Ritual Conformity / Interpretations of the Rubrics of the Prayer-Book Agreed Upon by a Conference Held at All Saints, Margaret-street, 1880-1881

by Unknown

THE ORDER OF THE

ADMINISTRATION OF THE LORD'S SUPPER,

OR

HOLY COMMUNION.

89. So many as intend to be partakers of the holy Communion shall signify their names to the Curate, at least some time the day before.

90. And if any of those be an open and notorious evil liver, or have done any wrong to his neighbours by word or deed, so that the Congregation be thereby offended; the Curate, having knowledge thereof, shall call him and advertise him, that in any wise he presume not to come to the Lord's Table, until he hath openly declared himself to have truly repented and amended his former naughty life, that the Congregation may thereby be satisfied, which before were offended; and that he hath recompensed the parties, to whom he hath done wrong; or at least declare himself to be in full purpose so to do, as soon as he conveniently may.

91. The same order shall the Curate use with those betwixt whom he perceiveth malice and hatred to reign; not suffering them to be partakers of the Lord's Table, until he know them to be reconciled. And if one of the parties so at variance be content to forgive from the bottom of his heart all that the other hath trespassed against him, and to make amends for that he himself hath offended; and the other party will not be persuaded to a godly unity, but remain still in his frowardness and malice: the Minister in that case ought to admit the penitent person to the holy Communion, and not him that is obstinate. Provided that every Minister so repelling any, as is specified in this, or the next precedent Paragraph of this Rubrick, shall be obliged to give an account of the same to the Ordinary within fourteen days after at the farthest. And the Ordinary shall proceed against the offending person according to the Canon.

The object of this rubric, when introduced in 1549, was to provide some corrective of the lax practice of the un-reformed Church in admission of unworthy persons to Communion. In this view, the Curate should be informed of the names of intending Communicants, in order that he may deal with the cases of scandal referred to in the second paragraph, and with the cases of enmity referred to in the third. The main reason of the Church's action herein is the danger of profanation of the Lord's Table by the presence of unworthy Communicants. A second reason is the danger of injury to the consciences of the congregation by wounding their sense of corporate responsibility for individual wrong-doing. A third is the spiritual interest of the offenders themselves, viz., in the words quoted with approval by Hooker (Eccl. Pol. vi. 4-15), "not to strike them with the mortal wound of excommunication, but to stay them rather from running desperately headlong into their own harm, and not to sever from Holy Communion any but such as are either found culpable by their own confession, or have been convicted in some public Court." The mode of the Curate's action was intended by the rubric to be admonition previous and private. The first paragraph indicates the duty of the people, not of the Curate, giving him the opportunity of admonition, but throwing upon them the responsibility of the decision whether or no to present themselves.

The rubric does not empower or entitle the Curate to repel any at the time of Communion, on the mere ground of their not having previously signified their names to him. For there is no means provided for receiving their names, or for making any due enquiry; nor is any penalty imposed upon the Curate for communicating people who have not signified their names, nor on the persons who present themselves without having done so. The reference to the Ordinary was added in 1662. The object is to set him in motion as the proper person to take legal proceedings against an offender, and effectually repel one who cannot be repelled by the Curate's weapons of persuasion and admonition.

The precautions of this rubric against communicating unworthily are not very effective, and it must be observed that the 26th, 27th, and 28th Canons extend the Curate's duty in this respect much farther than the rubric, but without giving him any power, which would be recognised by a secular Court, of conscientiously performing his duty therein.

92. The Table, at the Communion-time having a fair white linen cloth upon it, shall stand in the Body of the Church, or in the Chancel, where Morning and Evening Prayer are appointed to be said.

The word 'fair,' applied to the white linen cloth in the fourth paragraph of this rubric, means 'beautiful,' and does not exclude adornment with embroidery.

The words 'upon it' require the cloth to lie upon the Mensa, or upper surface of the Table, but do not require the whole Table to be covered or enveloped therewith. The linen cloth is to be laid upon the covering described in Canon 82 as 'a carpet of silk or other decent stuff.'

Bishop Cosin states that "among the Ornaments of the Church that were then (i.e. in the second year of Edward VI.) in use, the setting of two lights upon the Communion Table or Altar was one appointed by the King's Injunctions, set forth about that time, and mentioned or ratified by the Act of Parliament here named (2 & 3 Edw. VI. cap. I)." If it be contended that Bishop Cosin is wrong in his opinion that the Injunctions were obligatory, we are thrown back upon the universal custom of the Catholic Church, which undoubtedly required lights to be used on the Altar for the office of Holy Communion.

93. And the Priest standing at the North-side of the Table shall say the Lord's Prayer, with the Collect following, the people kneeling.

One Priest only is here spoken of as celebrating: there is no authority for a change of the celebrant in the course of the Service; and only extraordinary contingencies of the gravest kind were anciently regarded as sufficient cause for such a change. Special provision is made for exceptions to this principle, in the pronouncing the Absolution by the Bishop, if officially present, and for the making the General Confession 'by one of the Ministers.' The Epistle and Gospel are also permitted to be read by Assistant Ministers, in accordance with customary usage recognised in the 24th Canon. The assistance of other Clergy may also be required for administration of the Elements.

Lay Assistants are not mentioned in this rubric, but the principle of assistance to the 'principal Minister' being recognized in the twenty-fourth Canon, there can be no objection to the ancient practice of employing clerks or choristers for other purposes than singing.

The term 'north side,' whatever was its origin (possibly the re-arrangements consequent on the transposition of the Gloria in Excelsis), acquired a meaning during the changes made in the substitution of Moveable Tables for fixed Altars about the year 1552, which determines its interpretation to exclude the north end. In those churches where the Table was placed with its long sides north and south, the Priest moved with the table, and stood at the same part of it as he had stood in the use of it as an altar, that is, at the centre of one of the long sides, though he no longer faced the same part of the Church, and now looked to the south instead of the east. But when Archbishop Laud pressed the restoration of the table to its ancient position,—a restoration which has become universal,—the question at once arose as to the position of the celebrant, and some of the High Church clergy placed themselves at the north end of the table placed 'altarwise,' alleging that they were in this manner conforming to the rubric. They were at once met with the reply that 'side' and 'end' were not convertible terms, and it was urged that the rubric could not be complied with at all, unless the table were set with its long sides north and south. It is thus clear that the use of the end was disputed from the first, and treated as an untenable innovation. Now that the altars are universally placed so that only one of the long sides is accessible, the rubric can only be literally complied with by the celebrant standing at the northern portion of that side.

It seems, however, absurd that when the altar is restored to its place, the Priest should not be restored to his. It is further to be noted that the regarding the word 'north' rather than the word 'side,' and the placing the Priest at the north end of the altar, has the disadvantage of making the practice of the English Church unlike that of all the rest of Christendom. For all the ancient historical Churches place the celebrant in front of the altar, while the Protestant sects, even those that seat the communicants round the table, place the Minister at the centre of a side, and not at one end.

There is no direction for the Celebrant to kneel on reaching the altar, and it is contrary to general Catholic usage to do so. Any private prayers he may use then, he should say standing.

It should be remembered that the service is for the congregation, not for the Priest alone, and therefore they ought not to be detained for his personal convenience. He has not the same liberty of private devotion as the individual members of the congregation, and should carefully restrain his private devotions so as to be as short as is consistent with reverence.

It is the clear intention of the Prayer-Book that the Lord's Prayer and the whole office should be said deliberately, and sufficiently loud for the congregation to hear distinctly, so as to follow it readily. Moreover, the words of the Liturgy form an integral part of the whole sacrificial action. They are included in the oblation of praise and thanksgiving; and, consequently, to hurry, or mutter them is, so far, to bring a blemished offering to God.

There is no direction for loudness of voice, but the words of the office should be, as was anciently ordered, "roundly and distinctly pronounced."[d]

94. Then shall the Priest, turning to the people, rehearse distinctly all the TEN COMMANDMENTS; and the people still kneeling shall, after every Commandment, ask God mercy for their transgression thereof for the time past, and grace to keep the same for the time to come, as followeth.

The Commandments were first introduced in 1552, and no rubric can be more express than this against their omission. Such omission involves also the loss of the Kyrie, an ancient and valuable feature of the Liturgy.

The Commandments are to be rehearsed 'turning to the people,' implying that the Priest was not standing so before.

95. Then shall follow one of these two Collects for the Queen, the Priest standing as before, and saying, Let us pray, &c. The words 'standing as before' mean standing in the position in which the Priest was before he turned to the people to rehearse the Commandments, viz. facing eastward.

96. Then shall be said the Collect of the Day.

97. And immediately after the Collect the Priest shall read the Epistle, saying, The Epistle [or, The portion of Scripture appointed for the Epistle] is written in the———Chapter of———beginning at the———Verse. And the Epistle ended, he shall say, Here endeth the Epistle. Then shall he read the Gospel, (the people all standing up) saying, The holy Gospel is written in the———Chapter of———beginning at the———Verse.

98. And the Gospel ended, shall be sung or said the Creed following, the people still standing, as before.

If more collects than the collect or collects of the day be used, they must be taken from the six collects at the end of the Communion Office. If a collect be used in commemoration besides the collect of the day at Morning and Evening Prayer, it should also be used in the Communion Service.

The practice of the people sitting during the reading of the Epistle, though not prescribed in the rubric, may be justified by ancient English custom.

The custom of singing or saying, 'Glory be to Thee, O Lord,' before the Gospel, has been continued from ancient times, and was specially ordered in the First Prayer-Book of Edward VI. Bishop Cosin thinks that it was afterwards left out by the printers' negligence. It seems very doubtful whether ancient authority will support the saying 'Thanks be to Thee, O Lord,' or equivalent words, at the end of the Gospel, though these words were inserted in the Scottish Office.

No directions are given as to the place where the Epistle and Gospel are to be read, but one very ancient usage is, that the former is to be read at the south, the latter at the north, of the sanctuary.

From whatever part of Scripture the Epistle is taken, the words 'here endeth the Epistle' are always to be said at the end of it.

In singing or saying the Creed, it is advisable, when there are clerks, to follow the direction of the Prayer-Book of 1549, and that the Priest should sing or say alone the words 'I believe in one God,' the clerks and congregation taking up the Creed with him after those words. On bowing at the Holy Name of JESUS, the same remark may be made as on the occurrence of the Name in the Apostles' Creed.

