The form of celebration developed in the Greek Church differs from the Roman. It is more symbolical, representing the Lord's passion. Five loaves are laid on the altar. The priest selects one, pierces it with a lance, while the deacon pours wine and water into the cup. Amid solemn dirges, with lighted candles and burning incense, the elements are borne through the church, and then back to the altar and placed like the body of Christ in the tomb. A curtain is lowered before the altar, unseen, the bishop, with an invocation of the Holy Ghost, consecrates the elements. When the curtain is raised, the altar represents the tomb from which Christ is arisen. While the choir sings a hymn of praise, the elements are distributed without any special formula.

The Roman rite displays (if possible) a still wider divergence from the original institution. The name "oblation" or offering was indeed from the first applied to the people's gifts of bread and wine. When the idea of a Christian priesthood, so earnestly advocated by Cyprian, came into vogue, the other related idea of a sacrifice also appeared. The consecrated elements were offered to God as a propitiatory sacrifice for sin. Gregory the Great, (A. D. 590), saw a sacrificial victim in the bread on the altar. Masses began to be offered for the dead, who could thus be delivered from purgatory, and magical effects also were claimed. Thus the Eucharist was divided. The congregational Communion began to be overshadowed by the sacrificial mass, which was celebrated with more than apostolic frequency and often privately. The thirteenth century brought radical changes. Transubstantiation was fixed in the Lateran Council, 1215, as the doctrine of the Church. Thomas Aquinas taught that the Sacrament is consummated in the act of consecration, according to the intention of the priest, not in the Communion of believers. The mass is a propitiatory. sacrifice whose benefits extend to the absent and to the dead. The Council of Trent established these doctrines in all their baldness. So far as the Eucharist is a sacrifice, it is the sole act of the priest, who is a mediator between God and the congregation. The words of consecration are spoken in Latin in an undertone and addressed to the elements. When the priest speaks the words, "This is My Body," he bows his knees and prays to the Christ who is present in the host, and shows it to the people who may also adore it. Likewise with the

cup. This is the elevation and adoration of the host. The priest then communicates and distributes to the people, if any are present.

Fear that the consecrated wine might be spilt, afforded the pretext for withholding the cup from the laity at the beginning of the thirteenth century, the real motive being a purpose to elevate the priesthood. Even before this, we meet with the occasional use of gold or silver tubes for taking the wine. The Communio sub unaque was further supported by the scholastic invention of the doctrine of Concomitance.

The doctrine of the Lord's Supper decidedly affects its administration. Consequently in those branches of the Protestant Church in which the Supper is viewed as only a memorial, little importance attaches to the manner of its administration and the Sacrament itself falls into neglect. There is a wide divergence of method between those branches that are rooted in the past and the growths of recent days. Where the spiritualizing tendencies are very marked, the objective means of grace are but lightly esteemed. The Quakers have no sacraments, and many others are in danger of losing theirs, even if their false doctrine had not already practically destroyed them.

We will close with a brief excursus upon the Essentials of a Proper Administration.

I.

The presence of the congregation which believes the Lord's promise and is assembled in His Name to do according to His appointment, is necessary for the consummation of the Communion. The minister is but the organ of the congregation, which blesses the elements and receives the Communion. The validity of the Sacrament does not depend upon the intention of the ministrant, as Rome erroneously teaches, nor upon the faith of the individual recipient, nor upon the exact and literal repetition of the words of institution, but only upon this, that it is an act of the Christian congregation, performed according to the intention and appointment of Christ, in faith in His Word and for the purpose of its institution. "No human work nor any declaration by the minister of the Church can effect the presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament, but only the omnipotent power and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ."

2. With reference to the elements, bread and wine are essential according to the Lord's institution. Christ without doubt

used the unleavened passover bread. The ancient Church, however, used the common leavened bread. The kind of bread used, the breaking of bread in the consecration, whether the wine is red or white, pure or mingled with water, whether the elements are received by the hand or mouth, whether the communicants stand, sit or kneel, are adiaphora.

