B , 594-7 G97> or < d'n? €nu\\ ^mmiii Jtatg THE GIFT OF L.....:<^jTUr^.. h,.)s.s:i^.bL s&.Ii/m. 5474 eaate shows when this volume was taken. J5~T1S "Pr ;' All books not in use for instruction or re- search are limited to all borrowers. Volumes of periodi- cals and of pamphlets comprise so many sub- jects, that they are held in the library as much as possible. For spe- cial purposes they are given out for a limited time. Graduates and sen- iors are allowed fiv,e volumes for two weeks. Other students may have two vols, from the circulating library for two weeks. Books not needed during recess periods should be returned to the library, or arrange- ments made fcfr their return during borrow- er's absence, if wanted. Books ne'feded by more than one person are held on the reserve list. Books of special value and gift books, when the giver wislles it, are ,not allowed to circulate. on 99 j Cornell University Library 1 BX5947.C6 G97 I "prayer of consecration" in *^?,,,f,'?,!?ri^^" ! olln 3 1924 029 458 290 Overs \<^y Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029458290 -^- .' ?' - // /.• < ) THE '^Prayer of Consecration'' IN THE AMERICAN LITURGY AN EXPOSITION By THE REV. HENRY RILEY GUMMEY, B.D. Rector of the Church of St. John the Baptist Germantown, Philadelphia Pennsylvania COPYRIGHT 1903, BY HENRY RILEY GUMMEY THE "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION" IN THE AMERICAN LITURGY. AN EXPOSITION. THERE is now current in the American Church, an interpretation of the Prayer of Consecration in the Communion Service, that sets at naught not only the history, but even the phraseology and con- struction of that venerable prayer, in order to assimilate both the under- standing thereof and the ceremonial accompaniment thereto, to the present Roman standard of interpretation and practice of the Canon Missae. History has been repeating itself in our midst. The well-known evolu- tion, in Western Christendom, that gradually transformed the original understanding of the Canon of the Mass (a process that extended from about A. D. 1 1 50 to 1570, and in the accomplishment of which many factors concurred), has been closely paralleled in the case of our own Prayer of Consecration during the last thirty years. This development (or perversion) does not make for peace and unity among ourselves. It cannot promote the reunion of English-speaking Christendom. In the eyes of our Roman brethren who know the history of their own rite, it but serves to make us appear as childish imitators of customs that do not invariably commend themselves to those who are bound to use them. Again, it serves to reerect a barrier between ourselves and the historic Churches of the East, which have held unswervingly to the primitive and apostolic tradition in this matter. It makes unreal the very words that are used by us in the most solemn act of the Church's corporate worship. A review and restatement of the facts which are thus ignored seems to be called for. It is therefore the purpose of this paper to make an examination of the text and historical origin of the Prayer of Consecration which the American Church adopted on the 14th of October, 1789, in rela- tion to the Lord Christ's original institution of the Holy Eucharist as recorded in the New Testament, and to the genuine liturgical tradition of the undivided Church, in order, if possible, to clear away the misconception of this venerable prayer wherewith it is enwrapped in the minds of some to-day, and to elucidate the principles upon which a lawful ceremonial accompanying it must be based. The title and purpose of the prayer, which is the subject of our inquiry, is given in the last clause of the rubric immediately preceding — ''When 4 -PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." the Priest he shall say the Prayer of Consecration, as fol- loweth" ; i. e. it is called the Prayer of Consecration because it is a prayer or petition to the All-Father for the consecration or hallowing of the elements of bread and wine to so high a state and use that the partaking thereof may be the "communion of the Body and Blood of Christ." *'A11 glory be to thee, Almighty God." The opening words of the prayer link it closely to the Thrice-Holy Hymn. In fact the "Prayer of humble access" is misplaced in our Liturgy (a dislocation inherited from the English Book) and should immediately precede the actual reception of the Holy Communion. The continuity of the Prayer of Consecration with the first part of the Anaphora, or Canon (in the ancient sense) would then be more clearly seen, as the note of praise and thanksgiving is caught up and reechoed in view of the redemptive sacrifice of the cross : "All glory be to thee Almighty God, for that thou, of Thy tender mercy, didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ to sufifer death upon the Cross for our redemp- tion." The raison d'etre of this ascription is redemption stated as the act of God the Father, and still further restated, in a relative clause, as the act of God the Son: "who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world." An additional reason for giving glory to God is appended in another relative clause parallel to the last, namely, the institution of the Eucharistic memorial : "and did institute, and in his holy Gospel command us to continue, a perpetual memory of that his precious death and sacrifice, until his coming again." Then follows in narrative form, in illustration of the previous statement of fact, the account of the original institution of the Eucharist, virtually, almost verbally, quoted from the four-fold New Testament record: "For in the night in which he was betrayed, he took Bread ; and when he had given thanks, he brake it and gave it to his disciples, saying. Take, eat, this is my Body, which is given for you ; Do this in remembrance of me. Likewise, after supper, he took the Cup ; and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of this ; for this is my Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you, and for many, foir the remission of sins ; Do this, as oft as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me." This narrative is embel- lished by five mimetic gestures, upon the part of the celebrant, constituting, with the recital they accompany, a solemn rehearsal, or memorial, of Christ's acts and words at the first Eucharist, before the Father. This is their alone original and constant significance as found in all Liturgies (save of course as now misunderstood in the Roman). Thus closes the first paragraph of the Prayer of Consecration, consisting of a giving praise to God for the sacrifice of His Son, and for the commemorative sacrifice instituted by Christ, whose acts, words and command are quoted as the charter or warrant for our observance of this holy service. In the second paragraph we return to present time (from which the "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 5 first paragraph, after its opening ascription, had digressed), and declare our obedience to Christ's command "Do this in remembrance of me," which we have just now rehearsed : "Wherefore, O Lord and heavenly Father, according to the institution of thy dearly beloved Son our Saviour Jesus Christ." We then go on to