sion of the morning service would not only be a deviation from the practice, but a reflection upon the memory of our reformers, as, though they lacked our wisdom, it will be wise to leave the Prayer Book as we received it from our fathers. It would not be possible to make alterations in one direction for one set of objections, without opening the door to applications from an opposite quarter. Once let in the hand of the would-be reformer, and short work would be made with the doctrines of the church. If it were not for the reasons mentioned above, we have thought that as there are now almost universally three services in our parochial churches, that it might be expedient to re-distribute the psalms for the day into three daily readings instead of two as at present.

ENGLAND AND ROME.

(Continued from page 49.)

CHAPTER

XIV.

THE ROMISH ADDITIONS TO THE CREED.

Art 18 of the Creed of Pope Pius iv.

ART. 18. I also confess that under either kind alone Christ is received whole and entire, and a true sacrament.

The next difference which exists between the churches of England and Rome, on the subject of the Eucharist, refers to the mode of administration; the Church of Rome, as is well known, mutilating the Holy Sacrament, and depriving the laity of a participation in the cup.

The Church of Rome admits and justifies this practice (adding the usual anathemas), in the first three canons of the twenty-first session, held July 16, 1562; and the Church of England thus condemns it in art. xxx.

ENGLAND.

ART. XXX. Of both kinds."The Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the lay people: for both parts of the Lord's Sacrament, by Christ's ordinance and commandment, ought to be administered to all Christian men alike.

ROME.

CANON I." If any one shall say, that, by the precept of God, or by necessity of salvation, all and each of the faithful of Christ ought to receive both species of the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist; let him be anathema."

CANON II."If any one shall say that the holy Catholic Church was not induced by just causes and reasons to communicate, under the species of bread only, laymen, and also the clergy when not officiating, let him be anathema."

CANON III.-If any one shall deny that Christ, whole and entire, the fountain and author of all graces, is received under the species of bread, because that, as some falsely assert. He is not received, according to the institution of Christ Himself, under both species; let him be anathema."

any

this

It is quite unnecessary to make remark upon point of disagreement between us, since even the Church of Rome herself acknowledges that "Christ the Lord, in the last supper, instituted and delivered to the Apostles this venerable Sacrament in the species of bread and wine,” (Decree c. i; so also c. iii.); and, in spite of this acknowledgment, goes on in her very next words to say, "that institution and delivery do not therefore tend thereunto, that all the faithful of the Church be bound by the institution of the Lord, to receive both species," (c. i.). We will merely draw our readers' attention to the fact that some of these authorities whom we quote from early times, were "infallible" popes of Rome.

A.-The Teaching of the Word of God.

"He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying: Drink ye all of it." (Matt. xxvi. 27).

"He took the cup, and when He had given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank of it." (Mark, xiv., 23.).

"As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till He come." (1 Cor. xi., 26.)

B.-The Doctrine of the Primitive Church.

Justin Martyr, A.D., 155:- "There is brought to that one of the brethren who presides, bread, and a cup of water and wine . . . .. When the president has given thanks, and all the people have testified their assent, the deacons, as they are called with us, give to each one of those present a portion of the bread and wine, and water which have beeu blessed." [See the whole passage cited from Justin Martyr in the last chapter. Several other passages there quoted will also apply to this subject.]

Cyprian, A.D. 250:- "The baptism of saving water indeed is taken once for all, nor is it again repeated, but the cup of the Lord is always thirsted for, and drank in the church.". "Since we make mention of His Passion in all our sacrifices (for the Passion of the Lord is the sacrifice which we offer), we ought to do nothing but what He did. . . For to shew forth the Justification and Testament of the Lord, and not to do the same that the Lord did; what else is it but to cast his words behind us, and to despise the Lord's discipline, and to commit not earthly but spiritual thefts and adulteries? Since he who steals from the truth of the Gospel the words and acts of the Lord, corrupts and adulterates the divine precepts."

And again:-"How do we teach and encourage them to shed their blood in the confession of His Name, if, when they are about to engage in conflict, we deny them the Blood of Christ? or how do we make them fit for the cup of martyrdom, if we do not first admit them to drink in the church the cup of the Lord, of which they have a right to partake?"

Julius, Bishop of Rome, A.D., 337, writes in condemnation of some who so far deviated from the mode of administration observed at the original institution of the Eucharist, as to give the bread and wine together; "for the blessing of the bread is related separately," he says, "and the blessing of the cup separately And therefore all such error and presumption ought to cease." [This decision of Pope Julius was confirmed by the Council of Braga, A.D., 675, canon i.] Ambrose, A.D., 370:-" He is unworthy of the Lord, who

celebrates the mystery otherwise than as it was delivered by him. Nor can he be devout, who receives it otherwise than as it was given by Him."

Chrysostom, A.D. 400:-"Not as it was in the Old Testament, the priest ate some things, and the people other things, and it was not lawful for the people to partake of those things of which the priest partook it is not so now, but one body and one cup are offered to all."

Leo I., Bishop of Rome, A.D. 461:-"(The Manichæans), when they dare, for the purpose of hiding their infidelity, to be present at our mysteries, receive with unworthy mouth, the Body, but refuse, altogether refuse to drink the Blood of our Redemption."

Gelasius, Bishop of Rome, A.D. 495::- "We have found that some [they were the Manichæans] receive only a portion of the sacred Body, and abstain from the cup of the sacred Blood. But doubtless they must either receive the entire sacrament, or be excluded from the entire sacrament, since a dividing of one and the same mystery cannot be done without great sacrilege."

The practice of communicating only in one kind arose naturally out of the doctrine of Transubstantiation. Belief in this article of the Roman faith had its origin, as we said in our last chapter, in the ninth century. The notion that the sacramental bread and wine were actually converted into the Body and Blood of Christ gave rise to an anxious fear lest any part of them should be lost or wasted. Instead, therefore, of common bread, small wafers were used, and many expedients were adopted to prevent the possibility of the spilling of the least drop of the wine. Still accidents would happen: so that in the thirteenth century Pope Innocent IV. permitted those only to receive the cup upon whose caution reliance could be placed; and at last, in the fifteenth century, the Council of Constance withheld the wine from the laity altogether. The Council of Trent, in the canons above quoted, confirmed the decree of the Council of Constance; and since that time it has been the invariable custom of the Church of Rome to confine this part of the Sacrament to the priests alone.

We promised, however, in our last chapter, that we would in this number, shew the actual difference that exists

between the Churches of England and Rome upon the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, as well as point out one or two more of the grievous errors to which Transubstantiation has given rise in the Romish Church. Space, however, or rather the want of space compels us to abstain from doing more than simply pointing them out, and adding only such very short observations as may enable our readers to judge for themselves on which side lies the truth, according to the teaching of the word of God and the practice of the first and purest ages.

The doctrine of the real Presence according to the Church of

ENGLAND.

ART. XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper." The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather is a Sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death, insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.

The Body

of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the means whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith."

ART. XXIX.- -Of the wicked which eat not the body of Christ in the use of the Lord's Supper-"The wicked and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as St. Augustine saith) the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ; yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ, but rather to their condemnation do eat and drink the sign or Sacrament of so great a thing."

ROME.

COUNCIL OF TRENT; Session xiii. Decree, cap iv., On Transubstantiation.

"But because Christ, our Redeemer, declared that which He offered under the species of bread to be verily His own Body, therefore has it ever been a firm belief in the Church of God, and this holy Synod doth now declare it anew, that, by the consecration of the bread and of the 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. Which eonversion is, by the holy Catholic Church conveniently and properly called Transubstantiation."

CANON VIII.-" If any one shall say that Christ, presented in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema."