I am very grateful to an Australian correspondent who sent me this quotation from the 1549 Book of Common Prayer; the first edition to be produced by Cranmer. Concerning the distribution of Holy Communion, it says:
And although it bee redde in aunciente writers, that the people many yeares past received at the priestes handes the Sacrament of the body of Christ in theyr owne handes, and no commaundement of Christ to the contrary: Yet forasmuche as they many tymes conveyghed the same secretelye awaye, kept it with them, and diversly abused it to supersticion and wickednes: lest any suche thynge hereafter should be attempted, and that an uniformitie might be used, throughoute the whole Realme: it is thought convenient the people commonly receive the Sacrament of Christes body, in their mouthes, at the Priestes hande.
The history of the Book of Common Prayer illustrates in a fascinating way the changes of doctrine that took place in the Church of England from the reign of Henry VIII to that of Charles II. The various texts can be found at this
Book of Common Prayer page. It also has a page on the
Sarum Missal, giving the texts in Latin and English.
I am very grateful to an Australian correspondent who sent me this quotation from the 1549 Book of Common Prayer; the first edition to be produced by Cranmer. Concerning the distribution of Holy Communion, it says: 
7 comments:
And I thought my spelling was bad!
Ouch...that's painful to read, and I don't mean the style or antiquated spelling.
Did Cranmer believe in the Eucharist? I was under the impression he didn't...it would be all the more damning if he that were the case. Did he believe in consubstantiation or something like that?
Cranmer was most likely a "receptionist", believing that we "feed on Christ in our hearts by faith" but not that he is substantially present in the Eucharist. The 1549 BCP was a first step. The 1552 BCP was more protestant: in this revision, Cranmer removed references to the Mass as a sacrifice.
Having looked at the ancient texts of the BCP on the internet its hard not to come to the conclusion that Cramners effort is a vast improvement on ICEL, notwithstanding Cramners stripping the sacrificial aspects from the mass which ICEL of course.. er.. oh.. shurely shome mishtake......did ?ICEL really translate those words as that...I must be misreading er........???
I went to a really interesting Lecture on Cranmer by Diarmaid MacCulloch who suggested that Cranmer may have been more Catholic than the Catholics. May I suggest his book Thomas Cranmer: A Life.
What is Cranmer saying? Communion in the hand is good or bad?
Bad.
Post a Comment