PRAYER BOOK. 1549. 1552. 1559. 1604. "Almighty God, Which dost make the minds of all faithful men to be of one will: grant unto Thy people," &c. 1662. "O Almighty God, "God, Which as upon this day hast taught [Who as at this time didst teach-1604 & 1662] the hearts of Thy faithful people," &c. "Almighty and merciful God, of Whose only gift it cometh that Thy faithful people "Grant, we beseech Thee, merciful Lord, to Thy faithful people pardon and peace," &c. 'Stir up, we beseech Thee, O Lord, the wills of Thy faithful people," &c. "Thy Mystical body [the Mystical body of Thy Son-1604 & 1662] which is the blessed company of all faithful people," &c. "Almighty God [1549-O Lord] with Whom do live the spirits of them that [be "Deus, qui corda fi- "Omnipotens & mi- proficis- "Largire,quæsumus, "Excita, quæsumus, "in corpore tuo mys- "Omnipotens Deus, Now it is observable that every one of these passages (except that out of the Burial Service) is from The Communion Office, i.e. The Liturgy; for the Collects are, of course, a part of that Office. In all reason therefore we ought to interpret the word "faithful" according to continuous Ecclesiastical usage, unless anything has been anywhere said to imply the contrary; so far, however, is this from being the case, that everything we know about the history of the English Liturgy, whether as first compiled in 1549 or as subsequently Revised, proves that the intention all along was to make it embody the mind of Primitive Antiquity, especially as set forth in the Primitive Liturgies so far as they were then known, or were embodied in the USES which had long been familiar in this Kingdom. The language of the five Collects quoted shews that "the faithfaithful" there spoken of are they who, being baptized, are Ecclesiastically capable of receiving those Gifts of God which are designed to procure for them the various Benefits of His Grace supplicated in the Collects themselves; possessing this capacity they are admitted (according to the Discipline of the Church as received and exercised in this English portion of it) to that COMMUNION which is a Divinely appointed means of conveying the requisite Gifts: but a capacity to receive a Gift by no means necessarily implies a disposition to profit by that Gift and as, in the case now under consideration, it is obviously impossible that any exercise of Discipline could absolutely declare the existence of such disposition, so the terms of a Liturgy must necessarily be limited to that capacity of which alone the Church can be cognizant. Hence, as it seems to me, the necessity for those words of the "Exhortation" given "at the time of the celebration of the Communion" which emphatically point out the distinction between Sacramental and Spiritual participation of " that holy Sacrament;" asserting that "as the benefit is great" to those who "receive" It with "a true penitent heart and lively faith. . . . so is the danger great" to them who "receive the same unworthily"—because the former "spiritually eat the Flesh of Christ and drink His Blood," whereas the latter eat and drink . . . . damna tion [i.e. judgment], not considering the Lord's Body"; inasmuch as they "presume to eat of that bread and drink of that cup" which is "the holy Communion [i.e. communication] of" It. Hence, again, the need for that most expressive "SO" in the Prayer of Access (found practically, too, in the Ancient Liturgies *) which it is impossible to gloss over as though it was not designed to mean that there is a way "to eat the Flesh of" God's "dear Son, and to drink His Blood" in which the Benefits sought for by that Prayer cannot be obtained. Again, take the sentence above quoted from the 2nd Postcommunion prayer; it can only be, as I think, by entirely ignoring the old Ecclesiastical sense of the words that the "all faithful people," who are there said to be the "mystical Body" of Christ, can be limited to those really pious and godly ones of the Church of whom it could scarcely be doubted that they "be meet partakers of these Holy Mysteries." The passage from the Burial Service may appear at first sight to present an exception to that meaning of the words "the faithful," which I am here alleging to be the true one. Liturgy of S. Mark.-"... Enlighten our soul with the divine rays of Thy Holy Spirit, that we, being filled with the knowledge of Thee, may worthily participate in the good things that are set before us, the spotless Body and precious Blood of Thine only-begotten Son, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; "-Neale's Transl., p. 26. Liturgy of S. James." Priest, (before communicating) . . . do Thou, who art a compassionate God, make me worthy by Thy grace to communicate without condemnation in the holy Body and precious Blood, for the remission of sins, and eternal life."- p. 61. Having received the Liturgy of S. Clement.-"And let the Deacon say, precious Body and precious Blood of Christ, . . . let us beseech Him that they may not be to us to judgment, but to salvation; . -p. 90. Liturgy of S. Chrysostom." The Priest meanwhile saith secretly, ... make us worthy to partake of Thy heavenly and terrible mysteries of this holy and spiritual Table, with a pure conscience, for the remission of sins, forgiveness of transgressions, participation of the Holy Ghost, inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, boldness of access to Thee: not to judgment nor to condemnation."p. 119. Liturgy of Malabar.