The clergy and congregation sometimes incline the head and body at the words 'And was Incarnate.' According to ancient English custom, the inclination should be maintained until the words 'for us.' But such custom furnishes no precedent for prostration, or such exaggerated marks of reverence.

99. Then the Curate shall declare unto the people what Holy-days, or Fasting-days, are in the Week following to be observed.

This direction refers to the table of moveable and immoveable feasts together with days of fasting and abstinence, in the calendar.

And then also (if occasion be) shall notice be given of the Communion; and the Banns of Matrimony published; and Briefs, Citations, and Excommunications read. And nothing shall be proclaimed or published in the Church, during the time of Divine Service, but by the Minister: nor by him any thing, but what is prescribed in the Rules of this Book, or enjoined by the Queen, or by the Ordinary of the place.

This rubric fixes the place in the service at which notice should be given of Holy Communion, when the occasion requires. It does not authorize the use in this place of the exhortations which are directed to be used 'after the sermon or homily ended.'

The object of the Church in the publication of Banns being publicity, it was directed to be made at a time when most people were likely to be in church, such as shortly before the Sermon. There is some divergence between this rubric and that at the beginning of the Service for the Solemnization of Matrimony, where the Banns are directed to be published 'immediately before the sentences for the Offertory,' i.e. after the sermon, instead of before it; and the time of publication of Banns is extended, by Stat. IV. George IV., c. 76, to the time of evening service, immediately after the 2nd lesson, if there shall be no morning service.[e] It may be doubted whether a publication of Banns on Holy-days would now suffice for a legal publication, as this last-mentioned act names Sundays only.

The order for reading briefs, &c., indicates this to be the proper time for reading notices from the Bishop of intended confirmations, &c., and may perhaps be extended to cover and protect from the prohibition which follows, the announcement of dedication, harvest, and other local festivals.

The whole paragraph is connected with the Sermon, with the object of grouping together all such additions to, and interruptions of, the Office of Holy Communion.

100. Then shall follow the Sermon, or one of the Homilies already set forth, or hereafter to be set forth, by authority.

If the sermon be preached from the pulpit (for which there is no rubrical direction), and by the priest who is celebrating Holy Communion, the Chasuble should be laid aside for the function of preaching. If the sermon be preached from the altar-steps by the celebrant the chasuble should be retained. If the preacher be not the celebrant, it seems to be in accordance with the Prayer-Book of 1549, and with old custom, that he should wear a Surplice, as having previously taken his place in the choir, and also a hood, if a graduate.

Although the 55th Canon enjoins the use of some form of bidding the prayers before all sermons, lectures, and homilies, yet the custom may be regarded as fairly established, of beginning the sermon without any introductory form, or with a collect from the Prayer-Book, or with an invocation of the Holy Trinity, in testimony of the preacher's commission to proclaim the Gospel. The last should be announced to the people, turning the face towards them. Custom has also established, from the days at least of St. Chrysostom, the practice of ending the sermon with an ascription of praise, which may properly be pronounced turning to the East.

101. Then shall the Priest return to the Lord's Table, and begin the Offertory, saying one or more of these Sentences following, as he thinketh most convenient in his discretion.

The words 'Return to the Lord's Table' point to the Priest having left the table, either for the purpose of preaching, or to take his seat in the sedilia.

In the impoverished condition of the churches at the time of the last revision, it was well to be content that one or more of the sentences should be said by the Priest, not sung by a choir. But now that clerks and choirs have been restored to many churches, it seems reasonable that the sentences may be sung as of old, and as was prescribed in the Prayer-Book of 1549: "Where there be clerks, they shall sing one or many of the sentences above written, according to the length and shortness of the time that the people be offering."

102. Whilst these Sentences are in reading, the Deacons, Church-wardens, or other fit person appointed for that purpose, shall receive the Alms for the Poor, and other devotions of the people, in a decent bason to be provided by the Parish for that purpose; and reverently bring it to the Priest, who shall humbly present and place it upon the holy Table.

The rubric mentions but one bason, to which originally the people brought their alms, instead of putting them into the poor man's box. This one bason is wholly inefficient for making a collection by several persons, and from a large congregation; and therefore is to be used for receiving alms collected in other receptacles. It is seemly that these should be formally given out to the persons by whom the collection is to be made, and afterwards received from them in the 'decent bason' by the 'deacon, churchwarden, or other fit person appointed for that purpose, who 'shall reverently bring it to the Priest.'

The words 'humbly present' obviously indicate some action beyond the mere placing on the Table, but do not mean a kneeling posture; for neither here nor in any other part of the Service should the Priest kneel, unless when ordered to do so.

103. And when there is a Communion, the Priest shall then place upon the Table so much Bread and Wine, as he shall think sufficient. After which done, the Priest shall say, Let us pray, &c.

The small fair linen cloth, commonly called the Veil, which is to be used after the Communion, should not be spread upon the fair white linen cloth which covers the Table, nor used to cover the Elements before the Communion.

