I

In 1521 a book entitled Assertion of the Seven Sacraments, bearing the name of King Henry VIII., was printed in London. It was an answer to Martin Luther’s On the Babylonish Captivity of the Church. Presented at Rome by John Clerk, the English ambassador, who was afterwards Bishop of Bath and Wells, it won for Henry the title of “Defender of the Faith,” which by a strange history was thus originally conferred on the King of England by the Pope, was afterwards recalled by papal authority, and was eventually granted to the king in defiance of the Pope by an Act of Parliament (35 Hen. VIII. c. 3). In this book the king maintained the doctrine of Transubstantiation and the sacrificial character of the Mass. He laid stress on the words of Christ at the institution of the Sacrament, in which the consecrated elements are called His body and blood, not bread and wine. He explained St. Paul’s use of the word bread to denote the Sacrament as “either following the custom of Scripture, which sometimes calls a thing not by the name of what it is, but of what it was before, as when it says, The rod of Aaron devoured the rods of the magicians, which then were not rods but serpents, or else perhaps content to call it what in species it appeared to be”. The doctrine of Transubstantiation, he said, was believed by the Church, not because of the scholastic disputations which Luther had ridiculed, but because she had believed it from the first, as was expressed in the writings of the Fathers. He condemned as worthless Luther’s arguments that the Mass is not a sacrifice or a good work, and declared that its sacrificial character, like the doctrine of Transubstantiation, is taught by the Fathers. The positive teaching contained in the treatise affirmed:—

“Christ in His most holy Supper, in which He instituted the Sacrament, made of bread and wine His own body and blood, and gave them to His disciples to be eaten and drunk. A few hours afterwards He offered the same body and blood on the altar of the cross, a sacrifice to His Father for the sins of the people, which sacrifice being finished, the covenant was consummated.… He who diligently examines this will find Christ to be the eternal Priest, who, in the place of all the sacrifices which were offered by the temporary priesthood of Moses’s law, whereof many were but the types and figures of this holy sacrifice, has instituted one sacrifice, the greatest of all, the plenitude of all, as the sum of all others, that it might be offered to God and given for food to the people.… On the cross He consummated the sacrifice which He began in the Supper. And therefore the commemoration of the whole thing, to wit, of the consecration in the Supper and the oblation on the cross, is celebrated and represented together in the Sacrament of the Mass, and therefore the death is more truly represented than the Supper.”

“The most holy fathers, … amongst many other things, with great care delivered to us this also, that the bread and the wine do not remain in the Eucharist but are truly changed into the body and blood of Christ. They taught the Mass to be a sacrifice in which Christ Himself is truly offered for the sins of Christian people. And so far as was lawful for mortals, they adorned this immortal mystery with venerable worship and mystical rites. They commanded people to be present so as to revere it whilst it is being celebrated for the procuring of their salvation. Finally, lest the laity by forbearing to receive the Sacrament should by little and little omit it for good and all, they have established that every man shall receive it at least once in the year.”

The chief interest of this treatise of King Henry VIII. is in connection with the personality of that monarch and as representing the ordinary ideas of the time. In itself it is of no special importance. More favourable specimens, though marred by intemperate language and tone, of controversial works on the same side as that of the king are the attacks on Luther and Oecolampadius by Bishop Fisher of Rochester in his Refutation of the Assertion of Luther, published at Antwerp in 1523, his Defence of the Assertion of the King against the Babylonish Captivity, published at Cologne in 1525, and his treatise On the Reality of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist against Oecolampadius, published at Cologne in 1527. Like King Henry VIII. Bishop Fisher advocated substantially the same doctrines as those afterwards affirmed by the Council of Trent. As regards the Eucharistic presence, it appears to have been a matter of course to them that the Scriptural and patristic descriptions of the consecrated Sacrament as the body and blood of Christ inevitably imply that the substance of the bread and wine is so converted into the body and blood of Christ that after consecration the only remaining substance is that of the body and blood. As to the Eucharistic sacrifice, the sacrificial language in the tradition of the Church and the identity of the body and blood in the Eucharist with the body and blood of our Lord’s earthly life led to the close association of the Mass with our Lord’s actions in the upper room and His death on the cross; with them, as with so many others at this time, the connection of the Eucharist with the high-priestly work of our Lord in heaven seems to have been out of sight.

