Eucharist
Part 2 History

Chapter 26 The Reformation Period [1500-1699]

Preliminary Questions

How do you explain the relation between the Eucharist and the once and for all event of Jesus' death and resurrection? 

"For Christ did not enter into a sanctuary made by hands, a copy of the true one, but heaven itself, that he might now appear before God on our behalf. Not that he might offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters each year into the sanctuary with blood that is not his own; if that were so, he would have had to suffer repeatedly from the foundation of the world. But now once for all he has appeared at the end of the ages to take away sin by his sacrifice. Just as it is appointed that human beings die once, and after this the judgment, so also Christ, offered once to take away the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to take away sin but to bring salvation to those who eagerly await him." (Hebrews 9:24-28 (Second Reading, 32^nd Sunday of Cycle B)

[Return to top of this page]

Bibliography

Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church, October 31, 1999.  The complete text of this very important document can be found on the Vatican Website.  An understanding of "justification," "grace," and "sacrifice" are essential to understanding the background to the question "How is the Eucharist sacrificial?"

Cabié, Robert. The Eucharist, New Edition 1986. Vol II of The Church at Prayer, G. Martimort editor. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1986, pp 149-186.

Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. London: Dacre Press, 1970, pp 613-734.

Franklin, William R. "Five Affirmations on the Eucharist as Sacrifice" Worship. 69:5, September 1995, pp 386-390.

Jasper, R. C. D. and Cuming, G. J. Prayers of the Eucharist: Early and Reformed. Third Revised Edition 1987. New York: Pueblo Publishing Company, 1987, #25-43 pp 177-314.

Mitchell, Nathan. Cult and Controversy: The Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press [A Pueblo Book], 1982, pp 129-200.

Osborne, Kenan. The Christian Sacraments of Initiation (New York: Paulist Press, 1987), pp 212-225.

Pierce, Joanne M. "The Eucharist as Sacrifice: Some Contemporary Roman Catholic Reflections" Worship. 69:5, September 1995, pp 394-405.

Thomas Richstatter, O.F.M. "Who Will Be Saved? A Catholic View of Salvation" Catholic Update, Cincinnati: St. Anthony Messenger Press, April, 1994. C0494.

[Return to top of this page]

The Sacrifice of Good Friday

Eucharist Jesus With Us #9, October 2005. Q1005

The following is a draft of a published article ©2005 by St. Anthony Messenger Press, 28 w. Liberty St., Cincinnati, OH 45202.  1-800-488-0488.  The article may not be reproduced or sold without written permission from the publisher.

Often when I am giving talks on the Eucharist I will ask: “What is the Mass?” And there are always people in the audience who will respond spontaneously: “The Mass is the sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine.”  This answer from the Baltimore Catechism which I memorized in grade school has had a lasting influence on the way Catholics understand the Eucharist as a sacrifice.   

And what is a sacrifice?   Sacrifice was defined in that same catechism as “the offering of a victim by a priest to God alone, and the destruction of it in some way to acknowledge that He is the Creator of all things.” (Baltimore Catechism, ©1953, # 358)  And when does this destruction of the victim happen?   

Not all of the authors agreed on the answer to this question.  Some said it happens “when the bread was eaten”; others said it is “when the priest breaks the host.”  But the most common explanation was that the sign of Jesus’ death is found in the two-fold consecration.  The bread (Christ’s Body) is on the paten (the small round bread plate) and the wine (Christ’s Blood) is in the chalice. This separation of his Body and his Blood is the sign of Jesus’ death, the “immolation” of the sacrifice.   

The prayer book I used a child explained: “How does Jesus die again and renew His Sacrifice?  On Calvary He died ‘physically’ by the separation of His Body from His Blood.  On the altar He dies ‘mystically,’ since the words of Consecration are like a sword, ‘mystically’ separating the Body from the Blood by the two separate Consecrations.” (Father Stedman’s, Sunday Missal, ©1938, page 52.)  

This understanding of the Sacrifice of the Mass served me well for many years.  There were some “loose ends” if I pushed the explanation too far.  But one might expect some “loose ends” when trying to explain the unexplainable.  However in recent years I have begun to work out a slightly different synthesis based on things I have learned about the history of the Mass and the meaning of “remembering” and “sacrifice” in Sacred Scripture.  I want to present the basic outline of this synthesis and invite you to examine your own understanding of the Mass to see if it might enrich your appreciation of the Eucharist:   the Sacrifice of Good Friday. 

Berakah / Prayer of Blessing 

Pretend for a moment that you have never seen a jigsaw puzzle, and you have in your possession a small strangely shaped piece of cardboard with a beautiful picture on it.  You treasure this object because it was given to you by your parents and had been handed down from their parents.  Then one day you learn about jigsaw puzzles and find other objects similar to the one you possess.  And you discover that your object is actually a piece something much larger and even more beautiful.  And in the context of the total puzzle your “piece” takes on new significance and meaning.  A similar process has taken place regarding the way we think of the words of consecration at Mass.   

Recent discoveries regarding the shape and function of the Eucharistic Prayer have led us to rethink the function of the words of consecration.  Formerly the words of Jesus at the Last Supper ---“This is my body... This is my blood...”--- were, in my mind at least, the only really significant part of the Mass.  (And I believe I was not alone in this perception.  I have seen books which describe the Mass as “the words of consecration with prayers before and after.”)  Consecration was the moment when it all happened.  The altar boy rang the bells.  The singing stopped.  We stopped whatever prayers we were saying.  The priest elevated the host.  Christ had come down from heaven onto the altar. 

As wonderful and important as this is, today we see that the “institution narrative” or words of consecration are one piece of a larger picture, the Eucharistic Prayer.  In a former issue of this newsletter we examined the berakah (blessing) “shape” of the Eucharistic Prayer and said that it consisted of three parts:  1) naming, 2) thankful remembering, and 3) petition through the Holy Spirit.   

To help my students remember this berakah shape of the prayer I sometimes use the silly example of the teenager talking to his dad:  “Dad [naming], you’re the best father a guy could ever have.  [thankful remembering] You work hard for us all week to put food on the table.  I bet you’re tired and want to stay home tonight and watch television.  [petition] Can I have the keys to the car?” 

