 
 J S. Mark iii. 10, 11. * S. Mark ix. 25-27. > S. John xiv. 12. 
 
Laying on of Hands associated with Healing. 37 
 
 Touch, taking him, as he lay, by the right hand, and lifting CHAP. II, 
 him up. 
 
 25. Six other cases occur in which, for aught we see, 
 our Lord might have touched the person, and it pleased 
 Him to heal with a word only. In each of these we may 
 observe, I think, unusual stress laid in the narrative on the 
 Faith of the person receiving the cure, or of those by whom 
 he was presented to our Lord. Two of them happened at 
 Capernaum, to persons of rank. The nobleman, somewhat 
 tardy in his belief, was however rewarded for it when it 
 came, by our Lord healing his son at a distance ; the Cen- 
 turion, his townsman, in his good and ready confession at 
 once of Christ's power and of his own unworthiness, shewed 
 a faith marvellous even to Jesus Christ Himself. Of those 
 who brought the man sick of the palsy we read, "Jesus 
 seeing their faith," forgave and healed him not without 
 some trial of the sufferer's own faith also ; for it was a great 
 trial to so helpless a person to set about obeying the com- 
 mand, " Arise, take up thy bed and go unto thine house." 
 The like may be said of what happened at the pool of Beth- 
 esda, and of the man bidden to stretch forth his withered 
 hand ; and, in a different way, of the ten lepers setting out 
 to shew themselves to the priests. By these comparatively 
 rare examples our Lord may have designed to symbolize the 
 necessity of faith in all capable receivers of sacraments, and 
 the sufficiency of it in certain cases without literally receiv- 
 ing; according to the principle, Gratia Dei non est alligata 
 sacramentis. 
 
 26. But however this may be, the general fact is obvious 
 to the most cursory reader of the Gospel, that almost as soon 
 as ever He came to be known by His miraculous cures, the 
 touch of His blessed Body came also to be known as the ordi- 
 nary visible mean whereby He performed them. Beginning 
 from Simon's house and the streets of Capernaum, " the fame 
 of Him went out into all Syria/' not only of His healing, but 
 of His touching or laying on of hands in order to heal m . 
 Thenceforth we meet with such sayings as, " Come and lay 
 Thine hand upon her, and she shall live ;" the deaf and the 
 
 ro Cf. S. Luke vi. 19. 
 
38 Reserve exemplified in some Miracles. 
 
 CHAP. II. blind are brought to Him, with a request that He would lay 
 His Hands upon them ; mighty works are said to be done by 
 His Hands; He could do no mighty works at Nazareth, save 
 that " He laid His hands upon a few sick folk ;" the turn of 
 expression indicates how completely the idea of mighty works 
 of healing was associated in the writer's mind with laying on 
 of hands. Indeed, it could not well be otherwise, seeing that 
 our Lord Himself, promising miraculous power to the first 
 generation at least of those who should believe, had used the 
 same form : " they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall 
 recover 11 ." After a while it came into the heart of the humble 
 person with the issue of blood to come and touch the hem of 
 His garment ; and, instead of a reproof for superstition, she 
 received not only the virtue which went out of Him to heal 
 her, but also His solemn approval, and a blessing on her 
 faith. And this, too, spread abroad; so that a short time 
 after, "wheresoever He entered, into villages, or cities, or 
 country, they laid the sick in the streets, and besought Him 
 that they might touch if it were but the border of His gar- 
 ment : and as many as touched Him were made whole ." 
 
 It should seem, moreover, that an additional sanction to 
 this popular notion is supplied by each of those remarkable 
 cases in which our Lord was pleased to withdraw Himself, 
 and deal in a peculiar way with certain sufferers ; such as 
 the deaf and dumb man in S. Mark vii. Being asked only 
 to lay His hand on him, He takes him apart from the mul- 
 titude, puts His fingers into his ears, spits, and touches his 
 tongue; and again, at Bethsaida, a blind man is brought to 
 Him with the same petition : " and when He had spit on his 
 eyes, and put His hands upon him, He asked him if he saw 
 ought. And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, 
 walking. After that He put His hands again upon his eyes, 
 and made him look up : and he was restored, and saw every 
 man clearly P." And then the well-known cure of the man 
 born blind, in S. John ix., which also seems to have taken 
 place in private : " He spat on the ground, and made clay of 
 the spittle, and He anointed the eyes of the blind man with 
 the clay, and said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, 
 
 n S. Mark xvi. 18. Ib. vi. 56. * Ib. viii. 23. 
 
The Five Loaves, and the Discourse ensuing. 39 
 
 (which is by interpretation, Sent). He went his way there- CHAP. IL 
 fore, and washed, and came seeing." These may well remind 
 us of the singular and exact discipline ever observed when 
 the Church was free to use it ; the cure of all inward evils 
 being one and the same, the Body and Blood of Christ, 
 but the time and mode of its application, and the degree of 
 tender and charitable reserve employed, varying much with 
 the specialities of the case. 
 
 27. The minds of the disciples, and indeed of all within 
 hearing of our Lord, being thus providentially trained to 
 think much of His blessed Body as the instrument of all good 
 to them ; and also, as we have seen, to regard His title, 
 Son of Man, as indicating rather than any other the relation, 
 in which He vouchsafed to stand to them ; it could not but 
 strike them deeply (such as were at all thoughtful among 
 them), and dwell much upon their minds, when towards the 
 beginning of the third year of His ministry (a time of many 
 great revelations concerning Himself), He bound the two 
 ideas together in the way recorded by S. John. He told 
 them, first, that the Son of Man should give them meat; 
 secondly, that this meat was only to be had by eating His 
 flesh and drinking His blood ; and, thirdly, that this was to 
 be done in a heavenly, supernatural manner a manner cog- 
 nizable only by faith, since it would be consistent with their 
 seeing " the Son of Man ascend up where He was before q ." 
 If the title, " Son of Man," as the Church has always be- 
 lieved, means the Second Adam, the root of life as Adam of 
 death, coming in a true body to save men's bodies as well 
 .as their souls, what were they to imagine of this eating 
 unto life, but that it should be as real and true, as was that 
 by which Adam ate unto death? a real and true eating of 
 His real and true Body, which should constitute a great 
 and indispensable portion of the marvellous system of divine 
 mercies now in course of being revealed to them. It is plain, 
 they did so understand Him; why otherwise should they be 
 offended? Had the eating and drinking been commonly 
 understood, as some writers think, to be a sort of parable^ 
 
 4 S. John vi. 27, 53, 62. 
 
40 Meaning of the Seven Loaves, 
 
 CHAP. II. a figure to express the receiving our Lord's doctrine, there 
 was nothing in that saying so hard, but they might very well 
 have borne with it. But we see that at the time it was taken. 
 by all, both friends and enemies, as a great and real mystery, 
 and that it proved just the same sort of trial to the Jews who 
 drew back, to the Eleven who believed, though they could 
 not understand, and to Judas, who remained with Christ in 
 hypocrisy, as the Holy Communion has evermore been to 
 rejectors and unworthy receivers on the onejiand, and to 
 faithful communicants on the other. 
 
 It must not be overlooked, that around these great sayings 
 are gathered, as it were, a group of miraculous doings, every 
 one suggesting more or less plainly the supernatural virtue 
 of our Lord's body. First they came to Him and He healed 
 their sicknesses; then not without His taking them into 
 His hands and breaking them the loaves were multiplied 
 and distributed ; then in His true flesh, by the power of His 
 true Godhead, He walked on the water; then He communi- 
 cated virtue to His favoured Apostle to do the same ; and 
 when he was sinking and cried out, " Jesus stretched forth 
 Ilis hand and caught him;" finally, "when they were gone 
 over, they came into the land of Gennesaret : and when the 
 men of that place had knowledge of Him, they sent out into 
 all that country round about, and brought unto Him all that 
 were diseased ; and besought Him that they might only touch 
 the hem of His garment : and as many as touched were made 
 perfectly whole 1 ." 
 
 28. And what if the other miracle, happening so soon 
 after, and recalling this by so many circumstances, were in- 
 tended to represent the great doctrine and ordinance under 
 another of its "aspects?" I mean the feeding of the four 
 thousand with seven loaves and a few small fishes 8 . If the 
 former miracle was typical of the Eucharist, as by the con- 
 sent of Christendom (one may say) it most certainly was, it 
 seems hard not to associate the later one also with that 
 sacrament. And if, as ancient writers teach*, and as the 
 
 r S. Matt. xiv. 35, 36. cepistis, vos estis quod accepistis. Apo- 
 
 - S. Matt. xv. 32; S. Mark viii. 1. stolus enim dicit, 'Unus panis, unuin 
 
 * S. Augf. Serin. 227 : " Si bene ac- corpus, multi surnue.' Sic exposuit Sa 
 
and of the "few small Fishes." 41 
 
 chief of the schoolmen undoubtedly taught, (grounding their CHAP. II. 
 opinion mainly upon S.Paul's saying, "For we being many 
 are one bread and one body : for we are all partakers of that 
 one bread ;") the Church, or mystical body of Christ, may be 
 regarded as present by the real presence of His heavenly 
 and glorified Body, and so as constituting in a secondary 
 sense, and one infinitely below the glory and dignity of the 
 other, yet in a very true sense the res sacramenti, or thing 
 signified in Holy Communion u ; then the circumstances of 
 the miracle in question may seem to make it a sufficiently 
 apt parable for the expression of that doctrine. The twelve 
 loaves being a known symbol in the old dispensation for the 
 twelve tribes, i.e. for the whole Jewish Church, and as such 
 presented day by day in the temple ; and seven being the 
 number which from the beginning, in the figurative language 
 of Scripture, had represented completeness 1 ; the seven loaves, 
 by no forced analogy, might be taken to represent the whole 
 Christian Church, and the partaking of them after Christ's 
 special blessing, to signify that union and incorporation of 
 Christians one with another, which, depending on their union 
 with Christ their Head, is perfected more and more by every 
 sacramental participation of Him ; according to His own 
 prayer, offered in conjunction with the very original Eu- 
 charist : " That they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in 
 Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us*'." 
 
 And since the fish is an acknowledged emblem both of our 
 Lord and of His members, and in the former miracle the two 
 fishes are considered by S. Augustine z to represent Christ in 
 His two characters of King and Priest, it might not, per- 
 haps, be straining the exposition of this latter miracle too far, 
 were we to conjecture that the few small fishes which "He 
 blessed and commanded to be also set before them," might 
 
 cramentum Mensae Dominicse." Cf. 4: "Duplex est res hujus Sacramenti 
 
 Serm. 229, 272. " Si vos estis Corpus . . . una quidem, quse est significata et 
 
 Christiet membra, mysterium vestrum contenta, scilicet ipse Christus; alia 
 
 in mensa Dominica positum est : rnys- autem est signiticata et non contenta, 
 
 terium vestrnm accipitis." scilicet Corpus Christi inysticum, quod 
 
 u Aquinas, Surnm. Tlieol. p. iii. qu. est societas Sanctorum." 
 
 60. 3 : "In Sacramento Altaris est x S. Aug. Serm. xcv. 2. 
 
 duplex res significata, scilicet Corpus * S. John xvii. 21. 
 
 Christi verum et inysticum ;" qu. 80. z De Diversis qusest. Ixi. 2, t. vii. 25. 
 
42 Other mysterious Hints concerning His Body. 
 
 CHAP. II. represent the holy martyrs and other eminent saints, few, 
 and very small in comparison, but in some especial manner 
 and degree having Christ imparted to them more than to 
 the rest, and therefore especially called by the same title 
 with Him ; and the partaking of those fishes may answer to 
 the Communion of Saints, as that of the loaves to our por- 
 tion in the holy Catholic Church. The four thousand may 
 be the multitudes coming in from the four winds of heaven 
 north, south, east, and west, to sit down with Abraham, 
 Isaac, and Jacob in the spiritual feast, the kingdom of 
 heaven. If the old method of interpretation be at all 
 allowed, this would seem no improbable account of the 
 second miraculous feast, occurring so soon after the first, 
 and tending in its degree to deepen the impression that 
 the Body of Christ was to be, in some mysterious way, all 
 in all to those who should be saved by Him. 
 
 29. Very shortly after, but not until His Divine nature 
 also had been more openly than ever declared to His disciples, 
 by the benediction pronounced to S. Peter on his confession, 
 nor yet until He had begun to predict to them in detail 
 what He was to suffer, He took His three chosen into 
 a high mountain apart, and shewed them that Body, in which 
 He had so many ways invited them to trust, transfigured, 
 His face shining as the sun, and His raiment white as the 
 light; thereby, as it may appear, giving them to under- 
 stand something of the properties of His glorious body; at 
 the same time that, by the discourse in their hearing with 
 Moses and Elias, He prepared them to see it in the lowest 
 humiliation and suffering. And twice on the same occasion 
 He taught them to believe that it was, and always would be, 
 a real Body; and as such the instrument of all good to all 
 believers, by touching, first, the three saints, (as Ezekiel 
 and Daniel had been touched of old,) and so enabling them 
 to endure the beatific vision; and presently afterwards by 
 touching the young man out of whom the evil spirit had 
 been cast, and restoring him to his father, and to the state 
 of probation and hope. 
 
 Between the Transfiguration and the week of our Lord's 
 Passion there is nothing on record to draw attention to the 
 
The Anointing at Bethany. 43 
 
 prerogatives of His blessed Body, if we except perhaps what CHAP, l r. 
 took place at the Feast of Tabernacles, in the last year of 
 His preaching, when, having asserted His Godhead, and 
 seeing that the Jews were taking up stones to stone Him, 
 Jesus made Himself invisible, " and went out of the temple, 
 going through the midst of them, and so passed by a ." And 
 *' passing by," He healed the man blind from his birth; 
 not without spitting, and making clay of the spittle, and 
 anointing the eyes of the blind man with the clay; pro- 
 ceedings well calculated to impress those who knew of His 
 Transfiguration, especially, with an increasing awe towards 
 that Body which they saw so marvellously and peculiarly 
 gifted, beyond the bodies of the sons of men; and with 
 a wondering expectation what Almighty God might be on 
 the point of working thereby. 
 
 30. The Holy Week itself begins with the anointing at 
 Bethany, commended by our Lord Himself to all ages as 
 a signal instance of devotion to His blessed Body, and ever 
 understood by the holy Church as a warrant for sparing no 
 trouble nor expense in providing for that Service, which ac- 
 knowledges the mysterious continuance of the same among 
 us. She must not be troubled nor interfered with; "she 
 hath done it for My burial;" it was as impossible for her 
 to help doing it now, as it was for her, or one very like her, 
 to abstain from the like loving worship, when she first came 
 to Me, loving much, and hoping, as far as she might dare 
 hope, to have much forgiven ; as impossible as it will be 
 within a few days for her not to wait on Me with spices and 
 ointments, when I am to be laid in My grave ; " trouble 
 her not," "she hath done what she could;" "she hath 
 wrought a good work on Me b ." And why was that work 
 so significantly decreed to be spoken of throughout "the 
 whole world," but that all might understand that they could 
 not go too far in loving, honouring, adoring that Body which 
 He had vouchsafed to take into His divine Person, by which 
 He was about to save the world, which was soon to endure 
 such humiliation for our sake, as nothing could equal, save 
 the glory to which it was afterwards to be visibly exalted for 
 our perfect salvation ? 
 
 S. John viii. 58. b S. Matt, xxvi. 10. 
 
44 The Passion : the Water and Blood. 
 
 CHAP. II. Moreover, in close connection with tins comes another 
 thought, indescribably fearful, as it seems to me, if we carry 
 it out : what manner of man he was who suggested to his 
 fellow disciples to have indignation and count it " waste," as 
 though too much were being made of Christ's real, and then 
 visible, Body, and the poor, His mystical body, were being 
 robbed. 
 
 Others in their simplicity for a moment adopted the no- 
 tion, but they presently received His correction ; Judas, who 
 had devised the scruple in hypocrisy, refusing to be cor- 
 rected, (though never surely were such gracious warnings 
 addressed to any one that we read of,) went out to commit 
 the two most outrageous sins that could be committed against 
 that blessed Body : first partaking of it with a heart and 
 mind actually at the moment determined on betraying it, 
 and so actually betraying it, as far as in him lay, to Satan, 
 who forthwith entered into him ; and afterwards, openly in 
 the sight of man betraying it betraying the Son of Man 
 by a kiss ; the loving penitent's token of adoration was the 
 hypocrite's token of insult and unearthly malice. 
 
 And then, as if to prove that the holy Flesh which endured 
 all this, and was about to endure much more, was still, as 
 ever, the Temple of the divine glory; first, by shewing Him- 
 self, and declaring, "I am He," He forced His assailants to 
 recoil and fall to the ground, either on their faces in involun- 
 tary worship, or backwards as in despair. Presently after- 
 wards He touched Malchus' ear, and healed him. The cure 
 was wrought by His touch, as in so many instances before. 
 And since the man had been hurt in laying rude hands upon 
 His Body, the healing may be received as a merciful token, 
 that even unworthy communicants are not shut out from 
 His mercy, and the benefit of the mysteries which they have 
 profaned, except they persist in unworthiness. 
 
 31. Then it was that our blessed Redeemer, withdraw- 
 ing, as it were, His power into Himself, gave up His Body 
 to the sacrifice, with the words, " This is your hour, and the 
 power of darkness." His disciples understood Him to signify 
 that nothing more could be done for Him, and they might 
 as well forsake Him and fly ; His enemies, both on earth and 
 in hell, knew that they were left to do their worst with Him; 
 
Tone of the Evangelist in recording it. 45 
 
 and they did it unsparingly ; and while His Body was, in CHAP. II. 
 fact, winning the decisive and eternal victory for which He 
 came into the world, it seemed to the eyes of men, perhaps 
 of all creatures, to be surrendered, for good and all, to suf- 
 fering and insult. But the first thing seen, when the pre- 
 ternatural darkness was over, and the light of day was again 
 permitted to shine upon the cross and those standing by it, 
 was the blood and water, flowing out from our Saviour's 
 side, as soon as ever He was certainly known to be dead. 
 
 There is no need here to explain at large the symbolical 
 and sacramental meaning of that miracle, a meaning wit- 
 nessed by all antiquity, and adopted by the Church of Eng- 
 land especially in her office of Holy Baptism, where she de- 
 clares that " for the forgiveness of our sins, Christ shed out 
 of His most precious side both water and blood/' "His 
 most precious side :" the very phrase instinctively indicates 
 what all devout persons have felt towards that sacred Form, 
 drawn to it the more by this parting insult from those who 
 were bent upon making themselves every way " guilty of the 
 Body and Blood of Christ our Saviour." 
 
 We may perhaps realize those feelings most effectually, 
 by reverently imagining how they may have begun in the 
 heart and mind of the beloved disciple, chosen by the Holy 
 Ghost to testify the transaction to us, and of the blessed 
 Virgin, and other holy women ; the special alarm and horror 
 which they must have felt as they watched the brutal soldiery 
 breaking the legs of the two malefactors, and approaching 
 their Lord's cross with the same intent ; the comparative re- 
 lief when they saw that all that was done was ignorantly and 
 wantonly to pierce His unconscious side ; the awful sense of 
 Divine interference and of Divine consolation, when, knowing 
 that He was already dead, they saw the stream gush out, not 
 of blood only, but of water and blood. Probably, indeed, 
 it was in this instance as is noted elsewhere in S. John's 
 Gospel c : " These things understood not His disciples at the 
 first: but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they 
 that these things were written of Him, and that " His ene- 
 mies " had done these things unto Him." Yet the very tone 
 
 c Chap. xii. 16. 
 
46 Sacramental Presence taught in 1 St. John v. 6 9. 
 
 CHAP. II. of the narrative implies that even at that moment of exceed- 
 ing grief and dismay, the Evangelist's mind as often happens 
 when dearest friends are departing was deeply impressed 
 with the circumstance, and would naturally go on wondering 
 what it could mean. " He that saw it bare record, and hi& 
 record is true : and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye 
 might believe d ." Perhaps it should be written, " HE know- 
 eth/' for the Greek words (fcd/celvos olSev) will bear that con- 
 struction ; as though the historian were saying with S. Paul, 
 "Behold, before GOD, I lie not." But that it should be in- 
 serted with such an asseveration, calling such peculiar atten- 
 tion to it, in this which may be eminently called the theolo- 
 gical Gospel, for this, we might reverently conjecture, if we 
 did not know, some deep theological reason must probably 
 exist. As it is, the knowledge of the reason is vouchsafed to- 
 ns ; it is indicated in the Scripture quoted. The saying, " A 
 bone of Him shall not be broken," carries with it the sacri- 
 ficial character of our Lord's Passion, that it was the very 
 antitype of slaying the Paschal lamb. And again, "They 
 shall look on Him whom they pierced" is the prophetic de- 
 claration of the mode of applying His Passion to the remis- 
 sion of His people's sins: the "piercing" is the opening of 
 " a fountain for sin and for uncleanness ;" and it is signified 
 that it would not take full effect until the Lord had " poured 
 out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of 
 Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications ;" i. e. until 
 a beginning had been given to Christian baptism by the 
 descent of the Holy Ghost upon the apostles gathered on 
 Mount Zion, and the setting up of the kingdom of heaven. 
 
 And the rationale, the principle of all this, is shadowed out 
 in the farewell letter of the same Evangelist: "This is He 
 that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by 
 water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit 
 that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there 
 are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, 
 and the Holy Ghost : and these three are one. And there 
 are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, 
 and the blood : and these three agree in one. If we receive 
 
 d S. John xix. 35. 
 
Allusions to the Work of the Spirit in the Sacraments. 47 
 
 the witness of men, the witness of God is greater : for this CHAP. II. 
 is the witness of God which He hath testified of His Son." 
 What is this threefold witness, this witness of God, on which 
 the Apostle would thus unreservedly rest our faith? It is 
 Jesus Christ, God incarnate, coming to His Church, and to 
 each one of us, by water, by blood, and by His Spirit. To 
 His whole Church He came by water, when, as the surety 
 and representative of His people, He was baptized by S.John 
 in Jordan; by blood, when He died on the cross; by His 
 Spirit, on the Day of Pentecost. To each several child of 
 Adam, whom He takes out of the world as one of His own, 
 He comes by all three at once by the Spirit, by water, and 
 by blood, in His two Sacraments, the one as well as the 
 other: for water in Scripture signifies sanctification and 
 cleansing; blood signifies satisfaction and atonement; and 
 both these are, by His ordinance, in both the Sacraments, 
 because in both the true gift is Participation of Christ, our 
 life and our all, begun in Baptism, continued and growing 
 in the Eucharist. And they are in the Sacraments by the 
 special operation of His Spirit : " It is the Spirit that beareth 
 witness, because the Spirit is Truth/' The Spirit is that 
 Truth which both declares and makes them to be what they 
 signify, as our Lord declared of one of them : " The words 
 that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life;" 
 the words in this case being, for the one, "This is My 
 Body ;" for the other, " I baptize thee in the Name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost/' And ac- 
 cordingly the Church, expressly or virtually, has always 
 prayed for this descent of the Holy Ghost, in Baptism, to 
 "sanctify the water to the mystical washing away of sin;" 
 in Holy Communion, according to the old Liturgies, to make 
 the elements what our Lord declared them to be ; according 
 to our own Liturgy, to make us, receiving them, partakers 
 of those holiest things. 
 
 To this doctrine, probably to expressions of it even then 
 in liturgical use, the Apostle alludes more than once : " By 
 one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body e ." And else- 
 
 6 1 Cor. xii. 13. 
 
' 48 Sacraments, the Extension of the Incarnation. 
 
 CHAP. IT. where f the Church service is described partly by the use in 
 it of Psalms and hymns in the way of response (so we may 
 best understand " speaking to yourselves/') partly by its in- 
 volving a continual sacrifice of thanksgiving, and that for 
 all, in the Name of Christ, to the Father, a definition of 
 a Christian Liturgy, as far as it goes, critically exact. 
 
 We may add the often-quoted passage in Rom. xv. 16 : 
 " That I might be a minister of Jesus Christ unto the Gen- 
 tiles, doing a priest's work in respect of the Gospel of God g ; 
 that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being 
 sanctified by the Holy Ghost ;" where S. Paul represents 
 his calling as a missionary by an image borrowed from his 
 other calling as a priest, the body of Gentile Christians 
 being that which he had to offer, and requiring, in order 
 to be acceptable, sanctification by the Holy Ghost, as the 
 proper sacrifice of Christians did. 
 
 In a word, the patristical doctrine, that the Incarnation is 
 not only applied, but extended as it were, by the blessed 
 Sacraments, supplies the sufficient and only interpretation, 
 both of the mysterious opening of the Redeemer's side on 
 the cross, when He was in the sleep of death, and of that 
 which is always referred to by antiquity as the ordained type 
 of that circumstance in the Passion, the piercing of the first 
 Adam's side in his sleep, and the formation or building up 
 of that which was taken out of it into the first woman, his 
 spouse, and the mother of us all. 
 
 And (it is a serious and alarming thought) if there be any 
 who now scorn the doctrine, wilfully I mean, and in spite of 
 helps to know better, we know for certain that they will 
 not always scorn it. Holy Scripture tells of a moment to 
 come, when that wound in our Lord's side, the fountain of 
 Sacraments, and the door of life to us all, will be openly 
 seen by all. " Every eye shall see Him, and they also who 
 pierced Him :" even they who, by abusing His Sacrifice and 
 Sacraments, shall have crucified and pierced Him afresh. 
 
 f " Speaking to yourselves in Psalms in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ." 
 
 and hymns and spiritual songs, singing Eph. v. 19, 20. 
 
 and making mekdy in your hearts to f lepovpyovvra rb svaryyiXiov TOW 
 
 the Lord; giving thanks always for eov. 
 all things unto God and the Father 
 
Nothing in Scripture to check Devotion to Christ's Body. 49 
 
 The scar in His side will be to them an especial condemna- CHAP. IT. 
 
 tion, as it will be a pledge of grace received and not wasted 
 
 to all penitent and devout receivers. It is S. John again 
 
 to whom this was revealed h ; the disciple whom Jesus loved 
 
 is throughout, by special Providence, the great teacher of 
 
 the doctrine of His life-giving Body, and of the devotion 
 
 due to it. 
 
 32. But whatever beginnings of high and hopeful thought 
 the miracle of the water and blood may have occasioned in 
 S. John's mind, to the outward eye the blessed Body was 
 still in the lowest and most pitiable condition, in the hands 
 of enemies, exposed to the worst indignities, until the mo- 
 ment when Joseph of Arimathea begged it of Pilate. This 
 must have been an hour or two after our Lord's death ; 
 for He gave up the Ghost at three, P.M., and, although the 
 Sabbath did not begin until six, it seems that the taking 
 down from the cross, the wrapping in linen clothes with the 
 spices, and the entombment itself, had to be somewhat hastily 
 performed. Some time, therefore, had probably elapsed be- 
 tween the piercing of Christ's side and the application of 
 Joseph to Pilate; and since Nicodemus was near, a colleague 
 of Joseph's, and known to have looked favourably on Christ, it 
 is not perhaps exceeding the bounds of reasonable conjecture, 
 if we suppose S. John to have applied to him, and through 
 him to Joseph, whose own new tomb was known to be near 
 at hand, but who was not yet known for a favourer of our 
 Lord, as Nicodemus was, and therefore, perhaps, less ob- 
 noxious to the Pharisees. And so, between them, though ac- 
 cording to His condescension, our Lord's grave would have 
 been " with the wicked," yet He was " with the rich in His 
 death" and obsequies; unintentional testimony being thus 
 borne by Pilate and others of His persecutors, that " He had 
 done no violence, neither was any deceit in His mouth." 
 
 Whatever the process may have been, whether it origi- 
 nated with S. John or no, we know for certain that, from 
 that moment forward, His true servants have never ceased to 
 shew, in all possible ways, their entire devotion and love to 
 that Blessed Body, enhanced beyond measure by all that they 
 
 , h Rev. i. 7. 
 E 
 
50 Instances of Devotion to Christ's risen Hody, 
 
 CHAP. u. were permitted to see and know of Its mysterious agonies; 
 and never was one word uttered from above to stay or check 
 them, or imply that they were going too far. When Corne- 
 lius fell down at S. Peter's feet to worship him, he was told, 
 " Stand up ; I myself also am a man." When S. John did the 
 like to the angel who was shewing him the heavenly vision, 
 he was stopped by what, among men, would have been an 
 exclamation of religious horror : " See thou do it not : I am 
 thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren that have the tes- 
 timony of Jesus: worship God 1 ." But nowhere in Holy 
 Scripture will you find anything at all answering to this in 
 respect of the worship and reverence shewn to Christ's Body, 
 as if it were possible to exaggerate or carry it too far ; not 
 one letter or syllable to interrupt or moderate the deep devo- 
 tion of the Church for all these centuries that she has re- 
 mained, with the beloved disciple, standing by the Cross, 
 and with adoring love and wonder contemplating 'the blood 
 and water as it flows from His pierced side ; seeing it, and 
 bearing record, and her record is true, and she knoweth 
 that she saith true, that we all might believe. 
 
 What, indeed, is the history of the three days of Christ's 
 burial, and of the forty days after His resurrection, but a 
 course of solemn acts of worship to His real Bodily Presence, 
 offered on His servants' part and accepted on His own ? 
 
 There are Joseph and Nicodemus, and the holy women, 
 laying Him in the grave with their myrrh and spices, such 
 as they knew that the Holy Ghost, by the prophets, had ap- 
 pointed to be offered to the King's Son. 
 
 There are the Maries coming to the sepulchre in the early 
 morning to complete their religious purpose, and she first 
 who loved best : and they have a great reward they are 
 permitted to be the first to see His risen Body, and hear 
 His voice ; and as soon as they see and hear, they worship ; 
 and so (as has been often noted) they obtain the privilege 
 of preaching the Gospel of the Eesurrection to the very 
 Apostles themselves. 
 
 There is S. John, who by his presence beneath the Cross, 
 and when our Lord's side was pierced, may be supposed 
 
 1 Rev. xix. 10. 
 
during the Great Forty Days. 51 
 
 to have learned deeper thoughts of the prerogatives of His CHAP. II. 
 Body than were yet familiar to any of the rest As he 
 was first of the Apostles at the sepulchre, so was he first 
 to believe without seeing, and to recognise our Lord appear- 
 ing suddenly at a distance k ; even as many years afterwards 
 he knew Him by sight through all His glory in the heavens, 
 in the midst of the golden candlesticks, and on the cloud 
 of judgment, discerning "one like unto the Son of Man 1 ." 
 Certainly it is a remarkable fact, that the two most noted 
 and most highly-favoured for their special love of our Lord, 
 the Magdalen and the beloved disciple, should thus be 
 marked out for their especial devotion to His Body. 
 
 Then there is His sudden appearance on the road to the 
 two disciples, and His no less sudden vanishing out of their 
 sight, just as their eyes were opened, and they had come to 
 know Him in the act of breaking of bread ; a history, the 
 significancy of which in our present argument surely needs 
 no elucidation; as neither do the circumstances of His last 
 appearance that evening, the entry through the closed 
 doors, the real Body with Its real scars, and Its real partici- 
 pation of meat with them, at the same time that It was visi- 
 bly breathing His own and His Father's Spirit into their 
 hearts, and audibly giving them that commission which none 
 could give but He that is equal with the Father. Who does 
 not feel, as he reads or hears, a deepening veneration and 
 inward worship of the holy Humanity of Him who thus spake 
 and acted? How much more those who saw Him all along 
 with their eyes! who "looked upon" Him, and "handled 
 with their hands " Him who is " the Word of Life m ! " 
 
 A week more, and the doubts of S. Thomas are removed 
 by the touch of the holy Body with Its scars, or rather, by 
 that permission to touch It, whereby the timid Apostle might 
 discern the omniscience of the speaker. With confirmed 
 faith he makes his confession, the very confession of devout 
 communicants in all ages, "It is my Lord and my God." 
 Observe the answer he received, a blessing, not so imme- 
 diately for himself as for us, whose trial is, that the same 
 Lord and Christ, the same Son of God Incarnate, is present 
 k S. John xxi. 7. l Rev. i. 13; xiv. 14. m 1 S. John i. 1. 
 
 E2 
 
52 The Presence of Christ risen at the Disciples' Meals. 
 
 II. with us, and permits us to touch Him, as really indeed, but 
 invisibly, and in a different kind of presence. " Blessed are 
 they now, and blessed shall they all be hereafter, who shall 
 believe and worship as thou now dost, without waiting for 
 the actual sight, which has at last convinced thee." These 
 are not words to make a Christian afraid of believing too 
 much of his Lord's Presence in Holy Communion, or of 
 adoring Him too earnestly. 
 
 33. Rather it might perhaps not untruly be said, that 
 one apparent purpose of our Lord's abode upon earth during 
 those forty days was, that He might inure them to the faith 
 and contemplation of a certain Presence of His now spiritual- 
 ized Body among them, occasional only, and in the highest 
 degree mysterious, but in itself most real and blessed, and 
 associated with all the best gifts and fruits of His Incarna- 
 tion the evidence and conveyance of the eternal life to 
 which He had risen. This Presence the sacred narrative 
 (we may almost say) studiously connects with the meals 
 which He took with them ; as at Emmaus, as He sat at meat 
 with them, He took the loaf, and blessed, and brake and 
 gave to them, recalling to their very eyes the miracle of the 
 five thousand and its antitype the greater miracle of the 
 Eucharist. The same day, at evening, having shewn them 
 " His hands and His feet, while they yet believed not for 
 joy, and wondered, He said unto them, Have ye here any 
 meat ? And they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish, and of 
 an honeycomb. And He took it, and did eat before them"." 
 The following Sunday, as it may seem, He appeared unto 
 the eleven (Thomas having now taken his place among 
 them) "as they sat at meat." The remarkable appearance 
 and miracle at the sea of Galilee, related in the last chapter 
 of the last Gospel, and considered by S. Augustine as ex- 
 hibiting a kind of link or transition from Christ's earthly to 
 His heavenly kingdom, had for its visible and immediate 
 occasion the present hunger and destitution of the disciples. 
 They had caught nothing that night; the morning light 
 
 n S. Luke xxiv. 40 43. dis, et in captura piscium commenda- 
 
 In S. Joan. Evang. Tr. 122: verit Ecclesisa Sacramentum, quails 
 
 "Narratur hie quemadinodum se ma- futura est ultima resurrectione mor- 
 
 xifestaverit Dominus ad mare Tiberia- tuoruin." 
 
Significance of His partaking with them. 53 
 
 shewed Him to them standing on the shore, but not, as yet, CHAP, n. 
 recognised by them. He enquires of them, " Children, have 
 ye any meat?" They answer, No. He tells them where 
 to cast their net; they obey, and in a moment it is full of 
 great fishes ; and not only so, but, before they could land 
 any of these, their condescending Lord had provided for 
 them "a fire of coals, and fish laid thereon, and bread;" and 
 His word is to them, " Come and dine ;" or, in more modern 
 language, " Take your morning meal." Then, and not be- 
 fore, the disciples knew that it was the Lord. It was the 
 third time of His shewing Himself to any number of them 
 together, and each time had been at a meal. 
 
 The whole transaction looked back, as it were, not only 
 to the similar miracle, the former extraordinary draught of 
 fishes provided for the same persons on the same waters, but 
 also to the two instances of supernatural feeding, when the 
 hunger of those coming to Christ was satisfied by a few 
 loaves and fishes. And did it not look forward also to the 
 state of things shortly to take place in the Church? how 
 that in our spiritual toil and hunger He would shew Himself 
 to us by glimpses of His blessed Body ; standing on the 
 shore, i.e. Heaven, and calling on us from time to time to 
 partake of the heavenly food He hath provided for us, until 
 the whole Church, the net full of great fishes, a hundred 
 and fifty and three, (the perfect number of the elect,) be 
 drawn after Him to the land, and the Bridegroom, with 
 them that are ready, go in finally to the marriage- feast. 
 
 Perhaps it was not without meaning of this kind that the 
 Holy Ghost P, describing the intercourse of Christ with His 
 disciples during those forty days, selected a word * which 
 (whatever its derivation) was evidently associated by the 
 fiarly Greek Christians with the idea of fellowship in meals. 
 Forty days, in the symbolical language of Scripture, would 
 represent the whole time of the Church's probation, until 
 the day come in which she shall ascend with her Lord: and 
 then His partaking of her banquet, or, (according to one 
 
 P Acts i. 4. S. Chrys. (Ecum. Theophylaet. in loco; 
 
 i (Tvva.\i6/j.evos ) "being assembled S. Chr. in S.Joan. Honi. 87, Ed. Sav. 
 
 together with them;'* ma rg. "eating ii. 325; Theodoret, Eranistes, Dial. ii. 
 
 together;" .Vulg. " convescehs '* cf. t. iv. 119. 
 
54 Significance of the Apostles 9 Miracles. 
 
 CHAP. II. interpretation), " eating salt with her," would denote His 
 presence at the celebration of the great sacrificial feast of 
 the new covenant, which He in His unspeakable condescen- 
 sion, accounts Himself partaker of with us : as when He 
 says, " I will not any more eat thereof until it be fulfilled 
 in the kingdom of God r ;" "I will drink no more of the 
 fruit of the vine until that day that I drink it new in the 
 kingdom of God ." For His " meat is to do" His " Father's 
 will, and to finish His work 1 ;" and where on earth is the 
 Father's will and work more perfectly found than in holy 
 and devout Communion ? There, if any where on this side 
 heaven, is the "very image of" those "good things to 
 come," which the gracious Lord encourages us to look on. 
 to in those words of unutterable condescension, "Blessed 
 are those servants, whom the Lord when He cometh shall 
 find watching : verily I say unto you, that He shall gird 
 Himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come 
 forth and serve them u ." 
 
 34-. Then came the day of the Lord's Ascension, when 
 His natural but now glorified Body was to go up to His 
 Father's right hand, there to abide, in its visible form and 
 substance, until the times of restitution of all things. As 
 they saw His Body in the act of departing, "they wor- 
 shipped v ;" He left them prostrate, or on their knees. Very 
 strange it would have seemed to them, had they been told 
 that His sacred Body was the less to be worshipped because 
 it is now glorified, and must wear a veil over it to be en- 
 dured by mortal sight. And when the Holy Comforter had 
 come down upon them, and they were admitted fully into 
 the kingdom of heaven; besides their knowledge, now made 
 perfect, of all doctrine connected with the Ascension, they 
 would find, in the visible prerogatives with which both them- 
 selves and others through them were endowed, fresh reasons 
 every hour for magnifying the holy Humanity of Christ, 
 divinely ordained to be all in all to them. For by their 
 communion with Him through His Spirit, as His chosen and 
 select witnesses, chief members of His mystical Body, the 
 
 . * S. Luke xxii. 16. S. Mark xiv. 25. * S. John iv. 34. 
 
 * S. Luke xii. 37. T S. Luke xxiv. 52. 
 
How Christ's Body ivas glorified in them. 55 
 
 works that He had done they were enabled to do also ; and CHAP. II. 
 for the more confirmation of this union, they were autho- 
 rized to use the very words and gestures which their Lord 
 had commonly employed in His miracles of healing. This 
 began with the very beginning of the Church, on the Day of 
 Pentecost ; but the first instance particularly recorded is the 
 healing of the lame man by S. Peter, in which there is the 
 same combination of the divine Touch and the divine Word 
 as in the majority of our Lord's own miracles, and also in 
 the outward and visible parts of His Sacraments : the Touch, 
 in that the Apostle took the patient " by the right hand and 
 lifted him up;" the Word, in his saying, "In the Name of 
 Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk x ." So we read 
 afterwards, that " by the hands of the Apostles were many 
 signs and wonders wrought among the people *';" that Ana- 
 nias laid his hands upon Saul, and he recovered his sight; 
 that S. Peter gave Tabitha his hand to complete her recovery 
 after he had wakened her from death, besides saying, " Ta- 
 bitha, arise ;" that S. Paul, upon the sudden death of Eu- 
 tychus, went down, and fell on him, and embraced him, 
 saying, "Trouble not yourselves, for his life is in him;" 
 recalling the remembrance of what Elijah and Elisha had 
 done, and intimating to thoughtful persons the typical sig- 
 nificance of their history, (and that miracle, we may observe, 
 took place during a celebration of the holy Eucharist) : 
 lastly, in Melita he cured a fever by prayer and laying on 
 of hands. 
 
 Moreover, from the members, as from the Head, of the 
 Church, it was noticed that the healing virtue did, as it 
 were, overflow, communicating itself to their garments, and 
 those even apart from their persons. From Paul's body 
 " were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and 
 the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went 
 out of them." And in Acts v., still more remarkably, " they 
 brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on 
 beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter 
 passing by might overshadow some of them." The excep- 
 tions also to the rule of healing by touch appear to be of the 
 
 * Actsiii. 6. r Acts v. 12. 
 
56 Direct Argument for Eucharistical Adoration. 
 
 CHAP. II. same kind as those which have been noted in the Gospel 
 history : they are, the casting out devils ; the infliction of 
 punishments, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, and of 
 Elymas ; special faith, affirmed in the case of the cripple at 
 Lystra, and implied in that of ^Eneas; and all in that one 
 only Name, whereby it might be known without question 
 that Christ is the only Healer, as He is known to be the 
 only Baptizer and the only Consecrator. Who can doubt 
 that the effect of all this was still to deepen men's reverence 
 and gratitude towards the awful and blessed Body which 
 they knew to be the fountain of it all ? which Body, be it 
 noticed, was every day presented before them in a sacra- 
 mental way in the holy Eucharist ; for in the mother Church 
 of Jerusalem, at least, we know that they " continued daily 
 in breaking of bread." 
 
 35. "We may perhaps not unfitly close this series of scrip- 
 tural facts by noticing that it is the Lamb which is selected, 
 rather than the Lion, or any other animal, as that symbol of 
 our Lord which may most meetly represent Him in His ce- 
 lestial estate, all through the Book of Revelations ; in part, 
 doubtless, for the same reason that the Cross is His chosen 
 standard among inanimate things, and the Son of Man His 
 chosen title : that wherein He abases Himself most, or is 
 most evil spoken of, therein He may receive especial glory. 
 
 And the general result of the survey comes, I think un- 
 deniably, to as much as this that every where such encou- 
 ragement is given to the worship of our Lord in His human 
 nature, made adorable by its union with the Divine, as to 
 Create a strong probability, at least, that such worship would 
 not be forbidden, but rather sanctioned and enjoined, in that 
 Sacrament which, rather than any thing else, is the standing 
 monument of the Incarnation, and extension of it. 
 
 86. And such, in fact, is the case, as a very few words 
 -will shew. Worship is a personal thing; the true, real, pri- 
 mary object of worship, in the proper and high sense of the 
 word, for all reasonable and understanding creatures, must 
 of course be some personal Being, and that Being the Most 
 High God. On this point there is no need of any abstract 
 
It follows immediately from the Real Presence. 57 
 
 discussion ; it is settled for us at once on the very highest CHAP. II. 
 authority: "Thou shalt worship the Lord Thy God, and 
 Him only shalt Thou serve." The Person therefore of 
 Jesus Christ our Lord, wherever it is, is to be adored to 
 be honoured, acknowledged, sought unto, depended on, 
 with all possible reverence, with the most entire and single- 
 hearted devotion, incommunicable to any finite being by 
 all creatures whom He has brought to know Him. This 
 proposition, though in the heat of theological warfare it 
 may seem to have been denied, and that recently, cannot, 
 I conceive, be really and advisedly denied by any one who 
 believes the Divinity of our Lord. Taking it for granted, 
 I will state it once again. The Person of Jesus Christ our 
 Lord, wherever it is, is to be adored. And now I will add 
 the next proposition in the argument, viz. Christ's Person 
 is in the holy Eucharist by the presence of His Body and 
 Blood therein. From which, as will be seen, follows, by 
 direct inference, that the Person of Christ is to be adored 
 in that Sacrament, as there present in a peculiar manner, 
 by the presence of His Body and Blood. 
 
 It is on the second or minor of these three propositions, if 
 on any, that opposition is to be expected, and explanation is 
 necessary. It raises, evidently, the whole question of that 
 which is denominated "the real objective Presence" of Jesus 
 Christ in the holy Eucharist. That is to say, whereas the 
 Divine nature in Christ is everywhere and always equally 
 present, and so everywhere and always alike adorable; but 
 to us frail children of men He has condescended at certain 
 times and places to give especial tokens of His Presence, 
 which it is our duty to recognise, and then especially to 
 adore : thus far, I suppose, all allow who in any sense 
 believe the Creeds of the Church, that in the holy Eucharist 
 we are very particularly bound to take notice of His divine 
 Presence, as GOD THE WORD, and to worship Him accord- 
 ingly. That which some in modern times have denied is, 
 that He is then and there present according to His human 
 nature, really and substantially present, as truly present as 
 He was to any of those with whom He conversed when He 
 went in and out among us ; or again, as He is now present 
 
58 No necessary Temptation to adore the Sign. 
 
 CHAP. II. in heaven interceding for us. Both of these two last men- 
 tioned are modes of His human Presence, acknowledged by 
 all who confess Him come in the flesh. But that which 
 some affirm, some deny, as part of the Catholic doctrine of 
 the Eucharist, is a third and special mode of Presence of the 
 holy Humanity of our Lord, denoted and effected by His 
 own words " This is My Body, this is My Blood ;" a Pre- 
 sence the manner of which is beyond all thought, much 
 more beyond all words of ours, but which those who believe 
 it can no more help adoring, than they could have helped it 
 had they been present with S. Thomas, to see in His hands 
 the print of the nails ; or, again, with so many sick persons 
 to touch the hem of His garment, and so to be made whole. 
 It is no more natural for them to think, one way or the 
 other, of worshipping the Bread and Wine, than it was for 
 the woman with the issue of blood to think of worshipping 
 the garment which she touched, instead of Him who was 
 condescending to wear it and make it an instrument of 
 blessing to her. 
 
 If we may reverently say it, (using an illustration which 
 is applied by the Church to a subject, if possible, still more 
 awful than this,) "as the reasonable soul and flesh is one 
 Man," and as " God and man is one Christ," so the conse- 
 crated Bread and Wine, and the Body and Blood of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, are one Sacrament. And as we know 
 the soul of a man, which we cannot see, to be present by the 
 presence of his living body, which we can see, so the presence 
 of that Bread and Wine is to us a sure token of the Presence 
 of Christ's Body and Blood. We are not more certain of the 
 one by our reliance on God's ordinary providence, than we 
 are of the other by our faith in Christ's own word. And as 
 persons of common sense are not apt to confound a man's 
 soul with his bod}', because of the intimate and mysterious 
 connection of the two, (to bring men to that requires either 
 extreme subtilty or extreme grossness of understanding) ; 
 nor yet can you easily bring them to doubt whether meat 
 and drink serve to keep the two together, whether life can 
 come by bread, because they cannot understand how, so no 
 plain and devout reader of Holy Scripture and disciple of 
 
The Real Presence, as taught in S. John vi. 59 
 
 the Church would, of his own accord, find a difficulty in CHAP. II. 
 adoring the thing signified, apart -from the outward sign or 
 form; or in believing that the one may surely convey the 
 other by a spiritual and heavenly process, known to God, 
 but unknown to him, and to all on earth. 
 
 37. It is not the object of these papers to reason out at 
 large that great, and comfortable, and (I will add) necessary 
 truth, known to the faithful under the name of "the Real 
 Presence," but rather to point out the inseparable connection 
 between it and the practice of adoration. But I must here 
 borrow so much from the premisses of that argument as to 
 assume that the sixth chapter of S. John really and pri- 
 marily relates to the Sacrament of Holy Communion ; ac 
 cording to the well-known interpretation of Hooker, which 
 is the interpretation of all antiquity, and lies so obviously on 
 the surface of Scripture, that one can hardly conceive a sim- 
 ple, unlearned reader giving any other turn to the discourse 
 in that chapter, unless he were prepossessed by a theory. 
 
 Allowing then, that, as Hooker alleges, the Apostles at the 
 Last Supper could not but understand the sayings and doings 
 of our Lord as the intended fulfilment of His typical miracle 
 and prophetic sayings a twelvemonth before, let us calmly 
 consider what doctrine about Holy Communion they must 
 have taught and believed, from that day forward, or at least 
 from the day of His coming upon them Who was to bring all 
 Christ's sayings to remembrance. They must have believed 
 that, as ordinary food and drink are necessary to ordinary 
 temporal life, so His Body and Blood, sacramentally received, 
 are necessary to spiritual life ; for f< except ye eat the Flesh 
 of the Son of Man, and drink His Blood, ye have no life in 
 you :" that as a common meal, with God's blessing upon it, 
 has a virtue to keep us alive for a certain time, so this hea- 
 venly meal has the like virtue in respect to the life everlast- 
 ing ; for " whoso eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood 
 hath eternal life :" that it has a certain special quality of 
 preparing our bodies for the general resurrection ; for " I will 
 raise him up at the last day z ;" that ordinary food and drink 
 is but the shadow of this, the true Bread from heaven, and 
 Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 45. 
 
60 Use of the Title " Son of Man" in S. John vi. 
 
 CHAP. II. the fruit of the true Vine, in the same kind of way that 
 Christ is the true Light, and this material light but a figure 
 of Him ; heaven the true riches, of which the earthly mam- 
 mon is but a coarse and unreal image ; and all other Gospel 
 antitypes far more real and substantial than their legal or 
 natural types : for which cause, mainly, (as I suppose,) Christ 
 is called the Truth, in contradistinction to Mosaical shadows ; 
 so that in the Sacrament we eat and drink more really and 
 substantially than on any other occasion : all this they 
 might gather from the saying, "For My Flesh is meat in- 
 deed, and My Blood is drink indeed." 
 
 Again, they would understand that His Flesh and Blood 
 in Holy Communion is the special means appointed by Him, 
 not for beginning, but for continuing, spiritual life, the 
 instrument whereby the members adhere to their Head, as- 
 well as the remedial token and pledge whereby they know 
 that they are very members incorporate in Him, and not yet 
 cast off for their many backslidings ; for "He that eateth 
 My Flesh, and drinketh My Blood, dwelleth in Me, and I in 
 him." Finally, to set the most awful seal to the greatness 
 and reality of all this, to put down for ever the notion that 
 He was merely using figures of speech, the Holy Ghost 
 caused them to remember that our Lord had said, "As the 
 living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father: so he 
 that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me a ." 
 
 38. And for a key to the whole mysterious transaction, 
 so far as man might comprehend it, He had introduced the 
 title, Son of Man, three times in the course of the conversa- 
 tion, and apparently just at those points of it where it would 
 come in most significantly, supposing His intention to be to- 
 intimate thereby the office of the Sacrament in extending 
 and applying the benefit of His Incarnation. 
 
 First, in leading His hearers to the whole subject, He had 
 said, " Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that 
 meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of 
 Man shall give unto you : for Him hath God the Father 
 sealed V Him the Father had " sanctified and sent into the 
 world," anointing His holy Manhood with the Holy Ghost 
 * S.John vi. 57. ' > b Ibid. 27. 
 
Bearing of Christ's Ascension on the Eucharist. 61 
 
 and with power without measure, for this especial purpose, CHAP. II. 
 that He, being the Son of Man, might give us the meat that 
 endureth unto everlasting life. 
 
 Secondly ; when in His gracious disclosures, keeping even 
 time (so to speak) with the stubborn and insolent answers of 
 the Jews, He had arrived at that saying, so offensive to the 
 ear and heart of philosophy falsely so called, "The Bread 
 that I will give is My Flesh ;" it began, as soon as spoken, 
 to be a cause of strife : for in regard of this doctrine espe- 
 cially has the saying ever been too truly fulfilled, " I came 
 not to send peace on the earth, but a sword." And accord- 
 ingly the Jews, at the very first hearing of it, began to strive 
 with one another, saying, " How can this Man give us His 
 Flesh to eat c ?" Whereupon our Lord, in repeating it, with 
 the addition that they must drink His Blood, was careful to 
 point out to them that it was the Flesh and Blood of the 
 Son of Man: "Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, 
 and drink His Blood, ye have no life in you." As Son of 
 Man, He had decreed to bestow on them His Flesh and 
 Blood, that it might be within them, to be the very life of 
 their souls. 
 
 , Once more, when the trial and agony caused by the 
 "hard saying d " seemed at the keenest, in His prophetic 
 mercy and pity He warned them of an event which would 
 make it harder still : " What and if ye shall see the Son of 
 Man ascend up where He was before?" He accompanied the 
 warning with a significant repetition of the title, Son of Man ; 
 which, when the time was come, His disciples would under- 
 stand to imply that His going up to heaven bodily, in His 
 human nature, was indeed a most essential link in the chain 
 of wonders which began with His Incarnation. His work as 
 Son of Man would be very incomplete without it ; He could 
 neither sit as a King on His Father's right hand in heaven, 
 " until Plis enemies be made His footstool/' nor stand before 
 Him, either there or in earth, as " a Priest for ever after the 
 order of Melchisedec." Since the commemorative Sacrifice 
 in heaven was necessary for the efficacy of the Eucharist of- 
 fered on earth, which, indeed, is only efficacious by being 
 joined to the oblation above, the Communion, however 
 
 c S. John vi. 52, 53. d Ibid. 60. 
 
62 .' The Holy Spirit's Work in the Eucharist. 
 
 CHAP. II. blessed a thing, cannot be understood as having done all its 
 work before the glorious Ascension of our Lord. Mary must 
 not touch Christ, because He hath " not yet ascended to His 
 Father," to send down, as the first-fruits of His priestly office 
 in heaven, the Holy Spirit, by Whose regenerating power 
 mortals might be united to Him, and made worthy to touch 
 Him spiritually. Such is S. Cyril's exposition of that mys- 
 terious saying, " Touch Me not, for I am not yet ascended to 
 My Father e ." And if any one hesitate to accept it, as incon- 
 sistent with our Lord's offering His Body, as He did so often, 
 to the touch of His disciples during those forty days, he may 
 consider that such permission was granted, by way of mira- 
 culous evidence, to such as were yet imperfect in the faith of 
 the Resurrection ; whereas the blessed Magdalene seems to 
 have had no doubt, but only wanted to kiss His feet, as be- 
 fore His death, in loving adoration. Her touch would repre- 
 sent the ordinary approach of believers to Christ's Body in 
 the Holy Eucharist, and was therefore to be deferred until 
 she had been purified by the Holy Ghost. 
 
 To return for a moment to His own words in the sixth 
 chapter: "What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend 
 up where He was before ?" Understood in this connection, 
 they do in a wonderful manner intimate the three great 
 mysterious Unities comprised in the idea of Christian re- 
 demption : first, the Unity of the Father and the Son, im- 
 plied in "where He was before;" next, the Unity of God 
 and Man in the Person of Christ, implied in the title, Son 
 of Man ; thirdly, the Union and Communion between Christ 
 and His saints, in that partaking of His Body and Blood is 
 here connected with His Ascension. And in the next verse 
 He turns our thoughts towards that other Divine Person, 
 Who, as Holy Scripture informs us, is in some heavenly way 
 the bond and principle of each of these divine unities. " It 
 is the Spirit that quickeneth." The Holy Ghost, the Lord 
 and Giver of Life, of Whom the Church says f that " in His 
 unity" the Son liveth and reigneth with the Father; and 
 Whom our Lord, speaking to the Father, seems in one place 
 to entitle, " The Love wherewith Thou hast loved Me e " by 
 
 In S. Joan. xx. 17. t. vi. 10841086. Ed. Aubert. 
 f Collect for Whitsunday. * S. John xvii. ult. 
 
Christ's Person is the Bread of Life. 63 
 
 Whose power, overshadowing the blessed Virgin, the God- CHAP. II. 
 head and Manhood were united for ever in Christ : He it 
 is that quickeneth the souls and bodies of men dead in tres- 
 passes and sins : He also (so our Lord seems to speak) shall 
 descend upon the earthly creatures which I by My priests 
 shall bless, and cause them to be the Flesh and Blood of the 
 Son of Man, life eternal to those who go on worthily receiv- 
 ing them. " The flesh profiteth nothing :" not even the Body 
 of the Lord Jesus Christ, could you conceive it separated 
 from His divine Person and Spirit, much less the Bread and 
 Wine used as a charm, could ever do your souls any good : 
 any such superstition or witchcraft could only come of this 
 earth, or worse ; but " the words that I speak unto you, 
 they are spirit and they are life." 
 
 But whatever turn may be given to this verse in particular, 
 certainly there is nothing in the above-mentioned way of 
 stating the general drift of that chapter of S. John, but what 
 the words will very well admit of: nothing unwarranted 
 by the testimony of the ancient Church : and the mere 
 statement of it shews sufficiently what an exact analogy it 
 bears to the Scriptural accounts of the other portions of the 
 divine process of salvation, how naturally it finds its place 
 among them. 
 
 39. Now to apply all this to the question of adoration ; 
 is the Person of Christ, God and Man, present in the holy 
 Eucharist by this transcendental Presence of His Body and 
 Blood? The affirmative seems distinctly proved by His own 
 words in the same discourse; in that He more than once 
 interchanges the first personal pronoun, I, Me, &c., with the 
 phrases, " This bread, My flesh," &c. I will not dwell on 
 the 32nd and 33rd verses h , which in our English translation 
 would seem to exemplify this ; for it may be that the sen- 
 tence which is rendered, "The Bread of God is He which 
 cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world," 
 should rather be rendered " that which cometh down from 
 heaven ;" although the word " giveth" strongly suggests the 
 idea of a person acting, and is distinctly so employed through- 
 
 h 'O IToT?;p fj.ov SiSuffivvfjuVTbit &prov Upros rov eou eon-u/ 6 Kara^alvuv c'/f 
 rov ovpavov rbv o.\T]Qiv6v. 'O^&p , TOV ovpavov, Ka.1 %<a)]v 5i5ovs rtp K&fffMf 
 
64 The Bread of Life, being Christ Himself, is adorable. 
 
 CHAP. II. out the New Testament, with two exceptions only, and those 
 of a poetical cast : " the moon shall not give her light ;" and, 
 " the heavens gave rain V 
 
 But be this as it may, two verses further on our Lord dis- 
 tinctly identifies the Bread of Life with His own Person: 
 "I am the Bread of LifeJ." And so the Jews understood 
 Him, for they murmured at His saying, " I am the Bread 
 which came down from heaven ;" and He, instead of correct- 
 ing, confirms their thought, re-asserting more unequivocally, 
 more at large, and in a more startling form, the truth at 
 which they had taken offence, and leaving it with them, and 
 with all His hearers, to be an occasion of falling to the one 
 sort, a wholesome exercise of faith to the other. " I am that 
 Bread of Life," He repeats ; " I, in My Person, Jesus Christ, 
 God and Man." " Of Life :" in that while "your fathers did 
 eat manna," which was called "Bread from heaven," "and 
 are dead, this is the Bread that cometh down from Heaven, 
 that a man may eat thereof and not die." Then, as if to 
 preclude the notion that the bread He was speaking of was 
 any mere gift of His, anything short of participation of His 
 very Self, He proceeds to qualify that Bread as living, and as 
 having come down from heaven : " I am the living Bread which 
 came down from heaven ;" not life-giving only, but living ; 
 not here /caTafiawwv, but Karafids, i.e. not (as in the pre- 
 ceding verse) coming, as it were, mystically down, from time 
 to time, on each sacramental occasion, but having once for all 
 come down by the wonderful Incarnation ; on which descent 
 plainly depends the word of promise immediately following : 
 " If any man eat of this Bread, he shall live for ever." And to 
 complete the statement, and bring the Sacrament which He 
 was to institute into closest connection with His own Incar- 
 nate Person, He subjoins, "And the Bread, moreover, (KOI 6 
 apros Be) which I will give is My Flesh, which I will give for 
 the life of the world." (The Be, which in this phrase indicates 
 the insertion of a new circumstance in the statement, is over- 
 looked in our version.) His Flesh, then, in this argument is 
 plainly Himself, and the sacramental Presence, oblation, and 
 participation of the one are respectively those of the other. 
 . . . S. Matt. xxiv. 29 ; S. James v. 18. J Ibid. 35 : cf. 41, 4851. 
 
S. Ambrose on the Personal Presence. 65 
 
 The same is again implied (may we not say, clearly as- CHAP. 1L 
 serted ?) in the concluding portion of the dialogue. " Whoso 
 .(v. 54) eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood, hath eternal 
 life ; and I will raise him up at the last day ;" is repeated 
 (v. 57) in this form : " He that eateth Me, even he shall live 
 by Me." The "Me" in this sentence is clearly equivalent 
 to " My Flesh " in the former one. Therefore such as eat 
 His Flesh and drink His Blood worthily in Holy Communion 
 are indeed partakers of the Son of God by a true super- 
 natural union, and derive from Him eternal life ; as really 
 as He is partaker of the Father, by that ineffable, incom- 
 municable Sonship, and being for ever God of God, Light 
 of Light, very God of very God, the Second Person, not 
 the First, derives from Him, who is the First, life and 
 being, and all that He hath ; and is God, not by adoption, 
 but by eternal generation. What man or Angel durst have 
 spoken such a word ? but now it is put into our mouths 
 by the Creator of men and Angels, and we dare not refrain 
 from speaking it. 
 