An interesting but tragic instance of dissent from the current doctrine, which was thus supported in England against the opinions of different continental Reformers, was in the case of John Frith. Frith’s own belief appears to have been much the same as that of Calvin; but the most noticeable point in his latest teaching is the contention that Transubstantiation, whether true or not, ought not to be required as an article of faith. A book written by him fell into the hands of Sir Thomas More, who wrote an answer to it. The continuance of the controversy led to the arrest of Frith, and his trial before the bishops, and eventually to his death by burning at Smithfield in 1533. The reasons for his condemnation were the opinions which he expressed about purgatory and the Eucharist. On the latter subject he wrote in a letter which he sent to his friends when he was a prisoner in the Tower:—

“The whole matter of this my examination was comprehended in two special articles, that is to say, Of purgatory, and Of the substance of the Sacrament.… Secondly, they examined me touching the Sacrament of the altar, whether it was the very body of Christ or no. I answered that I thought it was both Christ’s body and also our body, as St. Paul teacheth us in 1 Cor. 10. For in that it is made one bread of many corns it is called our body, which, being diverse and many members, are associated and gathered together into one fellowship or body. Likewise of the wine, which is gathered of many clusters of grapes, and is made into one liquor. But the same bread again, in that it is broken, is the body of Christ, declaring His body to be broken and delivered unto death, to redeem us from our iniquities. Furthermore, in that the Sacrament is distributed, it is Christ’s body, signifying that as verily as the Sacrament is distributed unto us, so verily are Christ’s body and the fruit of His passion distributed unto all faithful people. In that it is received, it is Christ’s body, signifying that as verily as the outward man receiveth the Sacrament with his teeth and mouth, so verily doth the inward man through faith receive Christ’s body and the fruit of His passion, and is as sure of it as of the bread which he eateth.

“Well (said they) dost thou not think that His very natural body, flesh, blood, and bone, is really contained under the Sacrament, and there present without all figure or similitude? No (said I) I do not so think: notwithstanding I would not that any should count that I make my saying (which is the negative) any article of faith. For even as I say that you ought not to make any necessary article of the faith of your part (which is the affirmative), so I say again that we make no necessary article of the faith of our part, but leave it indifferent for all men to judge therein, as God shall open their hearts, and no side to condemn or despise the other, but to nourish in all things brotherly love; and one to bear another’s infirmity.… This is a spiritual meat, which is received by faith, and nourisheth both body and soul unto everlasting life.… The cause why I die is this, for that I cannot agree with the divines and other head prelates that it should be necessarily determined to be an article of faith, and that we should believe under pain of damnation, the substance of the bread and wine to be changed into the body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ, the form and shape only not being changed. Which thing, if it were most true (as they shall never be able to prove it by any authority of the Scripture or doctors) yet shall they not so bring to pass that that doctrine, were it ever so true, should be holden for a necessary article of faith. For there are many things, both in the Scriptures and other places, which we are not bound of necessity to believe as an article of faith. So it is true that I was a prisoner and in bonds when I wrote these things, and yet for all that I will not hold it as an article of faith, but that you may without danger of damnation either believe it or think the contrary. But as touching the cause why I cannot affirm the doctrine of Transubstantiation, divers reasons do lead me thereto: first, that I do plainly see it to be false and vain, and not to be grounded upon any reason either of the Scriptures or of approved doctors. Secondly, for that by my example I would not be an author unto Christians to admit anything as a matter of faith more than the necessary points of their creed, wherein the whole sum of our salvation doth consist, especially such things the belief whereof hath no certain argument of authority or reason.… Thirdly, because I will not for the favour of our divines or priests be prejudicial in this point unto so many nations of Germans, Helvetians, and others, which altogether rejecting the Transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ are all of the same opinion that I am, as well those that take Luther’s part as those that hold with Oecolampadius. Which things standing in this case, I suppose there is no man of any upright conscience who will not allow the reason of my death, which I am put unto for this only cause, that I do not think Transubstantiation, although it were true indeed, to be established for an article of faith.”

