But, thirdly, as it cannot be denied, I think, but that the priest's duty is to offer daily the Blessed Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood, we may observe another circumstance which appears to strengthen this conclusion.

In order, then, to arrive at this third particular, let us first inquire what it is that priests "do" in their celebration of the Holy Eucharist. Do they not, when offering up the Holy Sacrifice, shew forth the Lord's death, re-present that one sacrifice offered upon the altar of the cross; and, in short, do they not precisely "do" that on earth which is being done in heaven by our great High Priest? With regard to this, I think there are not two opinions among faithful Catholics, and that all such believe that the sacrifice on our altars is a true and real representation of, and may be identified with, that which is being offered up before the throne of God in the courts of Heaven. As this is so, we cannot but observe that there the great High Priest alone officiates; there are none of the faithful present to communicate with Him. This, we observe, is strictly the actual state of things; though, of course, we know this to be unnecessary there, and that as a matter of course all do join in communion with Him in that celebration as often as they celebrate on earth the Holy Mysteries. Only, we must note that this necessity is, as it were, laid upon Him, to intercede for us continually by virtue of His one sacrifice once offered, and yet continually represented before God's throne in Heaven. And we cannot but admit that the same necessity is laid upon His deputies on earth to follow His example, and continually in like manner to intercede for God's house

The Priest is Christ's Deputy.

49

hold by offering the Holy Sacrifice, and to do this also without the intervention of, or the immediate presence of, any other person at the celebration (Heb. xiii. 15, 16).

This is, then, that third particular that we note in connection with the celebration-that in Heaven the great High Priest alone celebrates. But it will be argued that the whole Church is there present, for where the Head is, there must be the Body likewise, and that in this sense the Apostle proves that all faithful Christians have ascended into Heaven, and are there present with their Lord. But need it be said that this is only to be taken in a mystical, spiritual, yet nevertheless real, sense? And if so, cannot it be argued that, in a similar sense, wherever a priest as Christ's deputy celebrates on earth, there we may say the whole Church is present? For surely the theologian does not indulge in any poetical strain when he declares that as often as the priest celebrates the doors of Heaven are opened, and that the choirs of celestial beings are present and attendant upon the Divine and unspeakable Presence which condescends to appear at that Altar! Nay, there is a true and real, though mystical, sense in which we may understand the hosts of angels and archangels are present thereat; and as the Head is there also present, may we not argue therefrom that the Body, His Church, is also mystically present?

Wherefore, all is being done on earth that is done so effectually by our great High Priest in Heaven! And at our Eucharists the Church is as much present as in Heaven, though none be really present in the body but the priest who officiates. But every member

E

of the mystical Body must share effectually in such Eucharists, inasmuch as we know the priest is in the first place chosen and maintained in his holy ministry by the members of his flock to "do" that which Christ commanded, though he receives his authority from Christ through the laying on of hands, in virtue of which alone he can execute his holy ministry. What they cannot individually or separately perform for themselves, their priest does for them, and this may be said to be carried out by the desire of the flock that the commandment of Christ should be obeyed. They corporately and individually, therefore, though indirectly, obey our Lord's command. As there is no actual communion of the faithful in Heaven, there need not be at every celebration on earth, save that which the celebrant alone makes for himself, and as representative of the Faithful for whom he ministers.

One thing is perfectly clear, as it would seem to us, from perusal of such passages as Heb. v. 1-3that it is the undoubted duty of every priest to celebrate the Eucharist continually, even if there be none present to communicate with him. That this was a practice of bishops and priests, even in primitive days, may be abundantly proved.*

* From Peliccia's account (lib. ii., s. ii., cap. 11) we learn that they egregiously err who imagine that private Mass is only of recent origin, for that examples of it are to be found in the writings of the Fathers of the Church ever since the fourth century. We continually find, accordingly, that the Holy Eucharist was celebrated in that age in little country chapels never intended for the attendance of a congregation.

And in the Tripartite History (ix. cap. 8) we have an instance of the private celebration of the Mass given us in the case of Gregory Nazianzen. This famous theologian of the Church informs us that his father, when grievously sick, arose from his bed and celebrated the Holy Mysteries in his chamber without any one being present.

Spiritual Communion.

51

If from such a passage as Heb. xiii. 10 we can argue that the Lord's Table is also verily a Christian Altar, on which the unbloody, real, and spiritual sacrifices are offered, so may we argue surely from Heb. v. 1-3, and 1 Tim. ii. 1, that it is the duty of Christian priests to offer up those sacrifices continually thereon. Nowhere have we the warrant of Holy Scripture that the Eucharist can only be celebrated where more than one (the priest himself) are present, or that the Eucharist, if celebrated by the priest alone in the absence of any other person or persons, is invalid, or something worse. Nay, the practice of the Church, according to the Vicentian canon, would seem to prove the contrary.

And now we would direct our readers' attention to one rule in our own Anglican Prayer-book, which would seem to confirm our argument as to the nonnecessity of any being present at every Eucharist besides the officiating priest. We refer to the third rubric which follows the office of Communion of the Sick. There we are given to understand that the sick person, if unable, owing to a combination of circumstances against him, to communicate in the Blessed Sacrament, may consider that he has truly and really partaken of the same if only he has certain dispositions of mind, one of which is faith.

Let us apply this same rule to multitudes of the Faithful who, though not infirm in body, yet owing to various and varying circumstances are unable to

Another account tells us how a holy Father, on being cast into prison for the Faith, lay at full length on the dungeon floor, and managed thus to celebrate the Holy Eucharist, making use of his own bosom as an altar, he having been supplied by certain of his faithful flock with the necessary things for the due celebration.

be present at the Eucharist. May not all such logically and truthfully consider they have partaken of that heavenly banquet, if only they join their priest or bishop, who may be celebrating at a distance from them, in spiritual communion; if only when they say their daily prayers they may direct their minds to God with the intention of joining in spirit in the act of their priest? Doubtless it must be so. For as Christ, who is the Head, is present at that Mystical Sacrifice on the Altar, so must also all His members, with all their prayers, be present, especially those who have remembered the Lord's death in their prayers, and have communicated spiritually with Him in intention! And those who do so will derive similar benefits to those of the sick man mentioned in the rubric.

This argument is also strengthened by reference to a practice which is almost universal among good Catholics, that of ringing the "Sanctus" bell at the actual canonical oblation of the sacred Host, in order that the sick at a distance may know when to bow the knees of their heart to the Lord, who is then present on His Altar, as well as for the information of those in the congregation who may be hidden away from observing the actual celebration and manual acts of the officiating priest. At the ringing. of this particular bell, then, all such may unite themselves with their Lord in an act of spiritual communion, if not so minded, or otherwise unable to communicate.

66

Moreover, S. Paul's exhortation that Eucharists* should be made for all men," argues the necessity of * Vide 1 Tim. ii. 1.