Office no change shall be made from the Vestments employed at Morning and Evening Prayer. We have cited these Rubrics of 1549, lest it should be supposed we had designedly, or accidentally, passed them over. We will now proceed to discuss briefly

The Place of the Priest.

600.-The Rubric at the beginning of the Communion Office, which we have already quoted (4 d), directs that the Priest shall stand at the north side of the Communion Table; that is to say, 'at the left hand side, as one approaches the Table from the Nave.' This gloss is necessary, because in some Churches the Chancel does not stand at the east end of the Church. In London there are several instances to be met with where the Churches have not been built in the usual direction, on account of the difficulty of procuring sites extending lengthways from east to west.

6

The Rubric at its first introduction in 1549, ran thus:

'The Priest standing humbly afore the midst of the Altar, 'shall say the Lord's Prayer, with this Collect. (1549.)— KEELING. 169.

and did not, as we can well imagine, contemplate that frequent omission of the celebration of the Eucharist which till lately had become almost an universal custom; yet provision was made for the event of there being none to communicate with the Priest' by a Rubric at the end of the Communion Office, of the same Liturgy, and continued with a little variation in all the subsequent Revisions, directing that, on such occasions only, the earlier portion of the Office should be used that which we now call the 'Ante-Communion Service.' At first, this Service was read by some at the north side of the Altar; by others, from their Stall in the Chancel, or from the Reading Pew; and thus did the usage vary, until the time of Archbishop Laud; who is charged with enforcing a strict adherence to the Rubric, and commanding that the Office

6

of the Holy Communion, wholly, or in part, should at all times be read from the north side of the Altar, whether there was to be an actual Celebration, or not. Among the Exceptions against the Book of Common Prayer' taken at the Savoy Conference (May 4th, 1661.) by the Presbyterian Divines at the last Revision, was this:-

'That the Minister be not required to rehearse any part of the Liturgy at the Communion Table, save only those parts which 'properly belong to the Lord's Supper; and that at such times only when the said holy Supper is administered.' (p. 307.)— CARDWELL'S Conf.

To this the Bishops reply:-'That the Minister should not read 'the Communion Service at the Communion Table, is not reason' able to demand, since all the primitive Church used it, &c...... The 'Priest standing at the Communion Table seemeth to give us an 'invitation to the Holy Sacrament, and minds us of our duty, viz. 'to receive the Holy Communion, some at least every Sunday; and though we neglect our duty, it is fit the Church should keep her 'standing.'-(ib. 342.)

601.-The present usage is certainly to read the 'Ante-Communion Service,' whether there be a celebration or not, from the north end of the Communion Table facing the south, and turning occasionally to the Congregation (see postea): the exception as to place prevails only in a few rural Churches, where they read this Service on no-communion days from the Desk; the exception, however, as to position, prevails only in extreme ritualistic Churches where the Priest stands at the north-end of the west side of the Communion Table, and faces the east. To enter into the dispute which so long existed as to what is implied in the Rubric by the expression 'the north side of the Communion Table'-whether, that is to say, it means the north-end of the Table, the Priest to face the south, or the north-end of the west side of the Table, the Priest to face the east, would neither be interesting, nor profitable; (see LATHBURY's Hist. of Book of Com. Prayer, pp. 323. 397. 425.); we may, therefore, close the consideration of this Rubric with a few authorities.

L'ESTRANGE (A. D. 1659-60) remarks:-'As for the Priest 'standing at the North-side of the Table, this seemeth to avoid the

fashion of the Priests standing with his face towards the East, as is the Popish practice. So the MS. Collections of a learned man.' (p. 166.)—Alliance.