 Therefore, again, (how can we help the conclusion? and 
 why should we shrink from it ?) where His Flesh and Blood 
 are, there is He by a peculiar and personal Presence, in His 
 holy Humanity ; and being there, being, as First-begotten, 
 so brought continually into "the habitable parts of His 
 earth," according to the "delight" which He has in being 
 "with the sons of men," He must needs be adorable, both 
 by the holy Angels and by the children of men themselves, 
 whom He comes to quicken and to bless for ever. 
 
 40. The points on which this argument turns are ex- 
 pressed in few and well-known words by S. Ambrose, near 
 the end of his Tract on the Mysteries, not as his own teach- 
 ing, but as the teaching of the Church k . First, of the real 
 and substantial Presence after Consecration thus he writes : 
 
 "The Lord Jesus Himself cries out, This is My Body. 
 Before benediction by the heavenly words, it is named by 
 the name of another kind of thing ; after consecration it is 
 signified to be a Body. He Himself calls it ' His own 
 Blood/ Before consecration it is called something else ; 
 
 k 54_58. 
 F 
 
66 How the Eucharist is a Sacrifice. 
 
 CHAP. 1 1. after consecration, its style and title is Blood. And tliou 
 sayest, Amen ; that is, it is true. What the mouth spcaketh, 
 let the mind inwardly confess ; what the discourse utters, 
 the same let the heart feel." 
 
 Next, as to the Presence being person al, by reason of the 
 Presence of His Body : " The Church, beholding so great 
 grace, exhorts her children, exhorts all around her, to run 
 together to her Sacraments, saying, Eat, ye who are near- 
 est unto Me, and drink, and be inebriated, my brethren 1 . 
 "What we eat, what we drink, the Holy Spirit in another 
 place hath explained to thee by the prophet, saying, taste 
 and see that the Lord is sweet : blessed is the man who trust- 
 eth in IIim m " Here the Psalmist is interpreted as signi- 
 fying that what we taste is the Lord Himself: for S. Am- 
 brose proceeds, "In that Sacrament is Christ, because it is 
 the Body of Christ." And then he warns us, in words- 
 corresponding to our Lord's cautionary saying, " It is the 
 Spirit that quickeneth ; the Flesh profiteth nothing ;" that 
 for this very reason, " because it is the Body of Christ," 
 it is "not bodily food, but spiritual. Wherefore also the 
 Apostle saith of that 'which is a type of it, that our Fathers 
 did eat spiritual meat, and drink spiritual drink. For the 
 Body of God is a spiritual Body; the Body of Christ is the 
 Body of a Divine Spirit : for Christ is a Spirit . . , . I may 
 add, that it is our heart which this meat ' strengthens/ and 
 this drink ' maketh glad the heart of man ;' as the prophet 
 points out " in the 104th Psalm. 
 
 What was the opinion of S. Ambrose, or rather what his 
 testimony is to the belief and practice of the whole Church 
 in his time, touching the adoration of Christ sacramentally 
 present, will appear by-and-by. 
 
 41. But the Scriptural argument for it is yet very far 
 from being exhausted. The Word of God presents to us 
 the Sacrament of the Eucharist under another, a sacrificial, 
 aspect : which must be considered, if the truth is adequately 
 to be told concerning either the Real Presence, or the 
 adoration claimed for it. The Eucharist, as the Fathers 
 1 Cantic. v. 1. m Ps. xxxiv. 8. 
 
How proved such by the Words of Institution. 67 
 
 speak, is the unbloody Sacrifice of the New Testament ; un- CHAP. II. 
 bloody, though it be in part an offering of blood: avai- 
 paKTos, not avails. No blood shed in it, but the living 
 Blood of Christ with His living Body offered up to the 
 Father, for a memorial of the real blood-shedding, the awful 
 and painful Sacrifice once for all offered on the Cross. ! 
 
 This memorial Christ offers in heaven, night and day, to 
 God the Father : His glorified Body, with all its wounds, His 
 Blood which He poured out on the cross, but on His resur- 
 rection took again to Himself, and with it ascended into 
 heaven. With that Body and Blood He appears continually 
 before the throne, by it making intercession for us; by it 
 reminding God the Father of His one oblation of Himself 
 once offered on the cross : as S. John writes, " We have an 
 Advocate," one to plead for us, " with the Father, and He 
 is the Propitiation for our sins." Thus He is our Aaron 
 first, and then our Melchisedec ; the virtue of His perpetual 
 advocacy depending on His former propitiation. Both ways 
 He is"/' a Priest for ever." 
 
 42. But to enter on a regular exposition of this great 
 evangelical truth would involve a detailed commentary on 
 large portions of Holy Scripture, and the whole system of 
 ancient sacrifices would have to be thoroughly and minutely 
 analysed. For the present undertaking it will suffice if we 
 can shew, 
 
 First, that the doctrine of the Eucharistical Sacrifice is 
 involved in the very words of institution, and is of course in- 
 separable from the true meaning and right use of the Sacra- 
 ment. In which argument it will incidentally appear that 
 the English Liturgy in particular is full of the same doctrine. 
 
 Secondly, that there are large portions of the New Testa- 
 ment which cannot be explained without assuming it. 
 
 And as we go along, we shall see how evidently the fact 
 of Christ's Eucharistical Priesthood implies the duty of con- 
 stantly adoring Him in the Eucharist. 
 
 43. First, then, of the Words of Institution, and the turn 
 given to them in our Communion Office. 
 
 The places, it is true, are not many, but they are deeply 
 significant. The key-words in them (so to speak) are such 
 
68 In what sense the Gospel has no Sacrifice. 
 
 as remembrance, memory, memorial, all which refer us of 
 course to one of the words of institution : " Do this in re- 
 membrance of Me;" et? rrjv e^rjv av.dfjkvij(riv. The word 
 avdfjLvrjcns is a sacrificial word, as may be seen in Leviticus ii., 
 and elsewhere, as well as the kindred word ^vrj^oa-wov ; and 
 when so applied, means always " something offered to Al- 
 mighty God, to remind Him" of the worshipper himself, or 
 of some other person or object in whom the worshipper takes 
 an interest; or of His own loving-kindness, shewn by mercies 
 past or gracious promises for the future. 
 
 Such memorial offerings in sacrifice are like the memorial 
 words in prayer : e.g., " Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Is- 
 rael, Thy servants 11 ;" "Remember me, O my God, for good ." 
 Or like that which is the conclusion of almost all the collects 
 which we address to God the Father, " through Jesus Christ 
 our Lord/' That short form is in words what the Chris- 
 tian memorial Sacrifice is in act and deed ; pleading with the 
 Father by Christ crucified ; presenting to Him the Body and 
 Blood of His incarnate Son, with all His wounds, and all 
 His merits and mercies, that in Him and by Him we may 
 be accepted ; that the remedy provided for all may be ap- 
 plied to, and taken by, each one in particular. This is the 
 proper drift of the word remembrance in our Lord's institu- 
 tion of the Sacrament. " Do this ;" He seems to say, "Bless, 
 break, distribute, receive, this Bread ; bless, distribute, drink 
 of this Cup; say over the two respectively, 'This is My 
 .Body, this is My Blood;' in order to that memorial sacri- 
 r fice which properly belongs to Me; the memorial which My 
 servants are continually to make of Me, among one another, 
 and before My Father." Not, of course, as though He could 
 .forget, or needed, like the heathen idols, to have His at- 
 tention recalled to His worshippers, (as Elijah said of Baal, 
 " He sleepeth, and must be awaked;") far be it from any 
 Christian to charge his brethren with such an unworthy 
 superstitious notion ; but as it is with the omniscient God in 
 ,he matter of prayer, so in this matter of sacrifice. He 
 knoweth what we have need of before we ask, yet He willeth 
 
 Exod. xxxii. 13 ; Isa. Ixiv. 9. 
 
 Nehem. xiii. 31 ; Ps. Ixxiv. 2, 18 : Ps. Ixxix. 8. 
 
The Eucharist not a material Sacrifice. 69 
 
 us to ask : so He might without any offering of ours apply CHAP.!H 
 to us the benefits of our Lord's Sacrifice, but it hath pleased 
 Him to ordain this way of memorial sacrifice a most blessed 
 way for us, in that we are hereby permitted to join in that 
 very same memorial of our dear Lord's Death and Passion, 
 which He is now and always making of it within the true 
 holy of holies, and before the true mercy-seat. 
 
 44. Theologians, indeed, have not seldom said that the 
 Christian dispensation has no standing sacrifice, properly so 
 called : thus Hooker, " The Fathers of the Church of Christ 
 call usually the ministry of the Gospel priesthood, in regard 
 of that which the Gospel hath proportionable to ancient sa- 
 crifices, namely, the Communion of the Blessed Body and 
 Blood of Christ, although it have properly now no sacrifice p ." 
 This passage undoubtedly does in words contradict the say- 
 ing that the Eucharist is the " Christian Sacrifice ;" but on 
 second thoughts it may, perhaps, be found substantially to 
 assert the doctrine contained in that saying. "The Gos- 
 pel," he says, "hath properly now no sacrifice;" i.e., no 
 such sacrifice as had been mentioned just before, under the 
 title of " ancient sacrifices ;" no material offering solemnly 
 ordained for the known ends of sacrifices. This we all 
 grant; it is the very same statement which the same Fa- 
 thers were in the habit of making, when they were explain- 
 ing the principles of Christianity to the heathen, so far as 
 their rule permitted. Take, for instance, the words which 
 Prudentius puts into the mouth of the martyr Romanus * : 
 
 "Cognostis Ipsum; nunc colendi agnoscite 
 Ritum modumque : quale sit templi genus, 
 Que dedicari sanxerit donaria, 
 Quse vota poscat, quos sacerdotes velit, 
 Quod mandet illic nectar immolarier. 
 
 .2Edem sibi Ipse mente in hominis condidit ; . . . . 
 Illic sacerdos stat sacrato in limine, 
 Foresque primas virgo custodit fides. . . . 
 Poscit litari victimas Christo et Patri, . . 
 Frontis pudorem, cordis innocentiam, 
 
 P Eccl. Pol., V. Ixxviii. 2. * Tlepl yr^ivuv, x. 341. 
 
70 Hooker's Doctrine substantially Patristical; 
 
 CHAP. II, Dei timorem, regulam scientiae, 
 
 Pacis quietera, castitatem, corporis 
 
 Ex his amoenus hostiis surgit vapor, . . . 
 Et prosperatum dulce delectat Deum." 
 
 Did Prudentius and others by these and the like sayings 
 imply that sacrifice is no part of the Christian ministry in 
 any sense ? surely not. 
 
 Prudentius nourished in the latter half of the fifth century ; 
 a time in which there can be no doubt of the prevalence of 
 the sacrificial view of the Eucharist over the whole Church. 
 All will allow that the language to which Hooker refers as 
 usual in the Fathers, was by that time at least universally 
 employed, both in liturgies, and in homilies, and other re- 
 ligious compositions. One short sentence in an epistle of 
 S. Augustine and other African Fathers to Pope S. Inno- 
 cent I. may be taken as a key to their doctrine : " Mel- 
 chisedec by bringing forth the sacramental sign of the 
 Lord's Table, was instructed how to prefigure His eter- 
 nal Priesthood 1 ." How can this be reconciled with re- 
 pudiation of altars and sacrifices in the statements before- 
 mentioned? In this way, if I mistake not, that the true 
 oblation in the Christian Sacrifice is in no sense earthly or 
 material. It is altogether spiritual : the chief of those spi- 
 ritual sacrifices in the offering whereof consists the common 
 priesthood of us all. The Eucharist comprehends them all in 
 one, and has besides, peculiar to itself, that which alone causes 
 any of them to be acceptable. For the true oblation in the 
 Eucharist is not the Bread and Wine, that is only as the 
 vessel which contains or the garment which veils it; but 
 that which our Lord by the hands of the priest offers to His 
 Father in the holy Eucharist, is His own Body and Blood, 
 the very same which He offers and presents to Him, with 
 which, as S. Paul says 8 , He appears before Him now, night 
 and day continually in heaven, in commemoration of His 
 having offered it once for all in His Passion and Death on 
 the Cross. It is the one great reality, summing up in itself 
 all the memorial sacrifices of old. In the Christian scheme, 
 it is " proportionable" to them ; and of course it stands in 
 
 1 Ap. S. Aug., Ep. cxxxvii. 12. Heb. ix. 24. 
 
both as to the Presence, and as to the Sacrifice* 71 
 
 the same rank and relation to them, as the other antitypes in CHAP.TE. 
 the Gospel to their several types and shadows in the law. 
 
 The memorial therefore made of Christ before the Father 
 in Holy Communion, is as much more real, more glorious, 
 more blessed, than all the memorial sacrifices of old ; than 
 the yearly paschal lamb, for instance; as the one atoning 
 Sacrifice on the Cross surpassed the lamb slain at the first 
 Passover ; as the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost 
 surpassed the fire on the burnt- offering; as Christ is more 
 glorious than Aaron or Melchisedec ; heaven, with the tree 
 of life and the waters of life, more blessed than the land 
 flowing with milk and honey ; the new Jerusalem more true 
 and real than the old. He who thinks most highly, and 
 therefore least inadequately, of that holy and divine Sacra- 
 ment, cannot well say, or conceive, any thing of it higher 
 than this, that it is, in the strict sense of the word, " that 
 which the Gospel hath proportionable to ancient sacri- 
 fices V 
 
 Therefore let no person apprehend that in teaching and 
 magnifying the Eucharistic Sacrifice he is really contradicting 
 this great authority ; any more than, to name a kindred point, 
 he need think himself departing in principle from Hooker's 
 mind by maintaining the Real objective Presence after con- 
 secration. For it is very plain that Hooker's scruple arose 
 not from any dread of so-called superstition, as though 
 too much were being attributed to sacraments, but from, 
 jealousy in behalf of the doctrine of our Lord's true and 
 abiding Humanity. That doctrine being duly guarded, (as 
 no doubt it is by the Fathers' language thoroughly consi- 
 dered,) Hooker evidently would have felt himself free to 
 receive that language in its literal meaning, as acknowledg- 
 ing a Presence most real and substantial, but not corporeal 
 or natural ; not such as would be recognised by the bodily 
 sense, though the veil were ever so much taken away. 
 The very passage which Hooker, in stating his difficulty, 
 alleges from S. Augustine, may seem to suggest the so- 
 lution of it : " The Man Christ Jesus is now in that very 
 .place from whence He shall come in the same form and 
 
 The italics are Hooker's own, in liis first edition. 
 
72 Art XXXI. relates to atoning Sacrifices. 
 
 CHAP. II. substance of flesh which He carried thither, and from which 
 He hath not taken nature, but given thereunto immortality. 
 According to this form He spreadeth not out Himself into 
 all places"." Not in His human form, nor simply in all 
 places; yet this hinders not, but that His Person may be 
 wherever in His sacramental word He declares, " This is 
 My Body," by a Presence of His glorified Humanity, lite- 
 rally true, though to us undefinable. 
 
 45. But if Hooker ought not really to be set down as 
 a denier of commemorative sacrifice in the Eucharist, much 
 less can our thirty- first Article be so interpreted with any 
 shadow of reason. That Article obviously deals with those 
 sacrifices only for which atoning virtue is claimed, and 
 power to make satisfaction for sin, besides and apart from 
 the offering of Christ on the Cross. It does not touch the 
 Eucharistic Sacrifice, considered as one with that presenta- 
 tion of His crucified and risen Body to the Father, which 
 the Apostle to the Hebrews describes as taking place con- 
 tinually in heaven, for the application of the great remedy 
 to the cleansing of each man's soul and conscience in parti- 
 cular. As in the typical atonement made yearly for God's 
 ancient people, it was no disparagement to the virtue of the 
 sin-offering, that its blood had to be brought by the high- 
 priest within the veil, and applied by sprinkling to the holy 
 places, the priests, and the people; so it is in this case. 
 To say that the sacrificial view of the Eucharist interferes 
 with the sufficiency of the sacrifice of the death of Christ,, 
 would in effect be saying that Melchisedec could not be 
 a priest because Aaron was; nay, more, that our Lord 
 could not be our Intercessor in heaven, because He had 
 become our Redeemer here by His death. 
 
 Now, if the holy Eucharist as a sacrifice be all one witb 
 the memorial made by our High-Priest Himself in the 
 yery sanctuary of heaven, where He is both Priest, after the 
 order of Melchisedec, and Offering, by the perpetual pre- 
 sentation of His Body and Blood ; then, as the blessed in- 
 habitants of heaven cannot but be thought of as adoring 
 Him in both His aspects, of Priest and Sacrifice, so how 
 Eccl. Pol., V. Iv. 6. 
 
Our Eucharists a Continuation of our Lord's. 73 
 
 should His holy Church throughout all the world not adore CHAP. II. 
 Him in like manner, as often as she " goeth up to the reve- 
 rend Communion" to offer up spiritual sacrifices, and "to 
 be satisfied with spiritual meats x ?" For there He is in His 
 holy and perfect Manhood, virtually present, as our Priest, 
 with Him that ministereth, being one of those to whom He 
 said, "Lo! I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
 world;" and really present, as our Sacrifice, according to 
 that other word, "This is My Body, and this is My Blood," 
 "Do this in remembrance of Me." 
 
 46. And so the Catechism of the Church of England 
 takes it ; requiring for the validity of the outward sign, that 
 it be not only " bread and wine," but that " Bread and Wine 
 which the Lord had commanded to be received;" i.e. over 
 which Christ Himself hath spoken the words of institution. 
 If any one doubt this construction, he may consider, first, 
 that it would be mere tautology, little to be expected in such 
 a document, to repeat here what had been plainly and suffi- 
 ciently set down in the general definition of a sacrament 
 that it must be " ordained by Christ Himself;" next, that 
 our view is no more than is required to make the description 
 of this Sacrament equivalent to that which had been given of 
 the other. For, (this section of the Catechism being plainly 
 intended to be framed in exact logical order,) since in the 
 account of holy Baptism, the outward and visible sign or 
 form had been defined both by the Element and the Word ; 
 the element, water ; the word, "In the Name of the Father, 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ;"- it was to be ex- 
 pected that there would be a like specification in the case 
 of the holy Eucharist also. But nothing of the sort appears, 
 unless we accept the above-mentioned account of the clause, 
 "which the Lord hath commanded to be received." The 
 outward part of the great Sacrament is on that hypothesis 
 denned by its Element only, and no Word at all assigned to 
 it. Whereas on our construction the well-known saying of 
 S. Augustine is precisely kept in view : " Accedit verbum ad 
 elementum, et fit Sacramentum." 
 
 Again, this mode of interpretation critically accords with. 
 
 x Horn, of the Sacrament, 1st part. 
 
74 Teaching of our Catechism on that point. 
 
 CHAP. II. a certain important distinction observed all along by the 
 Church in dealing with these two blessed mysteries. The 
 Word or verbal part of the form in Baptism is minutely and 
 unchangeably laid down, but nothing is said or implied 
 of any special qualification in the person speaking it. In 
 the Eucharist, not only are the words of institution (as 
 we take it) peremptorily enacted, but it is also enacted 
 that they must be spoken by Christ Himself, saying in each 
 case over the particular element, "Take, eat, This is My 
 Body which is given for you;" and " Drink ye all of this, for 
 this is My Blood." Thus the Catechism assumes that it is 
 no true Supper of the Lord, unless the person celebrating be 
 one expressly authorized to speak the words in our Lord's 
 own Name ; as much so as those were with whom He cele- 
 brated His first Eucharist. This, I say, harmonizes well with 
 the fact notorious in Church history, that all Christians, in 
 case of necessity, are empowered to administer holy Baptism, 
 but none may "make the Body of Christ," except those 
 specially commissioned by the Apostles. 
 
 Would it be going too far to say that our Church in this 
 sentence simply accepts the idea of one only Consecrator, 
 analogous to that so plainly preached by S. John Baptist, 
 and expounded by S. Augustine, of orie only Baptizer ? 
 Whereupon it would seem to follow, that in reality there is 
 but one Eucharist; that our celebrations, how innumerable 
 soever, and however widely separated in time and place, are 
 not so many commemorations of that first offering in the 
 upper room, but an actual continuation of it ; a continuation, 
 of it on earth, the very image (as S. Paul and S. Ambrose 
 speak) of that other and heavenly continuation of it, which 
 began on our Lord's Ascension, and will go on to the end of 
 the world. 
 
 This is the theory of the Church's daily Sacrifice. It would 
 be literally continual, if all lands were Christian, and if Holy 
 Communion were solemnized at the same hour in every Chris- 
 tian land. Not as if, according to the language of Roman 
 writers, the expiatory Sacrifice on the Cross were repeated or 
 continued on our altars. The Epistle to the Hebrews, and 
 the ancient Church commenting on it, as expressly negative 
 
The Catechism, teaching Real Presence, implies Adoration. 75 
 
 any such statement, as they affirm the continuance of the CHA.P. II. 
 pleading commemorative Sacrifice : " The continual remem- 
 brance of the Sacrifice of the Death of Christ, and of the 
 benefits which we receive thereby." 
 
 The Man Christ Jesus, according to the Catechism, is thus 
 virtually present, as the true Consecrator, in our Eucharist. 
 Still more distinctly are we there instructed concerning the 
 real Presence of His Body and Blood in that Sacrament, to 
 be first our Oblation, and then our spiritual Food. Com- 
 bining the several statements, they amount to this : the 
 Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in that it is a sacrament, 
 has always in it two parts, whereof the inward and spiritual 
 part is the Body and Blood of Christ; and it has two pur- 
 poses : 1. to be a continual remembrance, or memory, or 
 memorial before God as well as man, not a repetition or 
 continuance, of the Sacrifice of the Death of Christ ; 2. to be 
 verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful for the 
 strengthening and refreshing of our souls, as our bodies are 
 strengthened and refreshed by bread and wine. I cannot 
 understand these statements to imply less than a real and 
 substantial Presence of Christ by the Presence of His 
 Body and Blood; nor can I imagine any one believing 
 Him so present, and not acknowledging the same by spe- 
 cial adoration. 
 
 The rather, since, (if I may revert here to one of the prin- 
 ciples laid down in the beginning of this essay,) His Pre- 
 sence here is associated not only with infinite blessings, but 
 also with unspeakable condescension. He comes down in a 
 manner to offer Himself anew for each one of us in particular, 
 receiving Him worthily ; and that under the poor and ordi- 
 nary veil, or form, which we all know, thereby subjecting 
 Himself (I speak as a man) to many indignities. He comes 
 to be feasted on, not sacrificed only ; as a Peace-offering to 
 apply His own merits, not as a proper Sin-offering, as when 
 on the Cross He merited all for us; and therefore He yields 
 His Body and Blood, i.e. Himself, to be partaken of by us 
 sinners. As partakers of the altar, we are permitted to eat 
 of the sacrifice ; which sacrifice in this case is that Man 
 who is the Most High God. That, therefore, of which we 
 
76 Doctrinal Force of the " Amen" after Consecration : 
 
 CHAP. IT. eat, the same we are most humbly to worship ; not the less / 
 but the more, because in so giving Himself to us He is 
 stooping so very low for our sakes. The very rule of giving 
 thanks before meals, if we rightly consider it, changes itself 
 into a law of adoration when it is applied to this Meal. If 
 "every creature of God is good, and to be received with 
 thanksgiving," how much more that Flesh and Blood which 
 the Son has taken into His own Divine Person, and by which 
 He gives Himself to us. If we really believe that that which 
 He declares to be His own Flesh and Blood is Jesus Christ 
 giving Himself to us under the form of Bread and Wine, 
 how can we help thanking, and therefore adoring, (for to 
 thank God is to adore,) the unspeakable Gift, as well as 
 the most bountiful Giver ? seeing that in this case both are 
 one. We may reverently apply here the apostolic words, 
 " For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of 
 for that for which I give thanks * ?" 
 
 47. Once more. It is the unquestionable doctrine both 
 of the Old and New Testament, that, without prejudice to the 
 special official priesthood of the sons of Aaron in the one 
 dispensation, and the successors of the Apostles in the other, 
 all the people of God, with the true Melchisedec at their head, 
 are " a kingdom of priests, a royal priesthood," and every 
 one is a " king and priest unto the Father, to offer up spiri- 
 tual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ/' None 
 may doubt that the chief of those spiritual sacrifices is that 
 which causes all the rest to be acceptable, Christ Himself 
 offered up to the Father by the offering of His Body and 
 Blood in Holy Communion. Accordingly, the Christian peo- 
 ple have been instructed from the beginning to take their 
 part in that offering, by the solemn Amen especially, where- 
 with they have always responded to the Prayer of Consecra- 
 tion. There is hardly any point of our ritual which can be 
 traced more certainly than this to the very apostolic times. 
 Every one will remember S. Paul's saying, "When thou 
 shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the 
 room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, 
 seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest 7 -?" words 
 
 71 Cor. x. 30. * 1 Cor. xiv. 16. 
 
Patristical Authorities for it. 77 
 
 which, in a singular way, bear witness both to the share CHA.P. II. 
 (TO'TTOS) which all Christians have in the priesthood of Mel- 
 chisedec, and to the distinction which nevertheless exists 
 between those who might bless, and laymen (28*05rai), who 
 were not permitted to do so. S. Chrysostom's comment on 
 the verse is, " If thou bless in the foreigners' tongue, the 
 ordinary Christian, not knowing what thou sayest, and unable 
 to interpret it, cannot respond the Amen, not hearing ' For 
 ever and ever/ which is the end a ." Justin Martyr mentions 
 the Amen uttered by the people at the end of the consecra- 
 tion as a special circumstance of the Christian Eucharist: 
 " To the Chief of the Brethren is brought Bread, and a cup 
 of Water and Wine; which he taking, sends up (dmTre/itTret) 
 praise and glory to the Father of all, by the Name of the 
 Son and the Holy Ghost, and gives thanks at large for these 
 His favours vouchsafed unto us. And when He has finished 
 the prayers and the thanksgiving, all the people present, by 
 way of auspicious acclamation, say ' Amen V ' " And when 
 the Chief Minister has offered the thanksgiving, and all the 
 people have uttered their acclamation, those who are called 
 among us Deacons make the distribution," &c. Here he 
 seems to mark our common Priesthood by saying that the 
 Celebrator "transmits" the prayers and thank-offerings to 
 the Father; and his repeating the mention of the Amen 
 indicates the importance of it. 
 
 " What a thing it is," exclaims again Tertullian c , te to pass 
 from the Church of God unto the Church of the Devil ! . . . 
 to weary with applauding an actor those hands which thou 
 hast just been lifting up unto the Lord! out of the mouth 
 whereby thou hast uttered Amen to the Most Holy Thing, 
 to bear testimony to a gladiator ! to say ' For ever and ever* " 
 (which was another of the Eucharistical acclamations') "to 
 any but our Lord Christ \" And Tertullian, we may notice, 
 was the author of the famous saying, " Nonne et laici sacer- 
 dotes sumus ?" 
 
 How sad to think that so many of those who are called to 
 so high dignity should forfeit or reject it, either by uuworthi- 
 
 ' On 1 Cor., Horn. 35, t. iii. 477, ed. Savile. b Apol. 64. 
 
 c De Spectaculis, 25. 
 
78 Sacramental Drift of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 CHAP. II. ness, or by refusing to own the mysterious Sacrifice which 
 they are called to assist in offering ! But those devout com- 
 municants who rightly regard themselves as exercising their 
 share in the Church's Priesthood, will find in this yet another 
 reason for adoring thankfulness to Him who has so lifted 
 them from the dust, enabling them, with and under Him, by 
 the hands of one especially commissioned to represent Him,, 
 to offer to the Father His own Body and Blood. 
 
 48. But now, to confirm out of Holy Scripture the 
 sacrificial meaning of the words of institution, let us turn 
 first to the Epistle to the Hebrews, which may perhaps not 
 inaptly be considered, from beginning to end, as one grand 
 theological harmony, its theme being the pregnant saying, 
 That " the Law hath a shadow of good things to come, but 
 not the very image of the things d ." What is the difference 
 between a shadow and an image? Not simply that, both 
 being representations, the one is solid and stationary, the 
 other unsubstantial and fugitive, but this also, which, if I 
 mistake not, is all-important in our present argument ; that 
 the word " shadow" may be used of anything, which by ever 
 so remote an analogy or faint resemblance calls a given ob- 
 ject to the mind ; whereas "image" implies a real similitude^ 
 an actual copy more or less exact, of something definitely 
 known to the memory, or bodied forth by the imagination. 
 
 And "the very image" (avrrj r) el/caiv) adds the idea of 
 perfection as an image, instructs us that in this case we are 
 to regard it as the authorized and authentic copy, the most 
 perfect likeness of the thing represented which the material 
 employed could admit of. The phrase seems to answer very 
 nearly to the well-known philosophical form instanced in 
 avrodvOptoTTos, avro(TO([>La, and the like; as if one should say,, 
 avToei/c&v as complete an image as in the nature of things, 
 and according to the mind of Him who framed them what 
 they are, could possibly exist. 
 
 The word -^apaKr^p (=" express image," or " stamp,") in 
 Heb. i. 3, seems to convey the same idea, in reference to the 
 mystery of the revelation of the Father through the Son ; as 
 we read, " No man hath seen God at any time : the only- 
 
 d Heb. x. 1. 
 
The Law has Shadows ; the Gospel, Images. 79 
 
 begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath CHAP. II, 
 declared Him ;" the Son, to speak with the Athanasian di- 
 Yines, being the airapaKKaKros el/cav, the unswerving, unde- 
 viating, unmodified Image, of the Eternal Father. 
 
 Applying this exposition to S. Paul's phrase, we come to 
 some such result as the following : that the visible part of 
 the Gospel system, or at least some portion of it which the 
 Apostle was particularly speaking of, is not simply the shadow, 
 but the reflection, as perfect as can be, of certain invisible 
 things now existing in the heavenly places, of which the cor- 
 responding part of the law was but an "example," VTTO- 
 Se2>y/za, an indication by way of pattern or sample, and in 
 comparison a most imperfect " shadow." In the Gospel you 
 see the object itself, as in a mirror ; the Law could at most 
 present but a rough outline or sketch of it. And the Image 
 in the Gospel is of things even now in being, only far above 
 out of our sight \ whereas the Law was altogether prophetic, 
 foreshadowing ra p,k\ovTa a<ya6a, a state and system which 
 as yet had no existence. 
 
 This comparison the Apostle proceeds to apply to the yearly 
 sacrifices of the Law, especially those which took place on the 
 day of atonement. He demonstrates their shadowy and imper- 
 fect nature, by the witness, first of the Law which enacts them, 
 decreeing their annual repetition e ; then of the fortieth Psalm, 
 predicting their abolition when He should come who should 
 do God's will f ; and lastly, of the prophet Jeremiah, announc- 
 ing that entire remission which would be inconsistent with 
 the " remembrance of sins made again every year *" And so 
 he passes on to describe " the very Image" which has taken 
 place of these shadows, in words which answer to nothing 
 surely on earth but the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. 
 "We have h " boldness to enter into the holiest by the Blood of 
 Jesus, by a new and living way, which He hath consecrated 
 for us, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh ; and" we have 
 " an High-priest over the house of God." Here is yKcuvi(r- 
 fjubs, an opening by solemn dedication of a new way into 
 the holiest, and that by our Lord Himself, in virtue of Hi& 
 Blood, and by means of His Body, broken and rent, as was 
 
 e Heb. x. 24. f Ibid. 510. Ibid. 1518. h Ibid. 1925. 
 
80 The Eucharist, the Image of the heavenly Intercession. 
 
 CHAP. II. the veil which represented it ; and this in His office as Priest, 
 over God's temple. And then comes a distinct account of the 
 preparation, i.e. Baptism with repentance, Faith, and Charity. 
 For, 1. the "heart" must be "sprinkled from an evil con- 
 science, and the body washed with pure water;" 2. "the pro- 
 fession of our faith" must be " held fast without wavering ;" 
 and 3. we must " consider one another, to provoke unto love 
 and to good works." 
 
 What is this but the priesthood of the true Melchisedec 
 exercised on earth ; as in other parts of the Epistle the exer- 
 cise of it in heaven is described, either simply (as in the 
 places noted below *), or as identical with one function of the 
 Aaronical priesthood, the entrance of the high-priest into the 
 holy of holies? (as in chap. ix. and xiii. 10 16). If the Bread 
 and Wine is not mentioned in words, it is sufficiently implied 
 in these repeated references to Melchisedec ; and the omis- 
 sion itself is significant, shewing it to be the will of the Holy 
 Ghost that the worshipper should not allow his mind to 
 dwell in the least upon what he sees in this Sacrament. It is 
 strictly to be to him an Image, lifting him up to the great in- 
 visible realities even now going on both here and in heaven. 
 49. This view of the Christian sacrifice was gathered 
 from the Epistle to the Hebrews by some of the greatest and 
 holiest Fathers of the Church, using the liturgical services to 
 which they were accustomed as a commentary on that Epi- 
 stle. Thus S. Ambrose, taking occasion from a verse in the 
 Psalms k : 
 
 " Surely every man walketh in an image. In what image, 
 then, doth man walk ? In that, of course, after the likeness 
 whereof he was made; i.e., after the image of God. Now 
 the image of God is Christ, who is the brightness of His 
 glory, and the express Image of His Person. 
 
 " Christ, therefore, the Image of God, came to the world that 
 we might no longer walk in a shadow, but in an Image. For 
 every follower of the Gospel walketh in Christ, the Image. 
 ... Therefore, as the people of the Jews went astray, be- 
 cause they walked in the shadow, so the Christian people go 
 
 1 Heb. iv. 14; v. 10 j vii. 13, 1228; viii.1 7. 
 k On Ps. 38, [39,] v. 6. 24. 
 
S. Ambrose on Legal Shadows and Gospel Images. 81 
 
 not astray, walking as they do in the Image, and having the CHAP, ir. 
 Sun of Righteousness shining out upon them. O good Image, 
 not coloured with the implements of the painter's art, however 
 brilliant, but wrought out in the fulness of the Godhead !" 
 
 " k First, then, the Shadow led the way, the Image hath, 
 come after, the Truth has yet to be. The Shadow in the 
 Law, but the Image in the Gospel, the Truth in the heavenly 
 places. The Shadow of the Gospel and of the congregation 
 of the Church in the Law; the Image of the Truth to come 
 in the Gospel ; the Truth in the judgment of God. And so, 
 what things are now celebrated in the Church, the shadow 
 of them was in the discourses of the prophets. Their shadow 
 in the deluge, and in the Red Sea, when our fathers were 
 baptized in the cloud and in the sea. Their shadow in that 
 rock which gushed out in water, and followed the people. 
 Was not that, in shadow, a sacrament of this holiest mys- 
 tery? Was not the water from the rock in shadow as it 
 were blood from Christ, in that it followed the people who 
 were hastening away from it, that they might drink and not 
 thirst ; be redeemed, and not perish ? 
 
 " But now the shade of night and of Jewish darkness hath 
 departed, the day of the Church hath drawn nigh. Now we 
 behold our good things by an image, and we possess the good 
 things of the Image. We have seen the Chief of Priests 
 coming unto us we have seen and heard Him offering for 
 us His own Blood : we priests follow as we may to offer 
 sacrifice for the people, though weak in deserts, yet honour- 
 able in sacrifice. Because, although now Christ is not seen 
 to offer, nevertheless He is Himself offered on earth when. 
 Christ's Body is offered ; or rather, He is Himself mani- 
 fested as offering in us, it being His own word which sancti- 
 fieth the sacrifice which is offered. And while He Himself 
 stands by us, our Advocate with the Father, we nevertheless 
 see Him not now : then we shall see Him when the image 
 shall have passed, and the truth come. Then no longer 
 through a glass, but face to face, shall be seen the things 
 that are perfect. 
 
 ifl Go up, then, O man, into heaven, and thou shalt be- 
 k 25. 26. 
 
 G 
 
82 8. Ambrose and S. Chrysostom on Gospel Sacrifice. 
 
 CHAP. IT. hold the things whereof in this world there was the shadow, 
 or the image. Thou shalt behold not in part, not in a dark 
 parable, but in fulfilment; not under a veil, but in the light. 
 Thou shalt behold the true Light, the eternal and perpetual 
 Priest, of whom thou didst here behold the images, Peter, 
 Paul, John, James, Matthew, Thomas. Thou shalt see the 
 Perfect man, not now in image, but in truth : for 'as is the 
 heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.' " 
 
 More briefly again, in the book on the Duties of Chris- 
 tian Ministers m : " Those things then we ought to seek, 
 wherein is perfection, wherein is truth. Here is the Shadow, 
 here the Image, there the Truth. The Shadow in the Law, 
 the Image in the Gospel, the Truth in the heavenly places. 
 Beforetime a lamb was the offering, or a bullock, now Christ 
 is offered ; offered, that is, as Man, as capable of suffering : 
 and as Priest He offers Himself, that He may forgive our 
 sins ; here in image, there in truth, where with the Father 
 He interferes for us as an Advocate. 
 
 "Here then we walk in an image, in an image we be- 
 hold ; there face to face, where full perfection is ; because 
 all perfection is in Truth." 
 
 S. Chrysostom, expounding the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 assumes all along the substantial identity of the Eucha- 
 ristical office with Christ's continual sacrifice in heaven. 
 
 "'The priests of old/ saith the Apostle, 'serve to the 
 example and shadow of heavenly things/ What things 
 speaks he here of as heavenly ? the things spiritual. For 
 what if they are celebrated on earth ? they are nevertheless 
 worthy of heaven. For when our Lord Jesus Christ lies im- 
 molated, when the Spirit draweth nigh, when He is here who 
 sitteth on the right hand of the Father, when by the Laver 
 men become His children, when they are denizens of the 
 heavenly places, when we have there our country, our city, 
 and conversation, when we are strangers to things here, 
 how are not all these ' heavenly things ?' Yea, let me ask, are 
 not our hymns heavenly ? the very strains which the Divine 
 choirs of the incorporeal powers chant on high, do not we 
 also, here below, utter notes in harmony with them ? Is not 
 w Lib. i. n. 248. 
 
TJie Eucharist, all Heavenly and Spiritual. 83 
 
 our Altar, too, heavenly ? Do you ask how ? It hath nought CHAP. IL 
 of flesh ; the things presented there become altogether spiri- 
 tual. Not into ashes, not into smoke, not into sacrificial 
 steam is the sacrifice dissolved, but it renders the gifts set 
 out there bright and glad to look upon. And how are the 
 offices less than heavenly, seeing that unto the persons minis- 
 tering unto them are still spoken, from the time that they 
 were first uttered, the words, ' Whose sins ye retain, they are 
 retained ; whose ye forgive, they are forgiven ?' How is it not 
 all heavenly, when these have the very keys of heaven?" 
 
 A few lines on he writes : " See thou do all things accord- 
 ing to the pattern which was shewed thee in the Mount. Did 
 he see then as concerning the construction of the Temple 
 only, or concerning the sacrifices and all the rest? Nay, you 
 will not be wrong in affirming this latter as well. For the 
 Church is heavenly, yea it is nothing else than a heaven n ." 
 
 Again, comparing the sprinkling of blood, by which the 
 Mosaic covenant was inaugurated, with our Lord's Blood in 
 the holy Eucharist, he writes : " Our purification was not 
 bodily, but spiritual, and the Blood spiritual. How ? Be- 
 cause it flowed not from any body of an irrational animal, 
 but from a Body formed by the Spirit. With this Blood, not 
 Moses, but Christ sprinkled us, by the word which He spake : 
 ' This is the Blood of the New Testament for the remission 
 of sins.' This word, instead of hyssop, being dipped in the 
 Blood, sprinkles all. And whereas in that instance the body 
 was cleansed from without, (the purification being bodily,) 
 here, because the cleansing is spiritual, it enters into the 
 soul, and cleanses it; not being simply sprinkled over us, 
 but springing as a fountain in our souls. The initiated know 
 what I mean. 
 
 " Again, in the former instance, he used to sprinkle the 
 surface alone ; and the person sprinkled would wash himself 
 again ; for he did not, of course, go about always stained with 
 blood : but in the soul it is not so ; rather the blood mingles 
 itself with our very being, making it strong and chaste, and 
 training it on to the Unapproachable Beauty itself." 
 
 n Horn. xiv. on Hebrews viii. 5, t. iv. 507, ed. Sav. 
 Horn. xvi. on Heb. ix. 22, p. 518. 
 
84 Our daily Sacrifices One, not many. 
 
 CHAP. IT. On ch. x. 3, he writes p : "God ordained (saith the Apostle) 
 ~~ continual offerings, by reason of weakness ; and ' a remem- 
 brance of sins/ to take place. What then ? do not we offer 
 daily ? Yes, we offer, but it is by way of memorial of His 
 death. And this memorial is one, and not many. How is it 
 one, and not many ? Because it was once for all offered, as 
 
 that one which was brought into the Holy of Holies 
 
 'For it is the same [Person] whom we offer always; not now 
 one [sheep], and to-morrow another, but always the same. 
 And so the Sacrifice is One . . . Christ is One everywhere, 
 being in His fulness both in this place and in that, One Body. 
 As, therefore, though offered in many places, He is but One 
 Body, and not many bodies, so also but One Sacrifice. He is 
 our High-Priest, Who offered the sacrifice which cleanseth us. 
 That same we now also offer, that which was then offered, the 
 Inexhaustible. This is done for a memorial of that which was 
 then done. For, Do this, He saith, in remembrance of Me. 
 We offer not another sacrifice, as the High-Priest then, but 
 the same always. Or rather, we celebrate a memorial of a 
 Sacrifice/' Thus far of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 49. And there is another book of Holy Scripture, which 
 seems from beginning to end as if the Holy Spirit had in- 
 dited it partly for this very purpose, that it might impress on 
 Christ's people the greatness of Christ's continual sacrifice, 
 whether on earth in Holy Communion, or in heaven by His 
 appearing as our Advocate. It begins by thanking Christ 
 for having made us kings and priests to His Father <*. It in- 
 troduces Him in the first vision as the Son of Man clad in 
 priestly apparel, the long robe and the girdle ; and walking 
 in the midst of golden candlesticks, the well-known furni- 
 ture of the Temple r . It relates to the fulness of the New 
 Testament, such as it was completed at Pentecost ; for it is 
 the revelation given to our Lord, as to the Prophet like unto 
 Moses, of things which were " shortly to come to pass ;" it 
 describes Him once and again as " Him that liveth, and was 
 flead, and is alive for evermore 8 ;" the Priesthood which it 
 
 * Horn. xvii. p. 523. Rev. i. 6. * Ibid, xii. 13. Ibid. i. 18; ii. 8. 
 
Sacrificial Tenor of the Apocalypse. 85 
 
 delineates is that which He exercises in glory, not that CHAP. II. 
 which wrought out its work upon the Cross. He is here the 
 antitype of Melchisedec, not of Aaron ; or rather of Aaron 
 within the veil, not in the outer Tabernacle. His descrip- 
 tions of Himself in the letters to the seven Churches, His 
 promises and threatenings, are frequently associated with 
 that most holy place : as where He says, " To him that 
 overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna *," with 
 a probable allusion to the manna laid up by the ark ; where 
 He engages to give a "new name/' such as "Holiness to 
 the Lord ;" or to clothe His faithful ones in white apparel ; 
 where He speaks of having " the key of David ;" of setting 
 " an open door " before us ; of making him that conquereth 
 " a pillar in the Temple of God u ;" and finally, not as Priest, 
 but as King, of granting to such an one to sit on His throne, 
 as He on His Father's throne. 
 
 The second vision, seen through a door opened in heaven *, 
 and signifying also at its commencement that it related to 
 things which should follow on that opening, i. e. on the 
 rending of the veil, which is His Flesh, has its sphere en- 
 tirely in a place of Divine worship, call it Temple, Tabernacle, 
 or Church, the very sanctuary of the Holy of Holies itself. 
 There appears the mercy- seat, a throne in heaven, and He 
 that sitteth upon it; and around it the inferior thrones of 
 God's people, twenty-four in number twelve prophets and 
 twelve apostles as kings sitting with crowns of gold on their 
 heads; as priests, clothed in white raiment; lamps and a 
 glassy sea before the throne, and cherubims within and 
 around it. And it is all perpetual worship and thanksgiving; 
 the Evangelists represented by the cherubim sounding the 
 key-note, and the twenty-four taking it up with the most 
 solemn act of worship ?. Still the High-Priest does not 
 appear, for the mystery as yet is only of Creation ; but now, 
 as a sealed book, comes that of Redemption, and One only in 
 heaven and earth is found worthy to open it and loose its 
 seals. Christ, our High-Priest and Sacrifice, is "the end of the 
 Law for righteousness ;" and how is He symbolized ? not now 
 
 * Rev. ii. 17. u Ibid. iii. 5, 7, 8, 12, 21. * Ibid. iv. 1. r Ibid. 911. 
 
86 The Lamb in the Apocalypse, Priest and Victim. 
 
 CHAP. II. as the Priest, but as the Victim ; a " Lamb, as it had been 
 slain 2 ," but which now had ascended up on high to receive 
 gifts for men, i. e. the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Spirit, both 
 of power and of wisdom ; " the seven horns and seven eyes, 
 which are the seven spirits of God sent forth into all the 
 earth a ." Observe where He stands ; " in the midst," or cen- 
 tral point, before the throne or mercy-seat, the regular 
 station of the sacrificing Priest before the altar. For as a 
 King, our awful Melchisedec " sitteth on the right hand of 
 God the Father Almighty;" but as a Priest for ever He 
 " standeth on the Mount Sion," in the height of the heavenly 
 Jerusalem, "with his hundred forty and four thousand re- 
 deemed from the earth," presenting them by His own merits 
 <{ without fault before the throne of God ;" He standeth as 
 slain : and (mark it well) as slain He is adored. For this is 
 the order of the service. He cometh and taketh the Book 
 of Prophecy (received by Him for men, as all other gifts, 
 of His Father on His Ascension) out of the right hand of 
 Him that sat upon the throne. The mention of the right 
 hand is most commonly a token that mercy, as well as 
 power, is being exercised. The receiving, then, of this gift 
 of prophecy by the Mediator as a divine gift to the Church, 
 is the signal for the whole Church to adore specially Him 
 who so receiveth it for them. " The four beasts and four- 
 and-twenty elders fell down before the Lamb." Surely, 
 when the same Divine Being, the Lamb slain, receives for us 
 and gives us His own Flesh and Blood, His own Self, His 
 own Person, to be our very meat and drink, to nourish us to 
 eternal life, less than adoring thankfulness is impossible. 
 
 The ritual (so to call it) proceeds with circumstances which 
 keep up in a remarkable way the notion that the whole is pro- 
 bably an antitype of the Temple services, all but those which 
 were strictly penitential or atoning. There is the sacrifice of 
 praise, the thank-offering, for they have each his harp ; and 
 of prayer, the peace offering, for there are the " golden bowls 
 (vials) full of odours, which are the prayers of the saints b ;" 
 and there is, not the anticipation, but the memory of Christ's 
 death; for the new song which they sing in answer to the 
 * Rev. v. 6. Ibid. i. 4. b Ibid. v. 8. 
 
Liturgical Allusions in the Apocalypse. 87 
 
 call of the true David is, " Thou art worthy to take the book, CHAP. II. 
 and to open the seals thereof: for Thou wast slain, and hast 
 redeemed us to God by Thy blood out of every kindred, and 
 tongue, and people, and nation ; and hast made us unto our 
 God kings and priests : and we shall reign on the earth c ." 
 And to correspond with the whole burnt-offering, there is 
 the concluding act of adoration and homage in which the 
 Angels and all creatures join. All these are portions of the 
 Liturgy according to the use of every Church from the be- 
 ginning; in our own Communion Office they are strongly 
 marked; every one familiar with it will be able at once to 
 point out in it the Thanksgiving (" Lift up your hearts," &c.), 
 the Intercession (in the Prayer for the Church Militant), 
 the memory of Christ's death, and the Angels taking part 
 in our services. 
 
 Only the penitential and strictly sacramental passages find 
 no counterpart in the heavenly office, being in their very 
 nature remedial, and belonging to this imperfect world. But 
 there is no such reason for us to forego adoration ; indeed, 
 if we do, we seem to be turning ourselves out of the blessed 
 company which S. John is describing. For as he heard 
 every creature in earth, and under the earth, as well as in 
 heaven, giving glory in its own way to Him that sat on the 
 throne, in words which all the ancient Liturgies used at the 
 end of their consecration prayer ; and the four Evangelists 
 answering Amen, (for they represent the verbal worship of 
 the Church) : so he saw both them and the twenty-four 
 elders (namely, the whole body of Christians) begin their 
 service with the act of falling down- and worshipping the 
 Lamb, and end it with the same homage to Him that sitteth 
 upon the throne, i. e., as it may seem, to God the Father 
 Almighty. Refusing to adore with the one would seem 
 much the same kind of thing as refusing to say Amen with 
 the other; a thought which surely no Christian can bear. 
 
 As the vision goes on, it becomes more and more evident 
 that we are in a place of sacrifice the true Tabernacle or 
 Temple. The events associated with each seal are localized 
 in this way : the first four are marked by voices from the 
 
 c Rev. v. 9, 10. 
 
88 All the Visions connected with the Temple. 
 
 CHAP. II. four Cherubims respectively ; the fifth and seventh by the 
 mention of the golden altar before the throne, on which in- 
 cense is offered with the prayers of all saints by an Angel, 
 from a golden censer, and under which are seen the souls 
 of the martyrs. It has four horns, and from it, as from the 
 central spot in the holy place, having a measure of its own 
 apart from the rest d , the voices of prayer go forth ; in answer 
 to which come the great turns in God's providence appointed 
 for the due ordering of the Church and the world; and 
 from which conversely come the voices of holy resignation 
 and thanksgiving, acknowledging how true and just are His 
 judgments. Under the sixth seal, the true Israelites having 
 been sealed, the countless multitudes from all lands renew 
 their solemn service to God and the Lamb, this time stand- 
 ing, and not falling prostrate, with palms in their hands, as 
 on the Feast of Tabernacles, and in white robes, like the 
 priests in the Temple; and their blessedness is to be before 
 the throne of God. 
 
 Further on, when a great crisis and agony is at hand, the 
 Temple and Altar are to l>c measured by way of preparing 
 for it e . And in contemplation of a great deliverance, the 
 twenty-four elders enthroned before God fall on their faces 
 and worship Him with thanksgiving: "And the four-and- 
 twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon 
 their faces, and worshipped God f ." When, on the other 
 hand, fearful judgments are coming, the temple of God in 
 heaven is opened, and the ark of the covenant is seen&.. 
 The hundred and forty and four thousand who follow the 
 Lamb whithersoever He goeth, i. e., as it should seem, in. 
 counsels of perfection, they also appear before the throne, 
 the four beasts, and the elders, with a song of their own,, 
 which ordinary Christians cannot learn. 
 
 From the Temple in heaven goes forth the Angel who is 
 to intercede with the Judge of all the earth, to reap His 
 final harvest, the fields being ready ; and likewise two other 
 Angels, avengers ; one of them bearing a sharp sickle, the 
 other having power over the fire; and the latter calls on 
 the former to proceed with his vintage, the grapes of the- 
 d Rev. xi. 1. Ibid. xi. 1. f Ibid. 16. Ibid. 19 ; xv. 5. 
 
Sympathy of Heaven with Earth in the Apocalypse. 89 
 
 earth being ripe : in which we may observe how our Lord CHAP. II. 
 delighteth in mercy, for the harvest of them that are saved 
 He reaps Himself, but the wrathful vintage He delegates to 
 His ministers. 
 
 The sea of glass mingled with fire 11 thought to symbolize 
 Baptism with water and the Holy Ghost, on which, as on a 
 sure foundation, those Christians stand who are yet fight- 
 ing victoriously this also recalls to memory the molten sea, 
 which Solomon placed at the entrance of the Temple. And 
 the use of the present tense, " conquering/' not as in our 
 English, "having gotten the victory;" and their singing, 
 not the "new song," but the song of Moses as well as of 
 the Lamb, these are pregnant signs of their belonging to 
 the Church Militant, although they are admitted to share 
 in the worship before the throne. 
 
 The Angels with the vials or bowls of God's wrath come 
 out of the Temple in priests' apparel, because it is the 
 Church's prayer, " Avenge me of mine adversary," which 
 prevails with God to interfere; and therefore one of the 
 Cherubims or Evangelists, on the part of the Church, sup- 
 plies them with the stores of " deadly wine " which they are 
 to pour out. In the course of the ensuing plagues there is 
 a voice of grave exultation from the earth, from the Angel 
 of the waters, "Thou art righteous, O Lord," which finds 
 an echo (so to speak) from another Angel out of the altar 
 in heaven : " Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and right- 
 eous are Thy judgments 1 ." At the pouring out of the 
 last vial there comes " a great voice out of the Temple of 
 heaven, from the throne itself, It is done." One such 
 word besides, and one only, is spoken in the New Testa- 
 ment, " It is finished :" when He gave up the Ghost. The 
 approaching end of the Passion (so to call it) of Christ's- 
 Mystical Body, is announced by the same Divine cry from 
 the throne, as that of His natural Body had been from the 
 Cross. 
 
 In the following vision of great Babylon J, the scene of 
 the prophetic survey is changed for a time ; the mystery 
 of iniquity, with its workings, is to be described in detail* 
 h Rev. xv. 2. l Ibid. xvi. 5, 7. j Ibid, xvii., xviii. 
 
90 Babylon and its Ritual set against the Church. 
 
 OHAP. II. and we are taken into the midst of it, and are made to see 
 how craftily it is ordered so as to correspond with the mys- 
 tery of godliness : Babylon being set against Jerusalem ; the 
 beast from the abyss against the Lamb; the purple and 
 scarlet against the white apparel ; the names of blasphemy 
 against the new Name ; her foul adulteries against the mar- 
 riage of the Lamb ; the wine of the wrath of her fornication 
 against the river of the water of life ; the brand of spiri- 
 tual slavery in the forehead and right hand, against the holy 
 and saving sign of the Cross ; and most especially the wor- 
 ship of the dragon, and of the beast, his vicegerent, against 
 the worship of God and the Lamb. That is the main point, 
 the one worship contradicting the other. Mark, then, with 
 what significance we are invited as it were to return from 
 this fearful survey of Christendom, become heathen again, 
 (the beast's deadly wound healed,) and the judgments im- 
 pending on it, to the glorious uninterrupted ceremonial of 
 the Temple in heaven, such as it had gone on night and day, 
 from the hour of the High-Priest's ascension k ; the four 
 Cherubim and the twenty-four elders falling down as before 
 and worshipping Him that liveth for ever and ever; the 
 Mediator giving the signal for praise, and the answer made 
 with Amen and Alleluia. Only as the times on earth grow 
 worse, the joyful commemoration, the marriage of the Lamb, 
 is more and more distinctly announced, and the warning 
 against any worship but that of God, how suitable soever it 
 may appear even to a religious instinct, more and more 
 plainly enforced 1 . 
 
 The final vision of the Apocalypse appears to me (desir- 
 ing to speak with all reverent doubtfulness) to begin with 
 the beginning of chapter xx., and to recapitulate the history 
 of the whole dispensation briefly, but more at large in the 
 very termination of it. The thousand years on this hypo- 
 thesis will denote the whole duration of the Church on 
 earth, during which Satan is comparatively bound ; except 
 the little time of his loosing at the end, which will corre- 
 spond with the want of faith which the Son of Man will find 
 when He cometh. This being taken as a brief sketch of the 
 
 k Kev. xix. i Ibid. 10. 
 
The Apocalypse ends with an Eucharistical Feast. 91 
 
 working of Christianity on earth, the next section, ver. 4 6, CHAP. II. 
 would seem to tell something of what is going on during the 
 same period in the heavenly Jerusalem; according to the 
 manner of this Divine book. Observe, if it be so, how the 
 vision goes on realizing the idea of a perpetual spiritual 
 sacrifice, in which the souls of Christ's martyrs especially, 
 but with them also the souls of all who have kept themselves 
 unspotted from the world, not worshipping the beast, nor 
 enslaving themselves to him at all, are living and reigning 
 with Christ, as so many inferior Melchisedecs, priests at once 
 and kings : kings, for they sit on thrones, and judgment is 
 given them; and it is twice written of them, they reigned, 
 and they are to reign, with Christ a thousand years ; 
 priests, for it is written again, "They shall be priests of 
 God and of Christ." If of Christ as well as of God, to be 
 sure they adore Christ as well as God in the spiritual com- 
 memorative sacrifices wherein they are permitted to join 
 with Him. 
 
 And if those sacrifices, as the ancient Church always be- 
 lieved, are all one with our Eucharist on earth, then part of 
 our ritual, one should think, would be to adore Him also. 
 
 And what is the conclusion, the perfect consummation and 
 bliss, toward which these heavenly sacrifices are continually 
 tending ? It is a divine feast, " the marriage supper of the 
 Lamb/' the river of the water of life, and the tree of life. 
 You cannot read of it without thinking of what we spiritually 
 receive in Holy Communion, any more than you can read of 
 the services going before it without thinking of what we 
 spiritually offer there. By eating of that which is sacrificed, 
 we become " partakers with the altar m ;" both of the altar of 
 the Cross, and of the intercessory altar before the throne. 
 
 50. Two more points occur in the Apocalypse, both of 
 them suggestive, as it seems to me, of the substantial identity 
 of the earthly and heavenly sacrifices. The one, that they are 
 both in a certain sense to come to an end, at " the time of 
 restitution of all things." With regard to our earthly Eucha- 
 rist the point is unquestionable ; we are to " shew the Lord's 
 death till He come" For as Theodoret says n , " After His 
 
 m 1 Cor. x. 18. n On 1 Cor. xi. 26, t. iii. 238. 
 
92 Cessation of Sacrifice foreshewn in the Apocalypse. 
 
 CHAP. JI; coming, there is no more need of the symbols of His Body r 
 the Body itself being visible." Or in more familiar and 
 more beautiful language : " When that which is perfect is 
 come, the use of sacraments shall cease; because the blessed 
 in heavenly glory need not any sacramental remedy ." This 
 all will comprehend, so far as our sacrifices and sacraments 
 have anything of this earth. But Holy Scripture seems to 
 affirm the same in a certain way of that which we sup- 
 pose Holy Communion to be an image of. Concerning our 
 Lord's kingly office, whereof Melchisedec is a type, although 
 "of His Kingdom there is no end," it is nevertheless plainly 
 written, He shall in the end " deliver it up to God, even the 
 Father/' " The sceptre of that spiritual regiment over us in 
 this present world is at the length to be yielded up into the 
 hands of the Father which gave it ; that is to say, the use 
 and exercise thereof shall cease, there being no longer on 
 earth any militant Church to govern P;" and the Son as 
 Man shall be simply " subject unto Him that put all things 
 under Him, that God may be all in all." In like manner, 
 it would be no strange thing if His priestly office, whereby 
 He fulfils the other half of Melchisedec's character, were 
 declared to be so far at an end, as that the perpetual inter- 
 cession and memorial Sacrifice for the application of His 
 merits to sinners shall have ceased. And accordingly, in the 
 heavenly Jerusalem, he whose visions had all along seemed 
 to place Him in a temple, with its mercy-seat and altar of 
 incense, and all its mysterious furniture, now writes, " I saw 
 no temple therein : for the Lord God Almighty and the 
 Lamb are the Temple of iti." One is afraid to conjecture; 
 but something of the same kind may possibly be intimated in 
 the saying, " At that day ye shall ask in My name : and I 
 say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you : for 
 the Father Himself loveth you, because ye have loved Me^ 
 and have believed that I came out from God r ;" in the in- 
 vitation, "Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord;" in the 
 promise, " He shall gird Himself and come forth and serve 
 them ;" coupled with the other promise, " His servants shall 
 
 Thomas a Kempis, iv. 11. P Hooker, V. Iv. 8. 
 
 i Rev. xxi. 22. ' S. John xvi. 26, 27. 
 
The " Wrath of the Lamb." 93 
 
 serve Him, and they shall see His face." If there be any- CHAP. IL 
 thing in these surmises, then the Eucharist and the Com- 
 memorative Sacrifice have this additional mark of identity, 
 that they come to an end together. 
 
