"They have the very thing": Bramhall on the Eucharistic sacrifice

From Bramhall's Protestants' Ordinations Defended, a response to a Roman apologist who claimed that Anglicans have "pared away" all sacrifice from the Church's life. Particularly interesting is Bramhall's statement that the Anglican understanding of the Eucharistic sacrifice as "a means ordained to apply" Christ's propitiatory sacrifice is also that of "the moderate Romanists":

First, they acknowledge spiritual and eucharistical sacrifices, as prayers, praises, a contrite heart, alms, and the like.

Secondly, they acknowledge a commemoration, or a representative Sacrifice, in the Holy Eucharist.

Thirdly, they teach, that this is not "nuda commemoratio" - "a bare commemoration" without efficacy, but that the blessed Sacrament is a means ordained by Christ to render us capable, and to apply unto us the virtue, of that all-sufficient Sacrifice of infinite value, which Christ made upon the Cross; which is as far as the moderate Romanists dare go in distinct and particular expressions.

But the Protestants dare not say, that the Holy Eucharist is a Sacrifice propitiatory in itself, by its own proper virtue and expiatory efficacy. Whatsoever power it hath, is in relation to the Sacrifice of Christ, as a means ordained to apply that to true believers .

In sum, the essence of the Roman Sacrifice doth consist, according to the doctrine of their own schools, either in the consecration alone, or in the manducation alone, or both in the consecration and participation; but not at all either in the oblation before consecration, or in the oblation after consecration, or in the fraction or mixtion. Seeing therefore the Protestants do retain both the consecration, and consumption or communication, without all contradiction, under the name of a Sacrament, they have the very thing, which the Romanists call a Sacrifice.

(The drawing of the Heavenly Altar, emphasising how the holy Eucharist is a representation of the eternal offering of Christ the High Priest, is from Wheatly's A Rational Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer, 1714.)

Comments

Why I support the ordination of women: a High Church reflection

A number of commenters on this blog have asked about my occasional expressions of support for the ordination of women to all three orders. With some hesitation, I have decided to post a summary of my own views on this matter. The hesitation is because I have sought on this blog to focus on issues and themes which can unify those who identify with or have respect (grudging or otherwise!) for what we might term 'classical' Anglicanism (the Anglicanism of the Formularies and - yes - of the Old High Church tradition). Some oppose the ordination of women (and I have friends and colleagues who do so, Anglo-Catholic, High Church, and Reformed Evangelical). Some of us support it (again, friends and colleagues covering a wide range of theological traditions). Below, I have organised my thinking around 5 points (needless to say, no reference to Dort is implied). 1. The Declaration for Subscription required of clergy in the Church of Ireland states: (6) I promise to submit ...

How the Old High tradition continued

Charles Gore's 1914 letter to the clergy of his diocese, ' The Basis of Anglican Fellowship ', can be regarded as a classical expression of the Prayer Book Catholic tradition. A key part of the letter - entitled 'Romanizing in the Church of England' - addressed the "Catholic movement", questioning beliefs and practices within it which tended to "a position which makes it very difficult for its extremer representatives to give an intelligible reason why they are not Roman Catholics". Gore provides the outlines of an alternative account and experience of catholicity within Anglicanism, defined by three characteristics. What is particularly interesting about these characteristics is their continuity with the older High Church tradition. Indeed, the central characteristic as set out by Gore was integral to High Church claims over centuries: To accept the Anglican position as valid, in any sense, is to appeal behind the Pope and the authority of t...

The Prayer Book's theology of eucharistic consecration: Why individual cups should be rejected

The common cup may now be shared. So says the Church of England's most recent Covid-19 guidance , issued on 25th January, repeating the guidance given in December. It is, therefore, a rather odd time to renew the campaign to allow the administration of the Eucharist by means of individual cups : after all, the Covid-19 restrictions are being eased across society, the bishops have judged it appropriate to restore the Chalice to the faithful, and there is now no pressing need to consider alternatives. Unless, of course, this campaign has never really been about public health concerns but, rather, about altering Anglican eucharistic practice and theology . The Book of Common Prayer 1662 makes clear, explicit provision for what is to happen with "consecrated Elements" remaining after the faithful receive the Sacrament: When all have communicated, the Minister shall return to the Lord's Table, and reverently place upon it what remaineth of the consecrated Elements, coveri...

laudable Practice

Search This Blog