BISHOP COSINS (A. D. 1672) quotes on this head the following:Quando stamus ad orationem. (B. Cypr. de Orat. Dominic.) Stantes oramus, quod est signum Resurrectionis, tempore Paschali, unde 'etiam omnibus diebus Dominicis ad ALTARE id observatur. (S. Aug. Epist. 119.) "The Jews prayed standing, (Matth. 6. 5.) but only "in the time of Mourning; for then they prayed prostrate, or upon "their knees." Formerly the Priest stood in the middle of the Sacred Altar. (Dionys. Eccl. Hier. Cap. 3. Tertull. de Orat. Cap. '14.) Si ad aram Dei steteris. "And the Writings of the Ancients ' abound with testimonies of the same thing." Again this Writer says with respect to standing at the Table :- which was the custom of the ancients, that all things which pertained to the Celebration ' of the Lord's-Supper should be said at the Altar. Now in this 'Celebration, there is hardly any difference between us and the Protestants in Germany, but that among us the Prayers are said by the Bishop or Minister at the Altar, but among them in the 'Desk: In which they do not agree with the Ancients.' - Add. Notes to NICHOLLS' Book of Com. Prayer. (p. 38.)

BP. SPARROW says: The place for this Service is the Altar, 'or Communion-Table; Rubric before the Communion. And so it was always in primitive times, which is a thing so plain, as that it ' needs no proof.' (p. 158.)-Rationale.

DR. BENNETT (A. D. 1708) says:-'If it be ask'd, whether those parts of the Communion Office which are allow'd to be read when 'there is no Communion, may be read without going to the Com'munion Table; I answer, they certainly may. And for this I need 'offer no further reason, besides its being an allow'd practice, which 6 our Governors do never blame, or endeavour to alter. There are some expressions in the Rubric, I confess, which intimate the con'trary. But certainly an allow'd custom is sufficient to satisfie any 'man's conscience in this case.' (p. 155. Note.)-Paraphrase on the Book of Common Prayer.

DR. BISSE says; -'Now in many Parish Churches, instead of 'this Anthem, is commonly sung a Psalm: which is very proper, though the Minister should not go up to the Communion-Table; 'and rather the more so when he does: because this interposal of a 'Psalm makes a separation and distinction between the two Ser'vices, which ought to be thus made by distance of time, when 'it cannot be done by difference of place. Not but in all Parish 'Churches, as well as in Quires, where it can be done with con'venience to the Congregation, this Service ought regularly to be said at the Lord's Table: a thing which Bishop Beveridge, that great 'saint and ornament of our Church, and great admirer and promoter of our Liturgy, much desires and insists upon, as useful to ' remind people, that there ought at least to be a Sacrament, though 'there be not, on every Sunday and Holy-day.'-(Quoted in MANT'S Book of Common Prayer. p. 281.)

'WHEATLY says:-'Wherever it (the Table) be placed, the Priest is obliged to stand at the north side, (or end thereof, as 'the Scotch Liturgy expresses it; which also orders, that it shall 'stand at the uppermost part of the Chancel or Church), the design of which is, that the Priest may be the better seen and heard; which, as our Altars are now placed, he cannot be but at the 'north or south side. And therefore the north side, being the right 'hand or upper side of the Altar, is certainly the most proper for the Officiating Priest, that so the assisting Minister, if there be one, may not be obliged to stand above him. And Bishop Beveridge has shewn that wherever, in the ancient Liturgies, the Minister is 'directed to stand before the Altar, the north side of it is always 'meant.' (p. 303.)-Rat. Ill. of Book of Common Prayer.

ARCHDEACON SHARP writes:-'For since the customary placing of Altars in Chancels it becomes sometimes impossible in large 'Churches, and where the Chancels are almost equal in length to the Churches themselves, to perform that part of the Communion 'Service which is to be read always on Sundays and Holy-days, at the Lord's Table, without quite defeating the intention of its being read at all, viz. "that it should be heard of all the people." But then, pray let us observe further, that where this necessity for breaking through the Rubric cannot be pleaded by us; that is, 'where this Service" may be conveniently enough performed at the "Table itself," situated in the Chancel; there will be no excuse for us for reading it in the Desk; as is but too commonly practised in our Churches, contrary to the letter and plain meaning of the Rubric. (p. 53.)......Where this Rubric cannot be observed, as I before said, an absolute necessity must overrule the order; but no prescription of nonobservance or customary neglect can avail to the setting it 'aside. It is true, the Ordinary may connive at this customary 'neglect, but he cannot warrant nor even excuse the Minister in it, 'because he is bound, by prior obligations of conformity, to obey 'the Church in what she commands in her Rubrics.' (p. 55.)...... In a Note is added;- Should it be insinuated that this Rubric, by expressly directing what should be done "in Communion time," may mean that the Priest should then only stand at the north side 'of the Table; the answer is, that there he is ordered to stand whensoever he begins the Office; and there he is commanded "to say the Lord's Prayer, with the Collect following," &c. (p. 55.)— On Rubrics and Canons.