 51. The other point worth noticing is the significant 
 way in which " the wrath of the Lamb " is mentioned, cor- 
 responding, as it may seem, to the threatenings against un- 
 worthy receivers, and especially against such as Judas ; in 
 that they turn the Blood of the Sacrifice and Sacrificial 
 Feast into "the wine of the wrath of God." That wine 
 comes out of "the wine-press" which is "trodden without 
 the city 8 :" and by whom is it trodden? by the Son of Man 
 alone; as both Isaiah and S.John declare*: whether it be 
 for mercy or for judgment, the sins and sufferings of the 
 whole world are gathered into one heap, and laid upon His 
 head in Mount Calvary; there He suffered "without the 
 gate ;" there is that wine-press which He describes in the 
 parable of the Vineyard, as a necessary part of the mystery 
 of the kingdom of God. The contents of that wine-press duly 
 taken, are the wine which Wisdom, i.e. the Son of God, hath 
 mingled as part of her Sacrificial Feast"; they are the " wines 
 on the lees well refined," promised for the banquet which the 
 Lord of Hosts was to make to all people in His mountain, 
 the Church y ; they are the water made wine, the best of the 
 creation of God, provided for those called to the marriage 
 supper of the Lamb. But unworthily and irreligiously par- 
 taken of, they are " the wine of the wrath of God, which is 
 poured out without mixture into the cup of His indigna- 
 tion ;" they are the wine-cup of the fierceness of God's wrath 
 to be given to the great Babylon, God being put in remem- 
 brance of her w ; they are " the wine of the wrath of her forni- 
 cation." Sometimes it is Babylon herself who gives it them : 
 "And there followed another Angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, 
 is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink 
 of the wine of the wrath of her fornication x ;" " With whom 
 the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the 
 
 8 Rev. xiv. 20. v Isa. xxv. 6. 
 
 lea. Ixiii. 3j Rev. xix. 15. w Rev. xvi. 19. 
 
 u Prov. ix. 5. * Ibid. xiv. 8. 
 
94 The Threatenings in the Apocalypse imply a Feast. 
 
 CHAP. II. inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine 
 of her fornication y ;" "And the woman was arrayed in purple 
 and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones 
 and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abomi- 
 nation and filthiness of her fornication 2 ." Sometimes, in the 
 old prophets, God Himself gives it by the hand of Babylon: 
 " Babylon hath been a golden cup in the Lord's hand, that 
 made all the earth drunken; the nations have drunken of 
 her wine ; therefore the nations are mad a ;" " For thus saith 
 the Lord God of Israel unto me ; Take the wine-cup of this 
 fury at My hand, and cause all the nations, to whom I send 
 thee, to drink it b ;" " For in the hand of the Lord there is a 
 cup, and the wine is red ; it is full of mixture ; and He pour- 
 eth out of the same : but the dregs thereof, all the wicked 
 of the earth shall wring them out and drink them ." In 
 all instances it is the world, more or less, profanely aping 
 the Church ; the Sacraments of the Church turned into sa- 
 craments of the Devil : that special horror and sin of pro- 
 faning Christ's Sacrifice, which is in kind the sin forbidden 
 in the third commandment, is spoken of as committed in 
 the greatest conceivable intensity. 
 
 The threaten! n gs, therefore, of the Book of Revelation, as 
 well as its rewards and promises, suppose a sacrificial feast, 
 and the Victim worthily or unworthily received. They repre- 
 sent Blood as given to wicked Christians to drink, which 
 Blood is the Blood of the Son of God crucified afresh by 
 their sins ; they are guilty of it, and they receive it to their 
 damnation. This tends, so far, to confirm the idea that the 
 heavenly ritual in the Apocalypse is, in fact, our Eucharistic 
 ritual, and that the adoration there practised is a precedent 
 for adoring in the Eucharist. 
 
 On the whole, we should, perhaps, be borne out in affirm- 
 ing, after consideration of what has been alleged both from 
 natural piety and from probable interpretation of Scripture, 
 that the presumption is very strong in favour of such adora- 
 tion, so strong, that unless there can be shewn an express 
 precept to the contrary, a loving and thankful Christian 
 
 7 Eev. xvii. 2. z Ibid. 4. a Jer. li. 7. 
 
 b Ibid. xxv. 15. c Ps. Ixxv. 8. 
 
Appeal to Sacred Antiquity. 95 
 
 would practise it of course ; so strong, that such an one might CgAp. II. 
 with confidence apply to this cas.e the first half of the divine 
 canon, " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God," without fear 
 of inadvertently violating the latter, the negative portion of 
 the same, " Him only shalt thou serve." 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 WITNESS OF FATHERS, COUNCILS, LITURGIES, AND 
 CHURCH TRADITION. 
 
 1. BUT what says Christian antiquity? for it is here as 
 in respect to the Articles of the Faith, or the Canon of Holy 
 Scripture itself. As we could not admit anything into the 
 Catholic Creed merely upon its appearing to ourselves, ever so 
 strongly, that it was taught as necessary to salvation in Holy 
 Scripture ; as we might not insert any book, chapter, or verse 
 in our copies of God's Holy Word merely upon our own strong 
 persuasion of its being so good and Scriptural that it must 
 have been inspired; so also in respect of the Holy Commu- 
 nion, (as of other main points of evangelical worship,) our 
 own Church instructs us that, "before all other things, this 
 we must be sure of especially, that this Supper be in such, 
 wise done and ministered, as our Lord and Saviour did and 
 commanded to be done, as His holy Apostles used it, and the 
 good Fathers in the primitive Church frequented it. For, (as 
 the worthy man S. Ambrose saith,) * He is unworthy of the 
 Lord that otherwise doth celebrate that mystery than it was 
 delivered by Him ; neither can he be devout that otherwise 
 doth presume than it was given by the Author V " 
 
 If, then, we found a consent of Fathers and Liturgies in 
 prohibiting the worship of Christ's Person, present in the 
 Eucharist by the presence of His Body and Blood, we durst 
 not practise it ; our reasoning from Scripture and the coun- 
 sel of our own heart must give way : and if we found the 
 matter left open, though we might humbly and modestly use 
 
 d Homily I. of the Sacrament, &c., near the beginning. 
 
96 S. Cyril enjoins Adoration as a Tradition ; 
 
 CHAP. Ill, such worship ourselves, we could not' positively judge that it 
 was an error to omit it, much less could we denounce the 
 prohibition of it as touching a vital portion of Christian doc- 
 trine, i.e. the doctrine of the Real Objective Presence of 
 Christ's Body and Blood in that Sacrament. But the case 
 stands far otherwise : for, first, we have positive historical 
 evidence sufficient to convince any fair mind that in the 
 fourth century Christians did universally adore Christ so 
 present, such evidence as cannot be set aside without 
 greatly damaging the witness of antiquity in regard both of 
 the Creed and the Canon of Holy Scripture. Secondly, we 
 have nothing at all to indicate that such worship was a recent 
 innovation, or a partial and unnecessary development ; but 
 we have very much in the way of presumptive evidence im- 
 plying its existence among Christians from the very begin- 
 ning, although, for a reason to be explained, it is seldom, if 
 ever, directly enjoined in the Liturgies. 
 
 2. First, then, for the direct historical evidence. About 
 the middle of the fourth century, S. Cyril, then presbyter, 
 afterwards Patriarch of Jerusalem, wrote his Catechetical 
 Lectures ; in the last of which, instructing the newly con- 
 firmed how to behave themselves in receiving Holy Com- 
 munion, he says, "After having partaken of the Body of 
 Christ, approach also to the cup of His Blood, not stretching 
 forth thine hands, but bending, and saying, in the way of 
 adoration and religious ceremonial 6 , Amen; be thou hallowed 
 also by partaking of the Blood of Christ/' The word ren- 
 dered " religious ceremonial " appears especially to be limited 
 to that kind of worship which acknowledges a peculiar pre- 
 sence of Deity. That and adoration, taken together, seem to 
 be nearly equivalent to Aarpe/a, in its definite theological 
 meaning. The posture is evidently not specified, any further 
 than this that it must be either kneeling, prostration, or 
 standing with a reverent inclination of the body, venerabili- 
 ter curvi, as a later authority expresses it. 
 
 The ground of this injunction, the Real Presence, had 
 been repeatedly laid down by S. Cyril before, in words well 
 known, of which I will cite a few out of many : " Regard not 
 
and grounds it on the Real Presence. 97 
 
 thou the Bread and Wine as merely such, for it is the Body CHAP, nr. 
 and Blood of Christ, according to our Lord's declaration. 
 And what if thy senses outwardly suggest the other? yet 
 let faith confirm thee ; judge not of the matter by thy taste, 
 but by the faith do thou assure thyself, without any man- 
 ner of doubt, that He counteth thee worthy of the Body 
 and Blood of Christ V And elsewhere: "Approaching, 
 therefore, come not with thy wrists extended or thy fin- 
 gers open, but make thy left hand as if a throne for thy 
 right, which is on the eve of receiving the King. And hav- 
 ing hallowed thy palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying 
 after it Amens." 
 
 The tradition, then, of the mother Church of Christendom 
 in the middle of b the fourth century, was to receive with ado- 
 ration, just because it is the Body and Blood of Christ. There 
 are no subtleties, no explanations ; the simple word of the 
 Lord is support, exposition, reason, and guidance sufficient. 
 And it does not come at all as a portion of S. Cyril's own 
 teaching, but as a rehearsal of the established custom of the 
 Church of Jerusalem. " Hold fast these traditions unspotted, 
 and keep yourselves free from offence. Sever not yourselves 
 from the Communion ; deprive not yourselves, by the pollu- 
 tion of sins, of these holy, spiritual mysteries h ." He speaks 
 as earnestly, and almost in the same words, as he had before 
 spoken of the Articles of the faith : " Take heed, therefore, 
 brethren, and hold the traditions which ye are now re- 
 ceiving, and write them on the table of your heart." Then, 
 having rehearsed the Nicene Creed, he goes on : " This keep 
 with godly fear, lest haply any of you, being puffed up, be 
 spoiled by the enemy ; lest some heretic pervert any of the 
 things delivered unto you. Tor as a creed is laying down 
 the money on the table, which thing we have now done, so- 
 God requires of you the account of the deposit. I charge you f 
 saith the Apostle, as before God, Who quickeneth all things, 
 and before Jesus Christ, Who before Pontius Pilate witnessed 
 the good confession, that ye keep this Faith as it hath been 
 delivered without spot, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. The treasure of life hath now been committed unto 
 thee, and the Master looks for His deposit at His appearing \" 
 
 xxii. 6. * xxiii. 21. h xxiii. 23. l v. 12, 13. 
 
 H 
 
98 Testimony of S. Ambrose. " 
 
 CHAP. III. And it is observable that in both instances he follows the 
 phraseology of S. Paul k , who in one place warns us to 
 meet the approaching Antichrist by standing and hold- 
 ing fast the traditions of the Creed; in another, praises 
 the Corinthians for keeping in all points the " ordinances" 
 (marg.j traditions) as he delivered them to them. And it is 
 clear that the "traditions" he refers to relate to the public 
 service in solemn assemblies, and most especially to the Holy 
 Communion. The custom therefore of adoration on that 
 occasion, was not simply enjoined in the Church of Jerusalem, 
 at that time, but it was enjoined as an old tradition, in the 
 same words in which the Apostle had urged or recommended 
 the rules which he himself had delivered. Is it too much to 
 say that S. Cyril virtually represents it as being an aposto- 
 lical tradition ? At any rate, the mere fact of its having 
 been then a part of the rubric in so venerable a Church, is 
 a reason why it should not be hastily condemned as in itself 
 wrong or superstitious. 
 
 3. About 381, the year of the second (Ecumenical Coun- 
 cil, S. Ambrose, by desire of the Emperor Gratian, wrote his 
 three books " Of the Holy Spirit/' to prove and illustrate, 
 against certain heretics, the Godhead of that Divine Person. 
 In book iii. c. 11, he is dealing with an objection alleged by 
 them from S. John iv. 23, 24. Their argument was, if I 
 rightly comprehend it, as follows : " In the saying, ' The 
 true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in 
 truth : for the Father seeketh such to worship Him : God is 
 a Spirit ; and they that worship Him must worship Him 
 in spirit and in truth,' the words ' spirit and truth' signify 
 persons, through whom and in whom the Father willeth to 
 be worshipped." This they take for granted, and go on 
 thus to reason upon it : " That person through whom and in 
 whom another is worshipped is not to be worshipped him- 
 self. But the Father is worshipped through and in the 
 Spirit ; therefore the Spirit is not to be worshipped." 
 
 S. Ambrose ! replies to this, first, what interpreters in gen- 
 eral would say, that " spirit/' as is very usual, means a spi- 
 ritual grace, the grace of loving devotion in the heart, as 
 " truth" means a deep conviction of the reality of the un- 
 
 k 2 Tfcess. ii. 15; 1 Cor. xi, 2. 70. 
 
Principle of Adoration according to S. Ambrose. 99 
 
 approachable Godhead. (So S. Ambrose here takes it ; but ? CHAP. III. 
 according to the ordinary use of the word 'truth* in S. John's 
 Gospel, it would rather seem to mean the substance of the 
 kingdom of heaven, as opposed to the shadows of the world 
 and of the Law.) 
 
 But, secondly, granting that the words in question do really 
 mean the Persons of the Spirit and of Christ, then " God is 
 adored in the Truth, just as He is adored in the Spirit. 
 Either, then, the two are alike inferior, which God forbid 
 thou shouldst believe, and so not even the Son is adored ; 
 or (which is the truth) the unity of the one is just like that 
 of the other ; and then the Spirit also is to be adored m ." 
 "Therefore," he repeats, "if in this place they understand 
 truth according to the usual sense, let them understand spirit 
 to be spiritual grace, and there is no offence ; or if they ex- 
 plain the Truth to be Christ, let them say that He must not 
 l>e worshipped. But then/' he goes on, "they are refuted by 
 the doings of religious men, by the whole course of the Scrip- 
 tures. Thus Mary adored Christ, and is therefore ordained 
 the first messenger of the resurrection to the Apostles, un- 
 doing the hereditary bond, and the grievous fault of woman- 
 kind. For so the Lord wrought in a mystery; that where 
 sin had abounded, grace might much more abound. And with. 
 reason is a woman commissioned unto men; that she who 
 had been first to be a messenger of sin to the man, might 
 be the first messenger of grace. 
 
 " The Apostles, too, adored ; and even because they bore 
 the witness of the faith, they retained the office of being mas- 
 ters in the faith. The Angels, too, adored, of whom it was 
 written, And let all His angels adore Him. 
 
 "And they adore not only His Godhead, but also His 
 Footstool, as it is written n , And adore His Footstool, for it is 
 holy. Else, if they deny that in Christ the mysteries of 
 Incarnation also are to be adored, wherein we discern (so 
 to speak) express traces of Divinity, and the ways of the 
 heavenly Word; let them read how the very Apostles adored 
 Him rising in the glory of His flesh. 
 
 "Therefore, if it is no disparagement to Christ, that God is 
 m 72. n Ps. xcix. (xcviii.) 5. 
 
 H2 
 
100 Adoration practised in S. Ambrose's time. 
 
 Ill, adored in Christ, because Christ too is adored ; neither is 
 it, of course, any [disparagement to the Spirit, that God is 
 adored in the Spirit. . . . 
 
 "But let us consider how the prophet's saying, Adore His 
 footstool) bears upon the mystery of our Lord's Incarnation. 
 For we must not interpret the word 'footstool' by the custom 
 of men, since God is neither corporeal nor finite, that we 
 should imagine a stool placed for the support of His feet. 
 Neither do we read of anything to be adored, save God; 
 because it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, 
 and Him only shalt thou serve. How then should the prophet 
 give a rule contrary to the Law, nurtured as he was in the- 
 Law, and instructed in the Law ? The inquiry, then, is no 
 ordinary one, and we must very accurately consider what 
 * footstool' means. For elsewhere we read, 'Heaven is My 
 throne, and earth is My footstool.' Well, but neither may 
 we adore the earth, because it is one of God's creatures. 
 
 " But let us see ; perhaps the prophet means that that earth 
 is to be adored which the Lord Jesus took on Him in as- 
 suming flesh. And so by the footstool the earth is under- 
 stood, and by the earth the Flesh of Christ, ivhich, to this 
 day, we adore in the Mysteries, and which the Apostles, as 
 we said above, did adore in the Lord Jesus. For Christ is 
 not divided, but One ; neither, when He is adored as the Son 
 of God, is it denied that He was born of a Virgin. The Sacra- 
 ment, then, of the Incarnation being adorable, and the In- 
 carnation the work of the Spirit, as it is written, The Holy 
 Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall 
 overshadow thee, and the Holy Thing ivhich shall be born of 
 thee shall be called the Son of God, doubtless the Holy Spirit 
 also is to be adored, since He is adored who, as to His Flesh, 
 is born of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 " And to prevent any one's extending this to the Yirgin 
 Mary, Mary was the temple of God, not the God of the 
 temple. And therefore He only was to be adored who was 
 performing His work in the temple. 
 
 "You see that God's being adored in the Spirit is no 
 ground of objection, since the Spirit also is adored." 
 
 This long passage of S. Ambrose is here cited, not only 
 
Testimony of S. Augustine. * , ?. ; . 
 
 on account of the express and inevitable testimony which he CHAP. Tir. 
 bears to the custom of the Church in his time, " The earth" 
 {which we are bidden to adore) "means the Flesh of Christ, 
 which to this day we adore in the Mysteries ;" but also be- 
 cause that great theologian and confessor so clearly sets out 
 the principle and reason of such worship, according to the 
 analogy of the faith. The Body present in the Eucharist is 
 to be adored on the same ground which made it right for 
 S. Mary Magdalen and the Apostles to adore our risen Lord; 
 and it follows, from the unity of His Person, that to refuse 
 It adoration is to act as if Christ were divided, and not One ; 
 and he signifies incidentally, but not less clearly, that all 
 things and all creatures which are merely adjuncts of His 
 Person, not essential parts of His humanity, (as His Soul 
 and Body both are,) such things, how high and precious 
 soever, are not to be adored; no, not if they come incon- 
 ceivably near to Himself. The two short sentences relating 
 to the Virgin Mary bring out this caution very forcibly. 
 
 4. Moreover S. Ambrose's testimony is distinctly re- 
 peated by his spiritual son, S. Augustine. He, in his 
 popular exposition of the 99th Psalm, delivered in Africa 
 about thirty years later than what has been quoted from 
 S. Ambrose, i. e. about 414-15, adopts S. Ambrose's in- 
 terpretation; or rather appeals to it without all question 
 as to the interpretation of the Church. 
 
 "Worship His footstool . See, brethren, what He com- 
 mandeth us to worship. In another passage of the Scrip- 
 tures it is said, The heaven is My throne, and the earth is My 
 footstool. Doth He then bid us worship the earth, since in 
 another passage it is said that it is God's footstool ? How 
 then shall we worship the earth, when the Scripture saith 
 openly, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God ? Yet here it 
 saith, Fall down before His footstool; and explaining to us 
 what His footstool is, it saith, The earth is My footstool. I am 
 in doubt; I fear to worship the earth, lest He who made the 
 heaven and the earth condemn me ; again, I fear to refrain from 
 worshipping the footstool of my Lord, because the Psalm bid- 
 deth me fall down before His footstool. I ask, what is His foot- 
 
 Ps. xcix. [xcviii.] 5. 
 
Symbolical Meaning of "Adore His Footstool." 
 
 IIT. stool ? and the Scripture telleth me, The earth is My footstool* 
 In hesitation I turn unto Christ, since I am herein seeking 
 Himself; and I discover how the earth may be worshipped 
 without impiety, how His footstool may be worshipped 
 without impiety. For He took upon Him earth from earth ; 
 because flesh is from earth, and He received flesh from the 
 flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very Flesh, 
 and gave that very Flesh to us to eat for our salvation, and' 
 no one eateth that Flesh unless he hath first worshipped, we 
 have found out in what sense such a footstool of our Lord 
 may be worshipped ; and not only that we sin not in wor- 
 shipping it, but that we sin in not worshipping. 
 
 "But doth the flesh give life? Our Lord Himself, even 
 when He was speaking in praise of this same Earth, said, It is 
 the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing. Therefore 
 when thou bowest thyself down prostrate .before the ( earth/ 
 look not as if unto earth, but unto that holy One whose foot- 
 stool it is that thou dost worship ; for thou dost worship it 
 on His account : wherefore He hath added here also, Fall 
 down before His footstool 3 for He is holy. Who is holy? He 
 in whose honour thou dost worship His footstool. And when, 
 thou worshippest Him, see that thou do not in thy thought 
 remain in the flesh, and fail to be quickened by the Spirit ; 
 for He saith, It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth 
 nothing. But when our Lord praised it, He was speaking of 
 His own Flesh, and He had said, Except a man eat My Flesh,. 
 he shall have no life in him. Some disciples of His, about 
 seventy, were offended, and said, This is an hard saying ; who 
 can hear it ? And they went back, and walked no more with 
 Him. It seemed unto them hard that He said, Except ye 
 eat the flesh of the Son of Man, ye have no life in you : they 
 received it foolishly; they thought of it carnally, and imagined 
 that the Lord would cut off parts from His Body and give 
 unto them; and they said, This is a hard saying. It was 
 they who were hard, not the saying ; for unless they had 
 been hard, and not meek, they would have said unto them- 
 selves, He saith not this without reason, but there must be 
 some latent mystery herein. They would have remained 
 with Him, softened, not hard ; and would have learnt that 
 
Adoration taken for granted by the Fathers. 103 
 
 from Him, which they who remained, when the others de- CHAP. III. 
 parted, learnt. For when twelve disciples had remained with 
 Him, on the others' departure, they, as if in grief for the 
 death of the former, pointed out to Him, how the other 
 were offended by His words, and turned back. But He in- 
 structed them, and saith unto them, It is the Spirit that 
 quickeneth, but the flesh profiteth nothing : the words that I 
 have spoken unto you, they are spirit and they are life. Un- 
 derstand spiritually what I have said : ye are not to eat this 
 Body which ye see ; not to drink that Blood which they who 
 will crucify Me shall pour forth. I have commended unto 
 you a certain mystery; spiritually understood, it will quicken. 
 Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it 
 must be spiritually understood. magnify the Lord our 
 God, and fall down before His Footstool, for He is holy." 
 
 In this passage I would remark the same three things 
 which were observable in S. Ambrose ; the fact, the doctrinal 
 aspect of it, and the caution against abuse. The fact, in 
 His saying, " No man eateth that Flesh unless he hath first 
 worshipped;" the doctrinal aspect of it, in that it is an ac- 
 knowledgment, first of the Incarnation, and then of the Real 
 Presence. " Of the flesh of Mary He took Flesh, and in that 
 very Flesh walked here among us." Again : " that very Flesh 
 He gave us to be eaten for our salvation." Thirdly, there 
 is the caution against low and carnal understanding drawn 
 from our Lord's saying, "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; 
 the flesh profiteth nothing." Though it is "Ipsa Caro " 
 which we are commanded to adore, it is not "Hoc Corpus 
 quod videtis ;" the very Body, but not subject to the senses. 
 I would observe, also, that neither of these great teachers in 
 any degree grounds the practice of adoration upon the verse 
 on which they are commenting, but taking the practice for 
 a thing approved and granted, they allege it, both of them, 
 as pointing out the true meaning of that verse; and S.Am- 
 brose, in particular, as strengthening the proof that the Holy 
 Spirit is to be worshipped ; which proposition he was then 
 maintaining against the Arians or Macedonians. 
 
 5. It may be well to add a few words on the ancient ren- 
 dering of the verse in question. As far as I have been able to 
 
101 The Footstool, the Holy Mountain, mean Christ's Manhood. 
 
 CHAP. IIT. find, the phrase here rendered adorate, or "worship, 
 
 is in every place but three unquestionably followed by a noun 
 denoting the object of worship. When the place or other 
 adjunct is to be mentioned, the preposition used is b, or b$, 
 or the like as Psalm v. 7 ; cxxxviii. 2 ; Is. Ix. 14. The three 
 places which might seem exceptional, as to the use of the 
 particle b with the verb of worship, are Ps. cxxxii. 7; this 
 of which we are speaking, xcix. 5 ; and the last verse of 
 the same Psalm. The two former in the Hebrew are one : 
 "Worship the footstool;" "we will worship" ^brr Dinb, 
 " His footstool." 
 
 There remains the last verse of Ps. xcix., where the He- 
 brew verb and preposition are the same, only the noun fol- 
 lowing, instead of " His footstool," is " His holy hill." Now 
 in 1 Chron. xxviii. 2, David speaks of building a house of 
 rest " for the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and for the 
 footstool of our God ;" and in Lam. ii. 1, " He remembered 
 not His footstool in the day of His anger." Here we see the 
 Temple, or the most holy part of it, represented as the Lord's 
 footstool, in allusion, no doubt, to the Cherubim appearing 
 over the mercy-seat, and the Lord enthroned in His glory- 
 between them. But His Temple, He Himself tells us, is the 
 type of His Body, both of His natural Body, and of His 
 mystical Body the Church ; and concerning this latter He 
 says in Isaiah Ix. 13, " I will make the place of My feet/' 
 i. e. My footstool, " glorious." 
 
 Again, the holy mountain itself, as S. Augustine remarks 
 on this verse, is a signal type of Christ, as well as of the 
 Church : " What is His mountain ? we read elsewhere of 
 this mountain, that it was ' a stone cut out of a mountain 
 without hands, which brake in pieces all the kingdoms of the 
 earth, and grew, and became a great mountain, and filled 
 the whole earth P.' What is the mountain whence the stone 
 was cut out without hands? The kingdom of the Jews in 
 the first place, because they worshipped one God. Out of it 
 was hewn a stone our Lord Jesus Christ. What is 'cut 
 out without hands ?' born of the nation of the Jews, without 
 agency of man. That stone grew, and in its growth brake 
 
 P Dan. r. 35. 
 
The Fathers' Testimony to the Fact indisputable. 105 
 
 to pieces all the kingdoms of the earth, and it hath become CHAP. III. 
 a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. This is the 
 Catholic Church ; and do ye rejoice that ye are in com- 
 munion with it I" 
 
 If, then, according to that identity of Christ and His 
 Church which in some sense is continually affirmed in Holy 
 Scripture, we suppose "His holy hill" in the last verse of 
 Tsalm xcix. to be equivalent to " His footstool," in ver. 5, 
 the precepts in the two, spiritually taken, come to the same 
 thing a command to adore the Son of God in His holy 
 liumanity; and then most especially, when His Humanity 
 is not only most signally manifested, but also mysteriously 
 'Communicated to us ; where the natural Body and mystical 
 Body are made more entirely one than on any other occasion 
 here on earth. 
 
 6. It is obvious, however, that our appeal to these 
 Fathers does in no degree involve the correctness either of 
 the Septuagint and Vulgate rendering, "Adore His foot- 
 stool," or of the patristical interpretation of it. Neither 
 the fact of universal adoration, nor the connection of it with 
 the substance of the faith, depends at all for its evidence on. 
 that verse itself. The translation may be ever so incorrect, 
 and the mystical meaning alleged ever so fanciful, and yet 
 the passages will be available to demonstrate, beyond the 
 shadow of doubt, that our Lord's Body was then universally 
 adored in the Eucharist. There is no getting rid of such 
 sayings as "Caro Christi, quam hodieque in mysteriis adora- 
 mus ;" " Nemo illam carnem manducat, nisi prius adora- 
 verit." If they are genuine which no one disputes they 
 prove the fact : at least, as concerns the Churches of Italy 
 and Africa, i. e. the whole West. For we cannot conceive 
 -S. Ambrose or S. Augustine, the one in a public homily, the 
 other in a controversial treatise written by an emperor's 
 desire against a great and influential party, affirming what 
 any one might know by the witness of his own eyes to be 
 false. If their evidence is not to be. accepted here, neither 
 need it in the matter of infant baptism, nor of the canon of 
 Scripture, nor of any other of the many ecclesiastical usages 
 which they mention, and of which every one of their Chris- 
 
106 S. Augustine's Testimony to Honor atus. 
 
 CHAP. III. tian contemporaries must have been just as cognizant as 
 ~" themselves. In short, the matter is too plain to bear argu- 
 ing upon. 
 
 Nor ought it to be unobserved that S. Ambrose in par- 
 ticular implies the practice of adoration to be not only 
 general in his time, but to have come down from the be- 
 ginning. He does not say " hodie," but " hodieque ;" not 
 " now-a-days," but " to this day." The word is constantly 
 so employed, of things done now as of old, circumstances 
 and usages recalling old times, indications of uninterrupted 
 tradition**. 
 
 7. There is another well-known passage of S. Augustine, 
 in his letter to Honorafns on the Grace of the New Testa- 
 ment r , in which he expounds the 22nd Psalm from be- 
 ginning to end. When he comes to verse 30, one of his- 
 objects being to point out how that the grace of the New 
 Testament stood not in temporal, but in eternal promises, 
 he proceeds as follows : " ' All they that are rich upon earth 
 have eaten and worshipped;' by 'the rich upon earth' we 
 are to understand the proud, if we ^were right before in 
 understanding ' the poor ' to mean the humble. . . . For not 
 without significance is the distinction made between them, 
 in that having said before of the poor, They shall eat and be 
 satisfied, here, on the contrary, All the rich of the earth have 
 eaten and worshipped. For they, too, are brought to the 
 Table of Christ, and receive of His Body and Blood; but 
 they worship only, they are not also satisfied, because they 
 do not imitate Him. For although they feed on Him that 
 is poor, they disdain to be poor. For Christ indeed suffered 
 for us, leaving us an example that we should follow His steps ; 
 but in that He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto 
 
 i Thus the Dial, de Oratoribus in idem jus, vi adempta." Velleius, i. 4t 
 
 the works of Tacitus, c. 34: " Crassus, "Vires autem veteres earum urbium ho- 
 
 Csesar, Pollio, ... in early youth dealt dieque magnitude ostentat mcenium.'* 
 
 with their respective adversaries in As in each of these phrases both are 
 
 those speeches, ' quas hodieque cum distinctly expressed, toe old object or 
 
 admirationeleghnus." Cicero, in his last state of things, and the exibting frag. 
 
 Oration against Verres, 25 : " Ho- ment or result of it, so in the pas- 
 
 dieque (' to this day') omnes sic habent sage under consideration : " the same 
 
 persuasum;" heis speaking of a trans* Flesh which the Apostles adored in the 
 
 action which had occurred long be- Lord Jesus Christ, we, hodieque,' down 
 
 fore. Liv. i. 17 : " Hodieque in legibus to this dav,' adore in the Sacrament.'*" 
 
 Tiagistratibusque rogandis usurpatur r Ep. xl. 66, 67. 
 
Testimony of Theodoret. \ 107 
 
 death, even the death of the cross, the rich scorn Him, and CHAP. iir. 
 refuse to suffer the like. . . . But since God hath raised Him 
 from the dead, and given Him the Name which is above 
 every name, . . . they too, moved by the glory of His Name 
 in the universal Church, come to the table, eat and adore ; 
 but they are not satisfied, because they do not hunger and 
 
 thirst after righteousness ; for such shall be filled By 
 
 preaching the world has been moved, so that all the ends of 
 the earth remember themselves and turn unto the Lord, and 
 all the families of the nations worship before Him. ... By this- 
 enlargement of the Church even the proud, i. e. the rich of 
 the earth, are brought nigh, to eat ; and though not satisfied, 
 yet they adore" 
 
 Here it is much to our purpose to remark how the writer 
 again and again mentions the adoration of all communicants 
 as a matter of course, and universally known ; and also as^ 
 being a signal accomplishment of a prophecy; the very 
 terms of which prophecy make it co-extensive with th& 
 whole Church. 
 
 8. In the East we have, about the middle of the fifth 
 century, the testimony of Theodoret, published, as is sup- 
 posed, a few years before the Council of Chalcedon, prin- 
 cipally to counteract the heresy then arising, which denied 
 the continuance of Christ's human nature. The passage- 
 is well known, being constantly and unanswerably cited as 
 a testimony against the dogma of Transubstantiation, and 
 for that of the Eeal Objective Presence. 
 
 The heretic alleges, that as, by consent of Christians, " the 
 symbols of the Lord's Body and Blood are one thing before 
 the priest's invocation, but after it are changed and become 
 another, so the Lord's Body since His Ascension is changed 
 into the Substance of the Deity 8 ." The reply is, "Nay; for 
 it is untrue that after consecration the mystical symbols 
 depart out of their proper nature ; remaining as they do 
 in their former substance, and figure, and form, and being: 
 visible and tangible, just as they were before. But the in- 
 ward sense perceives them as being simply what they hav& 
 become, and so they are the object of faith, and are adored y 
 
 * Eranistes, Dial. ii. t. iv. 126, ed. Sclmlze. 
 
108 Theodore t's Statement uncontradicted. 
 
 HAP. in. as being those very things which they are believed to be. 
 Compare, accordingly, the image with its archetype, and 
 thou wilt see the resemblance. For the type must needs 
 resemble the reality. And thus that Body, while it hath 
 its former aspect, figure, and outline, and, in one word, its 
 substance as a Body, hath nevertheless, since the resurrec- 
 tion, become immortal and incorruptible. It is deemed wor- 
 thy to sit on the right hand, and is adored by the whole 
 creation, as being divinely named the Body of the Lord of 
 nature." 
 
 Heretics, it appears, professed to join with the orthodox 
 in every point of this doctrine of the Eucharist. It was 
 taken as an irrefragable, undeniable ground, from which to 
 set out in reasoning on other mysteries. And in respect of 
 the adoration in particular, the worship of Christ's Body by 
 all Christians in the Eucharist is studiously set down as the 
 correlative of the worship of the same Body by all created 
 beings in heaven. And the Church's seal was in a manner 
 set to this doctrine, at least by implication. For had there 
 been anything at that time supposed heretical in it, there 
 was no lack either of subtle and bitter opponents to expose, 
 or of sound and watchful theologians, like S. Leo, to correct 
 the error : as the most cursory glance at that page of Church 
 history will shew, in which Theodoret's name is one of the 
 most conspicuous, more by the restlessness of his accusers 
 than by any special doings of his own. In fact, it is well 
 known that he was both upholden by S. Leo, and in the 
 Council of Chalcedon restored to his see by acclamation on, 
 saying anathema to Nestorius ; in whose heresy he had 
 never sympathized, although from his good opinion of the 
 man, he had been long unable to believe that he meant so 
 much ill, and had shrunk from proceedings which he feared 
 might countenance the opposite error. But let Theodoret 
 have been what he may, the fact that, at such a time, those 
 very public statements of his remained uncensured and 
 uncontradicted, is an additional warrant for our believing 
 that on the Eucharist, at any rate, he did but express the 
 known mind and practice of the holy Church throughout 
 the world. 
 
Testimony of the Church in the Eighth Century. 109 
 
 " 9. Three centuries after Theodoret's time, in the course CHAP, in. 
 of the controversy on image-worship, we find each several 
 section of the Church bearing its testimony incidental 
 indeed, but not the less trustworthy to the doctrine of the 
 Real Presence, and the consequent practice of worshipping 
 Him who vouchsafes to be so marvellously present. The 
 parties or sections alluded to are three : the Iconoclasts, 
 who, as is well known, condemned not only the adoration of 
 images and pictures, but all religious use of them ; the Image- 
 worshippers, who enforced that adoration under anathema ; 
 and a third party, more moderate and apparently more 
 orthodox than either, who justified the use of images as 
 a means of edification, but protested against adoring them. 
 Each had its regular authentical expression in a formal 
 synod : the Iconoclasts at Constantinople, A.D. 754, under 
 the Emperor Constantine Copronymus; the Iconolatrse 
 (so to call them) at Nicaea, in 787, under the patronage of 
 Irene and Constantine her son ; and the moderate, or, as it 
 may be called, the Gallican, at Frankfort, in the palace of 
 Charlemagne, in 794. It is obvious that in the course of 
 their discussions the question of Eucharistical Adoration was 
 almost sure incidentally to arise; since that practice also, 
 in one aspect of it, might seem to sanction the worship of 
 sanctified creatures. 
 
 Accordingly, we find the Iconoclasts arguing on it as fol- 
 lows: Having laid down as a principle in a former para- 
 graph, " Where the Soul of Christ is, there also is His God- 
 head; and where the Body of Christ is, there also no less 
 is His Godhead*;" (which saying was allowed by their op- 
 ponents as a great truth, and the use they proposed to make 
 of it alone disavowed ;) they proceed to apply it to the Sa- 
 crament of Holy Communion. 
 
 "Let them be glad and rejoice, and speak out with all 
 confidence, who frame, and yearn after, and venerate the 
 true Image of Christ with an uncorrupt soul, and who offer 
 it for salvation of soul and body ; which Image our Priest 
 and God (having unreservedly taken to Himself, of us, the 
 lump out of which we are kneaded) did in His own Person 
 
 * Harduin, Cone. iv. 364 C. 
 
110 Testimony of the Iconoclasts. 
 
 CHAP. Ill, deliver to His initiated, at the time of His voluntary Passion, 
 for a most evident type and memorial. For being about 
 to yield Himself, of His own accord, to] His memorable and 
 life-giving death, He took the Bread and blessed it, and 
 gave thanks and brake it, and distributing it said, ' Take ye, 
 eat, for remission of sins : this is My Body/ Likewise also 
 distributing the Cup He said, ' This is My Blood : this do in 
 remembrance of Me :' as though no other kind or form were 
 selected by Him in the Church under heaven, which should 
 be capable of imaging forth His Incarnation. Behold, then, 
 the Image of His life-giving Body, so richly contrived, and 
 endowed with all honour. For what did the All-wise God 
 devise herein? Even to shew and unfold evidently to us 
 men the mystery wrought out in the dispensation concern- 
 ing Himself: that even as that which He took of us is 
 simply matter of human substance altogether perfect, not 
 having the lines of a distinct person with independent ex- 
 istence, no additional person thrown as it were into the 
 Divinity; so also He enjoined His Image to be offered in 
 that matter which He selected, even the substance of bread, 
 not representing the form of a man, lest idolatry creep in 
 unawares. 
 
 " Wherefore, as Christ's natural Body is holy, having been 
 taken into God^", so plainly is His adopted Body also that is, 
 His holy Image, as being by grace taken into God through 
 a certain sanctification. This, as we said, was the purpose of 
 our Lord Christ : that as He deified the Flesh which He took, 
 from that very union, with the sanctification which was His 
 own by nature, so also the Bread of the Eucharist, being 
 sanctified as a true Image of His natural Flesh by the coming 
 of the Holy Ghost, He willed to become a Divine Body, not 
 without the instrumentality of the Priest, who maketh the 
 offering by transference from that which is common to that 
 which is holy. 
 
 " Once more, that natural Flesh of our Lord, animate and 
 gifted with reason, was anointed in respect of His Godhead 
 with the Holy Ghost. So also the divinely ordained Image 
 of His Flesh, the Divine Bread, was filled with the Holy 
 
Testimony of other Sections of the Church. Ill 
 
 Ghost, together with the Chalice of the life-giving Blood CHAP. III. 
 from His side. This then is revealed as the true Image of 
 the dispensation of Christ our God coming in the flesh, as 
 was aforesaid; thus the true Framer and Quickener of our 
 nature delivered it unto us with His own lips v ." 
 
 Without assenting to all their statements and reasonings, 
 thus much one may gather from them in corroboration of 
 what has been said : that with S. Ambrose they applied the 
 expression of S. Paul x , " The very Image of the Things," 
 to the holy Eucharist y ; that they regarded the Bread after 
 consecration as not the natural Body of Christ, but yet most 
 truly His Body by some special dispensation * ; that they wor- 
 shipped that Body in, or with, or under the Bread, because 
 of the Godhead with which it is inseparably united a ; that 
 they could not worship the Bread, as such, it would be mere 
 idolatry, and therefore Christ would not have His memorial 
 formed into a likeness of Him; and that they considered 
 all this as connected with the doctrine of the Incarnation 
 in such sense, that worshipping Christ's Humanity under 
 any other image, would cause confusion in that doctrine. 
 Observe that these were the " Protestants " of the time 
 watching, as they thought, with a godly jealousy against 
 everything that might look like exaggerated respect to the 
 creature : yet how far do they go in enforcing the adoration 
 which many good men now religiously shrink from ! 
 
 Harduin, Cone. iv. 368, 9. aij/eu8f) *lK6va T 
 
 Heb. x. 1. Connect these sayings with the prin- 
 
 Calling it rV a.\7]drj TOV XPHTTOV ciple which they had previously laid 
 
 va. . .us OVK &\\ov et8ovs e7rtAe%- down, "Oirov <rufj.a XpiffTOv, e'/cet Kai fi 
 
 irap' aurov eV ry VTT' ovpavbv, 7) fle^TTjs, and the conclusion in the 
 
 V,^ eiKOfiffeti TT}V avTov <rdpKu<riv text, I think, can hardly be avoided. 
 
 wcijueVou . . . avr-f] ovv cbroSe'Sei/cTat For etyeuS^s eiKuv=" no untrue image 
 
 a\l/vd7)s fiKuv TTJS evcrdpnov OIKOVO- of a thing absent:" and to venerate 
 
 {j-ias Xpto-Tov TOV ecu rjfj.uv. the Sacramental Bread as an image of 
 
 z w(T7Tp rb Kara (pvaiv TOV Xpiffrov Christ's present Body, is to all but 
 
 arS}/.ta ayiov, us OewOet/' ovrcas 8rj\ov /col Nestorians a mode of worshipping 
 
 rb 6ecrei, tfroi rj eiKwv avrov aytx, us Christ's Body through or under that 
 
 Sid TLVOS ayiaapov %ap/ri ^eou/xe^ . . . image. Indeed, the very gist of the 
 
 rrjs evxapiarias &prov, us fyevSrj controversy seems to have been this 
 
 rrjs (^WTJKIJS aaptcbs 5ta -rrjs rov whether it was lawful to worship 
 
 ni'fvfj.aros ewHpoiT-riaeus ayia6- images with a worship passing through 
 
 Belov a-ufia euSo/cTjae ybfrttu. the image (so to f-peak) to the reality; 
 
 pavOllTuaav . . . ol rfr aAT?0rj it being allowed that such worship 
 
 . . . <r<&ntrot ---- T^ m i g ht be paid to the holy Eucharistic 
 
 , v\r)f ecupeTov, tfyovv &prov ov~ symbols. 
 oiav . . . . T'bv TJJS evxapiffTias &pTov, us 
 
Ancient Consent for Adoration. 
 
 CHAP. III. The opposite party, which proved the dominant one, ob- 
 jected to the term Image as unscriptural in its application 
 to the Eucharist ; in which, however, they were incorrect, if 
 S. Ambrose is right in his interpretation of Hebrews x. 
 They allowed the word ' figures/ avrlrvTra, but said it was 
 only applied before consecration, a most erroneous state- 
 ment, corrected in the margin by the editors of the Coun- 
 cils, both Roman and Greek ; from S. Cyril of Jerusalem, 
 S. Gregory Nazianzen and others b . But these very mistakes 
 being made in their eagerness to glorify the Sacrament as 
 much as they could, it is needless to seek testimonies ia 
 favour of adoring the Inward Part of it from them. 
 
 The Council of Frankfort, as is notorious, was very plain 
 and express in its condemnation of image-worship. Their 
 second canon is, " The question was mooted of the recent 
 synod of the Greeks, holden at Constantinople, touching the 
 worship of images ; wherein it was set down, that such as 
 would not pay service or worship to the images of the saints, 
 as to the holy Trinity, should incur an anathema. Our holy 
 Fathers above mentioned rejected altogether such adora- 
 tion and service, and that with scorn, and unanimously con- 
 demned it c ." And one of their reasons for rejecting it, 
 alleged afterwards to Pope Adrian, was, " It is great rash- 
 ness and extreme absurdity to be minded to put the said 
 images on a par] with the Body and Blood of our Lord d ." 
 Herein they adopt the argument of the Iconoclasts, whose 
 decisions they had before them, embodied in those of Nicsea^ 
 and shew that they regarded it as a matter of course to adore 
 Christ's Body and Blood in the Eucharist, since otherwise 
 the adoring of images would be no real intrusion on the 
 rights of that Sacrament. 
 
 10. Thus we seem to have evidence sufficient that 
 down to the beginning of the ninth century, i. e. through 
 all the ages of comparatively unbroken unity in the Church, 
 the Body and Blood of the Man Christ Jesus of Him who 
 is God and Man was adored as present after consecration 
 in the Eucharist ; i. e. Christ Himself was adored, as present 
 by the Presence of His Body and Blood. Neither the de- 
 
 b Harduin, iv. 372 A. e Ibid. iv. 904 D. d Ibid. 791 D. 
 
Objection from the Silence of the Liturgies. 113 
 
 pravers of the faith on the one hand, nor the maintainers of CHAP. III. 
 purity of worship on the other, ever seem to have found 
 any difficulty in that point. Who can help concluding that 
 it came down direct from the Apostles? especially consider- 
 ing what I will venture to call the strong presumption made 
 out in favour of it from Holy Scripture and natural piety. 
 It will have been seen that both S. Ambrose and S. Au- 
 gustine use expressions and arguments which would be quite 
 unwarrantable, unless they knew the practice to be a real 
 apostolical tradition. S. Ambrose's " hodieque," and S. Au- 
 gustine's " Nemo manducat, nisi qui prius adoraverit," would 
 be neither of them honest sayings, were they not uttered 
 under that conviction. And their arguments, grounded as 
 they are on the two great and simple verities of the In- 
 carnation and the Real Presence, are of course good for 
 all times as well as for their own. 
 
 Besides, it is hard to imagine how such a serious and 
 awful innovation could have made its way into the most 
 solemn and at the same time the most frequently repeated 
 of all Church ordinances, without some notice or discussion 
 at the time. Other questionable tenets and usages, such 
 as purgatory, the worship of the Virgin, and of saints and 
 images, and the papal supremacy, may be traced in Church 
 history, coming on by degrees, and some of them not with- 
 out much noisy discussion and conflict : in regard of each 
 one of them a time may be certainly assigned, when it was 
 no part of the necessary teaching of the Church. Not so 
 in respect of this rite of Eucharistical Adoration. There is 
 nothing in early Church history or theology, any more than 
 in Holy Scripture or in the creeds of the Church, to pre- 
 vent our receiving in their full extent the statements of the 
 fourth century concerning it. It is a case coming natu- 
 rally and completely under S. Augustine's famous aphorism, 
 "that whatsoever positive order the whole Church every- 
 where doth observe, the same it must needs have received 
 from the very Apostles themselves, unless perhaps some gen- 
 eral council were the authors of it e ." 
 
 11. The only plausible objection, that I know of, to the 
 
 e Hooker, Eccl. Pol., VII. v. 3, quoting S. Aug. Ep. 108, c. 1. 
 I 
 
114 The Liturgies have few special Collects to our Lord: 
 
 . foregoing statement, arises from the omission of the subject 
 in the primitive Liturgies, which are almost or altogether 
 silent as to any worship of Christ's Body and Blood after 
 consecration. We find in them neither any form of prayer 
 addressed in special to His holy Humanity so present, nor 
 any rubric enjoining adoration inward or outward. 
 
 But with regard to the first, the omission of special col- 
 lects to our Lord, that it does not negative adoration is de- 
 monstrated at once by the twenty-third canon of the Third 
 Council of Carthage, A.D. 397 f ; at which council S. Augus- 
 tine was present : and his express testimony to the uni- 
 versal custom of adoration has been here quoted at large. 
 Yet he was a party to the following enactment : " Ut nemo 
 
 "an precibus vel Patrem pro ^Filio, vel Filium pro Patre no- 
 minet. Et cum altari assistitur, semper ad Patrem dirigatur 
 oratio. Et quicunque sibi preces aliunde describit, non eis 
 utatur, nisi prius eas cum instructioribus fratribus eon- 
 tulerit." A rule remarkable on many accounts : 
 
 First, as a striking illustration of the great liberty allowed 
 for variation of Liturgies in the several dioceses, or even in 
 the several congregations ; since it implies, apparently, that 
 every Bishop and Priest might adopt prayers from any quar- 
 ter, taking good advice upon them. So much the more 
 remarkable is the concurrence of all the Liturgies in so 
 many material points. 
 
 Secondly," we see what danger there was under such cir- 
 cumstances of ill-advised language, unawares countenancing 
 the very gravest of doctrinal errors ; such as confounding 
 the Persons of the Trinity one with another, naming the 
 Son for the Father, and the Father for the Son. 
 
 And thirdly, (which is much to our present purpose,) there 
 is a direct prohibition, for whatever reason, of special vocal 
 prayer to our Lord, as also to the Holy Ghost, in the Com- 
 munion Office. How is this to be accounted for ? Perhaps 
 by recollecting that the rationale of the Holy Eucharist is to 
 be a sacrifice offered by the Son to the Father; it is the 
 transference for the time to earth of the great perpetual 
 commemorative sacrifice in heaven; and there might be 
 
 f Harduin, 5. 963. 
 
because the Sacrifice is offered to the Father. 115 
 
 danger of devout persons not considering tins, and obscuring CHAP. I IT. 
 the simplicity of the priestly act by intermingling prayers 
 to our Lord with those which are eminently and particularly 
 offered by our Lord; He, our Melchisedec, being the true 
 Consecrator, as well as the true Baptizer. 
 
 It might seem as though this African rule were far from 
 being invariably observed, for in the Roman Canon itself, 
 as Bishop Andrewes remarks g , there are four collects ad- 
 dressed to our Lord; and among the normal liturgies of 
 the East, that of S. James has four 11 , S. Chrysostom three 1 , 
 S.Mark two only k ; the Persian family, as represented, ac- 
 cording to Mr. Weale, by the Liturgy of Theodore the Inter- 
 preter, as many 1 . In the Jacobite liturgies, especially those 
 of Egypt, there appear to be many more. In one, called 
 after S. Gregory, the very prayer of consecration itself is 
 addressed to our Lord. But this seems to be a remarkable 
 exception ; and one might almost imagine that the African 
 canon above quoted, though many years earlier, was in- 
 tended to guard against similar invocations, as obscuring 
 the true doctrine, if not directly tending to error. The 
 other addresses to Jesus Christ above referred to, in the 
 several Anaphorse, (for I take no account here of the more 
 distant preparation for the sacrifice,) are most of them 
 private, for the use of the priests, or of each communicant ; 
 praying to be made worthy, or giving thanks after com- 
 munion, or (as in S. Chrysostom) deprecating the forfeiture 
 of the gift. As far as I see, there is no invocation of our 
 Lord that may be well called public, or congregational, but 
 the response of the people following the words of institution 
 in S. James' and some other Oriental Liturgies. "Will it 
 be too much to say, that in spite of these exceptions, the 
 clear mind of the Church in her Eucharistical offices has 
 always been to offer the sacrifice directly and immediately 
 to God the Father only ? Not as if we were ignorant how 
 inseparable the Persons of the Blessed Trinity are, nor as 
 if we were excluding the Most Holy Son and Spirit from 
 
 e Minor Works, Ans. to Perron, l Ibid. 127, 142, 148. 
 
 p. 50, Lib. of Anglo-Catli. Theol. k Ibid. 27, 32. 
 
 h p. 72, 74, 76, 79, (Neale's reprint, l Neale, Introduction, 593, 613. 
 1858.) 
 
116 The English Liturgy conformed to this Rule. 
 
 CHAP.III. being truly recipients of the Christian Sacrifice, which kind 
 ~ of error was once censured in the Eastern Church ra ; but 
 because Holy Scripture everywhere teaches, that it has 
 pleased Him so to order the economy of our redemption,, 
 as that each Person shall have His own work therein, to 
 which He is in a certain sense nearer than either of the 
 other two : e. g. in the mystery of the Altar, (which in 
 heaven is the mystery of Christ's Intercession,) the Holy 
 Ghost prepares the Sacrifice, the Son offers it (being His 
 own incarnate Self), and the Father receives it. And by 
 Divine instinct, as it may seem, the holy Church from the 
 beginning has been taught to arrange her liturgies in con- 
 formity with this. 
 
 12. Among the rest, it is obvious to remark that our 
 own reformed Liturgy does not contain any prayer or ad- 
 dress to our Lord, until we come to the Gloria in excelsis 
 at the end of it. All along, down to that moment, it is as if 
 He, the true Melchisedec, were condescending to officiate 
 among us as Priest, marvellously offering up Himself as a 
 memorial of His death ; and where He begins, as it were, to 
 re-ascend, then we begin to call on Him in prayer as well 
 as praise. With S. John we see Him in the " Lamb standing 
 as it had been slain," now taking His place in the midst of 
 the throne n ; and we salute and beseech Him accordingly ; 
 as our King, to have mercy on us, and to receive our 
 prayers in His own right ; as our. Priest, to receive and 
 present them with His own Eucharistical offering to the 
 Father. And then we lose sight of Him (so to speak), as 
 the Apostles did, behind the cloud of glory, where " He only 
 with the Holy Ghost" is "most high in the glory of God the 
 Father." He departs, but not without a blessing, which He 
 leaves His earthly priest to pronounce in His Name. Ought 
 not all this to be religiously accepted, as one of the many 
 providential tokens that the doctrine of Eucharistical Sacri- 
 fice is not abandoned in our Liturgy ? God forbid ! although 
 by reason of certain deviations from the received language 
 of early times, omission of some things, and transposition of 
 
 m Neale, Introd. to Hist, of the Holy Eastern Church, 434. 
 n Rev. v. 6. 
 
Adoration may be without saying Prayers. 117 
 
 others, the truth of the blessing is less distinctly taught than CHAP. III. 
 might have been wished. 
 
 13. The above would seem to be a sufficient reason why 
 congregational prayers and collects formally addressed to our 
 ILord should not in general have formed part of the Eucha- 
 ristical services. But we are not hastily to conclude that He 
 was not intended to be directly worshipped as there present. 
 We have seen that S. Augustine, while discouraging verbal 
 prayers addressed to Him, testifies nevertheless to the fact 
 of His being universally then and there adored, and declares 
 the duty of such adoration : " We have found out in what 
 sense such a Footstool of our Lord may be worshipped, and 
 not only that we sin not in worshipping it, but that we sin. 
 in not worshipping it." 
 
 For adoration is by no means limited, as some appear to 
 imagine, to "the saying of prayers." It was observed of old, 
 in answer to an Arian who would fain argue the inferiority 
 of the Holy Ghost from the saying, " that the Spirit maketli 
 intercession for us :" " To intercede or pray, is one thing 
 to adore, another. Whoever prays, asks, but not every one 
 who adores, asks. Remember the custom of kings : they are 
 commonly adored" with a civil kind of worship, "and not 
 asked for anything. Sometimes they are asked without being 
 adored." Religious adoration is of the heart, and not of the 
 lips only; it is practised in praise and thanksgiving, as well 
 ^as in prayer ; we adore as often as we approach God in any 
 act of divine faith, hope, or love, with or without any verbal 
 or bodily expression : neither, among postures, is it limited 
 ; to actual prostration ; kneeling, or standing with inclina- 
 tion of the body, (venerabiliter curvi?,} was always accepted 
 in most ancient times as a competent attitude of outward 
 worship. 
 
 14. The absence, then, of special prayer to our Lord 
 sacramentally present in the Eucharist proves nothing 
 against His being adored there; although it is not without 
 significance as an indication of the sacrificial import of that 
 ^ordinance. But what shall we say to the deficiency of 
 
 S. Aug. confc. Maxim. Arian. i. 9. 
 J Ep. of [Pseudo] Anastasius, ap. Cone. Labbc, ed. Culeti, t. ii. 1429. 
 
118 Rubrical Injunctions ; why rarely found : 
 
 CHAP. Ill, rubrics ? True it is that the extant copies of ancient litur- 
 gies are not without special instances sometimes of express 
 direction to adore, sometimes of what is unmeaning without 
 adoration : as in the Mozarabic, after the consecration, and 
 before the Nicene Creed, "the priest elevates the Body of 
 Christ, that it may be seen by the people 1 ;" and the Creed 
 itself is evidently repeated in the way of adoration. la 
 those of the Hierosolymitan family, the rubric and prayer 
 of S. Chrysostom run thus r : 
 
 After the consecration and offering, the priest prays se- 
 cretly : " Regard, O Lord Jesus Christ our God, out of Thy 
 holy dwelling-place, and from the throne of the glory of 
 Thy kingdom, and come to sanctify us, Thou that sittest on 
 high with the Father, and art here invisibly with us, and 
 vouchsafe with Thy mighty hand to impart unto us of Thine 
 immaculate Body and precious Blood, and through us to all 
 Thy people. Then the priest adores, and the deacon in his 
 place, saying secretly thrice, God be merciful to me a sin- 
 ner. And the people likeivise all reverently adore. And when, 
 the deacon seeth the priest stretching out his hands, and 
 taking hold of the holy bread in order to make the holy 
 elevation, he says aloud, Let us attend. And the priest : 
 Holy things for holy persons. The choir: There is One 
 Holy, One Lord Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the 
 Pather. Amen." 
 
 The corresponding portion of S.James' Liturgy runs thus s : 
 " The priest secretly : Holy Lord, who restest in the holy,, 
 hallow us by the word of Thy grace, and by the visitation 
 of Thy all-Holy Spirit ; for Thou hast said, O Lord, Be ye 
 holy, for I am holy. Lord, our God, incomprehensible 
 Word of God, consubstantial, coeternal, indivisible, with the 
 Pather and the Holy Ghost, receive the pure hymn in Thy 
 holy and spotless Sacrifice, with the Cherubim and Seraphim, 
 and from me a sinner ; crying and saying, (then he elevates 
 the gifts, and saith,) Holy things for holy persons. People : 
 One Holy, one Lord Jesus Christ, in the glory of God the 
 Pather, to Whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." 
 
 i Neale, Intrcd. to Hist, of Eastern Church, p. 589. 
 * Ibid. 63038; S. Chrys., t. vi. 1001, ed. Sav. s Neale, ubi supr. 635, 639. 
 
hardly needed in this case. 119 
 
 And so in S. Mark's, and in the other normal litur- CHAP. III. 
 gies. 
 
 Who can doubt that where the rubric is wanting in 
 the MSS. the rite was nevertheless remembered and prac- 
 tised ; the case being one to which the remark of the 
 learned Renaudot is eminently applicable : " To what end 
 write in the Office-books all the points which the priests 
 and deacons were learning every day by practice in their 
 ministry? Many directories of later ages, later than the 
 time to which the Protestants themselves refer the ori- 
 gin of adoration, contain not a single line on the subject. 
 And so it was in the Eastern Churches, where it was com- 
 paratively late before any rules for the administration of the 
 Sacraments were set down in writing, and the MSS. con- 
 sisted of prayers only V To the Eucharist, more especially, 
 this saying will apply, because of the peculiar reverence 
 which induced the Christians of the first ages, living so 
 much as they did among the heathen, to veil the sacred 
 mysteries from the knowledge of all but communicants. So 
 that even in the time of S. Basil, as is notorious, the very 
 words of consecration were accounted among unwritten tra- 
 ditions". And we know how commonly, in unauthorized 
 and popular reprints of our own Prayer-book, the rubrics 
 are apt to drop out. 
 
 15. Putting all this together, there is nothing in the 
 silence of the Liturgies, so far as they are silent, to outweigh 
 the distinct affirmation of so many competent witnesses, 
 backed as they are by intrinsic probability, that the Bread 
 and Wine being once consecrated, the Body and Blood were 
 believed to be present as the Inward Part of the Sacrament, 
 and then and there to be adored ; and that a certain moment 
 in the celebration was appointed in each Liturgy, sometimes 
 by rubric, oftener by unwritten custom, for such adoration to 
 take place. One very usual time, perhaps the most usual, 
 for this ceremony, was just before the priest communicated, 
 when, having completed the preparation of the holy ele- 
 ments for distribution, he held up one portion of them, to 
 signify to the people that all was ready ; at the same time 
 
 4 Liturg. Oriental, t. i. 270. u De Spiritu Sancto, c. 27. 
 
120 The Practice universal; the Manner diverse. 
 
 HAP. Ill, inviting and cautioning them by the words, " Holy things to 
 holy persons." In other cases, as in the Koman Liturgy, the 
 signification takes place immediately after consecration. In 
 our own, the same end is answered by the provision in the 
 rubric, that the bread must be broken, and the cup taken 
 into the priest's hands, before the people ; besides that there 
 is less occasion for it as a notice, when the Sacrament is 
 ministered in a tongue " understanded of the people." 
 
