cms@gatech.edu (03/27/91)
The Eucharist in the Book of Common Prayer
The Eucharist is God's good favor to us. "Eu" means "good" and "charis"
means "favor." Since God did us a favor by dying on the Cross for our
sins and then rising again that we might believe, the word "eucharist"
has a strong connotation of thanksgiving for the favor, the feeling of
thankfulness by the one who receives, and the prayer of thanksgiving
itself. Furthermore, "eucharist" later on took upon itself the meaning
"Body and Blood of Christ" since the Body and Blood are the gifts
received with thanksgiving. In other words, God's grace is channeled
through his good favor (Jesus) and is brought to humanity under the
species of bread and wine. The concept of the Real Presence of Jesus
in the Eucharist is a primary impetus behind the most heatedly disputed
changes in the Book of Common Prayer. The fullness of the Eucharist is a
sacrament (or mystery) directly instituted by Christ in which the Whole
Person of God, the whole, saving, concrete reality of the Lord are really
present. The Eucharist is the central act of Christian worship. How the
Eucharistic celebration developed, and how popular conceptions of the
Eucharist developed (Eucharistic theology), all led to Prayer Book changes
that reflected one or another view. In toto, however, these Prayer Book
changes, especially in the Holy Eucharist, were led by or led into the
Catholic Revival. The ultimate triumph of the Catholic Revival is
exemplified in Eucharistic theology and in the way the Holy Eucharist is
celebrated in the Episcopal Church today.
All Prayer Books have had in common primary affirmations of Anglican
Eucharistic Theology: 1. Physical elements remain material food;
2. Elements are sanctified by the Holy Spirit; 3. Elements are
instruments of God's grace; 4. Those who receive by faith with
thanksgiving have access to the gift of saving grace. Much is said here
but with little concrete definition. "Faithful receivers" might be
interpreted as a receptionist view (i.e., Communion becomes the Body and
Blood of Christ only after consumption). The idea that "hallowed food"
instrumentally causes Christ's presence is called "dynamic receptionism."
When there is an emphasis on Christ's presence, omitting faithful
reception from the definition, and the Holy Spirit renders the Body and
Blood present, not in substance, but in power or virtue -- then it is
called Dynamic Virtualism. Other views are: 1. Body and Blood are
Bread and Wine; 2. Body and Blood, or consecrated wine, are Types of the
Natural Body and Blood of Christ; 3. Not such cold and imperfect Types
as those before and under the law; 4. Not in Substance but are the very
Body and Blood of Christ, yet in Spirit, Power, and Effect. Calvin and
the Eastern Church maintained that the Consecration is effected by the
Holy Spirit. Thus, the principal and immediately cause of the bread and
wine becoming the Body and Blood of Christ is the Holy Ghost; the
subordinate cause is the recitation of the words of institution, oblation
of symbols, and the prayer of Invocation, all of which contribute to the
Consecration of the elements into the Body and Blood. These are the
issues with which all Prayer Books had to deal.
Other points of contention are the sacrificial nature of the Mass and a
major Reformation dilemma: How to say the Sacrament of the Eucharist is
efficacious without ascribing to it the virtue which properly belongs to
Christ's sacrifice. Puritans didn't like the word "sacrifice" at all.
What Anglicans deny is also something the Roman Church denies, namely,
that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice that completes the Sacrifice of Christ,
since the Sacrifice of Christ is thought to be complete and perfect and
holy -- it needs no improvements since it has no defects. This is about
the highest Anglican theology ever gets. For the High Anglican, the
Eucharist is an "impetrative and applicative" sacrifice. This leads to a
propitiatory sacrifice, which the Reformers desperately sought to avoid.
Communion was considered efficacious for the faithful communicant
(Calvinist doctrine). If it is efficacious for others, this leads back
to the doctrine Luther sought to deny and the 39 Articles repudiate --
that is, that the Eucharist is efficacious for pagans or the unfaithful.
For some, propitiatory meant not repeating Calvary but used as a way of
describing the Eucharist in dynamic terms. The doctrine of the
Eucharistic Sacrifice finds expression in the words and actions of the
eucharistic liturgy (prayer of oblation) -- which is lacking in the
English rite but found in the Scottish rite. Samuel Seabury, consecrated
by the Scottish church, fervently espoused this view.
Due to the ambiguity in the term "real presence," Anglicans preferred to
use the term "mystery" or "mysteries." Calvin said "mystery" to express
the effectual reality of communion with Christ in this sacrament.
Following his ambiguous lead, people later referred to the Eucharist as a
mystery whose reality is secured by the words of Christ but whose manner
cannot be defined. A mystery is not a thing to be explained but a
reality to experience. Indeed, the very word "Communion" originated in
the Book of Common Prayer (a Cranmerism).
Generally, the word "real" replaced the word "physical" in most doctrinal
books and prayer books then and now. This works precisely because of the
ambiguity of the term "real." For Catholics, it means transubstantiation;
for Lutherans, it means consubstantiation. For others, it means a real
effect in a vague kind of way that left interpretation wide open. Herein
is a prime example of the Episcopal Church's desire and success at being
"all things to all people." Scholars have taken these very same texts to
prove transubstantation, consubstantiation, and no-transformation, that is
to say, no change in either the substance or the elements (sometimes called
the "real absence"). Nevertheless, many Reformers strove valiantly against
the notion that the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist was somehow
dependent upon the individual believer; they strove to maintain that the
Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist have a "reality" independent of
the faith of the individual believer. Thus, it is possible for an
unbeliever to receive "the real presence," however, the "real effects" are
detrimental rather than positive. Because the works of John Calvin had
such an impact on Anglican theology, here is an example from his work:
Calvin says in his "Institutes of the Christian Religion" 4:14:1, "[...a
sacrament] is an outward sign by which the Lord seals on our consciences
the promises of his good will toward us in order to sustain the weakness
of our faith; and we in turn attest our piety toward him in the presence
of the Lord and of his angels and before men...[or] one may call it a
testimony of divine grace toward us, confirmed by an outward sign, with
mutual attestation of our piety toward him. Whichever of these
definitions you may choose, it does not differ in meaning from that of
Augustine, who teaches that a sacrament is a 'visible sign of a sacred
thing,' or 'a visible form of an invisible grace,' but it better and more
clearly explains the thing itself." The Prayer Book's vaguely worded
"real presence" neatly tied together the Catholic faith in some kind of
transformation while managing not to offend the "real absence" folks.
In the 39 Articles of Religion, the following statement is found: "The
offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation,
and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and
actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone.
Wherefore the sacrifices of Masses, in which it was commonly said, that
the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission
of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits." The
idea that the Reformers were striving to get across is that there was no
offering of Christ at the Eucharist. In the Roman rite, the consecration
follows the institution narrative; this was regarded as essential to
transubstantiation. The doctrine following upon this is what the
Reformers sought to eliminate. Thus, in 1552 Prayer Book, the anamnesis
or memorial of the sacrifice was omitted and the phrase "sacrifice of
praise and thanksgiving" added instead. In the Scottish liturgy the
Eucharist is said to be "a perpetual memory of his precious death until
his coming again." Also, because Luther didn't like the word "oblation"
(indicating the offering of bread and wine), the word "oblation" is
generally omitted, and the "gifts" refer to the sacrifices of praise and
thanksgiving. However, as Anglicans began to study the matter, they
realized, from the Eastern churches especially, that the lack of an
oblation of the elements following upon the institution narrative was a
serious mistake. Again, the Scottish Prayer Book remedies the situation.
Furthermore, there is evidence indicating that priests of the English
rite actually used the oblation terminology subsequent to the institution
narrative anyway, despite its lack in the Prayer Book; other priests, to
avoid controversy, recited the oblation prayers privately. The 1552,
1559, and 1604 rites all omitted the oblation language.
The proposed Prayer Book of 1786 was largely based on the Scottish
Prayer Book, however, the English Prayer Book of 1662 formed the basis of
the 1789 Book including its latitudinarian nature. The conventions from
Maryland and Pennsylvania, at the General Convention, supported restoring
an invocation to the eucharistic prayer before the institution narrative,
according to the English form. Many important conventioneers also
supported the Scottish Prayer Book form. The Revolutionary War, and all
its political implications, made changes in the American Prayer Book not
only necessary but politically desirable. Furthermore, Puritan
influences caused the Prayer Book's complicated metaphysical statements
of faith to be eradicated along with condemnatory statements ("If you
aren't good, the devil take you," kind of thing). For theological
reasons, the Convention changed "own oblation" to "One oblation." The
Prayer of Humble Access was retained, according to the English form,
rather than the Scottish, because it was used as a safeguard against
transubstantiation doctrine creeping in; this is due to the English
Prayer Book's treating the words of institution as the consecration
itself.
The most significant change in the first American Prayer Book was in the
Eucharistic liturgy, and was regarded by many as the greatest improvement
over the 1662. Initially, Seabury had met resistance when he tried to
introduce the Scottish Communion service in America, but, in the new
Prayer Book, it was a welcome addition. Dr. Benjamin Rush, a signer of
the Declaration of Independence, wrote: "In consequence of an alteration
made in the forms of Baptism and the Communion service, the former
admitting infant regeneration, and the latter favouring
transubstantiation, I declined after a year or two communing in the
church, and had my children baptized by Presbyterian ministers."
In the eighteenth century the rise of the Evangelical Movement caused
preaching to be stressed more and conformity to rubrics and tradition
stressed less. The concept of participation in the celebration of the
Eucharist was eliminated in favor of an audience listening to the Word
and preaching of the clergy. Never before had Anglican worship been
stripped so bare of the essentials of ceremonial, or religion been
stripped so bare of mystery in favor of intellectualism. Nevertheless,
by unifying the altar and the people, Evangelicals anticipated the coming
of the Liturgical Movement of the twentieth century.
Soon, Evangelicalism lost ground, and was eventually replaced by a
movement begun in England in the 1830s, soon to become the dominant force
in the later liturgical movement: The Catholic Revival. The groundswell
of this movement was a sermon by a poetry professor named John Keble
entitled: "National Apostacy." In his sermon, Keble criticized the
Church of England in terms of its then current shape as well as the
dwindling fervor of the Catholic faith and practice in the nation. The
Oxford Movement, as it came to be known, was influenced by the
publication of ninety Tracts For The Times from 1833 to 1841. "Tracts
for the Times" were a series of articles written by English clergy at
Oxford who wished to rediscover the Catholicism inherent in Anglicanism.
The Tracts emphasized the historical continuity of the Church of England
with Catholic Christianity of the apostolic and patristic periods,
emphasized the authority of the Church, of the episcopate, the apostolic
succession, and the nature of the sacraments. The Catholic Revival
insisted on a high church tradition reflecting Catholic theology: the
apostolic succession ("a Church stands or falls on the apostolic
succession," said Charles Staley, author of "The Catholic Religion"), the
church as an instrument of divine grace, the sacraments as a means of
grace, and a high view of Christ's Real Presence in the Eucharist, as
well as a sacrificial understanding of the nature of the Eucharist.
Because of the high church views of John and Charles Wesley, some view
the Oxford Reformers as their successors. Thus, Oxford Reformers and
Evangelicals shifted away from each other, although each strengthened the
Church by providing an understanding of Christianity that appealed to the
heart as well as to the mind. Thus, the Episcopal Church became a merger
of these two traditions. Both succeeded because of the emotional
starvation caused by excessive rationalism.
The way this happened is because of the merger of Calvinistic and
Eastern Orthodoxy into the Scottish-American rite. The synthesis of
these two views enabled Reformation controversies to be transcended over
the Real Presence and the eucharistic sacrifice. The doctrinal stance in
opposition to the evangelicals, especially the liturgical emphasis and
Catholic theology implicit in the liturgy, led to what the evangelicals
felt was an undue emphasis on the sacraments. Unfortunately, the
liturgical revival of the Oxford Reformers was their greatest success,
and not their theology behind the liturgy. Yet, because function follows
form their theology is slowly but surely catching up. In general,
Episcopalians are attracted to the "smells and bells," but remain
doctrinally neutral. A major triumph of the Oxford Reformation was the
return of celebrating the Eucharist every Sunday.
Specific changes in the Eucharistic celebration of 1892 were a modest
attempt to shorten the service, the Lord's Prayer was recited without the
doxology, and Decalogue only once a Sunday, and the Exhortation only once
a month. Etc. Although the rite does not differ significantly from
1789, there is a loss due to the separation of Morning Prayer, the
Litany, and the Eucharist into three separate rites. Overall, the
changes made were slight and quite conservative. Indeed, the theological
significance of the American eucharistic prayer was probably lost on most
Episcopalians. The influence of Evangelicals caused the Eucharist to be
celebrated more often, although the rationalists insisted on limited
celebration.
Changes in the 1928 Prayer Book included a modest improvement in the
eucharistic rite. Once again, the Scottish order was favored: the
Lord's Prayer was placed before (rather than after) the Eucharistic rite,
and the Prayer of Humble Acess placed between the Sanctus and
post-Sanctus, rather than preceding Communion; this had the effect of
relinking the two parts into what in the 1979 Book is called the Great
Thanksgiving. The evangelicals were immediately concerned and thought
that this would result in adoration of the Eucharist. Collects,
Epistles, and Gospels were placed after Holy Communion. Also in the
rubric before Prayer of Consecration, "table" changed to "holy table,"
and the Lord's Prayer was added at the conclusion of the Consecration
followed by the Prayer of Humble Access. High Church parts of the
country received the 1928 Prayer Book well while Low-Church parts of the
country saw Anglo-Catholic and Romanisms in every dog-ear. There was a
complaint that enrichment of liturgy caused poverty in the evangelic
religion. The most widespread criticism: Introduction of the Lord's
Prayer at the end of the Prayer of Consecration. This was revised from,
"as our Saviour Christ hath taught us, let us say" to "we are bold to
say," continuing the address to the Father, and thus making it an
integral part of the Prayer of Consecration. The most significant change
was that the Real Presence came to be accepted by Episcopalians in
general. Transubstantiation, consubstantiation, etc. were considered
irrelevant, as long as one avowed the Real Presence.
The following is a direct quotation from the 1979 Book of Common Prayer
from the Catechism pages 859-860, which best exemplifies the great
triumph of the Catholic Revival:
Q. What is the Holy Eucharist?
A. The Holy Eucharist is the sacrament commanded by Christ for the
continual remembrance of his life, death, and resurrection, until his
coming again.
Q. Why is the Eucharist called a sacrifice?
A. Because the Eucharist, the Church's sacrifice of praise and
thanksgiving, is the way by which the sacrifice of Christ is made
present, and in which he unites us to his one offering of himself.
Q. By what other names is this service known?
A. The Holy Eucharist is called the Lord's Supper, and Holy Communion; it
is also known as the Divine Liturgy, the Mass, and the Great Offering.
Q. What is the outward and visible sign in the Eucharist?
A. The outward and visible sign in the Eucharist is bread and wine, given
and received according to Christ's command.
Q. What is the inward and spiritual grace given in the Eucharist?
A. The inward and spiritual grace in the Holy Communion is the Body and
Blood of Christ given to his people, and received by faith.
Q. What are the benefits which we receive in the Lord's Supper?
A. The benefits we receive are the forgiveness of our sins, the
strengthening of our union with Christ and one another, and the foretaste
of the heavenly banquet which is our nourishment in eternal life.
Q. What is required of us when we come to the Eucharist?
A. It is required that we should examine our lives, repent of our sins,
and be in love and charity with all people.
Revised liturgies in the sixties were the direct result of deep and
widespread study of history, principles, and significance of worship.
Increasing ecumenical agreement on the pattern and form of the Eucharist,
resulted in agreements consistent with the doctrines and traditions of the
Episcopal Church. There was a need to keep up with changes since
successive revisions of the Book of Common Prayer had set the highest
standard of Christian worship in the English speaking world. The
eventually adopted Prayer Book says in the Catechism p. 857, "What is
corporate worship? In corporate worship, we unite ourselves with others
to acknowledge the holiness of God, to hear God's Word, to offer prayer,
and to celebrate the sacraments." Also, on p. 13, the rubrics state, "In
all services, the entire Christian assembly participates in such a way
that the members of each order within the Church, lay persons, bishops,
priests, and deacons, fulfill the functions proper to their respective
orders, as set forth in the rubrical directions for each service."
