What do Anglicans believe about Holy Communion?
The service of Holy Communion or the Lord’s Supper was founded by Jesus in the Gospels (Matt. 26.26-8; Mark 14.22-4; Luke 22.17-20; cf. John 6.32-58) and is addressed by St. Paul in I Cor. 11.23-9. It is accepted that it was practiced in Christian Churches from the beginning (e.g. the reference to “the breaking of bread” in Acts 2.42).
The term Eucharist for the Lord’s Supper is a Greek word meaning “thanksgiving” and has been used to describe the Communion from at least the second century. The earliest church writings outside the Bible which tell us about Christians’ celebration of Communion include the Didache or “Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” ca. 100-130 A.D.; The letter of St. Ignatius to the Philadelphians ca. 107 A.D.; and the First Apology of Justin Martyr ca. 155 A.D.
St. Justin Martyr wrote this regarding Communion to the Emperor Antoninus Pius:
This food we call Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth [baptism], and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Saviour being incarnate by God’s word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus. (1st Apology 66ff).
The Communion service has been preserved with great faithfulness throughout the centuries as evidenced by the striking similarities between the service of our own prayer book and that of an early 3rd century document: The Apostolic Tradition recorded by St. Hippolytus (first published and available to modern scholars in 1900).
What is the relationship between Jesus’ sacrifice and the Holy Communion?
The Anglican reformers, along with their brethren on the continent rejected the Medieval notion that a priest “offered” Christ on the altar. There is a clear teaching (Article 31 – 1928 BCP p. 609) that Jesus’ sacrifice on Calvary was a once-for-all-time sufficient sacrifice for the forgiveness of both original sin and “actual” sins committed by individual Christians in the past, present and future.
For Anglicans, what actually is going on in the Communion is neither simply a “remembering” (i.e. a memorial), nor a “re-offering”. The key to understanding the relationship between Communion and sacrifice is in Jesus’ words to his disciples: “do this in remembrance of me.” The word “remembrance” (Greek: anamnesis) means more than our English translation implies. The sense is that as the congregation is gathered in prayer and the priest speaks the words of Christ over the bread and wine, time is transcended so that we are present (spiritually) at the Last Supper and receive the benefits of Jesus’ once-for-all self offering on the cross through the physical elements of bread and wine.
In what manner is Jesus present in the bread and wine?
There have been two ends of the spectrum on this question. On one hand, there are Churches which believe the Communion is simply a memorial – a remembering of what Christ has done for us and a celebration of our common life together in him. This was promoted in the sixteenth century by the Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli, and is the practice and belief of many denominations such as the Baptists.
On the other end is the Roman Catholic position (owing to Aristotelian philosophy) which argues that in the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine is changed into the actual body and blood of Christ. A doctrine called “transubstantiation.”
Anglicans have taken a variety of positions in between these two poles. It is agreed that in Communion we truly receive the body and blood of Christ, and that there is spiritual nourishment in the partaking; but Anglicans have typically avoided overly defining how exactly that happens.
Richard Hooker wrote in the seventeenth century: Let it…be sufficient for me presenting myself at the Lord’s table to know what there I receive from him, without searching or inquiring of the manner how Christ performeth his promise. (Laws V.lxvii.12).
This follows the uncomplicated faith statement of John Calvin who wrote: [Christ] bids me take, eat and drink his body and blood under the symbols of bread and wine. I do not doubt that he himself truly presents them, and that I receive them.” (Institutes IV, xvii, 32).
The majority view among seventeenth century Anglicans has been called receptionism—i.e. the doctrine that only the faithful receive the body and blood of Christ in communion. But due to the influence of the Anglo-Catholic movement in the nineteenth century, a recognition of Christ being objectively present in the bread and wine regardless of the faith of the recipient seems to be the prevailing understanding today. This was made official in the Agreed Statement on Eucharistic Doctrine between the Anglican and Roman Catholic Church published in 1981.
Christians (and Anglicans) have fought, died and broken communion over precise definitions. It is helpful to abide by the Anglican principle of not requiring of anyone more than can be proved by scripture. That is, that Christ is truly present in the bread and wine (sometimes referred to as the doctrine of real presence). We don’t know how. But in receiving the Eucharistic bread and wine we find “the strengthening and refreshing of our souls” (1928 Prayer Book Catechism).