It is to be observed that the phrase “natural body” was used in the question addressed to Frith by the bishops. From this time on the word “natural” often occurs in such a context. The use of it was probably due to the exigencies of controversy which led men to seek for phrases which seemed definite and explicit; and the design in using it was probably to affirm that the body of Christ in the Eucharist was really the same body as that of His earthly life. But the use of it marked a tendency to forget the differences between the manner of the presence of Christ in heaven and the manner of His presence in the Eucharist on which the schoolmen had insisted, and which the divines at Trent a little later were careful to maintain; and also the failure to realise the changed state of our Lord’s body after the resurrection and the ascension which seems to have been general among controversialists on all sides in the sixteenth century.

There is an account of Frith’s condemnation and the reasons for it in a letter which Archbishop Cranmer addressed to Nicholas Hawkins, the Archdeacon of Ely, who was the English Ambassador at the court of the Emperor Charles V., on 17th June, 1533.

“One Frith, which was in the Tower of London, was appointed by the king’s grace to be examined before me, my lord of London, my lord of Winchester, my lord of Suffolk, my lord Chancellor, and my lord of Wiltshire; whose opinion was so notably erroneous that we could not dispatch him but was fain to leave him to the determination of his Ordinary, which is the Bishop of London. His said opinion is of such nature that he thought it not necessary to be believed as an article of our faith that there is the very corporal presence of Christ within the host and Sacrament of the altar, and holdeth of this point most after the opinion of Oecolampadius. And surely I myself sent for him three or four times to persuade him to leave that his imagination; but for all that we could do therein, he would not apply to any counsel; notwithstanding now he is at a final end with all examinations, for my lord of London hath given sentence and delivered him to the secular power, where he looketh every day to go unto the fire.”

Andrew Hewet was burnt with Frith on 4th July, 1533. In his examination by the bishops he had said that he thought concerning the Eucharist “as John Frith doth,” and that he did not believe that the Sacrament is “really the body of Christ, born of the Virgin Mary”.

At the meeting of the Convocation of Canterbury in 1536 the Lower House laid before the Upper House a list of “errors and abuses” which they regarded as “worthy of reformation”. These tenets were probably due to the teaching of the Lollards. Those of the “errors and abuses” which related to the Eucharist were the following:—

“1. That it is commonly preached and discoursed to the slander of this noble realm, the disquiet of the people, and to the hindrance of their salvation, that the Sacrament of the altar is not to be regarded: for several profane and scandalous persons are neither ashamed nor afraid to say, ‘Why should I see the sacring of the High Mass? Is it anything else but a piece of bread, or a little pretty round robin?’ ”

“6. That all those deserve the character of Antichrist who refuse to communicate the laity under both kinds.”

“7. That all who are present at the Mass and do not receive with the priest have no benefit by that office.”

“37. That it is a pity Mass, Matins, Vespers, or any other part of Divine Service, was ever made, or suffered to be read or sung in a church.”

“41. That all recommending prayers and offices, such as Dirges, Masses, distributions of charity, etc., for the souls of the departed signify nothing.”

“51. That the saying or singing of Mass, Matins, or Vespers, is no better than roaring and whistling, masquerading and leger-de-main.”

“58. That the canon of the Mass is the comment of some illiterate foolish priest.”

It is not known what took place in the Upper House of Convocation as the direct result of the presentation by the Lower House of this list of censured propositions. But the document known as the Ten Articles appears to have been drawn up in consequence of the discussions arising out of the presentation. This document was issued with the authority of the king, and was signed by very many of the bishops and by a considerable number of the dignified clergy. It was evidently the outcome of an attempt to formulate a statement upon which the more moderate advocates of the traditional doctrines and the more conservative adherents of the Lutheran theology could agree. The article entitled “The Sacrament of the Altar” was as follows:—

“As touching the Sacrament of the altar, we will that all bishops and preachers shall instruct and teach our people committed by us unto their spiritual charge, that they ought and must constantly believe that under the form and figure of bread and wine, which we there presently do see and perceive by outward senses, is verily, substantially, and really contained and comprehended the very self-same body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which was born of the Virgin Mary, and suffered upon the cross for our redemption; and that under the same form and figure of bread and wine the very self-same body and blood of Christ is corporally, really, and in the very substance exhibited, distributed, and received of all them which receive the said Sacrament; and that therefore the said Sacrament is to be used with all due reverence and honour, and that every man ought first to prove and examine himself, and religiously to try and search his own conscience before he shall receive the same.”