 16. It is a question seriously to be asked, Can any one 
 who believes in the Real Presence help adoring, at least in- 
 wardly, when he sees or hears either of these signals, or any 
 other equivalent to them. Such an one would need no ru- 
 bric ; and accordingly we find that even in the Canon of the 
 Boman Mass, though the celebrant is directed to adore, no 
 such injunction is given to the communicants or assistants. 
 It is taken for granted, as part of the unwritten mind of 
 the Church. And the same observation will apply to those 
 ancient Liturgies which prescribe nothing on the subject, and 
 perhaps, as we shall see by-and-by, to our own. 
 
 To me this seems to harmonize beautifully with the tenor 
 of the old services, and of all that are in unison with them, 
 the English not the least ; with the fact that the very Creed 
 for a long period was not allowed to be put in writing, and so 
 it came to pass that every diocese almost had its own creed, 
 its own wording for the same Articles of belief; with the 
 similar fact as to Liturgies and Church offices; with many 
 also of the great social rules and rules of discipline ; with the 
 many meanings, or shades of meaning, assigned to the same 
 words of Scripture, under the sanction of the New Testament 
 itself, and its way of interpreting the Old, and using the 
 LXX. version. In all these things, taking all Christendom 
 over from the beginning, there is an endless variety in detail, 
 presupposing a perfect unity in principle, such as one might 
 expect in His work, Who made the visible and material world 
 so various, yet so uniform. And thus, as well as by its free- 
 ing us from sin, is the Gospel eminently a law of liberty. So 
 much the more striking is it, when in opinions, or interpre- 
 tations, or formulae, or usages, which at first appear substan- 
 tially diverse, or even inconsistent, we detect a common ele- 
 
Providential Course of Doctrine touching the Eucharist. 121 
 
 ment animating all, which binds and reconciles all together. CHAP. Ill, 
 Such is the doctrine of the Real Objective Presence in re- 
 spect of everything in the Eucharistic offices and traditions, 
 and eminently in respect of the practice of Adoration. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 1. ALAS! that this great, and blessed, and simple truth 
 should have been so marred in its visible effect, and too often, 
 we may fear, in its intended work on men's souls, by the 
 restless curiosity of mere investigators, or the mistaken policy 
 of Church governors ; the one speculating, the other de- 
 fining, on this and other subjects, beyond the lines drawn by 
 Holy Scripture and sacred Antiquity. But this process, be 
 it observed, kept time in a manner with the steps of the un- 
 happy division which the great Enemy was then working out 
 between the Eastern and Western portions of the Church. 
 And so it has come to pass, that for none of the present cor- 
 ruptions, however widely diffused, can it be truly said that 
 there was at any time even a fair semblance of oecumenical 
 authority. 
 
 There is no need here to go into the history of Transub- 
 stantiation ; the introduction of which, erroneously supposed 
 the only alternative with an indevout rationalism, has proved 
 undoubtedly, if not the origin, at least the main aggravation 
 of all our present difficulties on the subject of Holy Commu- 
 nion. But it may be instructive to remark the difference be- 
 tween the course of synodical decision in the Western Church 
 on this point, and the manner in which the full doctrine of 
 the Incarnation had been affirmed by the great Councils in 
 opposition to the conflicting heresies of the fifth century. The 
 undivided Church in the time of Ephesus and Chalcedon was 
 equally on its guard against Nestorius denying the unity of 
 our Lord's Person, and Eutyches denying the truth of His 
 abiding human nature: the Scripture and the Holy Fathers, it 
 
122 The Roman View damages proper Adoration : 
 
 CHAP. IV. was found and authoritatively declared, were as express and 
 earnest on the one point as on the other. Between the two, 
 the way was marked out without swerving to the right hand 
 or to the left, and all Christendom accepted their witness, 
 and has repeated it all along; with how great a blessing, 
 none may yet know. Who can say how much of the unity 
 in belief, which, blessed be God, as yet prevails among us in 
 spite of so many fretful hearts and undisciplined minds, is 
 due to those solemn assemblies, under the guidance of God's 
 good Spirit? 
 
 So it has fared with the doctrine of the Incarnation itself; 
 but it has been far otherwise with the doctrine of the Eucha- 
 rist, the extension, as it has been often called, of the Incar- 
 nation, and corresponding to it by a very remarkable ana- 
 logy. Instead of maintaining with the Fathers the full and 
 true co-existence of both parts of the Sacrament, the Western, 
 Church, from about the time of the great schism, has allowed 
 and cherished, and finally enforced by anathema, a notion, 
 apparently corresponding to Eutychianism, that the earthly 
 and inferior part is quite swallowed up of the higher, and 
 ceases to be. 
 
 2. Let it be granted that this view as an English 
 Churchman, I must be allowed to call it this error unlike 
 the opposite one, which would make the Sacrament a shadow* 
 " destitute, empty, and void of Christ," has nothing in it that 
 seems immediately profane, and shocking to a religious mind; 
 nay, more, that it is fully consistent with the very highest 
 contemplations and devoutest breathings of saintly love, as 
 who can doubt, that has only heard the names of Thomas 
 a Kempis, S. Bernard, S. Anselm, and a hundred others? 
 Yet still, if it be an error, a one-sided formula, a half-truth,, 
 on so grave a point of Christian doctrine, it must be an ex- 
 ceeding calamity for any portion of the Church to have com- 
 mitted itself to it ; and in process of time it will be sure, one 
 way or another, to betray itself by the appropriate results of 
 error: the tree will be known by its fruits. And Transub- 
 stantiation, like certain views which have found more of a 
 home among ourselves, the views (e. g.) of Calvin or of Wes- 
 ley, however it may have commended itself to many, in their 
 
tempting all sorts to theorize in their Worship. 123 
 
 deep longing to draw as near as possible to their Saviour, CHAP. IV. 
 must be judged, on a wide view of Church history, and look- 
 ing to the average sort of believers, to have borne on the 
 whole very evil fruit, both where it is received and where it 
 is not. Within the Roman obedience it has been a scandal 
 to the simpler sort by " giving occasion to many super- 
 stitions," it being so exceedingly hard for them to separate it 
 from a base and carnal idea of the Holy Sacrament. Among 
 us, and everywhere in the West apart from Rome, it has 
 proved a still greater scandal ; it is the one chief reason of 
 the prejudice which in these later ages has prevailed, and is 
 prevailing (God grant it may not always prevail), against the 
 true and primitive doctrine, which is mistaken for it, like 
 Jehoshaphat in Ahab's robes. 
 
 3. It is obvious how this prejudice must tell against the 
 rite of adoration especially. Before the time of Paschasius, 
 when it was said, as by S. Augustine or S. Cyril, "the Body of 
 Christ in the Sacrament is to be worshipped," the faithful had 
 been plainly taught that not the outward sign was meant, but 
 that of which the bread was the veil. They no more thought 
 of adoring the bread, as such, than S. Mary Magdalen and 
 the Apostles thought of adoring our Lord's garments, when. 
 He appeared to them after His resurrection. They worship- 
 ped His Divine Person present by the presence of His glori- 
 fied Humanity : there was no call or need if they were de- 
 vout, there was neither time nor wish to think at all of the 
 manner of the Presence, the earthly substances by which He 
 was pleased to veil Himself. " They had at that time a sea 
 of comfort and joy to wade in, and we by that which they 
 did are taught that this heavenly food is given for the satis- 
 fying of our empty souls, and not for the exercising of our 
 curious and subtle wits." But the teaching of Transub- 
 stantiation, if realized at the time, forces men to think of the 
 manner of the Presence, and, to subtle minds, must prove so- 
 far a hindrance to devotion, if not a temptation to unbelief. 
 So that even among those who most firmly believed it, the 
 refuge of loving hearts has always been to turn away from 
 it as a topic of Eucharistical meditation, and revert uncon- 
 sciously to the simpler faith of the times before such points 
 
124 An Instance of Harm by over-explaining. 
 
 CHAP. IV. had been discussed ; as we see, (for example,) in the last 
 book of Thomas d Kempis. And it has been just the same 
 all along on the other side, with those who feel it a mat- 
 ter of conscience to be denying or doubting that mode of 
 Presence'. They have hard work to abstain from thinking 
 of their denials and doubtings, when they most wish simply 
 to receive the blessing. Thus Hooker himself, after depre- 
 cating " the exercise of our curious and subtile wits" on the 
 holy Eucharist, propounds in the very next paragraph an 
 explanation of the words of institution, which, whether it be 
 more or less correct than the Roman, is surely not less 
 " curious" or scholastic : 
 
 " My Body, the Communion of My Body ; My Blood, the 
 Communion of My Blood. Is there anything more expedite, 
 clear, and easy, than that, as Christ is termed our life be- 
 cause through Him we obtain life, so the parts of this Sa- 
 crament are His Body and Blood, for that they are so to 
 us, who receiving them, receive that by them which they 
 are termed ? The Bread and Cup are His Body and Blood, 
 because they are causes instrumental upon the receipt 
 whereof the participation of His Body and Blood ensueth. 
 For that which produceth any certain effect is not vainly 
 nor improperly said to be that very effect whereunto 
 it tendeth. Every cause is in the effect which groweth 
 from it." 
 
 The truth is, if one may venture to say it of one so wise, 
 holy, and venerable, that on this subject, as on the Apo- 
 stolical Succession, and some others, Hooker was biassed by 
 his respect for Calvin and some of his school, in whose 
 opinions he had been educated, and by sympathy with the 
 most suffering portion of the foreign Reformers, so as in- 
 stinctively and unconsciously to hide his eyes from the un- 
 questionable consent of antiquity, and to make allowances 
 which, logically carried out, would lead to conclusions such 
 as the ancient Church never could have endured. In this 
 part of his treatise especially, many a thoughtful reader has 
 doubtless wondered, not without some disappointment, at 
 the manner in which he winds up his enunciation of the 
 doctrine of the Eucharist, after fearlessly pouring himself 
 
Hooker's Words to be taken in Spirit, not in Letter. 125 
 
 out in the most glowing words and most transcendental CHAP. IV. 
 thoughts of the deepest and most eloquent of the Fathers : 
 " The Real Presence of Christ's most blessed Body and Blood 
 is not therefore to be sought for in the Sacrament, but in 
 the worthy receiver of the Sacrament." Why ? not because 
 we are so warned by consent of the ancient Church ; not 
 because the words of Holy Scripture are irreconcilable with 
 such an opinion ; but because, as it may seem to us, all the 
 purposes of the holy Eucharist may be answered without 
 supposing an objective Presence ; an argument which, be- 
 sides other difficulties, obviously assumes that we know a 
 priori all the purposes of the holy Eucharist. At the same 
 time, it should be carefully observed that he does not enforce 
 this view as necessary, nor say anything exclusive against 
 the Lutherans, but only that " they ought not to stand in it 
 as in a matter of faith, nor to make so high accompt of it." 
 And then how strikingly beautiful is the conclusion to 
 which, after all, he recurs, his mind floating upward again to 
 its congenial element of love ! and how aptly do his words 
 shadow forth the impression which would be left on a duti- 
 ful heart by the simple consideration of what Holy Scripture 
 and ancient authors wrote of the tenet which he shrank 
 from the Real Objective Presence in Sacrifice as well as in 
 Sacrament, before the unhappy refinement of Transubstan- 
 tiation came in ! " Where God Himself doth speak those 
 things, which either for height and sublimity of matter, or 
 else for secrecy of performance, we are not able to reach 
 unto, as we may be ignorant without danger, so it can be no 
 disgrace to confess we are ignorant. Such as love piety will 
 as much as in them lieth know all things that God com- 
 mandeth, but especially the duties of service which they owe 
 to God. As for His dark and hidden works, they prefer, as 
 becometh them in such cases, simplicity of faith before that 
 knowledge, which curiously sifting what it should adore, and 
 disputing too boldly of that which the wit of man cannot 
 search, chilleth for the most part all warmth of zeal, and 
 bringeth soundness of belief many times into great hazard." 
 It cannot surely be wrong to wish that, in this spirit, the 
 spirit of holy humility, all priests may speak, and all Chris- 
 
126 Fear of Idolatry ; how to be obviated: 
 
 CHAP. IV- tians hear, the holy words, "Tins is MY BODY; THIS is MY 
 BLOOD;" and if they so speak and hear, how can they help 
 inwardly adoring, even at the very time of consecration? 
 seeing that He does not say, " This will to you and in you 
 be My Body;" that is the gloss, not the text; but He 
 says simply and positively, " This is My Body ;" and again, 
 " This is My Blood." 
 
 4. But you fear to surrender yourself to this impulse 
 you. fear to adore before you eat lest you should be un- 
 awares committing yourself to a kind of idolatry, in wor- 
 shipping Bread and Wine; or to a gross material conceit, 
 like that which our Lord reproved in the multitude at Caper- 
 naum ; as though, if the sight were not miraculously with- 
 held, they would behold Him corporally in His human form 
 and features ; and how then could they dare partake of Him? 
 We have too much reason to believe that the latter of these 
 errors has been, perhaps is still, not uncommon among the 
 uneducated in neighbouring countries ; and as to the former, 
 it is involved in the very notion of Transubstantiation, sup- 
 posing that notion untrue. To worship the outward part of 
 the Sacrament must, of course, (to use a school distinction,) 
 be material idolatry in their eyes who have learned and be- 
 lieve that it is true Bread and Wine; although in those 
 whose faith teaches them that there is really no outward 
 part, that the holy Body and Blood are alone present, such 
 worship can hardly be formal idolatry, nor in any degree (we 
 may hope) incur the guilt thereof. No wonder, however, 
 if the mind, haunted by this idea, shrink more or less from 
 the thought of any worship in the Eucharist. And yet, when, 
 we reflect on it in earnest, how can the heart help wor- 
 shipping? The remedy must be, to place yourself, by God's 
 help, with courageous faith, in the same posture of mind 
 with the ancient undivided Church before these theories 
 were invented; simply to adore, from simple conviction of 
 Christ's presence. For many generations all good Chris- 
 tians did so without fear or scruple : not because they were 
 unaware of the possibility of these later errors, for they were 
 distinctly warned against them by their teachers ; Theodoret, 
 as against Transubstantiation, declaring that " the mystical 
 
not by forbidding all adoration. 127 
 
 symbols in no wise depart from their proper nature ; for CHAP. IV. 
 they remain in their former substance, and figure, and kind, 
 and are visible and tangible, just as they were before x ;" 
 S. Augustine, as against Carnal Presence, pointing to our 
 Lord's cautionary words : "When thou adorest Him, lest thy 
 mind linger in the flesh and thou fail to be quickened by 
 the Spirit, ' It is the Spirit/ saith He, ' that quickeneth, the 
 flesh profiteth nothing/ . . . Some of His disciples . . . took 
 foolishly what He had said ; they had carnal thoughts of it, 
 and imagined that our Lord was to separate certain par- 
 ticles from His own Body, to give unto them. . . . But the 
 Twelve having remained, He instructed them, and said unto 
 them, 'The words that I speak unto you are spirit and 
 life.' Understand what I have said to you spiritually; it 
 is not this Body which you see, that you are to eat, nor to 
 drink that Blood which they will shed who shall crucify Me. 
 It is a certain Sacrament which I have entrusted to you; 
 spiritually understood it will give you life. Though it must 
 needs be visibly celebrated, it is meet to be thought of fc as 
 something invisible y." 
 
 Theodoret and S. Augustine, be it observed, are two of the 
 most express witnesses to the adoration of Christ's Body in 
 the Eucharist. 
 
 5. It will be said it has been^said again and again; 
 it was the primary argument of those who were accounted 
 "sober Churchmen" a century ago that it might be very well 
 for the primitive Christians to speak such language as they 
 did, and practise such ceremonies, but that the mischiefs in 
 which that course eventually issued were a providential warn- 
 ing to us not to tread in their steps. And no doubt there 
 are cases to which this topic may and ought to be applied. 
 But they must be cases of detail, not of principle. The 
 Church must look well to it, that in no instance the opinion 
 or right surrendered be such, as that the loss of it shall 
 materially damage any one of the great truths or duties com- 
 mitted to her charge. To take instances from the ritual of 
 the Eucharist itself : the suppression of the apostolical feasts 
 of charity, or, in later times, of the kiss of peace, no one, 
 * Eranistes, Dial, ii., ed. Scbulze, t. iv. p. 126. r In p s . 98 [99], 9. 
 
128 The "Admonition" after the English Liturgy. 
 
 CHAP. IV. under the circumstances, would think of deprecating. But 
 it is far otherwise when we are dealing with such great fun- 
 damental matters as the Real Presence, and adoration con- 
 sequent upon it. The doctrine, if revealed at all, is revealed 
 for ever ; the homage, if due at first, must be due always : 
 it cannot be innocently suspended or done away. For the 
 observation of Bishop Butler on the worship of the Second 
 and Third Persons of the most Holy Trinity in what sense it 
 is a moral duty may be applied with much seeming reason 
 to this case. " The worship," he may be understood to say, 
 " the internal worship itself," before defined to be " the re- 
 ligious regards of reverence, honour, love, trust, gratitude, 
 fear, hope," to Christ present in the holy Eucharist, " are no- 
 farther matter of pure revealed command, than as the fact 
 of" that Presence " is matter of pure revelation; for the fact 
 being known, the obligations to such inward worship are 
 obligations of reason arising out of the fact itself 2 ." 
 
 Should abuses then occur, they must be met by explana- 
 tion; but far be it from the Church of God to permit any 
 abuse of man to take away the use of His merciful gifts. 
 That would be simply lending ourselves to the purposes of 
 the crafty One who prompted the abuse. To him it is all 
 one, if he can but turn you away from Christ, whether he do 
 so by unauthorized veneration and worship, or by unloving 
 and faithless fear of that which is authorized. Just as in the 
 period of the great (Ecumenical Councils, he cared not to 
 make men Nestorians rather than Eutychians. His single 
 point was to disturb, at all events, their faith in our Lord's 
 Incarnation. And how did undivided Christendom meet him? 
 By simply and steadfastly abiding in the old ways. Cou- 
 rageous in their charity, and charitable in their courage, they 
 held fast the whole truth, only guarding it on the right hand 
 and on the left by needful and considerate explanations ; yet 
 not they, " but the grace of God which was with them." 
 
 6. To what extent that grace may have been forfeited 
 and withdrawn, by reason of the manifold sins and divisions 
 of God's people in the following ages, we can but surmise 
 with fear and trembling. But we of the reformed Church 
 
 z Anal., p. ii. c. 1. Works, Oxf. 1807, vol. i. p. 212. 
 
rightly taken, commands Adoration. 129 
 
 of England are most surely bound by a deep debt of gra- CHAP. IV. 
 titude to Him, who in most critical times so overruled the 
 course of religious change in this country, as to preserve us 
 in many signal instances from most imminent peril of giving 
 up something essential for dread of accidental error. One of 
 these instances, if I take it aright, is the matter of adora- 
 tion in the Eucharist. 
 
 For what in very deed is the drift of the Admonition at 
 the end of our Liturgy, so often quoted as forbidding all 
 adoration? Take the words in their literal and grammatical 
 sense : " It is ordained in this Office for the Administration 
 of the Lord's Supper, that the communicants should receive 
 the same kneeling; (which order is well meant, for a signifi- 
 cation of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the 
 benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy receivers, and 
 for the avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the 
 Holy Communion, as might otherwise ensue)." 
 
 Kneeling, in a church, and in divine worship, is a posture 
 of adoration one of the three recognised postures; and 
 where it is especially prescribed, some especial adoration 
 must be intended. To whom? and for what? The words 
 themselves of the protestation answer the latter question. 
 "We kneel in receiving " for a signification of our humble 
 and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein 
 given to all worthy receivers." 
 
 The grammar of this may be a little uncertain ; i. e. it 
 does not quite clearly appear whether Christ Himself, or 
 His benefits, are said to be given in the Sacrament. But 
 in meaning and effect the phrases are plainly equivalent. 
 Coming worthily, we are therein " partakers of Christ/' 
 of Christ present in His human nature by the presence of 
 His Body and Blood, a Presence hidden from us, but cer- 
 tified by the consecrated bread and wine which we do see. 
 All who believe this and this surely is no more than the 
 Catechism plainly teaches us all, must they not of course 
 feel, that in kneeling down to receive the Holy Communion, 
 they are in fact kneeling to Him who is come to give Him- 
 self to them ; kneeling to His Person, to His human na- 
 ture, to His Body and Blood; as truly, verily, and indeed, 
 
 K 
 
130 Drift of the rule, To receive kneeling. 
 
 CHAF. IV. as if they had been kneeling on Calvary itself, at the foot of 
 the real Cross ? 
 
 And who shall dare to come and tell them that in so 
 feeling, so bowing before that Presence, in the most perfect 
 homage their hearts can attain to, they are going beyond 
 the rule of " humble and grateful acknowledgment of the 
 benefits of Christ, therein given to all worthy receivers ? " 
 The real question is, what is the benefit received? If it 
 be Christ Himself, not His grace and help only, surely 
 " humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of 
 Christ" cannot mean less than adoration. 
 
 I must take leave then to say, that granting the doc- 
 trine of the Heal Objective Presence, Adoration is not only 
 permitted, but enjoined by the Church of England in her 
 Prayer-book. Those who would prove that she prohibits the 
 one, must first make out that she denies the other; which 
 they can never do as long as her Catechism and her Com- 
 munion-office remain. 
 
 7. But now mark how wisely and charitably, guided, no 
 doubt, by God's good providence, our Anglican Church, in 
 asserting for her children the full right and duty of simple 
 -and primitive worship, disavowed on their behalf errors which 
 experience had shewn were likely to be laid to their charge, 
 and provided them also with a ritual rule, which would guard 
 them from seeming to fall either into those errors or the 
 contrary. The rule is most simple, yet most effective; it is 
 ,just this, that whereas in the Church generally great free- 
 dom has been allowed to communicants to adore in what 
 posture they would ; standing generally, at least on festivals, 
 in the first ages, afterwards for the most part kneeling, but 
 with permission to those who felt such an impulse, to pros- 
 trate themselves in the mysterious Presence ; this liberty is 
 now so far curtailed among us, that we are all (if health allow) 
 bound to receive kneeling; which, being on the one hand 
 a posture of adoration, answers the purpose of a " humble 
 and grateful acknowledgment ;" on the other hand, it avoids 
 the semblance of that worship which to most men's fancy 
 had unhappily come to imply belief in Transubstantiation. It 
 also guards against a certain ' ' profanation and disorder," not 
 
Doctrinal Import of the Rite very serious. 131 
 
 of course intentional, but sure to occur, where some kneel CHAP. IV: 
 and others fall prostrate; as well as against the worse pro- 
 fanation of sitting, or using other careless postures, accord- 
 ing to the custom of those Christians who have a super- 
 stitious fear of the Real Presence. 
 
 Nay, and there is something to be said of it yet more 
 serious, so serious, that I will repeat it, though it has been 
 mentioned above. What Hooker writes of the customs of 
 standing up when the Gospel is read, and of bowing at 
 the Name of Jesus, seems even more applicable to the rite 
 of adoration in the Holy Communion; "Against infidels, 
 Jews, Arians/' he might have added, Nestorians "who 
 derogate from the honour of Jesus Christ, such ceremonies 
 are most profitable." And accordingly, "it is observed by 
 the Polish Church in their ' Consensus/ that ' the men who 
 lapsed there into the Arian heresy were all such as addicted 
 themselves to the posture of sitting at the Communion V " 
 
 And no wonder; for in refusing to adore on that occa- 
 sion, (supposing them to know what they did,) they had be- 
 trayed themselves at least to be very imperfect believers ; 
 there being no outward act which does so entirely gather 
 up, as it were, the whole Catholic faith in one, and declare it 
 before the eyes of men, as receiving the holy Eucharist with 
 a gesture of adoration. This any one may easily under- 
 stand, who will just go through in his mind the several arti- 
 cles of that faith, and pause to consider how each one is sym- 
 bolized in, or associated with, the Great Sacramental Rite. 
 For instance : by receiving His creatures of Bread and Wine, 
 we acknowledge Him (as S.Irenaeus argues) Creator of heaven 
 and earth, against all sorts of Manicheans : receiving Christ's 
 Body is confessing His Incarnation; and adoring it, His 
 Divinity ; it is the memorial of His death, and the partici- 
 pation of that Sacrifice which supposes Him raised and as- 
 cended into heaven ; it is obeying His command, so to shew 
 forth His death till He come; it is drinking "into one 
 Spirit ;" it is partaking of that " one Bread " which makes 
 us "one Body/' the Holy Catholic Church; it is "the 
 Communion of Saints ;" it is the Blood shed " for the re- 
 L'Estrange, Alliance of Divine Offices, c. vii. p. 323. 
 K 2 
 
132 Drift of the Church's cautionary Words. 
 
 CHAP. IV. mission of sins;" it is the last Adam coming to be in us 
 a quickening spirit, to seal us for the "resurrection of the 
 body, and the life everlasting." 
 
 8. For reasons such as these, as we may well imagine, 
 the Church of England in 1661 declined either to abolish 
 or to leave optional the rite of kneeling to receive the holy 
 Eucharist, but rather desired to retain it with cautionary 
 words. And the cautionary words are evidently intended 
 not so much for the communicants themselves, as for others 
 who might be inclined to misinterpret the ceremony. The 
 framers of them clearly indicate that they would have been 
 best pleased simply to leave those committed to their charge 
 to follow the dictates of natural piety, which, of course, 
 would lead them to adore. But knowing the misconstruc- 
 tions which are abroad, they charitably protest " that thereby 
 no adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto 
 the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or 
 unto any corporal Presence of Christ's natural Flesh and 
 Blood." This is not the language of persons intending to 
 negative all idea of any adoration whatever in the Eucharist. 
 Had such been the mind of the Reformers, it was easy for 
 them to speak it out ; they might simply have said, " No 
 adoration is intended unto the Sacrament, or either part of 
 it." But what they have really said amounts to this : We 
 not only permit, but enjoin, all communicants to worship 
 Christ present by the peculiar mystery of the Sacrament ; and 
 all objectors are desired to take notice that this implies nei- 
 ther Transubstantiation, nor any sort of natural and local 
 presence. For as to Transubstantiation, "the Sacramental 
 Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural sub- 
 stances, and therefore may not be adored ; (for that were 
 idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians)." And 
 as to material Presence, "the natural Body and Blood of 
 our Saviour Christ are in heaven, and not here ; it being 
 against the truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time 
 in more places than one." That Body which was seen by 
 S. Stephen, S. Paul, and S. John, "is in heaven, and not 
 here." As a true natural Body, it is one, and it has its own 
 dimensions and outline, whereby it was recognised by those 
 
Origin of the Admonition in King Edward's time. 133 
 
 blessed disciples ; and in respect of that form (to use the CHAP. 
 words of Aquinas), "the Body of Christ is not but in one 
 place only, i.e. in heavenV 
 
 These two errors then are excluded, viz. such a change 
 in the Bread and Wine as would destroy the Sacrament, 
 by annihilating its outward part; and such a "diffusion " 
 of the Lord's Body into all places as would make it cease 
 to be His own true natural Body. But no kind nor degree 
 of worship, as towards the inward part of the Sacrament, 
 apart from those errors, is in any degree censured or for- 
 bidden ; on the contrary, such worship is, as we have seen, 
 implicitly commanded in the preamble of the Admonition. 
 It is as if the Church should say, "You see me and my 
 children adoring, of course we must do so, since we know 
 find believe that here are verily and indeed present the 
 Body and Blood of the Lord, to be taken and received by 
 the faithful ; but you are not therefore to tax us with this 
 or that human interpretation, which we hereby renounce." 
 Is this unduly straining the expressions of the protestation? 
 I think not, for obvious and well-known reasons. 
 
 9. First, the significant change in the words of the 
 document, the history of which appears to be as follows. 
 In the beginning of the second year of Edw. VI., March 8, 
 1548, a "Communion-book" was issued, pending the com- 
 plete revision of Church Offices, which was known to be 
 going on ; in which book the rubric at the time of receiv- 
 ing is, " Then shall the priest rise, the people still reve- 
 rently kneeling d ." 
 
 In the end of the second year, or beginning of the third, 
 the first Prayer-book became law : in the Communion-office 
 of which no direction for the posture was given ; but in " cer- 
 tain notes" at the end of the book we read, " As touching 
 kneeling, crossing, holding up of hands, knocking upon the 
 breast, and other gestures ; they may be used or left as every 
 man's devotion serveth, without blame e ." 
 
 It would appear that this licence tended, on the whole, 
 to irreverence : it could hardly be otherwise, seeing that 
 
 b iv. d. 10, 1. ad 5, t. xii. 193. d Cardwell,Two Liturgies, &c. p. 431. 
 
 " See Hooker, Eccl. Pol., V. Iv. 6. e Ibid. 397. 
 
134 The Admonition not authorized 
 
 HAP. IV. before it was granted, proclamations and acts of parliament 
 to check profane talking about Holy Communion had been 
 thought necessary by King Edward's Bishops and coun- 
 cillors, and in 1553 especially, encouragement had been 
 given to Alasco, and other earnest importers of low Zuing- 
 lianism. From incidental sayings here and there in Strype, 
 we may imagine to what lengths the evil had gone : and it 
 may have been the apprehension of it, joined probably to 
 the influence of Ridley, which caused the revisers of 1552 
 positively to enjoin reception in a kneeling posture; though 
 they could not but be well aware, what fierce and lasting 
 opposition that rubric was likely to encounter. Puritanism 
 was too evidently in the atmosphere for such discerning 
 watchers to be ignorant of it, and by this we may perceive 
 how serious a principle they judged to be involved in the 
 step they were taking. 
 
 The new Prayer-book, thus enjoining, as I should say, 
 adoration of that which is unseen in the Sacrament, and so,. 
 if Strype speak truly, interpreted by many, came into use by 
 act of Parliament on All Saints' Day, 1552 f . " But because 
 the posture of kneeling was excepted against by some, and 
 the words used by the Priest to the communicant at the re- 
 ception of the Bread gave scruple, as though the adoration 
 of the Host were intended ; therefore, to take off this, and 
 to declare the contrary to be the doctrine of this Church, 
 October 27, a letter was sent from the Council to the Lord 
 Chancellor, to cause to be joined to the Book of Common? 
 Prayer, lately set forth, a declaration signed by the King,, 
 touching the kneeling at the receiving of the Communion." 
 
 It is remarkable, and may serve to indicate a great con- 
 flict of opinion in the council, that although the act establish- 
 ing the new Liturgy had passed before April 16, it was not 
 until October 27, just four days before the book was to come 
 into use, that the government made up their minds to insert 
 this protestation. Of course, so inserted by order of council 
 only, it had no authority of parliament. A convocation was 
 summoned for the following September, but the king's death 
 in July prevented its assembling. So far, the protestatioa 
 f Life of Cranmer, b. ii. c. 33. 
 
either in Edivard's time or Elizabeth's. 135 
 
 we are considering had neither the authority of the Church CHAP. IV. 
 nor of the State. 
 
 10. On the accession of Queen Elizabeth, it came of 
 course into discussion with the other contents of King Ed- 
 ward's book. But in that revision it was omitted, and the 
 rubric for kneeling simply retained, without any explanation, 
 although it appears from a paper in Strype , that the posture 
 of the communicant was left free free, that is, as between 
 standing and kneeling (both which are postures of adoration) 
 in the first draft of the bill prepared by the divines for parlia- 
 ment. As far as Strype knew, the single emendation adopted 
 by the first parliament of Elizabeth in the Common Prayer as 
 submitted to them, was making the posture of kneeling com- 
 pulsory. And according to all the experience of that reign, 
 we may well suppose this due to the influence of the Queen; 
 and it may perhaps be set down (especially if we connect 
 it with the omission of the explanatory note of King Ed- 
 ward's council) as one of the instances in which Elizabeth's 
 Catholic tendencies succeeded in counteracting the exclusive- 
 ness of many of her people and some of her ministers. It 
 betokens the same faith in the Real Presence, and sympathy 
 with those who maintained it, as did the cross and lights 
 which she continued in her private chapels, in spite of so 
 many remonstrances from her chaplains of the Frankfort and 
 Genevan schools, and from her councillors, who feared their 
 influence '^with the people. Nor can we in any more pro- 
 bable way account for the remarkable enactment and rubric 
 just now the object of so much attention which have been 
 supposed to form the standard of our ritual in such matters : 
 " The minister at the time of Communion, and at all other 
 times in his ministrations, 'shall use such ornaments in the 
 church as were in use by authority of parliament in the 
 second year of King Edw. VI., according to the act of par- 
 liament set forth in the beginning of this Book." 
 
 This second of Edward VI. is precisely the last year in 
 which the ritual of the unreformed Church was in the realm 
 by authority of parliament : I mean, of course, in all matters 
 which had not been specially interfered with. For the First 
 
 Ann. I. 5. 122; ii. 464. 
 

 136 The Admonition restored in 166% ; with a Change, 
 
 CTTAP. IV. Book of Edward, the first reformed Liturgy, did not come in 
 use by authority of parliament until Whitsunday, 1549, which 
 fell far within the third year of Edward VI. Therefore, strange 
 as the assertion may sound, and unadvisahle as, of course, it 
 would be to affect to carry it out, it would perhaps be true 
 to say, that the Church ornaments and furniture then com- 
 mon here, and now among the Lutherans, were not only tole- 
 rated, but enacted under penalties by the law of England in 
 Elizabeth's time. One cannot suppose so wide and serious an 
 enactment, touching so many, as it were, in the apple of their 
 eye, to have passed in mere inadvertence. What more pro- 
 bable than that the Queen, as her known inclination and 
 after conduct would lead us to expect, threw her weight de- 
 cisive, of course into the scale of those who wished to pre- 
 serve or restore the old ornaments, and that the arrange- 
 ments of her private chapel were intended to be strictly con- 
 formable to the law so interpreted ? Thus, when Parker first, 
 and afterwards Cox and others, remonstrated with her on 
 those practices, we do not find it alleged by them that her 
 Majesty was violating the law of the land : yet this would 
 surely have been among their topics, had they put the same 
 construction on the rubric which has since become familiar 
 to us. Their arguments are all drawn from the second com- 
 mandment, the peril of idolatry, and the like. And when 
 they would proceed in their dioceses against the obnoxious 
 ornaments, we find them obtaining " injunctions from the 
 Queen's Majesty," I suppose under the last part of the 
 twenty-fifth clause of the Act of Uniformity ; which seems 
 to imply that if she withheld her injunction the ornament 
 would not be illegal : otherwise each bishop might have 
 acted at once for himself. 
 
 11. Under such a state of the law, and with such a dis- 
 position on the part of the sovereign, began the long years 
 of conflict with Puritanism, throughout which this question 
 of the receiver's posture at Holy Communion supplied an 
 outward and visible symbol of the deep doctrinal differ- 
 ences which were really at issue. And when the Prayer-book 
 came once again under authoritative review at the Resto- 
 ration, then, and not until then, (it being determined that 
 
guarding the Doctrine of the Essential Presence. 137 
 
 the posture of kneeling should still be compulsory,) was the CHAP. IV. 
 Admonition of 1552 adopted by the Church in Convocation, 
 as part of our present Prayer-book, and legalized, as all men 
 know, by the second Act of Uniformity. 
 
 It may be asked why, if the tenor of that Admonition be 
 really so favourable, as I have now alleged, to the doctrine 
 of the Real Presence, and to legitimate adoration, was it 
 rejected by Queen Elizabeth, and by the parliament under 
 her influence? In answer it may be sufficient to refer to 
 one brief but pregnant alteration, familiar to all who have 
 looked at the history of the Prayer-book, which the divines 
 of 1662 made in the document before they adopted it. King 
 Edward's Council had said, " We do declare that it is not 
 meant thereby that any adoration is done or ought to be 
 done, either unto the sacramental bread and wine there 
 bodily received, or to any real and essential Presence there 
 being of Christ's natural flesh and blood." But the Church 
 of England in the Prayer-book of 1662 declared, and still 
 continues to declare, the same concerning any corporal Pre- 
 sence. "Corporal" is not equivalent to "real and essen- 
 tial." It is not only associated with grosser and more car- 
 nal ideas, but in its strict philosophical meaning implies 
 also something local, in the sense of filling a certain space; 
 ol/ceiav Trepcypd^TjVf the form of His glorious Body. " Real," 
 " substantial," " essential," imply nothing of the kind. They 
 express our faith in the miracle, without in the least pre- 
 tending to indicate the manner of it. By the very change 
 liberty is left, and must have been intended to be left, to 
 adore Him, as the Catechism had taught us to believe Him, 
 really, substantially, essentially present. That permission is 
 as plainly implied as the prohibition to worship Him " cor- 
 porally" present is expressed. Such, no doubt, was the 
 meaning of divines like Ridley in 1552; although the form 
 which they were led to adopt was unfortunately capable of 
 a much more questionable interpretation. It is probable, 
 too, that Queen Elizabeth, both in principle and in policy, 
 would wish to leave such questions open, as far as might be, 
 on the Roman as well as on the Lutheran side ; and for the 
 same reason that the Thirty- nine Articles, and amongst them 
 
138 Cosin' s first Statement on the Real Presence : 
 
 CHAP. IV. the sentence against Transubstantiation, were not entirely 
 adopted by the Church of England until 1571, this decla- 
 ration also might be advisedly omitted. 
 
 12. We can hardly be wrong in this interpretation of the 
 clause in question ; for it has more or less warrant from the 
 very divines who had the chief hand in that last revision of" 
 the Liturgy. Bishop Cosin, e.g., in his first set of Notes on.' 
 the Prayer-book h , feared not to say, " It is confessed by all 
 divines, that upon the words of consecration the Body and 
 Blood of Christ is really and substantially present, and so 
 exhibited and given to all that receive it ; and all this not 
 after a physical and sensual, but after a heavenly and in- 
 visible and incomprehensible manner : but yet there re- 
 mains this controversy among some of them ; whether the 
 Body of Christ be present only in the use of the Sacrament, 
 and in the act of eating, and not otherwise. They that hold 
 the affirmative, as the Lutherans (in Conf. Saxon.) and all 
 Calvinists do, seem to me to depart from all antiquity, which 
 places the Presence of Christ in the virtue of the words of 
 consecration and benediction used by the priest, and not in 
 the use of eating of the Sacrament ; for they tell us that the 
 virtue of that consecration is not lost, though the Sacrament 
 be reserved, either for sick persons or other. Whereupon 
 Cassander, quoting S. Cyril on S. Luke, saith, ' They are 
 mad who say that the mystical benediction of the Sacra- 
 ment ceaseth, or loseth its virtue, if any remains stand over 
 for days to come ; for the holy Body of Christ will not 
 be changed, but the virtue of the benediction and the life- 
 giving grace is perpetual in it/ And this did most of the Pro- 
 testants grant and profess at first, though now the Calvinists. 
 make popish magic of it in their licentious blasphemy." 
 
 Here it is very observable, that Cosin adopts (it must have 
 been on purpose) a phrase equivalent to that which King 
 Edward's Council, or rather Bucer speaking through them,. 
 had recommended the Church of England to disown and 
 deprecate. Bucer wanted to make us all say, "No adoration. 
 is done, or ought to be done, .... unto any real and essential 
 Presence there being of Christ's natural Flesh and Blood .'* 
 h Works, Anglo-Catli. Lib., v. 131. 
 
how far afterwards withdrawn. 139 
 
 Cosin says, "The Body and Blood of Christ is really and CIIAF. IV. 
 substantially present." 
 
 So far, at any rate, Bishop Cosin continued in the same 
 mind, when he bore his part apparently, a principal part 
 in the arrangement of our present Liturgy. And in 
 his third series of Notes on the Prayer-book, v. 480, he 
 remarks with evident satisfaction, that "this rubric, by the 
 tenor of it, seems to be no part of the Prayer-book ;" not 
 being, it would seem, aware of its history, but struck, as any 
 one might be, with the expression, so and so " is ordered 
 in the Book of Common Prayer ;" not at all a natural way of 
 speaking, if the sentence were itself part of the book. 
 
 At a later period Cosin quotes from Calixtus, with general 
 approbation, the following sentence: "Dum accipiunt, in 
 genua procumbentes, Christum Dominum, qui praesens eia 
 digne edentibus et bibentibus adest, suumque corpus man- 
 ducandum, et sanguinem bibendum exhibet, venerantur et 
 adorant ; non quidem elementa in sacramentum significata, 
 quse adoranda non sunt, sed ipsum Dominum et Deum no- 
 strum Jesum Christum V This, I own, Cosin qualifies so as 
 to limit the Presence to the faithful receiver, and to the very 
 moment of receiving; and so far he withdraws his former* 
 and, as I conceive, his more primitive, opinion ; still, how- 
 ever, implying, that wherever there is Sacramental Presence 
 there cannot but be special adoration, only not directed to 
 the outward part or sign, but to the thing signified, Christ's- 
 Person, present by the Presence of His Body and Blood. 
 
 Whatever he withdrew, it is plain that he had not with- 
 drawn his faith in the Heal and Essential Presence, and in 
 the dutiful necessity of adoring our Lord so present. Nor 
 is it irrelevant to remark, that had Cosin had his own way 
 in all points, the order of our Liturgy would have been 
 brought as near to that of King Edward's first Book as the 
 first Scottish office was, and as the American is now. In 
 particular, the Prayer of Oblation and the Lord's Prayer 
 would have come between Consecration and Communion. 
 This we may surely consider to be a clear indication what he 
 thought of the doctrine of Eucharistical Sacrifice. And we 
 1 Works, Anglo-Catli. Lib., v. 345. 
 
140 Opinions of Bishop Overall, 
 
 CHAP. IV. may infer that he never would have sanctioned our present 
 order, had he regarded it as inconsistent with that doctrine. 
 
 And with regard to the first-quoted passage, in which 
 Cosin had asserted not only a Real and Substantial, but also 
 a Real Objective Presence from the moment of consecration ; 
 it may be neutralized on that point, as far as he is concerned, 
 by what he afterwards wrote; but this does not destroy the 
 force of the same passage as an evidence of Bishop Overall's 
 mind on the subject. Cosin, as is well known, was Overall's 
 chaplain and disciple ; and to him, in the first set of Notes 
 especially, he all along refers with entire reverence. We 
 may take it for granted that on such a point Cosin, in his 
 earlier days, would not speak positively without his master; 
 and we may conclude with some confidence that Overall held 
 strongly the doctrine of Christ's Presence immediately after 
 consecration, and not in the faithful receiver only. 
 
 -And Overall is the author of the section on Sacraments in. 
 the Catechism. He it is who has taught us all from our 
 childhood, that Christ's Body and Blood are the inward part 
 of the Lord's Supper, coexisting with the outward part with 
 Bread and Wine, over which the words of Christ have been 
 spoken by one who is for that purpose as Christ Himself. 
 
 13. There were other revisers in 1661, whose views on 
 this subject are either declared by themselves, or may be 
 with tolerable certainty conjectured from other facts known 
 concerning them. Bishop Wren, of Ely, for example, at 
 whose house, by reason of his extreme age, the conferences 
 were held, had been one of those most prominent in acting 
 under Laud, and enduring persecution with him for Christ's 
 altar's sake. Now Laud's principle as to the Real Presence 
 appears in a remark on Bellarmine, who had said, " The Con- 
 version of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of 
 Christ is substantial, but after a secret and ineffable man- 
 ner." " Now/' says Laud, " if he had left out ' conver- 
 sion/ and affirmed only Christ's ' real Presence' there, after a 
 mysterious, and indeed an ineffable, manner, no man could 
 have spoken better k ." 
 
 k Conf. with Fisher, Works, A. -C. L. place assumes, that except in regard 
 ii. 322. The whole argument in that of Transubstantiation and its corol- 
 
and of Archbishop Laud. 141 
 
 His principle as to adoration was, " The altar is the great- CHAP. IV. 
 est place of God's residence upon earth greater than the 
 pulpit; for there 'tis Hoc est Corpus meum . . . but in 
 the other it is at most but Hoc est verbum meum; and a 
 greater reverence is due to the Body than to the Word 
 of the Lord V But " When this reverence is performed, 
 'tis to God as to the Creator, and so divine ; but 'tis only 
 'toward/ not 'to' the altar, and so, far short m ." This is 
 just the principle of kneeling at the Eucharist, as I suppose 
 it to be explained in the Protestation of 1661. That reve- 
 rence is done " to" the Body and Blood, as to the Person of 
 Christ there present in a special way ; but only " toward," 
 not " to," the elements, and " so, far short." Or, as it is less 
 quaintly expressed in the Scottish Canons of 1636, ch. vi. 
 can. 6 n : " Superstition and profaneness are both of them 
 extremities to be avoided : as therefore the adoration of the 
 bread is condemned, so the unreverent communicating, and 
 not discerning of those holy mysteries, must be eschewed. 
 Therefore it is ordained, that the Holy Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper be received with the bowing of the knee, to 
 testify the devotion and thankfulness of the receivers for that 
 most excellent gift." The seventh English Canon of 1640 
 recommends "reverence and obeisance," not "upon any 
 opinion of a corporal Presence" ..." but only for the ad- 
 vancement of God's Majesty, .... and no otherwise ." It 
 will be seen on comparing these citations, that in Laud's 
 opinion, denying a corporal Presence was not inconsistent 
 with believing a substantial Presence. It was not that his 
 opinion had altered when he issued the Canon. For, 1. The 
 Conference was published by him only in 1639, and the 
 Canon dates from 1640. 2. In his last will he directs the 
 Conference to be "translated into Latin and sent abroad, 
 that the Christian world may see and judge of" his "re- 
 ligion." 
 
 laries, our doctrine of the Eucharistical nious imputation of Burton and others, 
 
 Presence is the same as the Roman. that in gestures of reverence to the 
 
 1 Laud's Works, A.-C. L. iv. 284. Church or Altar " we worship the 
 
 01 Ibid. 285. holy Table, or God knows what/' 
 
 n Ibid. v. 594. Speech at the Censure of Bastwick, 
 
 Ibid. 626. The " no otherwise" &c. vi. pt. i. p. 56. 
 is clearly meant to disavow the calum- 
 
142 Opinions of Herbert and others : 
 
 CHAP. IV. J4. If Bishop Wren may be justly regarded as an ex- 
 ponent of Laud's doctrine, Bishop Henchman of Salisbury, 
 another of the revisers, may seem to stand in the same re- 
 lation to George Herbert. This is Walton's statement con- 
 cerning them. At the time of Mr. Herbert's being or- 
 dained priest, " the Rev. Dr. Humphrey Henchman, now Lord 
 Bishop of London, (who does not mention him but with 
 some veneration for his life and excellent learning), tells me 
 he laid his hand" (being then a prebendary of Salisbury) 
 " on Mr. Herbert's head, and alas ! within three years lent 
 his shoulder to carry his dear friend to the grave." Now 
 Collier says of the same Bishop Henchman, " He is reported 
 well acquainted with the Fathers and Councils." He at the 
 Savoy Conference " discoursed with great temper, but was 
 strongly against large abatements and schemes of compre- 
 hension. This prelate, together with Sheldon and Morley, is 
 said to have had the chief management of this affair P." One 
 should not expect from this, that Bishop Henchman would 
 fail to sympathize with Herbert on such a point as the Real 
 Presence. Now what Herbert thought of that doctrine, and 
 of the consequent practice of adoration, has been shewn 
 already, and may be further judged of by what follows : 
 "The Country Parson . . . especially at Communion-times, 
 is in great confusion, as being not only to receive God, but to 
 break and administer Him. Neither finds he any issue in 
 this, but to throw himself down at the Throne of Grace, say- 
 ing, 'Lord, Thou knowest what Thou didst, when Thou ap- 
 pointedst it to be done thus ; therefore do Thou fulfil what 
 Thou didst appoint : for Thou art not only the Feast, but 
 the way to it 1.' " 
 
 Bishop Earle, then Dean of Worcester, another friend and 
 neighbour of Herbert's, was on the commission for discussing 
 the Prayer-book with the Presbyterians. It was not likely 
 that he, any more than Henchman, would deliberately sanc- 
 tion a formula which must have cast Herbert out of the 
 ministry. 
 
 I may mention also Sparrow, afterwards Bishop of Exeter, 
 who, in his " Rationale of Common Prayer," p. 236, gives 
 P ii. 885, fol. q c. 22. 
 
of Nicholson and TkorndiJce. 143 
 
 the following account of the posture enjoined at the Eucha- CHAP. IT. 
 rist : "It is to be given to the people KNEELING; for a sin it 
 is not to adore when we receive the Sacrament." " And the 
 old custom was to receive it after the manner of adoration." 
 For which he quotes S. Augustine and S. Cyril. 
 
 Bishop Nicholson also, of Gloucester, one of the final 
 .revisers, writes thus of the holy Eucharist : " All the words 
 used by Divines in this Mystery may receive a candid inter- 
 pretation, except that of Rome. 1. That Christ is in the 
 Sacrament corporally, substantially, and perhaps consub- 
 stantially, may have a respect to the subject or supposite, of 
 the relatum and correlation, their meaning no more than 
 that He is there under the forms of Bread and Wine, not 
 changed in substance but in use; as it is in other re- 
 lations; as e.g. betwixt a father and a son; who though 
 they relate to each other, yet they remain two distinct sub- 
 stances, and the same they were r ." 
 
 Thorndike's view is expressed in the following passages, 
 among others. "I suppose that the Body and Blood of 
 Christ may be adored, wheresoever they are." . . . "And is 
 not the presence thereof in the Sacrament of the Eucharist 
 a just occasion, presently to express by the bodily act of 
 adoration that inward honour which we always carry to- 
 wards our Lord Christ as God?" . . . " I do believe that it 
 was so practised and done in the ancient Church ; which I 
 maintain from the beginning to have been the true Church 
 of Christ, obliging all to conform to it in all things within 
 the power of it." ..." For I do acknowledge the testimonies 
 that are produced out of S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, S. Chry- 
 sostom, Theodoret, S. Gregory Nazianzen, S. Jerome, Origen: 
 where he teacheth to say at the receiving of the Sacrament, 
 'Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldst come under 
 my roof:' which to say, is to do that which I conclude. Nor 
 do I need more to conclude it. And what reason can I have 
 not to conclude it ? Have I supposed the elements ... to be 
 .abolished? or anything else concerning the Flesh and Blood 
 of Christ or the presence thereof in the Eucharist, in giving 
 a reason why the Church may do it, which the Church did 
 r Expos, of the Catechism, 178, A.-C. L. 
 
144 Opinions of the Savoy Commissioners. 
 
 CHAP. IV. not believe? If I have, I disclaim it as soon as it may ap- 
 pear to me for such s ." 
 
 But it is needless to multiply single testimonies, since we 
 are able to cite the allegation of the members of that vene- 
 rable commission as a body. " The posture of kneeling best 
 suits at the Communion as the most convenient, and so most 
 decent for us, when we are to receive as it were from God's 
 hand the greatest of seals of the kingdom of heaven. He 
 that thinks he may do this sitting, let him remember the 
 prophet Malachi, ' Offer this to the prince, to receive his seal 
 from his own hand sitting, see if he will accept of it' When 
 the Church did stand at her prayers, the manner of receiving 
 was more adorantium, (S. Aug., Ps. xcviii. ; Cyril. Catech. 
 My stag. 5,) rather more than at prayers; since, standing at 
 prayer hath been generally left, and kneeling used instead 
 of that, (as the Church may vary in such indifferent things). 
 Now to stand at Communion, when we kneel at prayers-, 
 were not decent, much less to sit, which was never the use 
 of the best times/' 
 
 Observe how studiously they refer to the practice of the 
 ancient Church : according to their own principle set in the 
 forefront of their Reply, " The Church hath been careful to 
 put nothing in the Liturgy, but that which is either evidently 
 the Word of God, or what hath been generally received in 
 the Catholic Church V And again, "If by 'orthodox' be 
 meant those who adhere to Scripture and the catholic con- 
 sent of antiquity, we do not yet know that any part of our 
 Liturgy has been questioned by such V 
 
 And the two references to S. Augustine and S. Cyril, and 
 the phrase more adorantium, sufficiently shew that they, who 
 first gave Church authority among us to Bucer's amended 
 protestation, intended by the rule of kneeling at Holy Com- 
 munion at least to tolerate that which the fathers meant, 
 when they spoke of worshipping " the earth which our Lord 
 took of the Virgin Mary/' His Body and Blood, sacra- 
 mentally but most truly present, in some way known to 
 God, with the consecrated elements. 
 
 Of the Laws of the Church, c. xxxi. 1, 4, 5, 6.' 
 * Collier, ii. 883 ; Cardwell, Hist, of Conferences, 337. u _Ibid. 338. 
 
Their Tone as to the Confession of Augsburgh. 145 
 
 This construction of the rubric in question seems to be CHAP. T v. 
 confirmed by two or three circumstances in the Conference 
 which led to its adoption. First ; one of the " exceptions 
 of the ministers" against the Book of Common Prayer having 
 been expressed as follows, " We should . . have our Liturgy 
 so composed, as to gain upon the judgments and affection of 
 all those who in the substantial of the Protestant religion 
 
 O 
 
 are of the same persuasions with ourselves :" the Bishops in 
 answer say, " It was the wisdom of our Reformers to draw 
 up such a Liturgy as neither Romanist nor Protestant could 
 justly except against ; and therefore as the first never charged 
 it with any positive errors, but only the want of something 
 they conceived necessary, so it was never found fault with by 
 those to whom the name of Protestants most properly belongs, 
 those that profess the Augustan Confession V Could they 
 have said so, if they had accounted the doctrine of the Eu- 
 charist as taught in that Confession untenable in the Church 
 of England ? could they have meant to make it untenable by 
 the rubric which they presently afterwards sanctioned ? 
 
 2. The Commissioners did but unwillingly entertain the 
 proposal for re-introducing that rubric : their first reply to it 
 was w , " This rubric is not in the Liturgy of Queen Elizabeth, 
 nor confirmed by law ; nor is there any great need of re- 
 storing it, the world being now in more danger of profana- 
 tion than of idolatry. Besides, the sense of it is declared 
 sufficiently in the 28th Article of the Church of England/' 
 Upon which it plainly follows, that whatever account may be 
 fairly given of the terms of that Article, as compatible with 
 a Real Objective Presence, the same is applicable to the ad- 
 monitory rubric, as intended by those who framed it. 
 
 3. Burnet* informs us that the eventual concession of the 
 Commissioners on this point was chiefly due to the efforts of 
 Bishop Grauden, but that it was in a great measure neutral- 
 ized by "P. G." (Peter Gunning), who procured the signi- 
 ficant alteration in the terms of the rubric, " corporal" being 
 substituted for " real and essential," a change which Burnet 
 himself evidently regrets, intimating thereby that it was gene- 
 
 T Cardwell, Hist, of Conferences, * Own Times, i. 183 fol. ; Hist, of 
 305, 338. w Ibid. 354. Ref., iii. Pref. p. viii. Oxf. 1816. 
 
146 Changes made by them in the Rubric. 
 
 CHAP. IV. rally considered as leaving the point at least open ; that it was 
 so meant by its promoters, and that he himself so understood 
 it. At any rate we seem warranted in adding the name of Dr. 
 Gunning to those among the revisers of 1661, who could not 
 have intended by what they were doing to exclude from the 
 English Church all belief in a Real and Substantial Presence. 
 
 15. It is plain that any passages bearing on the ques- 
 tion of Adoration, either in the Liturgy itself, or in the other 
 portions of the Prayer-book, or in the Articles or Homilies, 
 were intended to be read by the light of this protestation, 
 the latest authoritative statement of the Church of Eng- 
 land on the subject. In the revised Liturgy, for example, 
 significant changes were made, (as all men know,) at least 
 in four important portions of the Office, First, in the pre- 
 liminary exhortation, the words of King Edward's second 
 Prayer-book, copied in that of Elizabeth, are, " He hath 
 given His Son our Saviour Jesus Christ, not only to die for 
 us, but also to be our spiritual food and sustenance, as it is 
 declared unto us, as well by God's Word as by the holy Sa- 
 craments of His blessed Body and Blood" In 1662 this was 
 altered to the present form, " To be our spiritual food and 
 sustenance in that holy Sacrament." The change from " by" 
 to " in," and the omission of the saying about God's Word, 
 introduce an obvious and important meaning : the same, no 
 doubt, with the corresponding clause in the first Prayer-book 
 of King Edward, " hath not only given His body to death, 
 and hath shed His blood, but also doth vouchsafe, in a Sa- 
 crament or Mystery, to give us His said Body and Blood to 
 feed upon spiritually." 
 
 There is, secondly, the direction to the priest himself to 
 set the Bread and Wine on the altar-table, under the name 
 of oblations, with a petition for their acceptance. 
 
 Thirdly, the rubric for celebration adds or restores the fol- 
 lowing particulars : that the prayer is called the Prayer of 
 Consecration ; that the priest is to stand before the table ; 
 that he is to break the Bread and take the Cup into his 
 hands before the people, doing the acts, as well as saying the 
 words, with which our Lord consecrated at first. These 
 were all changes in the same direction with that very sig- 
 
The Burden of Proof lies on those who reject Adoration. 147 
 
 nificant one made in Elizabeth's time, the restoration of CHAP. IV. 
 the words, te the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ," 
 to the form of distribution. So much the less probable would 
 it appear, that in adopting King Edward's rubric, which 
 Elizabeth had ignored, the revisers meant to damage the 
 doctrine of a Real and Essential Presence ; so much the more 
 are we encouraged to believe that they drew the distinction 
 which \ve contend for, between " Corporal" and " Essential," 
 and intended to express it by the way in which they modified 
 ^he statement. 
 
 Fourthly, in the Post-Communion, (what, on reflection, 
 appears very significant,) our present Liturgy is the only 
 English one which provides for the covering of the con- 
 secrated Bread and "Wine, if any be left, with a fair linen 
 cloth, and for the reverent eating and drinking of it by the 
 priest and some of the communicants : correcting what was 
 most probably an oversight in the last rubric of Queen 
 Elizabeth's Liturgy, which says simply, " If any of the Bread 
 and Wine remain, the priest may have it to his own use /' 
 making, in words, no difference between consecrated and 
 unconsecrated. 
 
 These details, taking them one with another, are such as 
 not simply to add decency to the celebration, but likewise to 
 recall and bring out the ideas of a real Sacrifice and a real 
 Presence, before (in the judgment of the revisers) too much 
 obscured. And those are not ideas to be forgotten or put 
 aside, when the person impressed with them kneels to re- 
 ceive the Sacrament. If he believe and consider, he cannot 
 choose but adore. 
 
 16. And now, what was said before of the Scriptural 
 argument may with some reason, perhaps, be repeated here ; 
 that some very distinct and positive prohibition ought to be 
 produced from some document of equal authority with the 
 Prayer-book, before the worship of the Inward Part of the 
 Eucharist can be pronounced unlawful in the Church of 
 England. Such prohibition is supposed to be found in the 
 Articles; and the supposition, as all men know, has lately- 
 received countenance from high authority. It has been ruled 
 that the doctrine contained in this saying, namely, " Wor- 
 
 L2 
 
148 The XXVIIIth Article no Censure on Adoration : 
 
 CHAP. IV, ship is due to the real though invisible and supernatural 
 Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the holy Eucha- 
 rist under the form of Bread and Wine," is " directly con- 
 trary and repugnant to the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth. 
 Articles of Religion y ." 
 
 Greatly indeed it were to be wished, for many obvious 
 reasons, that the particular words of the Article, or Articles, 
 to which the document alludes, had been specified, either in 
 the sentence itself, or if that course would have been in- 
 formal, in the judgment which preceded it. In default of 
 such specification, one can only surmise that the sentence 
 proceeds either (1.) upon the last clause of Art. XXVIII. ; 
 or (2) upon some doctrine supposed to be implied in the 
 two Articles taken as a whole. 
 
 The last clause of Art. XXVIII. is, " The Sacrament of 
 the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, 
 carried about, lifted up, or worshipped." This being the 
 only place in the Articles where Eucharistical Adoration is 
 mentioned, it seems natural to look to it for an explana- 
 tion of the sentence. Yet many perhaps may feel hesitation 
 in doing so : the premiss will appear to them so palpably 
 unable to support the conclusion, that they will cast about 
 in their mind for some other ground on which the judges 
 must have proceeded. 
 
 For what, after all, does this proposition amount to, " The 
 Sacrament was not by Christ's ordinance worshipped ?" Take 
 it in its logical form ; it is not so much as a censure on 
 the practice. It need not mean more than that the out- 
 ward adoration was no necessary part of our Lord's in- 
 stitution. 
 
