Eucharist than had been accustomed; all tended to invest that Sacrament with a greater dignity than it seemed to possess when Rubrically shorn of some of its Ritual directions in the Offices subsequent to Edward's 1st Book: indeed, in some respects, the Rubrics of 1662 were fuller and more explicit than those of 1549; for the obvious reason-that the Clergy of Edward's days, familiar as they were with the Rules of the Old Offices, had no need of directions upon points which subsequent negligence or prejudice had obscured or would be likely to hide from the view of the Clergy of Charles the 2nd's reign, and their successors.

Moreover, the instructions given to the Commissioners were themselves calculated to favour this end; for, in "the King's warrant for the Conference at the Savoy," they were directed "to advise upon and review the said Book of Common Prayer, comparing the same with the most ancient Liturgies which have been used in the Church, in the primitive and purest times." (Card. Hist. Conf. p. 300); and if those who exercised the most influence in the Conference desired (as there can be no doubt they did) to conform the Liturgy to the Ancient Offices as much as they could consistently with the King's direction to be careful in "avoiding, as much as may be, all unnecessary alterations of the forms and Liturgy wherewith the people are already acquainted, and have so long received in the Church of England" (ibid), there can be no question in what direction they must have been led: it would require no very extensive search among those ancient monuments of Eucharistic Doctrine and Ritual before they saw that whatever changes or additions they made in the Book under review must be of a nature to surround and penetrate the Communion Office with protections and defences against Puritanical assaults and betrayals.

It follows, therefore, that any uncertainty which may now arise as to the construction of expressions, whether in the Rubrics or in the Substance of the Communion Office, can only be fairly and safely removed by a reference to those same Ancient Liturgies which were so distinctly and authoritatively commended to and employed by the Savoy Commissioners: the

analogy of those Liturgies (including the old English Uses which the Reviewers could not but have regarded as the Church of England's traditional exposition of the Ancient Liturgies) must be followed in interpreting the language of the present English Liturgy if we at all wish to comprehend its letter and its spirit.

The word "reverently," now under discussion, occurs in three of the Rubrics just quoted, viz: Nos. IV, IX, and X; an examination and comparison of these will probably materially help to define the meaning of the term as used in No. X.-the Rubric now under consideration.

66

Rubric No. IV prescribes the mode of collecting and presenting the various Offerings of the people: the corresponding Rubric in the Books of 1549 to 1604 made a distinction in the method of receiving them. "The devotion of the people" was put "into the poor men's box" either by the people themselves (as in the Book of 1549), or by "the Churchwardens, or some other" who had gathered it: "the due and accustomed Offerings" were to be paid "to the Curate" by "every man and woman" on the offering days appointed." But the Rubric of 1662 made no such dif ference; by that "the Alms for the poor, and other devotions of the people' were alike to be collected by "the Deacons, Churchwardens, or other fit person appointed for that purpose," who were to "reverently bring it to the priest: considerations of convenience no doubt led to this change: the point however here to be observed is the act intended by the word "reverently: " I understand it to mean "Kneeling;" this belief is confirmed by the fact-that Bishop Cosin so explained the Rubric of 1604 in his 1st Series of Notes where (p. 97 A. C. L.) he says, quoting Bishop Andrewes

"And upon the offering days appointed, every man and woman shall pay to the Curate the due and accustomed offerings.]. ?. W. ? 'They should not pay it to the curate alone, but to God upon the altar; from whence the curate hath his warrant to take it, as deputed by Him, and as the Apostle plainly alludes, 1 Cor. ix. 13, 14; Heb. xiii. 10. And this is not to be forgotten, though it be foregone, that whosoever gave any lands or endowments to the service of God, he gave it in formal writing, (as now-a-days between

man and man) sealed and witnessed. And the tender of the gift was super-altare, and by the donor upon his knees."

Again, in his 2nd Series, p. 323, Bishop Cosin says:—

"And upon the Offering-days appointed.] It was one of the instructions set forth by the authority of King Henry VIII. in the Convocation of his clergy, anno 1536, to be generally observed in the Church of England, That the feasts of the Nativity of our Lord, of Easter Day, of the Nativity of St. John Baptist, and of St. Michael the Archangel, shall be accounted, accepted, and taken for the four general Offering-days.' Which order is in some places among us still observed. And the King or Queen in their Chapel-royal (or wherever they be at Church in those days) never omit it, but arise from their seat, and go in solemn manner to present their Offerings upon their Knees at God's altar. And then is read by the Priest or Bishop attending, this sentence here prescribed, 1 Cor. ix.: 'They which minister about holy things,' etc.