In view of the later history of opinion it is of some interest that among the episcopal signatories to the Ten Articles there were from the party most favourable to the Reformers Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Hugh Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, and from the party most opposed to the Reformers John Stokesley, Bishop of London, and Cuthbert Tunstall, Bishop of Durham, while the name of Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, does not appear in either of two existing copies of the list of signatures. The Institution of a Christian Man, Containing the Exposition or Interpretation of the Common Creed, of the Seven Sacraments, of the Ten Commandments, and of the Pater Noster, and the Ave Maria, Justification, and Purgatory, usually known as the Bishops’ Book, was composed in 1537 by a committee consisting of all the bishops and some other divines. It was signed by all the members of the committee; and it was issued by the king, with orders that portions of it should be read in church every Sunday and holy day during the three years following, though he stated that he had not minutely considered its contents. A difference of some importance as regards general character between the Bishops’ Book and the Ten Articles was that, while the Ten Articles had referred to the three Sacraments of Baptism, the Eucharist, and Penance without defining whether there are or are not other Sacraments, the Bishops’ Book treated explicitly and at length the “seven Sacraments” of the usual list. The article on “the Sacrament of the Altar” was not changed except for very slight verbal alterations which did not in any way affect the meaning.

In 1538 the desire of King Henry VIII. to obtain political support from Germany, coupled with the demand of the Lutheran princes that all who should enter into league with them should assent to the truth of the Confession of Augsburg, caused him to invite an embassy of the more conservative Lutheran divines to visit England. On their arrival he nominated a committee of three bishops—apparently Stokesley of London, Tunstall of Durham, and Sampson of Chichester—and four doctors, with Cranmer as president, to confer with them. A manuscript written in Latin, entitled A Book Containing Divers Articles, de Unitate Dei et Trinitate Personarum, de Peccato Originali, etc., which was found by the late Dr. Jenkyns among a bundle of papers which belonged to Archbishop Cranmer, probably gives all the statements of doctrine on which the Lutheran and English divines were able to agree. It is usually known as the Thirteen Articles. Its historical importance is considerable, both as showing what at this time Cranmer and Tunstall could agree to assert and because it appears to have been the link between the Confession of Augsburg and the Articles which were eventually formed into the present Thirty-nine Articles of Religion of the Church of England. The article on the Eucharist was as follows:—

“Concerning the Eucharist we firmly believe and teach that in the Sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord, the body and blood of Christ are really and substantially and actually present under the species of bread and wine; and that under the same species they are really and actually presented (exhibentur) and administered to those who receive the Sacrament, both good and bad.”

In the same year as that of the drawing up of the Thirteen Articles, 1538, John Nicholson or Lambert engaged in a controversy about the Eucharist with Dr. Taylor, the Rector of St. Peter’s, Cornhill; and, on being prosecuted by Archbishop Cranmer, appealed to the king. After trial before the king and discussions with the bishops, he was condemned to death, and was burned at Smithfield in November, 1538. The gist of his opinions may be seen from the following passage from his Treatise upon the Sacrament, which he addressed to the king:—

“I confess and acknowledge that the bread of the Sacrament is truly Christ’s body, and the wine to be truly His blood, according to the words of the institution of the said Sacrament: but in a certain wise, that is to wit, figuratively, sacramentally, or significatively, according to the exposition of the doctors before recited and hereafter following. And to this exposition of the old doctors am I enforced both by the articles of my creed, and also by the circumstances of the said Scripture, as after shall more largely appear. But by the same can I not find the natural bodyody of our Saviour to be there naturally, but rather absent both from the Sacrament and from all the world, collocate and remaining in heaven, where He by promise must abide corporally unto the end of the world.”

