THE BIBLICAL BASIS, THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, AND THE

REFORMED CATHOLIC THEOLOGY OF THE SERVICE OF HOLY COMMUNION

OF THE 1662 BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER

BY

THE REV’D DR SG RINDAHL

FORT DRUM, NY

10 DEC 2013
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1
Biblical Language ............................................................................................................. 3
Biblical Form .................................................................................................................... 8
THE ANGLICAN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF WORSHIP ............................... 8
THE ANGLICAN PATTERN OF WORSHIP .............................................................. 9
HISTORICAL BASIS .......................................................................................................... 11
THEOLOGICAL BASIS...................................................................................................... 15
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 20
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 21
APPENDIX A – THE TABERNACLE ............................................................................... 23
APPENDIX B – THE TEMPLE .......................................................................................... 24
APPENDIX C – THE HOLY OF HOLIES ......................................................................... 25
APPENDIX D – THE SYNAGOGUE................................................................................. 26
APPENDIX E – THE TRADITIONAL ANGLICAN CHURCH ....................................... 27
 INTRODUCTION

Having been converted to Christ in a non-Liturgical denomination, I was largely

free of any understanding as to what the liturgy is or why it was performed. In the church

of my youth if the liturgy was mentioned it was done so with an at best dismissive response

and at worst a derisive reaction accompanied with accusations of such practices being non-

Christian.

These anti-Liturgy biases seeped into my own thinking and I soon accepted the

“common understanding” that the liturgy was unnecessary, risked (if not outright violated

the injunction against) “vain repetition” warned against in Matthew 6:7, was non-biblical,

was “man-made” without historic basis in the practice of the early church, and instilled an

understanding of God that was without theological warrant. All of these factors added up to

a belief that the liturgical practices of some churches obscured if not outright destroyed the

conveyance of the Gospel message to the people. Complicating the matter was that when I

asked people who attended such churches why they did what they did, they did not know

and could not answer with anything more than a “because we do” response. This in-turn

strengthened my biases against the liturgy as something to be avoided.

When I was in Christian ministry in the denomination of my youth I began to

question the format of the service. It had no distinctly biblical pattern from which it was

derived. The service pattern could only be traced back a few hundred years so there was a

lack of significant historicity. Finally, it seemed incomplete. As I began to feel restless

within the denomination’s methods I sensed a growing appreciation for the liturgy.

1
 Over time I began to read and privately use the Book of Common Prayer for my

personal devotional time.1 I began to see the Gospel story woven throughout the liturgy in

its wording, physical movement, and (when in a place of worship designed for the Liturgy)

the very architectural setting.2 I finally realized that the liturgy did not obscure the Gospel.

Rather, it was the Gospel writ large in words, actions, and space all of which were rooted in

biblical examples, historical practices, and theological principles. Soon I was converted to

liturgical worship and eventually moved denominationally to match. The result of that

move was a lot of misunderstandings and even accusations of leaving the faith. In answer

to these concerns, I offer the following essay where I purpose to explain the Biblical Basis,

the Historical Background, and the Reformed Catholic Theology of the Service of Holy

Communion of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.3

BIBLICAL BASIS

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer Service of Holy Communion is thoroughly

biblical.4 It is biblical both in its own language and in its form both of which will be

described in the following sections.

1
Church of England. Book of Common Prayer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1662.
Throughout the body of this essay “Book of common Prayer” or “BCP” refers to the Book of Common
Prayer, 1662 unless otherwise noted.
2
Addleshaw, G.W.O., and Frederick Etchells. The Architectural Setting of Anglican Worship.
London: Faber and Faber, n.d.
3
“Catholic in this statement is reference to the true meaning of the word catholic which is
“Universal” or “Throughout the Whole” and is intended to reference back to the period of Church history
prior to ecclesiastical abuses and corruption of the Gospel message as a result of said abuses which resulted in
the need for reformation (or it could be said “restoration”) to return the church to its earliest beliefs and
practices.

2
Biblical Language

It has been said that Anglicans like the Bible because there is so much Prayer Book

in it. While said a bit tongue-in-cheek, the comment reveals one of the great truths of the

Book of Common Prayer – it is filled with passages from the Bible. The BCP service of

Holy Communion is no exception.

