Modern view. is supposed to be now offering in heaven. We shall support the therefore proceed at once to consider those passages which are cited as evidence that in the earliest ages of Christianity, when the liturgies took form, this view was in the minds of those who compiled them. It is not our purpose to examine the structure of the liturgies as a whole, or to investigate the different families into which they are divided. For our present need all we have to consider is two classes of passages, which are so admittedly found in almost all liturgies that our controversy is narrowed down simply to an investigation of their significance. These are, first, those which commemorate the Resurrection and Ascension; and, second, those which speak of a "heavenly altar." The controversy concerns only two classes of passages in the liturgies. Mr. Brightman, in his paper, refers to both classes Mr. Brightman of passages. In regard to the first, he says: refers to both. 1. His reference to those which commemorate the and Ascension. "It is common, if not usual, to add to the recital of the Institution, 'Do this in remembrance of Me,' S. Paul's words,' for as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup, ye do shew the LORD'S Death till He Resurrection come,' or 'ye do shew My Death till I come.' Now it is not uncommon to treat these two phrases, 'do in remembrance of Me' and 'shew the LORD's Death,' as if they were equivalent, so that remembrance of Me' is limited and interpreted to mean 'shew My Death.' We might question whether this is justifiable or required by the text of S. Paul. But without discussing the force of for' in 1 Cor. xi. 26, we may say that the question is not whether the LORD'S Death' is 'shewn forth,' but in what order-whether primarily, and as a historical event, or as existing, so to speak, in His Person, perfected through suffering. And at He says the liturgies do not confine the and gives ex- various sources. least the liturgies embody this second alternative: they do not treat the memorial as confined to the act of our LORD's Death on the Cross-for, in order to make these two phrases more explicitly equivalent, they commonly make an addition to S. Paul's words, and say not only, ' ye do shew the LORD's Death,' but 'ye do shew the LORD'S Death and confess His Resurrection,' and sometimes, also, and His Ascension' 'till He come.' And "Again, the next paragraph of the liturgy expressly interprets the words 'in remembrance of Me.' Beginning we therefore remembering,' it proceeds to detail what is included in the commemoration-what 'the remembrance of Me' embraces and implies. in every liturgy I know, the scope of the commemoration includes more than our LORD'S Death, while in some cases this latter is not particularized at all. The commonest types include the moments of our LORD'S Life from the Cross to the Second Advent. In some cases it includes all from the Incarnation to the Coming of the HOLY GHOST and the Second Advent. To give an example-in the Roman rite: Wherefore, O LORD, we Thy servants and Thy holy people, remembering as well the blessed Passion of the same CHRIST Thy SON our LORD, and His Resurrection from the dead and His glorious Ascension into heaven, offer unto Thee,' etc. Or in the Greek rite: 'Wherefore, O LORD, we also remembering His saving Sufferings, His quickening Cross, His three days' burial, His Resurrection from the dead, and His Ascension into heaven, His Session at Thy right hand, GOD and FATHER, and His glorious and fearful Second Advent, The Anglican, we offer unto Thee,' etc. Or, once more, in the Anglican Scotch, and rite, the Scotch and American liturgies, following that The Roman rite. ་ man's inferences from these quotations. of 1549, read: Having in remembrance His blessed American Passion and precious Death, His mighty Resurrection liturgies. and glorious Ascension,' etc. The liturgies, therefore, Mr. Brightplainly interpret the memorial of the Eucharist, not as a historical memorial of the past fact of His Death and Passion, but as the memorial of Himself as He reveals Himself and manifests His eternal Person and Its significance in His acts, past, present, and to come: as He is in His exaltation, not merely as He was in His humiliation the memorial of His historical acts only as they reveal the meaning of His present Life: the memorial in which we know Him and the power of His Resurrection,' and, therefore, the fellowship of His Sufferings.' The facts indisputable; the inferences writers teach that the H. E. tion, as well as As one would expect, the facts to which Mr. Brightman calls our attention are indisputable, although we cannot admit that they will bear the weight of the unwarranted. arguments which he hangs upon them. There is probably scarcely a treatise on the Eucharist by any Catholic writer of repute which does not set forth the Catholic truth that in the Eucharist the whole mystery of our LORD'S Life is brought before us; that it is an extension of the Incarnation, as well as a memorial of the Passion; that it is related to "His mighty Resurrection and glorious Ascension," since the Body there present is not His dead Body, but that glorified Body which, "being raised from the dead, dieth no more," over which "death hath no more dominion ;" and which, while present upon our altars "clothed with signs glory. representative of His Death,"† still reigns glorious at the Right Hand of GOD. While thankfully making the memorial our LORD has commanded of the crowning act of love by which we were redeemed, the Sacrifice * Brightman, pp. 8 and 9. † Bossuet. is an extension of the Incarnaa memorial of the Passion, fore us our LORD'S whole and brings be Life both on earth and in The word ἀνάμνησις has both a subject ive and an objective force. Mr. B. quotes it is used sub jectively, of the Cross, we also rejoice in the remembrance of "His mighty Resurrection," by which He overcame death, and of "His glorious Ascension," by which He, as the First-fruits of redeemed humanity, entered heaven and sat down at the Right Hand of GOD. The word aváμvnois includes both a subjective action in the mind and an objective representation of a past event. Now it is evident that our remembrance of the mysteries of our LORD's Resurrection and Ascension must be subjective only; but in the mystery of His Death upon the Cross the subjective remembrance becomes in the Eucharist an objective representation since we offer there our LORD'S Body and Blood, present under the diverse species severed as by death. Mr. Brightman says: "In the Anglican rite, the Scotch and American liturgies, following that of 1549, read, 'Having in remembrance His blessed Passion and precious Death, His mighty Resurrection and rites in which glorious Ascension,' etc., but strangely and conveniently he omits the passage which precedes these words: "Wherefore, O LORD and Heavenly FATHER, according to the institution of Thy dearly Beloved SON our SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST, we 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; 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.” We have given here the whole of the Oblation in order that the position of the passage quoted by Mr. Brightman may be clearly apprehended. context in which it is re ferred objectively only to It is surely both unfair and misleading to quote only but omits the one passage from the Oblation and to omit the words which show that in addition to the subjective remembrance of the great mysteries of the Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension, an objective MEMORIAL is made, which is contrasted with the subjective remembrance which follows. our LORD'S Death. contention that the two If it be suggested that the two are identical, the Answers to the answer is (1) that the structure of the passage excludes this, since an objective memorial commanded by our are identical. LORD is made by means of offering certain holy Gifts, the Body and Blood of CHRIST; and together with this objective memorial are associated two subjective acts, the remembrance of the Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension, and hearty thanks for the innumerable benefits procured unto us by the same. (2) And further that in what our LORD commanded us to do in the Holy Eucharist there is clearly no act which can be shown to be an objective memorial or counterpart of His Resurrection and Ascension, whereas the separate consecration of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our LORD, severed as by death under the diverse species, is the objective memorial which our LORD instituted and commanded us to make. At this point we gladly draw attention to what we The valuable believe to be the true and valuable element in the Modern view, namely, the relation of the Eucharist to our LORD's Life in glory; although we distinctly deny that this involves what the Modern view, as expressed by Mr. Brightman, claims, namely, a celestial Sacrifice in the proper sense of the term "sacrifice," or the transference of the sacrificial act in our LORD'S Offering of Himself, from the moment of the Cross to His entrance into heaven. element in the Modern view, the relation of the H. E to the Life of glory. This does not involve a heav enly S. |