3. The elements are to be used only according to Christ's appointment, that is, they are to be consecrated and distributed. Augustine's famous dictum,-Accedit verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum, is defective. This would make it a Sacrament without its distribution and for other uses than that of its institution. It needs to be supplemented by the words of Luther and the Formula of Concord,-Nihil habet rationem sacramenti extra usum a Christo institutum seu extra actionem divinitus institutam. Requiritur consecratio seu verba institutionis, distributio et sumptio.

According to ancient custom the consecration is by the solemn recitation of the verba testamenti. With this was combined the Lord's Prayer as the filial and fraternal petition for the sanctification of the congregation, but it does not possess the nature nor has it the design of a consecratory prayer and its proper place is after the Words of Institution.

While there is no sacrament and no promise of Christ without the distribution, we must nevertheless, view the consecration as an integral part of the act and of the command, "This do." By the explanatory addition "which we bless" (1 Cor. 10: 16), the Apostle gives special emphasis to the consecration through which the cup is set apart to become the "Communion of the Blood of Christ." Hence we must regard it as an essential, and the words of institution should never be omitted. The plural form shows that it is the act of the whole congregation, which also indicates its participation and assent by its Amen. By the consecration, the bread and wine are separated from the ordinary sphere of natural gifts for bodily nourishment, and are transferred into the service of Christ for the application of the gifts of redemption.

"The true consecration," says Gerhard, "does not alone consist in the recitation of those four words, "Hoc est corpus meum," but in this, that we do as Christ did, that is, that we bless, distribute and receive the bread and wine as He appointed." This is the chief thing in the Sacrament. For it the other acts are but a preparation. The giving and receiving are always neces

sary, while the mode of giving and receiving is left in the sphere of the Church's liberty.

Not so weighty, but still of great importance is the formula of distribution. Here the aim must be, not only to promote pious feelings in the heart, but to speak for Christ Who gives, and in His Name to assure the penitent and believing communicant that to him belong the full benefits of the broken Body and the shed Blood of his gracious Lord and Savior. Here the Church should give unequivocal expression of its faith, as the Oriental, Roman and Lutheran Churches do in the use of the ancient formula of distribution, "The Body of Christ, the Blood of Christ, the cup of life."

Homestead, Pa.

G. S. SEAMAN.

THE LITURGICAL HISTORY OF CONFIRMATION.

JUST as the character of the works manifests the nature of the faith which produces them, and as the objective factors of worship are but the outward expression of the real life of devotion itself, so also any liturgical observance is ever the outgrowth or embodiment of a corresponding doctrinal view. Therefore the history of any liturgy or part of it, is the history of the doctrine out of which it has grown and which is its life and spirit. To trace the liturgical history of Confirmation, is almost impossible without tracing at the same time the views which the Church has held concerning this rite.

The custom of Confirmation has its beginnings in the early days of the Christian Church, and while many outward conditions. have changed since then, there is still much in the catechumenate and subsequent Confirmation of the present day that is closely connected with the customs of the first few centuries. It need hardly to be stated here that in the early days, catechisation preceded baptism, as the accessions to the church were principally through adults. It is this fact however, that accounts for the catechetical observances of that period. In early Apostolic days, the instruction was confined to that which was absolutely essential, and baptism, whether of adults or of infants, represented full entrance and admission into the Church of Christ, without any additional ceremonies. As the missionary activities of the Church extended and Christianity came into contact with Hellenic culture and Roman power, with philosophic thought and heretical doctrine, adults of all descriptions entered the catechumenate, and these needed both instruction and refutation by argument. During this period, which Zöckler calls that of the Ancient Church, the catechumenate consisted of two distinct periods: the actual catechumenate or period of instruction, lasting about two years, and the period of immediate preparation by fasting and prayer.