While reading through the book Reformation Anglican Worship, the notes I wrote out and captured were synthesized and recorded here for their primary or major points. The book presents highly informative points of interest concerning Anglican worship and practice, and it’s of high importance to bring together the composite reading to recognize the substantive meaning of the text. Beginning with the introduction, my notes cover each chapter as separate sections are distilled and brought together.

Introduction

Jensen defines worship in his book as the congregation’s reception of the gospel through the reading and preaching of Scripture, the sacraments, prayer, and singing. He emphasizes that worship is not about offering something to God to earn His favor but is a means of experiencing God’s grace and expressing gratitude in response. This perspective aligns with Reformation principles, focusing on God’s initiative in salvation and the believer’s response of faith and thanksgiving. Accordingly, the emphasis on worship as receiving God’s grace rather than offering something to earn His favor communicates the worshiper’s acceptability to God. Jensen highlights that Anglican worship, rooted in the doctrines of the Reformation, centers on the gospel message: believers are accepted by God not through their own merits but through the finished work of Christ. This is made clear in the structure of the liturgy, which proclaims the forgiveness of sins, the assurance of pardon, and the centrality of Christ’s sacrifice.

Through Scripture, the sacraments, and prayer, the liturgy reminds worshipers that their acceptability before God is based on grace alone, received through faith. For instance, participation in Holy Communion visibly enacts the reality of union with Christ and the sufficiency of His atonement. Jensen implies that such worship reassures believers of their standing before God, fostering a confidence made possible by Christ’s work rather than human effort. This focus grounds the worshiper and deepens their gratitude and reverence for God. By aligning worship with the gospel’s proclamation, Anglican liturgy continuously reinforces the believer’s assurance of worship accepted in Christ.

Jensen further writes about the theological and doctrinal framework that shapes Anglican liturgical practices, particularly as they align with the 39 Articles of Religion. He emphasizes that Anglican worship fundamentally responds to God’s revelation through Scripture and is structured around principles within Reformation theology. This worship is ordered with a clear focus on the supreme authority of Scripture, the centrality of Christ, and the doctrines of grace. Jensen highlights how the 39 Articles provide the doctrinal boundaries for worship, rejecting practices like the invocation of saints or transubstantiation while affirming the authority of God’s Word, the efficacy of the sacraments, and the necessity of faith for salvation. Within this framework, worship must be intelligible, edifying, and focused on God’s glory. Jensen wrote that Anglican liturgy, through its prayerful and sacramental structure, reflects a commitment to orderly worship rooted in biblical truth and theological clarity, ensuring that every aspect—from prayers to preaching to sacraments—points participants to rightful worship for God’s glory.

True & False Worship

In chapter one of Reformation Anglican Worship, Michael P. Jensen addresses the foundational questions surrounding worship, beginning with the distinction between true and false worship. He covers humanity’s innate predisposition to worship and highlights how worship can take several forms: worshiping God falsely, worshiping a false god, or worshiping the true God rightly but nullifying it through corrupt behavior. Jensen reminds readers that worship is not merely an expression of religious devotion but a central concern. He challenges worshipers to confront their own practices, asking whether their worship aligns with God’s standards or reflects human misconceptions and moral failings.

Drawing from Israel’s history, Jensen explores the principles of engaging with God on His terms. Through scriptural examples, he emphasizes that worship should be rooted in homage, reverence, and love for God rather than transactional bargaining or self-centered rituals. True worship honors God’s authority, expressing devotion and gratitude in alignment with His revealed will. Unlike the false gods of ancient cultures, worshiping the true God requires an acknowledgment of His holiness and a heartfelt desire to adore and respect Him as the sovereign Creator.

Necessary for Christian worship, Jensen writes, is the role of Jesus Christ as the ultimate high priest and mediator. Drawing on the book of Hebrews, he explains that Jesus intercedes for His people, making worship of the triune God possible (Hebrews 6:20; 7:25–28; 8:6). Worship, therefore, is fundamentally Christ-centered, dependent on His mediation rather than human effort or self-determined approaches. Private and corporate acts of worship are authentic with the indwelling Holy Spirit, who unites believers with the Father through the Son. This means of worship must not only be approached as an individualistic endeavor but as a communal act rooted in Christ’s redemptive work.