make the solemn memorial before God the Father, by means of the anti-typical bread and wine (now regarded as "holy," i. e., set apart for this especial use) of the work and sacrifice of His Incarnate Son : 'Ve, thy humble servants, do celebrate and make here before thy Divine Majesty, with these thy holy gifts, which we now offer unto thee, the memorial thy Son hath commanded us to make." This sec- ond paragraph then closes with the statement that while engaged in this sacrificial act, we are not only mindful of all that the Lord Christ did and suffered on our behalf, but are also duly grateful for all the good that has accrued to us therefrom : "having in remembrance his blessed passion and precious death, his mighty resurrection and glorious ascension; rendering unto thee most hearty thanks for the innumerable benefits procured unto us by the same." This paragraph we note is called (by the title indented into it) ''The Oblation/' The third paragraph entitled, in similar fashion, ''Tke Invocation," the yet further doing of obedience to Christ's command, opens with lowly petition to be heard in respect of our request that follows : "And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us." We then proceed to ask God the Father to hallow the elements of bread and wine (that have been, just now, offered to Him upon His holy table, in the Oblation), through the instrumentality of the Second and Third Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, so that from being simple elements they may be dignified to become the sacrament, that the inward part being superadded to the outward, it may be possible through the reception of the outward signs, to receive "verily and indeed," because "spiritually," the Body and Blood of Christ : "and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to bless and sanc- tify, with thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine; that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood." In this con- nection, we should note, that these three paragraphs make up the Form of Consecration agreeably to the rubric governing the consecration of more bread and wine, if the already consecrated species do not suffice. "// the consecrated Bread or Wine he spent before all have coHnmunicated, the Priest is to consecrate nwre, according to the Form before prescribed ; beginning at, All glory be to thee, Almighty God, and ending zvith these words, partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood." In other words the consecration of the Holy Eucharist is not regarded by the American Church as accomplished by the mere recital of the narrative of the original institution, but after that has been rehearsed as containing the warrant 6 '' PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." for our observance of the rite, we make solemn memorial to God, of Christ our sacrifice, with the material elements ordained by Him, and then invoke the Divine Mercy to make, through the operation of the Word and Holy Spirit, these "gifts and creatures of bread and wine" to be the Body and Blood of Christ. This consecration is the act of God in response to our prayer therefor; and The Invocation is the crown and consum- mation of our solemn act of obedience to Christ's command — the Prayer of Consecration par excellence. The fourth paragraph of our prayer, being non-essential to the integrity' of the act of consecration upon the part of the Church, does not concern our present purpose and need not therefore now be considered. Our next step is to examine and compare the four accounts of the institution of the Holy Eucharist, contained in St. Matt, xxvi 126, 2y, 28; St. Mark xiv:22, 2^^, 24; St. Luke xxii:i9, 20; I Cor. xi : 23, 24, 25, 26. So doing we find the several narratives to be exactly parallel in the order or sequence of procedure by our Lord in regard to the bread and cup respectively. The variations in words or phrases are relatively slight, and do but bring out more clearly the details of the picture of what the Christ said and did upon that ever-memorable occasion. Briefly we may note in the order observed a few points, i. The setting apart of the bread and cup for the New Passover by the Saviour — "He took bread," "He took the cup." 2. An act of prayer upon the part of Christ, described by two (jreek words that are used synonymously here (and afterwards also by early Christian waiters). Cf. Sadler on I Cor. xi: 24; Scudamore, Notitia Eucharistica, 2nd ed. pp. 573-4; Watterich, Der Konsekrationsmoment im heiligen Abendmahl, Heidelberg, 1896, pp. 1-4. "He gave thanks," He blessed." We must use both expressions in English if we wish to show the full content of this thanksgiving-blessing. 3. After this, the distri- bution of either element to the disciples (the bread being first broken in order that they might all share in the one bread, or loaf, that Christ had hallowed) with the declaration appropriate to each: "This is my Body," "This is my Body which is given for you," "This is my Blood of the New Testament," "This is the New Testament in my Blood." Cf. the Decrees of the Council of Trent, Sess. xiii. chap. i. and iii. in the first of which it is distinctly affirmed that Christ consecrated by His blessing and after- wards testified to the truth of the gift in the express words recorded in Holy ^Yrit. 4. The reiterated command, "Do this in remembrance of me." "This do ye as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me," which obviously bids us to perform this action or series of words and acts follow- ing Christ's example. It cannot be too strongly insisted upon that the words of declaration which Christ spoke were not in any sense words of blessing or consecration, but a proclamation of fact. The method whereby Christ consecrated is recorded but not the words. Nothing can justify an attempt to set at defiance the plain statements and sequence of the four- "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 7 fold inspired narrative of the institution. Moreover we must note before proceeding further the three meanings or ideas attached to the words '"bless" and "blessing," i. God is said to "bless His creatures," which means that His "blessing" of them is some operation upon or toward them for their increment of happiness or wealth or spiritual improvement. 2. Man is said to "bless" God, which means that he ascribes praise and glory to Him or gives to Him thanks for "blessings" received. 