There is another point to which reference should be made. When at Khartoum, Gordon wrote to a friend, "There is no eating up here, which I miss." Some have contended that in this sentence he showed that he recognised the necessity for the presence of a priest, to make the Lord's Supper a valid ordinance. As a matter of fact, he never believed that the presence of a clergyman was necessary for Holy Communion. There were besides himself only two Englishmen at Khartoum during the siege, and one of them was Power, a Roman Catholic, who, although a great admirer of Gordon, probably would, from early training, have had conscientious scruples about taking the Lord's Supper without the presence of a priest. The other Englishman was Colonel Stewart, who, despite his friendship for Gordon, was not in sympathy with him in regard to religious matters. Had the three Englishmen been like-minded, there can be no question that that sentence in Gordon's letter would never have been written. This is a subject that touches Christian men in the army and navy, as well as in the merchant service, very closely. Frequently such men for months together never see a clergyman, and it would be absurd to say that under such circumstances they must neglect the dying command of their Saviour. It is told of three officers, who were great friends, that on the night before the battle of Waterloo, they agreed to partake together of the Holy Communion. The senior of them took an ordinary glassful of wine and some bread, and they knelt together, and asked God to bless the sacred rite. They rose, and the senior administered to each, using the beautiful words of the Church of England Communion Service. They never met together again on earth, but who can question the validity of that sacred meal, and who would dare to say that the ceremony would have been more acceptable to God if a clergyman had been present? The Bible nowhere asserts that the presence of a minister is necessary, and our National Church has very wisely followed the example of the Bible. The Church of Rome does teach that the presence of a priest is necessary to make Holy Communion a valid ordinance. Our National Church, in common with the various bodies of Nonconformists, recognises, as a matter of ecclesiastical order, that under ordinary circumstances, an officiating clergyman should be present. But his presence in no way affects the validity of the sacrament, being merely a wise precaution against the admission of unworthy communicants. The laity surrender into the hands of the clergyman, or the minister aided by elders or deacons, their power of admitting or rejecting worthy or unworthy persons. But under abnormal circumstances, such as those in which Gordon was placed at Khartoum, ecclesiastical order would be suspended, and any two or three Christian laymen would have a perfect right to partake of the Holy Communion in accordance with the Word of God. This is the view that