The 1979 Book of Common Prayer was a triumph of Democratic Action. The
eventual result of all the debate was that the often used services of
Morning and Evening Prayer, the Holy Eucharist, and Burial exist in two
versions: Rite I (traditional language) and Rite II (contemporary
language). The tone changed from human depravity to the death and
resurrection of our Lord and gifts of the Spirit. The Ancient three-fold
initiatory unit -- Baptism, Sealing with the Spirit, and First Communion
-- were restored.
The new order of the Holy Eucharist conformed to the recommendations of
the 1958 Lambeth Conference. The Liturgy of the Lord's Supper, used in
1967, was retained because of successful trial use. It also conformed to
early Church practice, adopted by other churches of the Anglican
Communion as well as the Roman Catholic and Lutheran Rites. The
versatility was useful to changing moods of feasts and fasts. There was
a theological balance to Eucharistic Prayers; it is now obligatory to
precede Holy Communion with Morning Prayer and the Litany. Furtherore,
the doctrine of creation was restored in several Eucharistic Prayers of
Rite II and in alternate "Great Thanksgiving" (1928 wording preserved in
Rite I with updating of Elizabethan English). The desires of Catholic
Revival movement expressed in the Prayer Book were both strongly
supported and vigorously resisted. Styles of worship still ranged from
the typically Protestant bare-bones approach to elaborate ceremonial
despite their using the same Prayer Book. The biggest change was from
Morning Prayer to celebration of the Eucharist every Sunday and holy day.
This was a substantial change from the days when baptisms, weddings, and
funerals were more common than the Eucharist. Sacramental theology also
changed with a renewed emphasis on the Real Presence of Christ in the
Eucharist, on Baptism as regeneration, and on the value of the
Sacramental Confession. The change in emphasis from awe in the presence
of death and the fear of judgment to the joy of the Resurrection began in
the 1928 Prayer Book. The order of service in the Eucharist is today
widely used by other churches, as well as the lectionary.
In the first rubric of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer is the following
statement: "The Holy Eucharist, the principal act of Christian worship
on the Lord's Day and other major feasts, and Daily Morning and Evening
Prayer, as set forth in this Book, are the regular services appointed for
public worship in this Church." This restores the centrality of the
Eucharist in Christian worship. Again, most Episcopal Churches now
celebrate the Eucharist _every Sunday_.
Indeed, in the Articles of Religion, Article 34 states: "It is not
necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly
alike; for at all times they have been diverse, and may be changed
according to the diversity of countries, times, and men's manners, so
that nothing be ordained against God's Word. Whosoever, through his
private judgment, willingly and purposely, doth openly break the
Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the
Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to
be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that
offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the
authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak
brethren. Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain,
change, and abolish, Ceremonies or Rites of the Church ordained only by
man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying."
The 1979 Prayer Book is, in many ways, the ultimate triumph of the
Catholic Revival. The Prayer Book proclaims the Episcopal Church is a
member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. The Episcopal
Church has retained the three-fold ministry of bishop, priest, and
deacon, and the Prayer Book consecration in the Eucharist retained most
of the Canon of the Mass in a way no other non-Roman church did.
Eucharistic Prayer D in the Book of Common Prayer is the Ecumenical
Eucharistic celebration used, with minor variations, in a number of
Christian denominations. It is a notable accomplishment and only a
foretaste of future unity. The Prayer Book requires people to be cleansed
of their sins before approaching the Holy Altar to receive Communion,
expressed in the Prayer Book's rhythmic cycle of repentance and
thanksgiving, designed to effect both personal and social behavior. In
conclusion, the Eucharist is the central act of Christian worship.
Hence, it is no surprise that changes in Divine Liturgy were caused by or
were themselves the cause of great theological reawakenings among
Christians of all eras from the early church to the medieval era to the
first Prayer Book of 1549 all the way to the 1979 Book of Common Prayer
in the American Church. The major thrust of the changes dealt with the
nature of the Eucharist, definitions or lack thereof concerning the Real
Presence or the Real Absence. The most significant change was perhaps
changing the liturgy from one of audience-spectator back to what the
Eucharist was originally intended to be -- an act of participation on the
part of the faithful in the saving act of Christ.
Yours in Christ,
Cindy Smith
SPAWN OF A JEWISH CARPENTER
P.S. Please direct all followups either to:
digest@dragon.uucp (Episcopal Digest)
or catholics@dragon.uucp (Free Catholics)
Thank you!