3. Man is said to "bless" his fellowman, or other of God's creatures by imploring God to bless them. All benedictions pronounced by man are strictly prayers to God on behalf of the person for whom or thing for which some boon is sought. A good illustration of this is to be found in Genesis xiv : 18-20. There we are told that Melchizedek "blessed" Abraham and how? He prayed that God would "bless" him: "Blessed be Abram of the most high God" — adding words of praise to God also: "Blessed be the Anost high God." We are not surprised then that "to give thanks" and "to bless" are used (in the Greek of the New Testament) as corollaries in describing the consecration of the elements as effected by His prayer to God for that end, at the institution of the Eucharist by the Lord Christ. "For our Lord Jesus celebrated His holy supper, both as God and as Man. As God on the one hand, by His divine and all powerful will and oper- ation, He blessed and consecrated the bread and wine to be His Body and Blood. As Man on the other hand. He joined to His divine blessing prayers to God, and invocations, raising His eyes heavenw-ard to the Almighty God, His Father, and giving thanks to Him, He blessed, hal- lowed and consecrated the bread and the cup. And this alone it is, which He commanded us to do saying, "This do ye," that is to say, what He did as Man. And again, what He did as God, it is impossible for the priest to imitate, but he (the priest) simply begs and invokes and implores, that the Holy Spirit, by the good pleasure of the Heavenly Father, and the cooperation of His only-begotten Son, may descend, and make and accom- plish this divine and ineffable consecration." Eustratius Argentes "Against Azymes." Part H., Postulate 2, sec. 68. This extract from a little-knowai author who has treated the whole subject most thoroughly, will serve not only as an elucidation of the original institution, but also as showing the rationale of our obedience to Christ's command, of which he says in another place ( Pt. H., Post. 2, Sup. ii. Ans. 3) : "For Christ did not say 'speak ye tHis,' but said 'do ye this,' that is, 'do ye, without vari- ation, as ye saw Me do, I took bread, I gave thanks, I blessed, I broke, 1 gave, I spoke. This do ye also. Take bread, give thanks, bless, break, givQ, speak.' " We therefore may reasonably expect to find the central act of the Liturgy as celebrated by the Church following closely the pattern set by her Master. And such indeed is the fact. When the Church comes together to celebrate the Holy Eucharist hearts are lifted heavenward, and a solemn act of thanksgiving goes up to God, for all His T ry 8 "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION. loving kindness and mercies, interwoven with the angelic praises, and then most humble prayer is made for the hallowing of the bread and wine — before she presumes to give to her children the Bread of Life saying "Take, eat, this is the Body of Christ." Moreover we see our own Ameri- can Liturg>- at one in tliis respect with all other Liturgies of the Catholic Church, in none of which, save in the modem interpretation of the Roman Canon (in which to some extent the present English Prayer shares), has the consecration of the Eucharist ever been considered as effected by the recital of the narrative of the original institution. We must next glance at the early patristic testimony, which is remark- able icrti'jn." Apol. L ch. 65. "And this food is called with us the Eucharist .... For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these. But in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour was incarnate by the ^^ ord of God, and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so also have we been taught that the f«Jod. from which cur flesh and blood receive nourishment bv assimilation, having been blcsscci by prayer of the Word that is from Him, is the flesh and blood of that same Jesus who was incarnate. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus deHvered unto us what was enjoined upon them : that Jesus took bread and when He had given thanks (or, had blessed), said Do this in remembrance of me. this is my Body.' And likewise having taken the cup, and having given thanks ( or, having blessed) He said, 'This is my blood," and gave to them alone." Ibid. ch. 66. It is obvious to any fair-minded person reading these extracts that St. Justin regarded the Eucharist to be consecrated by prayer to God for that end. and that he appealed to the original institution as illustrating this fact. Moreover the rationale of the service as briefly outlined by him is strictly in accordance with this model. St. Irenaeus (A. D. 120202) ver} clearly alludes to the Invocation. "For as bread which is from the earth, receiving the invocation of God is no linger common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two things, an earthly and an heavenly, so alsj our bodies receiving the Eucharist, are '* PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 9 no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to eternity." Against Heresies, IV. xviii. 5. Passing by many other clear statements of other writers to the one purpose, we should note particularly St. Cyril of Jerusalem (A. D. c. 315- 386). In his lectures to those who had been baptized, in preparation for the Holy Communion, we note the following statements : ''For as the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist before the invocation of the Holy and Adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, while after the invocation the Bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ, so," &c. Cat. Lect. xix. (Myst. i.) 7. "For as the Bread of the Eucharist after the invocation of the Holy Ghost is mere bread no longer, but the Body of Christ, so," &c. Ibid. xxi. (iii.) 3. The final lecture is a commen- tary on the Anaphora of the Liturgy of Jerusalem in his day. ''The priest cries aloud 'Lift up your hearts' Then ye answer, 'We lift them up unto the Lord' Then the priest says, 'Let us give thanks unto the Lord' Then ye say, 'It is meet and right,' for in giving thanks we do a thing meet and right After this we make mention of heaven and earth and sea ; of sun and moon ; of stars, and all creation rational and irrational, visible and invisible ; of Angels, Archangels, Virtues, Dominions, Principalities, Powers, Thrones, of the many-faced Cherubim, in effect repeating that call of David's O Magnify the Lord with me. We make mention also of the Seraphim, whom Esaias in the Holy Spirit saw standing around the throne of God, with two wings veiling their face, with twain their feet, with twain flying, and saying Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of Hosts. For we recite this divine song, of the Seraphim that has been handed down to us, in order that we may be partakers in the hymn of praise with the hosts of the world above. Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; in order that He may make the bread the Body of Christ, and the wine the Blood of Christ, for indeed whatsoever the Holy Ghost has touched is sanctified and changed." Ibid, xxiii. (v.) 4, 5, 6, 7. After this St. Cyril goes on to speak of the intercession that followed immediately upon the completion of the Christian sacrifice by the Invo- cation. There can be but one meaning to his words, and that is best expressed by Mr. Brightman, "The Institution is not mentioned as recited here : but for St. Cyril it does not belong to the 'form' of consecration." (Lit. E. and W. Vol. I., p. 469. n. 11). St. Cyril omits all explicit refer- ence to what intervenes between the Sanctus and the Invocation, because he is expounding the salient or essential points of the Liturgy only. The narrative of the Institution being purely historical is hence not considered in this connection. Surely we may feel thankful at finding our own Prayer of Consecration so absolutely, in its phraseology and construction, in accord with the practice of the early Church. lo "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." St. Chnx.'stoni ( A. D. 347-407) '^ears also a ver}- distinct witness in -c\eral of his w riririi^s i- > the same tradition. In his treatise "On the Pricsiii- ">d" (Bk. iii. ch. 41 aiicr a g:rap]nc reference to EHjah on Mt. Cannel he jt' ccv';>: "Xow then pass from this scene to the rites which arc celebrated at the jroLri: day. they are not only marvellous to behold, but transcendent in awe. There stands the priest not bringing dowTi fire from heaven, but the Holy Spirit; and he makes prolonged supplication not that scnic l^ame sent down from on high may consume the offerings, but that g:race descci.dir.g on the sacrince. should by means of it enlighten ti'e sonls of all." Again in the same treatise ( Bk. vi. ch. 4) he plainly speaks of the lituririca] Invocation. "And wi:e!ie\Lr he invokes the Holy Spirit, when he consummates the most dread sacrilice. &c." Again i^De Cemeterio et Cruce. § 3V "\\ hat are you doing, O man, when the priest stands before the table, lifting up his hands to heaven, invoking the Holy Ghost to come and touch the ottered gifts?" St. Bas^il (A. D. 330-37^), De Spiritu Sancto, ch. 27 (§ 66V. speaks of the Invtvatinn as part ^:>i the unwritten apostolic tradition oi the Church. "Which of the saints lias left us in writingr the words of the invocation at the c Tisecration oi the bread of the Eucharist, and of the cup of bless- ing: For we do not rest content, with those tilings which the apostle or Gospel has recorded, but we say other things, both before and after, as having great power with reference to the mystery, that have been received from the unwritten teaching." St. Augustine (A. D. 354-430) also bears immistakeable testimony (De Trinitate, Bk. iii. ch. 4). "A\'e call that the body and blood of Christ, which taken from the fruits oi the earth, and duly consecrated by the mystical prayer, we receive to our spiritual health in memory of the Lord's passioti for us: which, thouirli it is hroni:;ht to its visible form bv the hand of men, is not sanctified to be so great a sacrament, save by the unseen operation of the Spirit oi God." Also ( Ep. cxlix. 16, to Paulinus, commenting on I Timothy ii: i) he says: 'I prefer in these words to understand this, that all or nearly all the Church is met t-jgether : so that we take the sup- plicjtions as mentioned, which we make in the celebration of the mysteries, bcijre that which is on the Lord's table begins to be blessed — prayers when it is blessed and sanciitied., and broken to be distributed, which entire petition almost ever}- Church conchides with the Lord's Prayer." Optatns oi ^Nlilevis. writing (c. 36S A. D.) on the Schism of the Donatists (Bk. vi. ch. I^ asks : "What is so sacriligious as to break down, raze, and remove the altars of God. where you yourselves formerly offered : on which the prayers oi the people and members of Christ were laid: whitlier Almighty God is invoked, whither the Holy Ghost, having been petitioned for descends?" Let us close these few patristic quotations with St. Isidore of Seville "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." ii (died 636 A. D.) De Ecclesiasticis Officiis. In words exactly parallel with those of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, he thus describes two of the seven parts of the liturgy: "The fifth is introduced as Preface (Illatio) to the sanctifying of the oblation, in which the whole universe of earthly crea- tures and of the heavenly powers is summoned to the praise of God ; and Hosanna in the highest is sung, because when a Saviour of the house of David was born the salvation that accrued to the world was shared on high. Then the sixth follows at once, the conformation (i. c. the conse- cration) of the sacrament that the oblation which is ofifered to God, having been sanctified by the Holy Spirit may be conformed to the body and blood of Christ." We note how St. Isidore also passes entirely over the narrative of the institution for the obvious reason that it is historically recited or quoted. Without enlarging our catena of quotations to an awkward degree considering our limitations of space, we may now pause a moment before proceeding further in our inquiry. Surely one must feel spiritually exhilarated by the realization of the fact that we to-day in this twentieth century are so thoroughly at one in our Eucharistic worship with the early and undivided Church. It is next our duty to look briefly into the liturgical testimony to the Church's belief and practice in the consecration of the Holy Eucharist by prayer or invocation, from the first. The recently discovered Sacra- mentary of Serapion, Bishop of Thmuis, in Egypt (the prayers of which are dated about the year 350 A. D.) supplies an interesting piece of evi- dence in this particular. Each bishop used in those days to frame his own liturgy, following in the rationale thereof the general model or norm, but choosing his own detail and phraseology. The narrative of the institution and the commemoration of Christ's death are combined by Bishop Serapion in such fashion as to show beyond question that Christ's declar- ation "This is my body," "This is my blood," is quoted purely as an historical fact. The Invocation which follows (though in the somewhat unusual form of a prayer for descent of the Word, i. c. the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, upon the bread and wine that they may become His body and blood), cannot therefore be explained away by any subtle or ingenious device. For the consecration of the Eucharist may be described (in like manner as may the Incarnation) as the act either of the Word or of the Holy Spirit. Bishop Serapion's mode of expression may be illus- trated from St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies, Bk. v. ch. 2, § 3), "When therefore the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receive the Word of God and the Eucharist becomes the body of Christ," and (Ibid.) "Just as a cutting from the vine planted in the ground fructifies, in its season, or as a grain of wheat falling into the earth and becoming decomposed, rises with manifold increase through the Spirit of God, who contains all things, and then through the wisdom of God serves for the use of men. 12 "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION. and having- received the Word of God hecomes the Eucharist, wliich is the hod} and hlood of Christ . . ." The importance of Bishop Sera- pion's witness is so great that we must quote the combined narrative of institution and oblation, and also the invocation he composed and used, bei^innino- after the Thrice-Holv hvmn. "Full is the heaven, full is also the earth, of Thy excellent glory, O Lord of Hosts : till also this sacrihce with Thy power and Thy partici- pation : for to Thee have we offered this living sacrifice, this unbloody oblation. To Thee have we ottered this bread, the likeness of the Body of the onlv-bect. i8i>r». pp. 97, 105-t), 112.) The Anaphora of the Liturgy contained in the eighth book of the so- called Apostolic Constitutions, thougli the compilation of an tmknown writer of heretical tendencies (in the second half of the IW century), bears witness to the same imiform tradition of consecration by prayer or invocation. The Anaphora of the Liturgy of