Before the German divines who had formed the embassy which together with the English divines drew up the Thirteen Articles left England they wrote a paper in which they recorded their condemnation of what they considered to be the abuses of Communion in one kind, private Masses, and the celibacy of priests; and it was suggested with some probability by the late Archdeacon Perry that the king’s annoyance at this document had something to do with the actions on his part which shortly followed. In 1539 he sent a message to the House of Lords in which he expressed his wish for the appointment of a committee to examine different opinions about religion, and draw up articles of agreement for the consideration of the House. The committee was appointed, but at the end of ten days had failed to reach any conclusion. Thereupon the Duke of Norfolk proposed that six articles dealing with matters in dispute should be discussed in the whole House, and for this purpose submitted six questions, of which those relating to the Eucharist were the first, second, and fourth, namely, “Whether in the Holy Eucharist Christ’s real body is present without any Transubstantiation”; “Whether the laity are to communicate in this Sacrament under both kinds”; and “Whether by the law of God private Masses ought to be celebrated”. The same six questions were submitted to the Convocation of Canterbury, which declared that no substance of bread and wine remains in the Sacrament after consecration, that Communion in both kinds is not necessary, and that private Masses ought to be continued. Latimer the Bishop of Worcester and Shaxton the Bishop of Salisbury, and two members of the Lower House, voted against this decision. Shortly afterwards the “Statute of the Six Articles” was passed by both Houses of Parliament, and received the royal assent. It declared the agreement of Convocation and Parliament, and included the following statements among those which it was made penal to deny:—

“First. That in the most blessed Sacrament of the altar, by the strength and efficacy of Christ’s mighty word (it being spoken by the priest) is present really under the form of bread and wine, the natural body and blood of our Saviour Jesu Christ, conceived of the Virgin Mary: and that after the consecration there remaineth no substance of bread or wine, or any other substance but the substance of Christ, God and Man.”

“Secondly. That the Communion in both kinds is not necessary ad salutem by the law of God to all persons: and that it is to be believed and not doubted of but that in the flesh under the form of bread is the very blood, and with the blood under the form of wine is the very flesh, as well apart as though they were both together.”

“Fifthly. That it is meet and necessary that private Mass be continued and admitted in this the king’s English Church and congregation, as whereby good Christian people ordering themselves accordingly do receive both godly and goodly consolations and benefits: and it is agreeable also to God’s law.”

In this Statute, as in the questions addressed by the bishops to John Frith six years earlier, and in later documents of the sixteenth century, the phrase “natural body” occurs.

The “Statute of the Six Articles” was enforced with less consistence and severity than might have been expected, but from time to time it was put in operation with the brutality which was characteristic of the age.

The book entitled A Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian Man, usually called the King’s Book, a revision of the Bishops’ Book, was the work of a commission of the two archbishops, six bishops, and twelve divines appointed by the king in 1540. In 1543 it was submitted to Convocation and approved; and it was published in the same year with a commendatory preface by the king. It contained a long exposition of the Eucharist, in which the word Transubstantiation was avoided but the doctrine of the conversion of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ was taught. The most important parts of this section of the book are the following:

“The Sacrament of the altar … among all the Sacraments is of incomparable dignity and virtue, forasmuch as in the other Sacraments the outward kind of the thing which is used in them remaineth still in their own nature and substance unchanged. But in this most high Sacrament of the altar the creatures which be taken to the use thereof, as bread and wine, do not remain still in their own substance, but by the virtue of Christ’s word in the consecration be changed and turned to the very substance of the body and blood of our Saviour Jesu Christ. So that, although there appear the form of bread and wine after the consecration as did before, and to the outward senses nothing seemeth to be changed, yet must we, for saking and renouncing the persuasion of our senses in this behalf, give our assent only to faith, and to the plain word of Christ, which affirmeth that substance there offered, exhibited, and received to be the very precious body and blood of our Lord, as it is plainly written by the Evangelists and also by St. Paul, where they entreating of the institution of this Sacrament, show how our Saviour Christ sitting at His Last Supper with His Apostles took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it unto His disciples and said, ‘Take ye and eat; this is My body’. And also when He gave the cup, He said, ‘This is My blood of the New Testament, which shall be shed for many for the remission of sins’. By these words it is plain and evident to all them which with meek, humble, and sincere heart will believe Christ’s words, and be obedient unto faith, that in the Sacrament the things that be therein be the very body and blood of Christ in very substance.… Here is to be noted, as touching the receiving of this Sacrament, that although our Saviour Jesus Christ at the first institution thereof in His Supper did minister it unto His disciples then present under both the kinds of bread and wine, yet that fashion and manner of ministering is not so necessary to the receiver, except it be to the priest when he consecrateth, that without the due observation of that way man might not receive that blessed Sacrament to his salvation. For the benefit or hurt that cometh to a Christian man by receiving of this Sacrament standeth not in the fashion or manner of receiving of it under one or both kinds, but in the worthy or unworthy receiving of the same. For he that receiveth this Sacrament worthily under the one kind, as under the form of bread only, receiveth the whole body and blood of Christ, and as many and great benefits of Christ as he that receiveth it in both kinds.… Seeing it is the very body of our Saviour Christ, which is united and knit to His Godhead in one Person, and by reason thereof hath the very virtue and substance of life in it, it must needs consequently by the most holy and blessed participation of the same give and communicate life also to them that worthily receive it. And it endueth them with grace, strength, and virtue against all temptation, sin, and death, and doth much ease and relieve all the troubles, diseases, and infirmities of their soul.… This heavenly meat is not turned into our substance, as other corporal meat is, but by the godly operation thereof we be turned towards the nature of it, that is to say, of earthly, corruptible, and sinful we be made heavenly, spiritual, and strong against sin and all wickedness.… It is to be remembered that, as in the receiving of this Sacrament we have most entire Communion with Christ, so be we also joined by the same in most perfect unity with His Church, and all the members thereof.… It was thought good to the Apostles and the Universal Church, being moved with the Holy Ghost, for the more honour of so high a Sacrament, and for the more reverence and devout receiving thereof, that it should always be received of Christian people when they be fasting, and before they receive any bodily sustenance, except it be in case of sickness or necessity. Wherefore, considering the most excellent grace, efficacy, and virtue of this Sacrament, it were greatly to be wished and prayed for that all Christian people had such devotion thereunto that they would gladly dispose and prepare themselves to the more often worthy receiving of the same. But seeing that in these last days charity is waxed cold, and sin doth abound (as Christ said in the Gospel that it should), yet if Christian men will avoid the great indignation of God, it shall be good for them, whensoever they receive this Sacrament themselves or be present when it is ministered or used, as specially in the time of Mass, to behave themselves reverently in pure devotion and prayer, and not to walk up and down, or to offend their brethren by any evil example of unreverence to the said Sacrament, except they will declare themselves to have small regard to our Saviour Christ there bodily present.”

An explanation of the rites of the Church or Rationale, which was drawn up about this time, may have been the work of the commission which formed the King’s Book. This explanation was not published, but a copy of it survived and was printed early in the eighteenth century by the Nonjuror Jeremy Collier. It is entitled Ceremonies to be used in the Church of England together with an Explanation of the Meaning and Significancy of Them. The section on “Ceremonies used in the Mass” assumes the doctrine taught in the King’s Book and expresses in a simple and practical form the view of the prayers and ceremonies of the Mass customary in the middle ages, by which they are regarded as a mystical representation of the incarnate life of Christ. The most important parts of this section are as follows:—

“The Mass is a remembrance of the passion of Christ, whose most blessed body and blood is there consecrated, and the ceremonies thereof are not dumb, but they be expressives and declaratives of the same passion, to the intent that by such signs and ceremonies they that be present thereat may the better be admonished and reduced into the memory of the same. And,

“First. It is to be understood that the priest is a common minister in the name and stead of the whole congregation; and as the mouth of the same not only renders thanks to God for Christ’s death and passion but also makes the common prayers, and commends the people and their necessities in the same to Almighty God.

“The priest therefore when he shall say Mass says it not in his common apparel which he daily uses; but puts upon him clean and hallowed vestments, partly representing the mysteries which were done at the passion, partly representing the virtues which he himself ought to have that celebrates the Mass. And,

“First. He putteth on the amice, which, as touching the mystery, signifies the veil with the which the Jews covered the face of Christ when they buffeted Him in time of His passion; and, as touching the minister, it signifies faith, which is the head, ground, and foundation of all virtues; and therefore he puts that upon his head first.