In the context of the structure of the Eucharistic Prayer, the words of consecration are seen in the context of the “grateful remembering.”  At each Eucharist we remember God’s wonderful and mysterious plan for our salvation which culminated in the incarnation and life of Jesus of Nazareth, the Last Supper with his disciples, his death on the cross, his resurrection, and his ascension into heaven.   

Anamnesis / Remembering 

God the Father freely offers the human race a share in his own divine life by sending his Son among us.  Filled with God’s spirit Jesus passed through suffering and death to return to the Father’s side.  At each Eucharist we gratefully remember this divine offering by recalling the events of the Pascal Mystery.  But we “remember” these events in the biblical sense of remembering.   

Biblical remembering is not simply recalling an event which happened once, long ago, in the past.  Anamnesis (the biblical notion of memorial) is a remembering that “makes present.”  “Remember me when you come into your kingdom. ... Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” (see Luke 23:42-43).   

The anamnesis or “grateful remembering” of the Eucharistic Prayer lifts us out of our “past / present / future” kind of earthly time (chronos in Greek) and we enter into God’s time, God’s eternal now, the time of salvation (chiros in Greek).   We do not repeat the Last Supper or Christ’s death or his resurrection, but we --- in some mysterious way --- become present to these “once and for all” events so that we “are enabled to lay hold upon them and become filled with saving grace.”  (Constitution on the Liturgy, 102) 

At the Eucharist we become present to the great events of the Paschal Mystery.  We are there with the apostles at the Last Supper.  We stand at the foot of the cross.  We witness the Resurrection and Ascension.  The Eucharist is called “the Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior.”  (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1330).

Sacrifice – Joyful Union

Biblical scholars have helped us see beyond the “death of the animal” in understanding the nature of a sacrifice.  It is not the suffering and death of the animal that is the key to the meaning of sacrifice.  Sacrifice is a ritual action which has as its aim joyful union with God.

For example on the Day of Atonement---the holiest day of the Old Testament calendar---the high priest took the blood of the animal (that is, its very life) and sprinkled it on the altar in the holy of holies (the dwelling of God on earth) and then sprinkled it on the people to indicate that God’s life flows through them.  They are united in the same blood and in the same life.  Their sins are forgiven because they are “at one” with the God’s life:  At-one-ment.  “Since the life of a living body is in its blood, I have made you put it on the altar, so that atonement may thereby be made for your own lives.” (Leviticus 17:11)    

This same “union of life” is exemplified in Jesus of Nazareth.  He let nothing stand in the way of his union with the Father.  Throughout his life he could pray “Behold, I come to do your will, O God.”  (Hebrews 10:7)   He emptied himself of all pride and self-will and everything that could impede this joyful union with his Father.  He “humbled himself, / becoming obedient to death, / even death on a cross.”  (Philippians 2:8)  At the Eucharist we stand in the presence of this mystery of sacrificial union.  

We stand in the presence of the Paschal Mystery and open ourselves to the work of the Holy Spirit to receive the Father’s offering of divine love in his Son.  And when in Holy Communion we receive Christ’s Body and drink the Blood of the new covenant, we are consumed by that Divine Love and become Christ’s Body here on earth and thus achieve the end, the purpose of sacrifice:  joyful union with God.

Our transformation into Christ is the principal petition (epiclesis / invocation) at every Eucharist.  In Eucharistic Prayer IV, for example, we ask that the Holy Spirit “gather all who share this one bread and one cup / into the one body of Christ, a living sacrifice of praise.”  Thus the sacred meal becomes the sacramental sign of the sacrifice of Christ.

 In summary, we can say that at the Eucharist we gather as the Baptized, the Body of Christ.  We read the Scriptures and hear the story of God’s wonderful plan for our salvation.  We give thanks for these memories and in the grateful remembering we become present to the Paschal Mystery.  We ask God to send the Holy Spirit to transform our bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ so that we who dine at that sacred table might be transformed into that very Body.  And in Holy Communion we receive a foretaste of that heavenly banquet where we will be one in Christ, and Christ one with God, “so that God may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28) and thus God’s eternal Plan for creation comes to its fulfillment.

 Integration and Synthesis

I believe that these insights into 1) the structure of the Eucharistic prayer, 2) the remembering that makes present, and 3) sacrifice as joyful union with God, can help us come to a deeper appreciation of the Eucharist: the Sacrifice of Good Friday. 

In trying to incorporate these ideas into our understanding of “sacrifice” I am not rejecting the understanding of the faith I received from my parents and the teachers of my youth.  Rather I hope that I am walking in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council which reminds us in the in the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation that the tradition that comes to us from the Apostles continues to grow and develop with the help of the Holy Spirit.  “For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.”  (Divine Revelation, #8) 

I invite you to see if the ideas presented in this newsletter can help you on your journey toward the “fullness of divine truth.”

“Sacrifice” and “real presence” are the key elements of our Catholic understanding of the Eucharist.  In this newsletter we have examined the Eucharist as sacrifice; but the Eucharist is also the real presence of Christ – and that will be the subject of our next newsletter.

[Return to top of this page]

The Reformation

1. The principle issue is: What role do our "Good Works" play in salvation? Are we saved by faith alone, or saved by our good works?

2. If we are saved by faith alone, there is no need to keep "repeating" [important word] the Sacrifice of Calvary.  Salvation is not earned (bought?) by good works and/or indulgences.

3. Reformers: Back to basics; remove "magic" symbols.  Counter-Reformers:  Which symbols are the "magic" ones?  Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.  

4. Today, we have moved beyond this seeming contradiction.  On October 31, 1999 German Lutheran Bishop Christian Krause, president of the Lutheran World Federation, and Catholic Cardinal Edward Cassidy, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, signed "The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" in Augsburg, Germany.  The text states that we both believe: "By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping us and calling us to good works."   Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church, October 31, 1999.  The complete text of this very important document can be found on the Vatican Website.  An understanding of "justification," "grace," and "sacrifice" are essential to understanding the background to the question "How is the Eucharist sacrificial?"

[Return to top of this page]

Sacrifice

"From the second century onward, the terminology of sacrifice was frequently applied.  Initially, the emphasis was placed on the sacrifice of the Church which was foretold by the prophet Malachi (1:10-12).  But in the third century, the favorite Old Testament text, understood to be a foreshadowing of the Eucharistic, became the sacrifice of Melchizedek in Genesis 14:18.  This happened as a result of the conscious theological reflection on the relationship of the sacrifice of the Church to the sacrifice of the cross." (Kilmartin, The Eucharist in the West, pg. 362.)