The service begins with a recitation of the Lord’s Prayer as found in Matthew 6:9–

13. From the Lord’s Prayer the service continues with the Collect for Purity.5

ALMIGHTY God, unto whom all hearts be open, all desires known, and from
whom no secrets are hid; Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of thy
Holy Spirit, that we may perfectly love thee, and worthily magnify thy holy Name;
through Christ our Lord. Amen.

This prayer is reflective of multiple biblical lessons. Job 42:2 tells us that nothing can be

withheld from God, 1st Kings 8:39 tells us that God knows the hearts of everyone, Psalm

38:9 tells us our longings are known to God. These are but a few examples from the Bible

of how the opening of this prayer is biblically based. Job 32:8 explains that it is God that

give mankind understanding. Matthew 15:19 tells us that it is out of the heart that evil

thoughts proceed. In James 4:8 we are told to draw close to God so that He will draw close

to us and to purify ourselves in the process. The overriding message of Psalm 51 is that of

a plea for God to purify the sinner and make him clean and Psalm 139 re-emphasizes God’s

all-knowing nature and ability to cleanse the sinner of his sins. Finally, our call to love God

4
The full text of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer Service for Holy Communion can be found here:
http://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-worship/worship/book-of-common-prayer/the-lord%27s-supper-or-
holy-communion.aspx accessed 27 November 2013.
5
Collect is a term for particular prayers as found in the liturgical form.

3
and magnify His name is taught to us in the Great Commandment found in Matthew 22:37

among many other locations.6

After the Collect for Purity the service immediately returns to direct quotes from the

Bible with a rehearsal of the Ten Commandments which are found both in Exodus 20:1-17

and Deuteronomy 5:7-21. In response to the reading of the commandments the worshippers

respond, “Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.” This is the

response until the last commandment when the worshippers respond, “Lord have mercy

upon us, and write all these laws in our hearts, we beseech thee.” These petitions are based

upon the biblical teachings found in Psalm 33:22 which asks the Lord to have mercy upon

us, the example given in Luke 18:13 where mercy is asked by the tax-collector, 1st Kings

8:58 which asks God to incline our hearts toward Him, and Jeremiah 31:33 where God

explains that He will write His laws upon the hearts of His people in the new covenant.

Then there is the collect for those in authority (in the case of the 1662 BCP this is

currently Queen Elizabeth, although local adaptations are allowed and expected to be made

according to Article 34 of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion).7 This collect is in

accordance with the exhortation found in 1st Timothy chapter 2 which reads,

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings
be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead
a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is

6
Henry Ives Bailey, The Liturgy Compared with the Bible (London, UK: Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge, 1857), 287-289. I have only given a portion of the references cited by Bailey. His
work is used throughout the this essay as a “go to” guide for finding biblical basis of liturgical language.
7
The Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion can be found in multiple locations including the majority of
BCP’s printed around the world. An online copy can be accessed here:
http://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html accessed 02 December 2013.

4
 pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to
come to the knowledge of the truth.8

Bailey gives an extensive list of biblical references for the collect for the Queen (those in

authority) which gives warrant for each specific petition within the collect demonstrating it

to be an incredibly biblically grounded prayer.9

After the prayer for those in authority there is the Collect of the Day and then

readings from multiple sections of the Bible following an established lectionary to ensure

the entirety of the Bible is read through and preached on over the course of a year.10 Once

the passages of scripture are read the people respond with the reciting of the Nicene

Creed.11

After the Nicene Creed there is a sermon in which the priest expounds upon the

meaning of the passage and proclaims the Good News – the Gospel message from the

scripture passage to the listener. This is in compliance with the multiple exhortations to

preach found in the New Testament and follows Jesus’ example of preaching the Good

News and coming of the Kingdom of God.

Following this there is the collection of alms following the example set in 1st

Corinthians 16:1-3 with each worshipper giving as he or she feels led according to 2nd

8
1 Timothy 2:1–4, The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society,
2001). All scripture quotes from here following will be from the ESV unless otherwise noted.

9
Bailey should be consulted for further detail as there is not room here to give a complete account of
the references.
10
Or over three years for those parishes that have switched to a modern 3-Year Cycle Lectionary.
11
The Nicene Creed is a multi-point statement which serves as a concise summary of the Christian
faith. While each of its assertions can be connected to a biblical reference, it is primarily a theological
statement written to defend orthodox Christianity against various heresies. The text of the Nicene Creed can
be found in multiple locations including here: http://anglicansonline.org/basics/nicene.html accessed 02
December 2013.

