Jayne Ozanne ViaMedia.News Unity – Has it Become a Golden Calf?
Laudable Practice Trad Expressions™: Why High Church is Contemporary
Samuel Keyes The Living Church Tradition for Teens
Jemma Sander-Heys Church Times Life by the sea is not all recreation and run
“Coastal communities face particular challenges, and politicians and churches must tackle them”
ViaMedia.News starts a new series of posts (one a week) on “Does the Bible Really Say….?” with this:
Jonathan Tallon Does the Bible Really Say…Anything at All about Homosexuality as we Understand it Today?
Colin Coward Unadulterated Love A philosophy and vision for parish ministry, then and now
and Interior reflections of a priest
With reference to Jayne’s article, while I recognise the problem when top-down leaders demand ‘unity’ but in fact want to impose uniformity, I don’t personally believe unity itself is the problem. The problem is conflating unity and uniformity. Yes, it is a demonstrable fact (as Jayne points out) that the Anglican Communion and indeed the Church of England are divided on issues of human sexuality. So, there is no uniformity of belief on those issues. But having said that, there remain deeper levels of shared faith – in our love of God, our faith in Christ, the service of the… Read more »
Another comment on Jayne Ozanne’s article. At least from my point of view, as a TEC member and not a CofE member, the only unity the CofE hierarchy cares about is “unity” on gay relationships, where the unity essentially involves the word “No.” I find this particularly bizarre since in many ways the CofE is much more diverse, that is, not unified, than TEC. From what I gather, CofE has a large Evangelical wing, much of which rejects liturgical worship, including vestments and anything that resembles a Prayer Book (or other liturgical book) liturgy, and adopts theological positions, such as… Read more »
Excellent point Dr Primrose, and I agree. Indeed, the history and identity of the Church of England has been forged on diversity of theological belief. I see that as a strength and a distinctive identity, because it calls on members to look beyond mere dogmatism, and learn to live and serve alongside each other, with the grace and love that calls upon. This ‘unity in diversity’ invites us to respect one another’s right to diverse views, while prioritising the things we do have in common, in Jesus Christ and in the day to day love that is called for in… Read more »
I’d have thought the issue which unites evangelicals with Forward in Faith in the CofE is a dislike of gay people. This is despite the large number of gay clergy in FiF. It is a unity based entirely on hypocrisy.
FrDavidH Are you really not aware that a significant number of evangelicals, like me and other regular contributors here, have no ‘dislike of gay people’? Quite the reverse. The evangelical tradition, like your own A-C tradition, holds no one view on this. Please take more care before making such claims.
Sorry if I generalised. Perhaps I should have said that many in both traditions like gay people, but don’t wish them to have complete equality.
Thanks FrDavidH. That feels like a different point you are making now. I am better informed on the Evangelical tradition where a significant number actually want complete equality. I can also count a good number of A-C friends who want the same.
Actually, I don’t think the two are analogous. That the CofE embraces many different styles of worship doesn’t speak to it embracing differences in teaching, especially on something many believe to be based on points of principle.
Differences in liturgy and differences in ‘teaching’ share a common ground. Differences in liturgy are, in fact, evidence of fault lines on “points of principle”, lex orandi lex credendi. Consider, just for example, the resistance on the part of conservatives to remove antisemitic prayers from the liturgy.
Keep in mind that in the C of E the need for hegemony on the part of + Welby and his bishops appears to be based, not just on domestic considerations but on the fact that the ABC is, as Mr. Nye reminded TEC, “…one of the instruments of unity within the Communion…”. (See TA, Friday 20th, 2018.) From the outside looking in, +Welby’s C of E and the office of the ABC appear joined together in way not so elsewhere.
“If CofE can live with wings where one part believes in Eucharistic memorialism and another part believes in transubstantiation” — memorialism and transubstantiation are real positions on eucharistic presence in the CofE? Transubstantiation? Memorialism without real presence of any kind?
