No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
The question of sacrifice in the Eucharist has been called by the Ways of Worship Commission of Faith and Order a ‘live issue’, that is to say a question over which agreement is not right out of sight though considerable and even vehement controversy continues. At Lund, the section considering Ways of Worship reported that they had held a lively and rewarding discussion on the subject, and had been surprised by the degree of agreement revealed; on the other hand it must be admitted that neither the discussion nor the resulting agreement are very apparent from the relevant chapter of the Conference report. This article is an attempt to examine the present state of the question against a background of ecumenical discussion, and to suggest ways of conceiving the Eucharistic Sacrifice which might be more widely acceptable than those commonly put forward by ‘catholics’ in the past. Its sources, besides a necessarily incomplete study of some of the more influential modern contributions to the discussion, consist mainly in discussions amongst younger theologians and theological students in the ecumenical movement. Whilst this group is not so learned as its elders, and its discussions are seldom recorded in print, its contribution can be a valuable one, because it is most sensitive to the issues which are now live ones, and also because it frequently seems to clear away misunderstandings more effectively and reach greater agreement than more senior groups.
page 365 note 1 Ways of Worship p. 34.
page 369 note 1 S.T. 111 Q83, art. 1; Q.73. art. 4; Q.73, art. 5 ad 3 m.; Q.74, art. 1.
page 369 note 2 The article is reproduced in Corpus Christi, Chap. IV.
page 371 note 1 cf. Bouyer, op. cit. pp. 122–3 for the bearing of this on the Eucharist.
page 372 note 1 John 10.17–18.
page 373 note 1 1 Cor. 11. 27.
page 373 note 2 cf. ‘o felix culpa’.
page 373 note 3 Thus the contention of Torrance, T. F., in Intercommunion, p. 333Google Scholar n. 31, that this view involves murder, seems to be a misunderstanding.
page 374 note 1 cf. The Christian Sacraments, pp. 196 and 203–4; and a slightly different position in Doctrines of the Creed, pp. 228ff
page 376 note 1 Camfield, F. W., quoted by Torrance, T. F., art. cit., p. 330.Google Scholar
page 376 note 2 Eph. 4. 15.
page 380 note 1 cf. Torrance, T. F., art. cit., pp. 306f, 311.Google Scholar
page 381 note 1 cf. Farrer, A. M. in The Parish Communion, pp. 88–92.Google Scholar
page 381 note 2 Church Quarterly Review, January-March 1952; Corpus Christi, Chap. IV.
page 381 note 3 op, cit. p. 227.
page 382 note 1 I owe this understanding of the Last Supper to some yet unpublished papers of Professor D.M. MacKinnon, and through him to Bouyer and de la Taille.