In order to place the Bread and Wine on the Table, which must be done at this time, and not before, the Priest should have them at hand in another place. This is usually the Credence-table, or some shelf near to the altar. He places them as he did the alms, humbly, as an offering, and so much of each as he judges approximately sufficient for the communion of himself and the people. But if he should afterwards find his computation excessive—as the offering the alms and elements together is not directly connected with consecration—he is not under obligation to consecrate all that he has offered. He may, therefore, if he should think the entire contents of the Flagon likely to be required for Communion, offer the Wine in that vessel. The usage, however, of pouring a portion of the Wine into the chalice (as was directed in the Prayer-Book of 1549), and placing the chalice on the table without the flagon, has been generally maintained, though this pouring forms no part of the rubrical directions of our Liturgy, either here or at any other period of the service.

This usage is properly associated also with the primitive custom (prescribed to be used in 1549) of 'putting thereto a little pure and clean water.'

The preparatory action of mixing water with the wine (besides being connected with the original Act of Institution), was undoubtedly the custom of the time when this Church and Realm received the order of ministering the Sacrament, and it has never been prohibited in the Prayer-Book. The practice is, therefore, a performance of the Ordination vow of the English Priesthood, "so to minister the Sacraments as the Lord hath commanded, and as this Church and Realm hath received the same, according to the Commandments of God." A few drops of water are sufficient for compliance with the usage, and in no case should the quantity of water exceed one third of the whole.

If the chalice is not fitted with a cover, some substitute for a cover should be placed upon it; a small, square piece of linen, stiffened with cardboard, is sometimes used for this purpose.

It is desirable that the Priest should, as a general rule, consecrate all the Bread and Wine that he offers. And in judging the quantity, it is to be remembered that on the one hand the consecration of an excessive amount of the elements involves a serious risk of irreverence in the consumption of what remains after Communion; so on the other hand, the error of consecrating too little is to be deprecated, as necessitating a second consecration, and thereby breaking the continuity of the service.

Many such points in the service are left without direction, or with inconsistent directions, in consequence of the old Liturgical order having been so broken and distorted in the revision of 1552, that subsequent revision has been, and probably will be, unsuccessful in removing the inconsistencies.

104. If there be no alms or oblations, then shall the words [of accepting our alms and oblations] be left out unsaid.

105. When the Minister giveth warning for the celebration of the holy Communion, (which he shall always do upon the Sunday, or some Holy-day, immediately preceding), after the Sermon or Homily ended, he shall read this Exhortation following, Dearly beloved, on, &c.

106. Or, in case he shall see the people negligent to come to the holy Communion, instead of the former, he shall use this Exhortation, Dearly beloved brethren, on, &c.

These exhortations are in anticipation of Communions on subsequent occasions, and are clearly distinct from the notice of Communion directed, in the rubric after the creed, to be given before the sermon, since they must come after the sermon. It is very difficult to say whether they should be read before or after the offertory and prayer for the Church Militant. Probably it was intended to group them generally with the sermon, without disturbing the offertory and prayer for the Church Militant.

We have here an example of inconsistency in the rubrics of our Communion Office referred to in the comment on the last rubric, and which is caused by successive attempts at patching (instead of revoking) the alterations made at the revision of 1552.

These two exhortations, with the third, which is appointed for use on the occasion of Communion, form a great feature of the English rite, but are more appropriate when Communions are rare, than when they are frequent. It is, indeed, somewhat inconsistent to use a prospective exhortation on the occasion of the Communion. It is possible that the expression 'warning' may be taken to except cases where the Minister does not consider unusual mention to be imperatively necessary, and at any rate to apply only where notice is given before the sermon.

107. At the time of the celebration of the Communion, the Communicants being conveniently placed for the receiving of the holy Sacrament, the Priest shall say this Exhortation, Dearly beloved in the Lord, &c.

The rubric seems to direct a change of place to be made by the communicants, and indicates, not the general withdrawal of the rest of the congregation, but the separation of the intending communicants into a part of the church by themselves, after the precedent of the Prayer-Book of 1549, which appoints that 'they shall tarry still in the quire, or in some other convenient place nigh to the quire.'

Such a re-disposition of the congregation requires time, and would be the opportunity for the retirement of children, or other persons, who may be unable (especially when a sermon has been preached) to stay for the whole service.

The neglect of this change of place of intending communicants has introduced many difficulties connected with the attendance of those who are not prepared to communicate on the occasion, and with the orderly reception of the Communion.

This exhortation gives opportunity for intending communicants to reconsider their 'mind to come' on that occasion: it throws upon their consciences with accumulated force the individual responsibility of coming to the Lord's Table, which the relaxation of discipline, and the removal of compulsory confession, had rendered doubly important: and it being impossible that a person inadequately prepared can fulfil on the moment the requisites here enumerated for coming duly to the Lord's Table, they have no alternative but to abstain.

108. Then shall the Priest say to them that come to receive the holy Communion, Ye that do truly, &c.

The limitation of this invitation 'to those that come to receive the Holy Communion,' is consistent with the presence of others, and the possible retirement of some of those who (previously to hearing the exhortation) were minded to come, to a part of the church not occupied by communicants.

109. Then shall this general Confession be made, in the name of all those that are minded to receive the holy Communion, by one of the Ministers; both he and all the people kneeling humbly upon their knees, and saying, Almighty God, &c.

This rubric makes it clear that the Confession is primarily intended for those who are about to communicate, though it does not exclude others from joining in it.