Is this an accurate representation of the CofE? It does not comport with my experience as holding a PTO in the CofE. Perhaps others can enlighten.
Transubstantiation is certainly held by some Anglo-Catholics. I don’t know enough about the protestant extremes to know how far towards Memorialism their Eucharistic theology goes.
Yo will find both transubstantiation and Zwinglian memorialism held by people in the CofE. This is just observable fact. Whether either view is compatible with C of E formularies is another matter…
One interesting source to consider is JH Newman’s Tract 90 on the 39 Articles, which has a long discourse on Transubstantiation. It belongs to a different generation, of course, but the same debate.
I train new ministers in the Church of England, and can certainly confirm that some hold a view they would call transubstantiation, some hold a view others would call memorialism (though that’s not a word I hear used), some wear what they would call full Eucharistic Vestments, and some do not wear distinctive dress of any kind when presiding at the Lord’s Table, some have an open table and some admit to communion only those baptised, confirmed and/or who have been through a recognised nurture course. We seem to get on together pretty well most of the time.
I don’t know what subject you train them in, but I wish somebody would train them, very firmly, in the provisions of the Sacrament Act of 1547, the canon that any one ready and desirous of confirmation be admitted to Communion, and the exhortation they must make to godparents in the permanent Baptism Service (whether they use it or not) that a person is ready for Confirmation, and so for Communion, when they can say the Lord’s Prayer, Apostles Creed and Ten Commandments, and have been instructed in the other parts of the Catechism. Is it good that you and… Read more »
Your last sentence is on target. One might add that the failure of anything like coherent instrumentality globally has meant that the ABC now has more notional or actual authority over the Communion than comparable figures in the RCC or Orthodoxy. I am not sure the polity of the CofE is fit for purpose extended to a successful missionary growth outwith England. But that may end up being a fact on the ground in short time anyway.
I’m not sure I have an intelligent response to this – and wouldn’t know what to say to a minister who requires those who will receive communion to have been instructed in the (1662?) catechism. Respectfully, my comment on us “getting on” was not about whether curates get on with me personally as training coordinator, but about those of us with very different views of the Eucharist getting on with each other; as Charles rightly says above, “You will find both transubstantiation and Zwinglian memorialism held by people in the CofE. This is just observable fact. Whether either view is… Read more »
I am not objecting to vicars who insist on anything. I am objecting to those who impose their own criteria. You admit that some of your students refuse to admit to Communion those who, in your personal opinion, have not attended a “recognised” nurture course. Recognised by whom? How dare they, and how dare you?
To me the real abomination is those vicars who do not baptise the children, on the spurious grounds that their parents don’t want to make promises.
In parish ministry, it’s common to get people attending (guests at baptisms & confirmations, holidaymakers, people at joint services etc) who are members of other churches. These are not ‘ready and desirous of confirmation’, nor is there an opportunity to check their knowledge of the Apostles Creed, Lord’s Prayer, and 10 Commandments. That’s why many of us invite all those who are confirmed members of the C of E or communicant members of other churches, to take part. Exceptions may also need to be made for those with learning difficulties or other disabilities – I certainly would not turn them… Read more »
I did not intend to imply that those not desirous of Confirmation, or who had not been instructed in the Catechism, should be turned away. My point was that those who had should not be denied Communion simply because they had not attended the priests favourite course. I strongly approve of your don’t ask policy. Access to Communion should not be restricted on the whim of the priest, that is the gist of the Sacrament Act, the foundation of the Civil and Religious Liberties of England. It is a route which all may take. What really disgusts me is vicars… Read more »
Much of this difference between the CoE and TEC comes down to Establishment. In the US, evangelicals (some of whom were exiled from England) were able to form their own churches without the need for mere “toleration” from any church by law established. This meant that for those who adopt a theology of, for example, male headship, there are viable options completely distinct from the Episcopal Church. So while there is significant historical and institutional pressure towards embracing theological diversity within the Church of England, the various churches in the US were more free to become distinctive from each other… Read more »
