And it is believed that the first appearance in a modern days of the _former_ doctrine, viz. that worship is due to the Body and Blood of Christ, was in the year 1856, in the case of Ditcher _v._ Denison.[16] It was through a chivalrous desire to uphold a cause, with the main aspects of which they naturally felt a deep sympathy, that the writers referred to were drawn into countenancing a doctrine, then new to their theology, but of the truth of which, on examination, they seem to have satisfied themselves. Surely we may believe that it was not without misgiving that they thus abandoned the doctrines which they once taught us. They cannot have felt altogether satisfied thus to break with the Church of the First Ages in a matter so momentous as that of the Object of worship, and of the nature and purpose of the Holy Eucharist. [16] See note at the end. Closely connected with this doctrine, is a practice not merely defended of late, but strongly urged as being of the very essence of exalted Eucharistic duty:--that of being present at the Rite _without receiving_; for the purpose, it is alleged, of adoring Christ as present under the Elements. But here again the Early Church furnishes thorough condemnation of the practice. In an exhaustive treatise,[17] it has been shown that, except as a deeply penitential act, she knew of no such practice; making no account whatever of attendance on the rite apart from reception: rightly viewing it as a Sacrifice indeed, but a Sacrifice of that class or kind in which _partaking_ was an essential and indispensable feature. And the English Church, it is almost unnecessary to add, though a faint endeavour has been made to disprove it, has given no more countenance than the Church of old to this practice. Contenting herself, at first, at the Reformation, with forbidding non-communicants to remain in the choir, she afterwards so effectually discouraged and disallowed their presence at all, that it became unmeaning to retain the prohibition any longer.[18] [17] Rev. W. Scudamore's 'Communion of the Faithful.' [18] This is fully proved by Scudamore, 'Communion of the Faithful,' pp. 107-120. And in truth it is, as might be expected, to the later and corrupt ages of the Church that we owe both of these positions which it is now attempted to revive among us: viz. that in the language of the decrees of Trent,[19] "our Lord Jesus Christ, God and Man, is truly, really, and substantially contained in the Sacrament of the Eucharist," _i. e._ in the Elements, "and is to be adored" as contained therein: and again, that the faithful may be present merely to adore, and may communicate spiritually,[20] though, as has been well said, "they purposely neglect the only mode of doing so ordained by Christ." [19] Council of Trent, Session 13, c. 1. See 'Principles of Divine Service,' Introd. to vol. ii., pp. 158-187. [20] Session 22, c. 6.