With regard to the manner of making the confession, it must be remembered that the direction that it should be made in the name of all those that are minded to come to the Holy Communion, was worded at a time when a considerable proportion of the communicants were too illiterate to follow such a piece of devotion by the use of a book. It was therefore essential that their leader should say it slowly and audibly, if they were to join in it at all. It cannot be said that this reason has wholly disappeared now; while even for persons of high education, so solemn and suggestive a devotion requires all the assistance of ample time, and facility of hearing, that they may join in it devoutly and deliberately.

The retaining the words 'one of the Ministers,' from the older form of the rubric, implies that if the celebrant have assistants one of them may lead the confession. And though it may no longer be read by one of the communicant congregation (as it formerly might) still a lay-clerk at the altar is not absolutely excluded. In any case the celebrant, even though not leading the confession, is to kneel.

110. Then shall the Priest (or the Bishop, being present,) stand up, and turning himself to the people, pronounce this Absolution, Almighty God, &c.

'The Bishop' means the bishop of the diocese, or other bishop acting in his stead. The words 'stand up,' imply that the celebrant has been kneeling for the confession.

111. Then shall the Priest say. Hear what, &c.

112. After which the Priest shall proceed, saying, Lift up, &c.

There is authority of ancient custom (though there is no direction for so doing in the rubric) for the Priest to open his arms, and raise his hands, while pronouncing the words 'Lift up your hearts,' which are to be said facing the people.

113. Then shall the Priest turn to the Lord's Table, and say, It is very, &c.

The Priest up to this point has been 'turning to the people' in accordance with the rubric of the Absolution. He must now turn to the Lord's Table.

114. These words [Holy Father] must be omitted on Trinity-Sunday.

115. Here shall follow the Proper Preface, according to the time, if there be any specially appointed: or else immediately shall follow, Therefore, &c.

116. After each of which Prefaces shall immediately be sung or said. Therefore, &c.

A comparison with the Books of 1549 and 1552 shews that the time at which the people should join in is at the words 'Holy, &c.'

117. Then shall the Priest, kneeling down at the Lord's Table, say in the name of all them that shall receive the Communion this Prayer following, We do not presume, &c.

The Priest is assumed to be at the Lord's Table, to which he had previously turned, and is merely directed to kneel down where he is.

118. When the Priest, standing before the Table, hath so ordered the Bread and Wine, that he may with the more readiness and decency break the Bread before the people, and take the Cup into his hands, he shall say the Prayer of Consecration, as followeth, Almighty God, &c.

The expression 'standing before the Table,' is to be rightly understood by observing that the emphatic word in it is 'standing.' The intention of the framers of this direction was to put an end to the previous posture of kneeling directed in the preceding rubric, and to direct the priest to stand during the consecration. The word 'before' evidently implies a position in front of the Table, and excludes the end, whichever way the Table might be placed.

The ordering the Bread and Wine for the manual acts of consecration, might include the pouring of some of the wine from the flagon into the chalice (if not previously done); also the separation of a part of the bread from the remainder which the Priest does not now intend to consecrate, and pre-eminently the arranging conveniently the individual piece to be broken during the consecration.

The expression 'before the people' in this rubric, means simply in the presence of the people.

It was proposed by Baxter, at the Savoy Conference, to direct the Bread to be broken in the sight of the people. The framers of the rubric seem to have rejected the latter part of this proposal, and to have thought it sufficient to direct it to be done in the presence of the people, irrespective of their being able actually to see it. Any breaking the Bread at this period of the service was then a novelty, and is now peculiar to the English Liturgy. The object of the Puritans probably was to bring the ceremonial acts of the Priest in the Consecration into closer harmony with the order of our Lord's own acts and words in the Institution itself, as recorded in the Synoptic Gospels, and this part of their proposal was conceded by the bishops and the revisers, as not inconsistent with the ancient usage of touching the Bread at this period of the service as if breaking it.

The acts of reverence of the Priest, during and after consecration, according to the old English use (as may be plainly seen in the rubrics of the Sarum Missal) consisted not in bending the knee, but in bowing the head and body.

The custom of elevating the consecrated Elements was probably connected with the Jewish heave-offering, and its idea of heavenward oblation. It was directed by the most ancient Liturgies, but was expressly prohibited in the Prayer-Book of 1549. This prohibition, however, was withdrawn in 1552. The elevation cannot therefore be unlawful, though certainly it is not obligatory. The ancient rubric of Sarum gives, as a first alternative respecting the height of elevation of the chalice, that it should be raised to the height of the breast. And this, therefore, would be a sufficient compliance with ancient custom.

There seems to be no reason for pronouncing the words of Institution in a different voice from the rest of the Prayer. See note e, p. 28.

119. * Here the Priest is to take the Paten into his hands:

120. + And here to break the Bread:

121. ++ And here to lay his hand upon all the Bread.

122. +++ Here he is to take the Cup into his hand:

123. ++++ And here to lay his hand upon every vessel (be it Chalice or Flagon) in which there is any Wine to be consecrated.

The direction of the Priest to 'lay his hand upon all the Bread and every vessel,' indicates the extreme care of the Church that none of the Bread and Wine intended for the Communicants should be overlooked in the performance of the manual acts.

It is better not to consecrate wine in the flagon (though the rubric permits it) except in the emergency of having only one chalice, and a very large number of communicants. Even in that case, a second consecration in the chalice would perhaps be preferable.

