'His marvellous work in the worthy receivers of the sacraments': Cranmer's 'Answer to Gardiner' and our wonder at the sacraments

But from the beginning the mystery of the sacrament hath been with wonder marvelled at, how Christ made bread his body, and wine his blood, and under the figure of those visible creatures, gave invisibly his precious body and blood presently there.

Gardiner's critique of Cranmer's sacramental theology is familiar. In Anglicanism, it was increasingly voiced by Tractarians as they parted ways with the Old High tradition. In the 20th century, Gregory Dix became is chief proponent - aided, ironically, by evangelicals such as Colin Buchanan, who shared an interest in denying the rich and vibrant sacramental vision of the founder of the Prayer Book tradition. Gardiner's view of Cranmer is still to be heard amongst those who regard the 1662 Holy Communion as insufficiently 'catholic'.

Cranmer's response, in his Answer to Gardiner (1551) powerfully sets forth why such impoverished readings of his sacramental theology should be banished. The sacraments are indeed "with wonder" to be "marvelled at", not because of what happens to water, bread, and wine, but because of what happens to the faithful who receive the water, bread, and wine:

For the wonder is not, how God worketh in the outward visible sacrament, but his marvellous work is in the worthy receivers of the sacraments. The wonderful work of God is not in the water, which only washeth the body, but God by his omnipotent power worketh wonderfully in the receivers thereof, scouring, washing, and making them clean inwardly, and as it were new men, and celestial creatures. This have all old authors wondered at, this wonder passeth the capacities of all men's wits, how damnation is turned into salvation, and of the son of the Devil condemned into hell, is made the son of God and inheritor of heaven. This wonderful work of God all men may marvel and wonder at: but no creature is able sufficiently to comprehend it. And as this is wondered at in the sacrament of baptism, how he that was subject unto death, receiveth life by Christ, and his Holy Spirit: so is this wondered at in the sacrament of Christ's holy table, how the same life is continued and endureth for ever, by continual feeding upon Christ's flesh and his blood. And these wonderful works of God towards us, we be taught by God's holy word and his sacraments of bread, wine, and water, and yet be not these wonderful works of God in the sacraments, but in us.

Receiving the water of Baptism, we are those who are made children of God and inheritors of heaven. Receiving the bread and wine of the Supper, we are those who feed upon the Lord's Body and Blood. Here is the root of Hooker's famous dictum:

The real presence of Christ’s most blessed body and blood is not therefore to be sought for in the sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of the sacrament (LEP V.67.6).

This is no 'low' sacramental theology, no 'mere receptionism'. As Hooker goes on to declare regarding our partaking of the Eucharist:

whereupon there ensueth a kind of transubstantiation in us, a true change of both body and soul, an alteration from death to life (V.67.11).

Or, as Cranmer put it, "his marvellous work is in the worthy receivers of the sacraments". Our wonder, then, is to pour forth "in the sacrament of Christ's holy table".

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...

1928 practices and the 1979 book: unthinking conservatism or popular piety?

Those responsible for Earth & Altar - a new blog emanating from a group within TEC - are to be congratulated for an excellent contribution to wider Anglican discussion and debate. The commitment to "an expansively conceived credal orthodoxy as fully compatible with LGBTQ inclusion, gender equality, and racial justice" is an important part of a wider retrieval of creedal orthodoxy within what we might call the post-liberal generation. It is in this spirit that I want to respond to a recent post on the site by Andrew McGowan , Dean of the Berkeley Divinity School at Yale and Professor of Anglican Studies at Yale Divinity School. Against the background of another round of "ill-defined" liturgical revision in TEC, he understandably urges that a fuller reception of the 1979 BCP should occur before further reforms. In doing so, however, he takes aim at what he describes as "clinging to the ritual structures of 1928" while using the text of 1979. We ...

laudable Practice

Search This Blog