5
Corinthians 9:6-8. This giving of alms is an act of worship promoted in the Bible as a

means of supplying the needs of the ministry and bringing blessings upon the giver.12

The collection is followed by the Prayer for Christ’s Church Militant.13 A prayer

for the many aspects of life both within the collected body of believers and how Christians

are to act in the world around them. Each of its precepts drawn from biblical warrant.14

Now we arrive at the Holy Communion specific portion of the service. First, there

is a warning. The parishioners are warned that a service of Holy Communion will be held

and that they are to prepare themselves accordingly. These preparations are to ensure that

that one will take time to confess sin and to reconcile with neighbor so that the sacrament

can be taken to the benefit of the soul rather than to its peril. This is based on the biblical

admonition found in 1st Corinthians 11 that one must judge oneself so that one is not judged

by God for taking the sacrament in an unworthy manner.

Upon completion of the warning those who are repentant and in concord with their

neighbors are exhorted to partake in the sacrament. Prior to continuing all present are led in

a time of corporate confession and pronouncement of absolution. This is reflective of the

biblical requirement to confess one’s sins in order to receive forgiveness of those sins and

Jesus’ entrusting the power to proclaim forgiveness to His Apostles and those who follow

in their office.15 This confession and absolution is immediately followed by “the

12
Note – This is not a comment about “Prosperity Gospel” but rather, it is a comment that
acknowledges that God does promise to bless those who give to His work. Financial blessing should not be
considered the expected end state of giving tithes and offerings.
13
“Militant” meaning those still on Earth and therefore fighting against the influence of sin.
14
See Bailey, p299-308.
15
James 5:16, 1 John 1:9, and John 20:22 among others.

6
comfortable words” – quotes from scripture about how God promises forgiveness to those

who confess.

The service continues with prayers that reflect the day or season and then the

“Prayer of Humble Access.” This is most directly linked to Matthew 15:26-28 where the

woman asks Jesus for a blessing and He responds with a challenge about it not being right

to feed the children’s bread to the dogs. From here the service moves to the consecration of

the Communion elements.

The consecration begins with the anamnesis which is a retelling of the life of Christ

and His sacrifice as detailed in the various biblical stories. From there it moves to the

actual words of consecration as given by Jesus.16 The consecrated bread and wine are

distributed to the faithful bringing them into communion with the body and blood of

Jesus.17

The service closes with another reciting of the Lord’s Prayer and a prayer offering

of ourselves to be living sacrifices to God in our praise and thanksgiving in accordance of

the precept taught in Romans 12:1.

From these many examples it is clear that the 1662 Book of Common Prayer of

thoroughly biblical in its language. Every bit of its language is either a quote from the

Bible or is a prayer or exhortation developed directly from the biblical text. Now it is time

to explore the biblical form of the BCP Holy Communion service.

16
Luke 22:19-20 and 1st Corinthians 11:24-25.
17
1 Corinthians 10:16-17.

7
Biblical Form

The form of the 1662 BCP Holy Communion liturgy is equally biblical as its

content. To demonstrate this fact it is important to briefly describe the architectural design

of worship and the pattern of worship.

THE ANGLICAN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF WORSHIP

The Anglican form of worship begins with the design of its buildings. In the

architecture of Anglican worship the worshipper is placed into the earliest of biblical

worship spaces, the Tabernacle. The tabernacle then influenced the design of the Temple,

the Temple influenced the design of the synagogues, and they the earliest churches and

churches ever since. To see these design influences see appendixes A through E.18 In the

diagrams provided in the appendixes it is clear how the church’s architecture correlates to

that of the biblical format (with the addition of transepts to make it cruciform) . The Nave

being translated from the Court, the Chancel from the Holy Place, and the Sanctuary from

the Holy of Holies.19

What is not completely clear from the images (although it can be seen in the

diagram of the Temple) is that each portion of the church is slightly elevated from the

preceding section. The worshipper goes up (typically a step or two) to enter the Court/Nave

then again for the Holy Place/Chancel and finally again at the Holy of Holies/Sanctuary.20

This is a physical reminder that we go up to be in the presence of God.

