Green on Article XXIX: Of the Wicked which eat not the Body of Christ in the use of the Lord's Supper

This Article first appeared in the draft presented to Convoca¬ tion in 1562. It was, however, struck out from the Articles as sanctioned by the Queen, and was not published until 1571, when it was reinserted by the Bishops.

The scruples of Cecil, or of the Queen, who both inclined to pre-Reformation doctrine on the Eucharist, may account for the withdrawal of this Article from the Convocation records in 1562; or perhaps its suppression should be traced to a desire to deal tenderly with those who held Roman doctrine, and who were still at this time in communion with the Church of England.

In 1571, however, the secession of the Romanist party in England was taking place,1 2 so that there was no need for the continued exercise of such forbearance. This circumstance would account for the readmission of the Article at that date.

A further ground for hesitation in promulgating the Article may have been the doubt raised as to the authenticity of the

1 For the first eleven years of Elizabeth’s reign the Roman party made their Communions and celebrated in English churches according to the Prayer Book. The final Bull of excommunication was not issued from Rome until 1570.

24i 2 II

words quoted and attributed to S. Augustine.1 The fairness of the quotation was, we know, called in question by Cecil during an interview with Archbishop Parker, which took place in 1 5 7 1 -2

§ 2. — OBJECT.

To guard against merely mechanical views of the Sacrament, and to provide a safeguard by reminding us how alone we may receive the Sacrament beneficially. We may compare the Article with the words of the Exhortation in the Communion Office : —

“For as the benefit is great, if with a true penitent heart and lively faith we receive that holy Sacrament … so is the danger great, if we receive the same unworthily. For then we are guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ our Saviour ; we eat and drink our own damnation, not considering the Lord’s Body.”

§ 3.— EXPOSITION.

It is clear, of course, that there can be no beneficial reception by those who are in a state of sin ; the Sacrament cannot act as a sort of charm in the case of such as come without faith and unprepared. On the other hand, we have seen that Christ is present objectively in the Sacrament, His Presence not depending upon the mental emotion or spiritual condition of the recipient.

Now we are not here involved in any contradiction. We dis¬ tinguish in the Holy Eucharist three parts — the Signum, the Res , and the Virtus Sacmmenti .3 Of these the Signum , viz., Bread and Wine, is evidently received by all communicants. The Res ,

1 The passage in question occurs in the twenty-sixth Treatise on S. John. It was rejected by the Benedictine editors of S. Augustine as not being genuine, but the words occur in Alcuin, Bede, and others.

3 For this threefold division we have the sanction of the Church Catechism. It can scarcely escape the notice of an attentive reader that there is a marked difference between the account of Baptism and that of the Holy Eucharist there given. I11 the instruction on the Sacrament of Baptism two heads are given : —

“ What is the outward visible sign or form in Baptism ? ”

“ What is the inward and spiritual grace ? ”

while in the account given of the Eucharist the teaching of the Catechism is arranged under three heads : —

“ What is the outward part or sign (Signum) of the Lord’s Supper ? ”

“ What is the inward part, or thing signified (Res) ? 55

“ What are the benefits whereof we are partakers thereby ( Virtus Sacramcnti)1 ”

the Body and Blood of Christ, is really there, and is offered to all.1 But while the reality of the Sacrament is not dependent upon faith,2 our own individual ability to partake of Christ is thus dependent. Christ’s Presence is only realised by the faithful ; only they receive the Virtus of the Sacrament ; only they “ so eat the Flesh of Christ and drink His Blood ” 3 that He evermore dwells in them, and they in Him.

The wicked, as our Article says, are in no wise partakers of Christ ; on the contrary, by their wilfulness and misuse of His most holy Ordinance, they incur condemnation. (See the passages of Scripture quoted below.)

It is to be noted that, since It neither derives virtue nor efficacy from the worthiness of the receivers, nor suffers any loss or diminution of Its power and perfectness by reason of their unworthiness, therefore the Sacrament always takes effect ; but not always the same effect. To some it is the savour of life, unto life ; to others, of death, unto death : —

“In such only as worthily receive the Sacraments, they have a wholesome effect or operation : but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves damnation” (Article XXV.).

“ As of some the Scripture saith, that their riches is their redemption, and to some it is their damnation ; and as God’s word to some is life, to some it is death and a snare, as the prophet saith ; and Christ Himself to some is a stone to stumble at, to some is a raising from death ; not by conversion of substances ( i.e ., it is one and the same word and one and the same Christ, whatever the effect may be), but by good or evil use, that thing which to the godly is salvation, to the ungodly is damnation : so is the water in Baptism, and the Bread and Wine in the Lord’s Supper, to the worthy receivers Christ Himself and eternal life, and to the unworthy receivers everlasting death and damnation : not by conversion of one substance into another (the Sacraments are the same in both cases), but by godly or ungodly use thereof.”

2 Cf. Second Helvetic Confession, Art. XIX.

“ Interim sicut a dignitate, vel indignitate ministrorum, non aestimamus integritatem sacramentorum, itaque neque a conditione sumentium. Agnosci- mus enim sacramentorum integritatem ex fide vel veritate ineraque bonitate Dei dependere. Sicut enim Verbum Dei manet verum Verbum Dei, quo non tantum verba nuda recitantur, dum praedicatur, sed simul a Deo offerun- tur res verbis significatae, vel annunciatae, tametsi impii vel increduli verba audiant, et intelligant, rebus tamen significatis non perfruantur ; eo quod vera fide non recipiant : Ita sacramenta verbo, signis, et rebus significatis, con- stantia, manent vera et integra Sacramenta, non tantum significantia res sacras, sed Deo ojferente etiam res significatas , tametsi increduli res oblatas non percipiant. Fit hoc non dantis aut offerentis Dei vitio, sed hominum sine fide illegitimeque accipientium culpa ; quorum incredulitas fidem Dei irritam non facit.”

3 Prayer of Humble Access in Communion Office.

Our exposition is in accordance with Scripture teaching on the subject ; see, e.g. : —

[…]

A person who received unworthily could not be said to be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord if the Elements, after consecration, were mere ordinary bread and wine.

[…]

But there would be no blame in not discriminating the Lord’s Body, unless that Body were present there.

Notes

• An account of the occurrence is given in Strype’s “Parker,” pp. 331, 332.
• Cf. Cranmer, Works, iii. p. 146: —