2.  Definition of Sacrifice

2A.  Common usage in American English (e.g. Oxford Dictionary)  sacrifice (noun) 1 the practice or an act of killing an animal or person or surrendering a possession as an offering to a deity. 2 an animal, person, or object offered in this way. 3 an act of giving up something one values for the sake of something that is of greater importance.

Check the definition of "sacrifice" in the Merriam-Webster Online available at www.m-w.com

1. An act of offering to a deity something precious; especially the killing of a victim on an altar
2. Something offered in sacrifice
3. Destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else; something given up or lost
4. Loss
5. Sacrifice hit

2B.  Biblical, religious, theological usage:  Sacrifice = Joyful union with God.  This "union" can be ritualized in various ways:  holocaust, burn offering, meal sharing, etc.   (Note:  smell [in OT] was considered a "spiritual sense" and God, who is pure spirit, could enjoy a beautiful smell.)

3. At the Eucharist, this joyful union is signified by sharing a meal.  The meal is the outward sign (sacrament) of the sacrifice.

A sacrament is a visible sign of invisible grace.

Meal : Sacrifice :: Sacramental Sign : Grace (union with God)

4.  "In spirituality, the goal of union with God suggests oblation as the more appropriate term for the self-offering by which the union is sought; the difficulty here has been the tendency to identify sacrifice or oblation entirely with a passive acceptance of suffering, in imitation of the suffering Christ."  [see "Sacrifice" in The New Dictionary of Catholic Spirituality.]

5.  Hebrews 9:24-28 (Second Reading, 32^nd Sunday of Cycle B) "For Christ did not enter into a sanctuary made by hands, a copy of the true one, but heaven itself, that he might now appear before God on our behalf. Not that he might offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters each year into the sanctuary with blood that is not his own; if that were so, he would have had to suffer repeatedly from the foundation of the world. But now once for all he has appeared at the end of the ages to take away sin by his sacrifice. Just as it is appointed that human beings die once, and after this the judgment, so also Christ, offered once to take away the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to take away sin but to bring salvation to those who eagerly await him.'

6.  Balance: Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday.  Each of these three speaks to us of "joyful union with God."

7.  BUT: sacrifice is not the issue!

8. To call the execution of Jesus of Nazareth a "sacrifice" involves theological reflection.

9. The temple sacrifices, familiar to the Jews and first Christians, do not form part of the lived experience of the majority of today’s catechumens.

10. The contemporary use of the word sacrifice (giving something up) can be different from the biblical understanding (joyful union with God).

11. The over-emphasis on the propitiatory aspect of the Eucharist can obscure the once-and-for-all nature of Christ’s Sacrifice.

12. The reformers were interested in preserving the meaning of Christ’s sacrifice, not in denying something about the eucharist.

13. Be able to explain why Catholics and Protestants can today come together in understanding these issues (e.g. ecumenical statements). Be able to explain why some Protestants avoid sacrificial terms (propitiation, priest, altar, etc) and why some Catholics avoid meal terms (The Lord’s Supper, etc) and insist so strongly on the sacrificial elements of eucharist.

14. The biblical notion of anamnesis is key to the resolution of the historical difficulty.

15. Anamnesis takes place through the action of the Holy Spirit in epiclesis. It is the Holy Spirit who makes us present to the reality of the "once and for all" sacrifice of Jesus. The Spirit makes possible the liturgical "hodie" (today). We no longer need to argue about "unrepeatable / repeatable" or "bloody / unbloody". Epiclesis is at the heart of every liturgical action.

16. The biblical and liturgical renewal in all of the Churches has helped all Christians grow in sacramental awareness. Through this lens of sacrament we can understand the eucharist as the sacrament of Christ’s sacrifice. And the meal the sacramental sign of the sacrifice. We no longer need to argue about "meal / sacrifice?

17. The core of the eucharistic liturgy is love: unity of Christians in Christ and with one another in the Spirit of Christ who is the soul of the Church.  This unity is the essential presupposition of the possibility of the authentic eucharistic celebration and not merely an effect of the reception of the eucharistic flesh and blood. (Kilmartin, 24)

18.  For Thomas [Aquinas], Jesus’ death is a sacrifice precisely because of his full, free, perfect self-surrender to the One who “could save him from death.” In short, Jesus’ sacrifice was “located” in his humanity, in his obedient will and in his body – not in the actions of those who executed him. Jesus became a “living sacrifice” not because of what his tormentors did (which was homicide), but because of what he did (which was a self-surrender in trust and love).

Jesus’ death thus became a liturgical act, an act of worship – one in which (as later theologians liked to say) he is simultaneously sacificium et sacerdos, priest and victim, the one who offers and the one who is offered. Jesus’ death, in short, was adoration: adoration = self-surrender = sacrifice. This same pattern (as Paul suggests in Romans 6) is replicated in all those who are plunged by baptism into Jesus’ death. Once again the equation applies: adoration = self-surrender = sacrifice. And sacrifice is the action of priests. Thus, as a body, Christians constitute a holy nation, a “royal priesthood.” (Remember, by the way, that the NT reserves the word priest, in a positive sense, to Jesus and to the people alone. Ministers, in the NT, are never called priests.)(Nathan D Mitchell “The Struggle of Religious Women for Eucharist” Benedictines (Vol ? #? ), pp 12-25.)

[Return to top of this page]

Qualities of Good Sacrifice Theology

Each time that I teach the Eucharist course, I ask the students to write an essay explaining the Eucharist as sacrifice.  After reading and critiquing the submissions, the students formulated the following list of those issues which should be included in any good explanation of the Eucharist as sacrifice. 

A good theology of Eucharist as sacrifice should:

• Begin with the self-offering of the Father to creatures in Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit

• Start with biblical and liturgical concepts (Lex orandi) rather than philosophical abstractions.

• Integrate what we now know about the Eucharistic Prayer:  BRK, anamnesis, epiclesis

• Give due place to the role of the Holy Spirit (and not be only about Christ)

• Give weight to both parts of the Epiclesis

• Integrate “anamnesis” into the issue of repeating or re-presenting Calvary

• Understand sacrifice in biblical terms (rather in terms of blood, slaughter, immolation, giving something up, etc.) 