St. James is also an important wit- ness. This was originally the Jerusalem Liturgy and answers almost ver- bally to St. CyriVs description in his catechetical lectures already quoted. The identity of the Greek and Syriac texts of the Anaphora is practicallv absolute — a fact which carries back its witness to the middle of the \'^. century at least. For the Syriac version has been used b)- a body of ]\Iono- physites that have had no intercommunion with the Orthodox since that time. ''PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 13 The witness of the Liturgies of St. Chrysostom and St. Basil, the two used throughout the Orthodox Churches to-day, is the same. Every eastern Liturgy, orthodox or heterodox, untampered by over-zealous Papalizers, bears incontrovertible witness that the users thereof have always regarded the consecration of the Eucharist as not effected until after the Epiklesis. So particular are they upon this point that part of the solemn pledge or oath of a Russian Bishop at his consecration runs as follows: "Moreover I believe and hold that in the Divine liturgy the conse- cration of the Body and Blood of Christ is accomplished, as the Eastern and our ancient Russian Doctors teach, by the overshadowing and oper- ation of the Holy Ghost through the bishop's or the priest's invocation, in the words of the prayer addressed to God the Father, 'Make this bread the precious Body of Thy Christ,' " etc. (Maltzew, Die Sacramente der Orthodox-Kath. Kirche des Morgenlandes, Berlin, 1898, pp. 408-9.) It is impossible in a brief paper to include even the names of the writers and commentators of the Eastern Church since the division of East and West, who all teach this same doctrine regarding the consecration of the Eucharist. One brief quotation therefore from a recent official document may well serve as the close of this part of our argument and as affording a transition to the next point to be considered. The tenth chapter of the "Answer of the Great Church of Constantinople to the Papal Encyclical on Union" in the year 1895, reads as follows: "The one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils held that the precious gifts are consecrated after the prayer of the invocation of the Holy Ghost by the blessing of the priest, as the ancient rituals of Rome and Gaul testify ; nevertheless afterwards the Papal Church made an innovation in this also, by arbitrarily accepting the consecration of the precious gifts as taking place along with the utterance of the Lord's words : 'Take, eat ; this my body' ; and 'Drink ye all of it ; for this is my blood.' " St. Isidore of Seville, whom we have already quoted, states (c. A. D. 600) that the whole world celebrates the Eucharist according to one and the same manner, and goes on to describe, as we have already seen, the order of the prayers of the sacrifice, clearly ascribing the consecration to the invocation of the Holy Ghost. From the somewhat fragmentary remains of the Galilean liturgy, and from the somewhat revised and altered Mozarabic rite (still used in a special chapel of Toledo cathedral and in a few other places), we are abundantly able to see that the original liturgies of this type were strictly parallel to the Greek rite in the point of Euchar- istic consecration. The statement made in the Greek Encyclical above quoted we shall find to be equally true of the Roman Canon Missae. The liturgy of Rome was Greek until the middle of the IV. century, probably even into the pontificate of Damasus (A. D. 366-384). The conversion of the masses of the people rendered necessary services in such a tongue 14 "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." as they could understand, and during this century a Latin liturgy with variable parts, like those in use throughout the rest of Western Christen- dom, seems to have been used alongside the invariable Greek form. In the displacement of Greek by Latin as the liturgical language, one particular set of variable parts took the place 'A the Greek Anaphora, and became the Canon or rule for the Roman Church under the changed linguistic condi- tions. (See Mr. E. Burbidge in The Guardian for March 24, 1897, p. 471 ; Paleographie ]\Iusicale, \'ol. \\ preface pp. 38-100. In the interpretation of its parts this Canon was strictly in accord with the Greek liturgy. The mvocation proper prays for the consecration of the gifts in somewhat dif- ferent phraseology it is true, yet with identical intention as the other litur- gies, as may be seen from the fact that its original meaning ( as equivalent to the Greek Epiklesis ) long sun-ived in the \\'est, well into the XIII. cen- tury, though grown to be an exotic by this time. ( Cf. Hoppe ''Die Epiklesis," etc., pt. I., pp. 93-210: cf. also Duchesne, "Origines," p. 173, 2nd ed.) The Roman Canon Missae displaced by degrees the equivalent parts of the liturgies of all Europe ( save the Mozarabic as noted above), as coming from the great patriarchal see of the West ; yet centuries went by before the process of evolution began by which its interpretation was perverted. The Qui pridic or account of the institution was purely histori- cal, and the consecration was not considered as made until after the Sup- plices Tc ( the invocation). This is plainly evident if we look at the cere- monial that accompanied these parts of the Canon from the IX. to XL century. Six sets of crosses are made in the Canon we are told by Ordo Romanus II. (Mabillon, Mus. ItaL, vol. ii. p. 48.) Of the third set we are told that they are made "ubi narratiir, accipiens panem.' This is very noteworthy, for the other prayers or parts of the Canon are alluded to by such phrases as "uhi dicituf;' 'Uibi snbinscrtur" and "ubi profertur." The account of the institution is. by contrast to what precedes and follows it, distinctly historical. The signs of the cross made in this illustrate mimetically our Lord's act "he blessed" ( "benedixit"). just as the simple taking up of the host and chalice at the words '"he took bread," etc., did then (and does now). The sign of the cross in this part of the Canon seems to have been used earlier than was the act of taking up the bread and cup. (Cf. !Micro- logus, De Eccles. Obser\\ ch. xv. and xxiii. — Brit. Mus. Ms. Add. 17,004, a Roman Ordo adapted to the use of Amiens, c. 1050 A. D.. fol. 1 19 V.) Other crosses foll'jw in the Uudc ct memores ( = our "Wherefore," &c., /. c. the Oblation) pointing out the oblations on the altar as the me- morial of Christ. Next we note that the priest bending low began the Invocation iSuppliccs Tc rogamus) '^^"e humbly l)e5eech Thee Almightv God,' and then paused a moment before proceeding to impetrate for the consecration of the offered gifts. This profound inclination of the body is the universal pusturc f'jr beginning the Epiklesis and the pause for "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 15 private profession of unworthiness is still found in Eastern liturgies, the invocation being so solemn an act as to fill the celebrant with awe. (Cf. Gerbert, Mon. \'et. Lit. Alem. i. p. 235, and note 3, where a picture of this profound inclination is given ; the Amiens Ordo just mentioned fol. 120 r — Bibl. Barberini MS. XIII. 12, century XII. in