124. Then shall the Minister first receive the Communion in both kinds himself, and then proceed to deliver the same to the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, in like manner, (if any be present,) and after that to the people also in order, into their hands, all meekly kneeling. And, when he delivereth the Bread to any one he shall say, The Body, &c.

This rubric, with the Twenty-first Canon, obliges the celebrant to receive the Communion every time that he celebrates, even if he shall do so more than once in the same day. He does so as a part of the sacrificial action, which is not complete unless a portion of the sacrifice is consumed by the offering Priest. For this reason he communicates himself, standing, as distinct from the congregation, and completing the essentials of the Sacrifice in his priestly character.

As he is not ministering to others when communicating himself, he should not speak audibly in so doing.

He is to deliver the Sacrament first of all to the Clergy assisting in the service, beginning with the Gospeller and Epistoler, in accordance with the reason assigned in the rubric of 1549 for so doing, viz. that they may be ready to help the chief minister.

The order of communicating the rest of the Clergy, and the lay congregation, would be as follows:—1. To the Metropolitan of the Province (if present). 2. To the Bishop of the Diocese (if present). 3. To other Metropolitans and Bishops (if present), in the order of their seniority of consecration respectively. 4. Priests or Deacons. 5. Lay choristers, and 6. The rest of the laity.

'In like manner' means 'in both kinds.'

'In order.' These words may refer to the distinction of sexes, as in the Clementine Liturgy,[f] or more generally to the usage of taking the Sacrament to the people in their places in the choir, in contrast with the present usage of coming up to the altar-step. At all events, here is no recognition of the practice of communicating by railsful.

'Into their hands.' It was prescribed in the Prayer-Book of 1549, "that, although it be read in ancient writers that the people, many years past, received at the Priest's hands the Sacrament of the Body of Christ in their own hands, and no commandment of Christ to the contrary: yet for as much as they many times conveyed the same secretly away, kept it with them, and diversely abused it to superstition and wickedness: lest any such thing hereafter should be attempted, and that a uniformity might be used throughout the whole realm, it is thought convenient the people commonly receive the Sacrament of Christ's body in their mouths at the Priest's hand." In 1552, the manner of receiving was again put back to the use of the hands, and this has been continued since, so that the receiving in the mouth is unrubrical now.[g]

Whatever be the manner of holding out the hands for the purpose of reception, the Sacrament should, in order to avoid the possibility of accident, be placed firmly and safely in the hands of the recipient, and not merely offered to be accepted with the fingers.

The words 'meekly kneeling' in this rubric exclude prostration, which is not kneeling.

The expression 'to anyone,' coupled with the use of the singular number in the address to the recipient, obliges the Priest to repeat the words of administration in delivering the Sacrament to each communicant separately.

The rubric is not clear on the point, whether the Priest should give the Sacrament of the Body as soon as he has pronounced the words 'The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ,' (when the communicant may be supposed to have made an act of faith in the mystery of the Sacrament,) or whether he should give it at the end of the whole of the first sentence of administration, as he says the word 'Take.' At all events, he should not wait until he has completed the second sentence.

The words of administration should be distinctly pronounced, so as to be audible to the communicant. See note e, p. 28.

125. And the Minister that delivereth the Cup to any one shall say, The Blood, &c.

Although the word 'Minister' is used for priest in the preceding rubric and elsewhere, yet in this place it implies an important distinction between a Priest and a Deacon, the latter being forbidden by ancient Canons of the Church to deliver the Bread. And when it is declared in the Ordination of Deacons that it appertaineth to the office of a Deacon to help the Priest in the distribution of the Holy Communion, this help must be confined to the distribution of the Wine.

The rubric for the delivery of the species of Bread (directing it to be given into the hands of the communicants), seems to govern generally the administration of the Cup, though the words 'into their hands' do not occur in this rubric. Thus, the omission of these words leaves it open to the discretion of the Minister to retain his hold of the Cup while the communicant uses his hands for the purpose of guiding it. But in no case should the communicant abstain from using the hands at all, unless absolutely disabled from doing so.

It is to be noted that the directions of the rubrics on the subject of the administration of the Sacrament, are intended for the guidance of the Priest. No similar details are specified for the acts of the communicants. Hence the celebrant will use a wise discretion in not enforcing exact uniformity in the mode of reception adopted by individuals, provided it be reverent, and does not endanger the safety of the Sacrament.

There seems to be no warrant, in the English use, for making the sign of the cross with the consecrated species, paten, or chalice, in front of the communicant, at the moment of administration. At the end of the words of administration provided for the celebrant at the moment of his own Communion, in the old Sarum rite, occurs the formula '+ In Nomine Patris,' &c., and the sign of the Cross was directed to be made with the Body of the Lord. A similar direction was given for the chalice, which the Priest was at that moment holding in his hands. But this formula does not seem to have been used in communicating the people. If the sign of the cross had been intended to be used in the Order of Communion of 1548 (the first formula of administration in English), we may certainly presume that it would have been notified or printed as a guide, as it is in the Book of 1549, in the Prayer of Consecration, and in the Blessing of the Marriage Service. But no such guide is to be found, either there, or in any subsequent formula of administration; nor does there seem to be any ancient precedent or tradition for its use in that place. Moreover, there is a risk attending the practice, especially in the case of a large chalice nearly full of wine.