• Move beyond “bloody” – “unbloody” terminology (which leads nowhere)

• Integrate the three distinct lessons of the Baltimore Catechism (“The Holy Eucharist”,  “The Sacrifice of the Mass,” and “Holy Communion”) into one synthesis

• Integrate sacrament, meal, sacrifice and presence

• Integrate Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday

• Integrate a theology of Eucharist, Baptism, and Holy Orders

[Return to top of this page]

Did the Presider Get it?

The last time that I taught the course, using Kilmartin as a text, we discussed the question:  “How can you tell if the priest-presider is working out of Kilmartin’s theology of sacrifice or our of Thomas Aquinas’ theology of sacrifice?”  The students came up with the following list. 

You can tell that the priest has Kilmartin’s theology of sacrifice if he:

• Prays with and in the name of the gathered community

• Addresses God

• Proclaims (by word and gesture) the Eucharistic Prayer as one, unified prayer

• Integrates the readings of the day into the anamnesis

• Proclaims the narrative of Holy Thursday as part of the anamnesis rather than words of consecration

• Uses no manual gestures during the BRK except at the great “toast” at the doxology

• Respects the pronouns and the structure of the text and addresses the Father with the words  "Before he was given up to death, / a death he freely accepted, / he took bread and gave you thanks. / He broke the bread, / gave it to his disciples, and said: / Take this, all of you, and eat it: / this is my body which will be given up for you ...”

• Does not break the bread at the words “He broke the bread”

• Proclaims the epiclesis for unity as the climax of the prayer 

• Receives the same bread and drinks from the same cup as the non-ordained participants (or does he have a different shaped bread and a nicer cup?)

• When singing the text uses melodies with reflect the BRK structure of the prayer

• Invites the participation of the congregation through dialogue and acclamations

[Return to top of this page]

Osborne's Summary On Sacrifice

[This summary is taken from Kenan B. Osborne, The Christian Sacraments of Initiation, pp 223-224.  © Paulist Press, New York, 1987.  Osborne's summary presumes that you have read the corresponding pages in the text book.]

1. The reformers of the sixteenth century took issue with the phrase and the theology which was preached and taught at that time regarding the sacrifice of the Mass. However, the issue of the sacrifice of the Mass was simply one instance of a deeper problem, namely, the question of the relationship between grace and good works.

2. The reformers, on the basis of what they were then hearing from preachers and theologians, complained that the way in which the sacrifice of the Mass was being explained totally undermined the once and for all propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus. The issue was christological not eucharistic.

3. The Council of Trent maintained, officially, that there was only one propitiatory sacrifice, namely, that of Jesus. This teaching was at the heart of the Christian faith.

4. The council also maintained that everything done by men or women, even the disposing or preparatory "good works," were ultimately done because of God's grace.

5. The council maintained that men and women cooperate with God's grace by using their own free will and are not simply passive or of no account.  However, because of sin all men and women are totally incapable of doing anything to bring about reconciliation and justification.

6. As far as the Mass is concerned, the Council of Trent maintained that the one sacrifice of Jesus was offered by himself as priest in a bloody manner on Calvary; this same sacrifice is re-presented in an unbloody manner at the celebration of Mass. The council did not further clarify this bloody / unbloody modality.

7. The issue of the sacrifice of the Mass, however, remained one of the most divisive elements in the eucharistic theologies between Protestant and Catholic for almost four hundred years after the reformation and the Council of Trent.

8. Contemporary restudy of the entire issue as well as the efforts of ecumenical dialogue on the eucharist has pointed out a way in which the issue might be resolved, namely, the Mass is a sacrament of the one sacrifice of Jesus.

9. Jesus as the primordial sacrament furthers this very line of thought since it grounds the sacramentalizing of the eucharist in Jesus' humanness which includes the sacrifice of his life, death and resurrection.

10. The key issue in this matter of the relationship between the sacrificial work of Jesus and the eucharist is "sacrament." The eucharist is a sacrament of the one sacrifice. This says, today, much more and in a much better way, the thrust of the Tridentine formulation: bloody / unbloody.

[Return to top of this page]

Jaspers and Cuming

25. Ulrich Zwingli

There are actually two worship services outlined in this section. The first one, “An Attack upon the Canon of the Mass”, is the reformers’ early attempt to do away with the Mass. The service follows many of the parts of the old Mass up to the Sanctus. The canon is replaced by four prayers that, together, are roughly the length of the Roman canon. The first prayer (184a) is anamnesis of the saving work of Jesus Christ, and it concludes with the assembly joining to pray the Lord’s Prayer. The second prayer (184c) is an epiclesis of sorts, calling the Spirit on the people (185a) if not the elements. The third prayer (185b) is an anamnesis of Jesus’ saving work and a confession of faith in Him. The final prayer (186a) is a prayer of humble access, asking those who participate in the Lord’s supper be made worthy to do so, leading into the words of institution.

The second service, “The Lord’s Supper”, is a later revision after no one was happy with the first one—it too closely resembled the Roman liturgy the Reformers had done away with. This was no longer called the Mass, but rather the Lord’s Supper. In this service, everything is very simple, rather short, and rather plain—there are no vestments, Latin, nothing of the old rite. There is nothing even resembling the Roman canon. After a liturgy of the word, there is a prayer of humble access like the one above, then the words of institution and communion. This liturgy is only celebrated four times a year—Easter, Pentecost, during autumn, and Christmas.

What is most interesting about these prayers is the theology behind them. Zwingli did not believe that Jesus Christ could be present both in heaven and in the consecrated elements. For him, God’s presence was found in Sacred Scripture, and the memorial of the Lord’s Supper was simply something to aid the worshippers, not a means of God’s grace.  The Bible was the real spiritual food, not the sacrament.

[Return to top of this page]

26. Martin Luther

27. Olavus Petri

This Swedish mass was written by Olavus Petri and appeared in Stockhom in 1531.  His rite was the first Lutheran rite to replace the priest's confiteor with a confession made in the venacular by the congregation.  This mass replaced the Latin low mass.  After several years it also replaced the Latin high mass, but took some of the features of the high mass such as adding prefaces, a sermon and moving the Sanctus back to its traditional place.  This rite was revised by Petri's younger brother in 1571 and is still in use today.

