At SEITE for the past few weeks we have been studying the origin of the Eucharist, which has been quite interesting in many ways.
It strikes me as quite interesting that Cranmer produced a liturgy to enable people in the 1600’s to be able to take part and understand in the Eucharist itself. The language was normal everyday language (the vernacular) for people living then. My question – why do churches still use this in their services some 400 years later? I wonder if Cranmer meant for this to happen, or would he scratch his head in confusion at seeing people use his wonderfully coomon language of the time being used in the way it is today to give an impression of a far off and irrelevant God?
By all means lets keep the structure and some of the ideas; but surely it needs to be reframed for a postmodern era and developed into a form with resonates with people where they are today.
It has been interesting looking at different views based around what happens with the blood and wine. Discussions around does it change into the actual blood and body of Christ transubstantiation), is it just symbolic (a visual aid as Zwingli says), or is it somewhere in between – being symbolic but more in some way. I think I’m with Zwingli here, but with a plus – God is present in some mysterious way which is achieved without the bread and wine actually turning into flesh and blood.
I must say I have struggled with some of this. It’s not that I have difficulty believing Jesus is somehow prsent in the elements, the bread and wine, of the Eucharist – my problem is believing God is present only there. God is present in the creation, God is present in the normal every day actions of people, God is present in the fantastic art of the world. In light of this, my problem is understanding how God is present in a unique and different way in the bread and wine.
Surely if we are saying he is particularly present in a special way at Eucharist then we are saying the prsence of God in our normal everyday lives is somehow a second class presence. Is that what we are saying, and is that what we are meaning?
Any comments?
The Shiny Headed Prophet 
Is God specially present in Jesus? Does this mean he is not found elsewhere?
My personal view is that the Holy Spirit is tangibly present at the Eucharist. Howvere I also believe that the tangible presence is partly a result of the focus that ceremony of the Eucharist brings to those who take part in it. The Holy Spirit (and thus God and Jesus) are present in all situations and at all times but we do not always percieve this. The Eucharist sharpens our perception of God’s presence around us. Now if we can only find that sharpness of perception everyday then we will be able to live lives that are truly focused on God!
Fascinating – thanks for sharing this. I mulling this issue through a lot as surprisingly the whole sacrament issue is still a very real issue in The SArmy. I guess the danger lies in the possibility of the symbolic squeezing out the grace that it actually represents. The other issue that I am bouncing around is the whole connection with missio dei. Which is why I love these words written by an old Salvation Army General in the 60sMy life must be Christ’s broken bread,My love his outpoured wine,A cup o’erfilled, a table spreadBeneath his name and sign.That other souls, refreshed and fed,May share his life through mine.Sorry this seems more of a blog entry than a comment. I think I need to flesh it out sometime.