126. If the consecrated Bread or Wine be all spent before all have communicated, the Priest is to consecrate more according to the Form before prescribed: beginning at [Our Saviour Christ in the same night, &c.] for the blessing of the Bread; and at [Likewise after Supper, &c.] for the blessing of the Cup.

The necessity for consecrating more of the species of Bread can almost invariably be avoided by subdividing what is already consecrated.

127. When all have communicated, the Minister shall return to the Lord's Table, and reverently place upon it what remaineth of the consecrated Elements, covering the same with a fair linen cloth.

The direction is express to place 'what remaineth of the consecrated elements' upon the Lord's Table. The Priest is, therefore, not at liberty to consume what remains at this period of the service.

In arranging 'what remaineth of the consecrated elements,' the cover previously used, and not the paten, should be placed upon the chalice. The fair linen cloth, or veil, should be large enough to cover thoroughly the whole of both chalice and paten, when the paten is placed in front of the chalice. It should be observed, that the employment of the word 'linen' excludes a fabric of other material, such as silk or cotton.

128. Then shall the Priest say the Lord's Prayer, the people repeating after him every Petition.

129. After shall be said as followeth, O Lord and, &c.

130. Or this, Almighty and, &c.

131. Then shall be said or sung, Glory be to God, &c.

The Gloria in Excelsis, as it originally stood at the beginning of the office, in the Prayer-Book of 1549, being an opening Act of Praise, was sung by the Priest and Clerks while the people were standing. In its altered position, it may be regarded rather as a prayer. It seems reasonable that when it is sung in a choral celebration, the people should stand, as for an Act of Praise; and that when it is said without music, and in a plain celebration, the people may treat it chiefly as a prayer, and so kneel.

132. Then the Priest (or Bishop if he be present) shall let them depart with this Blessing.

For the meaning of the expression 'or bishop if he be present,' see the note on rubric No. 110, p. 35.

The words 'let them depart' imply that the congregation are not to dismiss themselves previously. Archbishop Grindal, in his injunctions to the Province of York in 1571, forbad the Minister to pause or stay between the Morning Prayer, Litany, and Communion, and directed him "to continue and say them, &c., without any intermission, to the intent that the people may continue together in prayer and hearing the word of God, and not depart out of the Church during all the time of the whole Divine Service."

The whole of the Blessing, including 'The peace of God,' &c., should be pronounced turning to the people.

The custom of reading St. John i. 1-13 aloud at the altar after the service is ended, adopted from the Roman Missal, has lately been introduced in some churches. Such public use of this Scripture has no authority, and is in direct opposition to the ancient English custom of the Priest reciting it privately, on his way to the sacristy.

133. Collects to be said after the Offertory, when there is no Communion, every such day one or more; and the same may be said also, as often as occasion shall serve, after the Collects either of Morning or Evening Prayer, Communion, or Litany, by the discretion of the Minister.

134. Upon the Sundays and other Holy-days (if there be no Communion) shall be said all that is appointed at the Communion, until the end of the general Prayer [For the whole state of Christ's Church militant here in earth] together with one or more of these Collects last before rehearsed, concluding with the Blessing.

135. And there shall be no celebration of the Lord's Supper, except there be a convenient number to communicate with the Priest, according to his discretion.

136. And if there be not above twenty persons in the Parish of discretion to receive the Communion; yet there shall be no Communion, except four (or three at the least) communicate with the Priest.

In considering the operation of the two last rubrics, it must be remembered—I. That the Prayer-Book gives the Curate no authority to dismiss non-communicants.—2. That the system of separating the communicants from the rest of the congregation, which underlies the rubrics in the earlier part of the office, has generally ceased to be observed.—3. That the order for signifying the names of intending communicants, at least some time the day before, has fallen into abeyance.—4. That the Curate has no opportunity of interrupting the Service for the purpose of making inquiry among the congregation of their individual intentions in this respect. The Curate, therefore, has no means of obtaining information whereon to exercise the discretion to which this rubric refers. It may happen that there being more than three or four in the church when he begins the Service, some may depart before Communion. If there be fewer, some may arrive later with the intention of communicating. In short, he cannot be certain whether or not the number of communicants be below the minimum until he has communicated himself.[h]

It seems then that the utmost he can do, in order to comply with this part of the rubric, is to avoid any deliberate promoting of Solitary Communion, or nearly Solitary Communion.

In accordance with the general protest of this rubric against Solitary Communion of the Priest, he should, at all celebrations, be very careful to allow ample time for the people to present themselves for Communion, not beginning the Lord's Prayer until it is quite evident that none who intend to communicate remain without having done so.

137. And in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, and Colleges, where there are many Priests and Deacons, they shall all receive the Communion with the Priest every Sunday at the least, except they have a reasonable cause to the contrary.

This rubric affords no ground for the opinion that Communions should not be more frequent than weekly. The direction that the Clergy when numerous should all receive the Communion every Sunday at the least, so far from debarring them or any one else from the privilege of more frequent Communions, implies that a weekly Communion is the lowest standard in such cases. Any other principle of interpreting the words 'at the least,' in this and in the later paragraph of this rubric (where the laity are required to receive three times in the year at the least), would involve a prohibition to the laity against receiving more than three times in the year.

