The Doctrine of the Lord's Supper. As Taught by the Church of England

The Doctrine of the Lord's Supper. As Taught by the Church of England

It is a very easy thing to make a confident assertion, and such assertions produce a greater effect on many minds than the most careful and best-established proof. Thus it is not at all an uncommon thing to hear it asserted with the utmost confidence that what is termed The Doctrine of the Real Presence, is taught by the Church of England; and the result is that a considerable number of persons believe in the assertion, and place reliance on those who make it, as if they, and they only, were the true expositors of the Churchs doctrine. In many cases a blind consent is blindly given. The Scriptures are not investigated because the p. 4point is supposed to have been settled by the Church, and the documents of the Church are not studied because the doctrine is regarded as beyond the reach of doubt; whereas, if the real groundwork of that opinion were examined, it would be found to consist in nothing more than confident assertion. But those who are loyal to the Church of England ought not to be satisfied with any such representation of its teaching. The issues at stake are far too serious, and, now that after three hundred years of faithful service the Church of England is entering on such a sifting time as she has never yet experienced, it is only fair to her that her own language should be patiently heard, and her own teaching honestly examined. This, then, is the object of this address. I am not about to discuss the teaching of Scripture, but of the Church of England; and my desire is to ascertain by the careful and candid examination of her own documents whether there is, or is not, any authority for the assertion that she teaches what is commonly called The Doctrine of the Real Presence. In doing this, our first business is to ascertain what is the real point at issue, and this is not so easy a task as it may appear, as p. 5amongst those who maintain that doctrine there are no authoritative documents on the subject to which we can refer. But, I believe, I am perfectly safe in arranging the three principal points at issue under the three heads of the Real Presence, Adoration, and Sacrifice; and these three I propose to investigate in that order. This lies at the foundation of the whole controversy, and to this our first and chief attention must be directed. Now, there can be no doubt on the minds of those who take the Word of God as their true and only guide that it is the sacred privilege of the Children of God to feed by faith on the most precious body and blood of our blessed Saviour. I am not now discussing in what way we feed on Him, or whether His words in the 6th chapter of St. John refer, or do not refer, to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. It is my own belief that they do not; but that is not the present question. My present concern is with the fact that, however we explain His words, we are taught by our Lord Himself that such a feeding is essential to our life: Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye have p. 7no life in you. Nor can there be any doubt that in 1 Cor. x. 16, 17, the partaking () of the body and blood of Christ is connected with the Lords Supper. I am not now making any assertion as to the way in which it is connected, for that is the great point to be determined. All that I now say is that there clearly is a connexion, for the words are: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many, are one bread and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread. Two things, therefore, seem plain from Scripture: that there is a feeding on the body and blood of our most blessed Saviour, without which none can live, and that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is in some way or other connected with that sacred privilege. Thus far, I presume, we are all agreed. But as to the nature of the connexion, there is the widest possible divergence. Rome teaches that by the act of consecration the bread and wine become Christ Himself; that the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine, and that both the bread p. 8and wine become each of them a whole Christ, body, soul, and divinity. The advocates for the doctrine of the Real Presence in the Church of England differ, as far as I can understand them, from Rome in one respect, and one only; namely, that they maintain that the bread and wine do not cease to have the accidents of bread and wine, so that they may still be spoken of as bread and wine, although they have become the body and blood of Christ, or rather Christ Himself. This slight difference is of no practical importance in the discussion, and appears to have been introduced only to avoid the conclusion drawn from those texts which speak of the bread as bread, and the wine as wine, after consecration. The practical conclusion is the same, viz. that our Lord Jesus Christ Himself is in the bread and in the wine. This is what is meant by the expression, The real objective presence. It means that He is present in the elements as a real independent object, without any reference to the character of the recipient, as a book is an independent object in the hand of the man who holds it, without any reference to his state of mind or character. In opposition to this, it is maintained by us who cling to the p. 9great principles of the Reformation, that there is no change whatever in the bread and wine, that they are solemnly set apart for sacramental use by means of consecration, but that they remain exactly the same as before consecration, in substance, and accidents, and everything else. That the most precious body and blood of Christ is altogether spiritual food, and that the soul feeds on it by faith, and faith alone. That there are two perfectly distinct kinds of food, the one material, and the other spiritual; the one for the body, the other for the soul; and two perfectly distinct actions; the one of the body eating the bread, the other of the soul feeding on Christ Himself by faith. That the material food is an emblem of the spiritual; and that the act of eating by the body is an emblem of the act of feeding by the soul; and the manner of the two are so far connected by sacramental appointment, that when we receive the emblem we are warranted to expect the enjoyment of the reality. When the body feeds materially on the one, the believers heart feeds spiritually on the other; but the two acts are distinct, and the one must not be confounded with the other. From this statement p. 10it will appear that the point at issue is, whether the precious body and blood of our blessed Lord and Saviour are in the bread and in the wine, so as to be eaten and drunk whenever, and by whomsoever, the elements are received, or whether the spiritual food described in this expression is received by the soul alone without being localised in the consecrated elements. And my object is to endeavour to ascertain which of these two systems is taught by the Church of England. That dear old Church is at this present time in a position to call forth the deepest anxiety and the most earnest prayers of all those who love the truth. Some are endeavouring to destroy it, some to corrupt it, and some to uphold it in its integrity. In such a state of things it is not fair that the Church should be held responsible for the assertions even of its friends. Its own voice ought to be heard, and its own clear statement carefully studied. I have no intention, therefore, of endeavouring to confuse the subject by a mass of quotations from collateral writers, but will turn at once to those authoritative documents for which the Church has made herself responsible. These are the Articles, Catechism, p. 11Liturgy, and Homilies; and these, if it please God, we will examine in order. ......Buy Now (To Read More)

Product details

Ebook Number: 52440
Author: Hoare, Edward
Release Date: Jun 30, 2016
Format: eBook
Language: English