I was a bystander to a conversation today on the "Black Rubric". For uninformed Anglicans and the rest of Christendom, this is the rubric at the end of the Anglican Liturgy which categorically denies a physical or corporeal presence in the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist. It is a verification of sorts of the 39 Articles which also state that a physical presence is not to be understood. One person in the conversation was upholding and agreeing with the fairly clear understanding of these two "documents". This person is someone whose opinion I hold in very high regard. Therefore, it is with some trepidation that I write this in dissension.
The black rubric teaches that Christ's Body is physically in heaven and that it can't be in two or more places at once, by nature. Christ is omnipresent by the power of his Spirit, not physically. So Anglicans generally hold that Christ is spiritually present in the elements (or in the reception of the elements.) There is a logic to this which I will not deny. But what frustrates me about it is that it attempts to put the Eucharist in a box. (I was tempted to say Tabernacle, but I digress...) Just as Rome will not admit of an understanding which does not involve a substantial change in the consecrated creatures, England will not recognize a view that includes the corporeal presnce of the Lord.
I don't use mystery as an excuse for ignorance or belief in that which violates the divinely ordained rules of nature. But I do think that the Church as a whole would be better off leaving some things unsaid. Jesus said "I am the bread of life". Jesus said "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood there is no life in you." Jesus said "This is my Body." Can this be defined by Aristotelian and Thomistic philosophy? What about Protestant Nominalism? Why not just say what Jesus says? In some mysterious fashion, the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord make their humble residence in Bread and Wine on Altars around the world.
Brighter minds than mine have and will give their opinion on this matter. England and Rome will not be chaging their positions. But the English view limits some of the mystery while the Roman one tries too hard to expound the exact manner of Christ's presence. The Christian faith is one of mystery and paradox. We should not shy away from that. Rather, it should be embraced in all of its holiness and beauty.
My priest used a good analogy for describing (hopefully, I don't botch it) what we as Anglican's call the the "Real Presence" which we leave as mystery, as you said.
ReplyDeleteif you take a table the purpose is to use it for eating meals on or doing work on. Now if some one were to sit on the table they have changed its use in this instance, however it still remains a table.
So as the bread and wine still exist, God has changed their use to become Christ's Body and Blood to convey the Grace to us.