“Secondly. He puts upon him the albe, which, as touching the mystery, signifieth the white garment wherewith Herod clothed Christ in mockery when he sent Him to Pilate; and, as touching the minister, it signifies the pureness of conscience and innocency he ought to have, especially when he sings the Mass.

“The girdle, as touching the mystery, signifies the scourge with which Christ was scourged; and, as touching the minister, it signifies the continent and chaste living, or else the close mind which he ought to have at prayers when he celebrates.

“The stole, as touching the mystery, signifieth the ropes or bands that Christ was bound with to the pillar when He was scourged; and, as touching the minister, it signifieth the yoke of patience, which he must bear as the servant of God, in token whereof he puts also the phanon on his arm, which admonisheth him of ghostly strength and godly patience that he ought to have to vanquish and overcome all carnal infirmity.

“The overvesture or chesible, as touching the mystery, signifies the purple mantle that Pilate’s soldiers put upon Christ after that they had scourged Him; and, as touching the minister, it signifies charity, a virtue excellent above all other.

“The minister the which shall celebrate in the beginning comes forth as from some secret place to the midst of the altar, signifying thereby that Christ, who is the High Priest, came forth from the secret bosom of His Father into this world to offer sacrifice for man’s redemption. And albeit that that sacrifice be a sufficient price and redemption for all the world, yet it is not efficient or effectual but only to them which knowledgeth themselves with penance to be sinners, whom He came to justify.… Therefore the minister in the beginning teacheth all men by his confession to humiliate and knowledge themselves sinners and ask remission to the intent they may be the more apt to participate of this high mystery.… Then after this followeth Kyrie Eleison et Christe Eleison, which be words of desire and to pray God for mercy, which mercy we cannot have of our deserts but of God’s goodness and Christ’s merits only; and therefore the minister, proceeding to the midst of the altar, renders the glory unto God, singing the angels’ hymn and song Gloria in Excelsis Deo, that is, glory be unto God in heaven, whereby we be learned not only to know that we receive all our benefits of God, being bound to give Him thanks for them, but also the means whereby we receive them, which is by the mediation of Christ, that is both God and Man, by whom the Father is pleased and reconciled, angels and men agreed. Then this song done, the minister and people with salutations exhort each other to prayers, in which he prays as well for the multitude as for himself.… After that prayer made, then the priest as a meet minister to teach the people reads the Epistle, which is a lesson taken out of the Old and New Testaments, and it precedes the Gospel, and prepares the mind thereunto, like as St. John prepared unto Christ, and the old law unto grace, and Christ sent the disciples into divers places to preach before His coming.… Next to the Epistle ensues the Graill, the which teacheth also such wholesome doctrine as was taught before in the Epistle, that they, proceeding in virtue by degrees, may proceed from virtue to virtue until such time as they may see Almighty God in His glory.… Then follows the Gospel, which is a glad message or tidings, for in it is contained the glad news of our salvation.… And forasmuch as faith springeth of the word of God, therefore divers days the Church (after the Gospel read) pronounces with a loud voice the Creed, expressing the faith with her mouth.… Then follows the Offertory, whereby we learn to prepare ourselves by God’s grace to be an acceptable oblation to Him, to the intent we may be partakers of the blessed sacrifices which Christ offered for us upon the cross. At which time the minister, laying the bread upon the altar, makes the chalice, mixing the water with the wine, signifying thereby how that blood and water ran out of Christ’s side in His passion, and admonishes us of the inseparable coupling and joining of Christ and His Church. Then after the Offertory done the priest washes his hands, knowledging himself not to be so clean but that he has ever need more to be washed.… Then after follows a prayer secretly said, which is called the Secret of the Mass, and that signifies Christ’s secret and privy conversation which He kept with His disciples a little before His passion.… Next after the Secret follows the Preface, which is a prolocution or prayer which goes before the most reverend consecration of Christ’s body and blood, preparing the minds of the faithful people to the reverence of the same, and moving them to erect their hearts to Almighty God.