Bishop Cosin was of opinion that when the Church enjoined her Priests and Deacons to communicate every Sunday at least, she supposed it "ought and should be done by them oftener. And from hence was it that the Collects, Epistles, and Gospels were appointed upon the Sundays and Holy-days, and a rubric made at the beginning of the Service Book for the Collects, Epistles, and Gospels to serve all the week-days, that were used on the Sunday—that is, at any time when there is a Communion on the week-day. And, certainly, though it be no fault to read the Collects, Epistles, and Gospels either upon Sundays or week-days; yet to read them, and not to go on with the Communion, is contrary to the intent of our Church, that, if there were any company, intended a Communion every day, for the continuing of the daily sacrifice in the Church, ever used till Calvinism sprung up, and leaped over into England."

It was a principle affirmed by Hooker and Archbishop Laud as well as by Bishop Cosin, and still later by Archbishop Sheldon in 1670, that the practice of cathedrals or mother churches was intended to be a pattern for that of parochial churches. Wherever, therefore, the Clergy form a company sufficient for communion they ought not to communicate less often than every Sunday, and may well do so oftener, even daily; and wherever a company of communicant laity desire a like privilege, they are not debarred from it by this rubric.

138. And to take away all occasion of dissension, and superstition, which any person hath or might have concerning the Bread and Wine, it shall suffice that the Bread be such as is usual to be eaten; but the best and purest Wheat Bread that conveniently may be gotten.

The words 'shall suffice' do not exclude a higher alternative, as may be seen in the rubric of administration of Baptism to Infants, where they are employed in the recognition of the validity of baptism by pouring, though it is not equally significant with, and certainly is not exclusive of, baptism by dipping. The true meaning is expanded in the corresponding rubric of the Scottish Liturgy of 1637:—"Though it be lawful to have wafer bread, it shall suffice that the bread be such as is usual; yet the best and purest wheat bread that conveniently may be gotten." This is more strongly expressed by Bishop Cosin, in his comment on the similar rubric in the Prayer-Book of 1604:—"It is not here commanded that no unleavened or wafer bread be used, but it is said only that the other bread shall suffice. So that, though there was no necessity, yet there was a liberty still reserved of using wafer bread, which was continued in divers churches of the kingdom and Westminster for one) till the 17th of King Charles.[j] The first use of the common bread was begun by Farel and Viret at Geneva, in 1538, which so offended the people there, and their neighbours at Lausanne and Berne (who had called a synod about it), that both Farel and Viret and Calvin and all were banished for it from the town; where afterwards, the wafer bread being restored, Calvin thought fit to continue it, and so it is at this day."

The rubric insists that great care should be taken in the selection of the bread; wherefore the Curate and Church-wardens should not be content with the first bread that comes to hand. Indeed, the ordinary bread of commerce scarcely comes up to the standard of excellence and purity here required. There is no mention of any corresponding care about the wine. But considerations of reverence obviously demand a similar standard of excellence and purity; and it is much to be wished that more attention were paid to this point. The thick and syrupy wines, commonly made up for this sacred use, are undesirable; on the other hand, unfermented grape juice is not wine.[k]

139. And if any of the Bread and Wine remain unconsecrated, the Curate shall have it to his own use: but if any remain of that which was consecrated, it shall not be carried out of the Church, but the Priest and such other of the Communicants as he shall then call unto him, shall, immediately after the Blessing, reverently eat and drink the same.

This rubric provides for the reverent consumption of the consecrated species.

The direction to drink the Wine, as well as to eat the Bread, reverently, is imperative to compel the consumption of the Wine, as well as of the Bread. It is most desirable that care should be taken in the consecration that no more of the consecrated elements should remain than the celebrant can conveniently consume without assistance. But if it should happen that he finds it necessary to call to him other communicants for the purpose of consuming a considerable surplus, the word 'reverently' implies that they should receive it in the same posture in which they communicated.

The prohibition against carrying the unconsumed remainder of the consecrated elements out of church involves the cleansing the vessels in church. This should be done by the Priest himself. Although the Service has been concluded, the people are not required to withdraw immediately: indeed, if all left immediately after the blessing, the Priest could not call unto him any of them for the purpose of consuming the remainder of the consecrated elements.

The method of cleansing, which is really intended to ensure the entire consumption of all that remains, is not prescribed, and the word 'reverently' leaves much to the discretion of the Priest, while it certainly applies as much to his demeanour as to that of the people.[l]

140. The Bread and Wine for the Communion shall be provided by the Curate and the Church-wardens at the charges of the Parish.

141. And note, that every Parishioner shall communicate at the least three times in the year, of which Easter to be one. And yearly at Easter every Parishioner shall reckon with the Parson, Vicar, or Curate, or his or their Deputy or Deputies; and pay to them or him all Ecclesiastical Duties, accustomably due, then and at that time to be paid.

142. After the Divine Service ended, the money given at the Offertory shall be disposed of to such pious and charitable uses, as the Minister and Church-wardens shall think fit. Wherein if they disagree, it shall be disposed of as the Ordinary shall appoint.

143. Whereas it is ordained in this Office for the Administration of the Lord's Supper, that the Communicants should receive the same kneeling; &c.