those places for him to kneel; it is very evident, that where the rubric gives no such direction, the Minister is always to stand. Whether the Priest be to say this prayer stand ing before the altar. §. 6. If it be asked whether the Priest is to say this prayer standing before the table, or at the north-end of it; I answer, at the north-end of it: for, according to the rules of grammar, the participle standing must refer to the verb ordered, and not to the verb say. So that whilst the Priest is ordering the bread and wine, he is to stand before the table: but when he says the prayer, he is to stand so as that he may with the more readiness and decency break the bread before the people, which must be on the north-side. For if he stood before the table, his body would hinder the people from seeing so that he must not stand there: and consequently he must stand on the north-side; there being, in our present rubric, no other place mentioned for performing any part of this office. In the Romish Church indeed they always stand before the altar during the time of consecration; in order to prevent the people from being eye-witnesses of their operation in working their pretended miracle: and in the Greek Church they shut the chancel door, or at least draw a veil or curtain before it, I suppose, upon the same account.3 But our Church, that pretends no such miracle, enjoins, we see, the direct contrary to this, by ordering the Priest so to order the bread and wine, that he may with the more readiness and decency break the bread, and take the cup into his hands, before the people. And with this view, it is probable, the Scotch Liturgy ordered, that during the time of consecration_the presbyter should stand at such a part of the holy table, where he may with the more ease and decency use both his hands. 33 SECT. XXIII. Of the Form of Administration. The holy ele livered by the communicant. THE holy symbols being thus consecrated, the ments to be de- communicants must not rudely take every one his own part; because God, who is the master of Minister to each the feast, hath provided stewards to divide to every one their portion. Some persons indeed have disliked the Minister's delivering the holy elements to each communicant; pretending that it is contrary to the practice of our Saviour, who bid the Apostles take the cup and di 33 Smith's Account of the Greek Church, p. 135. vide it among themselves.** But one would think that any one that reads the context would perceive that this passage does not relate to the eucharist, but to the paschal supper; since it appears so evidently from the nineteenth and twentieth verses of the same chapter, that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not instituted till after that cup was drank. But as to the manner of his delivering the Sacrament, the Scriptures are wholly silent; and consequently we have no other means to judge what it was, but by the practice of the first Christians, who doubtless, as far as was convenient and requisite, imitated our Saviour in this as well as they did in other things and therefore since it was the general practice among them for the Minister to deliver the elements to each communicant, we have as much authority and reason as can be desired to continue that practice still. : First to the clergy. §. 2. The Minister therefore that celebrateth is first to receive the communion in both kinds himself; then to proceed to deliver the same to the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, in like manner, (i. e. in both kinds,) if any be present, (that they may help the chief Minister, as the old Common Prayer has it, or him that celebrateth, as it is in the Scotch Liturgy,) and after that to the people also in order. And this is consonant to the practice of the primitive Church, in which it was always the custom for the clergy to communicate within the rails of the altar, and before the Sacrament was delivered to the people.35 36 37 And then to the people. Into their hands. §. 3. The rubric further directs, that the Communion must be delivered both to the clergy and laity into their hands; which was the most primitive and ancient way of receiving. In St. Cyril's time they received it into the hollow of their right hand, holding their left hand under their right in the form of a cross. And in some few ages afterwards, some indiscreet persons pretending greater reverence to the elements, as if they were defiled with their hands, put themselves to the charges of providing little saucers or plates of gold to receive the bread, until they were forbidden by the sixth general Council.38 Another abuse the Church of Rome brought in, where the Priest puts it into the people's 34 Luke xxii. 17. 35 Const. Apost. 1. 8, c. 13. Concil. Laod. Can. 19. Concil. Tolet. 4, Can. 17. 35 Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. 6, c. 43, p. 245, B. Chrys. in Ephes. i. Hom. 3, tom. iii. p. 778, lin. 16. 37 Cyril. Catech. Myst. 5, § 18, p. 300. 38 Can. 101, tom. vi. col. 1186, A. mouths, lest a crumb should fall aside; which custom was also retained in the first book of king Edward VI., though a different reason was there alleged; the rubric ordering that although it be read in ancient writers that the people many years past, received at the Priest's hands, the Sacrament of the Body of Christ in their own hands, and no commandment of Christ to the contrary; yet forasmuch as they many times conveyed the same secretly away, kept it with them, and diversely abused it to superstition and wickedness: lest any such thing hereafter should be attempted, and that an uniformity might be used throughout the whole realm, it was thought convenient the people should commonly receive the Sacrament of Christ's Body in their mouths, at the Priest's hand.39 But however Bucer censuring it, as savouring too much of an unlawful honour done to the elements,40 it was discontinued at the next review, when the old primitive way of delivering it into the people's hands was ordered in the room of it. The Apostles probably re ture of adoration. §. 