18
Exodus 25-27; 2nd Chronicles 3-5.
19
For detailed description of the development of Anglican Churches see Addleshaw and Etchells.
20
For the Holy of Holies only the one priest would go up the steps and enter. In Christian worship
all worshippers have access to the Sanctuary when receiving Holy Communion. Teaching through motion
that the Christian is sanctified by drawing close to God.

8
 We know the Garden of Eden was the high ground by the fact that the river flowed

out of it.21 God’s throne in Heaven is above a sea described as being like glass and from

the throne flows the River of the Water of Life.22 “The temple was not just another place of

worship but a reminder of God’s creation in its pristine order – a little Paradise. Like the

Garden of Eden, the sanctuary was the place where heaven and earth converged – the

LORD was in heaven, and he was also in his holy temple.”23 Likewise, Anglican worship

space is designed to bring the worshipper into communion with the incarnate Lord. Jesus

has ascended to Heaven and yet He is with His people.

THE ANGLICAN PATTERN OF WORSHIP

The pattern of BCP Holy Communion service is one of preparation, communion,

and praise. Each of these elements have biblical warrants. The preparation is a matter of

confession and instruction in the form of preaching reflective of the many biblical mandates

for God’s people to confess and repent to receive God’s grace and promotion of preaching

of the scripture so that mankind might know the Word with the result of hearing the Good

News and receiving salvation.24

The pattern for the actual reception of the Holy Communion elements is based on

the Gospel and Epistle narratives of the institution of the Lord’s Supper.25 Furthermore, it

21
Genesis 2:10.
22
Revelation 4:6; 22:1-2.
23
Allen P. Ross, Recalling the Hope of Glory: Biblical Worship from the Garden to the New
Creation (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2006), 85. See Ross for a very comprehensive description
of the biblical roots of Christian worship.
24
Psalm 32:5, 38:18-22; Proverbs 28:13; Romans 10:9-11; James 15:6; 1 John 1:5-10; Mark 1:38-38,
3:14, 16:20; Romans 10:14-17, among others.

9
is the biblically demonstrated way in which the people of God saw the post-resurrection

Jesus clearly. Biblically, it is also in the combining of the Holy Communion breaking of

bread with scriptural teaching that the teaching of Gospel can be understood in full.26

In the institution of the Lord’s Supper Jesus redefined the Passover meal inserting

Himself as the “true Paschal Lamb that was slain for the remission of sins.”27 When doing

this He took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to His disciples then took wine, blessed

it, and gave it to His disciples. Today, in the liturgy we follow the pattern of taking,

blessing, breaking, and giving of the elements to Christian worshippers. In participation in

the Lord’s Supper (AKA Holy Communion, AKA the Eucharist) the worshipper is brought

into communion with the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and looks forward to the ultimate

wedding banquet in the Kingdom of God.28

Finally, in the pattern of worship Christians give praise and thanksgiving for the

grace they have received with the words, “O Lord and heavenly Father, we thy humble

servants entirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of

praise and thanksgiving…” or “Almighty and everliving God, we most heartily thank thee,

for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us, who have duly received these holy mysteries…”.

This is followed with more praise in the form of the Gloria, “Glory be to God on high, and

in earth peace, good will towards men. We praise thee, we bless thee, we worship thee, we

25
Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-20; 1st Corinthians 11:23-26.
26
Luke 24:28-35.
27
Ross, Recalling, 395.
28
Isaiah 25:6; Matthew 8:11; Revelation 19:9.

10
glorify thee, we give thanks to thee for thy great glory…”29 Each of these are reflective of

the multiple biblical examples of giving praise to God for His mighty works.30

Having demonstrated the overwhelming biblical support for the Anglican service of

Holy Communion, it is important to demonstrate the historicity of the liturgy.

HISTORICAL BASIS

I was raised in a denomination which rejected liturgical worship as “an invention of

man” and therefore it was without biblical or historical validity and interfered with true

Christian worship. These charges would be hard to overcome if they were true. As the

previous section gave strong defense of the biblical basis for the liturgy, this section will

build the case for the historical basis for the liturgy.

How far back does the liturgy date? Effectively, prior to Jesus’ incarnation. Just as

the design of the church building relied upon Tabernacle/Temple antecedents, so does the

liturgical motion of the church. To enter the Temple required washing in the lavers.

