More by Francis J. Hall, DD, on the Eucharist

Prydain ^ | 8/03/2005 | Will

[sionnsar]

The prior post regarding Dr. Hall's views focused on his negative statements; here are some positive statements on the Eucharistic doctrines:

(c) Positively, but relatively speaking, the presence is determined in mode by the sense and mode of the identification expressed in the words, "This is my body, This is my blood." We may call it sacramental, which means the same thing.

(d) Positively again, the presence is spiritual, a description which needs safeguarding, if it is not to be understood either as emptying the presence of objective reality or as excluding the body and blood of Christ from our notion of what is present. By spiritual presence should be meant a superphysical and non-sensible presence, perceived by faith, and supernaturally brought about by Christ through His Holy Spirit. In brief, it is mysterious, and transcends every earthly analogy hby which we seek to describe it; although it is determinately objective, and sacramentally recognizable by faith. from pages 142-143 of Hall, Volume IX

Would Calvin have disagreed much with this? I really think he would have agreed substantially with Dr. Hall in this specific area (again, he and Dr. Hall would have differed substantially about the sacrificial aspects of the Eucharist, as they would have in other areas such as ecclesiology.) But if I can I will post something in the future to demonstrate the agreement in this area. It would be tremendous, in my view, if some consensus among Anglicans could be reached regarding sacramental doctrines--could this be a means to such an end?