—“The Priest saith: . . . make us also worthy, by Thy love, that in all pureness and holiness we may receive the gift: and that it may not be unto us for judgment or vengeance, but for love and piety and the remission of sins, and resurrection from the dead, and eternal life: ."-p. 154. Other passages will be found at pp. 24, 25, 29, 61, 89, 119, 122, 154. Q Q It will, perhaps, be said that-granting the term, as elsewhere employed in the Prayer Book, to have the comprehensive sense contended for; it must be taken in a more limited sense here, where "the faithful" are pronounced to be "in joy and felicity;" and therefore it may have the like contracted meaning in the Catechism. But, it seems to me, that the expression as here employed, so far from having a meaning at variance with its use in the other places cited from the Prayer Book, is entirely in accordance with them; because it is no more limited than they are to those whom I suppose Mr. Goode includes in the term "true believers." The way in which it is used in the Liturgy of Malabar (See 5 (n.) p. 293) supports this opinion. A reference to the Table (p. 295) will shew that the term was first inserted in this Office at the last Review (1662); and was then substituted for the expression "the Elected" which had been used up to that time in all the Reformed Prayer Books, and which was taken from the Salisbury Manual. Now, though no other key is furnished to the meaning of the words than the context of the Prayer, it can hardly be supposed that it was used in a narrower sense than the words "saints," "faithful," "believers," quoted at p. 291 from the Apostolical Epistles, or than the word "elect" as applied to these persons in any of those same Epistles (Coloss. iii. 12; 2 Tim. ii. 10; Tit. i. 1) or to those "strangers" whom St. Peter addresses (1 Pet. i. 1 & 2). Yet, whether this be or be not accepted as the true explanation of "the Elected," we are not left without a guide to the meaning of "the faithful"; for, when the former term was exchanged for the latter, a new Rubric was prefixed to the Office, distinctly limiting its use by saying, "Here it is The same idea is preserved in the following passages. LITURGY OF ST. MARK.-"Give rest to parted in the faith of Christ. every spirit that has de"-Neale's Trans. p. 17. LITURGY OF ST. CHRYSOSTOM.-" And further we offer to Thee this reasonable service on behalf of those who have departed in the faith. ."-p. 117. "Deus, apud quem spiritus mortuorum vivunt, et in quo electorum animæ deposito carnis onere plena felicitate lætantur," &c.-Palmer, Orig. Lit. p. 237. to be noted, that the Office ensuing is not be used for any that die unbaptized, or excommunicate, or have laid violent hands upon themselves." So, then, while by not using the Office in these three cases the Church of England would abstain from any judgment upon them, and would leave them to the justice and mercy of God, she intended to regard all others as "the faithful," and so partakers of "joy and felicity". varying, we may well believe, with the varied degrees of faith and holiness in which they departed this life. It will be no answer to this view to say-that this Office is often used for those who ought to be among the " excommunicate;" for the Office, as revised in 1662, contemplated the continued use or rather, the stricter application-of that DISCIPLINE enjoined in the Laws of the Church-Laws of whose existence the Canons of 1603-4 alone bear abundant proof; however much, whether from necessity, or unfitness, or other causes, they have, to a great extent, fallen into abeyance. It follows, therefore, that the Church meant to regard as "the faithful" all validly baptized persons (except such as "laid violent* hands upon themselves") who had not been severed from her Communion by a "sentence of excommunication pronounced against them" (Can. 65) by an Ec I must confess myself unable to agree with those who think that "violent hands" must be limited to cases pronounced by a Coroner's Jury to be felo de se it is no want of charity, I trust, which compels me to believe that the Church of England did not contemplate in this Rubric any distinction between such cases and those in which a verdict of "temporary insanity" is given, but meant to forbid the use of the Office in both, though not the interment of the latter in consecrated ground: Wheatley (Com. Prayer, p. 481) supports this view: Shakspeare, too, represents this as the rule of his day-a rule from which, as it seems to me, the Church of England has not in theory departed: Ophelia, though “crowner's quest law" gave her" Christian burial," for else" She should in ground unsanctified have lodg'd," was only buried with "maimed rites;" for when Laertes asked, "What ceremony more?" the Priest answered, "Her obsequies have been as far enlarg'd as we have warranty: Her death was doubtful;" (Hamlet, Act V.) No doubt there are cases in which the omission of the Office would be a great trial to the friends of the deceased; but then it should be remembered (and would so far be a consolation) that, while its omission can be no injury to souls so passing out of this life (for God is their Judge), it might have a most salutary effect in deterring from self-destruction others for whom no sound plea could be urged. It is to be feared that (so-called) charitable verdicts and charitable use of the Burial Office in cases of suicide may have lessened the dread of the act itself, and so have encouraged its more frequent commission. |