preview

Cranmer's Understanding Of The Sacraments

Better Essays

Sacrament There are varied interpretations of Cranmer’s understanding of the sacraments. These include the assertion that, consistent with the gospel instruction to “Do this in remembrance of me,” Cranmer understood the significance of the mass as a memorial of Christ’s sacrifice , which had occurred once and only once. The sacrament could not be the embodiment of that sacrifice. Cranmer objected to the idea of re-sacrificing Christ as diminishing Christ’s passion and death. Richardson has defined the Eucharistic Theology of the sacraments in terms whether or not the Christian can participate in the substance of the body of Christ and whether the consecrated elements bear an essential relation to this substance , asserting that with Zwingli, Cranmer would answer both in the negative. Null disagrees, defining Cranmer as occupying a mid-point between a passive or memorialist understanding of reception and an active understanding which supposes an increased participation in Christ as a result. According to Null, for Cranmer a sacrament is something that was instituted by Christ for the forgiveness of sins. Jeanes points out that a sacrament from Cranmer is A sign of a holy thing …show more content…

By this reasoning participation in the sacrament cannot be a participation in the physical body of Christ. On the other hand, faith could be fed by spiritual food, rather than physical food. Cranmer held that when faithful people take communion, Christ is spiritually present with divine power giving eternal life The grace and efficacy of the passion is present in the Lord’s Supper, not the corporal presence of Christ. Cranmer makes the distinction that Christ is present in the recipients, as opposed to being in the elements. For some this de facto asserts Christ’s absence from the

Get Access