 Let us put a case connected with the holy Eucharist* 
 Suppose (since we know that very sad and hurtful contro- 
 versies have arisen on the point) that some Eastern Council, 
 wishing to allay disputes, had passed a canon in these terms, 
 " The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's 
 ordinance consecrated in leavened bread :" could we justly 
 understand more than this ; that whereas a notion had pre- 
 vailed, and been fiercely maintained, that^ the leaven was 
 
 y Proceedings in Archdeacoii Denison's Case, pp. 134, 5. 
 
any more than on Reservation. 149 
 
 a necessary part of the ordinance, it should not hereafter be CHAP. IT. 
 insisted on, nor those Christians censured as departing from 
 Christ's institution, who, as in the West, thought it suit- 
 able to " put away" the leaven ? Would not the clause, so 
 worded, have still left it open to Easterns, continuing to think 
 leaven more agreeable to the institution of Christ, to go on 
 using leaven, and arguing for it as the more dutiful way ? 
 There might be many reasons for it, though it were no 
 necessary part of Christ's ordinance ; and so, for anything 
 that appears to the contrary in the wording of this clause, 
 there might be powerful reasons for the very adoration of 
 the Eucharist, and an English clergyman might be free to 
 allege those reasons. 
 
 17. This argument gains in strength, if we go on to 
 consider the other practices enumerated here to be for- 
 bidden along with adoration. They are Eeservation, carry- 
 ing in Procession, and Elevation. As far as the wording of 
 the sentence goes, those three usages are equally forbidden, 
 with the worship of the Sacrament, and deprivation would 
 be alike incurred by pleading for or inculcating either one 
 of the four. Yet it is notorious that reservation had been, 
 practised from the beginning in the ancient Church, for the 
 benefit, at least, of the sick and persecuted : Justin Martyr 2 
 saying, "To those who are not present the consecrated gifts 
 are sent by the deacons ;" and Irenseus a testifying that in 
 the time of Anicetus, i.e. the middle of the second century, 
 the Eucharist used to be sent as a pledge of Communion 
 from one diocese to another. 
 
 Further : reservation had only just ceased to be part of the 
 reformed English Ritual ; for until 1552 the Communion of 
 the Sick was thus ordered : On days of public celebration, 
 the priest "shall reserve so much of the Sacrament of the 
 Body and Blood as shall serve the sick person, and as many 
 as shall communicate with him, (if there be any) ; and so 
 soon as he conveniently may after the open Communion, 
 shall go to administer the same b ." 
 
 Now we may well understand that there might be abuses 
 
 2 1 Apol. 65. Ep. ad Victor, ap. Euseb. EccL Hist. v. 24. 
 
 b Two Liturgies, p. 368. 
 
150 The condemned Proposition not contrary to the Article. 
 
 CHAP. IV. and superstitious practices, which might entirely justify the 
 Church, or any portion of it, in suspending or abrogating such 
 an usage ; and that, in order to reconcile men's minds to the 
 change, it might be needful to point out that reservation 
 was no part of Christ's institution. But supposing a clergy- 
 man to think and argue, on grounds devotional, doctrinal, 
 or practical, that it was our duty to restore the practice ; so 
 \ long as he refrained from holding that it was part of Christ's 
 institution, would any one say that the clergyman was hold- 
 ing doctrine contrary or repugnant to the Article ? 
 
 Now if this hold in respect of the reservation, why not 
 in respect of the worship also ? If Bishop Ridley (e. g.) 
 were now living, and were to write and preach what he 
 maintained almost with his last breath on this subject, 
 
 " "We hold with^the eyes" of faith Him present after grace, and 
 spiritually set upon the table ; and we worship Him that sitteth 
 above, and is worshipped of Angels . . . We adore and worship Christ 
 in the Eucharist ; and, if you mean the external Sacrament, I say 
 that also is to be worshipped as a Sacrament c ;" 
 
 we might demur to his concluding affirmation as likely to 
 be offensive; but since he neither affirms nor implies any- 
 thing here concerning Christ's ordinance, how could we say 
 with show of reason that he was contradicting this pro- 
 position, " s The Sacrament was not by Christ's ordinance; 
 worshipped?" 
 
 18. So much would be true, as touching Art. XXYIII.^ 
 were a person even to maintain the worship of the whole 
 Sacrament, or of the outward part. But now the proposi- 
 tion which has been condemned formally excludes both these 
 from worship, and limits itself to the Inward Part alone.. 
 Thus it runs : 
 
 "It is not true that the consecrated Bread and Wine are changed 
 in their natural substances, for they remain in their very natural 
 substances, and therefore may not be adored. It is true that wor- 
 ship is due to the real though invisible and supernatural presence 
 of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, under the 
 form of Bread and Wine d ." 
 
 Be it well noted that this latter phrase is a description 
 
 c Proceedings, &c. at Batb, p. 94. d Ibid. p. 226. 
 
Adoration claimed for the Inward Part only. 151 
 
 of the Inward Part or tiling signified in the Sacrament, as CHAP. 
 " Bread and Wine which the Lord hath commanded to be re- 
 ceived," is of the outward part or sign " the outward visible 
 sign or form" with which the Inward Part is sacrament- 
 ally connected : that connection being signified, as is usual 
 in language, by the preposition ' under.' Now propositions, 
 to be contrary to one another, must have substantially the 
 same subject and predicate. Is this the case here? The 
 subject of the condemned proposition (I change the word- 
 ing for reverence* sake, but the two expressions are meant 
 to be, and I believe are, equivalent ;) the subject, I say, of 
 the condemned proposition is " the Inward part or thing 
 signified in the Lord's Supper." What is the subject of the 
 proposition in the Article ? " The Sacrament of the Lord's 
 Supper." Can this possibly mean " the inward part or thing 
 signified only?" 
 
 The word ' Sacrament/ as every one knows, has a looser 
 and a stricter use. In its stricter use, as defined in the Cate- 
 chism, it means both the outward and inward parts. Iii 
 that sense the proposition condemned, limiting itself as it 
 does to the inward part only, cannot contradict the proposi- 
 tion in the Article, for it speaks of a different subject. If 
 we take the wider meaning of 'Sacrament/ whereby it is 
 taken for Sacrce rei signum y any divinely intended sign of 
 something pertaining to God, then the " Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper" must mean the outward part, not the in- 
 ward the Bread and Wine, not the Body and Blood of 
 Christ : for these are not the sign, but the thing signified. 
 In neither acceptation, then, can the word Sacrament mean 
 the Inward Part in the Eucharist exclusively ; and yet, un- 
 less you give it that meaning, there is plainly no repugnance 
 nor contrariety between the condemned proposition and the 
 proposition in the Article. 
 
 That the proposition in the Article refers not to the in- 
 ward part, was distinctly stated (if the report be correct) by 
 the counsel for the promoters of the last sentence : 
 
 "The Article closes with this statement :' The Sacrament of 
 the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried 
 about, lifted up, or worshipped/ which shewed the distinction that 
 
152 The Sentence seems to deny the Real Presence. 
 
 \v. IV. W as made between the outward and visible sign, and the inward 
 and spiritual grace. They could not reserve the spiritual grace, 
 they could not carry that about, they could not lift it up, it was of 
 a spiritual nature. Therefore, again he contended that it shewed this 
 Article used the words ' Sacrament of the Lord's Supper' in a sense 
 which confined it to the outward and visible sign to that which they 
 could see to that which they could handle e ." 
 
 Is not this expressly maintaining that the worship of the 
 outward part is the only worship forbidden (if it be forbidden) 
 in that Article ? and is it not primd facie surprising that on 
 such premises a condemnation should have passed, not only 
 on Mr. Denison but on Bishop Andrewes, whose words were 
 declared by a principal person in the court to be "a re- 
 iteration" of what had been said before? those words being, 
 " Christ Himself, the Thing signified of the Sacrament, in 
 and with the Sacrament, is to be worshipped." 
 
 As to the predicates of the two propositions that in the 
 Article, and that which has incurred condemnation they 
 have been already shewn not to be identical, unless it be the 
 same thing to say that a thing ought to be done, and that 
 it is formally ordained by our Lord. 
 
 19. All things considered, there seems much reason to 
 fear that the sentence proceeded not so much on the final 
 clause of Art. XXVIII. as on a certain construction of that 
 and the following Article taken together, making out not 
 only Transubstantiation, but any Real Objective Presence to 
 be virtually denied in them. This, granting the construction, 
 would make the proceeding logical, a thing too hard for 
 human skill, if their sole allegation were the saying in the 
 twenty- eighth Article. But what was gained .in logic would 
 be lost in candour and frankness, to say nothing just now 
 of sound theology. 
 
 For the question of the Real Objective Presence was raised 
 in the Articles exhibited to the Archbishop at Bath f , and that 
 doctrine was not treated argumentatively, but assumed to be 
 an error, in the pleadings of the promoter's advocate; after- 
 wards, the defendant's reply having been heard, the point of 
 
 Proceedings, &c. at Bath, p. 70. f Arts. IX., XII., XIV. 
 
The Real Presence not denied in Article XXVIII. 153 
 
 the Heal Presence, and also that of its depending upon con- CHAP. IV. 
 secration, were withdrawn s. If, after all this, the convic- 
 tion on the matter of adoration went upon the ground that 
 the Keal Presence after consecration is an error condemned 
 by the Articles, it surely ought to have been so declared by 
 the court, in Christian and fatherly charity to souls which, 
 were sure to be perplexed and offended; if not in plain and 
 simple justice to persons amenable to the law, and naturally 
 anxious to know what their own legal position is. 
 
 But now, supposing for a moment what, under these 
 -circumstances, can hardly be supposed that the adoration 
 was condemned simply because it was felt to imply the Eeal 
 Presence, still the condemnation professes to ground itself 
 on these two Articles; and therefore it seems requisite for 
 the completeness of this argument to shew that those Ar- 
 -ticles, taken by themselves, do in no wise negative the idea 
 of such a Presence as is alleged. And this may be very 
 quickly done. 
 
 In the twenty-eighth Article, the first paragraph states 
 ef that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive 
 the same," i.e. the Sacrament, " the Bread which we break 
 is a partaking of the Body of Christ ; and likewise the Cup 
 of blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ." Now 
 take the literal and grammatical meaning of this, (for I pre- 
 sume it will hardly be contended that an accuser may travel 
 out of that meaning, while a defender is so strictly confined 
 to it) : what is there in the saying that " the Bread is a par- 
 taking of Christ's Body," inconsistent, literally and gram- 
 matically, with the saying that the Body is really present ? 
 The first may not warrant the second ; but is there any con- 
 tradiction ? Surely, of the two, there is something more like 
 a contradiction in denying the Presence of that which is af- 
 firmed to be partaken of. 
 
 The Article proceeds to deny Transubstantiation : but to 
 say that this is denying the Real Presence, is just begging 
 the question. Certainly the objections here taken to Tran- 
 substantiation do not apply to the notion that the inward 
 .and outward parts are both equally present. That notion, 
 
 s Proceedings, &c. at Batb, pp. 69, 70, 7274, 125. 
 
154 Meaning of the "Faith " whereby we receive. 
 
 CHAP. IV. taken according to the letter, is proveable from Scripture, 
 It maintains the "nature of a Sacrament/' making both 
 parts real. Nor does it appear from history to have been 
 the " occasion of many superstitions." 
 
 "The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the 
 Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner." In this 
 all theologians agree; it proves, therefore, nothing against any 
 particular section of them. The words " given" and " taken," 
 as has been often observed, would appear, as far as they go, 
 to imply, rather than disavow, the Objective Presence h . 
 
 But the sentence in the Article chiefly relied on by those 
 who shrink from the letter of Scripture, is the following: 
 " The mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and 
 eaten in the Supper is faith." Yet, on a little consideration, 
 one might perhaps not unreasonably ask, how a person be- 
 lieving the Real Presence of both parts in the Sacrament,, 
 could more accurately express his belief in the manner of 
 receiving the Inward Part, than by adopting this very sen- 
 tence ? The point will be clearer if we supply what there 
 was no need for the Article to mention the manner of 
 receiving the outward part. "As the mean whereby the 
 Bread is received and eaten is the mouth, so the mean 
 whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the 
 Supper is faith." What shadow of denial of the Real Pre- 
 sence is here ? j 
 
 Besides, we ought to know what the word " faith" means 
 in this sentence. Does it denote the general qualification 
 for worthy receiving, that "lively faith" which is men- 
 tioned in the following Article ? or does not the tenor of the 
 sentence rather lead us to think of a special act of faith in 
 the reality and blessedness of that which is being received ? 
 even as it is required of persons to be baptized, to have 
 " Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the promises of God 
 made to them in that Sacrament." And the corresponding 
 phrases in S. Augustine, so often quoted in this argument,. 
 
 h Compare the letter of Bishop only' did not exclude the Presence of 
 
 Guest, who penned the Article, to Lord Christ's Body from the Sacrament, 
 
 Burleigh ; ap. Pusey on " The Real but only the grossness and seusiblenes* 
 
 Presence," p. 203. " I told him [Bi- in the receiving thereof." 
 shop Cheney] plainly, that this word 
 
The Presence not denied in Article XXIX. 155 
 
 import as much : " This is the work of God, that ye believe CHAP. 
 on Him whom He hath sent. This, then, is to eat, not that 
 meat which perisheth, but that which remaineth to eternal 
 life. Why make ready the teeth and belly ? Believe, and 
 thou hast eaten '." As if our Lord should say to them, " In 
 that of which I am speaking to you, the eating of that life- 
 giving meat," (which, as it appears afterwards, is the Inward 
 Part of the Lord's Supper,) "your work, or rather God's- 
 work in you, is simply to believe : He will take care of the 
 rest. Bodily eating is for this ordinary Bread; as for the 
 Bread which cometh down from heaven, ' believe, and thou 
 hast eaten/ ' : ' In these and the like passages, it is clear that 
 beneficial receiving alone is spoken of, and that the proper 
 instrument by which men so receive is their faith in Him so 
 giving Himself to them. There is not the smallest appear- 
 ance of S. Augustine's sympathizing with those among the 
 Reformers who regarded the participation of the Kedeemer's 
 Body and Blood as ordinarily separable from the grace of 
 the Eucharist, any more than there is any instance in Holy 
 Scripture of such eating and drinking being spoken of ex- 
 cept in connection with that Sacrament. And next to Holy 
 Scripture, S. Augustine is plainly the authority most de- 
 ferred to in the Articles on this subject. We are not, there- 
 fore, likely to be far wrong if we take the twenty-eighth 
 Article as insisting, not on faith in general, but on faith in 
 the particular grace of the Sacrament. " Believe that thou 
 receivest Him," (so we seem to be told,) "and thou hast 
 Him*." 
 
 Concerning the twenty-ninth Article : the safest way is to 
 understand it as interpreting S. John in the same sense as 
 S. Augustine does, whom it quotes k . But if we took it, as 
 the Judgment does, to deny all eating, in any sense, of the 
 Holiest Thing by the wicked and unworthy, not even so 
 could it be inferred that the framers of that Article shrank 
 from the doctrine of a Heal Objective Presence in respect <- 
 of the good and faithful : nor does the Article' so under- 
 stood, contradict the notion which has commended itself to 
 
 1 In Joan.Ev. tr. xxv. 12 : cf. xxvi. 12. k What that sense is, Dr. Pusey and 
 J Cf. S. Mark xi. 24. Mr. Grueber have shewn. 
 
156 The Court inconsistent with itself in the Sentence. 
 
 v > HAT> - ^- some, that there is at first a Real Presence to all, but that 
 it is withdrawn when the unbeliever communicates. 
 
 Are we not, on the whole, justified in inferring that the 
 Real Objective Presence is not impugned by the general 
 tenor of these two Articles ? Therefore, neither is adoration 
 impugned as implying the Real Objective Presence. 
 
 20. The question then comes back upon us, What could 
 have been the Censors' ground for saying that it is im- 
 pugned ? May it be pardonable, if one venture to suggest 
 that even good and sensible men, giving way to a panic, are 
 not likely to be good reasoners ; that something like this 
 happened to the authors of this sentence ; that they hastily 
 caught up, as people do in a panic, that which in fact is 
 a weapon from the Roman armoury, viz. that the Article does 
 in such sense deny any reception by the wicked, as virtually 
 to deny the Real Objective Presence also ; and then know- 
 ing that adoration at least of the heart is inseparable from 
 belief in such Presence, they considered it as condemned by 
 the two Articles taken together ? Whether this, however, 
 or any other, was the process by which they arrived at their 
 conclusion, it is impossible not to feel deep regret that it 
 was not distinctly stated, according to the ordinary practice 
 of ecclesiastical as well as civil courts in this country, more 
 especially in cases involving heavy penalties. And in this 
 case, the court being eminently, by its composition, a court 
 Christian, it would not perhaps have been irrelevant or un- 
 fatherly, had some words been spoken to relieve the con- 
 sciences of the many, who have hitherto practised unquestion- 
 ing adoration, without a thought of being undutiful to the 
 Church; and to protect them from the troublesome scruples 
 and bewildering imaginations, doctrinal, metaphysical, or 
 ecclesiastical, which the bare authoritative utterance of such 
 a sentence would be likely to awaken in them ; and that 
 at a time when their hearts most earnestly long to sur- 
 render themselves to their Saviour without reserve or in- 
 terruption. 
 
 21. Or, it may be, the condemnation was meant to apply 
 not so much to the requirement of worship, as to the phrase 
 by which the Object of worship had been defined, " the Body 
 
The Phrase, " Under the Form of Bread and Wine:' 157 
 
 and Blood of Christ under the form of Bread and Wine:' CHAP. IV. 
 But if so, then, according to a rule which has entered largely 
 into this very judgment, it was specially incumbent upon the 
 Censors to make known the grounds of their censure. In 
 denying the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ to be 
 eaten by the wicked, they have laid great stress indeed, the 
 main stress of their cause on the title of Art. XXIX. They 
 have refused, it would appear, to consider the explanation 
 which has been offered, and sustained by a large array of 
 authorities, to the effect that the phrase, " eat Christ's Body," 
 is a theological phrase ^capable of more than one interpreta- 
 tion ; that is, that it has more than one " literal and gram- 
 matical sense," and that the body of the Article itself fixes 
 the title to that meaning which would justify the defendant. 
 All this they entirely ignored, and grounded a sentence of 
 deprivation on a statement, of which all that could be fairly 
 said was, that it was contrary to one of two literal and gram- 
 matical interpretations of one single phrase. By this, at any 
 rate, they would seem to bind themselves to be very " literal 
 and grammatical" in all their proceedings, and not to condemn 
 the other expression, " present under the form of Bread and 
 Wine," (which is, in other words, " really and objectively pre- 
 sent, as the inward part of the Sacrament,") unless they could 
 shew some " literal and grammatical " contradiction of it in 
 the Articles. I do not see how this can be denied, without 
 maintaining one rule for the prosecution and another for the 
 defence. No such contradiction has yet been distinctly al- 
 leged. If any exist, the learned assessors will be only doing 
 themselves justice in pointing it out. 
 
 22. And more than this. There is among the Thirty- 
 nine Articles one which was originally specified in the charge 
 against Archdeacon Denison, but the mention of it was after- 
 wards, for whatever reason, withdrawn ; I mean the thirty- 
 fifth, which re-asserts the general doctrine of the Book of 
 Homilies. Now the condemned phrase (" under the form of 
 Bread and Wine") is taken, as every one knows, from the 
 Book of Homilies ; not, indeed, from the body of any homily, 
 but from one of two authorized titles of the fifteenth homily 
 of the second book, authorized, undoubtedly, one as much 
 as the other ; and therefore, according to all common rules 
 
158 It does not imply the Errors disavowed by our Church; 
 
 CHAP. IV. of construction, the second to be taken as at least reconcile- 
 able with the first ; which notion is farther confirmed by the 
 description prefixed to the body of Queen Elizabeth's Homi- 
 lies : " The second part of Homilies, on such matters as were 
 promised and entituled in the former part of Homilies." 
 
 And on comparing the two titles, few persons, I think, 
 would doubt that the one was meant to be equivalent to the 
 other. The first is " the due receiving of the Body and Blood 
 of Christ under the form of Bread and Wine;" the second, 
 " the worthy receiving and reverent esteeming of the Sacra- 
 ment of the Body and Blood of Christ." " The Body and 
 Blood of Christ under the form of Bread and Wine" is thus 
 set before us as something inseparable from " the Sacrament 
 of the Body and Blood of Christ," as, indeed, it must be, 
 according to the account of a sacrament in the Catechism. 
 
 And surely this being part of the definition of the Eucha- 
 rist is a main point of Christian doctrine. If it be so wrong, 
 so ungodly and unwholesome, as this condemnation supposes 
 it, how can it be true that the Homilies, taken generally, 
 " contain a godly and wholesome doctrine?" 
 
 One way, indeed, is conceivable, in which we might be 
 forced to admit the hypothesis of the phrase having been 
 left by mistake ; i.e. if the homily so entitled contained any 
 statement clearly repugnant to the first title. But no such 
 statement ever has, or can be, produced from this or any 
 other homily. 
 
 No doubt the formula, " Sub specie Panis et Yini," is used 
 by the Roman Catholics ; but it is also used by the Lutherans, 
 and from them, probably, it was adopted by Ridley, whose 
 sentiments on Christ's Presence in the Eucharist are known, 
 to have differed materially from Calvin's 1 . They were formed, 
 confessedly, on " The Book of Bertram the Priest," who de- 
 scribes the holy Sacrament thus: " Sub velamento corporei 
 Panis, corporeique Vini, spirituale Corpus, spirit ualisque San- 
 guis existit m ." " Sub velamento :" the phrase is equivalent 
 to " under the form." That Bertram meant by it to express 
 a spiritual, not a carnal or material, Presence, is plain by his 
 saying, "Panis ille vinumque figurate Christi Corpus et San- 
 guis existit m ;" and, " Secundum visibilem creaturam corpus 
 1 See Remains of A. Knox, ii. 164, 166. m Book of Bertram, p. 24, ed. 1686. 
 
especially not that of Carnal Presence. 159 
 
 pascunt, juxta vero potentioris virtutem substantise mentes CHAP. IV 
 tfdelium et pascunt et sanctificant." That he did not receive 
 Transubstantiation is also plain; for his words are, "Se- 
 cundum creaturarum substantiam, quod fuerunt ante conse- 
 cration em, hoc et postea consistunt." Bertram, therefore, 
 holding Christ's presence under the form of Bread and Wine, 
 did yet contradict the same two errors which the Reformed 
 Church of England warns her children against. 
 
 And however coarsely Luther himself, and some of the 
 Lutherans, might sometimes express themselves, there can 
 be no reasonable doubt that the very same is the true mean- 
 ing of the confession of Augsburgh, teaching (Art. X.) that 
 " with the Bread and Wine, the Body and Blood are truly 
 present in the Lord's Supper, and truly given to those who 
 eat there ; and they censure such as teach otherwise." 
 
 Neither Ridley, then, nor the Homilies, nor such as adopt 
 their language, can fairly be charged with holding the gross, 
 carnal idea which was afterwards imputed to them under the 
 name of Consubstantiation : which idea seems to be censured 
 by implication in our twenty-eighth Article, where the Body 
 of Christ is said to be "given, taken, and received in the 
 Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner ;" and at 
 the end of the Liturgy, where we disclaim adoration of any 
 corporal Presence of Christ. Well may we, with the whole 
 Church rightly understood, condemn and disavow any notion 
 of such a Presence. But to condemn the phrase, " under 
 the form of Bread and Wine/' would be condemning, first, 
 Bishop Ridley, and the rest who sanctioned the First Book 
 of Homilies, and, through them, the Confession of Augs- 
 burgh, and the whole body of orthodox Lutherans. 
 
 Not in this present instance only has mischief been done 
 by a vague dread of Consubstantiation, hurrying people on 
 to erroneous censures, which would have been spared, had 
 they given themselves more time to consider either the true 
 meaning of the words censured, or the extent to which the 
 censure would reach. 
 
 23. Thus, in default of all explanation from those who 
 decided the other day that Eucharistical worship is contrary 
 to the Articles, endeavour has been made to trace, as ex- 
 
160 Amount of material Error in the Sentence. 
 
 CHAP. IV actly as one might by conjecture, the possible ground of that 
 decision, and to shew that it is as little warranted by the 
 Prayer-book, Articles, and Homilies, as by Holy Scripture 
 and Primitive Antiquity. The survejr, such as it is, will per- 
 haps have sufficiently explained the deep and intense anxiety 
 which was felt by many, at the first promulgation of the 
 sentence, for the integrity of the Catholic doctrine of the 
 Holy Eucharist, an anxiety which must continue to be felt, 
 until it shall please God to put in the hearts of those who 
 have spiritual authority, either to withdraw that condemna- 
 tion, or so to limit it that it shall not seem to contradict the 
 Real Objective Presence. 
 
 For assuredly it is not, as it now stands, a mere question 
 of posture. Were that all, there is not one who denies the 
 full right of every particular or national Church to choose 
 among the several postures of adoration, and to forbid the 
 use of either or all of them on this or that particular oc- 
 casion, when it might cause scandal or confusion; just as 
 English Churchmen are left, as it seems, to their own cha- 
 rity and discretion, whether or no to recognise by outward 
 gesture the Presence which they must believe (unless they 
 deny altogether the validity of the Roman Sacraments) when 
 they meet with any of the customary solemn processions, 
 or on other occasions not unfamiliar to travellers. 
 
 The question, it must be repeated, is not " how or ivhen 
 we are to adore/' but " whether it is lawful at all to adore 
 Christ as the Inward Part of the Sacrament ?" That this 
 is the real issue we were officially told by the Archbishop's 
 principal lay assessor, when he pronounced a certain sen- 
 tence quoted from Bishop Andrewes to be a "reitera- 
 tion" of what had been condemned before : and neither 
 his Grace himself, nor any of his clerical assessors, did 
 either then or at any time since intimate any dissent from 
 the statement. 
 
 Therefore, but for a providential flaw in the form of pro- 
 ceeding, it would stand at present before the world as the 
 judicial sentence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, that it is 
 contrary to the Articles to say, " Christ Himself, the Thing 
 signified of the Sacrament, is to be worshipped in and with 
 
Present legal Position of the Clergy. 161 
 
 the Sacrament ;" and that any beneficed person so teaching CHAP. IV. 
 and worshipping must incur deprivation. Now of course no 
 one supposes that the Archbishop and the clergy sitting with 
 him would deny that Christ is to be worshipped, and with 
 special worship where He is especially present. It remains, 
 therefore, that they meant to deny any such especial Pre- 
 sence in the Eucharist as should claim special worship and 
 homage ; and what is that but denying altogether any Keal 
 Presence after consecration ? Consequently, believers in that 
 Presence not only in its truth, but in its essential import- 
 ance must apprehend a vital doctrine of the Gospel to have 
 been put in jeopardy by this decision. It is a sad thing to- 
 say, but is it not too true ? 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 DUTIES OF CHURCHMEN IN RESPECT OF THIS CASE. 
 
 1. THERE remains the very serious practical inquiry, how 
 the position of persons so believing within the Church of 
 England was or is affected by these proceedings. I call it a 
 " practical" inquiry, because, although that particular case is 
 at an end, the points involved in it may at any time be mooted 
 in some other instance : and in the present unhappy state of 
 parties, are too likely to be so. It is, indeed, two questions in 
 one; for it may be taken as relating either to our legal or to 
 our moral and spiritual position. With regard to the former, 
 it is useless now to speculate. We can but leave it to receive 
 solution, if need be, from the proper authorities in due course 
 of law. But should it again arise, and be finally decided as it 
 was the other day in the Court of Arches, then (as the judg- 
 ment on appeal will be legally binding at least on the dioce- 
 san courts of England,) the other question will arise, How 
 shall we stand, morally and spiritually, as clergymen bound 
 by certain Articles, when the legal interpreters of those Arti- 
 cles have declared them to be, by implication, contrary and 
 repugnant to a tenet which we hold as a vital doctrine of 
 the Gospel ? 
 
 2. But before going on to this, it may be worth while to 
 
 M 
 
162 The Articles, how far made the sole Test of Doctrine. 
 
 CB:AP. V. say one word more on the comparatively immaterial question, 
 of our legal position. Speaking under correction, I believe 
 that, as a matter of course, until the legislature decree other- 
 wise, the decision of the highest court of appeal rules all sub- 
 sequent decisions. Therefore every clergyman from that day 
 forward will understand, that if he be known in any way 
 to hold the duty of worshipping Christ, "in and with the 
 Sacrament, as the Thing signified of the Sacrament/' his 
 place and benefice in the Church of England will be at the 
 mercy of any one choosing to exhibit articles against him. 
 And since it is known that there is a numerous and powerful, 
 and in these matters (may we not say it?) an unscrupulous 
 section of the Church, watching to see whom they may take 
 at such an advantage; there can be small doubt, humanly 
 speaking, what will become in a few generations, not only of 
 the custom of adoration, but of the doctrine inseparable from, 
 it the doctrine of the Real Presence among us. 
 
 Again ; it is doubtless true that legally the act of Eliza- 
 beth, under which the judgment has been obtained, would 
 not, taken by itself, constitute the Articles the sole test of 
 doctrine. But those who have expressed a fear of such 
 & result were thinking not of that act only, but of its effect 
 taken conjointly with the Gorham decision. The latter 
 .seemed to rule that nothing should be held obligatory, un- 
 less it were affirmed in the Articles. The former, that no- 
 rthing, however plainly affirmed in Holy Scripture, or the 
 Prayer-book, should be so much as allowed, if it appeared at 
 '.first sight contrary to the Articles; assuming thereby that 
 that one document had nothing in it ambiguous, nothing 
 equivocal, nothing which could need to be interpreted by 
 comparison with other documents of co-ordinate authority. 
 What more could be desired by any one who might wish to 
 escape from Holy Scripture and the Prayer-book, and make 
 the Thirty-nine Articles our sole standard ? If a man were 
 .minded, for instance, to deny the Inspiration of Scripture, 
 the Eternity of hell-torments, or the personal existence of 
 the Evil Spirit, he would have only to point out that they 
 .are not affirmed in the Articles. If he wished to deny 
 S. James's doctrine of Justification by works, or to enforce 
 
Case of the Clergy, as bound to obey the Law. 163 
 
 Calvin's doctrine of absolute Predestination, he might have CHAP. V. 
 his way by quoting the letter of the eleventh and seven- 
 teenth Articles. 
 
 If it be really the mind of the present English Church so 
 materially to narrow her pale of admissible doctrine on one 
 side, and enlarge it on the other; would it not be wiser, 
 better, more seemly, to do it once for all, deliberately, and 
 in the face of day, that all men might know what themselves 
 and others are about, rather than go on in this unhappy, 
 vexatious course; watching for seasons when an adversary 
 happens to be unwary or unpopular, or when sympathy may 
 l>e hoped for from a prime minister or a judge; and dis- 
 posing of deep and high points of theology by a side-wind, 
 et quasi aliud agendo ? 'Ev Be fyaii Kal 'o\ea-crov, eirei vv rofc 
 evaSev ovrcos. 
 
 3. But be that as it may, the question will remain for 
 individuals, supposing the sentence confirmed, What ought 
 they to do, who have gone on hitherto believing the Real 
 Presence, and adoring accordingly, in no undutifulness to 
 the English Church, but in full conviction that they were 
 but carrying out what they had learned in the Catechism 
 and Communion Office ? They cannot give up their con- 
 victions, they cannot cease to believe and adore, in defer- 
 ence to a mere affirmation, even from the highest human 
 authority, the reasons (for whatever cause) being withheld ; 
 nor yet upon such reasons as have hitherto been alleged. 
 Neither is the matter an abstract one, such as one may 
 withdraw his mind from, and exclude it from his teach- 
 ing, or even in a way suspend his belief of it, in a dutiful 
 wish to obey those whom God's providence has set over him. 
 Such cases are conceivable ; perhaps (e.g.) a person's view of 
 predestination may admit of being so treated ; but whether 
 or no Jesus Christ the Son of Man is specially present in the 
 Holy Sacrament, as the Inward Part thereof, and whether to 
 worship Him accordingly or no, these are thoughts which 
 cannot be put by ; they come before the mind and heart as 
 often as you go to His altar. And if you believe them to be 
 essential parts of Christian truth and duty, you must teach, 
 them to all entrusted to your care. 
 
 M 2 
 
164 We are not disloyal in keeping our Posts ; 
 
 CHAP. V. The only question will be, Is a person continuing so to 
 believe and teach bound to resign any privileges which he 
 may enjoy in virtue of his subscription to the Articles? or is 
 he free in conscience to retain them as long as he can, if he 
 consider it otherwise his duty to do so ? 
 
 Now this question seems to resolve itself into another and 
 a more general inquiry. It being allowed that human laws 
 bind the conscience of the subject to obey them according to 
 the intention of the legislature, if not contrary to the law of 
 God ; we are to consider whether the like submission is ab- 
 solutely due to the judicial interpretations of the same laws? 
 For example : certain goods of foreign manufacture are, or 
 were lately, prohibited in this country, and no doubt it was 
 a moral duty to abstain from importing what were unques- 
 tionably known to be goods of that description ; but let us 
 suppose that in a particular instance a question had arisen, 
 whether such and such a fabric came under that description, 
 and the judges had determined it in the affirmative, while 
 the merchant, from his technical knowledge, was thoroughly 
 convinced of the negative; was he bound in conscience to 
 abstain from importing the like in time to come ? or might 
 he innocently risk the transaction if he thought it worth 
 while ? Other imaginary cases might be put, but this one 
 will be sufficient to explain what is meant. 
 
 Now, as I can hardly conceive any one imagining that the 
 tradesman in this instance was morally guilty of breaking 
 the law, so neither, or rather much less, would the same guilt 
 seem to attach to a clergyman retaining his cure, if he could, 
 after his opinions and teaching had been condemned, sup- 
 posing him sincerely and seriously convinced before God that 
 the condemnation proceeded on a mistake in the law. It 
 would be a question, not of right or wrong, but of expedient 
 or inexpedient ; and surely, in the event we are now contem- 
 plating, (may God avert it ! but if it should happen,) truth 
 and charity, and loyalty and devotion, the honour of God In- 
 carnate, and the salvation of the souls of our brethren all 
 the motives that can be imagined going to make up the 
 highest expediency would render it the duty of every Catho- 
 lic clergyman to abide in his place until he was forcibly ex-r 
 
Are we incurring the Taint of Heresy ? 165 
 
 pelled from it, either by a like prosecution, ending in like CHAP. V. 
 manner, or from inability to bear up against the worry and 
 expense of the proceeding. 
 
 If any misgiving occurred to a right-minded person in 
 adopting this course, it would probably be on the ground 
 that there was some appearance of breach of trust, in respect 
 of those under whose authority he was taking the benefit 
 of his subscription, conscious all the while that he was sub- 
 scribing in a different sense from what they might be willing 
 to allow. But this scruple might at once be met, by taking 
 care to give sufficient notice of your mind and purpose to 
 the persons concerned, and so enabling them, if they thought 
 proper, to put you also on your trial n . 
 
 4. So much may suffice with respect to our legal diffi- 
 culties : but there are others more serious, connected with our 
 ecclesiastical position. We know too well, by very sad expe- 
 rience, that some earnest persons regard the Church of Eng- 
 land as distinctly committed by the sentences of that which 
 may happen practically at a given time to be her supreme 
 Court of Appeal. So that if the late judgment against 
 adoration (e. g.) had been unhappily affirmed by her Majesty 
 in Council, there would have been, according to them, no 
 help for it : the Church by law established would have 
 denied the faith, and believers must have sought another 
 home where they might. 
 
 Now many will feel as if this saying refuted itself by its 
 very extravagance. To suppose that for one sentence, once 
 promulgated and enacted, by a court constituted as that of 
 which we are speaking, every one's faith and practice re- 
 anaining just what it was before, by far the greater number 
 of our communicants knowing nothing at all of the matter, 
 not even aware that there was any trial going on, and ready, 
 for aught any one can tell, to disclaim the doctrine implied 
 in the sentence, if it were duly explained to them, from the 
 very bottom of their hearts ; to suppose, I say, that by one 
 such decision all these believing multitudes were fairly turned 
 out of God's Church on earth, and left with the heathen to 
 the forlorn hope of incurable ignorance, all this would be in- 
 
 n See note at the conclusion. 
 
166 The Sentence does not commit our Church : 
 
 CHAP. V. tolerable, nay, impossible, unless some unquestionable word 
 of some infallible authority were shewn for it. Compare 
 it with the known dealings of the Almighty towards either 
 Churches or individuals. See how it looks when judged of 
 by the analogy of the faith. No doubt there are fearful 
 instances of one person falling in a moment, and drawing 
 after him in ruin thousands, themselves at the time uncon- 
 scious, or not yet existing. We do not forget Adam in Para- 
 dise, nor Esau selling his own and his children's birthright, 
 nor Saul when Samuel turned away from him, nor Jeroboam 
 when he made Israel to sin ; nor the several ringleaders of 
 heresy and schism among Christians, and how their unhappy 
 followers were cast out with them ; nor (in a word) how the 
 fathers' sins are by the Divine law visited on the children : 
 and it is, of course, possible that any particular instance of 
 transgression and misleading may prove to be one more in 
 that list ; but who at the time shall declare it so ? Surely 
 none may do that with authority but the Judge Himself; 
 and when He has done so, He has constantly done it by 
 signs unequivocal miracles or prophecies, or the consenting 
 voice of His Church ; and even then not until after long en- 
 durance and repeated warnings. But for private Christians 
 to take upon themselves to pass that sentence, which a man 
 would in effect be passing, if he forsook the Church's com- 
 munion for any such proceeding as is now dreaded, this 
 would seem not unlike the error of those who were warned 
 that they knew not what manner of spirit they were of. One- 
 mortal sin, we know, deliberately consented to, is enough to 
 destroy a soul ; but we know also how long and how tenderly 
 He whose name is Merciful as well as Jealous has borne with 
 whole years of transgression and has not destroyed ; we know 
 that His mercy is over all His works ; that it extends to the 
 thousandth generation, while He is said to visit iniquity upon 
 children only and children's children. The antecedent pro- 
 bability therefore is, in every case, until the Church has ex- 
 amined and ruled it, that the error complained of, however 
 real and deadly in itself, does not bring such a taint of heresy 
 over those communicating with its professors, as to separate 
 them, ipso facto, from the Church. 
 
to do that there must be fresh Legislation. 167 
 
 5. Secondly, in this particular case, the error coming CHAP. V. 
 out not in the shape of a synodical or legislative enactment, ~ 
 but of a judicial decision ; as it is no part of the law of the 
 land, of force to bind the conscience of the subjects, so is it 
 no part of the law of the Church, (the provincial Church, of 
 course, I mean,) with power to bind the conscience of its- 
 members. It betrays, indeed, a sad want of discipline, and; 
 threatens and forebodes an eventual corruption of doctrine ; 
 but it leaves the formularies of the Church and the faith of 
 its present members just where they were. If any one doubt 
 this, let him consider one or two parallel cases. Suppose,, 
 from some epidemical delusion, (we have seen such things 
 at no great distance,) it had become morally impossible to 
 obtain a verdict of guilty against a murderer in a particular 
 country would any one think of laying it to the charge of 
 that country that it had no law against murder? Or what 
 if, at any time, by connivance, corruption, or indolence, it 
 should appear that the slave-trade is still being carried on 
 in English vessels, or slavery practised in some English 
 colony would it be fair to say that slavery and the slave- 
 trade had again become part of the laws and institutions of 
 England ? Or again, to put a case nearer the actual one, 
 if we imagine the days of Arian ascendancy returned, and, bjr 
 some such combinationas we read of under Constantius, a 
 judicial body formed which had a leaning that way, and skill 
 more or less to carry with it the popular feeling, and thus 
 a sentence obtained against orthodoxy : would such a deci- 
 sion, or a hundred such, prove the English Church to be in* 
 its essence really Arian ? They would certainly cause great 
 anxiety lest it should quickly become such ; but instead of 
 their affording any excuse or reason for separation, every 
 heart that was truly loyal to our Saviour would assuredly feel 
 called on to cling to its profession the more earnestly, and 
 take away the reproach from Israel ; and if any made that 
 state of things an argument for withdrawing himself and 
 joining some other Christian body, how very sure should we 
 feel that he was either indulging temper, or but availing 
 himself of the first excuse he could find for carrying into 
 effect what for other reasons he had before determined on L 
 
'168 The main Difficulty of the Case. 
 
 HAP. V. The matter may be put in this light. Casuists are agreed 
 that the proper authorities to determine the meaning of 
 documents subscribed to, are the same by whom the sub- 
 scription is enforced ; i.e., in this case, the Church and State 
 of England. There can be no reasonable doubt that when 
 these bodies last legislated on the subject, in 1661, they 
 meant to receive subscriptions in the sense now condemned. 
 ;If they have changed their mind and will, let them declare 
 it in the only way in which it is competent for them to do 
 so ; namely, by fresh legislation corrective of the former. 
 Until they shall have so done, they must be taken to be of 
 the same mind as before, and the old interpretation to stand 
 good. Any court of justice interpreting the document on 
 any other principle narrower than this, must be presumed 
 to be mistaken, and cannot bind the conscience by its de- 
 cision. Nothing can do that, short of the voice of the le- 
 gislature, distinctly enacting the new interpretation. The 
 synod or convocation so decreeing may bind us as Church- 
 men ; the parliament as Englishmen ; until they have spoken 
 we are free. 
 
 6. It would appear, then, that by the decision, simply 
 as a decision, we really need not feel ourselves or our Church 
 in any degree bound or committed. It may be a great 
 scandal and a bad precedent, but no man is pledged as a 
 Churchman or as a clergyman to abide by it, and therefore 
 no man need think of retiring on account of it. But there is 
 one circumstance connected with it which yet requires grave 
 consideration ; it presents, indeed, as far as I see, the only 
 real difficulty of the case, in the view of a conscientious 
 Churchman, knowing and wishing to hold by the rules of 
 antiquity. That circumstance is the share which the Metro- 
 politan has had, and is likely to have, in the whole transac- 
 tion ; and the difficulty which it raises is incurred already : 
 we have not to wait for it until some fresh appeal shall 
 have been dealt with : we have been burdened with it ever 
 since the first solemn declaration of the Court at Bath in, 
 the case of Archdeacon Denison. It is simply this : that 
 if there be any soundness in the statements and argu- 
 ments set down above, the proposition of the Court touch- 
 
The Sentence heretical by the Statute of Elizabeth. 169 
 
 ing worship in Holy Communion would seem, even by the CHAP, v. 
 existing law of the English Church, to be heretical, or verg- 
 ing on heresy ; and of course the question might occur, 
 Can Christians knowingly go on in communion with a spiri- 
 tual superior who has publicly so committed himself, and not 
 be partakers of the ill? This question I should answer, 
 without hesitation, in the affirmative, and that for reasons 
 strictly ecclesiastical. I will endeavour to explain, as briefly 
 and clearly as I can, the grounds both of the difficulty and 
 of the solution. 
 
 For the prima facie suspicion of heresy : the measure and 
 extent of that evil, as is well known, are legally determined 
 among us by the statute, 1 Eliz. i. 56, where it is ruled that 
 persons commissioned by the Crown to determine ecclesias- 
 tical causes " shall not in any wise have authority or power 
 to order, determine, or adjudge any matter or cause to be 
 heresy, but only such as heretofore have been determined, 
 ordered, or adjudged to be heresy, by the authority of the 
 canonical Scriptures, or by the first four general Councils, or 
 any of them, or by any other general Council wherein the 
 same was declared heresy by the express and plain words of 
 the said canonical Scriptures, or such as hereafter shall be 
 ordered, judged, or determined to be heresy by the high 
 court of parliament of this realm, with the assent of the 
 clergy in their convocation ;" and " it hath been since gene- 
 rally holden, that although the High Commission court was 
 abolished by the statute 16 Chas. I. c. 11, yet those rules 
 will be good directions to ecclesiastical courts in relation to 
 heresy ." 
 
 Now the third (Ecumenical Council, that of Ephesus, 
 A.D. 431, gives the full authority of the Church to the fol- 
 lowing paragraph of the remonstrance sent to Nestorius 
 a little before by S. Cyril and the Synod of Alexandria P. 
 
 " And there is another point which we must of necessity 
 add; how that, setting forth the death after the flesh of the 
 Only-begotten Son of God, that is, Jesus Christ, and con- 
 fessing His resurrection from the dead, and ascension into 
 the heavens, we celebrate in the Churches the unbloody 
 
 Burn's Eccl. Law, ii. 277. 5th ed. * vii. ap. Routb, Opusc. ii. 25. 
 
170 The Real Presence distinctly set forth 
 
 CHAP. V. Sacrifice. And thus we draw nigh to the mystical Eucha- 
 rists, and are sanctified by becoming partakers of the holy 
 Flesh and the precious Blood of Christ the Saviour of us all. 
 And not as common Flesh do we receive it, (God forbid!) 
 nor yet as that of a Man sanctified, and united unto the 
 Word as having one and the same dignity, or as having re- 
 ceived God to dwell in Him, but as truly life-giving, and 
 the very Flesh of the Word Himself. For being, as God,, 
 in His nature, Life, in that He became One with His own. 
 Flesh, He manifested it to be life-giving. So that, although 
 He say to us, ' Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat 
 the Flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His Blood/ we are 
 not to infer that it (like the rest) is the flesh of a man, one 
 of those who are such as we are ; (for how shall the flesh of 
 a man be life-giving, according to its own nature?) but that 
 it has truly become the very own Flesh of Him who for our 
 sake both became and is entitled as well a Son as a ManV* 
 
 Here it is plain, first, that the Council, adopting tha 
 phraseology of the Liturgy then in use at Alexandria, gives 
 distinct sanction to the doctrine contained in that and all 
 the ancient Liturgies, of the unbloody Sacrifice offered in 
 all Churches continually. Next, that it attributes our par- 
 ticipation of Christ's Body and Blood, and our consequent 
 sanctification, not to the whole action, including the prayers 
 and the rest, but to that which we do when we draw nigh to 
 that which has been sacramentally blessed, and partake of it. 
 Thirdly, that what we so draw nigh to receive and to partake 
 of is not ".common flesh," (God forbid !) but the "very own 
 Flesh of the Word, Who, as God, being by nature Life, be- 
 cause He had made Himself one with His own Flesh, de- 
 clared it to be life-giving." It is for those who deny the 
 Heal Presence, and forbid adoration, to reconcile these say- 
 ings, if they can, with their own views ; or else to shew some 
 reason why they are not to be accounted so far heretical, ac- 
 cording to the standard of heresy in the Church of England* 
 
 7. Consider, again, in connection with the foregoing, 
 what follows, and observe how it is sanctioned; it is not 
 a statement made incidentally with a view to establish some* 
 
 i Koi vlov nal avOp&irov. Some false reading may be suspected. 
 
in the Decrees of Ephesus and Niccea. 171 
 
 thing else, but was regarded by the (Ecumenical Council as CHAP, v. 
 so necessary a portion of our holy faith, that they guarded it 
 with a special anathema r : "If any one confess not the Flesh 
 of the Lord to be life-giving, and the very own Flesh of the 
 Word Himself who is of God the Father, but [regard it] as 
 belonging to some other beside Him, however closely knit 
 unto Him in dignity, i. e. as having simply received an 
 indwelling of the Deity, and not rather as life-giving, (to 
 repeat the expression,) because it hath become the very 
 own Flesh of the Word who hath power to quicken all 
 things," (or " o make all His living progeny *,") " let him 
 be anathema." 
 
 Observe that the life-giving quality is declared to depend 
 on Its being " the very Flesh of the Word who hath power 
 to quicken all things ;" which implies that It is life to us not 
 simply by Its merit as a Sacrifice on the Cross, but also by 
 a real participation of It on our part. That Flesh, the Council 
 means, which we approach and partake of in the Eucharist : 
 no one, if he fairly compare the two passages, can avoid 
 seeing this. Or if there were any doubt, it would be settled 
 by the use of the same phrase, " the mystic Eucharist," in 
 the following dictate of S. Cyril* : " I hear that some affirm 
 that the mystical Eucharist avails not for sanctification, if 
 any relic of it remain unto another clay. But in so saying 
 they are beside themselves. For Christ is not estranged 
 [therefrom], neither will His holy Body admit alteration. 
 But the power of the blessing, and the life-giving grace, do 
 therein continue." The particular idea denoted by that word 
 " objective" could scarce be set forth more distinctly. Can 
 we help recognising it, when the same phrase, " mystic Eu- 
 charist," is employed by the Council itself, over which the 
 same S. Cyril was presiding, and in a document of which it 
 is impossible to doubt that he was himself the author ? And 
 this document has been in such sort adopted by the Church 
 of England, as that any contradiction of it is enacted to be 
 positive heresy. 
 
 * Ibid. xi. p. 32. 
 
 * Ep. ad Calosyrium, Op. t. vii. 365 B. ed. Aubert.; cf. Cosin's Works, 
 V. 130. 
 
172 Presence and Sacrifice implied in the Nicene Canons. 
 
 CHAP. V. 8. Nor may it be omitted that the first Nicene Council 
 so far encourages the same notion, as not only to call the 
 holy Eucharist in three several canons a Gift and an Offering, 
 but also to imply that the giving and receiving of it is giving 
 and receiving the Body of Christ u . In the fifth canon they 
 say, (and surely it is an enactment not unseasonable to be 
 brought just now to our recollection,) "At the provincial 
 synod twice in the year inquire into the causes of the ex- 
 communicate, lest some narrowness of mind or party-spirit, 
 or other uncomfortable feeling, should have caused the ex- 
 clusion ; and let one of the synods be holden before Lent, 
 that all such ill-temper being done away, the Gift may be 
 offered pure unto God." In the eleventh, certain penitents 
 are directed, without offering, to communicate in the prayers 
 only. The eighteenth runs thus : " It hath come before the 
 holy and great synod, that in some places and cities the 
 deacons give the Eucharist to the presbyters, a thing trans- 
 mitted to us neither by canon nor custom, that such as have 
 no authority to offer, should give to those who offer the Body 
 of Christ. And of this, too, we have been informed, that 
 ertain of the deacons approach the Eucharist even before 
 the Bishops. Wherefore, let all this be done away. . . . Let 
 them receive the Eucharist in their own order, after the 
 presbyters, at the hands either of the Bishop or the pres- 
 byter." Here is a distinct recognition of the Eucharist, as 
 a, sacrifice in which the Body of Christ is offered by Bishops 
 and presbyters, and cannot be offered, in the same sense, by 
 deacons and laymen. 
 
 9. No one who really reflects upon these sayings of the 
 great councils, and is at all aware of the mass of undesigned 
 testimony, diffusing itself through all antiquity, to the same 
 effect, can doubt what sort of a decree would have been 
 passed at Nicaea or Ephesus, had the doctrine of the Eucha- 
 rist required synodical assertion in those days. But whether 
 it be that the sacramental system does not require to be 
 doctrinally known in order that its benefits may be received, 
 any more than a person need be able to analyze what he eats 
 and drinks before he can have it for " food and gladness," 
 
 u Ap. Eouth, Script. Eccl. i. 373, 377, 381. 
 
Distinction of Material and Formal Heresy. 173 
 
 or for other causes unknown to us ; it pleased Providence CHAP. V. 
 that the Church should enter on its era of sad division 
 without any oecumenical decision primarily and directly 
 pronounced on that subject. And therefore that portion of 
 Christ's truth has not come down to us in distinct dogma- 
 tical assertions guarded by anathemas, as the statements 
 concerning the Trinity and Incarnation have. And it is 
 consequently a more adventurous thing, and more largely 
 partaking of the boldness of private judgment, to denounce 
 any person as a heretic in respect of the former class of 
 errors. It is not so plainly our duty to withdraw from his 
 communion, as it would be if he had been distinctly ex- 
 communicated by the Church. Materially he may be in 
 heresy, but formally he is not yet so, a distinction acknow- 
 ledged by all theologians. " v Simple error is not heresy, 
 without the addition, 1. of something in the matter of it, 
 viz. that it take place in somewhat appertaining to the 
 faith ; and, 2. of something in the erring person, i.e. perti- 
 nacity, which alone makes a heretic. And this pertinacity 
 arises from pride ; for it cometh of great pride, when a man 
 prefers his own sense to the Truth Divinely revealed." And 
 S. Augustine says, " Though men's opinion be false and per- 
 verse, yet if they maintain it not with any obstinate wilful- 
 ness ; and especially if it be one which they have not daringly 
 and presumptuously engendered for themselves, but have re- 
 ceived it of parents misled and fallen into error ; and if with 
 careful anxiety they are seeking the truth, and are ready, 
 as soon as they have found it, to receive correction; such 
 are by no means to be accounted among heretics x ." " Be- 
 cause" (as Aquinas, quoting the passage, adds) " they have 
 no choice, aipeaiv, no set purpose, of contradicting the 
 doctrine of the Church. In this way," (he proceeds to say,) 
 " certain doctors appear to have differed, even in some things 
 appertaining to the faith, which had not yet been determined 
 by the Church. But after they had been determined by the 
 authority of the universal Church, if any one kept obsti- 
 
 T S. Tho. Aquin. De Male. qu. viii. * Ep. xliii. 1. t. ii. p. 67. ed. Bened. 
 Art. i. ad 7 mum - t. xv. 165. ed. Venet. Antwerp, 1700. 
 1781. 
 
1 74 No sufficient Ground of Separation in this Case. 
 
 CHAP. V. nately resisting such an ordinance, he would be accounted 
 " a heretic V 
 
 In the case before us, the determination of the whole 
 Church is so far less unequivocal than it might be, in that 
 it has never been sealed with an anathema by an (Ecu- 
 menical Council. Nor is there any proof of its having been 
 so distinctly set before those who have denied it, that they 
 can be rightly and at once accused of heretical pravity in 
 resisting it. And even if they might, that were no excuse 
 for separating from, the hundreds of thousands of simple 
 Christians who go on believing our Catechism and partaking 
 of our Eucharist, with or without any definite perception of 
 the doctrine of the Sacraments, vital though it be. " For" 
 (to quote again the same author 2 ) "the simple are not 
 condemned as heretics for not knowing the Articles of the 
 faith, but because they obstinately maintain things contrary 
 to those Articles ; which they would not do, if they had 
 not their faith corrupted by heresy. 
 
 In sum : heretical as this or any similar decision may ap- 
 pear to a well-instructed private Christian, it cannot, under 
 existing circumstances, so taint with heresy those who pro- 
 nounce or favour it, as to render it his duty to break com- 
 munion with them, and with all, sound or unsound in faith, 
 who abide in the same body with them. It might and would 
 be his duty, had they been pronounced heretics by sufficient 
 authority ; but such is not now the case. For example : 
 were there now a Chrysostorn or an Aquinas in the Roman 
 Church, he might perchance upon good grounds seriously 
 apprehend that the recent decree touching the Immaculate 
 Conception of the Blessed Virgin does in fact promulgate 
 material heresy, and that a true (Ecumenical Council, were 
 such an one ever to meet and decide upon that doctrine, 
 would assuredly condemn it with an anathema. But it does 
 not follow that a person so convinced ought to withdraw 
 himself from the present Roman Catholic Communion. It 
 might be his duty to make such a profession of his faith as 
 would probably involve him in serious ecclesiastical penalties. 
 
 y Sec. Secundse, qu. xi. art. ii. ad 3. t. xxii. 55. 
 1 In 3 Sent. dist. 25. qu. 2. t. xi. 349. 
 
Course recommended to faithful Churchmen. 175 
 
 But excommunication or deprivation incurred for conscience* CHAP. V. 
 sake is one thing, voluntary separation is quite another thing. 
 The application to our own case is evident. 
 
 There are, indeed, instances in Church history of private 
 persons, lay or clerical, refusing to communicate with here- 
 siarchs ; as Eusebius of Dorylaeum, and others separating 
 themselves from Nestorius, in the beginning of the move- 
 ment which led to the Council of Ephesus : but they did not 
 thereby break communion with the mass of believers at Con- 
 stantinople ; and it seems not to have been so much from an 
 apprehension of contracting the heretical taint from him, as 
 because such separation was the received mode in that time 
 of bringing such questions to a legitimate issue : as if one 
 should say, " Either he must be excommunicated or I." It 
 is no longer so, now that the holy discipline is so generally, 
 alas ! in abeyance. 
 
 10. But is there, then, no remedy ? nothing for clergy- 
 men or faithful laymen to do, who may feel with the whole 
 Church for so many ages, that he who touches the doctrine 
 of the Real Presence after Consecration, touches to use 
 sacred words the very " apple of their eye," whether it be 
 by prohibition of worship or in any other way ? Yes, surely; 
 they have first and chiefly hearts to lift up night and day in 
 prayer to the Most Holy Trinity, and they have the com- 
 memorative Sacrifice of their Lord, in union with which 
 to present their intercessions. As towards men they have 
 tongues and pens, wherewith to protest and appeal ; they 
 have influence with more or fewer of their brethren; they 
 have more or less substance, of which they may give to such 
 as are suffering in any, way for the same truth, (of whom 
 not a few may be found, if they are well looked after). And 
 in the present instance there is something yet more to be 
 done, by all subscribers to the Articles at least ; their pro- 
 tests and appeals need not be mere words, as on other occa- 
 sions the like may have appeared; they may be so worded, 
 and so publicly notified, as to make them liable to the same 
 molestations and penalties which others for the same teach- 
 ing have incurred a . Such sayings are real doings, and if God 
 8 See note at the end of the book. 
 
1 76 Why Appeal is better than mere Protest. 
 
 CHAP. V. give them grace to utter them not rashly or in the way of 
 challenge, but in the serious discharge of a painful duty, 
 they may be blessed, if trouble ensue, with somewhat of the 
 peculiar blessing of Christ's confessors. 
 
 11. One word more to point out why the way of Appeal 
 as well as Protest is recommended. Protest, strictly speak- 
 ing i.e. a mere ' solemn declaration against a thing ' ap- 
 pears to be the course of those who feel themselves aggrieved, 
 but know of no legal remedy. But to appeal, taken also 
 strictly, is to apply to another, a superior judge ; it assumes- 
 that there is a grievance, but supposes also a constitutional 
 corrective. A protest, as such, simply relieves the mind and 
 conscience of those who take part in it ; an appeal adds to 
 this a call upon certain others who are supposed to have 
 power to redress the wrong. 
 
 A protest in any juridical matter supposes the final authority 
 to have spoken ; an appeal, of course, supposes the contrary. 
 
 For which reason, among others, it seems matter of regret 
 that the term protestant rather than appellant was adopted 
 by those who, not intending schism, were cut off from the 
 Church of Borne in the sixteenth century ; especially as the 
 former term arose from the mere political accident of their 
 representatives forming the minority in the Diet of Spires, 
 1529, whereas the latter would have kept in mind Luther's 
 appeal long before to a general council : a much more legi- 
 timate and ecclesiastical ground to stand on, were it only 
 that by simply protesting we do in some sense admit the 
 paramount authority of Rome, by appealing we assert Rome 
 herself to be under authority. 
 
 However, in our own position I mean, the position of 
 English Churchmen it seems to be of the very last im- 
 portance that we should keep in our own minds, and be- 
 fore all Christendom, the fact that we stand as orthodox Ca- 
 tholics upon a constant virtual appeal to the oecumenical 
 voice of the Church, expressed by the four great Councils, and 
 by general consent in all the ages during which she continued 
 undivided. And if that voice be disputed, is there any con- 
 ceivable way of bringing the dispute to an issue, except only 
 another true (Ecumenical Council, when such by God's grace 
 
Our Church, with the whole Church } under Appeal. 177 
 
 may be had ? In the meantime, what can we do but con- CHAP, v 
 tinue as we are in those points of our creed which other 
 portions of the Church dispute, (unless we can be proved to 
 be wrong :) not denying their life and catholicity, but main- 
 taining our own, with submission to the whole Church ? The 
 position may be called unreal or chimerical, but it is that 
 which has been claimed for the Church of England by two 
 great men (to mention no more) whose names may as fairly 
 as any be taken to represent the great schools or sections in 
 this Church: Cranmer, when drawing towards his martyr- 
 dom, and Bramhall in his exile, expressly asserting not sim- 
 ply the truth, but the Catholicity of the English Church. 
 And they were not either of them persons apt to take up 
 with a chimerical, unreal view. 
 
 Nay, the question may be well asked much more easily 
 asked than answered whether, in the present divided state 
 of Christendom, all who believe in the holy Catholic Church 
 must not in reality, however unconsciously, be going on 
 under this very appeal : at least, as against other claimants I 
 The Greek will say, " I go by the voice of the present Church 
 diffusive ;" the Latin, " I go by the infallible voice of the See 
 of S. Peter ;" the English, " I go by what has been held fun- 
 damental everywhere, always, and by all :" ,but who is to de- 
 cide between them, which of these measures is right ? Yet 
 all, one may hope, would agree to defer to the decision of 
 such a Council as has been specified, were it obtainable. It 
 is our common position ; and we in England have so much 
 the more reason to acquiesce in it, as it does not force us 
 to "unchurch" (as it is termed) either of the other great 
 sections of Christendom, as they do mutually one another 
 and us. 
 
