length in many parts presented, when conducted without the safeguards which those fanatics laboured to remove, may be seen in The Holy Fair of the Scottish poet Burns.1 The great, and in many parts total, neglect of the Blessed Sacrament during the Commonwealth in England, was a far less evil than that desecration of it which inevitably follows, sooner or later, the triumph of Presbyterian principles. It is evident too that irreverence of gesture, habitually practised at the solemn commemoration of our Lord's Passion, must tend to produce a low view both of His Person and office. In the Consensus of the Reformed Church of Poland, a significant fact is mentioned:-" Of sitting at the Lord's Table, . . . they were the originators among us, who, rashly changing all things in the Church, and without knowledge affecting to imitate Christ, became faithless deserters from us to Arianism."

IT IS HERE DECLARED.]—Here the original of 1552 had "We do declare," another mark of the source from which it proceeded. So also in the preamble given in the last page, Therefore we willing.”

SECTION II.-The Roman Worship of the Host.

1 NO ADORATION IS INTENDED, OR OUGHT TO BE DONE.]— It will be well to state here in limine what are the Roman doctrine and practice to which this Declaration is in part opposed. The Council of Trent declares that, forasmuch as "by the consecration of the bread and wine, a conversion takes place of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the Body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His Blood,”4

1 Praiseworthy efforts to promote reverence on these occasions have been made of late years in many parts of Scotland; and with good success. The misfortune, however, is that it does not naturally result from the doctrine usually taught, and that the prescribed forms have little tendency to secure it. Too much is left to individual care and zeal. And now every step in advance will be watched and impeded by the Society recently formed (with objects similar to those of the English Church Association) under the plausible title of the Association for the Maintennance of the Purity of Worship.

2 Specimens of what might have become general in time, even in England, are alluded to by Agate :-"To say nothing of their administering the oath of the Covenant and the Lord's Supper together, . . . 'tis certain old Case, a famous preacher in those times, addressed the Communicants in this form, viz., You that have assisted the Parliament against the King, draw near with faith," etc.-The Plain Truth, p. 220. 3 Conclus. Synod. n. iv. ; Corpus et Syntagma Confess. p. 306; Gen. 4 Sess. xiii.; De Euch. cap. iv.

1612.

"therefore no room is left for doubting that all the faithful of Christ, according to custom ever received in the Catholic Church, do in their worship render to this most holy Sacrament the cultus of Latria, which is due to the true God."1 The Council accordingly denounced an anathema against all who should "say that Christ, the only begotten Son of God, is not to be adored in the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist with the worship of Latria, even external."2 The Church of Rome, then, teaches that the consecrated Elements are to receive Divine honour, to be addressed, reverenced, worshipped, adored, knelt to, as God. This is partly defended on the ground that the Divinity of Christ is therein contained; but this plea is insufficient, because the Roman Catholic does not close his eyes, and merely worship Christ, as there by some especial mode of presence; but he fixes his eyes on the Host, and worships that which he sees; although he is taught that he does not see Christ, but the mere accidents of bread. A further defence is therefore necessary, and this is attempted in the following manner :"We say that Christ is by Himself and properly to be adored with the worship of latria; and that that adoration belongs also to the symbols of Bread and Wine, so far as they are apprehended as a something that is one with Christ Himself, whom they contain. As they who adored Christ clothed on earth, did not adore Him only, but even His garments in some sort (for they did not bid Him be stripped of clothing before they adored Him, or in mind and thought separated Him

3 Catech. Trident. p. ii.; De Euch. Sacram. c. xxxi. The Council declares, under anathema, "the Body and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and so whole Christ, to be truly, really, and substantially, contained in the Sacrament."-Sess. xiii.; De Euch. Can. i. See cap. i. The following may suffice for specimens of devotional language founded on this doctrine :-"In the institution of the Most Holy (Sacrament) the Divine Omnipotence toiled to enclose God, drawn down from heaven, under the mean species of bread. . . . Great God, how wonderful Thou art! Thine immensity, restrained within no bounds, is shut up under a little Host." "That the Supreme Lord, of whose greatness there is no end, should hide Himself under the worthless covering of the species, should be ever concealing all that the Most High Trinity has august! That the King of Glory should be perpetually en- · closed in a narrow prison; that so enclosed He should remain among us, almost forgetful of His Majesty;-are not these stupendous facts? Thrice adorable Majesty! That Thou shouldst take up Thy abode in a poor Tabernacle, made by sinners' hands! dwell under a Canopy very often torn and worn; be often taken up in cloths also torn, not seldom unclean and dirty!"--Dufresne, Sacerdos Numini Eucharistico devotus, Medit. i. pp. 8, 10; Aug. Vind. 1744.

from His garments, when they adored), but simply adored Christ as He then was, although the ground of their adoration was not His clothing, nay, not His humanity itself, but His Divinity alone." If men rightly paid Divine honour to the garments of Christ, when upon His Body, the force of the analogy might be allowed; but what Roman Catholic even could be found to deny that such adoration would have been idolatry? But if so, we must still ask on what ground that worship of latria, which is due to God only, is habitually paid to that which is not God, but a cloak only, or mask, under which Christ lies hid? We may add that no reverence, in any degree, was claimed for the garments of Christ; but men are commanded to give Divine honour to the outward symbol of His Body, and those who dare to say that it is not due to it are pronounced accursed.

specimens of the worship actually given to the Sacrament under such sanction will suffice to show more clearly the evil against which our Church had to guard. The following address is to the reserved Host, "A brief salutation of the most holy Sacrament:"-" Hail, health of the world, Word of the Father, sacred Host, true Life, living flesh, whole Deity,2 true man, Body of our Lord Jesus Christ. Thou who didst form me out of the dust of the earth, have mercy upon me a sinner." 3 The following prayer was to be said to the Blood at the Elevation of the Chalice:-"Hail, true Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which didst flow with water from His side. Be Thou to me counsel, protection, and defence in this life and in the world to come.' "" 4 Priests are in Myrc's Instructions told to encourage their people to pray thus, when the Sacring Bell is rung,—

"Jesu, Lord, welcome Thou be

In form of bread, as I Thee see.