God is named "holy Lord" (202b), "almighty Father" (202b), "everlasting God" (202b) and "heavenly Father" (202d).  This eucharistic prayer moves around some of the elements and eliminates others.  It begins with the dialogue on 202a.  There is no preface and the Sanctus is moved to after the institution narrative (203a).  The text that follows the dialogue (202b) begins like the post Sanctus in that it says, "Truly it is meet, right and blessed that we should in all places give you thanks and praise...".  Additionally this remembrance has a very penitential feel to it: "when by reason of sins we were all in so bad a case that nothing but damnation and eternal death awaited us" (202b).  So the remembrance begins at the incarnation and it focuses on Jesus born as a man, Jesus having our sins laid upon him, Jesus dying so we won't undergo eternally death and Jesus being raised to conquer sin and death (202b-c).  This leads into the institution narrative (202c-d) that includes an elevation of the bread and the wine.  Following the narrative the Sanctus comes and then the Lord's prayer.  The epiclesis is eliminated in this rite (actually there is no mention of the Holy Spirit).  Also eliminated is the offertory, the intercessions and the doxology.  The emphasis is on remembering the Last Supper and not on recreating it (203a).  The mention of the people comes in 202c: "so likewise shall all those who put their trust in him overcome sin and death and through him attain to everlasting life."

28. Martin Bucer

This Eucharistic prayer dates from 1539.  It was daring.  It was in German, instead of Latin.  It was said facing the congregation by the pastor--not priest--vested in only a cassock and black gown (Even they couldn't get rid of all the accretions of centuries.).
    Here we have three choices of prayers the minister could take--besides making his own on the spot.  These three prayers have much in common.  The minister addresses God the Father.  The intercessions are for rather practical things, such as for the king.  The gifts are first prepared in silence.  The epiclesis is not invoked upon the gifts, but upon the people present.  A constant accent on personal faith, rather than the power of the Spirit dominates.  The minister prays for a change in the people.  He prays that they are receiving the body and blood of the Lord, which is in heaven.  The bread and wine, then, have remained just bread and wine.  It is the people's faith which has worked any kind of change.  The institution narrative is the last thing read, before the distribution of the Lord's Supper--not Eucharist.
    The people are named as rotten, dirty, depraved sinners.  That is why they need to be changed.  In fact, their sins are only pardoned, not taken away.
    The prayers do include some mentions of Christ's saving work, but not very much.
    All in all, these prayers are for Jesus and me, my faith in God, not for God and his people.

29. John Calvin

The Eucharistic prayer that I have been assigned is John Calvin.  It can be found on pages 213-218.  The pray itself begins on 215.

Calvin, in producing his own French service book followed closely the rite of Martin Bucer.  Calvin like Zwingli and Luther was not fond of the medieval Roman mass.  He believed that it involved “magical numblings.”  Calvin sought to return the Eucharist to what he believed was its primitive simplicity; Word and Sacrament holding their rightful place.  Calvin like Bucer developed what Japer calls a “mediating position on the presence of Christ.”  Calvin believed that the body of Christ was in heaven and could not be “imprisoned” in earthly matter.  However, he believed that the sacrament was a divine act and a means of grace.  Calvin did not include intercessions in his eucharistic prayer.  Intercession was a separate prayer, following the sermon.  

1. What is unique about this prayer is that the Institution narrative is taken directly from 1 Corinthians 11.  The institution narrative does not form a part of the eucharistic prayer.

2. Calvin’s eucharistic prayer is not addressed to God.  Instead, it is an exhortation addressed to the congregation.  In addition, Calvin’s eucharistic prayer contains little of the elements of praise and thanksgiving or remembering of our Lord’s saving work.  It stressed, heavily, worthy participation and holiness of life.  

3. The individual who is speaking in Calvin’s eucharistic prayer is the presider; the minister.  The prayer asserts that the speaker acts in the name and authority of Jesus: “Therefore, in accordance with this rule, in the name and by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, I excommunicate all idolaters, blasphemers, despiers of God, heretics, and all who form private sets to break the unity of the Church, all perjures, all who rebel against parents or superiors, all who are seditious, mutinous, quarrelsome or brutal, all adulters, fornicators, thieves, ravishes, misers, drunkards, gluttons, and all who lead a scandalous and dissolute life.”  

4. Calvin’s eucharistic prayer does not fit the “model” eucharistic prayer: There is no preface, naming of God, anamnesis, sanctus, epiclesis, anamnesis of the Paschal Victory, and no intercessions.  

5. What is remembered?  Nothing, except for the institution narrative taken from 1 Corinthians 11.

6. There is no epiclesis.

7. The change in the elements is named explicitly in the Institution narrative.  “This is my body” and “this cup is the new covenant in my blood.”

8. The prayer says nothing about the sacrifice of Christ except that it is imputed to us for righteousness.  “Moreover, let us receive this sacrament as a pledge that the virtue of his death and Passion is imputed to us for righteousness, just as if we have suffered it in our own persons.”

The intercessions are separate from the eucharistic prayer.  It is a separate prayer that follows the sermon.

30. Hermann von Wied

31. The Order of the Communion

The first two steps taken to revise the Latin Mass in England were to read the Epistles and Gospel in the vernacular and to offer communion to the laity under both species.  “The Order of Communion” gives the instructions as to how the receiving of communion should take place.  A set of penitential devotions in the vernacular was inserted into the Latin Mass following the receiving of communion by the priest.  Before the priest is to take communion, the rubrics reminds him that he is not to drink all the wine.  In fact, he is to only take “one sup or draught.”  After the priest received communion, there were two exhortations.  One was to be read on the previous Sunday, and the other right before communion.  These exhortations were to encourage those present to examine their sins.  The first examination was a private confession, while the second was more general.  These confessions were read by the priest, or other minister, or another communicant.  Absolution was then given.  The Prayer of Humble Access was said aloud by the priest.  When giving communion, the words chosen spoke of the bread preserving the body and the wine preserving the soul.  At the very end, there was a rubric that reminded the priest that he could break the host into two or more pieces, because the whole body of Christ was present in each wafer.  There is also a provision for consecrating more wine should the chalice be emptied before everyone has the opportunity to receive from it.

The Order of Communion—228-231

228a  First Exhortation:
The priest is tell his parishioners at some point during the week to prepare themselves to receive communion.

228b  Rubric:
Communion is after the priest.  Both species are to be offered.  The priest is to only take one sip.

228d Second Exhortation:
Priest lists sins that would prevent one from receiving communion.  This is the personal confession.  If anyone walks out, the priest is to take note so that he (229a)may “commune with him privily at convenient leisure, and see if he can with good exhortation bring him to grace”.

