I don't know if this has been shared before, but I found it to be very useful and informative: http://anglicaneucharistictheology.com/Anglican_Eucharistic_Theology/Welcome.html
It's an interesting survey...certainly makes every attempt to advocate "moderate realism" as the prevailing Anglican position, which I'm not sure is exactly accurate historically.
...even though i accept moderate realism as rhe most biblically and traditionally accurate of the different anglican views.
I like how he provides quotes from so many Anglican leaders from the past. It is quite exhaustive. Of course he wrote his PhD. on the subject. Glad he is sharing his research with us.
I find this the best Anglican response to the medieval errors of the Roman church: https://books.google.com/books?id=2NcvAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=html_text
Why are you so quick to attack me? I did nothing but call this interesting, and then find myself attacked by you. This is coming out of nowhere...
CR--I'm not sure you understand how discussion boards work. I didnt attack you. My comment wasn't even directed to you. It was meant merely to continue the discussion about Anglican eucharistic theology, which, as a fact of history, was developed as a reaction to and a correction of the errors and accretions of the medieval Roman Church which prevailed in England and elsewhere immediately before the Anglican reformation. Simply because someone states an opinion contrary to yours, doesn't mean it is an attack. You must realize tha Anglicans have different opinions than a Roman Catholic would. You can't expect people to stop talking about relevant topics for fear it might offend the idiosyncratic views of one forum member. That kind of censorship defeats the whole purpose for which the Forums were founded. If you felt singled out, please know for future reference that, unless I mention your name, which is getting less and less likely as you continue to post, I am not speaking about or to you directly and it is certainly not meant as an attack. What is sad and a little hypocritical is that you direct me to "start reading the early church fathers" when you obviously didn't even scan the link I posted. Cranmer's arguments against Roman eucharistic theological errors draws heavily, if not primarily from the church fathers.
I'm not here to argue. I didn't even want a discussion about my comment. I just said it was interesting.
Thanks for posting this resource. I've bookmarked it to read more later! It's interesting to compare different time periods to see what each author is responding to in their own contemporary society. Even though the Eucharist is the center, the authors are bring renewal and fresh eyes to their own era's struggles.
Even though Moderate Realism hasn't always been the dominant Eucharistic theology in Anglicanism, I'm reasonably sure it's the historically and biblically accurate one. I personally hold to Dr. Pusey's view on the matter; that our Lord's Body and Blood are present in and under the bread and wine after a spiritual, mystical, real and heavenly manner, objectively independent of faith, but only truly nourishing the souls of those with a true and lively faith with the graces conveyed thereby. I've been familiar with the Anglican Eucharistic Theology site, and I frankly admire Dr. Douglas for his devotion and effort put into setting forth the right and proper doctrine of that most comfortable Sacrament.