Ebner's Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte .... des Missale Romanum p. 149 — Brightman. Lit. E. and W. i, pp. 53, 88, 178, 405). The Canon was said in so low a voice as to be inaudible to those standing near, but after the invocation, the celebrant, in beginning the next prayer in the Canon, raised his voice slightly so that the attendant ministers who had been standing with bowed heads since he began might know that the sacrament was con- secrated (cf. Ordo Romanus I. sec. 16; Ordo II. sec. 10; Mabillon Mus. Ital. ii. pp. 12, 48). This is distinctly stated by the Amiens Ordo of the Middle of the XI. centur^^ referred to above (fol. 113 v. "post cantatum autem angelicum hymnum subdiaconi post altare ante episcopum vultu stant inclinato donee corpus et sanguis domini consecretur et audiant nobis quoque peccatoribus.") Perhaps we may obtain the best idea of the Roman ceremonial at this time (centuries IX. -XL) bv looking at our own Prayer of Consecration and noting how it fits in with it, and also how little there is of this cere- monial not explicitly provided for by our own present rubrics . If he had been using our prayer, we would have seen the celebrant slightly raise the paten and chalice at the appropriate words "He took bread," "He took ihe cup," making the sign of the cross over each at the words, "when He had given thanks." He would also have pointed out the bread and wine in The Oblation by the sign of the cross at the words, "these Thy holy gifts." At the beginning of The Invocation he would have bent humbly before the holy table as he said, "And we most humbly beseech thee, O Heavenly Father, to hear us." At the close of The Invocation he would have made the sign of the cross over each element respectively at the words "Body and Blood," indicating their consecration and hence their right so to be designated. In the fourth paragraph of our prayer he would prob- ably have signed himself at the words "be filled with Thy grace and heavenly benediction," and have struck his breast at the words "and although we are unworthy." At the close he would have elevated both chalice and bread while making the ascription of praise "all honour and glory," etc. With this last paragraph we are not so much concerned at present, the object of our investigation being the first three paragraphs that make up our "Form of Consecration." To put the case vividly before us, let us suppose a bishop of the period we have had under consideration come to New York. If he should be present, for example, at the late cele- bration in Trinity Church, he would follow intelligently the prayer of Con- secration and its simple ceremonial, and feel at home. If, however, he should be present at the saying of the Canon of the Mass in St. Patrick's 1 6 *^ PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." (R. C.) Cathedral he would wonder what all the elevations, genuflexions and ringing of bells, etc., during the narrative of the institution {Qui pvidic) meant. We must, therefore, turn our attention to these subsequent additions to the ceremonial of the Canon Alissae and inquire their origin and trace their growth. Mr. Edmund Bishop, in his interesting paper, ''The Genius of the the Roman Rite," candidly tells us : "We do not reaHze at once how much of added and imposing ceremonial is involved in the addition in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, of the single act of the elevation of the Host and Chalice, with its accompanying lights and torches, censings, bell ringings, and genuflexions" (p. lo). It should be added that these other ceremonies did not at once arise, but were slowly evolved in the course of the XIV. and XV. centuries. The Rev. Herbert Thurston, S. J., writing in The Month for October, 1897, on "Genuflexion at Mass," says: "The observances which now prevail so uniformly throughout the Roman obedience were only introduced shortly before the Reformation, and several of the external rites which we regard as among the most appro- priate of the ceremonies of the Mass, would probably have seemed strange and outlandish in the eyes of St. Dunstan, St. Thomas Aquinas, or even Blessed John Fisher. If some of our zealous rubricians would examine a little more closely into the history of the liturgy in past ages, they would, I think, find much matter for profitable reflection. It is surely a striking fact that while the Holy Sacrifice has been offered for less than nineteen centuries, thirteen of them should have passed away before the priest who offered it was ever seen to bend his knee to the ground in the gesture so familiar at our altars now." These well known Roman Catholic scholars are quoted to show the fact that, as before stated, the modern Roman cere- monial of the Canon Missae is by no means blindly admired by all those who are bound to use it. The elevation of the Host, seems to have begun as an exaggeration of the simple mimetic gesture at the words, "He took bread." Like some other practices of modern Roman Catholicism, this exaggerated gesture spread rapidly and was utilized as a protest against the Berengarians. The Paschasian controversy in the IX. century, and the Berengarian controversy in the XI century, with the increasingly materi- alistic conceptions of Eucharistic doctrine prevalent made easy the path of innovation and development. At first this gesture seems to have been recommended merely as a general aid to devotion, for the Canon being said secretly it would serve to show the approach of the time of consecration (in the Supplices Tc). The speculations of the scholastic theologians, and especially the introduction, 1215 A. D., by William of Auxerre of the con- ceptions of "form" and "matter" into sacramental doctrine, brought a new emphasis upon the statements "This is my body," etc., contained in the narrative of institution, and by the end of the XIII. century the elevation was considered to be a call to worship the Host, now thought to be con- "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 17 secrated by the utterance of Christ's words "this is My Body." The elevation was then transferred from its place as an exaggerated "taking" of the bread, and made after the recital "Hoc est enim corpus meum." Then acts of adoration were introduced at this point, inclinations or bows, but not so profound as that before the original Epiklesis ; which last deep act of humility remains to-day imbedded in the present ceremonial of the Canon Missae, a relic no longer understood of earlier and more truly Catholic ceremonial. The next step in the development was the exagger- ation of these slight bows, or moderate inclinations, by bending the knees, in a more or less crouching attitude, and finally into the momentary kneel- ings on one knee now known as genuflexions. The entire process of this evolution was slow, progressing with greater rapidity in some parts of Europe than in others, and the first attempt to introduce uniformity is seen in the "Ordo Missae" of John Burchard, Master of Ceremonies under x\lexander VI. and his successors, at the Papal Court, first published in 1502, intended to instruct the "ignorant" clergy everywhere how to cele- brate "correctly." The provisions of this book were substantially adopted