Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:02:32.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Virtual’ Eucharists in a Time of COVID-19 Pandemic: Biblical, Theological and Constitutional Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2020

Brian Douglas Open the ORCID record for Brian Douglas [Opens in a new window]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the possible use of ‘virtual’ Eucharists in the Anglican Church of Australia in a time of a global pandemic such as exists in the world in 2020 with the spread of coronavirus or COVID-19. The changing nature of modern communication is considered in the context of the possibility of the use of a ‘virtual’ Eucharist, where a priest in one place with a set of bread and wine, consecrates the bread and wine, while at the same time a person in their own home consumes another set of bread and wine with the assumption that second set of bread and wine is also consecrated. Suggestions for and discussion of the use of a ‘virtual’ Eucharist in two dioceses of the Anglican Church of Australia are discussed with a consideration of published material by episcopal leaders. Biblical, theological and constitutional perspectives are then considered in relation to a ‘virtual’ Eucharist before the recommendation is made that ‘virtual’ Eucharists are not considered as appropriate at any time, including during a global COVID-19 pandemic, in the Anglican Church of Australia. Several alternatives to a ‘virtual’ Eucharist are considered which would allow people to obtain spiritual nourishment by other means.

Keywords

AnglicanbiblicalconstitutionalCOVID-19 pandemicEucharisttheologicalvirtual
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Anglican Studies , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , November 2020 , pp. 129 - 143
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Journal of Anglican Studies Trust 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Brian Douglas is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Public and Contextual Theology, Australian Centre for Christianity and Culture, Charles Sturt University, Canberra, Australia.

References

2 Glenn Davies, ‘Letter to Clergy’, 31 March 2020, pp. 1–2.

3 Davies, ‘Letter to Clergy’, p. 2.

4 Davies, ‘Letter to Clergy’, p. 2.

5 Davies, ‘Letter to Clergy’, p. 2.

6 Glenn Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, 31 March 2020, pp. 1–2.

7 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 1.

8 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 1.

9 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, pp. 1–2.

10 The rubric defining the manual acts was added to the Book of Common Prayer in 1662 and clearly directs that ‘the priest is take the Paten into his hands’; that the priest is ‘to break the bread; that the priest is ‘to lay his hands upon the Bread’; and that the priest is ‘to lay his hand upon every vessel (be it Chalice or Flagon) in which there is any Wine to be consecrated’.

11 The Anglican Diocese of Sydney has a history of deviating from the theology and practice of the 1662 BCP in relation to the issue of lay presidency of the Eucharist. While this practice has not been authorized by the Diocese of Sydney, the Diocese has agreed not to hold any clergy accountable who may allow lay or diaconal presidency of the Eucharist.

12 Mark Short, Ad Clerum, April 2020, pp. 1–2.

13 Short, Ad Clerum, p. 1.

14 Short, Ad Clerum, p. 2.

15 Note that Archbishop Davies makes similar comments in his theological reflection pointing to the difficulties for isolated people who may have no access to the internet for live-streaming. See Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.

16 Short, Ad Clerum, p. 2.

17 Short, Ad Clerum, p. 2.

18 Such a liturgy was sent out to the clergy of the Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn for possible use on Easter Sunday evening. The liturgy includes a section where bread is passed from one person to another and each person consumes a piece of bread.

19 Short, Ad Clerum, p. 2.

20 Anglican Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn, Anglican News, 37 (2020), 3 April 2020, pp. 1–5.

21 Anglican Diocese of Canberra and Goulburn, Anglican News, p. 1.

22 It is important to note that neither the Archbishop of Sydney nor the Bishop of Canberra and Goulburn has spoken to theology of practice in relation to ‘virtual’ Eucharists. Other bishops in the Anglican Church of Australia have taken quite the opposite approach in relation to ‘virtual’ Eucharists.

23 I acknowledge the contribution of the distinguished liturgist and long-time member of the Church of England Liturgical Commission, Bishop Colin Buchanan, who shared these six points with the author in April 2020.

24 Thomas Cranmer, An Answer unto a Crafty and Sophistical Cavillation Devised by Stephen Gardiner (ed. J.E. Cox; Cambridge: Parker Society, 1844), pp. 1–367 (350).

25 Cranmer, An Answer, p. 352.

26 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.

27 Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy (London: A&C Black, 1945).

28 Thomas Cranmer, ‘Defence of the True and Catholic Doctrine of the Sacrament’, in The Work of Thomas Cranmer (ed. G.E. Duffield; Appleford: The Sutton Courtenay Press, 1964), pp. 45–231 (181).

29 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.

30 Nicholas Ridley, ‘Disputation at Oxford’, Works (ed. H. Christmas; Cambridge: The Parker Society, 1841), pp. 186–252 (229).

31 Lancelot Andrewes, ‘Sermon on the Nativity. Preached on Christmas Day 1607’, Works, (eds. J. Wilson and J. Bliss; Oxford: Parker, 1841–54), I, pp. 23–44 (35).

32 Jeremy Taylor, The Real Presence and Spiritual of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, proved against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation (London: Bohn, 1867), II, pp. 681–760 (686).

33 Rowan Williams, ‘Sacraments and the New Society’, in On Christian Theology (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), pp. 209–21 (215).

34 Williams, ‘Sacraments and the New Society’, pp. 215–16.

35 See Donald Robinson, ‘The Principles of Doctrine and Worship in the Book of Common Prayer and the Thirty-Nine Articles’, in Donald Robinson: Selected Works. Volume 3 Biblical and Liturgical Studies (ed. E. Loane; Sydney: Australian Church Record/Moore College, 2018), pp. 330–42 (330).

36 1662 Book of Common Prayer, rubric following the Prayer of Consecration at the time of administration.

37 See First Apology of Justin Martyr, in R.C.D. Jasper and G.J. Cuming (eds.), Prayers of the Eucharist: Early and Reformed (New York: Pueblo, 1987), pp. 25–30 (30).

38 Archbishop Davies also uses part of this quote from Augustine in his theological reflection, adding further weight to the idea that a spiritual communion is an effective means of knowing the presence of the Lord. See Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.

39 Rubric in the service ‘The Communion of the Sick’, 1662 Book of Common Prayer.

40 See the form of spiritual communion recommended by Bishop Stephen Cottrell at the following link: https://www.chelmsford.anglican.org/spiritual-communion (accessed 8 April 2020).

41 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.

42 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.

43 Paul addresses this problem in 1 Cor. 11,17-22.

44 Davies, ‘Holy Communion in a Coronavirus World’, p. 2.