 Many a devout and loving heart, I well know, will rise up 
 against this view of our case. To be on this conditional, 
 temporary footing, will strike them as something so un- 
 satisfactory, so miserably poor and meagre, so unlike the 
 glorious vision which they have been used to gaze on of 
 the one Catholic Apostolic Church. And poor, indeed, and 
 disappointing it undoubtedly is, but not otherwise than 
 as the aspect of Christianity itself in the world is poor 
 
 N 
 
178 The Present Decay to be submitted to. 
 
 CHAP. V. and disappointing, compared with what we read of it in 
 the Gospel. 
 
 Men will not escape from this state of decay by going 
 elsewhere, though they may shut their eyes to the reality of 
 it. Rather, whatever our position be in the Church, since 
 God Almighty has assigned it to us for our trial, shall we 
 not accept it and make the best of it, in humble confidence 
 that according to our faith it will be to us ? 
 
 This (please God) is the way of truth and peace, and 
 therefore in it we may hope for a blessing; the rather, if 
 it should prove to be the way of the Cross also. But to 
 engage oneself, by a strong act of the will, to the whole 
 system of a body new to us, not upon the proper evidence of 
 that system, but because some in temporary authority among 
 ourselves have denied our holy doctrine this has something 
 in it so very unreal, that it can hardly agree with truth; 
 and so like ill-temper, that it gives but a bad omen for 
 peace. This is said, not from any special apprehension of 
 such evil in store for us now, but from sad remembrance 
 of what has occurred on former misinterpretations of our 
 Church's doctrine. 
 
 But we may hope for better things. If only two kinds of 
 people would be patient with one another those who have 
 hitherto worshipped Christ in the Eucharist undoubtingly, 
 and those who for vague fear of certain errors have shrunk 
 from owning, even to themselves, that they worshipped Him ; 
 if both sorts would pray and strive to be helped to take 
 simply the plain words of Holy Scripture and the Church, as 
 they do in respect of other mysteries ; then this Sacrament 
 of peace, ceasing to be to believers a Sacrament of contention, 
 would be free to work its Lord's work among men : being, 
 indeed, that wonder-working Fire which He came to kindle 
 on the earth, of power to transform and subdue all to itself. 
 ' Should what has been here set down contribute towards 
 that blessed end but in one single instance, God be thanked! 
 it will not have been written in vain. 
 
Protest and Appeal. 179 
 
 NOTE on c. v. 3, 10, p. 163, 175. 
 
 As an exemplification of the course here recommended, I subjoin, 
 1. a copy of a Protest and Appeal, occasioned by the Primate's De- 
 cision in the Court at Bath ; 2. a letter written in explanation of that 
 paper by some of those who signed it, but suppressed at the time in 
 deference to the scruples of others, who considered themselves impli- 
 cated in it in a way which they thought unadvisable. 
 
 1. Protest and Appeal (1856.) 
 
 " WE, the undersigned, Priests of the one Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church, called by God's Providence to minister in 
 the Province of Canterbury, according to the Book of Com- 
 mon Prayer, do hereby, in the Presence of Almighty God, 
 and in humble conformity with the tenor of our Ordination 
 Vows, as we understand them, make known and declare as 
 follows : 
 
 1. We believe (in the words used in the Book of Homi- 
 lies) that in the Holy Eucharist we " receive the Body and 
 Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the form of bread 
 and wine;" and with Bishop Cosin, "that upon the words 
 of Consecration, the Body and Blood of Christ is really 
 and substantially present, and so exhibited and given to 
 all that receive it ; and all this, not after a physical and 
 sensual, but after an heavenly and incomprehensible man- 
 ner;" of which statement, Bishop Cosin says, "it is con- 
 fessed by all Divines." 
 
 2. We believe, in the words of Bishop Ridley, " that the 
 partakinge of Christ's Bodie and of His Bloude unto the 
 faithfull and godlie, is the partakinge and fellowship of life 
 and of immortali tie. And, again, of the bad and ungodlie 
 receivers, St. Paul plainlie saieth thus : ' He that eateth of 
 this breade and drinketh of this cuppe unworthilie, he is 
 guilty of the Bodie and Bloude of the Lord. He that eat- 
 eth and drinketh unworthilie, eateth and drinketh his own 
 damnation, because he esteemeth not the Lord's Bodie ;' that 
 
 N 2 
 
180 Protest and Appeal. 
 
 is, he receiveth'not the Lord's Bodie with the honoure whiche 
 is due unto Hym." Or with Bishop Poynet, " that the Eu- 
 charist, so far as appertains to the nature of the Sacrament, 
 is truly the Body and Blood of Christ, is a truly divine and 
 holy thing, even when it is taken by the unworthy ; while, 
 however, they are not partakers of its grace and holiness, 
 but eat and drink their own death and condemnation." 
 
 3. We hold, with Bishop Andrewes, that " Christ Himself, 
 the inward part of the Sacrament, in and with the Sacrament, 
 apart from and without the Sacrament, wheresoever He is, is 
 to be worshipped." With whom agrees Archbishop Bram- 
 hall: "The Sacrament is to be adored, says the Council of 
 Trent, that is, (formally,) ' the Body and Blood of Christ/ 
 say some of your authors ; we say the same : ' the Sacra- 
 ment/ that is, ' the species of bread and wine/ say others \ 
 that we deny." 
 
 We therefore being convinced, 
 
 1. That the doctrine of the Real Presence of "the Body 
 and Blood of our Saviour Christ under the form of Bread 
 and Wine " has been uniformly held as a point of Faith in 
 the Church from the Apostolic times ; and was accepted by 
 General Councils, as it is also embodied in our own formu- 
 laries ; 
 
 . That the interpretation of Scripture most commonly 
 held in the Church has been, that the wicked, although they 
 can " in no wise be partakers of Christ," nor " spiritually eat 
 His Flesh and drink His Blood," yet do in the Sacrament 
 not only take, but eat and drink unworthily to their own. 
 condemnation the Body and Blood of Christ, which they do 
 not discern; 
 
 3. That the practice of worshipping Christ then and there 
 especially present, after Consecration and before communi- 
 cating, has been common throughout the Church : 
 
 And moreover that the Thirty-nine Articles were intended 
 to be, and are, in harmony with the Faith and Teaching of 
 the Ancient Undivided Church ; 
 
 Do hereby protest earnestly against so much of the opinion 
 of his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, in the case of 
 Ditcher v. Denison, as implies, directly or indirectly, that 
 
Protest with Explanation. 181 
 
 such statements as we have cited above are repugnant to the 
 doctrine of the Thirty-nine Articles: 
 
 And we appeal from the said opinion, decision, or sentence 
 of his Grace, in the first instance, to a free and lawful synod 
 of the Bishops of the province of Canterbury; and then, if 
 need be, to a free and lawful synod of all the Churches of our 
 communion, when such by God's mercy may be had." 
 
 2. Letter in explanation of the foregoing. 
 
 "!T having been given out that those who signed the 
 Protest and Appeal against the recent decision on the Doc- 
 trine of the Holy Eucharist may probably end in forming 
 a Nonjuring Church, will you allow us to state through your 
 paper, that we have no such intention or thought. The ob- 
 ject of that declaration was to liberate our own consciences. 
 
 We believe, in their most literal and fullest sense, every 
 word of the Articles, on the ground of which Archdeacon 
 Denison has been condemned. We cannot see how the 
 doctrines for which he has been condemned can be fairly- 
 brought under the Articles. We are convinced, that they 
 are points upon which the Church of England has not de- 
 cided ; and that those who have condemned him, have 
 proceeded on grounds foreign to the Articles. They have 
 brought meanings into the Articles, not out of them. Still, 
 since we believe that which the Archbishop and his Asses- 
 sors have condemned as contrary to the Articles, it became 
 matter of honesty to avow it. We are in a place of sacred 
 Trust. If we voluntarily retire from our place, we betray 
 our trust; if we continue in our place, saying nothing, we 
 seem to betray it. Either way there is grievous scandal. 
 The only course open to us is, publicly to apprise those in 
 authority over us, that we cannot obey them in this, and to 
 go on as before, leaving it to them to interfere with us, or 
 no, as they may think fit. It was on this view of our duty 
 that we signed that Paper. Our subscription to the Articles 
 is honest in itself, for we believe them in the only sense of 
 which we can see them to be capable. But we did not feel 
 
182 Conclusion. 
 
 it honest to hold a belief which had been condemned as 
 contrary to the Articles, and not to avow that we held it, 
 and make ourselves liable to the consequences. 
 
 The being of the Church of England we believe to be per- 
 fectly unaffected by this decision, grievous as the result of it 
 may be in respect of her well-being. The sentence of an 
 Archbishop's Court may make an Act penal ; but the sen- 
 tence of one man cannot bind the conscience. Prosecution 
 after prosecution can but deprive individuals. Nothing less 
 than the voice of the Church can make any decision the 
 judgment of the Church ; and nothing but the judgment of 
 the Church (in fact, a new " Article of Religion") can limit, 
 as now proposed, the meaning of the present Articles. If 
 the Church of England should will to condemn what hitherto* 
 she has not condemned, she must do it by a distinct Act. 
 
 We know there are some who wish us to be removed. But 
 we do not, please God, intend to do their work for them 
 by withdrawing. Even should we be deprived, we should 
 hope not to be silenced, nor degraded, nor excommunicated* 
 Meantime, in full conviction that we teach only what the 
 Church sanctions, or at any rate allows, we shall go on teach- 
 ing as long as we are permitted to do so. Through God's- 
 good Providence we have had our several spheres of duty 
 assigned to us. If it be His will, He will help us cheerfully 
 to exchange them for others. But it will be His doing, not 
 ours. We hope to know His Will best, by waiting for it." 
 
CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 SUGGESTED BY 
 
 A LATE PASTORAL LETTER 
 
 ON THE 
 
 DOCTRINE OF THE MOST HOLY EUCHARIST. 
 
 "Is anything too hard for the LORD ?" Gen. xviii. 14. 
 
 " Thus saith the Lord of Hosts ; If it be marvellous in the eyes of the remnant 
 of this people in these days, should it also be marvellous in Mine eyes ? saith the 
 Lord of Hosts." Zech. viii. 6. 
 
CONSIDERATIONS, &c. 
 
 subject and occasion of the late Pastoral Letter are so 
 important, at this time especially, to all who desire to be 
 faithful members of the Church Universal, that a few respect- 
 ful words on it may perhaps be without impropriety offered 
 to those more immediately interested, by one who has not 
 been called to work among them ; whose name, nevertheless, 
 by the joint kindness of one of their bishops and one of their 
 faithful Laymen, appears in the list of Scottish clergy ; who 
 is a member and priest of the Church in Scotland by virtue 
 of its unity with the Church of England, and is bound ac- 
 cordingly to suffer and rejoice with it ; who moreover feels 
 that by former publications he has incurred deep respon- 
 sibilities in this matter, and ought not to shrink from any 
 effort which may tend, how feebly soever, towards truth and 
 peace. He would address himself especially to those on 
 whom (under Providence) the well-being of the Scottish 
 Church seems mainly now to depend. Nay, it were no great 
 exaggeration to say, the whole Church must deeply feel the 
 effect, for good or for evil, of what is now taking place there; 
 for good, if, mutual forbearance prevailing, those who at the 
 bottom hold the same truth are content to spare and help one 
 another, each going on with his work in peace ; for unspeak- 
 able evil, if, as seems for the moment but too likely, every 
 man is to be against his neighbour, for want of a little 
 patience and explanation. 
 
 They on whom God's providence has laid the burden of 
 taking the next, and that a very critical step, are the Pres- 
 byters, as members of the several Diocesan Synods. For to 
 them the Six Bishops have referred their Pastoral Letter. 
 Each Bishop in his own diocese is to communicate the docu- 
 ment formally to his clergy. It does not clearly appear 
 
186 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 whether this is to be done in the way of official information, 
 or to elicit some opinion from the Presbyters virtually to 
 ask their adherence. 
 
 I say, to ask, not " to require " for although their Lord- 
 ships, in their Pastoral Letter, have not argued, but have 
 simply stated the conclusions they have come to, and so far 
 may seem to have put the matter merely on authority, using 
 such expressions as " you will continue to teach," " you will 
 not attempt," " you will remember ;" claiming, as it should 
 seem, the full right of a provincial Episcopate to overrule the 
 Diocesan bodies, and calling the step which they are taking 
 a " synodal action :" notwithstanding all this, one of their 
 Lordships in the Synod, apparently with the concurrence of 
 the rest, limited the object of the Letter as follows : " It was 
 necessary to make known that the other Bishops did not 
 concur in the opinions of the Bishop of Brechin. So far a& 
 it went beyond this, the Pastoral Letter was, directly speak- 
 ing, of an hortatory character, especially in regard to the 
 clergy." 
 
 The clergy, then, are in no wise invited to accept the 
 theological statements of the paper as having synodical 
 authority, properly so-called. They could not be so, for 
 several reasons. 
 
 First, the Scottish Episcopal Synod, like the English, is 
 confessedly not quite as an ancient provincial Council, in that 
 it has formally given up the right of making canons to an- 
 other body. The Bishops, having thus parted with a por- 
 tion of their authority to the Presbyters, and admitted them 
 to a co-ordinate share in their decisions, cannot, it is sub- 
 mitted, of their own will only, resume that authority, so de- 
 legated, according to the constitution of the Church under 
 which they accepted their office. Neither is the Synod, by 
 its own confession, a judicial body, or Court of Appeal, in this 
 cause; for which reason it would seem that the ancient 
 canons cited in the Pastoral Letter are not precisely in point,, 
 seeing that they all contemplate wrongs complained of, and 
 an appeal from some lesser authority a . Would it be putting 
 
 ^ At least the Council of Nice recog- court of appeal, to be held every year, 
 irises, not a deliberative synod, but a So, too, the Council of Antioch. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 187 
 
 its claim too low were we to say that the case is analogous to 
 that of one House of Parliament passing resolutions without 
 the other ? Nor would this defect be supplied by their ask- 
 ing the consent of the Presbyters, severally or by dioceses. 
 It would not yet be a canon, any more than a vote of the 
 Commons, similarly accepted by the Lords, would be law, 
 without the Royal assent. 
 
 And I must add, with all respect, that even if the consult- 
 ing body in this case were properly a Synod, like the primi- 
 tive Synods, still, in order to make good its claim to full 
 authority, it must proceed as a Synod, under conditions 
 carefully provided for by antiquity. 
 
 One usual condition is the presence of witnesses, after the 
 precedent of the first Council at Jerusalem. Besides the 
 Apostles who gave the decision, the elders and brethren 
 came together; not, of course, to give a voice in the ques- 
 tion of doctrine, as though the mind of the Holy Ghost were 
 not sufficiently declared by the inspired Apostles, but partly, 
 it may be surmised, for instruction, partly to attest the 
 Synodical Letter, which was to satisfy the Christian world 
 that there was no difference, as had been reported, among 
 the Apostles, as to the necessity of keeping the Law. In 
 the Council of Carthage on heretical Baptism, the greatest 
 part of the laity were present, and in the preliminary Synods 
 the Presbyters. The Synodical Letter from Antioch to Rome 
 and Alexandria against Paul of Samosata, running, as it does, 
 in the name of others besides the Bishops who are named, 
 implies those others to have been in the Council, and cogni- 
 sant of its proceedings. As to the great (Ecumenical Synods 
 of Nice, Ephesus, and Chalcedon, the thing is notorious. 
 Now the Synod which put out this Pastoral Letter de- 
 liberated with closed doors not one of the faithful was 
 present to attest their proceedings, and the allegations on 
 which they were grounded. Adherence to an episcopal state- 
 ment under such circumstances is evidently a far stronger 
 act of unreasoning submission than the ancient Councils 
 commonly required. 
 
 Again, we shall hardly find in antiquity an instance of 
 a Council, assembled on a serious question, as yet undeter- 
 
188 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 rained by any Synod, which, in announcing its proceedings 
 to the Church, barely set down the conclusions it had come 
 to without the premisses. On the contrary, the Synodical 
 "Letters are commonly mines of theological instruction, con- 
 fronting the heretic at large with Scripture and tradition, 
 diligently comparing one word of God with another, and 
 shewing, by elaborate Catena?, what the Church had always 
 believed. It is one thing to give assent to propositions thus 
 made out, the evidence also being laid unreservedly before 
 jou ; it is quite another thing to pledge yourself to the same 
 propositions upon a mere implicit trust in the persons framing 
 them. We may, we must, respectfully say to the Synod, 
 If ancient precedents were to be followed, we should be not 
 only certified in general of the matter having been regularly 
 and fully debated in the Synod itself, but the specific grounds 
 and authorities would also be communicated to us, upon 
 which the Bishops proceeded in each one of their important 
 decisions ; so much at least as might serve for a sample and 
 specimen. 
 
 The acts of all the great theological Councils, so far as they 
 have come down to us, indicate and exemplify this course. 
 To go no farther than the instances already cited : at Car- 
 thage St. Cyprian at large in writing, and each several 
 Bishop in words, set forth, not only his own opinion, but 
 what he considered sufficient reason for it ; at Antioch, as 
 is well known, Malchion, one of the most trustworthy 
 divines of the time, was invited to conduct the controversy 
 with the accused Bishop, in presence of the Synod, and the 
 arguments on both sides were taken down in short-hand, 
 .inserted in the Acts of the Council, and published b . And 
 I suppose no person is ignorant how the same part was per- 
 formed at Nice by the great Athanasius, then only a deacon, 
 although but fragments only of the Acts of that Council 
 remain. The records, too, of what {passed at Constantinople 
 in the second (Ecumenical Synod are almost entirely lost ; 
 but that the same method of public remonstrance was then 
 employed towards the Macedonians which had been tried 
 with the Arians at Nice, the histories of the time plainly 
 
 b Euseb. ap. Routh, Reliq. Sacr., iii. 324, 325, 330. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 
 
 indicate. As for Ephesus and Chalcedon, the records of 
 what was transacted in those Councils are as full and minute, 
 and were as accessible to all who were officially concerned in 
 them, as any documents in our modern courts of law. 
 
 Now, if the great Synods of the whole Church were so 
 careful to give every information, not only of their con- 
 clusions, but of the way in which they came to them, before 
 they claimed the adherence of the clergy, and of the faith- 
 ful generally ; much more (if possible) would the same care 
 appear to be required, when the Bishops of a single province 
 are dealing with such very serious matters, matters which, 
 concerning as they do the faith and practice of every Chris- 
 tian regarding the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, 
 have never yet been directly brought into question in any 
 Synod whose authority we acknowledge. I say this, not as 
 questioning the right and duty of the Bishops, as Bishops, to 
 watch over this, as over all portions of the faith ; but in 
 order to make it as plain as possible that our Eight Reverend 
 Fathers of the Scottish Church, in referring their Pastoral 
 Letter to the Diocesan Synods, could not have intended to 
 ask their adherence to it, but simply to inform them of a view 
 which they, the Bishops, are disposed to take of certain por- 
 tions of Christian doctrine, and to caution them against cer- 
 tain extremes. 
 
 And in this I am confirmed by observing that the sister 
 Church of England has laid her Synods under the very same 
 restrictions which have been pointed out as deducible from 
 ancient practice. As at Antioch, Nice, and the other places 
 above mentioned, the orthodox process always was to con- 
 firm, both by the Old and New Testament, whatever was 
 alleged as part of the apostolical teaching and tradition of 
 the Fathers : so in the statute, 1 Eliz., c. 1, which may be 
 considered as a kind of concordat between this Church and 
 State, order is taken that in any Council taking upon itself 
 to declare what is Heresy, the same shall be so declared 
 " by the express words of the Canonical Scriptures." With- 
 out such proof, the declaration of vital doctrine in Synod 
 need not, it seems, have power to bind the inferior orders. 
 
 For all these reasons, it is the duty of the clergy to assume 
 
190 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 that the Pastoral Letter was not intended to be received as 
 having any canonical authority, but simply as the result of 
 counsel gravely taken by those six individual Bishops, one 
 amongst another, previous to the Synod. For the Letter is 
 known to have been printed as it now stands before the 
 Bishops met in synod. To a document so issued, attention 
 and respect must of course be due. Still it leaves room for 
 dissent, silence, or remonstrance, as the case may require, 
 without undutifuluess. 
 
 As far as I see, there are but two ways in which the 
 Diocesan Synods may fairly and canonicaily deal with the 
 Letter. The first, simply to acknowledge the receipt of it, 
 and the watchful care of its propounders, promising to con- 
 sider it thoroughly with an obedient heart, but pronouncing 
 no opinion whatever upon any disputed doctrine which it 
 touches on. And this, if I may venture to say so, is by far 
 the wisest and most fitting course for the clergy of the 
 second order to adopt, under all the circumstances of the 
 case. The only alternative would be, to institute a careful 
 and exact inquiry into the meaning and evidence of every 
 part of the document, with a view to some expression of 
 opinion on the whole, or on certain portions, if such seem 
 advisable. 
 
 Should this latter course be adopted, a material question 
 will arise. By what rule must the Synods, (or any deputed 
 by them to consider and report on the matter,) proceed, in 
 making up their minds regarding the grave doctrinal sayings 
 of the Pastoral Letter? In the absence of any statement to 
 the contrary, we may assume that they are to recognise the 
 standards which the Bishop of Brechin himself desires to be 
 tried by c ; which are, first, the Catechism and Articles, then 
 the authorised doctrinal formularies, with the exhortations, 
 directions, and rubrics, all to be referred to Holy Scripture 
 as paramount, and where the meaning of Scripture and 
 Church formularies is ambiguous, all to be interpreted 
 by the consent of the Undivided Church, if it may be as- 
 certained. 
 
 c Charge, 2nd Edition, pp. 5, 8. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 191 
 
 Had the Synod, in considering the Bishop of Brechin's 
 Charge, declined acknowledging either of these as an element 
 in our theological decisions, so material an objection to the 
 Charge would surely have been noticed. It would have 
 been plainly said, ft To consult antiquity in this way, is an 
 unauthorised addition to the Rule of Faith." They have 
 said no such thing. On the contrary, they claim to be 
 teaching what the Primitive Church did ; for the very gist 
 t)f their complaint is, that " it is attempted to restore" cer- 
 tain " excesses with which the primitive teaching had been 
 overlaid ;" and " the testimony produced" they disallow as 
 misinterpreted, not as proceeding from sources of no author- 
 ity. They claim also a certain prerogative in teaching, on 
 the ground that it was " constantly exercised by the Bishops 
 of the Primitive Church" 
 
 There is ground here for much thankfulness ; for (I wish 
 to say it not offensively, but as simple matter of fact) there 
 have been symptoms in some quarters worthy of all respect, 
 of a disposition to follow the example of a late Court at 
 Bath, by ignoring the voice of Antiquity in this controversy. 
 A Bishop has recommended the parties in a certain case 
 of controverted doctrine to confine their line of argument 
 *' to the formularies of the Scottish and English Reformed 
 Churches, (assuming them to be, as they certainly are, in 
 accordance with Holy Scripture and the teaching of the 
 Primitive Church,) and to the authority of theological writers 
 of those Churches, and others in communion with them;" 
 and has ruled, that " any argument beyond these limits will 
 be held irrelevant to the case now to be tried," a case in- 
 volving (among others) the disputed points in the Bishop of 
 Brechin's Charge. There was somewhat in this very startling, 
 to those who have been taught to believe that the very cha- 
 racteristic of the English Church, as distinguished from the 
 Roman divines on the one hand, and the merely Protestant 
 bodies on the other, is her loyal and constant reference to 
 primitive Antiquity ; as in the 20th Article, the Prefaces to the 
 Prayer-book and Ordinal, the Canon of 1571, and in regard 
 of this controversy, the Homily on the Sacrament especially. 
 We were at a loss to understand how the standard theo- 
 
192 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 logical writers of the Keformed Church could be appealed to^ 
 without virtually appealing to the Fathers of the Undivided 
 Church also; to whom our own divines so constantly refer, 
 to whose consenting witness they attribute so great au- 
 thority. But now, whatever the drift and purpose of that 
 direction was, we are sure that it could not have been in- 
 tended to separate this Church from the Church of the 
 Fathers, as assuredly it would be separated in a most mate- 
 rial point, pertaining not to one doctrine only, but to the 
 yery rule and standard of the entire faith, if the process 
 enjoined in that particular cause were on principle to be 
 carried out in all doctrinal questions among us. The Pas- 
 toral Letter implies that we are to be spared this calamity, 
 and we cannot be too thankful for it. 
 
 Proceeding then to examine the paper by the tests which 
 our Church directs us to apply ; those who sympathize with 
 Bishop Forbes find this ground also of thankfulness, that 
 the Bishops, strong as some of their words sound, distinctly 
 reserve this important question, Whether or no the colleague 
 whom they are censuring in their Charge, exceeded the lati- 
 tude of interpretation which the Church Formularies allow. 
 This concession the Synod makes in saying, "The case 
 may not amount to a call for a formal presentment." Spe- 
 cially as to the meaning of the Rubric on Adoration, " the 
 matter not having been ruled by a General Synod of our 
 own Church/' they are "satisfied meanwhile" to go else- 
 where "for their own guidance." They imply the same 
 where they affirm concerning Bishop Forbes* way of teach- 
 ing the Real Presence that "our Church has given us no 
 authority whereby we can require " so and so " to be be- 
 lieved." The stress seems to be laid on the word " require," 
 as though their Lordships might not account it an offence 
 simply to believe or teach the doctrine, but would not have 
 it urged as necessary either to salvation or to communion 
 with the English Church. 
 
 And in this there is apparently no difference between 
 them and their colleague ; for he too " regrets d ," (speaking. 
 
 d Charge, p. 9. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 193 
 
 of Mr. Denison's case,) " that a question not ruled by the 
 Church should have been made the test for admission to 
 Holy Orders :" he considers that " the condemnation of one 
 peculiar view of the Presence of Christ in connection with 
 the Sacrament/' is another thing from denying that Pre- 
 sence altogether. Such, indeed, may be its logical result; 
 but God forbid that those who believe in heart should be 
 tied to all the hard logical consequences of every error which 
 besets them through imperfect understanding. When the 
 Church Universal has spoken plainly, then it is another 
 thing. But until then, as the Bishop of Brechin e. g. 
 would shrink, we may be sure, from the thought of anathe- 
 matizing or excluding any for demurring to his doctrinal 
 statements ; (which to him nevertheless are vital, because 
 he feels that unless he hold and teach them he must give up 
 what is vital ;) so, on the other hand, it seems not unrea- 
 sonable to hope, that he and others like-minded will not be 
 sentenced as heretics, or visited with severe moral censure, 
 as though they were maintaining all which their premisses 
 are thought by their opponents to imply, but which they 
 earnestly and expressly disclaim and reason against. 
 
 One word more on this head. If the right construction 
 has been given to the Pastoral Letter, clearly the Bishops 
 are in no wise committed by it to a decision one way or the 
 other, in any cause relating to this doctrine which may corne 
 before them on appeal. As in all judicial processes which 
 excite interest out of doors, men may speculate on the pro- 
 bable result; but should it be other than they look for, they 
 will have no right, from anything contained in the Pastoral 
 Letter, to charge the Synod with inconsistency or wavering. 
 
 Their positive doctrinal statements, as far as they go, are 
 such as all of us, I trust, would cheerfully subscribe. First, 
 the doctrine of Sacramental Grace in general, and the grace, 
 dignity, and efficacy of the Lord's Supper in particular, are 
 treated with the deepest reverence, as essential parts of our 
 religion. On the Real Presence, they say, " The consecrated 
 elements of bread and wine become in a Mystery the Body 
 and Blood of Christ, for purposes of grace to all who receive 
 them worthily, and for condemnation to those who receive 
 
 o 
 
194 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 the same unworthily." This sentence acknowledges, 1. The 
 Virtue of Consecration : 2. The ineffable union in the Sacra- 
 ment of the outward and inward parts, expressed, as in many 
 old liturgies, and in the Scottish Office, hy the phrase, " be- 
 come the Body and Blood of Christ :" 3. An Objective Pre- 
 sence for condemnation to unworthy receivers. I say this, 
 assuming that the Bishops did not, by those words, "in a 
 Mystery," which they have inserted in the midst of the 
 declaration of the Scottish Office, intend to qualify or ex- 
 plain away the words of that Office. Although they dis- 
 claim the Bishop of Brechin's mode of " pleading for what 
 has recently been called " (as they say) " the Real and Ob- 
 jective Presence," they cannot mean to explain away the 
 statement of the Scottish Office itself, which they adopt. 
 They cannot mean to take words which, have always had 
 a recognised sense, and give them a different sense, by 
 adding those other words, " in a mystery." Whatever 
 then be the difference which they suppose to exist between 
 their belief and that of the Bishop of Brechin, they must 
 hold, and recommend to us, the doctrine, which, to prevent 
 any ambiguous use of the words " Real Presence," has, by 
 the Bishop of Brechin and by others, been called the Real 
 Objective Presence. 
 
 On the Sacrifice, the positive part of their formula is, 
 " This Sacrifice of the Altar is to be regarded ... as the 
 means whereby we represent, commemorate, and plead with 
 praise and thanksgiving before God the unspeakable merits 
 of the precious death of Christ; and whereby He commu- 
 nicates and applies to our souls all the benefits of that one 
 full and all-sufficient Sacrifice once made upon the Cross." 
 Here 1. Holy Communion is a Sacrifice; 2. The Holy Table 
 is an Altar; 3. It is "the means" (by way of eminency, 
 otherwise the phrase is unmeaning) "whereby we com- 
 memorate" Christ's Passion "before God," the Father, 
 and "whereby He applies all the benefits thereof to our 
 souls." 
 
 It is just the same in regard of Eucharistical Adoration. 
 "The consecrated Elements, being the communion of the 
 Body and the Blood of Christ, are to be received with all 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 195 
 
 lowly veneration and thankfulness .... for the advance- 
 ment of God's Majesty, and to give Him alone the honour 
 and glory due to Him." All this recommends itself at once 
 to every heart, that knows anything of natural piety, and 
 believes anything of Sacramental grace. 
 
 But it is different when we come to the negative portions 
 of the Pastoral Letter. There we find much that is open 
 to grave objection ; some things expressly and some indi- 
 rectly delivered. Among the former may be specified first, 
 that which one would on theological grounds regret more 
 than any other sentence in the Letter, only we may feel 
 sure that it stands there by mere inadvertence, and is not at 
 all meant to say what it really does say. "As our Church, 
 has repudiated the. doctrine of Transubstantiation, so she 
 has given us no authority whereby we can require it to be 
 believed that the Substance of Christ's Body and Blood, 
 still less His entire Person as God and Man, now glorified 
 in the Heavens, is made to exist with, in, or under the ma- 
 terial substances of Bread and Wine." 
 
 In transcribing this, I was struck with the difference of 
 expression between the first and second clauses of the sen- 
 tence. " Our Church repudiates Transubstantiation :" what 
 of the other doctrine, of the Substantial or Essential Pre- 
 sence ? No word of " repudiation" there, but only "she 
 has given us no authority whereby we can require it to be 
 believed." As far as this statement goes, she may have left 
 it an open question. The contrast with the case of Tran- 
 substantiation brings out strongly the view which I have 
 ventured to take above of the purpose of the Synod. 
 
 Yet even this modified saying could hardly be accepted 
 without scruple by one deeply considering our Catechism, 
 and comparing one portion of it with another. " How- 
 many parts are there in a Sacrament?" "Two: the out- 
 ward visible sign, and the inward spiritual Grace." "The 
 outward part or sign," and " the inward part, or Thing sig- 
 nified." These answers evidently connect the outward and 
 inward parts by a real though mysterious and wholly spi- 
 ritual union, and suppose one part as real as the other: 
 
 o 2 
 
196 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 they give the idea, that where and when the Sacrament 
 is, there and then both these parts are; that the one part 
 is given by the other, and under the veil, or as the Cate- 
 chism calls it, the Form, of the other. The prima facie 
 sense of the answer is, that the two parts co-exist, exist 
 together, exist one with the other, in the complex and 
 marvellous work of God which the Church has taught us 
 to call a Sacrament ; and specially, that as in Baptism the 
 regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit as the inward part, 
 and the water with the Word as the outward part, so in 
 the Lord's Supper the Body 'and Blood of Christ as the 
 inward part, and the consecrated bread and wine as the 
 outward part, co-exist, exist together, exist one with an- 
 other; not in figure, but "verily and indeed." And the 
 plain literal meaning of " the Body of Christ " is " the sub- 
 stance or essence of His Body," "that which makes it to 
 be the very thing itself, and not something else." Unless 
 there be some special reason to the contrary, every one 
 would naturally so take it. 
 
 The supposed reason to the contrary here is that the Sub- 
 stance of Christ's Body being in heaven cannot be also on 
 earth in the Sacrament. And the obvious answer is, that 
 we do not know enough of what is possible in regard of 
 our Lord's glorified Body, that Body which is inseparably 
 united to the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, 
 to be certain that our Lord may not cause it to be really 
 in the Sacrament by a supernatural and spiritual Presence, 
 though locally, in its form and dimensions, we know and 
 believe that it is only in heaven. It is not self-evident, 
 nor has our Master anywhere taught us, that this is "too 
 hard for the Lord." May I be allowed to ask, not invidi- 
 ously, but very seriously, Will not those who shall unre- 
 servedly adhere to this Pastoral Letter be in fact commit- 
 ting themselves to the proposition, "It is too hard for the 
 Lord ? " Had they not better at least leave it doubtful until 
 it is more certainly proved? 
 
 Against this mode of reasoning it is often alleged, that 
 neither do they who employ it take the Words of Institution, 
 literally, as they profess to do ; seeing that our Lord doea 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 197 
 
 not say, " In, with, under e , or by this Bread, my Body exists, 
 or is contained, or conveyed" but simply, "This is my Body." 
 " This" they seem to say, is literally equivalent to " This 
 Sread which I give you : this Bread which you see and 
 feel." But what if one construed it, as the Roman Ca- 
 tholics do, " This which I am giving you," could the con- 
 struction be grammatically disproved? 
 
 In truth, however, we are not called in this matter to 
 stand so closely upon syllables. Those phrases have been 
 employed, some by one, some by another, " to declare rather 
 the truth than the manner f " of the awful Sacramental Pre- 
 sence. And the saying, " Under the form of bread and 
 wine," has been specially adopted, as it was considered to 
 have express sanction in the Book of Homilies : a notion 
 which has never, that I know of, been proved erroneous. 
 But the Presence itself is believed, not because of this or 
 that saying, but because, being in itself consistent with 
 the letter of Scripture and the analogy of the Faith, it has 
 been held and taught everywhere, always, and by all, in the 
 times of the undivided Church. The proof of this, as con- 
 densed in Dr. Pusey's book on the Real Presence, is such, 
 that any one setting himself to explain it away may as rea- 
 sonably employ himself next in shewing that the Fathers 
 did not teach the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 The words then of the Institution being capable of a literal 
 sense, those of the Catechism and of the Fathers concur in 
 authorizing us to take them literally : and the onus probandi 
 lies altogether upon the deniers of that sense. Prima facie, 
 therefore, and as the plain and inevitable result, not of any 
 refined logical process, but of simply taking words as they 
 stand, our Church may seem to many to "require it to be 
 believed that the substance of Christ's Body and Blood is 
 made to exist with, in, or under, the material substance of 
 bread and wine." They, of course, must so far demur to 
 the first " instruction " of the Synod. 
 
 And it would fortify them in their reluctance, when they 
 
 * Is it quite fair for the Bishop of used ; keeping himself to the language 
 
 Brechin. to be charged, as he virtually of the ancient Church ? 
 is in the Pastoral Letter, with these f Hooker, V. Ivi. 9. 
 .Lutheran formulae, which he never 
 
198 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 came to consider the other passage, in which their Lordships 
 have adverted to the same point, indicating that whether or 
 no a Figurative or Virtual Presence be the only view tenable 
 in our Church, they at least are convinced that it is the only 
 correct view. The passage in cjuestion selects from the 
 Bishop of Brechin's statements two which it terms " doctrin- 
 ally unsound." The first is, "Supreme Adoration is due to 
 Christ, as mysteriously present in the Gifts." The supposed 
 unsoundness here must lie in the assuming our Lord's mys- 
 terious Presence in the gifts. For granting that Presence, 
 who could refuse Adoration ? And to Christ the Adora- 
 tion could not be less than supreme. The statement there- 
 fore of the Synod ought not to be accepted, unless by those 
 who see their way to answer what has been just now al- 
 leged from Scripture and the Catechism, interpreted by the 
 Fathers. 
 
 Observe that the denial, if it is to be strictly taken, ex- 
 tends to all Real Presence of Christ's Body, as well within as 
 without the faithful receiver. It contradicts even Hooker's 
 paraphrase, " This is to you, and in you, My Body." Plainly 
 it must do so, so far as it is grounded on the notion that 
 there can be no Real Presence except what is corporeal, and 
 so inconsistent with the verity of our Lord's human nature. 
 Such a Presence as that would be equally impossible in or at 
 reception, as it was before. 
 
 Although I feel sure that their Lordships did not intend 
 it, I fear it would not be going too far to say, that in strictness 
 of reasoning, whoever accepts this sentence of the Pastoral 
 Letter commits himself to the following proposition: "There 
 is not in the Holy Eucharist, from beginning to end, any 
 real, essential Presence of Christ's blessed Body and Blood." 
 A startling negative, and hard to be proved; and one which in 
 its results would be found I fear no exception to the aphorism 
 of a great Anglican Divine and zealous antagonist of Roman- 
 ism, Dr. Thomas Jackson, to this effect : "As in novel pro- 
 positions positive there is danger of heresy, so in negatives of 
 infidelity." 
 
 Men may say, " Nay, but He is Virtually Present present 
 by power and effect present as the sun in the heavens it 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 199 
 
 is all one, as if He were present." You may say this to 
 yourself, and try to believe it, and to be thoroughly con- 
 tented with it; but it will never do. To the loving heart it 
 never can be the same thing, whether your condescending 
 Saviour, in His human nature, is really come to visit you, 
 as in the days of His flesh, or no. The limitation to a virtual 
 Presence no more satisfies the subjective longings of the 
 believer than it does the objective sayings of the Church and 
 of the Fathers. There is palpable proof of this. Holy and 
 devout writers of our Church, who perhaps have been driven 
 by the seeming necessities of controversy to argue and con- 
 clude as this Pastoral Letter does, when they come to pray 
 and give thanks, when, instead of disputing on Eucharisti- 
 <cal doctrine, they have to pour out their hearts in Eucha- 
 ristical devotion, what is the tone which they invariably 
 take? They borrow instinctively the words and thoughts 
 which most aptly express the mind of those whom they have 
 just before been reasoning against. Nothing but a Real 
 Presence real in the nearest and highest sense real as the 
 things of God are real nothing less than this will content 
 them then. Bishop Jeremy Taylor may perhaps be cited as 
 <a remarkable instance of this. In such cases, as in the con- 
 struction of Church Formularies, " Legem credendi lex sta- 
 tuit supplicandi." The mere dogmatical sayings of indi- 
 viduals, or of the Church, or of any portion of it, must be 
 qualified and interpreted by the words which they say to 
 God in prayer. And this is a great and peculiar refreshment 
 all through this sad controversy, that persons on both sides 
 are quite sure of their opponents not meaning the mischief 
 which, as they think, inevitably follows from the opinions 
 they deprecate ; and in their prayers, which are grounded on 
 the positive truth they hold in common, they may heartily 
 and comfortably unite, even though they have been disputing, 
 or are to dispute, about the full meaning of those prayers. 
 Each side not only may in charity, but must in truthfulness, 
 say of the other, Their faith is better than the words by 
 which they express it. 
 
 For instance, (to continue our examination.) one is quite 
 sure that the Synod did not intend to pass a censure oa 
 
200 
 
 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 Bishop Andrewes ; and yet in words they have done 
 unless I am greatly mistaken. 
 
 so, 
 
 Bishop Andrewes 
 ad Bell. 195) says, 
 
 " Who will grant him [Bellarmine] 
 tin?, that the worship of the Sacra- 
 went is equivalent to that ' of Christ 
 in the Sacrament T Of course Christ 
 Himself, the Bes Sacramenti, in, and 
 with the Sacrament, out of, and apart 
 from the Sacrament, wheresoever He 
 Is, is to be worshipped. Now, the King 
 [James] lays it down that Christ, in 
 the Eucharist, being truly present, is 
 truly also to be worshipped ; not so the 
 Sacrament, that is, the ' earthly part/ 
 as Irensous, the ' visible/ as Augustine 
 calls it 
 
 "And we too * adore* in the myste- 
 ries ' The Flesh of Christ/ with Am- 
 brose j and [as in Gregory Nazlanzen] 
 not * that, but Him, who is worshipped 
 
 on the altar.* Neither ' do we 
 
 eat [That] Flesh without first adoring 
 fit,'] with Augustine. And yet we 
 none of us adore the Sacrament." 
 
 Bishop Andrewes, (as above,) speaks 
 of " Christ Himself," (i.e., of course, 
 the Person of Christ, God the Son,) as 
 *'the Res Sacramenti" and as ' being' 
 (existing) " in and with the Sacra- 
 ment," explaining that by "the Sa- 
 crament" here, he means " the earthly 
 ar.d visible part," " the gifts," so the 
 Bishop of Brechin calls them, as An- 
 tiquity often did, with allusion to 
 S. Matt. v. 23, 24. 
 
 (Resp. The Pastoral Letter says : 
 
 " [It is] doctrinally unsound [to in- 
 fer that] supreme adoration becomes 
 due to Christ, as mysteriously present 
 in the gifts; or, as it is expressed 
 elsewhere, ' to Christ in the gifts.* 
 We are convinced that this conclusion 
 is not to be found in Holy Scripture, 
 nor has been deduced therefrom by 
 the Church, and persuaded that the/ 
 teaching of it has given rise to cor- 
 ruptions and superstitions Th 
 
 reasoning by which it is maintained 
 is, in our opinion, fallacious ; and the 
 testimony of authorities produced in 
 its support, .... will generally be 
 found not to justify the use to which 
 it has been applied." 
 
 The Pastoral Letter seems to object 
 to the phrases, " Christ in the gifts," 
 " Christ mysteriously present in the 
 gifts," and protests against teaching 
 that Christ's Person " is made to exist 
 with, in, or wider the material sub- 
 stances of Bread and Wine." 
 
 Is it so or no that an unprejudiced person, comparing 
 these statements, (which I trust are not unfairly exhibited,) 
 would say that the Pastoral Letter animadverts upon Bishop 
 Andrewcs' teaching, censures it as " exceeding the truth of 
 God's Holy Word," and " earnestly entreats the faithful not 
 to suffer themselves to be disturbed or misguided by it?'" 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 201 
 
 If any say, Bishop Andrewes may have erred, or his meaning 
 may be mistaken by those who plead it ; then this ought to 
 be thoroughly made out, (which I am sure it cannot be,) 
 before any synod or single clergyman makes himself respon- 
 sible for the portions of the document which seem to con- 
 demn him, as well as Bishop Forbes. 
 
 Together with Bishop Andrewes, the Synod may seem 
 to have virtually condemned the following passage from 
 a treatise on the Church, by one to whom this generation is 
 deeply indebted; a work especially recommended to stu- 
 dents preparing for holy orders, by such as the late Primate- 
 of England and the present Primate of Ireland : 
 
 "This Catholic and Apostolic Church . . . believes that the Body 
 or Flesh, and the Blood of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Redeemer 
 of the world, both God and Man, united indivisibly in One Person, 
 are verily and indeed given to, taken, eaten, and received by, the 
 faithful in the Lord's Supper, under the outward sign or form of 
 bread and wine, which is, on this account, the partaking or com- 
 munion of the Body and Blood of Christ. She believes that the 
 Eucharist is not the sign of an absent body, and that those who 
 partake of it receive not merely the figure, or shadow, or sign, of 
 Christ's Body, but the reality itself. And as Christ's divine and 
 human natures are inseparably united, so she believes that we re- 
 ceive in the Eucharist, not only the Flesh and Blood of Jesus 
 Christ, but Christ Himself, God and 
 
 Many other passages might be, and have been, cited from 
 Anglican divines, whom the Synod could not have intended 
 to condemn : some among them coming with peculiar force, 
 as expressing the sentiments of the very persons to whom, 
 by God's providence, was committed the last revision of the 
 Prayer-book. It were a strong step, and would need irre- 
 sistible evidence, to cast out men or opinions as evil for 
 holding to the Formularies in that sense which the compilers 
 of them have recorded as their own. 
 
 And in regard of those passages, no doubt very numerous, 
 which may be gathered from approved writers of our Church, 
 sounding as if in condemnation of the Real Presence, I be- 
 
 * Palmer on the Church, p. ii., ch. vii., 527, 8. Bivington, 1838. 
 
202 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 lieve they may all be reduced under three heads. They are 
 directed either against, (1,) a gross corporal Presence, as of 
 an earthly body; or, (2,) the notion of ubiquity, as main- 
 tained by some of the Lutherans; or, (3,) they as much 
 disprove the receiving and eating as they do the real giving 
 and taking of Christ's Real Body. With the first and se- 
 cond class, those whom the Synod censures entirely agree ; 
 as to the third, it is hard to see how they can be reconciled 
 with the Catechism and Communion Offices. 
 
 A still graver difficulty arises upon considering those 
 -words of the Pastoral Letter, which appear to contemplate 
 the Body and Blood of Christ that portion of our Blessed 
 Lord's Manhood which He took of the Virgin Mary as 
 capable of existing apart from His Sacred Person. The sen- 
 tence I allude to is this : " The Church has given us no 
 authority whereby we can require it to be believed that the 
 substance of Christ's Body and Blood, still less His entire 
 Person, as God and Man, now glorified in the heavens, is made 
 to exist with, in, or under the material substances of Bread 
 and Wine." And the words which raise the difficulty are 
 contained in the clause, "Still less His entire Person, as 
 God and Man, now glorified in the heavens." 
 
 The theological force of this sentence is not to me very 
 evident. Certainly it is quite unnecessary to the main argu- 
 ment of the Synod in that passage. To deny the substantial 
 Presence would have sufficed, without determining whether, 
 if granted, it would involve such presence of Christ as is here 
 denied. As it is, I cannot make out the passage, without 
 supposing some such process as the following to have passed 
 in the writer's mind : " Even if one granted the Substantial 
 Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in the Holy Eucharist, 
 it would not follow that Christ is present in ' His entire 
 Person, as God and Man, now glorified in the heavens/ 
 But the Bishop of Brechin assumes that it would follow ; 
 this, then, is another error, which may be noted by the 
 way." 
 
 Now, of course, no one can say that this was at all the 
 train of thought which occasioned the sentence in question. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 203 
 
 But they who are unable to understand it otherwise cannot 
 but earnestly hope that such meaning may be disavowed. 
 For, if adopted and carried vut, it would involve us in error* 
 compared with which the worst that is imputed to the Charge 
 would be as nothing. It would make us, in one word, 
 *' plainly and inevitably Nestorians." Well may one shrink 
 from the word, and from the grave responsibility incurred 
 by so naming it; but " a necessity is laid upon us" (not to 
 charge any of our brethren, or any of our Fathers in God> 
 with anything deliberately heretical, God forbid, but) to 
 shew, according to the understanding and knowledge which 
 He has given us, what is " erroneous and strange doctrine/' 
 from whatever quarter it may come ; what it is, and whither 
 it leads. 
 
 Now the orthodox faith teaches, according to the Second 
 Article, that by the Incarnation " two whole and perfect 
 Natures, i.e., the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together 
 in one Person, never to be divided ; whereof is one Christ, 
 very God and very Man." The Creed of S. Athanasius 
 teaches that "our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is 
 God and Man ; . . yet not two, but one Christ : one, 
 not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking 
 of the Manhood into God ; . . not by confusion of sub- 
 stance, but by Unity of Person :" and that, " as the reason- 
 able soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one 
 Christ." And it is essential to this doctrine that we believe 
 the Son no less than the Father and the Holy Ghost, to be 
 for ever one and the same Person : one only and wholly 
 Divine. He is in nowise affected as to His personality by 
 having taken to Himself the nature of man, so as that His 
 Person should now be divisible, made up as it were of two 
 parts, His Godhead and His Manhood; so as that, where 
 the Manhood is not (e.g., elsewhere than in Bethlehem at 
 the time of His birth,) there should be only part of His 
 Person ; nor yet that it should be possible anywhere or at 
 any time for the Manhood, either soul or body or both, 
 to exist, otherwise than in union with the Person of God 
 the Word such union as is expressed in the Creed by its 
 i>eing "taken into" that Person. But as in the union of 
 
204 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 soul and body in a man (which the Church likens in some 
 way to the union of God and Man in Christ) there are twa 
 natures, the material and spiritual, but only one person, the 
 man and the personality resides in the higher nature, (for 
 the soul, not the body, is the man's self, the responsible 
 person,) so also in Christ. His Personality resides altogether 
 in His Divine Nature, in that He is the very Word of God : 
 the reasonable Soul, which with the Body He took to Him- 
 self, did never for one instant exist apart from Himself, nor 
 did it either with or without the Body constitute a fresh or 
 human person, to be united to or merged in that which was 
 eternal and divine. He was just the same Person after as 
 before His Incarnation, only subsisting in a different man- 
 ner, with and in a human soul and body for ever made one 
 with Him, the perfect Manhood taken into Him who is- 
 perfect God. 
 
 To speak therefore at all of His " entire Person," as if His 
 Person could be in any way divided, anywhere otherwise 
 than entire, I suppose to be a grave mistake. His entire 
 " Being " or "Essence," might in some cases be a more un- 
 exceptionable phrase. But in this case the distinction would 
 be irrelevant. In itself it would be more unexceptionable, 
 because although the Person of God the Son be omnipresent, 
 the nature of Man, both soul and body, which He has vouch- 
 safed to take into that Person, is not omnipresent, else it 
 would have ceased to exist, it would have been swallowed 
 up, as some have dreamed, in the higher, the Divine Nature. 
 
 On the other hand, wherever Christ's Manhood is, it exists 
 as united to Christ's Person, as taken into God, and no 
 otherwise : it never had, never will have, any other mode 
 of subsistence. It carries with it always and everywhere 
 a peculiar personal Presence of Him who is both God and 
 Man, God over all, blessed for ever, Man once crucified 
 for all, now glorified in the heavens above all. To deny this 
 to admit or maintain that the holy Humanity of Christ, 
 or the essential parts of it, the Body and Blood of Christ, 
 may or ever could exist, really, not figuratively, apart from 
 His Divine Nature this is, logically, to open the door ta 
 a series of profane imaginations, which would make out the 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 205 
 
 "whole Christian creed, the whole work of our redemption, 
 to be nujl and void. For then it need not be God In- 
 carnate, Who according to the Scriptures was conceived and 
 born, Who suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, Who 
 descended into hell, rose again, ascended, sits on the right 
 hand, sends the Holy Ghost, will come again in glory to 
 judge. If Christ's Body is to be conceived of as apart from 
 the Person of God the Word, then it need not be God In- 
 carnate who did and suffered all those great things in our 
 behalf, but only the Man Christ Jesus, raised up in due 
 time, first to suffer and die, then to be glorified and deified 
 for us. And what is this but direct Nestorianism ? which 
 in one shape or another, I much fear, bids fair to become 
 the prevalent tendency among the religionists of our day. 
 
 It will be seen from this, that even if we suppose the word 
 t( Person" to have been inadvertently used by the Synod 
 for "Being" or "Essence," it will not bring out a sound 
 meaning for the clause we are objecting to. For in this 
 way only could the clause so altered have a sound meaning, 
 viz., if it imputed to the Bishop of Brechin what no one ever 
 held ; not only that our Lord's entire Essence is present in 
 the Holy Eucharist, but that it is there exclusively, so as 
 to cease to be elsewhere. Taken in any other way, the 
 Synod implies, that it is a less error to believe that our 
 Lord's Body is present without His Godhead than with it. 
 That is (according to the plain meaning of the words " still 
 less") it would be a less error to believe that our Lord's 
 Manhood is in the Holy Eucharist apart from His Godhead, 
 or else His Body apart from both His Manhood and His 
 Godhead, (although the Catholic faith professes the whole 
 and perfect nature of Manhood to be in Him joined with the 
 whole and perfect nature of Godhead, in One Person, never 
 to be divided,) than to believe that our Lord, when He 
 makes His Body and Blood to be present in the Holy Eu- 
 charist, is present there in His Godhead and in His Man- 
 hood, according to His own gracious words, " Whoso eateth 
 My Flesh, and drinketh My Blood, dwelleth in Me, and 
 I in Him :" Whoso eateth Me, he shall live by Me." 
 
 Not to dwell upon this other inadvertence " that whereas 
 
206 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 it is the Human Nature alone which is, strictly speaking, 
 " glorified" by the Ascension, the Synod does in words in- 
 struct us to speak of Christ's t( entire Person as God and 
 Man, now glorified in the heavens." 
 
 It seems so important to clear up this point, that at the 
 risk of officiousness and unnecessary repetition, I am tempted 
 to set down here a series of dogmatical statements, which 
 I had occasion not long since to draw up for private use. 
 They may perhaps help to relieve some of tedious, haunting, 
 bewildering thoughts: setting forth, as they endeavour to 
 do, the special bearing of the doctrine of the Incarnation 
 on these Eucharistical questions. 
 
 1. I believe that there is one, and only one, True Body of 
 the Lord Jesus, in the sense in which any man's natural 
 body is called his own. That Body, I mean, which He 
 took of the Blessed Virgin Mary when He came into the 
 world. 
 
 2. That neither this Body, nor the reasonable Soul which 
 He took to Himself at the same time, nor His Manhood, 
 consisting of both together, have or ever had any distinct 
 personality, but have subsisted, and ever will subsist, as 
 taken into the Person of the Eternal Son of God. 
 
 3. That as the Divine Word or Person of Christ is every- 
 where and always present and adorable, so ever since the 
 Incarnation, the Presence of the Body of Christ, or the Pre- 
 sence of the Soul of Christ, or of both united, whenever and 
 wherever and however He vouchsafes to notify it, is to be 
 taken as a warrant and call for especial adoration on the 
 part of all His reasonable creatures, to whom the knowledge 
 of the two natures has been revealed : adoration to Him as 
 to God Most High, and to His holy Manhood, not sepa- 
 rately, but as subsisting in His Divine Person. I believe, 
 therefore, 
 
 4. That His sacrificed Body, hanging on the Cross and 
 laid in the grave, was adorable. 
 
 5. I understand the words, 'This is My Body which is 
 
 "1 v -i j- for you ; literally taken, to affirm that what He 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 207 
 
 gives us in the Sacrament is the same body which was sacri- 
 ficed on the Cross. 
 
 6. And I believe that those words ought to be literally 
 taken. Therefore, 
 
 7. I believe that what He gives us in the Sacrament, 
 under the Name of His Body, is adorable. 
 
 It seems to me that the only link in this chain about 
 which any dispute can be raised by one who believes the 
 Creeds of the Church, is the last proposition but one, " These 
 words should be taken literally." Granting all the rest, it 
 might still be questioned, 'May not the words mean only 
 ' this is a figure of My Body ?' or, ' This is (not My Body, 
 but) something which in energy and effect will be as it were 
 My Body/ The former of these I suppose to be the Zuin- 
 glian view, the latter the Calvinistic. Besides these two, I 
 see no way of taking the words short of the literal one. 
 But neither of these two will bear the weight of the sixth 
 chapter of S. John, or of the sayings of the ancient Church, 
 especially in the Liturgies. Therefore I fall back on the 
 literal sense, which makes it necessary for me to allow 
 Adoration, or to deny the "taking of the Manhood into 
 God." 
 
 The objections usually taken to such statements as the 
 above, are taken some to their evidence, some to their sub- 
 stance. The latter may be referred (speaking broadly) to 
 one or more of the following heads. 
 
 1 . Men cannot in their own minds separate what is said 
 from notions of a carnal and natural presence, as of an 
 earthly body among earthly things : or, 
 
 2. They are religiously afraid of encroaching on the verity 
 of Christ's human nature, by believing His Body to be verily 
 and indeed present any where but in one place in heaven. 
 
 With the principle of both these objections, I need hardly 
 say, the maintainers of the Presence have entire and perfect 
 sympathy. They would rather die than accept a carnal 
 heathenish doctrine as against the one, or as against the 
 other a notion which would spiritualize away the whole 
 Gospel. But they claim to be believed when they say that 
 they cannot of themselves discern, nor has it ever been en- 
 
208 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 forced on them by any authority to which they are bound 
 to defer, that their doctrine involves either of these notions. 
 "Until that has been done, the question between them and 
 their opponents is, so far, a question of God's omnipotence. 
 And they ought not to incur censure for declining to allow 
 a difficulty of that kind to interfere with their simply taking 
 the Bible and the Church at their word. The " onus pro- 
 bandi," if I may respectfully repeat it, lies rather on the 
 contrary side. 
 
 I believe that the testimonies cited on that side, either 
 from Holy Scripture, or from Primitive or Anglican Fathers, 
 will always be found, on examination, to be directed either 
 against Corporal, i. e. Carnal Presence, or against such a no- 
 tion of the Ubiquity of Christ's Body as would interfere 
 with the truth of His human nature. There will, I suspect, 
 hardly one be found which may not be reconciled with such, 
 an idea as the following, suggested incidentally by a passage 
 in Hooker (not himself a maintainer of the Real Presence). 
 Hooker is quoting S. Augustine for this saying, " Make 
 thou no doubt or question of it, but that the Man Christ 
 Jesus is now in that very place, from whence He shall come 
 in the same form and substance of flesh which He carried 
 thither, and from which He hath not taken nature, but 
 given thereto immortality. According to this Form He 
 spreadeth not out Himself into all places. For it behoveth 
 us to take great heed, lest while we go about to maintain 
 the glorious Deity of Him which is Man, we leave Him not 
 the true bodily substance of a man." (V. Iv. 6.) The com- 
 ment, indeed, upon this is, " The substance of the Body of 
 Christ hath no presence, neither can have, but only local." 
 But, first, The text, after speaking of "Form and Sub- 
 stance" as that with and in which our Lord will come 
 again, adds, "According to this Form,'' (he does not add 
 Substance) "non est putandus ubique diffusus." And in 
 the next place, it lays the stress upon "ubique." Our Lord 
 and Saviour's true Manhood, for any thing we know, cer- 
 tainly for any thing in this place of S. Augustine, may only 
 warrant us in saying, " He spreadeth not out Himself into 
 all places." It may well be consistent with such miraculous, 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 209 
 
 supersubstantial, exceptional, yet most real Presence, as the 
 Eucharistical sayings of Scripture and Antiquity do un- 
 doubtedly, prima facie, affirm. It were over bold, surely, to 
 say, on mere grounds of human philosophy, " This is more 
 than the Almighty can do." And yet this is what the 
 ^Church in Scotland will be really committing itself to, in 
 condemning the Doctrine of the Real and Essential Pre- 
 sence, as taught by the Bishop of Brechin. 
 
 With respect to startling inferences or perplexing questions, 
 alleged with more or less of ingenuity to embarrass our argu- 
 ment : supposing the Foundation laid, as we have tried to 
 lay it, on Holy Scripture, interpreted by pure Antiquity, 
 such difficulties might well be endured without in the least 
 disturbing our Faith, even though we saw no special answer 
 to meet them with. They are parallel in kind, if not in 
 amount, to those which beset the Incarnation itself. And 
 strange indeed it would be if " things which the Angels desire 
 to look into " were all plain and easy to such as we are. 
 