into the Pian Missal of 1570, whenceforward they became the rule for every Roman priest, except the members of certain privileged religious orders. It is noteworthy that the Carthusians, organized in the XII. cen- tury, were active in spreading the elevation of the Host, then a novelty, but that they have remained relatively unaffected by later developments, and to-day do not genuflect to the ground, although bending the knee some- what. It is important also to remember that the isolation of the West, the ignorance of the writings of the Fathers of the early Church, and the free rationalism of the scholastics, hand in hand with a materializing spirit, secured a ready acceptance of new theories, which seemed to be pious in their intent ; there being no criteria by which to judge the propositions advanced. In the late discus- sion on the question of Holy Orders, the appeal of the Anglican Communion has been, back of late mediaeval speculation, and ignorant practice, to the earlier traditions of the whole Church. It is certainly curious, however, that some writers on theological and liturgical subjects in our Communion while repudiating scholastic error in the question of ordination, should be the foremost in reintroducing, similarly unhistorical and late teaching and practice in relation to the Holy Eucharist. Let us retrace our steps a moment to note one or two points. In Ordo Romanus XIV., A. D. 131 1 {Mus. Ital. ii. p. 305), e. g. we find the consecration now referred to the words "Hoc est enim corpus meum," and slight bows of adoration are provided for before and after the elevation. It is interesting to note that in the year 1341 the Armenian liturgy was first faulted by the Latins because it regarded consecration as not effected until after the invo- cation, although this liturgy had been known to them for three or four hundred years previously. (See Le Brun, Explication, etc. iii. pp. 216-9.) 1 8 "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." About this time Nicholas Cabasilas, Archbishop of Thessalonica, in his "Exposition of the Divine Liturgy," ch. 29, rephes to the objections made by the Latins to the Eastern hturgies, and in ch. 30 turns the tables upon them by showing the inconsistency of their new doctrine of consecration with the prayer Supplices Te r ogam us in the Roman Canon, which as Cabasilas reminds his opponents is nothing else than a prayer for conse- cration, the equivalent of the Epiklesis of the Greek Liturgy. The* attempt made at Florence in 1439, to coerce the Greeks into an acceptation of the then recently formulated Roman doctrine upon the consecra- tion of the Eucharist was the failure it deserved to be. (Cf. Le Brun, Defense de 1' ancien sentiment sur la forme de la consecration de 1* Eucharistie, Paris, 1727, pp. 19-57.) The Greeks and all the Orientals have continued to teach and practice in the saying of the Eucharistie Ana- phora, as the whole Church had taught and practiced from the first, includ- ing the Latins themselves (until the invention and development of their peculiar and relatively modern opinion and ceremonial). It is impossible in this brief paper to illustrate this ceremonial development in its various stages. The comparison of the earlier and later Ordines printed by Mabillon (Mus. Ital. vol. ii.) throws some light upon the subject. Ebner, in the work above cited, gives the rubrics of the Canon from several MSS. Missals or Ordines (see pp. 314, 329, 334, 349), which show the simplicity of the earlier rite. If anyone will take the trouble to examine the MSS. contained in any fair sized collection, he will be well repaid. Not only the variety in the rubrics (if there are any), but also the details of the scribes' work show plainly the theological atmosphere in which they worked and prayed. The earlier Missals and Sacramentaries knowing nothing of the notion of consecration by mere recitation of Our Lord's words of declar- ation do not exaggerate the size or decoration of these words. In this connection we may compare, e. g., a Gregorian Sacramentary, written at Como, Italy, in the XI. century, and a Missal, written at Bergamo in the XIV. century. In the first [Bodleian, MS. Lat. liturg. d. 4] the first word of "Q//i pridie" is not given even a capital letter, the narrative being merely a quotation in the paragraph that includes from Qitam ohlationem down to the Invocation, Supplices Te. Rubrics added in the margin by a later hand, direct the simple picking up of the host and chalice in the narrative of institution, the profound inclination before the invocation, and the raising of the voice after it. In the second, however [British Museum Add. MS., 15,120] we find the words of declaration "Hoc est enim corpus meum," &c., in letters about two and a half times as large as the residue of the text of the Canon. In an English MS. of about the year 1188, that once belonged to a monk of the Benedictine abbey of St. Werburgh at Chester [Bodleian, MS. Tanner 169,* part 3] , we note that the places emphasized by the scribe are the opening words of the Canon, Te igihtr, and the opening words of a PRAYER OF CONSECRATION. 19 the Siippliccs Tc. marking out thus tlie all importance of the Invocation. Examples might be multiplied and the growth of rubrics fully shown, from the writer's own notes of about one hundred ^IS. ^Missals, etc., dating from tlie IX. to the X\"I. centur\-, but space forbids. The printed MissaL> are Hkewise witnesses to the slow growth and late adoption of tlie cere- monial we have had under consideration. They reproduced old rubrics (altliough daily practice had changed) for some time, probably because of tlie lack of an>-thing like uniformity in the customs surroimding the ele- vation. Burchard's Ordo Missae. as before mentioned, went through many editions and was made the basis of the present Roman ceremonial in tlie Missal of 1570. but one of the earliest Roman Missals in which its directions are incorporated, is the Paris edition printed bv lolande Bon- homme, only fifteen years before this, in 1555. The late and purely Western character of all this ceremonial development from the XII. to the X\T. centuries, the fact tliat it was the product of a materializing and rationa- lizing of Eucharistic doctrine, oi speculations made in ignorance of patristic teaching, mark it on distinctly from earlier thought and custom which last alone has any real title to the name of CathoHc. The strange thing to consider is that all this development has been repeated in our midst during the last thirty years. The notion that the recitation of Our Blessed Lord's words "This is my body. " etc., is the means of consecration was deliberately adopted. This carried with it tlie necessity of getting rid of the plain meaning oi the Invocation in our Prayer of Consecration, and any number of ingenious arguments have been advanced to show that it is practically meaningless. It is needless to state that these arguments are nothing more or less than the reproduction of attempts made by Roman writers to explain away tlie Invocation in the Eastern liturgies, and that they set at defiance even the rules of grammar. On this basis modem Roman ceremonial has been introduced en b^oc. and many men. thinking they were