229c  General Confession:
Priest makes a general confession to almighty God on behalf of the people.

229d General Absolution:
The Lord has given the power to absolve sins to the Church.  May he forgive you, strengthen you and bring you to everlasting life.

230a Words of Christ:
A statement of confirmation of faith.  That is, Jesus is the source of strength and to believe in him means everlasting life.

230b Words of Paul:
Jesus came to save sinners.

230b Words of John:
Jesus is the advocate of the sinner before God.

230c The Prayer of Humble Access:
This prayers is said aloud by the priest while he kneels.  In this prayer the priest acknowledges the unworthiness of all those to receive communion, but asks that all those who do receive communion that  it may make them strong and grow in holiness.

230c Communion:
The priest will offer communion while those who receive remain kneeling.  If there is another minister, he is to follow the priest with the chalice so that all may receive under both species.

230d Words of Administering:
When passing out the bread the priest is to say, “The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body unto everlasting life.”   (231a) When passing out the cup, the following is to be said, “The blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy soul unto everlasting life.”

231b Final Blessing:
Dismissal

231c Rubric:
If the host is broken, one should not think less, because in each of them is the whole body of Christ.  If the wine should run out, the priest may consecrate more wine without any elevation or lifting up.

32. BCP 1549

The 1549 Book of Common Prayer was produced under the authority of King Edward of England by Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury.  It was a transitional and a compromise document, replaced by 1552, and generally criticized by all parties.  In many ways, it was conservative in its theology, retaining much of the wording of the Roman rite, and including prayers for the dead and the invocation of the saints.  There were changes, however, which are especially apparent in the removal of any sacrificial notion of the Mass apart from the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving offered by the people.  

Like our own prayers, it is God the Father who is addressed in this prayer.  The use of names is limited, pretty much restricted to Almighty and ever living God, Lord and Father.  

The prayer varies a good deal from our “model” Eucharistic Prayer.  Most striking is the almost complete lack of any anamnesis.  There are five proper prefaces for feast days, but otherwise, the prayer proceeds directly from the naming to the Pre-Sanctus, without any preface anamnesis at all.  There is no Vere Sanctus, and the petitions follow immediately upon the Sanctus itself.  There is a split Epiclesis, followed by the Institution Narrative, Anamnesis of the Pascal Victory, the offertory, the second half of the Epiclesis and the Doxology.

The change prayed for in the epiclesis is somewhat vague, stating that the “creatures of bread and wine…may be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ.  The second half of the epiclesis goes on to pray that those who receive this body and blood may be made into “one body with thy Son Jesu Christ,” and may receive grace and blessing.

Perhaps the most significant difference that can be seen in the underlying theology of the prayer is the removal of any notion of the Mass itself being a sacrifice.  Rather, it is the praise and thanksgiving of the assembly, as well as the offering of their lives in service that constitutes the only elements of sacrifice within the liturgy.  The sacrifice of Christ is remembered within the prayer, but its past occurrence is emphasized and removed from the present celebration.

Though lengthy, the intercessions are not all that notable.  They do include an extended petition for the king, and unlike other reformed rites, contained an invocation of the saints and prayers for the dead.  

This prayer as well as the rest of the liturgy has a strong penitential tone, but seems to me to be otherwise unremarkable.  The lack of anamnesis makes the prayer read like a litany of requests, lacking in many ways both simplicity and beauty.  I agree with the people of the time in finding this prayer rather unsatisfying.  Perhaps the compromising character of the prayer has robbed it of its ability to express the deeper reality that lies behind it.

33. BCP 1552

The 1552 version of the Book of Common Prayer was the immediate replacement of the one published just three years earlier.  While the 1549 version could be seen as a compromise document, this prayer represents a nearly wholesale acceptance by Cranmer of the theology of Bucer and Zwingli.  In fact, many of the elements of the prayer have been removed completely or placed at other parts of the liturgy.  The result is a short prayer that consists primarily in an institution narrative with a lengthy introduction.

Even more that the prayer of 1549, this version bears little resemblance to our “model” Eucharistic Prayer.  It contains absolutely no anamnesis apart from the five feast day prefaces, lacks the “Blessed is he…” of the Sanctus, has no Vere Sanctus, no epiclesis, no memorial acclamation, no anamnesis of the Pascal Victory, no intercessions, invocation of the saints, and if one limits the prayer to before communion, it lacks any sort of offertory, doxology and amen.  The prayer begins with the opening dialogue and the naming, followed immediately by the pre-Sanctus.  Following the Sanctus itself, a prayer of humble access is offered, which is essentially a penitential, preparatory prayer before receiving communion.  This is followed by an introduction to the institution narrative and the narrative itself.  This is followed immediately, without any ceremony or instruction, by the distribution of communion.  If one allows that Cranmer intended the sharing of communion in the middle of the prayer, then that sharing is followed by the Lord’s Prayer, an offertory and the doxology.

There is no anamnesis in this prayer, and the closest thing to an epiclesis is that the communicants receive communion with a good disposition.  There is no change in the elements.  In fact, the prayer goes out of its way to emphasis that the people receive the “creatures of bread and wine.”  In delivering the bread and wine to the people, any notion of the elements as the body and blood of Christ are removed, and replaced with the command to be thankful for Christ’s death.  In fact, the rubrics instructed the presided to take the left over elements for his own personal use.

The offertory prayer after communion speaks of sacrifice only in terms of the peoples praise and thanksgiving and the gift of their very selves.  All other references to sacrifice within the liturgy have been removed, while the mention of the sacrifice on the cross remains.  As was mentioned earlier, all the intercessions of the 1549 prayer have been moved to another part of the liturgy, and no intercessions remain within the prayer itself.

Even more so that the former prayer of 1549, I find this particular prayer to be unsatisfying.  Though short, the prayer manages to be wordy without any real beauty.  It is so stripped down that there is little of substance left.  The effort to reject medieval notions of sacrifice and substantial change leaves one feeling that in fact here the Eucharist is “just a symbol” with no deeper meaning or reality behind it.
 

34. John Knox

35. Scottish BCP 1637

The motivation behind this prayer was the Scottish Bishops desire to have a service book very similar to that of England but with some Scottish characteristics.  One characteristic described by the commentator was that this rite was to avoid anything that would appear to be Roman Catholic such as having the presbyter elevate the hosts.  Other interesting facts about this prayer is that it was written in the vernacular language of English and that it was never promulgated due to widespread opposition.  