 Some, however, of the questions which have been raised 
 are obviously due to inadequate apprehension of the meaning 
 of theological terms. As, e.g., when it is said, " If the pre- 
 sence of Christ's Person be held to follow from the presence 
 of His Body in the Bread, and of His Blood in the Wine/' 
 {these are no words of the Bishop of Brechin's,) " then the 
 substance of our Lord's Person must be held to be divided 11 ." 
 Here, as elsewhere, it is forgotten that "the substance of 
 our Lord's Person" is the Substance of God, and is every- 
 where. Nestorius, not having that faith, might perhaps con- 
 sistently argue as above ; and if he pleased, he might go on 
 and argue against the Creed, and say, " If the Presence of 
 Christ's Person be held to follow from the Presence of His 
 Body in the grave, or of His Soul in Hades, then the Sub- 
 stance of our Lord's Person must be held to be DIVIDED/* 
 Our Lord's Person, the Second Person in the Most Holy 
 Trinity, God the Word, is of course omnipresent ; not so the 
 whole of His Being. That which is intended to be denied 
 here is the Presence of His Body, which is part of His Being, 
 part of His Human Nature; by receiving which Body He 
 
 b Mr. Shaw's "Analysis," &c., p. 14. 
 P 
 
210 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 grants us, in an unspeakable way, to be partakers of His 
 Divine Nature, joined as it is to the Human in One Person. 
 And this applies to His Blood as well, which pertains also 
 to His Human Nature ; for the Blood is the Life of the Mesh, 
 the bond, as it were, between it and the Living Soul. Both 
 kinds, then, giving separate indications of the Presence of 
 His Manhood in the Sacrament, betoken a peculiar Pre- 
 sence of His Godhead also, i. e., of His Person, for His Per- 
 sonality belongs to His Godhead. And therefore no one, 
 speaking strictly, would say (has any one ever said?) that 
 " the Bread and Wine," singly or united, " are His Person 1 ." 
 The thing said and believed is, that That which is in Sacra- 
 mental Union with the Bread and Wine, i. e., His blessed 
 Body and Blood, is so taken into His Person, which is wholly 
 divine, that we cannot be wrong in adoring It, as the dis- 
 ciples adored His blessed Body visible on earth. 
 
 Then, as to the term " Substance." In Christ, revealed to 
 us as God and Man, there are of course several substances,, 
 co-existing without confusion. The Substance of the God- 
 head is not the same with the substance of Christ's human 
 Soul, nor either of these again with the substance of His 
 Body. But as they co-exist by an ineffable union in heaven 
 at the right hand of the Father, so we believe them to co- 
 exist sacramentally with the Elements in the Holy Eucharist, 
 by virtue of His Word and His Spirit. There is no division 
 of His Person. God forbid. 
 
 The revealed order of the divine mercies required (if one 
 may so speak) that thus it should be. Christ, the Second 
 Adam, was to be to us " a quickening Spirit," and His Flesh 
 was to be that whereby He should quicken us k . " He that 
 eateth Me, even he shall live by Me." These sayings of un- 
 utterable love the Church has ever believed to be fulfilled in 
 the Eucharist, because she has believed that in that Sacra- 
 ment, and ordinarily no otherwise, the real Flesh and the 
 real Blood, which are " meat indeed, and drink indeed," are 
 really given, taken, and received. Does not all this imply 
 a special presence of " whole Christ," God and Man ? Does 
 
 1 "Analysis/' uli sup. k Hooker, E. P., V. Ivi. 8. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 211 
 
 it not prove that only by inadvertence could devout and 
 learned persons have ventured on such expressions as " the 
 Body and Blood of Christ, neither more nor less," "the 
 Flesh, before it is eaten, is no more than His Flesh," " many 
 Christs," and other similar sayings ? 
 
 By like inadvertence it has been argued, from the cir- 
 cumstances of the first Eucharist, that " His Body and Blood 
 are capable of a mysterious mode of Presence apart from 
 the other constituents of His living Person." " Person/' no 
 doubt, was unwarily written for "Essence." But even so, 
 since the Godhead and Manhood of Christ are, ever since 
 the Incarnation, joined in one Person, " never to be divided," 
 since Christ, as man, "subsists of a reasonable soul and 
 human flesh," and since His Manhood never did or can sub- 
 sist, except as "taken into God," the separation affirmed 
 would seem hardly consistent with the Creed. It would 
 rather seem to follow that wherever the Body of Christ is 
 truly present, there God the Word, who is everywhere, does 
 especially manifest His Presence by the presence of His 
 Body. Where He is as Man, He cannot but be also as God. 
 "We deny, of course, that His Divinity was crucified, or sacri- 
 ficed, or buried, but which of us doubts that He who is true 
 God was crucified, sacrificed, buried, by virtue of the union 
 of the Word with that Body which was the subject of those 
 processes? By the same rule, it would seem that the Pre- 
 sence indicated by our Lord's Sacramental Words, if those 
 words are to be taken in their obvious meaning, is a Real Pre- 
 sence of the Person of the Word, eVt TW Ovaiaa-Tijpia), as 
 S. Gregory says. The impossibility of conceiving the man- 
 ner of this is no objection, any more than it would be to any~ 
 other, the most undeniable, aspect or result of the mystery 
 of the Holy Incarnation. 
 
 Some appear to think that what happened in that first- 
 celebration cannot be reconciled with such Presence ; that; 
 it could not be, as S. Augustine says, " Ferebatur in ma- 
 nibus suis." But if the Sacramental Presence be at all 
 credible, as real, yet distinct from the formal and natural 
 Presence, I do not see that it makes any difference, whether 
 the natural Presence be close at hand with the sacramental,. 
 
212 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 as in the Upper Room, or be as far from it as heaven from, 
 earth, as in all subsequent Eucharists. 
 
 Another instance of the confused use of terms, is the 
 manner in which Christ's Mystical Body is spoken of in 
 connection with this argument. It has been asked, " Since 
 every Christian is truly a member of Christ, why should not 
 the presence of a person baptized, carrying with it a Pre- 
 sence of His Body, be a call for special adoration, as truly 
 as is the Eucharistical Presence?" I answer, (among other 
 reasons,) because the term Body, used to express the mys- 
 tical union betwixt Christ and His Church, is a figurative 
 term, how real and blessed soever be the union which it 
 denotes. It is a figure, a parable, just as "I am the true 
 vine," is a parable. The Church is in mystery a Body, of 
 which Christ is the Head, Christians so many members, and 
 the Holy Spirit the soul : a body which is as yet incomplete, 
 and in the act of being builded up, like Eve under her 
 Maker's hands, by continual incorporation of new members. 
 If the Eucharistical use of the term Body be merely parallel 
 to this, (as I suppose it is considered by some theologians,) 
 it denotes no R/eal Presence of the Body which was born of 
 the Virgin Mary. 
 
 A Real Presence, no doubt, there is in the Mystical Body, 
 and in every member of it, a very blessed and very awful 
 Presence of the Son of God, dwelling in our souls and bodies 
 by His Holy Spirit : a personal presence and participation 
 of Him, beginning with our baptism : a real and great mys- 
 tery, but as yet no miraculous Presence of the Body and 
 Blood which, through His mother, He took of our first fa- 
 ther, Adam, and by which He became our Second Adam. 
 
 So, again, in holy places, where, having recorded His 
 name, He hath promised to come unto us, and bless us 1 ; 
 and in holy assemblies, where two or three are gathered 
 together in His name ; there assuredly He is in the midst. 
 His Person, His Godhead, is there by special grace and 
 favour; but His Body, His Manhood, is present only by 
 a sort of " concomitancy," in such manner as Hooker defines, 
 saying, " The nature which cannot have in itself universal 
 
 1 Exodus xx. 24. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 213 
 
 Presence, hath it after a sort by being nowJiere severed 
 from That which everywhere is present." Or we may say, 
 the Body of Christ is there virtually, because that Person 
 is there into which that Body is mysteriously " taken." 
 Whereas, in the Eucharist, as S. Ambrose writes, " Christ 
 is there because it is the Body of Christ." The peculiarity 
 of His Personal Presence depends on the Real Presence of 
 His Body. 
 
 Turn the matter as I may in my mind, I seem always to 
 come back to this. If " This is My Body" means anything 
 short of this, it is a figurative saying ; there is no Eeal Pre- 
 sence to be acknowledged by the heart's adoration. But if 
 it means that Body which was conceived of the Holy Ghost, 
 I do not see how a thoughtful believer can help worshipping. 
 I can fancy a person, by a lowering process of exposition, 
 reconciling himself to the Calvinistic doctrine, and so deny- 
 ing the Presence, and the duty of Adoration. I cannot 
 fancy explicitly believing and explicitly refusing to worship : 
 although the most earnest believer may well be so confused 
 and bewildered, by erroneous teaching or natural infirmity, 
 as to shrink from realizing his own belief and worship, 
 lest he should be paying undue honour to the " earthly 
 part." 
 
 To this same head, misapprehension of theological terms, 
 we may perhaps refer the difficulties which have been raised 
 from the separate consecration of the Bread and Cup. The 
 sentence of Antiquity being that Christ's Person might and 
 ought to be worshipped in the human nature inseparably 
 joined to it, and in the essential parts thereof, this may be 
 maintained without positively defining whether the state- 
 ments to which, as English Churchmen, we believe ourselves 
 pledged, do or do not involve the separate worship of Christ 
 present under each kind in the Sacrament. Archdeacon 
 Denison's formula from the Homilies, and the well-known 
 citations from Andrewes and Bramhall, which were lately 
 produced as identical with it in meaning, determine no- 
 thing about concomitance, nor yet about any separate wor- 
 ship of Christ in the Body, apart from that of Christ in the 
 Blood. It is enough, I conceive, that the two expressions 
 
Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 contain between them the whole of what He took of His 
 Blessed Mother, which, by consent of the whole Church, is 
 adorable, by reason of its being taken into God. 
 
 One reason why the Blood should be consecrated and 
 given apart, the woyis of institution appear to indicate. The 
 separation declares the Lord's death till He come, sets forth 
 the aspect under which especially we are to contemplate 
 Him in the Lord's Supper, namely, as a suffering, slain, 
 atoning sacrifice, purchasing' all our blessings by His death. 
 Our Eucharist presents Him to the Father as He presents 
 Himself in heaven (for it is the very " image of the things" 
 in heaven) not merely as Christ, but as the slain Christ. 
 
 As slain, but not now dead; for, if it may reverently be 
 said, What would even His death be to us, were He not now 
 living? And accordingly, some of the Liturgies say, "We 
 confess Thy Besurrection," as well as, " We shew forth Thy 
 Death." 
 
 I would not here speak dogmatically, nor am I sufficiently 
 versed in Liturgical writings to know whether the idea has 
 sufficient authority ; but may not this separate consecration 
 and subsequent union of the two kinds, (for they are united 
 always by reception, and in some rituals by a distinct cere- 
 mony before reception,) may not this be intended to sym- 
 T)olise His dying and rising again ? the Blood being regarded 
 ;as the special token and pledge of the Presence of our Lord's 
 human Soul. Such an idea seems to accord well with the 
 mysterious mention of blood in the Old Testament, espe- 
 cially with Lev. xvii. 11; "The life of the flesh is in the 
 blood : and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an 
 atonement for your souls : for it is the blood that maketh an 
 atonement for the soul ; ... for the life of all flesh is the 
 blood thereof 10 ." There is not only a distinct enactment, 
 but the principle also of the enactment, a principle to be 
 borne in mind, I suppose, wherever in the old law, or the 
 new, we find any direction touching blood ; and so the 
 words of institution are, not simply " My Blood," but " My 
 Blood of the New Testament," referring us expressly to the 
 
 m Cf. what is said by (probably) Hilary the Deacon in S. Ambrose's work* 
 on 1 Cor. xi. 26. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 215 
 
 "Mosaic ritual, and especially to the ratification of the cove- 
 nant in Exod. xxiv. 8, as strictly analogous to that which 
 was done once for all "on the cross, and is commemorated 
 and applied continually on Christ's altar in heaven and on 
 earth. 
 
 By this analogy the Wine, i.e. the Blood, in the Eucharist 
 -would be a token for us to believe and teach the Sacra- 
 mental Presence of the Living Soul of the Man Christ Jesus 
 along with His Body, from which, indeed, we know from 
 Scripture that it never can be separated, now that He is 
 risen again; for "Christ being raised from the dead, dieth 
 no more ; death hath no more dominion over Him." The 
 Fathers, too, (S. Cyril most earnestly and repeatedly,) con- 
 nect the epithet and idea of "living" with that which is 
 given in the Sacrament, as needful, in order that the same 
 being received may be " life-giving." And what is more, the 
 Truth Himself says, " I am the Living Bread ; ... if any 
 man eat of this Bread, he shall live, . . . and the bread 
 that I will give is My Flesh ;" and he compares the mystery 
 to that of the Holy Incarnation, " As the Living Father hath 
 sent Me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth Me, even 
 he shall live by Me n ." 
 
 The difficulty which some have had in realizing this ap- 
 pears to have arisen from their allowing themselves to argue 
 as if several aspects or relations of the same thing or person 
 were equivalent to several things or persons. Thus, because 
 in Holy Communion the Lord's death is that which is to be 
 most peculiarly remembered, His Body to be offered as 
 loroken and slain and pierced, His Blood as poured out unto 
 death, men inferred that His glorified Body cannot be there ; 
 as if it were one Body that was crucified, and another that 
 is glorified ; as if the Blood that was poured out on the Cross 
 were not the same with that which our High-Priest took with 
 Him into the Holy Place, and wherewith He now appears in 
 the presence of God for us. All is harmonized, if we bear 
 in mind that He both presents Himself to His Father, and 
 
 n Perhaps this presence of our Lord's stantly found in the Liturgies, and 
 "human soul may help to explain the probably in that which S. Paul himself 
 term "reasonable," hoyiKrji', so con- used: cf. Rom. xii. 1. 
 
216 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 gives Himself to us, not simply as now living, nor yet simply 
 as having died, but as " He who liveth and was dead, and 
 behold he is alive for evermore. Amen/' 
 
 For want of the caution now suggested, Bishop Andrewes 
 has been quoted as denying the Real Presence of our Lord's* 
 Living Body in the Eucharist. He says, (Sermons, A. C. L., 
 vol. ii., 301,) what no one can doubt, that in 1 Cor. v. 8, 
 the expression " keep the feast/' taken along with the word 
 " immolated," relates to " Christ's Body, not as now it is, 
 but as then it was when it was rent and slain." He doe* 
 not deny, but affirms, that it relates to " Christ's Body that 
 now is." And elsewhere, as we know, he declares that 
 " Christ, the inward part of the Sacrament, is to be wor- 
 shipped in the Sacrament ." 
 
 Other objections to the Bishop of Brechin's teaching are 
 of a more popular and palpable cast, and admit, I think, of 
 popular and palpable answers. For instance, it is easy, and 
 often effective, to say your doctrine of the Real Presence, 
 setting aside Transubstantiation and its corollaries, is the 
 fame with the doctrine of the Church of Rome, and of the 
 Churches of the East also. I do not at present grant or 
 deny this. But supposing it were so, I wish seriously to 
 make an appeal to all thoughtful and charitable Christians* 
 I would wish to ask them, before God, Is this really, and 
 apart from all else, a prejudice against a doctrine, or rather 
 a presumption in favour of it? If you say, " a prejudice," it 
 tells equally against the Creeds, against the Canonical Scrip- 
 tures, against the idea of Sacraments, against Episcopacy, 
 against all points in which we agree; i.e. (blessed be God 
 that, in spite of all differences, this still may be said) against 
 the far greater part of what we own as necessary doctrine* 
 Surely the right way must be, in this or any other question,, 
 calmly to apply the proper standards, Scripture as interpreted 
 
 Afterwards, indeed, he says, what rupt this remembrance of His Passion., 
 
 even in him sounds a little too adven- " Christ offered is it : thither we must 
 
 turous, " If an host could be turned look. To the serpent lift up : thither- 
 
 into Him, now glorified as He is, it we must repair." He did not mean, 
 
 would not serve/' But the next words to deny the Presence of His Body ift 
 
 shew that he meant to deprecate such the Sacrament, much less the identity 
 
 thoughts of His glory as should inter- of His crucified and glorified Body.. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 217 
 
 by our own Formularies, and where they are ambiguous or 
 silent, by the consent of the ancient Undivided Church : and 
 if the conclusion come out agreeable to what the rest of 
 Christendom has received, thankfully to welcome such agree- 
 ment ; if not, humbly and reverently to commit the cause to 
 Almighty God, and to such authorities as it may hereafter- 
 please Him to raise up for the healing of the wounds in His 
 Church. In no case ought we to think it simply a recom- 
 mendation to any view, that it makes one more difference 
 between us and Rome or the East. 
 
 Again, it is said our teaching leads to superstition ; but so, 
 in a degree, does all outward religion so does the doctrine 
 of the Holy Incarnation itself. And it is obvious to say, and 
 I suppose at least equally borne out by experience, that 
 the opposite teaching leads to coldness and irreverence. Such 
 statements are very well by way of cautioning each side 
 respectively against wrong ways of acting upon their opin- 
 ions; they are of little worth as testing the truth itself of 
 the opinions. 
 
 Another topic, which I should wonder to see taken up by 
 the Synod, had I not so often heard it dwelt on in private by 
 persons worthy of all respect, is contained in those words of 
 the Pastoral Letter, "You will not, we trust, attempt to de- 
 fine more nearly the mode of this Mysterious Presence." I 
 should have thought there had been much more of defining,, 
 much more of subtleties and distinctions difficult to grasp, in 
 a theory which requires so many negatives on the right hand 
 and on the left, than in the simple proposition, " Christ is: 
 verily and indeed in the Sacrament, in that His Body and 
 Blood are there, as the inward part or thing signified." It 
 is not they who by God's mercy are able, with the Ancient 
 Church, to rely and repose on this, who feel themselves 
 driven to complicated and subtle explanations; to the en- 
 forcement of those explanations as articles of faith and terms- 
 of communion ; and to worrying and bewildering apprehen- 
 sions of going too far, or stopping short, when the soul most 
 longs to spread her wings, and be at rest in her Lord. 
 
 I have now, I believe, noticed, one by one, all the main 
 objections to the substance of the Bishop of Brechin's teach- 
 
218 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 ing on. the Real Presence. To me they seem as nothing in. 
 comparison with those which are involved in the acceptance 
 of the Pastoral Letter, were it only for the words which 
 imply (I am sure with no such thought on the writers' part) 
 that our Lord's true Body might be separated from His 
 Person. 
 
 But a good deal is also said in disparagement of the evi- 
 dence alleged for the doctrine. And if we adhere to the 
 Pastoral Letter, we must " not hesitate to say that the rea- 
 soning by which that doctrine is maintained is fallacious, 
 and the testimony of authorities" insufficient. The Synod 
 says this, " after due consideration," upon " full and careful 
 examination" of authorities, and would not, of course, wish 
 either Diocesan Synods or individuals to indorse the saying 
 without such consideration and examination. As a specimen, 
 of the Patristical testimony which would have to be examined 
 in detail, and proved insufficient, I venture to subjoin a series 
 of passages, which I had lately occasion to extract, in course 
 of friendly discussion with one who had laid it down that 
 the ancient Church always called the Elements "Christ's 
 Body and Blood," never "Himself." The reply was to 
 the following effect : " I presume that you mean here the 
 Liturgies only ; for I find a good many places in the Fathers 
 which seem to me to disprove the assertion, and to demon- 
 strate that the Church in those days did not understand the 
 Liturgies as you do, in respect of the Special Presence of 
 Christ Himself after Consecration." E. g. 
 
 1. " Holding in thy palms Jesus Christ the Son of God the Saviour." 
 Inscription at Autuu, A.D. 200 : ap. Pusey, Notes, &c., p. 338. 
 
 2. " The Word which is offered to God." S. Iren. iv. 18, 4. (If you 
 read " per quod offertur," it affirms the identity of our Eucharist with 
 our Lord's : but the other seems to have most authority.) 
 
 3. Origen, in Jos. Horn. ii. " Ministering not the blood of goats and 
 bulls, but the Word of God through the grace of the Holy Spirit." 
 
 4. Nagnes, ap. Galland. iii. 341. "That which hath not the Living 
 Word united with the body which was earthly, could not bring those 
 that ate to life eternal. Christ then gave to believers His own Body 
 and Blood, infusing into them the life-giving medicine of Divinity." 
 
 5. S. Athan. (ap. Pusey, 238.) "When the great prayers and holy 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 219 
 
 supplications have been sent up, the Word cometh down into the 
 Bread and Cup, and His Body is produced." Cf. p. 373. "We, 
 eating of the Word of the Father." 
 
 6. S. Cyril. Hier. 23, 21. " Making thy left hand a throne for thy right, 
 which is about to entertain the King . . Receive the Body of 
 Christ." 
 
 7. S. Hit. on Psalm cxxvii. 10." It is the Table of the Lord from 
 which we take food, that is, the food of the Living Bread : and the 
 virtue of which is this, that He Himself, living, doth also give life 
 to those who receive Him." 
 
 8. Id. contra Constant, ii. 11. '" On Himself, as the holy with me un- 
 derstand, on Christ Himself, hands were laid." 
 
 <). S. Optatus, in Pusey, 403. "What is the altar but the Throne of 
 the Body and Blood of Christ ? . . . They (the Jews) lay their 
 hands on Christ on the Cross : by you He was smitten on the altar." 
 
 10. S. Ephr. ib. 422." Thou art sacrificed upon our Table." 
 
 11. Euseb. Alex. ap. Galland. viii. 253. " Behold niy Lord, divided in 
 pieces and distributed and not expended." 
 
 12. S. Amir, in Psalm xxxviii. 25. "Christ Himself is offered on 
 earth when the Body of Christ is offered." 
 
 13. Id. de Off. i. 248. "Before, a lamb was offered, a calf too was 
 offered, now Christ is offered." 
 
 14. Id. de Cain et Abel, i. 5. 19." What is nobler than Christ, who iu 
 the banquet of the Church both ministers and is ministered ?" 
 
 15. Id. in Psalm cxviii. 8, 48." Where His Body is, there is Christ." 
 
 16. Id. ibid. 18, 26. "Christ is Food to me: Christ is Drink to me. 
 ... God's Flesh is Food to me, and God's Blood is Drink to 
 ine. . . . Christ is daily ministered to me." 
 
 17. Id. in S. Luc. i. 28. " Doubt not that an angel is present when 
 Christ is present, when Christ is sacrificed." 
 
 18. Id. de Virginibus, i. 66. "The Altar . . on which Christ the 
 Head of all is daily consecrated." 
 
 19. S. Gaudentius, (ap. Pusey, 487.)" In this truth in which we are 
 one died for all ; and the same, in each house of the Church, in the 
 mystery of the Bread and Wine, being sacrificed, refresheth ; believed 
 on, quickeneth ; consecrated, sanctifieth the consecrator. This is 
 the Flesh of the Lamb, this His Blood," (referring expressly to 
 S. John vi. 51.) 
 
 20. S. Paulinus (ib. 495.) S. M. Magdalen "took beforehand Himself, 
 the Living and Lifegiving Bread, in her hands and mouth." 
 
 31. S. Aug. in Joan. iv. 45, 9." There the Rock was Christ : to us 
 that is Christ which is placed on God's Altar." 
 
220 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 22. Id. in Ps. xxxiii. Serm. i. 10. " Christ was borne in His own hands, 
 when setting forth His own Body, He said, This is My Body." 
 
 23. Id. ibid. Serm. ii. 2." When He was setting forth His very Body 
 and Blood, He took into His hands what the Faithful know ; and He 
 in some sort carried Himself when He said, This is My Body." 
 
 24. Id. Serm. 89. de Verb. Evang. " As far as pertained to corporal 
 presence, Christ onr Lord was thought to be absent. . . . Hold 
 faithfully, hold Him unto the breaking of bread. . . If you have 
 recognised [Him], there you have found Christ." 
 
 25. Id. de Civ. Dei, x. 20." Himself the Offerer, and Himself the 
 Offering ; of which thing He willed the Church's sacrifice to be a 
 daily sacrament." 
 
 26. Id. adv. Jud. 8." He fulfilled the sacrifice of praise, Himself 
 the Priest and Victim." 
 
 27. Id. ibid. 13. " (Sacrifice is offered) in every place, even unto Jeru- 
 salem itself. ... for ... Christ's priesthood abideth for 
 ever in Heaven." (The Eucharistical Sacrifice then is_in some sense 
 identical with the Sacrifice in Heaven.) 
 
 28. Id. contr. adv. Leg. et Proph. i. 37. "The whole of which the Faith- 
 ful know, in the sacrifice of the Church : whereof all the kinds of pre- 
 vious sacrifices were shadows. . . . That which David offered 
 was a shadow of that which was to come, whereby it was signified that 
 through one sacrifice, of which that was a figure, the salvation of the 
 people is spiritually granted. For it is Christ Jesus Himself, Who 
 was delivered for our offences." Wherefore also he saith, " Christ our 
 Passover is sacrificed." (Here again the Sacrifice of the Altar is im- 
 plied to be in some sense identical with that on the Cross.) 
 
 29. Id. ibid. 39." The Church immolates to God in the Body of Christ 
 the Sacrifice of Praise ... for this Church is Israel after the 
 Spirit, from which is distinguished that Israel after the flesh, which 
 used to serve in shadowy sacrifices, whereby the One only Sacrifice is 
 signified, which is now offered by Israel after the Spirit." 
 
 30. Id. c. Faust, xx. 21." Of this sacrifice the flesh and blood . . . 
 was rendered in actual truth in Christ's passion ; after Christ's ascen- 
 sion it is celebrated by means of a sacrament of commemoration." 
 (The same victim under several aspects.) 
 
 31. Id. in Ps. cxx. 12. u The flesh of Christ is the Head of the 
 Church." cf. Eph. v. 23. 
 
 32. S. Chrys. de Sacerd. iii. and vi. p. 15. (Sav.) "When thou seestthe Lord 
 sacrificed, and the Priest standing and praying over the sacrifice, . . 
 can it be that thou still accountest thyself to be among men and to be 
 standing on earth ? yea, art thou not at once translated (/ieTwurrcKrai) 
 to the heavens." (So far was S. Chrysostom from thinking that such 
 a view was inconsistent with " sursum corda.") 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 221 
 
 33. Id. ibid. p. 16. 1. "He that sittetli above with the Father, at that 
 hour is held in the hands of all, and gives Himself to those that desire 
 to embrace and clasp Him." Of. S. Chrysostom's Liturgy, Sav. t. vi. 
 1001. liii. 21. " The Priest after Consecration prays secretly, ' Hear 
 us, O Lord^God, from ^Thy Holy Habitation,"" and from the Throne 
 of the glory of Thy Kingdom, and come to sanctify us, Thou who 
 sittest on high with the Father, and art here invisibly with us.'" 
 
 34. Id. ibid. 1. 17. "How great a thing is it for a man yet clothed in 
 flesh and blood to have power to come near that Blessed and Immortal 
 Nature." 
 
 35. Id. ibid. vi. p. 46, 14. "When he is continually touching the com- 
 mon Lord of all." 
 
 36. Id. ibid. 1. 21, 25." I heard . . of one seeing a multitude of 
 Angels . . . surrounding the Altar, and bowing down, as one may 
 see soldiers standing in the presence of the king." (Is not this Adora- 
 tion ?) " And I for my part believe it." 
 
 37. Id. de S. Philog. v. 509, 16. "If we come with faith, we shall 
 surely see Him lying upon the manger ; for this table takes the 
 place of the manger. For here also will lie the Body of the Lord, 
 not in swaddling-bands as then, but wrapt all round with the Holy 
 Spirit. The initiated know what I mean. And the Magi, indeed, 
 did no more than worship; but if thou draw near with pure con- 
 science, we will allow thee to take It also, and to go thy way home." 
 
 38. Id. 1 Horn, de Stat. t. vi. 472, 15. "Elijah left his mantle to his 
 disciple, but the Son of God ascending left us His. own Flesh; and 
 whereas Elijah put it off, Christ both left It to us, and departed re- 
 taining it." (To shew that we have the same Body and the same 
 Sacrifice.) 
 
 39. Id. ibid. Horn. 15, 565, 33. "Dost thou make a man swear before 
 the Holy Table ; and in the very place where Christ lies immolated, 
 dost thou immolate thy brother ?" 
 
 40. Id. Horn, in Nativ. 7. c. t. v. 518, 41." When God caUeth to His own 
 Table, and setteth forth His own Son, the Angelic Powers standing by 
 with fear and trembling, and the Cherubim veiling their faces, while 
 the Seraphim in trembling cry out, Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord." 
 (Is not this Adoration ?) 
 
 41. Id. in Bapt. Christi, v. 528. "When Christ is present, when the 
 Angels are standing by, when this awful Table is set before us." 
 
 42. Id. de Prodit. Judse. v. 557, 38. "On that Table both Passovers 
 take place ; both that of the type and that of the reality." (The same 
 Christ, therefore, on the cross and on the altar.) 
 
 43. Id. de Cam. et- Cruce, v. 566, 5. "Him who was nailed to the Cross, 
 we also are to behold this evening, as a Lamb slain and sacrificed." 
 (On Easter-Eve.) 
 
222 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 44. Id. ibid. 1. 11. "We are to stand by, not an empty sepulchre, but 
 the very Table which hath the Lamb." 
 
 45. Id. ibid. 28. " Consider what in especial That is which lieth before 
 thee, (rb irpoKeifji.ei>ov) whence it originated. He was slain for thee, 
 and thou forsakest Him, immolated as He is before thine eyes," 
 (effQayia.ffjj.evoj' opuv) cf. lin. 19. "Thou beholdest the Lamb slain." 
 
 46. Id. on S. Matth., Horn, vii. 6. "Thou wilt behold the young Child. 
 . . Only let thy coming be to honour and adore, not to spurn, the 
 Son of God. . . Be not like Herod and say, ' that I may come and 
 worship Him,' and when thou art come be minded to slay Him," &c. 
 . . " To behold Him on the spiritual manger." 
 
 47. Id. ibid. Horn. iv. 3. "Thou seest Him lying." 
 
 48. Id. ibid. "Himself He hath set before thee, sacrificed." 
 
 49. Id. ibid. Ixxxii. 4. " Him thou seest, Him thou touchest, Him thou 
 eatest. He giveth thee Himself not to see only, but also to touch 
 and to eat." 
 
 50. Id. ibid. "This hand which divideth the flesh . . . What 
 Angels tremble to behold, on That we are fed." 
 
 51. Id. in. S. Joan. Horn. 46. (Sav. ii. 746, 37.) "He allowed those 
 that desire not only to see (Him) but even to touch and eat Him." 
 
 , 52. Id. in Act. Horn. 21. (t. iv. 735, 42.) "The Sacrifice is in hand, 
 and all things are prepared and set forth. Angels are present, and 
 Archangels the Son of God is present." 
 
 53. Id. in Rom. Horn. 8. (t. iii. p. 63, 33.) "The Table of which we 
 all partake, the Christ who has been slain for us, the Victim that is 
 laid upon it." 
 
 54. Id. in 1 Cor. Horn. 24. "He hath changed the Sacrifice itself, and 
 instead of the slaughter of irrational creatures hath commanded us to 
 offer up Himself ; . . What He submitted not to (ou/c e7ra0ei/) upon 
 the cross, that He submits to in offering for thee, and endures to be 
 broken that He may satisfy all. Why speak I of the future ? since 
 even here this mystery makes earth to be Heaven. Only unfold the 
 gates of Heaven and look in : or rather, I say not of Heaven, but of 
 the Heaven of Heavens : and thou shalt see what I mean. For what 
 is more precious than all things there, That I will show thee lying on 
 earth. . . Tor not Angels, nor Archangels, nor Heavens of Hea- 
 vens, but the very Lord of all these, I show thee. Perceivest thou 
 how That which is more precious than all, That thou seest on earth,, 
 and not only seest, but also touchest and not only touchest but eat- 
 est, and having received It returnest home ? . . . Why, if the 
 king's child were put in thine arms to be borne, thou wouldst cast by 
 anything on earth ; and now receiving no child of a mortal king, but 
 the Only-begotten Son of God Himself, dost thou not thrill all over?" 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 223 
 
 55. Id. ibid. Hom. 28. on 1 Cor. XI. 29. nr] $ia.Kpiv<av rJ> 0-u/j.a, rov irvptov. 
 
 " That is, not estimating, not pondering, as he ought, the greatness of 
 the Things that are set before him ; not taking into account the dig- 
 nity of the Gift. For if thou shouldst learn accurately Who, of all 
 beings, (ris iroi4} it is Who is set before thee, and being who He is, to 
 whom He is giving Himself," &c. 
 
 56. Id. Hom. on Eph. iii. "How wilt thou stand before the judgment 
 seat of Christ, who with foul hands and lips presumest upon His Body ? 
 Thou wouldst not choose to kiss a king with an unclean mouth, and 
 dost thou kiss the King of Heaven with an unclean soul ?" 
 
 57. Apost. Constit. ii. 57. " With awe and reverence (cf. Heb. xii. 28. 
 Aorpeita/iej') as approaching the Body of the King." 
 
 58. S. Cyril Alex, de Ador. ix. 297 (of the Shewbread.) " Hath it not 
 been clearly pointed out that our Bread from heaven should be set 
 forth at due seasons on the Holy Tables of the Churches, giving life 
 to the world ?" 
 
 59. Id. on Zephaniah, t. iii. 617. "And the Lamb is spiritually sacri- 
 ficed by the holy priests." (lepovpywv.) 
 
 60. Id. ap. Pusey, 623." The holy Flesh bore the efficacy of the power 
 of the Word, which (flesh) He made His own, having implanted a 
 Divine power therein. Let it then touch us also, yea rather we It, 
 through the mystic Eucharist." 
 
 61. Id. ibid. 624." Not a lamb out of the flock sanctiBes those who 
 are in Christ, but rather Himself holily sanctified through the mystic 
 Eucharist." (Cf. S. John xvii. 19.) 
 
 2. Id. ibid. 626. " The Lifegiving Word of God, having united Him- 
 self with His own Flesh, in what way He Himself knoweth, made It 
 lifegiving." (Cf. S. John vi. 47, 51, 53.) "So then, eating the Flesh 
 of Christ, and drinking the Precious Blood, we have life in us, being 
 made one with Him, and having Him also in ourselves. . . God 
 sendeth forth the power of life into the Elements, and transfers them 
 into the efficacy of His own Flesh . . that the Body of Life might 
 be found in us a lifegiving seed." 
 
 63. Id. in S.Joan, vi. 51, p. 354. "Christ gave . . His own Body 
 for the life of all, but again through It He maketh life to dwell in us ; 
 . . . For when the Lifegiving Word of God dwelt in the flesh, 
 He transformed it into His own proper good, that is, life, . . . 
 therefore the Body of Christ giveth life to those who partake of It, 
 . . . producing by Itself perfectly that Word which abolisheth 
 corruption." 
 
 64. Id. ibid. ver. 54, p. 361. "His Holy Body is considered as One 
 [Person, els] with Him, for since the Incarnation He is indivisible, 
 
 ," &c. (The whole passage should be read, ap. Pusey, 631, 
 
224 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 e. g. " He is Life by nature . . but no less vivifying is His holy 
 Body. . . And since the Flesh of the Saviour became lifegiving, 
 as being united to That which is by nature Life, the Word from God, 
 when we taste It, then, we have life in ourselves, being for our part 
 made one with It, as It with the indwelling Word." 
 
 65. Id. ibid. ver. 55, p. 363. "Instead of saying, 'Him that eateth, 
 My Body shall raise up,' He hath put the word ' I/ and not as being 
 another [eVepos] than His own Flesh. . . For after the union He 
 cannot be severed into a duality of Sons," &c. 
 
 66. Id. ibid, on chap. xx. 16, 27, p. 1104." We shut the door, and 
 Christ makes His visit and shows Himself to us all, visibly and in- 
 visibly; invisibly as God, and visibly again in the Body. And He 
 permits and grants us to touch His holy Flesh. For according to 
 God's grace we approach by participation of the mystical Blessing, 
 receiving Christ into our hands." (He then connects it with the 
 doctrine of the Resurrection.) 
 
 67. Id. Horn. Div. V. 371." The Son is willingly offered, iepovpyeirai, 
 not now by the enemies of God, but by Himself." 
 
 68. Id. ibid. 372. "The Personal, ^vir6 < rraros, Wisdom of God the 
 Father, having built herself a temple not made with hands, distributes 
 her own Body as Bread, and adds the gift of her own life-giving 
 Blood as Wine." 
 
 69. Id. ibid. 375." He who was typically eaten in Egypt there of His 
 own will sacrificeth Himself." 
 
 70. Id. ibid. 378. "If indeed the Body of God is distributed, here is 
 Very God, Christ the Lord." 
 
 71. Id. ibid. infr. "Believing that He abideth Himself, Priest and 
 Sacrifice, Himself the Offerer and the Offered, both receiving and dis- 
 tributed, not dividing into two Persons the Divine and indiscerptible 
 and withal unconfused Unity. . . To whom be glory and wor- 
 ship," &c. 
 
 72. Id. adv. Nestor, iv. t. 7, 109. "Withdraw the life-giving Word of 
 God from its mystical and true union with the Body, and part them 
 entirely, and what way hast thou left to prove it (the Body) life- 
 giving ?" 
 
 73. Id. ibid. 116. " I think you have forgotten that what is set forth 
 on holy Tables in Churches is in no wise the Nature of the Godhead, 
 but the own Body of the Word, the offspring of God the Father; 
 which Word is naturally and truly God. Why then confound and 
 thoughtlessly jumble all together, all but deriding our Bread from 
 Heaven that giveth life to the world, because it is not called 'the 
 Godhead ' by the voice of the holy Teachers, but rather ' the Body ' 
 of Him Who was made Man for us, i.e. of the Word, who is of God 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 225 
 
 the Father ? Why call it at all the Lord's Body, except you know 
 it to be Divine, and the Body of God ?" 
 
 74. Proclns. ap. Pusey, 692. ''Instead of the Manger let us fall down 
 before the Altar." 
 
 75. 8. Nilm. ap. Pusey, 705." It is the Flesh of God, Mesh venerable, 
 and adorable, and life-giving." 
 
 These quotations are nearly all selected from Dr. Pusey's " Doctrine of 
 the Real Presence, from the Fathers," verified in all but a few instances in 
 which I had not access to the originals. They are in chronological order, 
 as nearly as might be. 
 
 It will be understood that these sayings form a very small 
 fraction of the teaching of the Early Church on the Real 
 Presence, relating, as they do, to one special proposition, 
 which is only a part of that doctrine, though of course 
 a cardinal point, viz., that the Presence of the Body and 
 Blood infer a special Presence of Christ, the Second Person 
 of the Holy Trinity. They seem, however, sufficient to con- 
 vince a reasonable man that the whole tone and cast of 
 thought of those ages was utterly inconsistent with the dis- 
 tinctions and explanations by virtue of which the Bishop 
 of Brechin is condemned. Either those writers were de- 
 claring what they believed to be the very truth, and then 
 they believed the Real Presence both of Christ's Body and 
 Blood after consecration, and of the Person of Christ, God 
 and Man, inseparable from that Body and Blood, or they 
 were merely employing fervid poetical metaphors ; and this 
 will apply as well to all they say of the spiritual grace of 
 the Sacrament, whether before or after receiving. It will 
 unsettle the whole doctrine of Sacramental Grace, I might 
 say the whole Creed of the Church. 
 
 Now, these writers knew and used their Liturgies. They 
 could not have read them in the sense which many now 
 .insist on. For of course they did not mean to contradict 
 them. The inference I would draw from this is, not (at 
 present) that their construction is the only right one, but 
 that it ought to be tolerated in the Church ; considering, 
 moreover, what manner of men they were. And if theirs, 
 then ours also, which means and tries to be the same with 
 
 Q 
 
226 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 theirs, unless it can be shewn that we read them amiss 
 altogether. 
 
 It cannot be all hyperbole and rhetoric ; both because 
 great divines do not so deal with delicate and sacred doc- 
 trines; and because many of the sayings occur in contro- 
 versial, and dogmatical, and ethical, as well as in popular 
 writings, e. g. in S. Ambrose, de Spiritu Sancto, and de 
 Officiis ; S. Aug., de Civ. Dei ; adv. Judaeos ; contra Fans- 
 turn ; S. Chrys., de Sacerdotio; S. Cyril Alex., de Ado- 
 ratione ; and contra Nestorium. 
 
 All this is sometimes dismissed easily, with the remark, 
 that the Sacramental system had not yet been called into 
 controversy, nor the terms in which it should be taught 
 denned by authority. Granting this to a certain extent, 
 ought it not obviously to tell in our debates as much for one 
 side as for the other, unless there can be shewn somewhat 
 approaching to an (Ecumenical decision since the contro- 
 versy was raised ? If the voice of the Church must needs be 
 indistinct until she is forced to exalt it for the putting down 
 of heresy, then we have as much right to explain and 
 neutralize the few passages which seem in comparison to 
 make light of Sacramental Grace, as others, the many which 
 plainly make more of it than the ruling fashion of this age 
 allows. The plea must be as good for toleration on our 
 part as on theirs, unless our local formularies have bound 
 us one way or the other; and that is here the very point 
 in dispute. 
 
 Moreover, if I mistake not, there is another question, a 
 very serious and important one indeed, closely connected 
 with this topic. Suppose the plea allowed, " This or that 
 passage was written before the matter had begun to be 
 debated, therefore you may disregard it; you may assume 
 that the writer does not say what he meant ;" will not this 
 mode of arguing prove applicable to other uses, from which 
 we should all shrink? May not some one, perchance, be 
 found to say, " Just so ; and in like manner here are places 
 in S. Cyprian and S. Augustine which seem to speak strongly 
 of the right of other bishops to dispute the decrees of the 
 Church of Rome ; but they need not be attended to ; the 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 227 
 
 supremacy of Rome had not yet been denied by any one, 
 so as to make people aware of the necessity of speaking 
 quite exactly concerning it, and so those Saints used incau- 
 tious language ; but we know better now ?" And the same 
 mode of reasoning may be employed to neutralize all the 
 passages which discountenance the Roman developments. 
 
 IIow do we meet it in the case of Rome ? By shewing 
 that the contradiction lies deeper than can be explained by 
 mere variation in the use of terms, and consequently, that 
 the Ancient Church was at least unaware of the necessity of 
 maintaining all that Rome now maintains, and that such 
 necessity is a mere addition to the faith of those primitive 
 times; and if an addition, of course a corruption. So the 
 censurers of the tenet now assailed, if they would justify 
 what they are about, are bound to make out, not only that 
 the old sayings, to which our Formularies themselves appeal, 
 are capable of another interpretation, but that they posi- 
 tively refuse to admit ours. Nothing short of this will 
 warrant their submitting us to ecclesiastical penalties. 
 
 Although the Mystery of the Eucharist itself had not as 
 yet become the subject of formal controversy, there was 
 a question, and that a deep and fundamental one, all along 
 agitating the Church : an error to which, by our opponents' 
 own account, Theologians speaking of the Eucharist were 
 bound always to have an eye, and to guard their expres- 
 sions accordingly : I mean as concerning the verity of 
 Christ's Human Body : the denial of which came to be 
 a distinct and positive heresy in the case of Eutyches, but 
 had been implied or expressed by whole tribes of false 
 teachers ever since the days of S. Ignatius, or rather of 
 S.John himself: all namely, who "believed not the Eu- 
 charist to be the Flesh and Blood of Christ," because they 
 " believed not Jesus Christ come in the Flesh :" they ac- 
 counted His Body no true human Body. It was, I sup- 
 pose, a very common, and in the East especially, a very 
 natural and obvious error. And whenever it was accepted, 
 we see that it would destroy the Doctrine of the Eucha- 
 rist as well as that of the Incarnation. We may be sure 
 that the Church in her Liturgies and Homilies, as well 
 
 Q2 
 
228 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 as in her dogmatical teaching, would be preserved from 
 habitually countenancing so deadly an error. We may be 
 sure it cannot be Eutychianism to take the Church at her 
 word. No need to claim that allowance for her, which is 
 claimed (e. g.) in the following sentence : " The Fathers 
 might safely speak in very glowing terms of the Eucha- 
 ristic Mysteries of His Body and Blood. * The Christians 
 then had too strong a grasp of the fundamental verities 
 about the true Humanity of their Lord to be in any 
 danger of misunderstanding them*!." The respected writer 
 of these words must have forgotten for a moment the pre- 
 valence of the above-mentioned Heresies. In the face of 
 that lamentable fact, we must find some other way of ac- 
 counting for the Fathers " expatiating " so freely as they 
 do "on the power which the signs possess." His expe- 
 rience, too, must be contradictory to that of many of us, 
 since he supposes that the men of this generation find our 
 Lord's Humanity harder to realize than His Godhead. 
 
 The second "Instruction" (so to call it) of the Pastora 
 Letter relates to the Sacrifice of the Altar. In substance it 
 says, " This sacrifice is to be regarded no otherwise than as 
 the means whereby we on our part plead before God the 
 merits of Christ's Death; and on God's part, the means 
 whereby He applies to our souls the benefits of the Sacrifice 
 on the Cross." Now, while it is matter of great thank- 
 fulness that the Synod has not expressly adopted the idea, 
 which we know to have been countenanced by several of its 
 members, that to maintain that the same Christ is offered on 
 the Cross and on the Altar is contradicting the thirty-first 
 Article, I must nevertheless own for myself, that were I 
 a member of any diocesan Synod, I could not accept this 
 statement, without such an explanation as the context, I 
 fear, makes impossible. For what is the meaning of " no 
 otherwise ?" That we are to hold nothing inconsistent with 
 this account of the Sacrament? or that we are to hold 
 nothing in addition to it? If the former, it is perfectly 
 sound, and to be subscribed with joy and gratitude; among 
 <> " Gospel Messenger," December, 1857. Appendix, 160. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 229 
 
 other reasons, because it is an instance of true agreement in 
 an important point of doctrine between us and a large por- 
 tion of our fellow Christians, whose terms of Communion we 
 cannot accept, but with whom we ought always to be glad 
 to agree when we can do it with a safe conscience. For the 
 Council of Trent teaches almost verbally the same idea of 
 the purpose of the Sacrifice : " That He might leave to His 
 Church a sacrifice whereby might be represented that bloody 
 one, once for all to be wrought out upon the Cross ; that the 
 memorial thereof might remain unto the end of the world, 
 and its salutary virtue be applied for the remission of our 
 daily sins." 
 
 But if " not otherwise" is to be taken as though that one 
 formula exhausted the subject, as though it were not 
 lawful to hold or teach anything not contained in it, or 
 proveable thereby ; in the first place, it is a matter on which 
 one may and ought to pause, and that long and very 
 anxiously. One ought to think more than once or twice, 
 before binding one's own conscience, or encouraging others 
 to bind theirs, on so great and sacred a thing, in deference 
 to any authority whatever, even though it looked like a 
 General Council of the Church. And this, I suppose, is 
 one reason why the Church, in her canonical decisions, has 
 commonly avoided both generalities and negatives, that 
 consciences might not be perplexed and ensnared, that all 
 men may know what they are about. Her way has been 
 mostly positive, always definite, to condemn some special 
 error, and those who asserted it, or to re-assert some special 
 truth, with censure of those who denied it. Vague and 
 abstract issues she has done her best to eschew, as the wiser 
 sort of statesmen have always done in secular legislation. 
 The " not otherwise" of the Pastoral Letter, understood in 
 the sense of "this and no more," would seem to be an un- 
 necessary departure from this principle. 
 
 And yet I am afraid it must be so understood. For in 
 the other sense it would be irrelevant, since no one has 
 pretended to find in the publication censured anything in- 
 consistent with the positive part of this statement on the 
 Sacrifice. 
 
230 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 Moreover, the sentence cannot but be taken in connection 
 with the previous words of censure, in which it had been 
 holden that it is doctrinally unsound to say, The Sacrifice of 
 the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Altar are " substantially 
 one," and " in some transcendental sense, identical." 
 
 Now here, if I mistake not, are at least two great and 
 precious elements of the Gospel forbidden to be held and 
 taught. The one, our Lord's sole Priesthood ; the other, 
 the relation of the Eucharist on earth to His continual inter- 
 cession in heaven. 
 
 Concerning Priesthood ; the Bible and the Church plainly 
 teach that whereas the sons of Aaron "were many priests," 
 not being "suffered to continue by reason of death, This 
 Man, because He contiuueth ever, hath an unchangeable 
 Priesthood ;" and that He is " a Priest for ever, after the 
 order of Melchisedec." There is no need to multiply pas- 
 sages. The idea, we all know, runs as a thread through 
 the whole argument of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 If, then, the Eucharist be a sacrifice at all, and the Com- 
 munion Table an altar, (which, in this argument, is expressly 
 allowed,) and if, as Hooker says, and the Church has always 
 believed, this Sacrifice is in the Church " proportionable " to 
 ancient sacrifices, their antitype, as much more real than 
 they as the Gospel from beginning to end is more real than 
 the Law, then, since we know that our Lord Himself is the 
 antitype of the Legal Priests, we cannot but believe, with 
 humble gratitude, that as He was present personally to offer 
 Himself a Sacrifice of Expiation on the Cross, once for all, so 
 He is present now, to offer continually His own appointed 
 memorial of that Sacrifice. We cannot believe that His 
 gracious promises, As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I 
 you ; I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world, 
 are not eminently applicable, and realized in this, the crown- 
 ing act, into which by His ordinance are gathered all the 
 services, inward and outward, of the new law; Jesus Christ 
 evidently set forth crucified among us. It would indeed be 
 taking the spring out of the year, were we to doubt or deny 
 a Special Presence of our High Priest, God and Man, to 
 solemnize with us that feast concerning which He declared 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 231 
 
 to His first disciples, With desire I have desired to eat this 
 Passover with you before I suffer. How could it be, that 
 having first commanded them, Do this in remembrance of Me, 
 and having within a few minutes after added, Without Me ye 
 can do nothing, He should leave them, and all other genera- 
 tions, to do the same without Him ? that having promised to 
 be in the midst of them where two or three are gathered to- 
 gether, this, of all others, should be the time when we might 
 not so expect His presence ? this, which is to be the very chief- 
 est instrument of such entire union with Him, as would best 
 entitle us to be called by His name, for here we become one 
 with Christ, as Christ with us. It cannot be. Those ancient 
 worshippers may not be thought to have prayed in vain, who 
 in their humble access said, " O Jesu, the good High-Priest ! 
 come, come, and be in the midst of us, as Thou wast in the 
 midst of Thy disciples ; sanctify this oblation, that, it being 
 sanctified, we may receive it by the hands of Thy holy angel, 
 O Holy Lord and Eternal Redeemer ! " He is there, we may 
 be sure of it, to bless, and break, and distribute, as well as 
 to be offered, given, taken, and received ; and therefore His 
 visible priests, by whose hands He vouchsafes to " do this," 
 are not mere shadows of Him, as the Mosaic priests, before 
 He had yet come, but very images, reflections as in a mirror, 
 denoting a special presence of the reality : which reality is, 
 Christ made our High Priest for ever, after the order of Mel- 
 chisedec. Where they are, there, by virtue of His promises, 
 we know and believe that He is, to eat of the Bread, (such is 
 His mysterious condescension,) and drink of the Fruit of the 
 Vine, new with us in His Father's kingdom. He is there; 
 not yet in His whole being, but in His divine nature only, 
 until in the way which He Himself knows, He become pre- 
 sent by consecration in His humanity also. 
 
 Consider the analogy of holy Baptism. We have all learned 
 that Christ is the only Baptizer. This or that Priest or Dea- 
 con may take the child in his arms, and baptize it with water; 
 but "this is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." By 
 which faith in the Ancient Church, S. Augustine put the Do- 
 natists to silence ; and our own Church builds upon it her as- 
 sertions, that " the unworthiness of the Minister hinders not 
 
232 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 the effect of the Sacrament ;" and that " the Sacraments have 
 their virtue, because of the institution of Christ, although 
 they be ministered by evil men." This applies, of course, to 
 the Eucharist, as well as to Baptism, i.e., in other words, as 
 Christ is the only Baptizer, so He is the only Consecrator. 
 The visible priest is merely an image of Him, a token of His 
 invisible presence. 
 
 All this is but in unison with the doctrine of our Lord's 
 sole Priesthood, as taught in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and 
 as such it is unequivocally recognised by the Fathers. I will 
 cite a few instances out of many, and if they are trite, they 
 will not be the less real. Thus S. Augustine r : "He is a 
 Priest [as well as a Sacrifice]. Himself offering, Himself 
 also the oblation. Of which thing He willed the daily sacri- 
 fice of the Church to be a Sacrament. The Church being 
 that body whereof Christ Himself is the head, learns to offer 
 herself through Him. Of this true sacrifice the ancient 
 sacrifices of holy men were tokens manifold and various." 
 Elsewhere 8 he mentions " the Table which Himself as Priest, 
 being Mediator of the New Testament, exhibits after the 
 order of Melchisedec, of His own Body and Blood. For that 
 sacrifice came in place of all those sacrifices of the Old Tes- 
 tament, which were slain as a shadow of what was to come." 
 S. Chrysostom * : " Our High-Priest is He who offered the 
 Sacrifice which cleanseth us." And u , "Whenthou seest the 
 Priest delivering it unto thee, account not that it is the 
 Priest that doeth so, but that it is Christ's hand that is 
 stretched out." S. Ambrose v : "Christ Himself is plainly 
 seen to offer in us, whose word sanctifieth the sacrifice which 
 is offered, and Himself indeed standeth by us, as an Advocate 
 with the Father; but now we see Him not." Again x , " What 
 more noble than Christ, who in the Feast of the Church both 
 ministers and is ministered?" S. Jerome y : " Himself is the 
 Prince, and ' High-Priest after the order of Melchisedec,' 
 and Sacrifice, and Priest, who, in the presence of His Father, 
 with us eateth the heavenly Bread, and drinketh the Wine, 
 
 r De Civ. Dei, x. 20. v On Psalm xxxviii. 25. 
 
 De Civ. Dei, xvii. 20. x Of Cain and Abel, i. 5. 19. 
 
 * On Heb. ix. 28. Horn. xvii. 3. ? On Ezek. xliv. 2. 
 u On S. Matt. 1. 3. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 233 
 
 whereof He saith in the Gospel, ' I will not drink of the fruit 
 of this vine, until I drink it new in the kingdom of My 
 Father/ " S. Cyril Alex. 2 : "He abideth a Priest and a Sacri- 
 fice, Himself the Offerer and Offered, Receiver and Imparter." 
 Theod. a : " He calls the Church His Body, and through it, as 
 Man, He exercises the Priest's office." S. Leo b : "Himself 
 it is whose likeness Melchisedec set forth, offering to God 
 not Jewish sacrifices, but the sacrifice of that Sacrament, 
 which our Redeemer consecrated in His Body and Blood." 
 The same is implied also in all the places which represent our 
 Eucharist as one with our Lord's : an idea which is of course 
 at the root of all the great things that are said of it. 
 
 The Synod, we are quite sure, would not intentionally dis- 
 parage this comfortable doctrine, and make the Sacrament, 
 so far as the Priest's office is concerned, " desolate, empty, 
 and void of Christ." But I would respectfully urge it on 
 their Lordships' candid consideration, whether their "no 
 otherwise," taken in the sense of a prohibition of additional 
 teaching, would not logically preclude their clergy from 
 teaching Christ's Presence as our Priest in the Sacrifice of 
 the Altar. In a disquisition which assumes that it is a very 
 " startling feature" in any doctrine, that it should " agree 
 almost entirely with the teaching of the Church of Rome," I 
 see it set down as a Romish error to say " He who offered 
 Himself on the Cross is the Offerer of the Sacrifice in the 
 Eucharist ," or, "The Body of Christ is offered up in these 
 Elements, by Jesus Christ Himself, acting through the 
 Priest." Yet the same writer acknowledges it as " an oft- 
 recurring expression" in ancient Liturgies and ancient 
 Authors, that " Christ Himself is both the Offerer and the 
 Offered in the Eucharist d : Offered, (so he goes on to ex- 
 plain 6 ,) merely as He would be in any prayer or pious wish 
 
 1 Ap. Pusey, 651. He seems to have some notion that 
 
 a Ibid. 673. persons hold Christ's Presence as Priest 
 
 b Ibid. 695. to involve a Real Presence of His 
 
 c Analysis, p. 28. Body; which, I need hardly say, no 
 
 d P. 34. It may be worth while to one ever thought of affirming, except, 
 
 notice that Mr. Shaw, page 35, argues perhaps, a few extreme Lutherans. 
 
 against a special Presence of our 'Lord e P. 35. " As in every prayer, with 
 
 as Priest in the Eucharist, from Hig this difference, that in prayer we 
 
 being specially present in Baptism, offer His Most Precious Body with 
 
234 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 with a commanded symbolical act, e.g., in bowing the knee 
 when the Church names the Name of Jesus. And as Christ 
 is then offered, so He offers ; not in any way peculiar to the 
 Mystery of the Eucharist, but simply " as He is the Offerer 
 and Administrator in all the offices and services of religion," 
 as "by His Holy Spirit and Divine Grace every time we 
 kneel in prayer." Whether this comes at all near the idea 
 of the Eucharist, which Scripture, Antiquity, and our own 
 Offices give, or would give if they were simply taken, and 
 without bias through modern abuses, any careful reader may 
 easily judge for himself. 
 
 The Presence of Jesus Christ as Priest, in our Sacrifice of 
 Holy Communion, is indeed only part of an idea which seems 
 to be ignored if not discountenanced by the Synod ; yet it is 
 unquestionably a primitive idea, and our Formularies, if I 
 mistake not, can hardly be explained without it ; I mean 
 the idea that our Eucharist is identical with that of our 
 Lord. 
 
 I say the Synod, inadvertently no doubt, discountenances 
 this doctrine also, by the phrase complained of, " Not other- 
 wise." For who, having before his mind's eye that which 
 took place in the Holy Upper Room, would think of describ- 
 ing that Eucharist in its sacrificial aspect, as a " means 
 whereby" the Communicants only, or chiefly, were " repre- 
 senting, commemorating, and pleading before God the 
 merits of the Death of Christ ?" Would he not much more 
 naturally regard it as a mysterious Presentation of the Lamb 
 of God by Himself to His Father, as in the Apocalypse ? as 
 the first offering and distribution of the Mystic Bread and 
 Wine, by Him who is "a Priest for ever after the order 
 of Melchisedec ?" Who, in that case, would be nice and 
 subtle in sufficiently separating the Head, which was soon 
 to be on high, from the Members, who were to abide on 
 earth ? Who would pass over Christ's part in the Sacrifice, 
 as if the people's were the chief part ? and begin to make 
 
 the mind and the lips only; but in and a 'shewing forth of His Death' in 
 the Eucharist, with the mind, the lips, the symbolical act." 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 235 
 
 mention of His doings only when the Feast came to be 
 spoken of ? Yet the Pastoral Letter does this, unless it 
 assume that Christ's Eucharist is not the same as ours. 
 
 Whatever may have been the mind of the Synod on this 
 matter, one writer at least, in the course of the present dis- 
 cussion, appears to have advisedly severed between the two. 
 " The rite," (he says f ,) " was not instituted .... that He 
 Himself should shew forth in it His own death to the Father, 
 .... that He Himself should be the Pleader and Intercessor 
 under the image, .... it was WE, I repeat, who were com- 
 manded to do this." As if the two were inconsistent, 
 Christ pleading for the Church, and the Church pleading in 
 and through Him ; as if they were not, through His mercy, 
 inseparable correlatives : according to the quotation from 
 Theodorets, alleged subsequently in the same argument : 
 " Now also Christ sacrifices, not offering anything Himself, 
 but being the Head of those who offer, for He calls the 
 Church His Body, and through it He, as man, sacrifices, 
 as God, receives the things that are offered. But the 
 Church offereth the symbols of His Body and Blood, hallow- 
 ing the whole lump through the first fruits." This surely 
 grants the fact which the other Fathers affirm, namely, that 
 Christ offers in the Eucharist : only it explains the man- 
 ner of the offering, as we also say, to be different from that 
 in the Passion. The expression, " Not offering anything 
 Himself," requires as much to be reconciled with Theodoret's 
 own context as with anything in the other writers whom he 
 is supposed to contradict ; for it is in terms contradictory to 
 " Christ sacrifices :" Avrbs, it would appear, must be con- 
 strued " by himself," in contradistinction to the great and 
 awful Expiation the wine- press which He trod Himself 
 alone. But what is it He offers ? Not primarily, as is here 
 said, the Mystical Body itself, with the souls and bodies of 
 its members, (though that also, in a secondary sense, is the 
 res Sacramenti,) but " the symbols of His Body and Blood 11 ," 
 
 f Analysis, p. 31. cration. Cf. (inter alia) ^the^ well- 
 
 e In Psalm cix. known place in Eranistes, Dial. ii. 126, 
 
 h For Theodoret calls the outward (part iv. Schulzc.) 
 part "symbols" still, after couse- 
 
236 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 the consecrated Bread and Wine, the outward signs 
 with the things signified, (for if they are separated it is 
 no true Sacrament,) i.e. Christ Himself sacramentally 
 present, to be offered to the Father, and received by us ; 
 for Christ Himself, and no other, is the " First Fruits" 
 of that " Lump." 
 