Entering the membership of the Church requires Baptism. In the Temple sacrifices were

constantly being made on behalf of the faithful. In the Church the Sacrifice of Christ is the

once and for all sacrifice that is re-presented in the Eucharistic liturgy. The translation of

existing Temple worship to Christian worship is easy to understand when it is remembered

that during the explosive growth of the Church immediately following Pentecost “a great

29
BCP, “The Order for the Administration of The Lord's Supper or Holy Communion.”
30
Hebrews 13:15; Revelation 19:5 among many others.

11
many of the priests became obedient to the faith.”31 These men would have easily seen

how what they had been doing was merely a foreshadowing of the incarnation and sacrifice

of Jesus and therefore been prime movers to develop the liturgy and worship practices of

the infant church.

During the first centuries of the Church Christians met in homes for the sake of

worship. There are biblical examples of this in Romans (16:5), 1st Corinthians (16:19),

Colossians (4:15), and Philemon (2). These references, among other sources, have lead

many people to believe that a house church was a simple affair with all the faithful gathered

around.32 However, “[t]he evidence is that structural changes were made to the houses so

as to better accommodate the rituals of the meeting” (emphasis added).33 An illustration

found in the Oxford History of Christian worship shows the design of such a retrofitted

home that has been discovered in an archaeological dig. Walls were removed in order to

create an oblong worship space with an elevated altar on the east wall.34

Concerning the liturgy itself, the earliest evidence of a Eucharistic liturgy is the

narrative from 1st Corinthians and the Didache. In these the combination of “word” and

“sacrament” is not disputed. “The only real question is whether such ‘liturgies of the word’

always came before the eucharistic (sic) meal or if… they were part of an extended

31
Acts 6:7.

32
I have personally been told by multiple people that the informal “family style” house church is the
biblical/1st century model and therefore churches as we know them should be abandoned.
33
Gail Ramshaw, Christian Worship: 100,000 Sundays of Symbols and Rituals (Minneapolis, MN:
Fortress Press, 2009), 79.
34
Geoffrey Wainwright and Karen B. Westerfield-Tucker, The Oxford History of Christian Worship
(New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006), 49.

12
discourse on the word occurring after the meal.”35 In the Didiche (exact date disputed but

ranged from AD 70-10036) the liturgy is still rudimentary but clearly forming and includes

the requirement of confession and blessing of bread and wine as part of the Eucharistic

meal.37

From the biblical and house church origins the “essential nucleus of the Liturgy

consisted of at least Benediction, the breaking of the Bread, the giving of thanks, and the

taking of the Cup into the hands, as is seen from the Gospel narrative [Matt. 26:22; Mark

14:22; Luke 22:19]; and also from the special revelation made to St. Paul [1 Cor. 11:23,

24].”38 This liturgical nucleus of the Apostolic age continued to develop along four distinct

lines. “Of the many Liturgies which are very ancient there are several which undoubtedly

belong to the primitive age of Christianity… They are the Liturgies which go by the names

of St. James, St. Mark, St. Peter, and St. John; the first was the Liturgy of Jerusalem, the

second of Alexandria, the third of Rome, and the fourth of Ephesus.”39

These liturgies developed in different areas of the Church and are the foundational

sources of the liturgies currently in use. The following two charts show the development

and internal variations.

35
Wainwright and Westerfield, 49.
36
J. Chapman, Catholic Encyclopedia "Didache". 1908.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04779a.htm (accessed 12 07, 2013).
37
Joseph Barber Lightfoot and J. R. Harmer, The Apostolic Fathers (London: Macmillan and Co.,
1891), 233.
38
John Henry Blunt, ed., The Annotated Book of Common Prayer, Revised and Enlarged Edition.
(New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1889), 344.

39
Blunt, 345.

13
and

40

What is important to glean from these charts is that although there are variations

from one liturgy to the next, they all include the same core elements. For this essay it is

crucial to see that the liturgy used in the 1662 BCP traces its source to two of the liturgies

of antiquity and that British Christians had an extant ancient Christian liturgy prior to the

arrival of the Roman Catholic Church in the person of Augustine of Canterbury. “By the

advice of St. Gregory [Augustine] introduced some changes into the Liturgy which he

found in use; the changes coming, not directly from the Roman Sacramentary of St.