“TEC managed to maintain a good amount of liturgical and ceremonial variety from parish to parish largely by choosing not to legislate such matters or make the rubrics of its version of the BCP too restrictive.” This is a generous description of TEC mostly in theory, but otherwise, c’est congenial. In the nineteenth century the Midwest minor assemblage of ‘biretta belt’ challenged the deist and tranquil TEC with ritualism, its US version of tractarian positivism. Controversial (and indeed condemned at TEC GC meetings), but otherwise sufficiently Romish (though in its days,viewed as ‘eccentric’ by a largely European RCC, if they… Read more »
Yes, I am aware of the mostly 19th-c efforts at GC to stamp out emergent ritualism, though, as I note, these efforts never made it into the BCP. These efforts were, as you observe, largely unsuccessful, and by the mid-20th c the church settled into what you call “a lovely vestment sect.” (The laurel goes to Almy et al, for which they no doubt give hearty thanks, as vestments and furnishings that would give your average late 19th-c churchman the cold sweats are now more or less universal.) My main thesis, however, is that the lack of Establishment means, in… Read more »
Your first two paragraphs meet with my assent fwiw.
We are being told here that memorialism (to the left of Zwingli) and transubstantiation (to the right of Elizabeth and the formularies) are part of a happy and to-be-desired diversity in one and the same Church of England.
That idea I find theologically incoherent and a bit sad.
FWIW I also agree with your third paragraph. I would only add that there is wide and ironic diversity of opinion on the desirability of diversity of opinion. The incoherence is in part a result of the victory of form over substance — given verbal formulations come to be held, by those reciting them, to mean entirely contradictory things, or, in some cases, nothing at all.
Agreed.
That is a terrific analysis. The Christian religion in the USA ranges from “catholic” denominations such as Roman Catholic, TEC, various Eastern Orthodox churches (including a small group of people who want to create a full, independent-but-in-communion American Orthodox Church, rather than American branches of the existing Orthodox churches), mainline protestantism in numerous forms, and dozens (scores? hundreds?) of Protestant denominations of every flavor of structure, theology, etc. My personal, non-expertly-trained theory is, the young USA was so vast in size, and so lacking in European-descendant population (the original native population, sadly, didn’t count), that if a religiously-inspired person and… Read more »
Excellent points. I failed to mention, of course, the difference between an island and a continent; but I suspect the English need to get along, versus the American concept of wide frontiers, may well have something to do with such proliferation of sects.
I think the wars of the three kingdoms are probably relevant as well.
Yes, the Establishment bit makes the UK and CoE far different from the US and TEC, and religion in our culture (US) in general. It was extremely liberating to be able to leave the Greek Orthodox Church of my birth for TEC. The Greek church has beautiful liturgy and sacramental theology but exclusive and oppressive policies on women and LGBTQ+ people. On my first visit to an Episcopal church, the lectionary reading was the story of the Greeks at the door looking for Jesus. I’d found my spiritual home! The Greeks were wonderful and loving, but I wasn’t created for… Read more »
I, also, have been affected by a lectionary reading. I was raised Reform Jewish, became disillusioned with my parents’ congregation, drifted around theologically and emotionally, and when I was homeless, I was given shelter and a space to heal and “find myself” by a group of TEC monks. I stayed with them quite a while, discovering the joys of making bread from scratch and a talent for using their word-processing typewriter. I have Cerebral Palsy in a mild form, but bread takes time and the dough doesn’t care how co-ordinated you are, and likewise, as long as the abbot got… Read more »
Alleluia
Lovely.
“That the CofE embraces many different styles of worship doesn’t speak to it embracing differences in teaching.”
As an infallible principle, perhaps not. But I doubt if any congregations that don’t use vestments and use projection screens have a Eucharistic theology of transubstantiation. Conversely, I doubt if any congregations that use vestments, incense, and high ceremonial have a Eucharistic theology of memorialism.