… Then after this Preface follows the Canon, which is said secretly of the priest, not because it is unlawful to be heard, read, or known of the people (as some fancy) but that it is expedient to keep silence and secrecy at the time of such a high mystery, and that both the priest and people may have the more devout meditations, and better attend about the same. Then the priest begins to represent in this sacrifice of the Mass the most painful and bloody sacrifice once offered for our salvation upon the cross, and prays the Father to accept these gifts prepared for the consecration, and, inclining his body, makes a cross upon the altar and kisses it, signifying thereby the humble inclining and obedience of Christ to His Father’s will, to suffer His passion upon the altar of His cross for our salvation. And then following the example of Christ, the High Bishop, which, approaching the time of His passion, gave Himself to prayer, and also according to the Apostle’s doctrine to Timothy, the minister gives himself to prayer.… He proceeds with all reverence to the consecration. First. Of the bread, taking it in his hands and giving thanks, following the example of Christ, by virtue and power of whose words the substance of bread is turned into the substance of the body of Christ. And likewise the substance of wine into His precious blood, which he lifteth up both that the people with all reverence and honour may worship the same, and also to signify thereby partly Christ’s exaltation upon the cross for our redemption, which was figured by the serpent set up by Moses in the desert, and partly signifying that triumphant advancement and exaltation whereto God the Father because of His passion has exalted Him above all creatures, bidding the people to have it in remembrance as oft as they shall do the same. After the which the priest extends and stretches forth his arms in form of a cross, declaring thereby that according to Christ’s commandment both he and the people not only have fresh remembrance of the passion but also of His resurrection and glorious ascension. And so proceeds to the second Memento, in which he prays for them that be dead in the faith of Christ and sleep in peace.… Then he joins himself with the people, knocking himself upon the breast, thereby teaching them that both he and they be sinners and have need of mercy and grace purchased by Christ’s passion.… The priest then to the intent he may the more worthily receive the blessed body and blood of Christ both to the comfort and strength as well of him as of them that be present, saith the Pater Noster.… And so discovering the Chalice in token that Christ would the fruit of His passion to be opened and manifest to all the world, takes the host and breaks it and divides it in token of the distribution of it amongst His disciples at His Last Supper and the breaking of His body at the time of His passion, at which Supper above all things He commends to them peace and charity, saying, Pacem meam do vobis, pacem relinquo vobis. And therefore the minister takes the kiss of peace from the blessed Sacrament, and sends it to the people.… Then saith the priest thrice, Agnus Dei, etc., advertising us of the effects of Christ’s passion; whereof the first is deliverance from the misery of sin; the second is from pain of everlasting damnation, wherefore he saith twice, miserere nobis, that is, have mercy on us; and the third effect is giving everlasting peace, consisting in the glorious fruition of God, wherefore he saith, Dona nobis pacem, that is, give us peace. Then follows the commixtion of the body and blood of Christ together, signifying the joining together of His body and soul at the resurrection, which before were severed at the time of His passion. And albeit there be two consecrations, yet there is but one Sacrament, containing under the form the holy body and blood of Christ inseparably. Then follows the Communion, which is an exciting or a moving to the people to laud and praise God. And because in the primitive Church, when devotion was fervent, divers used many times to receive it together with the priest, therefore in the prayer called the Post-communion the priest in the name of them all prays and renders thanks unto God for their spiritual refection per Dominum nostrum, by whose passion exhibit the Mass has its strength and efficacy. Then the priest eftsoons turning his face to the people after the salutation says these words, Ite, missa est, that is, Go ye, the Mass is ended. And in that he bids them go is signified that we ought to follow Christ in His holy life, and always be going from virtue to virtue, and not to stand and tarry in the worldly pleasures, but diligently to haste us to life everlasting. And that we may be of the number of them to whom it shall be said, Venite benedicti, that is, Come ye blessed of My Father, and receive the kingdom, etc., the priest gives us at our departure sometimes the benediction in the name of the whole Trinity, signifying that last benediction which Christ gave to His disciples in the Mount of Olivet, when He ascended to His Father, where He sits on His right hand, a continual Intercessor for us.”

It has seemed worth while to quote a considerable part of the section of this Rationale which refers to the Eucharist partly because of the additional illustration to that supplied by the King’s Book which it affords of the doctrinal teaching in the closing years of the reign of King Henry VIII. of the conversion of the substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ at the consecration, and partly because it is an excellent instance of that way of regarding the prayers and ceremonies of the Mass which the sixteenth century inherited from the middle ages.