40
Blunt, 346-347.

14
Gregory, but ‘from a sister rite, formed in the south of France.’”41 Through Cranmer’s

work the liturgy was restored to represent the theology of pre-medieval liturgies.

THEOLOGICAL BASIS

The preceding sections have summarily answered the charges that the liturgy is non-

biblical and without historical foundation. The last charge to answer is that the liturgy

obscures, or even destroys, the Gospel message in its practice. This charge can be

understood in light of medieval practices that gave rise to superstition. It will be

demonstrated, however, that with the Cranmerian restoration of the liturgy the theology of

the Gospel message and Christian response is made clear.

To begin it must be understood that Anglicanism is part of the Church catholic. As

mentioned in the Historical Basis section, for the Church existing in England the

Reformation was truly more of a restoration. Rather than rejecting the Roman Catholic

Church in favor of something new – Anglicanism reformed the practices of the Church to

restore a pre-medieval church which is described as Reformed Catholic.

There were a few distinct items within the Roman theology of the Roman liturgy

that caused Archbishop Thomas Cranmer and other members of the English Church’s

leadership to desire reform. A primary concern was the “objectification of Grace.”42 This

is the theological corruption that resulted in a belief that the consecrated elements of the

Eucharist did not just convey God’s grace but they were in fact Grace in their physical

41
Blunt, 346.

42
Ray Sutton, Lecture Notes, Anglican Liturgics, Cranmer Theological House.

15
being. This objectification of grace gave rise to abuse and superstition and was rejected by

Cranmer in his work to restore liturgical theology to that of the Church Fathers with

particular attention to Chrysostom. Cranmer explained, “the bread and wine be so

consecrated [with Jesus’ words of consecration], that whosoever with a lively faith doth eat

that bread and drink that wine, doth spiritually eat, drink, and feed upon Christ, sitting in

heaven with his Father. And this is the whole meaning of St. Chrysostome.”43 To receive

grace (rather than condemnation) therefore is contingent on the recipient being faithful.

The next point of theology that was reformed by Cranmer was the “sacrifice of the

Mass.” This is the belief that Eucharist was a propitiatory sacrifice to assuage the wrath of

God.44 It is described as such in the Trent Catechism (See the Trent Catechism, cap. iv.

quæstt. 73, 75.), “the sacred and holy sacrifice of the Mass is not only a sacrifice of praise

and eucharist (sic), or a mere commemoration of the sacrifice effected on the Cross, but

also truly a propitiatory sacrifice, by which God is appeased, and rendered propitious to

us” (emphasis theirs).45

This theology of the “sacrifice of the Mass”, however, is not found in the earliest

liturgies. “[S]uch was not the doctrine of the Latin churches, even in the ninth century,

43
Thomas Cranmer, The Remains of Thomas Cranmer, ed. Henry Jenkyns, vol. 2 (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1833), 416.

44
Millard J. Erickson, The Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway
Books, 2001), s.v. Propitiatory Sacrifice.

45
Quoted in Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, eds., The Ante-Nicene
Fathers: Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Novatian, Appendix, vol. 5 (Buffalo, NY:
Christian Literature Company, 1886), 410.

16
sufficiently appears from the treatise of Ratramn; but it is not less apparent from the ancient

liturgies themselves.”46 Bishop Hugh Latimer preached against the doctrine saying:

Christ said‚ Omnia traham ad meipsum: “I will draw all things to myself.” He
meaneth‚ drawing of man’s soul to salvation. And that he said he would do per
semetipsum‚ by his own self; not by any other body’s sacrifice. He meant by his
own sacrifice on the cross‚ where he offered himself for the redemption of mankind;
and not the sacrifice of the mass to be offered by another. For who can offer him
but himself? He was both the offerer and the offering.47

There was also the common belief that the “sacrifice of the Mass” was a new

sacrifice separate from that of the Christ on the Cross.