1. This prayer was to be more distinctly Scottish, although due to my ignorance on the two cultures back then, I am not aware of exactly how it is more Scottish.
2. God the Father is addressed in this prayer, usually with the term Almighty God as well as Lord and holy Father.
3. The speaker is primarily the presbyter, speaking on behalf of the congregation.  
4. This Eucharistic prayer seems to follow our model reasonably closely.  It begins with dialogue, has a pre-Sanctus prior to the preface, utilizes a preface that remembers, has a Sanctus although it lacks a very Sanctus, it then moves to anamnesis, a unified epiclesis, anamnesis with the institution narrative, then there is offertory, and intercessions.
5. The last supper is primarily remembered.  The various prefaces remember different events from Jesus’ birth to Pentecost.
6. The epiclesis is not split.  The change of the elements is named this way, “Vouchsafe so to bless and sanctify with thy word and Holy Spirit these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved Son; so that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ’s holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of the same his most precious body and blood”. (pp 262).  
7. Christ has already made the sacrifice but the people make a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving as well as their body and souls.
8. The intercessions focus on those who will be receiving communion.  There is no mention of church leadership, saints, or the dead.  
9. I don’t really see any real significance of this prayer for contemporary pastoral practice, seeing as how it was never implemented

36. A Directory of 1645

37. Richard Baxter 1661

The reformation of the Liturgy 1661
In 1660 he played a prominent part in the restoration of Charles II, but declined the offer of the bishop of Hereford due to his views on episcopacy. The refusal debarred him from ecclesiastical office and he was not allowed to return to Kidderminster. Between 1662 and 1668 he suffered persecution at the hands of Judge Jeffreys. He was in sympathy with the removal of James II and welcomed William and Mary. He died on the 8th December 1691.

“His eucharistic rite was intended to be used at the conclusion of the normal Sunday service, which Sunday service, which had its full quota of psalmody, Old and New Testament readings, prayers, and sermon.”  

B. TO WHOM ADDRESS?
To the three different person of the Trinity.
Father (273 d) Son (274c) Spirit (275 a)  

C. WHO IS SPEAKING?
Ministry and people all pages.

D. EUCHARISTIC MODEL
Naming (273d)
No Preface
No Sanctus  
No Post - Sanctus
Anamnesis –Holy Thursday (274 b)
Epiclesis (274 c)
No Paschal Victory

E. WHAT IS REMEMBERED?
Last Super when he addressed the three person of the Trinity.

F. CHRIST SACRIFICE
It is a New Covenant  (273 d)  
It is to give us pardon of our sins (274 c)

G. INTERCESSIONS
Yes prayer for the Church (273 b)  

H. CONTEMPORARY SIGNIFICANCE
This prayer is a Trinitarian Prayer. Make a good balance between Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
 

38. BCP 1662

The first big liturgical reform by Arbp. Cranmer (Book of Common Prayer 1549) was not well received; it retained too much of the old traditional Eucharistic theology.  It was cut and changed, becoming more Protestant in The Book of 1552. The third step, Book of Common Prayer 1662,  represents a compromise theological position between those who wanted to restore the pre-Reformation liturgy, and the reforming Presbyterians. It does  not follow the “model” eucharistic prayer, although it retains some of the elements.  As a prayer of the Protestant Churches, it follows the “Order for the Administration of the Lord’s Supper or Holy Communion” as found in the previous Books of Common Prayer. This 1662 version includes some 600 changes, most of them minor.  The words were substantially  unchanged, but the manner of celebrating the rite does change.    

1. The title Offertory reappears (279c)
2. Direction to lay both alms and bread upon the Lord’s Table is added, but nothing is “offered up” (277d)
3. There is a Dialogue, Preface and Sanctus (279d and 280a)  
4. Naming: O Lord, holy Father, almighty, everlasting God. (279d)
5. Eucharistic Prayer is called The Prayer of Consecration (280d) with no mention of Holy Spirit anywhere
6. A short remembering of the suffering and death precedes the consecration (280d) but there is no mention of resurrection or ascension anywhere.  
7. A scriptural institution narrative contains the words of consecration (281a)
8. Fraction takes place at the institution Narrative (281a); bread is broken before the words “This is my Body” (281a)  
9. Includes Rubrics to lay hands on all the bread and on every vessel (281d)
10. AMEN inserted at the end of consecration (281b)
11. Ministers and people eat and drink immediately, within the prayer itself.(281b)  
12. The rubrics recognize “Bishops, Priests, and deacons” as well as “minister” (281b)
13. Declaration on Kneeling was restored so people receive communion kneeling (281c)
14. People receive Communion in the hand (281c)
15.  When the minister delivers to the recipient, his words point to a belief in the change: “The Body of Lord Jesus Christ...(281b)   The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ...”   (281c)
16. Borrowing from Scottish rite, if additional supplies are required, there is provision to loop back to the Institution Narrative and consecrate again. (281d)  
17. New provision for consecrated remains after communion (282a) Must be covered immediately and later consumed, not taken out of the church, not for the personal use of the priest.
18. After communion, a Prayer of Oblation: “We offer ourselves, our souls, our bodies, to be a living sacrifice to thee” (see 249b)

This version of theological compromise lasted for 300 years, and is still one of the official rites of the Church of England.  In addition to Anglicans, many Methodists have found it acceptable throughout the centuries. The pastoral significance may well be in the area of Church Unity. Roman Catholics and Anglicans have been in dialogue about our common sacramental beliefs. The Anglican Church that broke from Rome and reformed the liturgy has been re-examining Eucharistic prayer and belief with us. We realize that for Church Unity, we may pray different prayers, but we must believe the same.   And our prayer reflects our belief.

39. Neuchatel 1713 – Br. Anton Rusnak
This is a homemade liturgy. John Frederic Osterwald,  Swiss Reformed pastor, composed his own eucharistic prayer in 1713, combining parts of Calvin’s rite, the Book of Common Prayer, and the Roman Missal.  The fact that he borrowed heavily also means that the theology will be mixed.  It is a very interesting cut-and-paste, but it certainly does  not follow the “model” eucharistic prayer.  