Worship style generally reflects theology.
Transsubstantiation?
That’s twice you have asked, Dr Seitz, so I’ll answer for myself. I believe in transubstantiation. I’m sure my priest does too. And I respect that others in the Church of England may hold quite a different view. I’m rather surprised you are asking to be honest. I thought it was common knowledge. And tracking back to the point being made, it could be seen as the genius of the Church of England that fellow Christians can hold strikingly different views on this matter and yet share in unity together. Once again, it’s unity in diversity. And Dr Primrose’s point… Read more »
Certainly a defining feature of “catholic Anglicanism” was its rejection of a eucharistic teaching—transubstantiation—it declared anti-scriptural, Aristotelian, rationalistic and at odds with the plain sense of Christ from whom the church received it. Anglo-catholics equally rejected the idea as a late mediaeval corruption, hammered down more firmly at Trent, and not true to catholic teaching as they held it. It likewise requires a view of the sacrament of ordination manifestly un-anglican, and treated as such by Roman Catholics for just this reason. In the Catholic circles in which I move in France one rarely hears the term and instead “real… Read more »
I agree, but I think we must acknowledge that the other end of the spectrum is often a great distance from Anglicanism historically speaking.
You will get no argument from me! Evangelical (CofE) anglicanism is certainly a long distance from the serious sacramental reflections of a Jean Calvin (read assiduously by Elizabeth in the above context). In certain cases it is something even a ways away from memorialism. I do not think this is any cause for ‘diversity celebration.’
Historically the tension in Anglican eucharistic doctrine was less between the Gift given than the relation between the sign and the thing signified, esp after Keble’s tract on Eucharistic Adoration. The Anglican Communion expended a lot of effort in its ecumenical dialogues to break through the Reformation Controversies and build an ecumenical consensus esp on the Eucharist. ARCIC was particularly important here. It would seem , alas; little of this has entered the C of E bloodstream even among the clergy. A good place to begin would be the book co authored by Henry McAdoo and Kenneth Stevenson entitled ,if… Read more »
Almost right, Perry. The Mystery of the Eucharist in the Anglican Tradition. Still available from Canterbury Press via Church House Bookshop in London….
Thanks Simon. Good to know its still available. 20plus years ago i gave a lecture to a theological course on Ecumenical Theology in the 20c and asked the group..about 25 who had heard of ARCIC: none had. This was picked up on by an ACCM inspector who was sitting in on the lecture. Seven yrs ago when in retirement i was asked to tutor an IME 4- 7 group ( of 9) i asked the same question. One in the group had heard about it. It brings to mind Karl Barth’s question to Archbishop Fisher ” What role does theology… Read more »
Thank you, Perry, I am aware of the discussion you cite; and I agree that life on the ground, especially now, tends to simply go its own way.
I am writing a small book, part of which centers on Vatican 2, due to my teaching at Centre Sevres in Paris. One can see there as well some effort to gain distance on Trent, though things like “two sources of authority” never leave the stage. Instead, other actors are brought alongside. This is a typical move. I like to say that Catholics “prefer lead to an eraser.”
The wording in the Prayer Book was deliberately and sufficiently ambiguous, both on the nature of the Eucharist, and on the issue of the baptismal regeneration of infants and their new birth, to accommodate a range of theological views. I think most of us probably know that, and they would have done back then as well. I fully realise and understand that for some Christians, the Eucharist is an act of memorial – and of course, we probably all believe that, but for others like myself (and many of the Christians in the catholic tradition in Tudor England) the Mass… Read more »
“Transubstantiation” does not refer to something “sufficiently ambiguous.” You are quite wrong there. It is a definite, worked-out theory involving accidents and substance. It was for that reason, amongst others, that it was rejected by reformed catholic anglicanism. You are free to speak about “literal eating” — Luther liked the idea — but this is not transubstantation.