Now if, as is implied in these two passages, Kneeling is the proper posture in which individuals should present their offerings; it seems to follow that, when those Offerings are presented for them by another, their representative should also Kneel in the absence therefore of any direct evidence to show the precise intention of the Reviewers of 1662, it is a very reasonable supposition that the introduction of the word "reverently "into the Rubric, as then altered, had some reference to these opinions of Bishops Andrewes and Cosin; especially as Bishop Kennett (Register p. 566) has this Note:

"Several Books and Papers, supposed to be laid before the Convocation while they were on this work of revising the Common Prayer.

"The Collections of Bishop Overall.

"The Notes of Bishop Cosins,

"And his additional notes in Latin.

"Notes of Bishop Andrewes."

I have since met with the following passage in Jebb's Choral Service, p. 497:-" According to regular Collegiate usage, the Clergy present their Alms severally themselves, kneeling in front of the Altar while making their offering. This custom is, I believe, unknown in Ireland, but it is one so reverential, and one which so distinctly exhibits the holy nature of almsgiving, and the purposes of God's Altar, that its revival were much to be wished. In some Colleges, all the lay members advance to the Altar rails, and then offer, one by one.

"A reverential mode of presenting the Alms 'offered to' God's 'Divine Majesty,' is distinctly prescribed by the Rubric. Many interpret this to mean Kneeling; and certainly the traditional practice of the Church, in the custom noticed in the last paragraph, would seem to justify the same posture in presenting the devotions of the people at large which was observed with respect to those of individuals."

And that such a meaning was designed, appears to be further indicated by the other word "humbly," which is employed to describe the posture of "the Priest," when he has to "present" the Offerings thus "reverently" brought to him. That a different posture was intended, is, I think, clear from the use of an expression which, though kindred in character, is not synonymous with "reverently "-the latter word implying (even according to the Dictionaries) more respect, veneration, and awe. Besides (recollecting the principles which guided the Reviewers) we cannot reasonably suppose that this choice of terms was made without reference to the directions of the old Offices; and in them there is nothing to indicate that kneeling was the Celebrant's posture when presenting Alms and Oblations, but quite the reverse: no direction indeed is given except as regards the Oblations of Bread and Wine; these, according to the Sarum and Bangor rubric, he is to place "diligenter" (i. e., carefully, attentively) "super medium altare," and then "inclinato parumper elevet calicem utraque manu offerens sacrificium Domino,...." but, plainly, no other offerings would be made with more devotion than those which were presented for the express purpose of being consecrated for the Sacrament, and that this principle is meant to be retained now, may be clearly understood from the Rubric in our present Prayer Book, which merely bids the Priest to "place upon the Table so much Bread and Wine as he shall think sufficient."

Moreover, it is important to remember that the act of presenting and placing upon the Altar, either the Offertory or the Elements is not the Priest's formal oblation of them, in our present Office, though the act of bringing the Offerings of the people to the Priest is their formal oblation: it is easy, therefore, to see why only the word "humbly" (equivalent to the "diligenter" of the Sarum and Bangor Rites) is used to prescribe the Priest's act, though the stronger term "reverently" prescribes the act of the people's representative. Indeed, some evidence of the intention in this choice of terms is apparently furnished by a comparison of this Rubric as it stood in Laud's book of 1637, where it reads "shall

humbly present it before the Lord and set it upon the holy Table. And the Presbyter shall then offer up and place the bread and wine prepared for the Sacrament upon the Lord's Table:" the words which I have italicized not being incorporated with the Rubric of 1662. The Priest's formal oblation of the Offerings is made in the Church Militant prayer by the use of the words, "We humbly beseech Thee most mercifully [to accept our alms and oblations,..] . . . which we offer unto thy Divine Majesty;" and at that Prayer standing is plainly the posture of the Celebrant-with an inclination of his body, according to the above Rubric of the old Offices.

...

These considerations go very far, I think, towards proving that whoever presents the Offerings of the people to the Celebrant is to do so KNEELING; but that the Celebrant when presenting them on the Altar is to do so STANDING.

Rubric No. IX prescribes the mode in which the Celebrant is to return to the Altar" what remaineth of the Consecrated elements" after "all have communicated:" the term used to describe his action is "reverently." It is to be noticed that this is the word which, in Rubric No. IV just considered, I have interpreted to mean "Kneeling;" it might seem therefore that the same construction must be put upon the same word in this Rubric: but this by no means follows, as will be seen by a reference to the old Uses which, it must always be remembered, were not likely to be overlooked by the Reviewers of 1662: the truth being that in Public Offices of Religion the same degree of reverence is not always expressed by the same action of the Minister and People, e. g., the Versicles and Responses beginning "O Lord shew Thy mercy upon us," etc., in our present Morning and Evening Prayer, where "the Priest" is ordered to be "standing up," though it is plain that he is engaged in exactly the same devotional act as the people; and again, in the ante-communion Service, the Lord's Prayer and two Collects are ordered to be said by "the Priest standing:" throughout this office indeed, except where expressly ordered otherwise, standing is the Celebrant's posture owing to the peculiar nature of that Ministration as a