'Not worthy to be called bread': Jeremy Taylor against wafers

Engaging with a Tridentine apologist who dismissed "the Protestant Communion" as "their bit of bread only", Jeremy Taylor - in The Second Part of the Dissuasive (1667) - responded rather robustly by highlighting how the use of the wafer at the Eucharist was significantly different to the use of bread as indicated by the Apostle's words in 1 Corinthians 10 and the practice of the Eastern Churches:

he might have considered, that if we had a mind to find fault whenever his Church gives us cause, that the Papists' wafer is scarce so much as a bit of bread, it is more like Marchpane [i.e. an early form of marzipan] than common bread, and besides that (as Salmeron [a Jesuit theologian, writing on 1 Corinthians 10:16] acknowledges) anciently, 'Olim ex pane uno sua cuique particula frangi consueverat' ['in the past, each person was accustomed to breaking off a piece of bread from one loaf'], that which we in our Church do was the custom of the Church; out of a great loaf to give particles to every communicant, by which the Communication of Christ's body to all the members is better represented, and that Durandus [14th century Dominican theologian] affirming the same thing, says that the Grecians continue it to this day; besides this (I say) the Author of the Roman order (says Cassander) took it very ill, that the loaves of bread offered in certain Churches for the use of the sacrifice should be brought from the form of true bread to so slight and slender a form, which he calls 'Minutias nummulariarum oblatarum', scraps of little pennies or pieces of money, and not worthy to be called bread, being such which no Nation ever used at their meals for bread. But this is one of the innovations which they have introduc'd into the religious Rites of Christianity, and it is little noted, they having so many greater changes to answer for.

Taylor's reference to "that which we in our Church do" - that is, the use of bread rather than wafers - reflects the rubric in the BCP 1559 Holy Communion: 

And to take awaye the superstition, whiche any person hath, or myghte have in the breade and wyne, it shall suffice that the breade be suche as is usual to be eaten at the table, with other meates, but the beste and purest wheate breade, that conveniently may be gotten.

This, of course, was retained in 1662:

And to take away all occasion of dissension, and superstition, which any person hath or might have concerning the Bread and Wine, it shall suffice that the Bread be such as is usual to be eaten; but the best and purest Wheat Bread that conveniently may be gotten.

The Canons of the Church of Ireland continue to require (even if, unfortunately, this is too often ignored) the ancient usage:

The bread to be used in the service shall be such as is usually eaten, of the best quality that can conveniently be procured; and the use of wafer bread is prohibited except in cases of illness where it may be desirable to administer the Holy Communion by means of intinction, subject to any conditions which the ordinary may prescribe.

Heeding Taylor's words, therefore, perhaps it is time to establish 'Anglicans for the Use of Real Bread in the Eucharist', rejecting wafers as "not worthy to be called bread" and restoring the use of Bread ... as is usual to be eaten" - according to the words of Scripture, following the practice of the Primitive Church, recovering the classical Prayer Book tradition, and sharing the wisdom of the Great Churches of the Christian East.