1. There is no Ministry of the Word at all, although while people are going to communion, psalms are sung and select passages of Scripture are read. (288c)
2. Opens from the pulpit with a Trinitarian Invocation and a Prayer for Grace. (285b)
3. Borrowing from Calvin, the Scriptural Warrant from 1 Cor 11 was read, leading to an exhortation. (258c thru 286b)  
4. Exhortation ends with an offertory to the Father and Holy Spirit. What is offered is the people,  offering themselves: It is “necessary for you to offer humble and thankful hearts,” (286c) and “let us offer today our praises and thanksgivings” (286d)  
5. Dialogue is replaced by Calvin’s type of Sursum Corda (286d) followed by Anglican-type Preface and Sanctus (288a)  
6. Naming: Lord God, Holy Father, God eternal.  
7. Proper Prefaces from the Anglican and Roman books (287) and one for September written by Osterwald himself. (287d)  Why September?  Perhaps to fill the long gap in Proper Prefaces between Pentecost and Christmas.  
8. Of two Pentecost prefaces, one seems political, speaking of “gift of speaking divers languages,” and “being brought out of darkness into light, from error to the truth.” (287c)  
9. Intercessions, Confession and absolution relied on Anglican form (288a)
10. Minister finally goes from the pulpit to the table for a brief institution narrative (288b)
11. No remembering.  
12. Prayer of consecration, which broke new ground in the Reformed Churches. (288b)  
13. Reference to sacrifice of Christ seems to divorce it from commemoration of his death (288b)  
14. Interesting sequence: Minister consecrates bread, eats, consecrates wine, drinks. (288d)  
15. When the minister delivers to the recipient, his words do not indicate belief in a change; he doesn’t refer to Body and Blood, but says “Remember what Christ has done and be thankful” (288d)  

This liturgy was a landmark for the Reformed Churches, and remained in use until the 20th century. It is considered the first ecumenical liturgy. It was used by the Huguenot congregation in Charleston, SC, starting in the 1850's, and from there went to Scotland.  The significance for contemporary pastoral practice is a chance to see what a “communion service” divorced from the Liturgy of the Word looks like.   Also,  the long scriptural warrant/exhortation (285c thru 286) seems harsh, like damnation and hellfire preaching. In Catholic terms,  it sounds like Jansenism leading one to scrupulosity

40. Nonjurors’ Liturgy 1718

A.  PRAYER
Anglican liturgy.

Nonjours were those who refuse to take oath of allegiance to King William and Queen Mary in 1689 and in consequences were deprived of their living or offices in the Church of England.

1716 - Priest petitioned a greater degree of uniformity in their forms of worship, and inclusion of four elements in the eucharist:  the mixed chalice, prayer for the departed, prayer of oblation and an epiclesis.

Based in the rite of St. Basil (offertory), St. James (sanctus, and thanksgiving for creation and redemption) , and Clementine liturgy (anamnesis-oblation-epiclesis, intercessions; Scottish rite (Gloria)

Familiar language.

Primitive structure.

B.  TO WHOM ADDRESS?
It has a good balance between Father and Son and Holy Spirit  (294a).

C.  WHO IS SPEAKING?
Dialogue between priest and people with God.

D.  EUCHARISTIC MODEL
Naming 292d.
Preface  293c.
Sanctus 293d.
Post Sanctus 294a.
Memory -Creation, Incarnation, Good Friday, Holy Thursday 294 a.b.c.
Offertory 295 a.
Epiclesis 295b.
Prayers 295d.

NO Paschal Victory   (Idea of sacrifice 295b).

E.  WHAT IS REMEMBER?
Passion and Suffering of Christ. 295c. 297a.

F.  INTERCESSIONS?
Yes 295d and 296 a.b.c.

G.  CONTEMPORARY SIGNIFICANCE
This prayer sustains the idea of Sacrifice as in the Middle

41. Henry Muhlenberg 1748 –
This is a Lutheran Rite that drew from the Church Orders of Northern Germany.  A few
decades before the Revolutionary War, Henry Muhlenberg, a native German, produced
this rite for congregations in Pennsylvania.  The Eucharistic Prayer comes from Martin
Luther’s Deutsche Messe of 1526 (see pages 196 and 197 for that).  The dialogue on the
middle of p. 300 is similar to what we are used to.  There is no preface.  The speaker is
the presider and the prayer is addressed to God.  Most of the prayer is an expanded
version of the Our Father.  Thus, the intercessions are found here.  There is no epiclesis.  
The institution narrative is intact, and the elements are called the body and blood of Jesus
(see top of p. 301).  When distributing communion the bread is called "the true body of your Lord Jesus Christ", and the wine is called "the true blood of your Lord Jesus Christ."  This prayer does not follow the form of the Eucharistic Prayer that we learned in class.  There is an institution narrative and some intercessions.  It is not so much a Eucharistic Prayer, but a paraphrase of the Our Father and an exhortation.

42. Scottish Common Office 1764 –
The Scottish Communion prayer is on page 303 and is based on Episcopalian and Presbyterian public worship.   The prayer is addressed to the Father. Angels and Archangels come in the beginning after proper preface. Words of institution come right after remembrance of Angels. After that fallow Oblation  and Invocation.  The offertory contains words “offer up” the bread and wine, the text of the prayer for church and the text of the epiclesis. The prayer for the church comes between eucharistic prayer and communion. The act of oblation and the epiclesis followed the Institution narrative.  

43. Protestant Episcopal 1790 –

[Return to top of this page]

To Think About

1. In what way is the Mass a sacrifice?

2. At Mass, who offers what to whom?

3. In what way does the Mass "repeat" the sacrifice of Calvary?

4. Explain the reformers preference for the term "The Lord's Supper" over "The Sacrifice of the Mass."

5. Explain what was at issue in the faith-works controversy at the time of the reformation.

Click here to go to the next chapter of this history  Click here to return to the summary chapter

[Return to top of this page]

© Copyright: Tom Richstatter, Franciscan Province of St. John the Baptist, Cincinnati Ohio, Order of Friars Minor. All Rights Reserved.  This page was created by Fr. Thomas Richstatter, O.F.M.  Every effort has been, and is being made, to acknowledge sources when the ideas are not my own.  Any failure to comply with the United States Copyright Act (Title 17, United States Code) will be corrected immediately should I become aware of it.  This site was updated on 06/05/07.  Your comments on this site are welcome at webmaster@tomrichstatter.org.