I’m decidedly Anglo-Catholic and go to a fairly high (but not nose bleed high) AC TEC parish. We believe in the Real Presence of God in the Eucharist. We don’t talk about it using the term “transubstantiation,” which to me seems rather arcane in trying to define when and how it happens. Perhaps it is my most Anglican characteristic, to believe in the very Real Presence without sweating the “how,” leaving the details in God’s hands. I certainly see a parallel with how I view inclusion. LGBTQ+ people exist, we are children of God, and if that’s a problem for… Read more »
The Lambeth Conference of 1988 recognized “the Agreed Statements of ARCIC I on Eucharistic Doctrine, Ministry and Ordination, and their Elucidations, as consonant in substance with the faith of Anglicans.” ARCIC I represents a significant advance beyond Reformation and Counter-Reformation polemics; for example, the word “transubstantiation” appears only in a footnote. But my experience in teaching about Anglicanism is that to most people the conversation is still stuck with the dichotomy between Aquinas and Zwingli. As is the conversation we seem to be having at the moment. Makes me sad.
The vantage point of your perspective i.e. ARCIC agreed statements and elucidations offers a better horizon. I think the ecumenical high ground includes the work of the WCC and the Lima Liturgy. I’ve attached a World Council of Churches link to the text with a preface by Max Thurian, for folks who may also be interested.
https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/unity-mission-evangelism-and-spirituality/spirituality-and-worship/the-eucharistic-liturgy-of-lima
Is this a failure of theological education and ministerial formation John..and teaching at parish level say, prior to confirmation? Once upon a time there was a General Ordination Exam: Doctrine 2 was Church,Ministry and Sacraments with set reading and texts. Every ordinand had to take it( with some theology graduates gaining exemptions from some parts. What has happened?
Transubstantiation specifically denies Christ’s presence in the elements is material,physical or local. Thats why St Thomas Aquinas devised the doctrine..to get away from these ideas post the I Berengarius. Sadly the concept of “substance” is misunderstood.
Important point you make. Note this line from a document from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: “…it is important to recognize that the Body and Blood of Christ come to us in the Eucharist in a sacramental form. In other words, Christ is present under the appearances of bread and wine, not in his own proper form.” ( See linked document ,paragraph 6). http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/the-real-presence-of-jesus-christ-in-the-sacrament-of-the-eucharist-basic-questions-and-answers.cfm Note also this line from Mysterium Fidei # 46 (noted in my earlier comment), “…nothing remains of the bread and the wine except for the species—beneath which Christ is present whole and entire in His… Read more »
Could TA be ‘transubstantiating’ Anglicans? What fun! With regard to Roman Catholic dogma, one needs to read the encyclical Mysterium Fidei, issued by Paul VI in 1965 and contemporaneous with Vatican II. (see link). See especially paragraphs 3, 45, 46 (the latter, an excerpt below). See also The (1992) Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1376 (below). One of the goals of MF was to dispel (no pun intended) notions that the RC Church had moved away from transubstantiation. What Anglicans make of all this, well that is another story. http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_03091965_mysterium.html “As a result of transubstantiation, the species of bread and… Read more »
The mystery to me is that in many cases Anglo-Catholics (and probably many Catholics) believe in transubstantiation but assert that Genesis contradicts science and can only be myth. Yet many evangelicals believe in a literal Genesis but think transubstantiation is magical poppycock.
Kate: “The mystery to me is that in many cases Anglo-Catholics (and probably many Catholics) believe in transubstantiation but assert that Genesis contradicts science and can only be myth. Yet many evangelicals believe in a literal Genesis but think transubstantiation is magical poppycock.” I don’t see a contradiction there. Regarding myth as a powerful medium in Genesis, operating at a deeper level than the literal and basic physical, and regarding transubstantiation as also an operation at a deeper level than the basic physical, seems to me in both cases to point towards the supernatural, the mythic levels of perception and… Read more »
“A learned doctor here has said it’s ‘a bit sad’ that there is such a range of theological views accommodated in our Church.” I find it sad as well that you tend to mis-state things to accommodate your own views. I said I found theological incoherence sad. I said that positions honed out over time and held up as “anglican,” against wrong alternatives, were worth honoring and preserving. I stand by that. I find your ideas about transubstantation misinformed and confusing of the issue. I believe that, in that, I am joined by others. Let’s not grandstand and bluff about… Read more »
Learned doctor: “I said I found theological incoherence sad.” Nurse Susie: No, you said This –> was sad: “We are being told here that memorialism (to the left of Zwingli) and transubstantiation (to the right of Elizabeth and the formularies) are part of a happy and to-be-desired diversity in one and the same Church of England.” But if you want to clarify that you messed up the sentence structure and you actually welcome this range of theological views as happy and desirable in the Church of England, I’m good with that. You said “That idea I find a bit sad”… Read more »
I am happy to stand by what I wrote.
“We are being told here that memorialism (to the left of Zwingli) and transubstantiation (to the right of Elizabeth and the formularies) are part of a happy and to-be-desired diversity in one and the same Church of England.
That idea I find theologically incoherent and a bit sad.”
It speaks for itself in answer to your question.
As ever, thank you for your discourse, Dr Seitz, and for persevering with this sometimes stroppy nurse. What I find sad is nothing to do with you at all, but the tendency of some Anglicans to want a narrowing of what is acceptable in our Communion, and the temptation to demand uniformity of belief, when it’s clear that conscientious belief is varied on issues like human sexuality and indeed on the nature of the Eucharist. When uniformity is demanded, that involves domination of people’s consciences, and that is no proper unity. All it tends to do is to drive people… Read more »
God bless you too.
When it comes to transubstantiation, again you are just wrong (“clearly we can’t even define that”). In point of fact, it is a very clearly argued position. That is why many object to it.
I do not regard memorialism consistent with Christ’s teaching, and neither do I believe transubstantiation is what Christ taught/commended/handed down via the Twelve.
So naturally I would be unable to endorse your position. I would accept it as possibly well-intentioned, but false and therefore impoverishing and misleading. As have, historically, Anglican Divines and the Anglican faithful.
Dr Seitz, please will you elaborate on what you mean by “memorialism”. I see this term used by many people, often in a pejorative sense, but rarely with any further explanation.
I am afraid I am the wrong person to ask. The term was introduced, rather oddly to my mind, at the top of this thread by a dr.primrose. I do not know what he meant by it. It was being held up as one of two poles, the other being “transubstantiation,” a RC teaching on the sacrament of the Eucharist. The CofE was supposed to be a place where both of these teachings co-exist happily. We then had Zwingli’s name brought in. Alongside this a rejection of the “calvinism” clearly in place (via Bucer et al) in early Anglican thinking.… Read more »
Thank you Dr Seitz. Perhaps Dr Primrose or one of the other commenters who has used this term could eleborate on what they understand by it?
You are welcome. Memorialism is a less fixed term than transubstantiation, and one can easily research it.
But your question is, appropriately, what those here using it mean by it, and why.
Wikipedia has an entry on Memorialism if you are interested in learning more.
Thank you, but Wikipedia has to be treated with much caution – it is frequently not a reliable reference. This article is using the word “memorialism” in a very recent sense (almost as an antonym to the “real presence” and/or as a synonym for Zwinglian thought). Historically the related words “memorial” and “memory” have an honoured place in Anglican liturgy and theology, but with a distinctly different sense to what is being implied here. For now I would like the people using the word “memorialism” to confirm what they mean by it.
If we allow parishes and priests to maintain and promote negative attitudes to LGBTI people and same sex couples we risk harming more people, even more suicides. It is a safeguarding issue and ALL priests should be required to promote a positive attitude to LGBTI people and that means that ALL must celebrate same sex marriages and recognition of gender. We have a responsibility – a Christian responsibility – to accept nothing less.
This is an important point and worth underscoring. “One of the goals of MF was to dispel…notions that the RC Church had moved away from transubstantiation.” It is the eraser/new lead problem. See now:
https://www.eerdmans.com/Products/7438/the-disputed-teachings-of-vatican-ii.aspx
The controversy over Vatican II has been, and likely will be, ongoing. On the point under discussion here, a number of R.C. theologians have been unhappy with the traditional formulation of transubstantiation, some of them like Edward Schillebeeckx, an experimental well known, controversial Thomist among them. Mysterium Fidei was/is aimed at thinkers like him. However the R.C. view on transubstantiation from Trent to MF to Ecclesial de Eucharistia (2003 John Paul II) is consistent. R.C. ecumenism is important, undertaken in good faith, but perceives the goal as ‘separated brethren’ being united to the fullness of the Catholic faith. The questions… Read more »
Bon chance.
Link non functioning.
Ok, tks the heads up on that. I’ve tested this one before sending. If it does not open, for those interested, the title is just above the link for a search. (You may already be familiar with this doc. ) salut, -Rod
ENCYCLICAL LETTER,ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA OF HIS HOLINESS POPE JOHN PAUL II
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/special_features/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_20030417_ecclesia_eucharistia_en.html
His Holiness the Pope … seriously?
Re: various comments here, transubstantiation, as an officially documented R.C. doctrine, is –if one takes the time to acquire the necessary philosophical background–perfectly intelligible. Indeed, intelligibility seems to be its whole purpose. I’ll leave individual Anglicans who profess agreement with this doctrine to explain their position. However,I agree in part (1) with CRS on the difficulty of such a position given historic Anglican formularies; but with (2) John Wall with on the importance of ARCIC (and I would add WCC/BEM/Lima) moving beyond the reformation-counter reformation situation. That said, transubstantiation does not contribute to my Anglican self understanding –neither as a… Read more »
Re: Bramwell. It seems to me that this was the same point from Elizabeth cited above. Her anti transubstantiation poetics: Twas God the Word that spake it, He took the Bread and brake it: And what that Word did make it, That I believe and take it. Re: transubstantiation — strictly speaking, this also entails a different understanding of the nature of Orders. One sees this clearly in the MP documents you cite (and feel are a bit of an improvement). Worshipping in a Catholic context, I have wondered if recent RC liturgies which invoke the Holy Spirit as effective… Read more »
Here’s a link to an article that reports laboratory tests on a consecrated Host prove that the Host is human cells (heart muscle, in fact) and (as a bonus) the DNA matches that found on the Shroud of Turin:
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/eucharistic-miracles-confirm-real-presence-of-jesus-christ
I think this topic has been aired sufficiently…
Thank you, Rod. I am keen to read it. No worries about the spelling of my name. In my private life and those close to me I use the Gaelic spelling Siusaidh anyway. With regard to the substantial change at the Eucharist, I think some critics’ misgiving stems from a misunderstanding about the deep physicality of the spiritual reality and dimensions of God. Some people seem to regard our physical universe as somehow in relationship with a non-physical world of God. While consciousness does indeed have aspects that may seem non-physical… so there is the temptation to see eternity and… Read more »
You speak about “mystery” as if it is self defining. Transubstantiation refers to a chain of sacramental actions. RC Bishops are heirs of the Apostles. They lay hands on Priests. RC Priests are thereby empowered to ‘lay hands’ on bread, causing it to ‘change its substance’ but not its accidents. No other action can produce this. Anglicans do not have a “transubstantiation” Eucharist because that is impossible. They speak of Real Presence. Priests invoke the Holy Spirit (in some cases). They speak Christ’s words. Lutherans speak of consubstantiation: the bread and wine remain bread and wine but are as such… Read more »