'We go to the Lord's Supper': an 1826 episcopal visitation charge and Anglican sacramental piety at the end of the 'long 18th century'

In his 1826 primary visitation charge, Thomas Burgess, Bishop of Salisbury, has three references to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. We might regard them as almost passing comments but, taken together, they provide an interesting insight into Anglican sacramental piety as the 'long 18th century' drew to a close. 

The first reference is not in the charge itself but, rather, in the accompanying letter to the clergy of the Diocese of Salisbury. Burgess is addressing the matter of justification by faith only, emphasising that, while this is true of our justification, "the Gospel covenant is not a covenant of faith only, but of faith and works". This, he states, applies to our approach to the Lord's Supper:

We go to the Lord's Supper to obtain the remission of our sins from God, and the renewal of his grace. If we go with repentance and faith, and do not leave them to follow after, we are absolved, forgiven, justified. 

This is what is taught in the short exhortation in the Prayer Book Holy Communion:

Ye that do truly and earnestly repent you of your sins, and are in love and charity with your neighbours, and intend to lead a new life, following the commandments of God, and walking from henceforth in his holy ways: Draw near with faith, and take this holy Sacrament to your comfort ...

We are, as Burgess states, following the teaching of the Prayer Book, to come to the Lord's Supper in penitence and faith: these are to precede, not follow, our reception of the Sacrament. It is this which, in the words of the Catechism, "is required of them who come to the Lord's Supper".

In his second reference, Burgess, after addressing matters concerning Holy Baptism, turns to those who have received the Rite of Confirmation:

Of the other sacrament, the Lord's Supper, I will only observe at present, that children and others who have been confirmed, should be encouraged to attend it, as soon as conveniently may be after their confirmation. 

There is something an echo here of the rubric in the Solemnization of Marriage, regarding the newly-married receiving the Sacrament. It is suggestive of how, while administration of the Sacrament was, of course, considerably more infrequent than is normal for 21st century Anglicans, being a communicant still marked the life of faith. 

Finally, Burgess draws attention to an aspect of the administration of the Sacrament that was, it seems, beginning to wane in 1826 and which was dismissed as entirely insignificant in late 20th century Anglican liturgical reform:

From the answers to my Circular Queries I am sorry to find, that alms are not so universally given at the Lord's Supper, as they ought to be, consistently with those most interesting introductory sentences, and exhortations to charity, which precede the administration of the sacrament.

Justin Martyr's description of how "what is collected is deposited with the president" for provision to be made "for the orphans and widows" is a reminder of how the collection of alms should be an integral part of the administration of the Sacrament. This, of course, is seen in BCP 1662, both in the offertory sentences and the rubric to "receive the Alms for the Poor", these being placed "upon the holy Table".

What can we learn from Burgess' primary visitation charge of Anglican sacramental piety at the end of the 'long 18th century'? There certainly are significant insights into a now almost entirely lost sacramental piety: the assumption that approaching the Sacrament requires the acts of faith and repentance; that more infrequent administration did not entail a lesser view of the duties of communicants; that alms-giving was an inherent aspect of 'drawing near with faith'. 

As we come to the end of this series of reflections on Burgess' 1826 charge, we can, perhaps, see something of the strengths of the sacramental piety of the 'long 18th century'. Indeed, its very unfamiliarity to contemporary Anglicans may hold some attractions, reminding us that a pattern of weekly reception, with no expectation of preparation, and an 'offertory' with little - if anything - to do with alms-giving, is not the only sacramental pattern or piety available to Anglicanism. To which we might also note how Burgess on these three occasions refers to the holy Sacrament as the Lord's Supper, a noble, scriptural term that is surely over-due revived use in Anglicanism in place of the ubiquitous but considerably less meaningful 'Eucharist'.