 Even supposing this comment erroneous; if the passage 
 may be set against those quoted from others, so may they be 
 set against it, and persons ought not to be summarily con- 
 demned for holding by one as their standard rather than by 
 the other : particularly when the theological history of Theo- 
 doret is compared with that of S. Ambrose and S. Chry- 
 sostom and the rest, who speak undoubtingly of that first 
 Eucharist, as being repeated in each after one, and who, if 
 they were only using figures of rhetoric, must be confessed 
 to have been deceiving their people. I will subjoin a few 
 sentences, by way of sample of their teaching. 
 
 S.Ambrose 1 : "Christ, in the Feast of the Church, both 
 ministers and is ministered." k " He offers Himself as a 
 Priest, that He may forgive our sins; here in image," 
 (i. e., through His Priests on earth, with whom He has 
 promised to be,) " there in Truth, where He intercedeth 
 for us as an Advocate with the Father." The passing 
 away of the image, then, is the cessation of Sacraments, 
 when we shall (please God) see our High Priest, and His 
 Body, which He offers for us, face to face in the heavenly 
 places. 
 
 Again : " This Bread He gave to the Apostles to divide to 
 the Christian people : to this day He gives us that which 
 Himself also daily, as our Priest, consecrates with His own 
 words." 
 
 S. Jerome * : " Let us go up with the Lord into the large 
 upper room, furnished and cleansed ; and let us receive from 
 Him on high the Cup of the New Testament, and there 
 keeping with Him the Passover, let us be inebriated by Him 
 
 1 De Cain et Abel, i. 5, 19 ; De adsistit." " He indeed, as an Advocate 
 
 Off. i. 48, 248 ; De Bened. Patr. with the Father, is standing by us ; 
 
 ix. 38. but now we see Him not." 
 
 k Cf. in Psalm 38, 25. Et Ipse Ep. 120, ad Hedib. qu. 2. 
 quidem nobis apud Patrem Advocatus 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 237 
 
 with the Wine of soberness." . . . . " Nor hath Moses given 
 us the True Bread, but the Lord Jesus ; Himself Guest and 
 Banquet; Himself feeding with us, and the Person fed 
 upon." 
 
 S. Chrysostom m : " Believe that it is even now that Sup- 
 per, in which He Himself sat down. For that did in no- 
 thing excel this, since it is not at all so that this is man's 
 work, and the other His own ; nay, both this and that are 
 His. When, therefore, thou seest the Priest delivering It 
 unto thee, consider it to be not the Priest who is so doing, 
 but that the hand which is reached out is the hand of Christ. 
 For as when thou art baptised, not he baptises thee, but it is 
 God who holdeth thine head," &c. nU This Table is the 
 same as that, and hath nothing less." 
 
 Theodoret, on 1 Cor. xi. 23 : " That sacred and all holy 
 night, in which .... He opened the doors of the saving 
 Mystery, and distributed of His Precious Body and Blood, 
 not to the eleven Apostles only, but also to the Traitor ; he" 
 (S. Paul) " teaches how we may at all times enjoy the good 
 things of that night." 
 
 Why, indeed, should any one wish to doubt that the 
 Lord's Eucharist is continued to us, in all its power and 
 blessing, in the double Mystical Presence (so to speak) of 
 Him who there, as well as on the Cross, vouchsafed to be 
 both our Priest and our Sacrifice ? our Priest, not only in 
 that He is very God, ever present with the Minister and with 
 the Gifts, by His Omni-Presence, as the Second Person in 
 the Blessed Trinity ; but also by a Spiritual Presence of 
 Grace and Favour : not as God only, but as God Incarnate, 
 Head of His Church ; although as Priest He is not present 
 in the Body ? Why should any one desire to make out that 
 Christ is in any sense absent from this, His own blessed Eu- 
 charist? Surely it were better philosophy, and not worse 
 devotion, here, if anywhere, to apply the maxim of the Wise 
 Man, " When you glorify the Lord, exalt Him as much as you 
 can ; for even yet will He far exceed ; and when you exalt 
 Him, put forth all your strength, and be not weary, for ye 
 never can go far enough ." 
 
 m On St. Matthew, Horn. 1. 3. n Ibid. Ixxxii. 5. Ecclus. xliii. 30. 
 
238 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 The rather, because on the identity of each one of our 
 Eucharists with that which our Lord Himself celebrated in 
 the beginning depends the final and most transcendent cir- 
 cumstance of what is revealed concerning this Sacrifice, 
 the identity of both with our Saviour's Presentation of Him- 
 self in heaven within the veil. It has appeared to many, 
 to S.Ambrose among the rest, that S.Paul in the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews, where he speaks of the Gospel having the 
 " very image " of the " good things to come," whereas the 
 Law had only the " shadow," and proceeds to exemplify it 
 in the matter of Sacrifice, had respect especially to three 
 things : the Priest's appearing within the Holy of Holies on 
 the great day of Expiation, our Lord's appearing before the 
 Father for us in Heaven, and the Holy Eucharistical Sacrifice 
 commemorating His Passion on earth : in this avaToixia, (to 
 use a Scriptural word) our Lord's Intercession is confes- 
 sedly the " good Thing to come," whereof the High Priest's 
 Ministry within the veil is the shadow, and the Com- 
 mentators in question believe the Sacrifice in the Lord's 
 Supper to be the "very Image" of the same. To express 
 what I suppose to be their meaning, I will use words of 
 Bishop Taylor : premising that I do not cite him as going all 
 the way with S. Ambrose. 
 
 " (1.) Christ ... in the virtue of the Cross intercedes for us, 
 and represents an Eternal Sacrifice in the Heavens on our behalf. 
 That He is a Priest in Heaven appears in the large discourses and 
 direct affirmatives of S. Panl. That there is no other Sacrifice to 
 be offered, but that on the Cross, it is evident, because ' He hath but 
 once appeared, in the end of the world, to put away sin by the 
 sacrifice of Himself;' and therefore, since it is necessary that He 
 hath something to offer, so long as He is a Priest, and there is no 
 other sacrifice but that of Himself, offered upon the Cross, it fol- 
 lows that Christ, in Heaven, perpetually offers and represents that 
 Sacrifice to His Heavenly Father, and in virtue of that, obtains all 
 good things for His Church. 
 
 " (2.) Now what Christ does in Heaven, He hath commanded us 
 to do on earth ; that is to represent His Death, to commemorate His 
 Sacrifice, by humble prayer and thankful record ; and by faithful 
 Manifestation and joyful Eucharist, to lay It before the eyes of our 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 239 
 
 Heavenly Father, so ministering in His Priesthood, and doing ac- 
 cording to His commandment and example ; the Church being the 
 image of Heaven ; the Priest the minister of Christ ; the Holy 
 Table being a copy of the celestial Altar ; and the Eternal Sacrifice 
 the Lamb being always the same ; It bleeds no more after the finish- 
 ing of it on the Cross ; but it is wonderfully represented in Heaven, 
 and graciously represented here ; by Christ's action there, by His 
 commandment here. And the event of it is plainly this, that as 
 Christ, in virtue of His Sacrifice on the Cross, intercedes for us 
 with His Father, so does the Minister of Christ's Priesthood 
 here, that the virtue of the Eternal Sacrifice may be salutary and 
 effectual to all the needs of the Church, both for things temporal 
 and eternal p ." 
 
 He proceeds to point out, that herein are fulfilled also 
 the revelations of Scripture concerning Melchisedec and his 
 priesthood. " Our blessed Lord was pleased to command 
 the representation of His Death and Sacrifice on the Cross 
 should be made by breaking bread and effusion of wine, 
 to signify to us the nature and sacredness of the Liturgy 
 we are about, and that we minister in the Priesthood of 
 Christ, who is a Priest for ever after the order of Melchise- 
 dec; that is, we are ministers in that unchangeable priest- 
 hood, imitating, in the external ministry, the Prototype 
 Melchisedec : of whom it was said, ' He brought forth 
 Bread and Wine and was the Priest of the Most High 
 God ;' and in the internal, imitating the Antitype, or the 
 Substance, Christ Himself; who offered up His Body and 
 Blood for atonement for us, and, by the Sacraments of 
 Bread and Wine, and the prayers of oblation and interces- 
 sion commands us to officiate in His Priesthood, in the ex- 
 ternal ministering like Melchisedec, in the internal, after 
 the manner of Christ Himself. This is a great and a mys- 
 terious truth, which, as it is plainly manifest in the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews, so it is understood by the ancient and holy 
 Doctors of the Church *." 
 
 In proof of which last statement Bishop Taylor subjoins 
 some of the very passages from S. Ambrose, S. Chrysostom, 
 
 P Bishop Taylor's Worthy Communicant, chap. I. sect. iv. vol. xv. p. 437. 
 i Ibid., chap. I. sect. iv. vol. xv. p. 438. 
 
210 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 and S.Augustine which the Bishop of Brechin and others 
 have alleged in this present controversy. 
 
 Are we quite prepared to say that this doctrine thus 
 taught by ancients and moderns shedding such a glory as it 
 does over the celebration of the Holy Eucharist and every- 
 thing connected with it, and harmonizing and explaining so 
 much of Holy Scripture and Liturgical usage and phraseology 
 (for besides what has been now mentioned, we may refer to 
 the Apocalypse, and to the remarkable way in which, more 
 than once, our Lord Himself connects the Ascension with 
 the Eucharist, marking out Thursday, the same day of the 
 week, by both :) are we prepared to say that all this is un- 
 authorized? and yet the Pastoral Letter would seem to 
 make those accepting it say so, if "no otherwise" means 
 to affirm that the account of the Sacrifice there given is 
 adequate. 
 
 More directly still : since the Bishop of Brechin had dis- 
 tinctly explained in what sense he holds substantial sameness 
 of the Sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Altar, 
 viz. in that the Priest is the same, i. e. Christ, and the Offer- 
 ing is the same, viz. the Body of Christ ; and how entirely 
 with all his heart he clings to the belief, that in the Sacrifice 
 of the Cross only the Sacrifice of Blood and Suffering and 
 Death, is there expiatory and atoning virtue : " It alone 
 was an atonement ; It alone was a Satisfaction for Sin ; It 
 alone (we may dare to say, for it is the language of the 
 Church) was meritorious 1 ";" and yet the statement so ex- 
 plained is declared to be " doctrinally unsound," " exceeding 
 the truth of God's holy Word," " an attempt to restore Popish 
 excesses ;" and some of the names appended to this decla- 
 ration had appeared before at the foot of another document, 
 not yet withdrawn, which denounced his teaching as contra- 
 dictory to the thirty-first Article : is there not great reason 
 to fear lest in adopting the Pastoral Letter we should be not 
 only establishing a variance between our Articles and such 
 great Divines as I have cited, but even denying that the 
 Holy Eucharist is the " very Image " of the perpetual Sacri- 
 fice in Heaven ? 
 
 ' Charge, page 52. 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 241 
 
 The third " Instruction " of the Synod relates to Adora- 
 tion : and expresses it as the opinion of the six Bishops, 
 that it were best for them to be guided in the Interpretation 
 of t'he Church's mind on the matter by the 7th English 
 Canon of 1640. That Canon touches but incidentally on 
 the matter of Eucharistical worship. After recommending 
 to the serious consideration of all good people, the most 
 ancient custom of the Primitive Church in the purest times, 
 to make obeisance at coming in and going out of Churches 
 and Chancels, its authors explain themselves not to mean 
 that persons so doing, should do it " with any intention to 
 exhibit any religious worship to the Communion Table, the 
 East, or Church, or anything therein contained in so doing, 
 or to perform the said gesture in the celebration of the Holy 
 Eucharist, upon any opinion of a corporal presence of the 
 Body of Jesus Christ on the Holy Table, or in mystical 
 elements, but only for the advancement of God's majesty, 
 and to give Him alone that honour and glory that is due 
 unto him, and no otherwise;" i.e. that it should be done 
 without any worship of the creatures used in the service of 
 God, and without any notion of a gross carnal Presence in 
 the Sacrament : neither of which would be for the advance- 
 ment of God's Majesty and keeping His glory inviolate. 
 Such is the amount of what that Canon excludes. It would 
 leave matters then in the same ambiguity as at present as to 
 the meaning of the word Corporal, on which the whole con- 
 troversy turns. What would be gained by adopting it, I 
 cannot well see, except we take " no otherwise " in the ex- 
 clusive sense above mentioned ; and then it will mean that 
 in such ceremonies we need not think of any special doc- 
 trine, but only in general that God is good and great, and 
 we are here to do honour to Him. It is not, however, self- 
 evident that this satisfies the meaning of the Rubric, for 
 which it is proposed, practically, to substitute it ; especially 
 when that Rubric is interpreted, as it ought to be in am- 
 biguous words, by the known mind of its framers and en- 
 actors. Therefore it would hardly be wise for a Diocesan 
 Synod, which to-morrow may have to sit in judgment on 
 this very point, to accept this as an adequate interpretation. 
 
242 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 Elsewhere their Lordships go farther, and rule this point 
 also, that it is "doctrinally unsound" to say, "Supreme 
 Adoration becomes due to Christ as mysteriously present in 
 the Gifts." There is no adhering to their document without 
 committing one's self to that proposition. The matter has 
 been argued above, for it is involved in the question of the 
 Real Presence, since no Christian would deny that Christ, 
 wherever He is, is to be worshipped, nor any orthodox 
 Christian, that Christ is wherever His Body and Blood are ; 
 although this latter, Jay some confusion of thought or lan- 
 guage, appears to be doubted by some of high authority. 
 Anyhow it is a momentous point, never yet ruled in the 
 negative by any Synod or Council of the Church ; and 
 very, very serious will be their responsibility, who shall lead 
 the way in so ruling it in making it a condition of orders 
 and office, and ultimately even of membership in the Scot- 
 tish Church, that a man must, on principle, refrain from 
 worshipping Christ as present by the Presence of the Gifts 
 in Holy Communion. This is going farther than any por- 
 tion of Christ's Church has ever yet gone. If Adoration 
 has not been enjoined everywhere, always, and by all, (as 
 I firmly believe it to have been,) certainly it has never yet 
 been forbidden under penalties by any. 
 
 On this topic, I may venture to point out what appears to 
 me a capital and somewhat unaccountable oversight in the 
 exceptions which have been taken to our argument from 
 ancient authority. That argument may be broadly stated 
 thus : If the Primitive Christians believed a Real Presence, 
 they must have adored at least in heart; but they did be- 
 lieve, therefore they must have adored, i.e., the onus pro- 
 bandi lies with those who say they did not adore. The 
 presumption is in favour of Adoration, and must be over- 
 powered, if at all, by positive evidence. We ask for this 
 positive evidence, we ask for one single vestige of Adoration 
 being ever prohibited or discouraged, or even argued against. 
 Not one is forthcoming; the only fact tending that way 
 is negative, viz., the silence (to a certain extent) of the 
 ancient Liturgies : which silence is accounted for when we 
 consider the Sacrificial Aspect of the whole Service : Christ, 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 243 
 
 as our Priest, presenting with us His own appointed Memorial 
 to the Father, to Whom accordingly almost all the prayers 
 are addressed ; with so much of exception, however, as to shew 
 that the worship of the heart at least was not forbidden. 
 
 On the other hand, we produce, (in addition to many 
 places indicating the mind of the writers, and of the Church, 
 on the subject,) direct evidence from five distinct quarters : 
 four of the chief Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries, 
 of several theological schools, and from several parts of 
 Christendom, and Acts of opposing Councils in the eighth 
 century. These we produce, not as sympathising in opinion 
 with us, (though they do so entirely,) but as witnesses to 
 a matter of fact, viz., that such Eucharistical Adoration as 
 we plead for was universal in their time, and had been so, 
 to the best of their knowledge, in all former times. 
 
 " But they are only four or five after all." Well, suppos- 
 ing it to be so, supposing them only three, two, or one, 
 why should not the fact be received upon the testimony, 
 being not incredible in itself, and to contradict it, not 
 a single witness produced? Neither is it of such kind 
 as that we should expect very frequent mention of it in 
 Christian literature, whether theological or popular. The 
 rule of reserve towards the Heathen and Catechumens would 
 lead to the opposite expectation. There are, in truth, other 
 testimonies, some of which have been alleged above; but 
 granting only these four or five, I say to reject these would 
 be contrary to the received rules of historical and legal 
 evidence. It would be as if four or five persons, in the 
 habit of attending a particular Church, should agree in 
 testifying that it was the custom of that Church for the 
 congregation to turn to the East at the Creed, and no one 
 having ever denied it, those who disliked the custom should 
 say, " What are four or five witnesses ? there ought to have 
 been four or five hundred." 
 
 In short, the objection to our evidence reduces itself very 
 nearly to this, that there is not so much of it as there might 
 have been. Yet the objectors go on in a most triumphant 
 tone, as if the Fathers and Liturgies, when they are silent, 
 were so many distinct testimonies against a thing. 
 
244 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 What is more : the evidence so rejected is such, both in 
 kind and degree, as that one rejecting it ought by parity of 
 reasoning to be sceptical about many things which all good 
 Christians would grieve to see disparaged, things touch- 
 ing the Canon of Scripture, the Ordinances of the Church, 
 and even some great Articles of the Creed. Everybody, 
 for example, knows that certain books of the New Testa- 
 ment are never expressly mentioned, and obscurely, if at all, 
 quoted, by the Fathers of the three first centuries. Accord- 
 ing to the reasoning by virtue of which Eucharistical Ado- 
 ration is condemned, not only must it be wrong to enforce 
 the reception of those books as Canonical, but the receiving 
 of them must be made penal. 
 
 It has been said, and by persons from whom it is a real 
 grief to differ, " Our Lord in the Eucharist comes not to be 
 worshipped, but to be received. He gave us no command 
 to adore Him so coming." In like manner, I have known 
 it urged against the Personality of the Holy Spirit, that 
 there is no Scripture precept or example of prayer to Him, 
 but only by Him : the Arians urged it, and were refuted by 
 St. Ambrose. The person, however, whom I recollect so 
 reasoning, did not carry the matter so far as the Pastoral 
 Letter, in its mildest interpretation, carries its censure 
 against the worshippers of our Lord in the Eucharist. He 
 was content with a dispensation for himself. 
 
 Again, as to ritual. What would be said if the Sunday 
 League were to point out, what is undoubtedly quite true, 
 that there is not a word, in those three hundred years, 
 of Christians abstaining from work on the Sabbath ; and 
 were thence to argue that Christianity recognises no day of 
 rest in the sense of not working ? 
 
 Truly, these negative arguments had need be well watched. 
 If we lightly receive them, we know not where they will 
 take us. 
 
 I believe that I have now, in some way, gone over the 
 main objections that have been taken either to the substance 
 or to the evidence of the Bishop of Brechin's doctrine. 
 
 There has been abundance of criticism also on the phrase- 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 245 
 
 ology which has been employed ; to which it may be replied 
 in general, that the writers of this generation are not re- 
 sponsible for it ; they have but used, as was natural, certain 
 language which they found ready to their hands, as having 
 been employed by their predecessors in a known and definite 
 sense. Thus, with respect to that around which the whole 
 debate has, as it were, gathered the term Real Presence 
 all readers of English divinity have been familiar with it 
 since the time of Hooker at least; and the learned author 
 of " The Panoply," who, (as far as I know,) stands alone in 
 simply rejecting it, and preferring (I grieve to write it) the 
 term Eeal Absence, grounds his objection on a circumstance 
 which would more than justify the Semi-Arians in rejecting 
 the Homoousion. For if the non-appearance .of this form 
 in early times makes it improper to be used by us, much 
 more would the absolute rejection of the Homoousion by 
 the Council of Antioch in the third century make it im- 
 proper to be used by the orthodox in the fourth. But there 
 could be no such thing as theology at all, if Churchmen were 
 debarred from adopting phrases which have gradually come 
 to have a technical meaning, as the standing exponents of 
 the Church's mind, provided they truly express that mind. 
 And that, I say again, is the very point in dispute. 
 
 So too, as to the word Objective, which some have added 
 as a safeguard to their description of the Sacramental Pre- 
 sence properly so called : it is convenient to have some word 
 expressive of our belief that the Presence, the supernatural 
 Gift, is there, independently of the disposition of him who 
 receives it; if not for his salvation, it is there for his con- 
 demnation; it cannot be "a thing absent," and its "figure 
 untrue:" and "objective," as opposed to "subjective," and 
 used as expressing this distinction in philosophical discus- 
 sion, has been largely employed to denote it in this case; 
 without any ill effect that I know of. Neither is this use 
 of it so absolutely novel as the Pastoral Letter seems to 
 imply: the note subjoined will prove this 8 . And " Sub- 
 
 8 The following, communicated by General Assembly of the Church of 
 
 one to whom the writer owes many Scotland, holden at Perth, the 25th 
 
 thanks, is taken from "A True Nar- of August, 1618. By Dr. Lyndesay, 
 
 ration of the Proceedings in the Bishop of Brechin. London, 1621." 
 
246 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 stantial," (which as I have shewn elsewhere, is apparently 
 authorized by Overall, the writer of the account of Sacra- 
 ments in the Catechism,) is not so different from " Real 
 and Essential/' a phrase undeniably countenanced by the 
 last revisers of the Prayer-Book, as that the one should 
 be used without scruple, the other incur Church censures 
 and degradation. 
 
 May I venture a word or two on some noticeable assump- 
 tions in the Pastoral Letter, to which, by an unreserved 
 assent, the Clergy would seem to commit themselves ? 
 
 For instance : " The aversion to the doctrine of Sacra- 
 mental Grace, and even its entire rejection, unhappily pre- 
 valent in many quarters since the time of the Reformation, 
 is to be regarded as the natural reaction from excesses with 
 which the Primitive teaching had been overlaid." The words 
 sound as if it were taken for granted that there is not in our 
 fallen nature any anti-sacramental tendency ; that every- 
 thing of that sort is due to men's recoiling from super- 
 stitious abuse ; that there is in the human heart abundance 
 of Popery but no Rationalism : as if one could forget on 
 what occasion the Rationalist's watchword, "How" was 
 first introduced: "How can these things be?" and "How 
 can this man give us His flesh to eat ?" as if there were not 
 One walking about, who cannot bear for us to know and 
 recollect that as Christians we are altogether in a super- 
 natural condition, the antitype of that of the twelve tribes 
 in the wilderness ; that the air around us is full of miracles, 
 
 pp. 141, 142 : " And it is no errour the Person. That to conclude it 
 
 to believe the Presence of Christ's is no errour to believe the 
 
 Body in the Sacrament, after some spiritual!, powerfull, and pertonall, 
 
 manner ; as to believe that it is there presence of Christ's Bodie in the Sa- 
 
 Objectivb, that is, as the Reall Object, crament, and in that respect to wor- 
 
 whereupon we must fix and fasten ship His Flesh and Blood there; 
 
 our Faith Lastly to beleave yea, Saint Augustine saith, ' That 
 
 that the Body of Christ is present it is sinne not to worship the Flesh 
 
 in the Divine Person, wherein It sub- there/ " 1 am also informed on the 
 
 sisteth, albeit locally the same be in authority of one more conversant 
 
 Heaven, is no errour; for wheresoever with their writings than I am, that 
 
 the Person is, there both the Natures the teaching of the Scotch Caroline 
 
 are present conjunctly And Divines generally approached that of 
 
 so as Christ is personally present in the Bishop of Brechin much more 
 
 the Sacrament, so is His Divinity closely than has been supposed, 
 and Humanity conjunctly present in 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 247 
 
 full of great intense realities, of which the things that we 
 see are for the most part only faint shadows. He wants 
 to keep our eyes downward, that we may not discern the 
 ladder which reacheth from earth unto heaven, and the 
 Angels of God ascending and descending upon our Lord's 
 Mystical Body. In our time and country at least, any one 
 who looks and listens around him, I had almost said for 
 a single half-hour, can he at no loss to say which way the 
 Evil One prevails most, by erroneous modes of realizing 
 things out of sight, or by gradually lowering our notions 
 of them, until we have come to scorn or disregard every- 
 thing that is not in sight. 
 
 Plainly the Synod could not mean that all the risk is one 
 way ; and their assertion being short of this, is liable to the 
 obvious retort, that any excesses which may be justly com- 
 plained of are themselves due to the defective and imperfect 
 way in which the Sacramental teaching of Holy Scripture 
 and the Church has been exhibited and enforced among us. 
 The word " excesses," as far as the Bishop of Brechin is con- 
 cerned, can mean only excesses in doctrine. He has point- 
 edly deprecated excess in ritual, and has not, that I know 
 of, been charged with it. The excess in doctrine is the very 
 point in debate. 
 
 I come to another serious imputation. The Synod "traces 
 plainly in the teaching of this Charge, a tendency to under- 
 mine the great foundations upon which our Formularies rest/' 
 The great Foundations upon which our Formularies rest, we 
 all agree to be, primarily, Holy Scripture, and in a secondary 
 way, the way of authoritative interpretation, the voice of 
 the Universal Church, however ascertained. What is there 
 in the Bishop of Brechin's teaching, even were it proved 
 erroneous in the special points here censured, which tends to 
 undermine these foundations? any further than as an error 
 in any theological point, according to the wonderful inter- 
 dependence of all Truths, may in logic, ultimately, affect any 
 other point. Saving this, I do not see how his mistakes (if 
 any) undermine the Foundations, any more than an oversight 
 in repeating a message on the part of a dutiful servant would 
 tend to undermine his master's authority. What do those 
 
248 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 mistakes amount to ? First, he does not feel warranted, in 
 the face of all that the Ancient Church has uttered by her 
 Divines and in her Liturgies, to accept a certain metaphysical 
 saying, as a sufficient reason for withdrawing faith and wor- 
 ship from our Lord, as mysteriously present by the presence 
 of His Body and Blood in What He gives. And secondly, 
 he has alleged two meanings of the word Sacrifice, to explain 
 and harmonize certain statements of Holy Scripture, in the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews especially. If those two explanations 
 are untenable, it is highly needful that they should be proved 
 so : but persons adhering to this document are bound to 
 have first satisfied themselves, not upon mere authority but 
 upon actual investigation, that those sayings are untenable. 
 
 Here, as in the former instance, (though it is not a form 
 of argument which I willingly resort to,) it may be well to 
 remind one's self and others, that there is a risk of " under- 
 mining foundations" on the other side also. It will be a 
 very strong measure in itself, and we live among those who 
 from different and opposing motives will be sure to make the 
 most of it, should any portion of the Church deliberately 
 commit itself to a decision, which will look so fearfully like 
 explaining away such a very large proportion of the sayings 
 of sacred Antiquity. I know this is the last thing the Synod 
 intends. But is there not a real danger of it? 
 
 Once more, the Bishop's teaching tends also, it is said, 
 " to weaken our sense of gratitude and respect towards those 
 holy men from whom we have derived our Formularies in 
 their present state." If this be taken in the letter, it seems 
 to me hardly reconcilable with the facts of the case : at least 
 as regards the English Office. For the present state of our 
 Formularies is that in which they were moulded at the Resto- 
 ration in 1661 : with the Catechism as enlarged by Bishop 
 Overall, and with certain well-known and very significant 
 alterations in the Liturgy, made at the time itself. 
 
 But the Reformers of the sixteenth century were probably 
 meant: and the Synod so far may seem to have countenanced 
 the popular sentiment, that they, apart from the merits and suf- 
 ferings of each, had a sanctity, all but an inspiration, of their 
 own, which would make it a sort of profane thing to question 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 249 
 
 any of their views, or suggest any defect in themselves or 
 their work. It is surely possible to love and honour them 
 deeply, as holy men, true martyrs (many of them) and special 
 instruments in the good hand of our God for our own spiri- 
 tual welfare ; it is quite possible to bless Him night and day 
 for sheltering us by their means from many sad corruptions, 
 which we are too well aware of in the unreformed Churches ; 
 and yet to be glad and thankful to Him that we with those 
 Churches and they with us enjoy the substance of saving 
 Truth ; that we are one in Christ, though parted in visible 
 Communion ; and that the Good Spirit both here and there 
 (so we humbly trust) makes Himself manifest by holy lives 
 and deaths and fruits of evangelical righteousness, in which 
 more abundantly, is not for man to know. \Ve are sure that 
 the Bishops did not mean to disparage Christian Antiquity, 
 in attributing to it a course of inexact and merely rhetorical 
 teaching, as their position in this controversy forces them to 
 do, to a very large extent : no more would we be thought to 
 disparage the Reformers, if we speak occasionally of defects 
 or infirmities in them or their work. He was no undutiful 
 son of the Church of England, who wrote*, 
 
 " The second Temple could not reach the first : 
 And the late Reformation never durst 
 Compare with ancient times and purer years ; 
 But in the Jews and us deserveth tears." 
 Even if one heartily concurred both with the main doc- 
 trines and also with the incidental remarks of the Letter, 
 there would be still a difficulty in adopting it, just as it 
 stands, until a person had well considered whether, more- 
 over, he find the negations contained in it so unambiguously 
 set forth in the Holy Scriptures and in the Formularies of 
 the Church, and by consent of pure Antiquity, as to shew an 
 heretical mind in any one declining to accept them. This pre- 
 caution is requisite, by reason of the tone of the document, 
 as concerning the Bishop of Brechin personally. I allude to 
 such expressions as the following : " The publication of such 
 views in a document for the guidance of Clergy, and still 
 
 1 Herbert's Remains, " Church Militant." 
 
250 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 more, the republication of the Charge 'in its integrity/ not- 
 withstanding the grave remonstrances with which it had been 
 met, and the scandal which it had raised this, attended by 
 the avowed confidence of the author in the eventual ' triumph 
 of his teaching/ leaves us, we feel, no alternative but to 
 declare our own dissent, and to caution you against being 
 led astray either by the teaching itself, or by the undue 
 confidence with which it is maintained." And elsewhere : 
 " Seeing, on his part, an apparent determination not to sur- 
 render the position he has taken up, we have felt ourselves 
 constrained to deal with the matter as we have now done." 
 Clearly the Bishops could not mean to censure their Col- 
 league, merely because he differs from them on these inter- 
 pretations, nor merely because he is strong and confident, 
 as earnest persons are wont to be, in recommending his own 
 view of them. Their words (surely they do not mean it) can 
 only be understood as denouncing him for a kind of heretical 
 obstinacy. And then, most unquestionably, he may claim at 
 the hands of those who are invited to take part in his con- 
 demnation the right of all accused persons to be presumed 
 innocent until he is proved guilty. We do not know the 
 tenor of the " grave remonstrances " with which the Charge 
 was privately "met." Of the public "scandal" which it 
 raised we do know something, not altogether of a kind to 
 make us think that a Bishop must needs have been wrong 
 in not suppressing his Charge on account of it. We know 
 that he cannot be charged with scornful neglect, either of 
 the remonstrance or of the scandal, by his large and charit- 
 able explanations in the second and third editions of his 
 Charge. Whatever people may think of his reasoning, they 
 cannot surely doubt his hearty desire to avoid offence and 
 satisfy the well-meaning, any more than the reverential love 
 with which he meditates on the Sacred Presence, as in that 
 Presence itself. 
 
 I must refer to another censure, which has been passed 
 on, without scruple, from mouth to mouth, and from hand 
 to hand. The Synod, it is true, has not expressly adopted 
 it, unless it be in saying that "the doctrine of the Blessed 
 Sacrament has thus unhappily been brought into contro- 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 251 
 
 versy," as though it had not been a subject of controversy 
 before the Charge was delivered. It is but common justice 
 to observe, that since the Primate of all England put his 
 venerated name to the judgment at Bath, in the case of 
 Archdeacon Denison, there cannot have been wanting suffi- 
 cient ground for any one, not only any Bishop, but any 
 simple Layman in communion with the Church of England, 
 to protest against that decision, and declare and vindicate his 
 faith to the best of his power. This must be my own apology 
 and that of many others, as well as the Bishop of Brechin's^ 
 for what might else have been a presumptuous " touching of 
 the ark :" but it should avail for the Bishop more than for 
 others, because he is a Bishop, and a great necessity is laid 
 upon him. I am sure neither the Synod nor faithful Scot- 
 tish Churchmen, generally speaking, would consider this 
 answered by saying, "The offence was in England what 
 had a Scotch Bishop to do with it?" They cannot have re- 
 pented of what they did seven or eight years since in asser- 
 tion of the other Sacrament. Neither, apart from the Bath 
 decision, has the state of Sacramental doctrine generally 
 been such within our memory, as to render it unreasonable 
 for any Bishop of an English-speaking Diocese to charge his 
 Clergy upon it, except there were local or other special cir- 
 cumstances, of which one cannot presume to judge. In one 
 aspect of the case, and supposing the substantial truth of the 
 Bishop's doctrine, or anything near it, the tone and amount 
 of opposition would seem to prove the Charge very season- 
 able, in the sense, namely, of indicating that it was high 
 time for something to be done. 
 
 And after all, zealous and confident as the Bishop's teach- 
 ing theologically is, yet in an ecclesiastical point of view, 
 things being as they are throughout Christendom, and spe- 
 cially in our Anglican Churches, his Lordship, and those 
 who agree with him, (I may venture to say,) are far from 
 pressing such agreement, as they would an Article of the 
 Creed. They have learned and believe, that good Christians 
 live by Sacraments, without necessarily knowing and owning 
 the full doctrine of those Sacraments. They are persuaded 
 that a very large proportion of those who argue and act 
 
252 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 most keenly against them hold implicitly the same belief as 
 themselves; and in accordance with this conviction, they 
 wish it to be remembered all along that they are seeking 
 only toleration for their worship and teaching, not to enforce 
 it as a condition of communion on others, much less as ne- 
 cessary to salvation. Hints are not wanting in the Pastoral 
 Letter, of this distinction being present to the mind of the 
 writers. We shall see them, I trust, acting upon it, though 
 the general tone and tendency of the document must ren- 
 der it harder for them to do so. And here let me say, what 
 I feel myself, and firmly believe concerning others, that 
 the persons now censured, generally speaking, would be as 
 earnest in discouraging any endeavour to press their in- 
 terpretation, supposing them the majority, by penalties or 
 exclusion from Communion, as they now are in deprecating 
 such proceedings against themselves. 
 
 On this principle they proceeded in the Baptismal Con- 
 troversy of 1850, when many were with them who unhap- 
 pily are now against them; and on the same they would 
 wish to proceed now and always, allowing, as an ecclesiastical 
 opinion, what they never could enforce as an adequate ac- 
 count of the Church's doctrine, unless the whole Undivided 
 Church could be shewn to have taught it as such. On all 
 serious points of difference between them and any of their 
 Fathers or Brethren, they consider themselves as provi- 
 dentially called to go on, (if they may,) under appeal to 
 superior authority, when such may be, by God's mercy, 
 raised up ; just as they consider the whole Eastern, the 
 whole Latin, and the whole Anglican Church, respectively, 
 to be under appeal, (as to the main differences between 
 them,) to a true General Council, when such may be had. 
 
 I subjoin two papers, for both of which, as for portions of 
 what I have said above, I am indebted to kind and venerated 
 friends. The one a summary, in better words, of the main 
 reasons above indicated for not accepting either the censures 
 on the Bishop of Brechin, or the doctrinal and historical 
 statements of the Letter, as they stand : 
 
 " Their Lordships, who have not thought fit to make a Canon on 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 253 
 
 the subject, never could have intended to propose for our accept- 
 ance a Letter, containing a great number of propositions, some 
 judicial, condemning the Bishop of Brechin, some dogmatic. For 
 this would be, by a side-wind, to obtain our condemnation of the 
 Bishop of Brechin without a hearing, and to ask our assent to 
 doctrinal propositions, not distinctly worded. But we must not 
 for a moment think that their Reverences could propose to us to 
 condemn, without form of trial, a Bishop who is nowise amenable 
 to us, of whom they themselves say, that ' This case may not 
 amount to a direct call for a formal presentment of the Bishop, as 
 liable to judicial penalties.' And if they wished to submit to us 
 for our acceptance doctrinal propositions, or in other words, ad- 
 ditional Articles, explanatory of any of the Thirty-nine, doubtless, 
 since by so doing they would express their conviction that the 
 Thirty-nine Articles were not drawn up with sufficient precision, 
 they would have been careful to present to us Articles, drawn up 
 in exact and precise language. Yet we cannot accept or approve 
 of the Letter, without accepting or approving all the statements 
 contained in it. Tor if we do not accept all the parts, we do not 
 accept the whole. 
 
 " The propositions relating to the Bishop of Brechin which we 
 should have to accept are these : 
 
 " (1.) We think the views which the Bishop of Brechin has ex- 
 pressed on the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, in the extent in 
 which he has defined and urged them, unsound, erroneous, and 
 calculated to lead, if not resolutely opposed, to still graver 
 error.' 
 
 " (2.) The Bishop of Brechin has * attempted to rest upon 
 a false foundation the importance ' of duties in regard of Holy 
 Communion. 
 
 " (3.) He 'has adopted a line of argument, which, as it exceeds 
 the truth of God's Holy Word, so it is calculated, we are sure, by 
 
 no slow or uncertain process, to defeat that very end ; 
 
 i.e. the end of assisting and upholding the grace, the dignity and 
 efficacy of the Blessed Sacrament.' 
 
 " (4.) He ' has pleaded for what has recently been called the 
 Heal Objective Presence, in such a manner that the inferences 
 which he draws from it, however doctrinally unsound, become, as 
 he represents, logically inevitable.' 
 
 " (5.) ' The reasoning by which they [these inferences] are main- 
 tained is, in our opinion, fallacious, and the testimony of autho- 
 rities produced in their support, when fully and carefully ex- 
 
254 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 amined, will generally be found not to justify the use to which it 
 has been applied.' 
 
 " (6.) ' We plainly trace in the teaching of the Charge a ten- 
 dency to undermine the great foundations upon which our formu- 
 laries rest.' 
 
 " It is one thing to listen with respect to what the Six Bishops 
 propound ; quite another to accept their statements as our own. 
 This we cannot be called upon to do : 
 
 " (1.) Because we are not the Bishop of Brechin's judges. 
 
 " (2.) He has had no hearing, and we may well say, 'Doth our 
 law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth ?' 
 
 " (3.) "Whatever ground any of the Bishops may think that he 
 has, for making these assertions, they cannot expect that many 
 of us should be able of our own knowledge to affirm, what we 
 dare not affirm, except upon our own knowledge. 
 
 " "With regard to the doctrinal propositions, we should be called 
 upon to affirm : 
 
 "(1.) 'The doctrine that Supreme Adoration is due to Christ 
 as mysteriously present in the Gifts, or to Christ in the Gifts, is 
 not to be found in Holy Scripture, nor has been deduced there- 
 from by the Church, 
 
 "(2.) 'The doctrine that the Sacrifice of the Cross and the 
 Sacrifice of the Altar become substantially one, and in some 
 transcendental sense identical, is not to be found in Holy Scrip- 
 ture, nor has been deduced therefrom by the Church/ 
 
 "Now, before going further, the Bishops, whatever they may 
 have meant by these statements, could not have meant to commit 
 us to ambiguous statements. They do not explain whether by 
 Sacrifice, they mean, That which was sacrificed, i.e. the Body of 
 Christ, or, the act of sacrificing. But in the only other place in 
 which they speak of ' the Sacrifice of the Altar,' (Instruction 2) 
 if they are using known language in its known sense, they mean 
 the ' act of sacrificing,' the ' making an oblation.' In this sense 
 the Bishop of Brechin also affirms that the Sacrifice of the Cross 
 and the Sacrifice of the Altar are not the same. Yet we should 
 be called upon not only to affirm that they are not the same, but 
 that the Bishop of Brechin has said that they are the same, in 
 that sense in which we are called upon to deny it. And this he 
 has not only not done, but in the Second Edition of his Charge, 
 he has explained that he has not done it. 
 
 " (3.) The Proposition, that the ' Church has given us no autho. 
 rity whereby we can require it to be believed that the substance 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 255 
 
 of Christ's Body and Blood, still less His entire Person, as God 
 and Man, now glorified in the heavens, is made to exist with, in, 
 or under the material substances of Bread and Wine' does not, 
 in words, enounce any doctrinal statement whatever. For, as 
 far as the words go, it is only a statement of a matter of fact? 
 that the Church of England does not require this to be believed. 
 But, by the force of the words, ' still less,' the statement would 
 imply that it is a less error to believe that the Substances of our 
 Lord's Body and Blood are present under, or with, the Substances 
 of Bread and Wine, separated from His Godhead, than to believe 
 that they are present with It; in other words, that a doctrine 
 which involves the Nestorian heresy, is the least error of the two. 
 
 "(4.) We have, apparently, a Canon of Archbishop Laud, 
 (which has long ago lapsed into desuetude, and which is now 
 received nowhere) offered for our acceptance, in explanation of 
 the Declaration at the close of the Communion service, whereas 
 the word upon which the meaning of the whole turns, ' the Cor- 
 poral Presence of the Body of Christ,' is the same in both. If 
 we accept this letter, we may not only be accepting a Canon new 
 to the Scotch, and not recognised by the English Church, which 
 Canon the Letter endorses ; but we may be accepting it as saying 
 something more, (we know not what,) than is expressed in the 
 Declaration of the Communion service. 
 
 " There are also two historical statements which we should be 
 called upon to adopt. 
 
 "1. 'The aversion to the doctrine of Sacramental Grace, and 
 even its entire rejection, unhappily prevalent in many quarters 
 since the time of the Reformation, is to be regarded as the natural 
 reaction from excesses with which the primitive teaching has been 
 overlaid.' 
 
 " Considering the great tendency of the unregenerate heart 
 to misbelief or unbelief, I should certainly think it untrue and 
 dangerous to account for unbelief in any truth, solely as a re- 
 action from opposite error. This I should say quite apart from 
 the implied application of this maxim to the teaching of the 
 Bishop of Brechin. 
 
 "2. ' The teaching of them (viz. of the Adoration due to Christ 
 in the Gifts, and of the Doctrine that the Sacrifice of the Cross 
 and the Sacrifice of the Altar are in any sense the same,) has 
 given rise to corruption and superstition.' 
 
 " If we are to take this last statement, as to the Sacrifice in the 
 Holy Eucharist, in the sense in which the Bishop of Brechin has 
 
256 Considerations respectfully addressed 
 
 explained it, it means this, The belief that the same Body which 
 was offered on the Cross, and the same Blood which was then 
 shed, are now present, really and sacramentally, in the holy 
 Eucharist, for us to present and plead to the Father, in memory 
 and application of the merits of the Sacrifice on the Cross, has 
 given rise to many corruptions and superstitions. 
 
 " In like way, we should, if we accepted the Letter, be called 
 upon to affirm the same as to the Adoration of our Lord mys- 
 teriously present in the Gifts. 
 
 "It has always been accounted a hardship inflicted on the 
 members of the Porte Boyale, that they were called upon, not 
 only to subscribe the condemnation of certain propositions which 
 the Pope alleged to be taken out of the works of Jansenius, but 
 also to affirm that those propositions were contained in the works 
 of one whom they reverenced, and where they believed they were 
 not contained. 
 
 "It seems to me, in itself, a sufficient argument that the Six 
 Bishops cannot mean us to adopt their Pastoral Letter, that it 
 would involve, (1,) a direct, but extra-judicial and unjudicial con- 
 demnation of a Bishop by Presbyters of other Dioceses ; and that, 
 (2,) for language which is not the language of the Bishop, and 
 itself in part not carefully worded; (3,) the adoption of new 
 Articles of Religion, not drawn up in the form of Articles, nor in 
 definite, unambiguous, language ; (4,) it would involve also an in- 
 direct acknowledgment of a Canon which the Church of Scotland 
 has never been called upon to acknowledge, and without any ex- 
 planation of its bearing ; and (5,) an assent to historical opinions, 
 such as the Clergy are nowhere called upon to subscribe." 
 
 The other paper is a draft of certain propositions, such 
 as a Diocesan SynocT might perhaps safely, and not un- 
 profitably adopt, by way of substitute for acceptance of 
 the Pastoral Letter. It has been endeavoured so to draw 
 them up as that they should express the whole doctrine, 
 1, orderly; 2, in the words of our formularies; 3, so as 
 to guard against material error either way ; yet, 4, to leave 
 the full latitude which the Church has allowed. 
 
 That nothing be taught relating to the Holy Eucharist 
 which is not in harmony with the following propositions : 
 1. 'Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is Grod and Man : 
 
to Scottish Presbyters. 257 
 
 God of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds, 
 and Man of the substance of His Mother, born in the world ; per- 
 fect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh 
 subsisting.' (AtTian. Creed,) 
 
 2. ' Two whole and perfect Katures, the Godhead and Manhood, 
 were joined together in one Person, never to be divided ; whereof 
 is one Christ, very God and very Man, who truly suffered, was 
 crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile His Father to us, and to 
 be a Sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for the actual 
 sins of men.' (Art. ii.) 
 
 3. We come to Him in Holy Communion, as to 'the Very 
 Paschal Lamb which was offered for us, and hath taken away the 
 sin of the world ;' as to the ' Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the 
 Father, that taketh away the sins of the world.' (Com. Off.) 
 
 4. He is "the Lamb of God," "the Very Paschal Lamb," 
 
 (a) In that He made upon the Cross, 'by His one oblation 
 
 of Himself, once offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient 
 Sacrifice, Oblation, and Satisfaction for the sins of the 
 whole world.' 
 
 (b) In respect of ' the perpetual memory of that His precious 
 
 Death,' which ' He did institute, and in His Holy Gos- 
 pel command us to continue until His coming again.' 
 (Com. Office.) 
 
 5. This ' Memory' is 'our Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving,' 
 in which, ' by the merits of Christ, and through faith in His Blood, 
 we, and all the whole Church,' hope to 'obtain remission of our 
 sins, and all other benefits of His Passion.' (Com. Office.) 
 
 6. That 'Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving' is the Lord's 
 Supper. (Cow. Office.) 
 
 7. In the Lord's Supper are two parts, ' Bread and Wine, which 
 the Lord hath commanded to be received/ and ' the Body and 
 Blood of Christ, verily and indeed taken and received by the faith- 
 ful.' (Oat.) 
 
 8. Since this holy Sacrament consisteth of an " outward part 
 or sign," as well as of an "inward part or thing signified," 
 we repudiate Transubstantiation, as "destroying the nature of 
 a Sacrament." (Cat. 28th Art.) 
 
 9. 'The Sacrament,' or * Sign,' of 'the Lord's Supper was not 
 by Christ's ordinance worshipped.' (Art. 28, 29.) 
 
 10. By Consecration, "the Bread and Wine" "become the 
 Body and Blood " of Christ. (Sc. Com. Office.) 
 
 11. The inward part of the Lord's Supper, i.e., the " Body and 
 
258 Considerations respectfully addressed, fyc. 
 
 Blood of Christ," is not " a thing absent," nor the sign of it " an 
 untrue figure." (Horn, on the Sacr.) 
 
 12. In the Lord's Supper ' we spiritually eat the Flesh of 
 Christ, and drink His Blood; we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us ; 
 we are one with Christ, and Christ with us ;' we ' so eat the Flesh 
 of Jesus Christ, and drink His Blood, that our sinful bodies are 
 made clean by His Most Sacred Body, and our souls washed 
 through His Most Precious Blood.' (Com. Of.) 
 
 13. Christ Himself, the Very Paschal Lamb, given of His 
 Father ' to die for us,' is also given, ' to be our Spiritual Food and 
 Sustenance in the Holy Sacrament.' (Com. Off.) 
 
 14. The Presence which we acknowledge is not to be thought 
 of as a " Corporal " or Carnal Presence, after the manner in which 
 bodies are present on earth, nor in such a way as to derogate 
 from " the truth of Christ's Natural Body." (DecL after Com. 
 Office.} 
 
 15. Christ thus sacramentally present in our ' continual remem- 
 brance of the Sacrifice of His Death,' and vouchsafing to be our 
 Spiritual Food, ' is the Lord God, the King of Glory,' the ever- 
 lasting Son of the Father, 'who, with the Father and the Holy 
 Ghost, is worshipped and glorified.' (Cat. Com. Office. Nicene 
 Creed.) 
 
 16. While devout communicants partaking of the Lord's 
 Supper are one with Christ, the wicked " receive the same un- 
 worthily," and are "guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ," in- 
 stead of " partaking of Christ." (29^ Art. Com. Office.) 
 
 And now it only remains for the writer to express his re- 
 gret, before God and man, if he has either interfered unduly 
 or failed in respect towards his superiors, or dealt unadvisedly 
 with high and holy truths. He hopes to find allowance for 
 human infirmity, and fair consideration for his reasonings, 
 such as they are. 
 
A P P E N D I X. 
 
 No. I. 
 PASTORAL ISSUED BY THE SIX SCOTTISH BISHOPS. 
 
 To all faithful Members of the Church in Scotland, the Bishops, in 
 Synod assembled, send greeting, 
 
 BRETHREN BELOYED IN THE LOBD, 
 
 IT must be only too well known to you all that a Charge delivered 
 to his Clergy, in the month of August last year, by our Eight 
 Reverend Brother the BISHOP OP BEE CHIN, and afterwards pub- 
 lished by him, has called forth much opposition, and given rise, 
 in an unusual degree, to anxiety and alarm. Our notice was 
 drawn to the publication by two of our body, at our ordinary 
 Synod in September last; and again, when we met for special 
 purposes, in December, the same subject was brought before us 
 more formally. Unfortunately we were not then qll present ; 
 and such being the case, and there being a difference of opinion 
 amongst us as to the course which it would be most expedient to 
 pursue in so grave a matter, it was ultimately resolved to postpone 
 the determination of it till our next Ordinary Synod. At the 
 same time, it is right you should be informed that there was but 
 one feeling and one opinion expressed by those who were present, 
 as there is now but one opinion entertained by us all (except the 
 BISHOP OF BEECHIN), in regard to the publication itself. We 
 unanimously regret that such a Charge should have been de- 
 livered and put forth by one of our Body. "We regret it on other 
 accounts, and because it forces upon us the painful duty of making 
 known that we do not concur with our Right Reverend Brother 
 in the views he has expressed on so material a point as the doc- 
 trine of the Holy Eucharist. We think those views, in the extent 
 in which he has denned and urged them, unsound, erroneous, and 
 calculated to lead, if not resolutely opposed, to still graver error. 
 
260 APPENDIX. 
 
 The case may not amount to a dire.ct call for a formal presentment 
 of the Bishop, as liable to judicial penalties ; and no such formal 
 presentment has been lodged before us. But the publication of 
 such views in a document for the guidance of Clergy, and still 
 more, the republication of the Charge ' in its integrity,' notwith- 
 standing the grave remonstrances with which it had been met, 
 and the scandal which it had raised, this, attended by the 
 avowed confidence of the author in the eventual * triumph of 
 his teaching,' (Preface, p. 6,) leaves us, we feel, no alternative 
 but to declare our own dissent, and to caution you against being 
 led astray either by the teaching itself, or by the undue confidence 
 with which it is maintained. 
 
 At the same time, however, let it be clearly understood that we 
 cordially concur with our Brother in his desire to protect the 
 most holy ordinance of our religion from all irreverence, and to 
 impress upon the hearts of all men a deep, faithful, thankful con- 
 viction of its unspeakable blessedness. It is not on account of 
 any variance between us as to the importance of these duties, but 
 for the attempt which he has made to rest them upon a false foun- 
 dation, that we feel we have cause to differ from him. We cannot 
 forget that the aversion to the doctrine of Sacramental Grace, and 
 even its entire rejection, unhappily prevalent in many quarters 
 since the time of the Reformation, is to be regarded as the natural 
 reaction from excesses with which the primitive teaching had been 
 overlaid ; and we have learnt abundantly, both from history and 
 experience, that the violence of such reaction, instead of gradually 
 diminishing, is liable to be renewed and aggravated, whenever it 
 is attempted to restore these excesses. This, we believe, is the 
 fundamental error into which our Brother has fallen. Anxious 
 to assert and uphold the grace, the dignity, and efficacy of the 
 blessed Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, he has adopted a line of 
 argument which, as it exceeds the truth of God's holy word, so it 
 is calculated, we are sure, by no slow or uncertain process, to 
 defeat that very end. He has pleaded for what has recently been 
 called ' the Real Objective Presence,' in such a manner, that the 
 inferences which he draws from it, however doctrinally unsound, 
 become, as he represents, logically inevitable ; that is, Supreme 
 Adoration becomes due to Christ, as mysteriously present in the 
 gifts, (p. 27), or, as it is expressed elsewhere, * to Christ in the 
 gifts,' (pp. 28, 33) ; and the Sacrifice of the Cross, and the Sacri- 
 fice of the Altar become ' substantially one,' and ' in some tran- 
 scendental sense identical.' (p. 42). 
 
APPENDIX. 261 
 
 Convinced, as we are, that neither of these conclusions is to be 
 found in Holy Scripture, or has been deduced therefrom by the 
 Church ; and persuaded that the teaching of them has given rise 
 to corruptions and superstitions, irom which we have been set 
 free through the blessing of God vouchsafed to the wisdom and 
 courage of our forefathers; we feel it our duty to resist the 
 attempt which has been made to press these conclusions upon 
 your acceptance, and we earnestly entreat you not to suffer your- 
 selves to be disturbed or misguided by it. After due considera- 
 tion, we do not hesitate to say, that the reasoning by which they 
 are maintained is, in our opinion, fallacious ; and that the testi- 
 mony of authorities produced in their support, when fully and 
 carefully examined, will generally be found not to justify the use 
 to which it has been applied. 
 
 More particularly, we feel called on, at this season of trial, to 
 exhort you, our dear brethren of the Clergy, that you be not 
 moved, under the excitement that prevails around us, so as 
 either to exceed or fall short in your teaching of the Truth 
 with respect to the doctrine of the Blessed Sacrament which has 
 thus unhappily been brought into controversy. 
 
 1. Instructed by Scripture and the Formularies of the Church, 
 you will continue to teach that the consecrated elements of Bread 
 and "Wine become, in a mystery, the Body and Blood of Christ ; 
 for purposes of grace, to all who receive them worthily, and for 
 condemnation to those who receive the same unworthily. But 
 you will not, we trust, attempt to define more nearly the mode of 
 this mysterious Presence. You will remember that, as our Church 
 has repudiated the doctrine of Transubstantiation, so she has 
 given us no authority whereby we can require it to be believed 
 that the substance of Christ's Body and Blood, still less His 
 entire Person as God and Man, now glorified in the Heavens, 
 is made to exist with, in, or under the material substances of 
 Bread and Wine. 
 
 2. You will continue to teach that this Sacrifice of the Altar is 
 to be regarded no otherwise than as the means whereby we repre- 
 sent, commemorate, and plead, with praise and thanksgiving, 
 before God, the unspeakable merits of the precious death of 
 Christ : and whereby He communicates and applies to our souls 
 all the benefits of that one full and all-sufficient Sacrifice once 
 made upon the Cross. 
 
 3. You will continue to teach that the consecrated elements, 
 being the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, are to be 
 
262 APPENDIX. 
 
 received with lowly veneration and devout thankfulness. And 
 inasmuch as doubts have been raised with regard to the true 
 interpretation of the Rubric affixed to the Communion Office in 
 the Book of Common Prayer, we desire to remind you of a Canon 
 which was passed by the Convocations of both Provinces of the 
 Church of England in 1640, and which we are satisfied to accept 
 meanwhile for our own guidance in determining the sense of the 
 aforesaid Rubric, the matter not having been ruled by a General 
 Synod of our own Church. According to that Canon, it was 
 resolved that gestures of adoration, in the celebration of the 
 Holy Eucharist, are to be performed " not upon any opinion of 
 a corporal Presence of the Body of Jesus Christ on the Holy 
 Table, or in mystical elements, but only for the advancement of 
 God's Majesty, and to give Him alone that honour and glory that 
 is due to Him, and no otherwise 8 ." 
 
 These words of fatherly guidance and admonition, in a time of 
 trouble and offence, we claim to offer to you all by a right es- 
 sentially inherent in a Provincial Episcopate 6 ; a right which was 
 constantly exercised by the Bishops of the Primitive Church. 
 Whenever in the exercise of this right, or, rather, in the per- 
 formance of this duty, they had occasion to animadvert upon the 
 teaching of one of their own Body, doubtless they would feel their 
 position of responsibility doubly difficult and painful. And the 
 same, most assuredly, has been felt by us. We would gladly 
 most gladly have avoided the course now taken, if we could have 
 done so consistently with the solemn obligations under which we 
 lie towards you all, and not least towards our Brother himself. 
 
 The reluctance we have shewn to adopt any Synodal action in 
 this case, and the calls we have made upon our Brother, both pri- 
 vately and in Synod, and the opportunities we have given him, to 
 reconsider what he has written, are a proof of this. But tracing, 
 as we plainly do, in the teaching of this Charge, a tendency to 
 undermine the great foundations upon which our Formularies rest, 
 and to weaken our sense of gratitude and respect towards the holy 
 men from whom we have derived them in their present state ; and 
 seeing, also, on his part, an apparent determination not to sur- 
 render the position he has taken up ; we have felt ourselves con- 
 strained to deal with the matter as we have now done. For this 
 purpose we have assembled in special Synod, which a due regard 
 
 * Can. vii. ; see Laud's Works, vol. v. p. 626 ; Cardw. Synod, vol. i. p. 406. 
 b See Apos. can. xxxvi. ; Nicene can. v. ; Synod of Antioch, can. xx. ; and in 
 our own Code, can. xxxvi. compared with canons ii., xxxii., xxxvi. 
 
APPENDIX. 263 
 
 to the peace and security of the Church appeared to us to require. 
 We earnestly entreat you to join with us in prayer that the issue 
 of our anxious and solemn deliberations may be blessed to the 
 restoration of mutual confidence and harmony, and to the avoiding 
 of all causes of dissension and offence for the time to come. 
 
 Grace be with you, Brethren, and peace from God the 
 Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. 
 
 C. H. TERROT, Bishop of Edinburgh, and Primus. 
 ALEXANDER EWING, Eishop of Argyll and the Isles. 
 W. J. TROWER, Bishop of Glasgow and Galloway. 
 EGBERT EDEN, Bishop of Moray and .Ross. 
 CHARLES WORDSWORTH, Bishop of St. Andrew's, 
 
 Dunkeld, and Dunblane. 
 THOMAS GEOR&E STTTHER, Bishop of Aberdeen. 
 
 EDINBTTBGH, 
 May 27, 1858. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 SOME additional reasons for hesitating before adhesion to the 
 Pastoral Letter, are supplied by the Lay Memorialists, with 
 a view to whose wishes that Letter was avowedly drawn up. In 
 the act of thanking the Bishops for it, those gentlemen in no 
 doubtful tone express dissatisfaction with it on a very important 
 point. The Bishops say " This Sacrifice of the Altar is to be 
 regarded" in such and such a light. The Memorialists, in quoting 
 this, correct it. " With renewed hope for the peace and welfare 
 of the Church, the Committee see the Clergy exhorted by the 
 Synod to teach that the solemn ordinance which some persons 
 have chosen to designate * The Sacrifice of the Altar' is to be 
 regarded," &c. 
 
 No less unmistakeable is the hint which they proceed to give, 
 that their continuance in our Communion depends on the exclu- 
 sion from it of all who hold or teach with the Bishop of Brechin, 
 or otherwise than in agreement with what they consider " Pro- 
 testant teaching." " We are convinced that this Pastoral Letter 
 will be the means of retaining in the Episcopal Church in Scot- 
 land, a large and influential body of conscientious men, who, if 
 the teaching of which the Memorialists complained had not been 
 
264 APPENDIX. 
 
 condemned by the Synod, would have ceased to belong to her 
 communion." " We anxiously desire that the measures taken by 
 the Synod may be found effectual for insuring henceforward to us 
 and to our children the fidelity of that Protestant teaching, for 
 which the Memorialists prayed, and we confidently rely on their 
 Reverences to take further measures if such should unhappily be 
 necessary for the accomplishment of that object." 
 
 The Pastoral Letter, on the other hand, (as becomes high judi- 
 cial authorities, on a point whereon they may probably have to 
 sit in judgment,) expressly, as we have seen, reserves the question 
 whether the teaching which on some accounts it censures is such 
 as that toleration of it would destroy the essence of a Church, 
 which it must do, if it make separation necessary. 
 
 I submit that it were more prudent not to commit ourselves to 
 a document which, while it fails to satisfy those whom it was in- 
 tended to satisfy, evidently gives them great encouragement to 
 press their own exclusive view upon us, by motives of very ques- 
 tionable propriety. 
 
 anfc 
 
14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 7Apr58MFY 
 
 DEPT. 
 
 L.D 
 
 
 
 
 OCT 151987 
 
 41SWI 
 
 LD 21-50m-8,'57 
 (,C8481slO)476 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
GENERAL LIBRARY -U.C. BERKELEY 
 
 BOQOBbSESfl 
 
 6s K* 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY