Early 18th century High Church praise for Lutheranism: What of Consubstantiation?

If High Churchmen could explain German Lutheranism's model of superintendency as an expression of episcopacy, what of the vexed issue of Eucharistic doctrine?  For Non-Juror (and Non-Juror aligned) critics of High Church defences of Lutheranism, Lutheran consubstantiation was little different than transubstantiation.  As Daniel L. Brunner has shown in his study of the pamphlet wars at the time of the Hanoverian succession, for Non-Jurors and their fellow-travellers, Lutheran Eucharistic doctrine contradicted the Sacramental teaching of the Church of England and certainly disallowed Anglicans and Lutherans receiving at each others altars.  

Against this, High Churchmen and others routinely denied that consubstantiation was an insurmountable barrier.  To begin with, it was not mentioned or defined in the Augsburg Confession, the Eucharistic teaching of which - "Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise" - was understood to be comparable with Article XXVIII.  Consubstantiation, by contrast, was deemed to be a private opinion held amongst some Lutherans but not a confessional requirement.  The official confessions of the Churches of England and Ireland, and of the Lutheran Churches, were understood to be compatible.  Thus Dorrington stated in his The History of the Lutheran Church:

we may perceive the Doctrine of Luther to be agreeable to that of the Church of England, the Reformation where of was settled, as before hinted, under the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, in the Year 1562, the Doctrinal Points whereof, consisting of 39 Articles, were confirm'd by her and her Parliaments.

A similar perception was found on the Lutheran side.  During the negotiations (involving John Sharp, Archbishop of York) which occurred in the reign of Queen Anne, which explored formal union between the Churches of Hanover and Prussia with the Church of England, a Lutheran advisor to the Elector noted:

I had the honour one day to talk pretty freely with the Elector on the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, and he very well comprehended that they come much to the same with what is believed in this country.

This, Dorrington emphasized, led to a significant shared rejection of Roman Eucharistic teaching:

that the Bread is transubstantiated into Christ's Body; that the Mass is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Quick and the Dead ... All which erroneous Principles are also deny'd by the Church of England, and the Lutheran Church.

The shared liturgical practices of the Lutheran Churches and the Church of England regarding the Eucharist was also a focus for High Church commentators.  In the words of Dawes, Archbishop of York:

They ... receive the Eucharist and Blessed Sacrament kneeling, and making use of the same Form as in our Liturgy.

Dorrington similarly stated:

The Eucharist, or Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is received both by us and the Lutherans kneeling.

Such shared liturgical practices were taken to signify shared Eucharistic teaching and piety.  Early 18th century High Church Eucharistic piety gives us a sense of the confidence with which High Church commentators could assert coherence between Lutheran and Anglican Sacramental teaching.  Even as this High Church piety used Reformed language of 'representation' regarding the elements, its joyfully robust affirmation of our true partaking of the Lord's Body and Blood in the Sacrament.  Take, for example, Dorrington's explanation of the Sacrament in A Familiar Guide to the Right and Profitable Receiving of the Lord's Supper:

It is faithfully in tended by God, that in the Use of this Sacrament, those who are fit Receivers, shall partake of the Body and Blood of Christ; and this Bread and this Cup shall be the Communication of the Body and Blood of Chriſt to them: These outward Elements of broken Bread, and Wine poured out, shall bring with them, to those humble and prepar'd Souls which receive them, this Spiritual Grace.

At the Administration, Dorrington urges the following prayer:

When you go to receive, and see the Minister approaching with the Sacred Bread, which represents the broken Body of our Lord, look on it, and say: Behold, my Soul, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the Sins of the World. Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive Power, and Riches, and Wisdom, and strength, and Honour, and Glory, and Blessing. Oh come Lord Jesus, take Possession of my Soul, and dwell thou for ever with me ; that I may be the more fit for such a Happiness, transform me into thy Likeness, by the renewing of my Mind. Open ye everlasting Doors of my heart, that the King of Glory may come in.

After reception, Dorrington's thanksgiving gives expression to a rich Eucharistic teaching:

Jesus, the Glorious Son of God, was Master of the Feast thou hast been at so lately, and he was himself the Feast. Jesus prepaid it out of Love to thee. And because his great Love could not (as we may easily imagine) provide any thing better, he provided himself to be thy rich and costly Entertainment. He has feasted thee with his Body and Blood. 

This vivid sacramental teaching and piety illustrates why the early 18th century High Church tradition could confidently affirm that Lutheran Eucharistic teaching was agreeable to the tenets of the Church of England.  Shared liturgical practices, similar liturgical texts, modest confessional statements, rejection of Roman teaching, and a vibrant sacramental piety rejoicing in a partaking in the Lord's Body and Blood in and through the eating of Bread and drinking of Wine enabled High Church commentators to declare that Lutherans and Anglicans were united in the essentials of Eucharistic faith. 

(The first illustration is a late 17th century print of the administration of the Lord's Supper in the Church of England.  The second is of the Holy Supper in 19th century Denmark.)