4. The communicants are enjoined, whilst they receive this blessed Sacrament, to be all ceived in a pos- meekly kneeling. What posture the Apostles received it in, is uncertain; but we may probably conjecture that they received it in a posture of adoration. For it is plain that our Saviour blessed and gave thanks both for the bread and wine; and prayers and thanksgivings, we all know, were always offered up to God in a posture of adoration and therefore we may very safely conclude that our blessed Saviour, who was always remarkable for outward reverence in devotion, gave thanks for the bread and wine in an adoring posture. Now it is very well known that it was a rule with the Jews to eat of the passover to satiety: and therefore, since they had already satisfied hunger, they cannot be supposed to have eaten or drank so much of the holy eucharist as that they needed repose while they did it: and since, as we have already hinted, they rose from their seats to bless the bread, it cannot be imagined, that, without any reason, they would resolve to sit down again during the moment of eating it; and then, though they rose immediately a second time at the blessing which was performed before the delivery of the cup, that they immediately sat down again to taste the wine, as if 39 See the last rubric at the end of the Communion-office in king Edward's first book. 40 Script. Anglican. p. 462. they could neither eat nor drink the smallest quantity without sitting. This indeed does not amount to a demonstration, but is yet a very probable conjecture; and shews how groundlessly they argue, who, from the Apostles eating the passover sitting or leaning upon the left side, (which was the table-gesture among those nations,) conclude, that they ate the eucharist in the same posture, because it was celebrated at the same time. But besides, we observe that the passover The example of may itself was, at the first institution of it, command- the Apostles does ed to be eaten standing and in haste, to express not bind us. the haste they were in to be delivered out of their slavery and bondage: but afterwards, when they were settled in the Land of Promise, they ate it in a quite contrary posture, viz. sitting, or lying down to it, as to a feast, to signify they were then at rest, and in possession of the land. And with this custom (though we do not find any where that it was ever commanded, or so much as warranted by God) did our blessed Saviour comply, and therefore doubtless thought that the alteration of the circumstances was a justifiable reason for changing the ceremonies. But was it ever so certain that a table-gesture was used at the institution of the Eucharist, yet it is very reasonable, since the circumstances of our blessed Saviour are now different from what they were at the institution, that our outward demeanour should also vary. The posture which might then be suitable in the Apostles is not now suitable in us: while he was corporally present with them, and they conversed with him as man, without any awful dread upon them, which was due to him as the Lord of heaven and earth, no wonder if they did use a table-posture: but then their familiarity ought to be no precedent for us, who worship him in his glory, and converse with him in the Sacrament, as he is spiritually present; and who therefore would be very irreverent to approach him in any other posture than that of adoration. As to the punctual time when the posture of kneeling first began, it is hard to determine; but When kneeling we are assured that it hath obtained in the West first began. ern Church above twelve hundred years; and though anciently they stood in the East,42 yet it was with fear and trembling, with silence and downcast eyes, bowing themselves in the posture of worship and adoration.43 41 Exod. xii, 11. X practice. The pope re But it is now the custom of the Greek, RoHow universal a man, Lutheran, and most Churches in the world, to receive kneeling: nor do any scruple it, but they who study pretences to palliate the most unjustifiable separation, or designed neglect of this most sacred ordinance. And it is worth observing, that they who at ceives the Sacra- other times cry out so much against the Church of England for retaining several ceremonies, which, though indifferent in themselves, they say become unlawful by being abused by superstition and popery, can, in this more solemn and material ceremony, agree even with the pope himself, (who receives sitting,) rather than not differ from the best and purest Church in the world.4 ment sitting. Sitting, by whom Nor may I pass by unobserved that the posture introduced. of sitting was first brought into the Church by the Arians; who stubbornly denying the divinity of our Saviour, thought it no robbery to be equal with him, and to sit down with him at his table; for which reason it was justly banished the reformed Church in Poland, by a general synod, A. D. 1583. And it is the pope's opinion of his being St. Peter's successor, and Christ's vicegerent, which prompts him to use such familiarity with his Lord." The form of words. §. 5. As for the words of Administration; the first part of them, viz. The Body, or The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, was the only form used in St. Ambrose's time at the delivery of the Bread and Wine,16 to which the receivers answered, Amen, both to express their desire that it might be Christ's body and blood unto them, and their firm belief that it was so. The next words, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life, were added by St. Gregory:4 and these with the former were all that were to be used at the delivery of the elements, during the first Common Prayer Book of king Edward VI. But these words, I suppose, being thought at that time to savour too much of the real presence in the Sacrament, which was a doctrine that then was thought to imply too much of transubstantiation to be believed; they were therefore left out of the second book, and the following words prescribed in the room of them, Take and eat this, &c., or Drink this, &c., as in the latter part of our present forms. But these on the other side reducing the 44 Durand. Rational. 1. 4, c. 54, numb. 5. 45 Durand. ibid. 46 Ambr. de Sacr. 1. 4, c. 5, tom. iv. col. 368, G. 47 Liturg. Clement. Basil. Æthiopic. Cyril. Catech. Mystag. 5, §. 18. 48 Vide Durand. de Rit. Eccles. Cathol. 1. 2, c. 55, numb. 16, p. 287. |