putting themselves in touch with tlie whole Catholic Church in all ages and places by so doing, have been pla^Tng 'follow the leader. ' There is one gesture still used by the Roman priest that has not been adopted, however, a gesture whose meaning has been forgotten, but whose use persists in the Roman rite in the midst of the accretions of later times — namelv, tlie low bow at the beginning of the Surplices Tc (the Invoca- tion), of which we have spoken before. This gesture has been signifi- cantl}- ignored. \^'e must also note one or two points in the history of our Prayer of Consecration, though tliey are of course well knowTi. WTien Cranmer re- wrote the Canon for the book of 1540 he seems to have endeavoured to effect a compromise between tlie tlien prevaiUng ^^"estem \-iew and the Eastern. (Cf. Dowden, The Workmanship of the Prayer Book, pp. 47-56.) In the second revision of 1552 we find the Prayer cut down to its present size. Yet we must note that although the Invocation is reduced to 20 "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION.' * the smallest remnant in this book, tisftt the English Church is saved by that remnant from the Lutheran use which consisted (with but few excep- tions ) in sweeping away all prayer from around the narrative of Insti- tution — a use that logically leads to the notion that the service is a bare subjective memorial of a past event in history and hence has been adopted by the Reformed Episcopalians in this country. That Cranmer was con- servative to this degree is probably owing to his acquaintance with the Antididagma or reply of the chapter of Cologne to their Archbishop Hermann's DcUbcralio. (Cf. Church Qiiar. Rev. Jan., 1891, p. 419, seq.) The chapter protests against presuming to consecrate the Eucharist with- out the Catholic prayer. Yet Hermann was but following the logic of that system in which he had been trained, for the speculation which had made the narrative of Institution the keystone of the act of consecration, had at the same time undermined the original meaning and importance of the other parts of the Canon. We may well be thankful that we in America are not condemned to the use of. the English Prayer of Consecration, which, save for the quasi-invocation, "Hear us," etc., would be merely a statement that God had redeemed the world by the sacrifice of His Son, who had also ordained a memorial of the same ; which statement is illus- trated by the quoted narrative following. The ill-fated book of 1637 for Scotland marked a reaching out for better things, for a closer relation to the ancient tradition of the Church, and at length was revived partially into use, largely through the influence and learning of the Non-jurors ; and with the final result that in 1764 there appeared the authorized text of the Scottish Communion Office with the Institution, Oblation, and Invocation in their ancient and normal order. The providential fact of Bishop Sea- bury's consecration at the hands of three Scottish Bishops, on the 14th of November, 1784, led him, by virtue of the fifth Article of the Concordate made between him and his consecrators, to look into the subject, and in 1786 to put forth, for the use of his clergy in Connecticut, a slightly modified edition of the Scottish Office of 1764. Through Bishop Sea- bury's influence the Scottish form of consecration was substantially adopted into the American Book of Common Prayer by the General Con- vention of 1789. The Rev. Dr. William Smith, President of the lower House at this Convention, cooperated heartily in this work, for the Mary- land Convention of 1786 had already recommended making the quasi- invocation, in the English and in the Proposed Books, more definite. This action was taken by intelligent men, with their eyes wide open, and with the deliberate intention of conforming the worship of the Church in America more closely to the primitive standard in the consecration of the Eucharist, that is to say, in order to obviate the notion of consecration by mere recital of Christ's words of declaration, and to impetrate instead in The Invocation for the Divine blessing upon the elements before bidding the communicant receive them as the Body and Blood of Christ. Bishop "PRAYER OF CONSECRATION." 21 Seabury's letter to Bishop White under date of 29th June, 1789, in which he urges the adoption of the Oblation and Invocation, at the Convention just approaching, puts beyond shadow of a doubt the purpose of the same. He says, in words that are often quoted : "That the most exceptionable part of the English Book is the Communion Office may be proved by a number of very respectable names among her clergy. The grand fault in that office is the deficiency of a more formal oblation of the elements, and of the invocation of the Holy Ghost to sanctify and bless them. The Con- secration is made to consist merely in the Priest's laying his hands on the elements and pronouncing 'This is my body/ etc., which words are not consecration at all, nor were they addressed by Christ to the Father, but were declarative to the Apostles." Thus we are absolutely sure of the raison d'etre of one of the chief "alterations and amendments" made to the English book. (Cf. Life and Correspondence of Samuel Seabury, D.D., pp. 354-5; Memoirs of Bishop White, pp. 178-9; Dr. Hart's Reprint of Bishop Seabury's Communion Office, with notes, 2nd ed., pp. 42-7; American Church Review, July, 1882, pp. 1-18.) There is also most inter- esting evidence to the true understanding of our Prayer of Consecration in the early years of the XIX. century, to be found in an old book called An Introduction Containing Observations on the Services for Morning and Evening Prayer, Sundays and Holy Days, Being a Pocket Companion to the Book of Common Prayer, etc., Philadelphia : printed and pubHshed [no author's name being given] by Abel Dickinson, Whitehall, 1809; copious extracts from which are given in the editorial columns of The Living Church for June 30, 1900, pp. 2y6-y. To sum up, the Prayer of Consecration in our American Liturgy, has a natural and obvious rationale and significance; it closely follows the analogy of obedience to our Lord Christ's command ''Do this"; it is in absolute accord with early patristic teaching, both Eastern and Western ; it is in harmony with the norm of the primitive liturgical tradition, with the unaltered usage of the Eastern Church until to-day, and of the Western Church until after the XII. century. Any ceremonial therefore of merely Western origin and of relatively recent introduction and development, and involving a late misinterpretation of the text of the Roman Canon Missae, and an ignoring of historical fact, not to mention the setting at naught of the very diction and grammatical construction of the Prayer of Conse- cration is ruled out ipso facto. All elevations of either species during the recital of the narrative of institution, with the accompanying genu- flexions, etc., are barred, being borrowings from the modern Roman rite (in which they have found an authoritative place since 1570 only) and be- ing based upon a misconception and an erroneous view of Eucharistic Con- secration that grew into ripened existence only in the late mediaeval period. '"•as*,