[22] Works: Vol. viii. p. 8.
[23] It is not easy to be understood, it is not lightly to be received; it is not much opened in the writings of the New Testament, but still left in its mysterious nature; it is too much untwisted and nicely handled by the writings of the doctors; and by them made more mysterious, and like a doctrine of philosophy made intricate by explications, and difficult by the apperture and dissolution of distinctions.—Jeremy Taylor, Works, vol. viii, p. 8.
[24] Milne.
[25] 2 Cor. viii: 9.
[26] See a valuable little book, Some Titles and Aspects of the Eucharist, by E. S. Talbot, D. D. (Bishop of Rochester). Rivington, Percival & Co., London.
[27] Bp. Alexander.
[28] Cf. 1 Cor. x: 17.—"We, who are many, are one loaf." The one serious objection to the otherwise convenient custom of using unleavened bread in the shape of wafers is that the symbolism of the common loaf is lost, and the point of contact with common life is somewhat obscured.
[29] Our Church, by the title adopted, by the form of service used, by the spirit of her rubrics where they touch upon the subject, plainly declares it to be her intention that the Holy Communion should always be celebrated so as to be a social act. The priest is not a mere representative of the congregation, doing things for them, but a leader acting with them. For the priest to act without the congregation is only less anomalous than for the congregation to act without the priest. Not that the whole congregation present should necessarily receive at any given celebration of the Holy Communion, though in the judgment of the present writer the ideal would be reached only thus.
[30] Cf. Philemon 16.