accept this our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," was put in the Post-Communion after the LORD's Prayer; of which I read thus in my interleaved Common Prayer Book: "This prayer,' &c.1

In the alterations made in the Office for administering the LORD's Supper, in king Edward the Sixth's Service Book, that Rubric was also left out which commanded the minister to "set the bread and wine upon the altar," as an offering. But this Rubric was restored, in the Office for the Church of Scotland, and likewise in the Office of the Holy Communion of our present Liturgy, established by the Act of Uniformity after the Restoration, with an intention undoubtedly to oblige the Priest to place the elements, as an offering, with reverence upon the LORD's Table. But as the disuse of this practice had taken deep root from the fifth year of king Edward VI., when the first Service Book was altered, to that time, and helped to obliterate the notion of the Christian Sacrifice in the minds both of priests and people; so this restored Rubric, to the great reproach of the Clergy, was almost never since observed in cathedral or parochial churches. I say almost never, because I never knew or heard but of two or three persons, which is a very small number, who observed it; but the bread and wine was still placed upon the table before the office of the Communion began, without any solemnity, it may be by the clerk or sexton, or any other, perhaps, unfitter person, to the great derogation of the reverence due to the holy mystery; and I hope, for the sake of my good intentions, no worthy clergyman will be displeased at me for taking notice thereof.

This practice of the officiating priests setting the bread and wine in the sight of the people with reverence upon the holy table, was so inviolably observed in ancient times, that they had in their churches a buffet, or side table, on the right or left hand of the altar, upon which a priest or deacon set the bread and wine, from whence they were carried by the deacon, or other priests, when there were two, to the officiating priest, who reverently placed them as an offering on the LORD's table. This

[1 Vid. sup. p. 72.]

side-table, for the elements and holy vessels, was called in the Greek Church IПpóleo, because they were first set in public view upon it; and in the Latin Church Paratorium, because they were prepared, and made ready upon it, for the Holy Communion; and in Italy it is called Credenza, in France Credence...

I have made these remarks for three reasons; first, to move the clergy of cathedral and parochial Churches to put the aforesaid Rubric in practice, which in the Communion enjoins the priest to place the bread and wine upon the LORD's table. Secondly, To persuade them to restore the ancient use of the Paratorium, or table of preparation, which that Rubric plainly implies; for the priest is supposed, either to fetch them from some place, or else to have them brought from some place to him, that he may set them on the altar; and I cannot tell why that should not be another table in some part of the Church or chancel, to set the bread and wine, and holy vessels upon, especially where there is no sacristy or vestry, where they may be conveniently set till they are brought unto the priest.

In cathedrals it seems to be most proper for the deacon, or another priest, as the sacrist commonly is, to bring the elements to the bishop, or officiating priest; but in parish Churches, where there is neither deacon nor second priest, the churchwarden, or other fit person, might reverently bring them from the Credence, wheresoever placed, to the rail, where the minister might receive them of him, to place them upon the altar. This practice would conciliate a greater measure of reverence than is often seen, to the holy Sacrament, and help the people to conceive how the bread and wine is their oblation, and how it is made a Sacrifice by the ministry of the priest.-pp. lxiii—lxviii.

ID.-Second Collection of Controversial Letters.

In this the reader will find the Holy Eucharist asserted to be a commemorative Sacrifice... that doctrine which so many of our greatest men have asserted to be the doctrine of the purest ages of Christianity, without seeing any danger in it, or any consequence from the old commemorative representative Sacrifice to the new Popish Sacrifice of the Mass.

Wherefore, to the eminent writers, which I formerly cited for that doctrine, ... I beg leave to add the authority of others..... p. 277.

I shall begin with a book entituled, "A Discourse concerning the worship of GOD towards the holy table, or altar." Printed at London, 1682. But as I understand it was printed from a MS. copy, which a learned clergyman, since deceased, somewhere met with, so is it plain from the book that it was written about the year 1687.... Who was the author of this little book, I cannot tell, but thus he writes...." Having proved an altar, by your own consequence we must have a Sacrifice too, and a priesthood, for these you say infer one another, as correlates. But I will not be beholden to you to make this my argument, but will prove it out of Scripture the word "Sacrifice" to be applied to our Sacrament. GOD by His prophet foretels the Jews, that whereas they had polluted His altars, He had also rejected them and their Sacrifices, and would appoint Himself a new people and a new Sacrifice. In every place (that is, not in Jerusalem only, and in one place) incense should be offered unto His name, and Sacrificium purum, a pure Sacrifice, or offering, for so the word signifies in the Hebrew. Now what other incense have we but prayer? what other Sacrifice but the LORD's Supper? which he calls a pure Sacrifice or offering; which God hath appointed to commemorate the death and Sacrifice of His Son, instead of the Jewish Sacrifices, which only typified it. This is the interpretation of the most ancient fathers; for among all the ancient fathers, both Greek and Latin, there is nothing more frequent than the use of the words Sacrifice, priest, altar, when they speak of the Sacrament, holy table, and ministers of the Gospel. No man can deny this, that hath but cast his eyes upon their writings, which are every where full of these expressions."