The multiplication of Masses came to be regarded as a multiplication of sacrifices

having a certain species of absolute and independent value. The Cross, it was
popularly thought, availed for original sin; but sacrifices of Masses were so many
separate propitiatory remedies for actual sin.48

Christ is offered… in the holy Supper; i.e. as the sole ground of our
reconciliation and acceptance. This is the deep truth which lies at the bottom of the
Catholic mass, and gives it still such power over the religious mind.
But this idea in process of time became adulterated with foreign elements, and
transformed into the Graeco-Roman doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass. According
to this doctrine the Eucharist is an unbloody repetition of the atoning sacrifice of
Christ by the priesthood for the salvation of the living and the dead; so that the body
of Christ is truly and literally offered every day and every hour, and upon
innumerable altars at the same time.49

The reformers within the English Church recognized these to be a corruptions to the

Sacrament.50 “Cranmer and the four bishops who went with him rejected the sacrifice of

46
Alexander Roberts et al, eds., ANF, vol 5, 410.

47
Hugh Latimer, Sermons by Hugh Latimer, ed. George Elwes Corrie, The Parker Society
(Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1844), 72.

48
Francis J. Hall, The Sacraments: Dogmatic Theology (New York, NY: Longmans, Green, and Co.,
1921), 97.

49
Philip Schaff and David Schley Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 3 (New York, NY:
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910), 504–505.

17
the mass, as it had hitherto been received in England and elsewhere.”51 In the reforming of

the liturgy “Cranmer chose to adapt, paraphrase and to transform the Sarum (or Salisbury)

rite, the rite most in use in England at the time.”52 In the writing of the liturgy and the near

simultaneous drafting of the Articles of Religion (which had the purpose of giving a

succinct summary of the theology of the church) great care was used in the wording related

to the Eucharist.

As to the Eucharistic sacrifice, both the draft and the official form condemned any
opinion which might conflict with the complete efficacy of “the offering of Christ
made once for ever,” and in particular any view that the sacrifice of the cross was
offered for original sin only, and that the sacrifice of the Mass was a distinct and
parallel sacrifice for actual sins.53

Cranmer did not simply reject the doctrine of the sacrifice of the Mass. He

reformed the theology of the Eucharist to what it was prior to its corruption and abuse. He

restored the early church doctrine that Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross was once and

sufficient while simultaneously being a sacrifice that is without end. Making clear that

Christ’s sacrifice is a sacrifice which therefore extends its benefit throughout the entirety of

history – past, present, and future.

It is Christ giving us anew His finished and full sacrifice. It is not we who offer
Christ to God, but Christ in the midst giving Himself to us. It is not the bloodless
sacrifice of the Mass. He does not offer Himself to God again. … The finished Act

50
Paul Avis, Anglicanism and the Christian Church: Theological Resources in Historical
Perspective (London, UK: T&T Clark, 2002), 13.

51
Francis Aidan Gasquet and Edmund Bishop, Edward VI and the Book of Common Prayer, Second
Edition. (London, UK: John Hodges, 1891), 86.

52
Owen F. Cummings, Eucharistic Doctors: A Theological History (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press,
2005), 187.

53
Darwell Stone, A History of the Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist (London, UK: Longmans, Green,
and Co, 1909), 146.

18
 is certainly in its nature an Eternal Act, an eternal once-for-all; and the gift of it to
us in the Supper may “function” still in the Church.54

Additionally, Cranmer called upon the faithful to give a sacrifice of praise and

thanksgiving (as discussed earlier) and to be a living sacrifice to God in loving response to

Jesus being God’s sacrifice for us. This is based on the teaching of Romans 12:1 and is

evident in the post-Communion prayer which includes,

And here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord, ourselves, our souls and bodies, to
be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee; humbly beseeching thee, that
all we, who are partakers of this holy Communion, may be fulfilled with thy grace
and heavenly benediction…55

This reformed nature of the sacrifice invites the understanding of sacrificial

Christian living, giving alms to the poor, being steadfast in faith, providing praise and

thanksgiving, and being penitent and contrite when convicted of sin. Simultaneously, this

understanding of the sacrifice does not dismiss Christ’s self-offering of His mystical body

in the Eucharist.56

Thomas Cranmer was a reformed Catholic and the theology of the liturgy he wrote

for the 1549 BCP, which is the foundation of the 1662 BCP, is reformed Catholicism.

Cranmer “sought to build up the Catholic Church anew on the same foundations of the

Bible, creeds, and the great councils of the early church… Cranmer was guiding the Church

of England to a renewed Catholicity.”57 The result is a liturgy that retains what was right

54
P. T. Forsyth, Lectures on the Church and the Sacraments (London, UK: Longmans, Green and
Co., 1917), 256–257.

55
BCP, “The Order for the Administration of The Lord's Supper or Holy Communion.”

56
Kenneth Stevenson, "A Memorial Sacrifice." In The Mystery of the Eucharist in the Anglican
Tradition, by H.R. McAdoo, & Kenneth Stevenson, (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008), 131.
57
Diarmaid MacCulloch quoted in Cummings, 190.