Jesu, for Thy holy Name,

Shield me to-day from sin and shame," 5 etc.

In the "Lay-Folk's Mass-Book" they are taught thus:

1 Bellarm. Disp. de Sacram. Euch. L. iv. c. xxix. tom. iii. p. 194; Colon. 1628.

2"The Eucharistic God" is a favourite expression with some writers. See Dufresne, Medit. iii. p. 32, iv. p. 35, etc.; or Pinnamonti, Lect. viii. de Excell. Sacrif. Miss. Ibid. pp. 156, 7, 8. The latter author considers the question, "Whether God is more wonderful within the Eucharistic Body, or without it," and decides for the former, p. 159.

3 Libellus Precum, p. 165; Richm. Ebor, 1844.

4 Hora B. V. Sarum, fol. iv.; Par. 1556.

6 Line 290; p. 9.

"Loved be Thou, King; and thanked be Thou, King;
And blessed be Thou, King; Jesu, all my joying,

Of all Thy gifts good, that for me spilt Thy blood,
And died upon the rood,

Thou give me grace to sing, the song of Thy loving.'
Pater Noster; Ave Maria; Credo."1

8 THE SACRAMENTAL BREAD.]- This was an expression that had been long known to English Divines. Thus Wiclif:2"I have often confessed, and still confess, . . . that the Sacramental Bread or consecrated Host, which the faithful perceive in the hands of the Priest, is truly and really the very same Body," etc. Coverdale,3 writing before the present Declaration was compiled:-"I speak not this as putting no difference between that Sacramental Bread and our common bread."

SECTION III.-Of Transubstantiation.

h OR UNTO ANY CORPORAL PRESENCE OF CHRIST'S NATURAL FLESH AND BLOOD.]—In the original of 1552 we find, or unto any real and essential presence there being of Christ's natural Flesh and Blood. There is no difference of meaning, for the "real and essential presence" was, in the scholastic language of the Reformers, equivalent to the "corporal presence." Thus in the first Disputation at Cambridge, 1549, one says, "Some Papists dream and fancy such a corporal, real, and gross presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament, as they affirm it to be there even as verily as it was upon the

1 Line 401.

2 Confessio, Life by Lewis, Records, n. 21, p. 323; ed. 1820.
3 Works, p. 427.

Cross;" another, in the third Disputation: "I deny not His presence; but His real and corporal presence I utterly deny; for doubtless His true and natural Body is in heaven, and not in the Sacrament." Cranmer: Although Christ in His human nature substantially, really, corporally, naturally, and sensibly be present with His Father in heaven, yet sacramentally and spiritually He is here present." Again:* "Christ's natural Body is not in the Sacrament really, substantially, and corporally, but only by representation and signification." Becon, Cranmer's Chaplain :-" According to the doctrine of the Papists, the natural, real, and substantial Body of Christ, even that which was born of the Virgin, crucified, dead, raised up again, ascended into heaven, glorified, etc., is truly, essentially, and presently. . . on every Altar." The enemies of the Reformation had appropriated these several words to express the effect of transubstantiation, as they understood it, and by so doing had precluded the Reformers from the use of those even which were susceptible of a sound meaning. When, therefore, the latter in express terms denied that Christ was essentially (or substantially), really, corporally, carnally, naturally present, they were only denying the gross and unprimitive theory by which they were confronted. That all these words were thus appropriated, as Becon tells us, by the upholders of the mediæval error, appears on the most cursory inspection of their writings. Thus Richard Smythe, 1546:-" The bodily and real presence of our blessed Saviour Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar;" "If Frith do take that Christ, speaking the said words, did mean that Christ's natural and very Body was not there really and indeed to be eaten in the Sacrament, then I must tell Frith that he hath . . . uttered . . . a manifest lie." Bishop Watson,8 1558 :-" His own natural Flesh and Blood which He giveth . . . in a Sacrament;" "The real and true Body and Blood . . . received of the faithful people not only spiritually by faith, but also corporally with their mouths." 9 Bishop Tonstall :10" His true and

6

1 Foxe, Acts and Monum. B. ix. vol. ii. p. 104.

2 Ibid. p. 118.

3 Answer to Gardiner, First Book, p. 47; Camb. 1844.

4 Ibid. 2d B. p. 283.

5 Articles of Christian Religion, Art. ix. p. 450; Camb. 1844.

6 Assertion of the Sacrament, fol. 5b.

7 Assertion, etc. fol. 113b.

8 Wholesome Doctrine, S. i. fol. iii.a.

9 Serm. vii. fol. xlii.a.

10 De Verit. Corp. et Sang. L. i. fol. 11b.