...

The next authority shall be that of Archbishop Bramhall1... To the Archbishop's authority let me add that of Dr. Brough, in his tract, printed in the appendix: "In the Sacrament of the

1 [Vid. sup. pp. 131, 2.]

2 "Sacred Principles, Services, and Soliloquies, or a Manual of Devotion made up of three parts, &c. The third edition, with some additions. London, printed

Eucharist, a Sacrifice commemorative both grant, but a propitiatory we disclaim."

In the next place let me produce the testimony of Mr. Thorndike'... that of Dr. Beveridge, late Bishop of St. Asaph... &c...

3

Reflecting upon what I have now written, did I not consider the power of prejudice in men, I should wonder how "Sacrament" came to jostle "Sacrifice," not only out of so many Reformed Offices of the LORD's Supper, but out of the writings of divines who have treated on that subject; as if now we were to know the holy institution but by halves, which the ancient apostolic Churches knew in whole and so taught and learned it, though we teach and learn but half of it, as the papists administer and receive it but in one kind. This, perhaps, was the pious reason why Mr. Nelson endeavoured to retrieve this primitive word and notion, by bringing the one into the title page, and the other into the devotions of his book. For he that knew Id verum quod prius, might think he could not more honour God, or better serve His Church, or more benefit his readers in writing on that subject than by restoring the Sacrifice to the Sacrament, which had kept possession in the Churches of GOD for fifteen hundred years, and was a notion so proper to explain the special nature of that mystery, as also to inflame the devotion of the faithful, and increase their veneration for the Sacrament and the whole ministration thereof.... And if I should ever write a book of it, as I think I now never shall, I would first treat of it as a Sacrifice, and then, as it is a Sacrament; and, with all due regard to many learned men, who have written of the LORD's Supper only as a Sacrament, I take the freedom to say, that, how useful and excellent soever their books may otherwise be, yet, excluding the doctrine by T. S. for John Clark, 1656.' The worthy author, who then only styled himself Philo-Christianus, was Dr. William Brough, who, for his piety and learning, as well as great sufferings and loyalty, was promoted by King Charles I. to the deanery of Gloucester, and, after the restoration of King Charles II., had other preferments conferred upon him, which upon many accounts he deserved.”— pp. xiii, xiv.

1

1 [Vid. sup. pp. 167-170.]

2 [Vid. sup. pp. 229–236.]

3 3 [Citing Johnson, Potter, (vid. inf.) Bingham, &c.]

of the Sacrifice from their subject, I think they are deficient and imperfect works.

I have hitherto been showing, that it is no fault, but, on the contrary, what becomes a Christian writer, to bring this primitive, common, and consentient doctrine of the Catholic Church into books of devotion, and but that I foresee it would swell my preface beyond its bounds, I should show the same from the admirable prayers in the ancient Offices, which relate to the LORD'S Supper as a Sacrifice. But this, I hope, may be done by another hand. I shall, therefore, only proceed to show, that the notion of the Sacrifice in the Eucharist is no stranger to the Communion devotions of the Church of England; for, as it was in the first Common Prayer Book of Edward the VIth. so is it now in her present Liturgy... the old rubrick for the priest to set the bread and wine upon the holy table is restored, and the order of doing it is directed in this manner: "While the sentences"....This is one sort of offering, which may be made when there is no Communion. But, "when there is a Communion (saith the rubric) the priest shall then place upon the table so much bread and wine as he shall think sufficient;" which is the other offering proper for the Communion, as being offered to be consecrated, and consumed in the celebration thereof. These two offerings being set in order upon the holy table, the priest is directed to say, "ALMIGHTY and ever living GOD... we humbly beseech Thee, most mercifully to accept our alms and oblations." I have already observed the difference that is, and is accordingly made by the Church, between these two material offerings, whereof the one is given, and presented upon the altar for pious and charitable uses, especially for the maintenance of the poor, but the other are dedicated and offered for the service of GOD in the holy Eucharist, and to that end to be consecrated into a memorial of the sufferings and Sacrifice of CHRIST upon the Cross, in remembrance of His death and Passion, and thereby become in the mystery, or Sacrament, the Body and Blood of CHRIST to the faithful receivers. This consecration of the OBLATIONS for the use of God's table and to be made His entertainment, is performed by solemn prayer1, and

1 Called in the Rubric the "Prayer of Consecration."