19
and reformed what was in error; a liturgy that emphasizes the Trinity, the need for personal

confession, God’s grace in Christ’s sacrifice, and the proper Christian response.

CONCLUSION

The service of Holy Communion in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer has been

shown to be biblical, historical, and fully Catholic in its best reformed sense. There is not a

single turn of phrase in the liturgy that cannot be traced to a passage of scripture for its

support. The service itself, in its architectural design and pattern of worship, is of

undoubted historicity which pre-dates the liturgical developments of the Roman liturgy.

Furthermore, the Reformed Catholic theology of the liturgy emphasizes the centrality and

uniqueness of Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf while restoring the obligation of the faithful

to live lives reflective of the grace they have received.

In light of these facts the Anglican Eucharist can withstand accusations on all fronts.

It can show the charges leveled by many evangelical “Free Church” Protestants to be

baseless. At the same time, it can prove itself to be fully Catholic in its purest form and

theology.

20
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Addleshaw, G.W.O., and Frederick Etchells. The Architectural Setting of Anglican

Worship. London: Faber and Faber, n.d.
Avis, Paul. Anglicanism and the Christian Church: Theological Resuurces in Historical
Perspective. London; New York, UK; NY: T&T Clark, 2002.
Bailey, Henry Ives. The Liturgy Compared with the Bible. London: Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge, 1857.
Blunt, John Henry, ed. The Annotated Book of Common Prayer. Revised and Enlarged.
New York, NY: E.P. Dutton & Co, 1889.
Chapman, J. Catholic Encyclopedia "Didache". 1908.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04779a.htm (accessed 12 07, 2013).
Church of England. Book of Common Prayer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1662.
Cranmer, Thomas. The Remains of Thomas Cranmer. Edited by Henry Jenkyns. Vol. 2.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1833.
Cummings, Owen F. Eucharistic Doctors: A Theological History. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist
Press, 2005.
Erickson, Millard. The Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology. wheaton, IL: Crossway,
2001.
Forsyth, P.T. Lectures on the Church and the Sacraments. London, UK: Longmans, Green,
and Co, 1917.
Gasquet, Francis Aidan, and Edmund Bishop. Edward VI and the Book of common Prayer:
An Examination into Its Origin and Early History with an Appendix of Unpublished
Documents. Second. London, UK: John Hodges, 1891.
Hall, Francis. The Sacraments: Dogmatic Theology. New York, NY: Longmans, Green, and
Co, 1921.
Latimer, Hugh. Sermons by Hugh Latimer. Edited by George Elwes Corrie, & The Parker
Society. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1844.
Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, and J. R. Harmer. The Apostolic Fathers. London, UK:
Macmillan and Co, 1891.
Ramshaw, Gail. Christian Worship: 100,000 Sundays of Symbols and Rituals. Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press, 2009.

21
Roberts, Alexander, James Donaldson, and Cleveland A. Coxe, . The Ante-Nicene Fathers:
Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Novatian, Appendix. Vol. 5.
Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1886.
Ross, Allen P. Recalling the Hope of Glory: Biblical Worship from the Garden to the New
Creation. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2006.
Schaff, Philip, and David Schley Schaff. History of the Christian Church. Vol. 3. New
York, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1910.
Stevenson, Kenneth. "A Memorial Sacrifice." In The Mystery of the Eucharist in the
Anglican Tradition, by H.R. McAdoo, & Kenneth Stevenson. Eugene, OR: Wipf &
Stock, 2008.
Stone, Darwell. A History of the Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. London, UK: Longmans,
Green, and Co, 1909.
Wainwright, Geoffrey, and Karen B. Westerfield-Tucker, . The Oxford History of Christian
Worship. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006.

22
APPENDIX A – THE TABERNACLE

23
APPENDIX B – THE TEMPLE

24
APPENDIX C – THE HOLY OF HOLIES

25
APPENDIX D – THE SYNAGOGUE

26
APPENDIX E – THE TRADITIONAL ANGLICAN CHURCH

27