The REV. J. J. BLUNT, (late Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge,) observes:- Here the Rubric is express against a practice, not uncommon, that of reading this Service, when there 'is no Communion, from the Desk. This, I say, is a clear infraction 'of the Rubric, which directs that "the Priest is to stand at the "north side of the Table, and say," &c. (p. 325.)—Duties of the Parish Priest.

The REV. J. JEBB states:-'Whatever license may be given to 'the Ordinary to change the place of the Holy Table, during the 'Administration of the Communion, no license whatever is given 'to the Minister by the letter, and I will add, by the spirit of the Prayer Book, to say any of the prayers of that Service, even on 'non-Communion days, in any other place than at the Holy Table

itself. All the Rubrics imply and suppose the use of the Table. And I cannot see why there is not as strong a ground for violating the Rubric directing the weekly use of the Ante-Communion Service, as for transgressing these. It may be said, indeed, that 'the Canon sanctions the removal of the Table at the Communion time only, and therefore that it is not only physically impossible in many places for the Minister to read the Ante-Communion in 'the Chancel, but that he has no option to do otherwise than read it in the Desk, if he is to be heard. To this it may be answered; it is far from clear whether the Church contemplates the nonadministration of the Holy Communion on Sundays, except as an unhappy accident. (p. 468.)......Our best Ritualists have held that the theory of the Church is to give an opportunity at least to all, every Sunday: and the Communion Service is to be read to as far as a certain place, to terminate there, should no persons 'have signified their intention of communicating......As to the plea often urged, that in long Chancels the Minister is not seen, this can apply to a part of the Congregation only: and in large Churches, there is no position whatever where he can be visible to all: besides, the Church has laid a stress upon his being heard, not upon his being seen. But whatever necessity may in some few 'instances exist, for reading the Ante-Communion from the Desk, it is in all instances to be deeply deplored. There is, perhaps, no one external practice, next to irreverence or apathy, which is more repugnant to all Christian precedent, and which has more injured 'the real edification of the people, as keeping out of remembrance the Table of the Lord, the recollection of His death, and the special obligations of the Sunday Communion, in which the devotion of 'the faithful ought mainly to consist. A thousand times more is 'lost to the cause of edification by the non-observance of this signi'ficant ceremony, than is gained by the more audible recitation of the Ante. Communion prayers. (p. 469.)......No pains should be spared to obviate a custom so essentially uncatholic.....But even at times when the Communion is administered, every pains seem to be taken in many places, to dissociate the former division from 'the latter, by performing the part preceding the Sermon in the 'Desk. (p. 470.)......Doubts have arisen with regard to the mean'ing of the term "north side," into which the Author must avow 'his incapacity to enter. It seems a very plain matter, that the 'Church intended merely that which universal custom exhibits; 'not an angle, but an end, or shorter side, of the Table, placed as it 'is now, altarwise. So the Church has interpreted it by the uniform 'position both of the Table itself, and of her Ministers, at least ever 'since the last Review.' (p. 471.)—On the Choral Service.

The REV. J. PURCHAS writes:-' The north side (as distinguished from the north end, the Altar being a parallelogram) is the tech'nical phrase for the north part of the west side, called also the Gospel or left corner. It occurs in the Syriac Liturgy of S. James: Venitque (i.e. sacerdos) a latere septentrionali ad australe." (Renandotii Lit. Or. Coll., tom. ii. p. 24.)-(p. 33. note.) — Directorium Anglicanum.

The REV. J. C. ROBERTSON says: -'In favour of the usage' (of reading from the Altar)' may be pleaded those Rubrics which speak 'of the Lord's Table in connexion with parts of the Communion