Finally, Authentic worship edifies God’s people, calling them to live under the political and spiritual reality of Christ as King over all creation. It also drives believers to participate in the missional call of the church, inviting others into worship and fellowship with the triune God. Worship, in Jensen’s vision, is not an isolated religious act but a profound expression of the Kingdom of God, with implications that shape personal lives, communal relationships, and the church’s global mission. This chapter sets the stage for understanding worship as theologically rich, spiritually formative, and missionally urgent.

Reformation Worship

There were significant changes to English liturgy that occured during the English Reformation. The author covers numerous historical facts that shaped the changes that have occurred during the Catholic and Protestant eras of English faith and practice within the Church of England. With the influences of Luther and Calvin during the reformation, Thomas Cranmer (Archbishop of Canterbury, 1533 to 1555 AD), retrieved the scriptural and patristic means of worship and liturgical development for the spiritual well-being of believers who would together worship God as He is meant to be honored and praised.

English Worship Reformed

The Reformation of worship involved simplification and the dismissal of traditions and practices from Roman Catholic traditions and dogmas. Parish chapels and chantry houses formed for royalty or the wealthy for prayers for the dead were dissolved, changing theological conditions and redirecting monetary wealth and the funds that support them. Funds were redirected to war and municipal development at some small level. Cranmer’s objections to liturgies that opposed the gospel and plain reading of Scripture eventually led to the Reformed Church in England.

Before the liturgical errors and abuses in the Church, it was Cranmer’s view that the root problem was the Roman Catholic Church’s notion of the Mass as a sacrifice (c.f., CCC 1367, 1368, 1414). There were errors, superstitions, and corruptions that came from that understanding of the Mass, and worse yet, it formed false ideas about the doctrine of soteriology as made clear by the biblical authors. Selling indulgences to replace the monetary contributions of chantries to fund prayers for the dead was recognized as a way to gain revenues from the populace. Still, worse yet, a deep misunderstanding of sin and salvation through the gospel imperiled the souls of people who sought Church leadership for guidance and truth. Awareness about the extent of wickedness from human depravity by continued and daily repeated thoughts of sinful words, deeds, errors, and omissions didn’t bear upon the people. [1]

Grace Over Works

Finally, according to the author, an additional reason for the Reformation comes from Jerome’s Latin translation of “Metanoeite” (c.f. Matthew 3:2), as “repentance” was rendered as “penance” to influence Catholic theology deeply. Contrary to the definition of the term and its semantic range, this interpretation framed the path to regaining favor with God as one dependent on penitential acts and meritorious works.[2] Over time, this understanding led to the development of various practices within the Church aimed at earning God’s favor through human effort. The focus on penance emphasized external actions as a way to address sin and restore spiritual status, creating a system heavily reliant on individual performance.

However, through his study of Scripture and deep reflection, Martin Luther came to see the futility of this approach. He realized that the weight and breadth of human sin were so vast that no amount of penance or good works could reconcile humanity to God. The sheer immensity of sin rendered any human effort insufficient to regain divine favor. In his anguish, Luther wrestled in prayer and contemplation, eventually understanding that he could do nothing to make up for his sinful condition. This realization set a turning point, redirecting his focus toward a reliance on God’s grace rather than human effort.

Through Luther’s study of Scripture and personal experience, he came to a realization that he had recovered the gospel of grace. This recovery was a departure from the practices of the Roman Catholic Church at the time, making clear that the Church was not infallible. As the author explains, Scripture was the necessary catalyst for nurturing faith rather than relying on mechanical practices to gain meritorious grace. This shift called for a renewed focus on faith as the means of salvation, rather than the accumulation of works.

Cranmer’s Scriptural Reformation

As Thomas Cranmer became increasingly influenced by Luther’s recovery of the gospel, a series of providential events unfolded, including King Henry VIII’s decision to divorce Katherine of Aragon. This decision led to England’s separation from the Roman Catholic Church and coincided with Cranmer’s appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury. While Cranmer’s appointment stemmed directly from the king’s political and religious maneuvers, he used this pivotal moment to elevate the role of Scripture within the Church of England. Cranmer worked to integrate Scripture more deeply into liturgy and worship, ensuring that it became central to the life and practice of the Church.

Guided by Luther’s views on salvation and the authority of Scripture, Cranmer became increasingly intentional about making the Bible accessible and foundational for the Church of England. He sought to establish its authority as surpassing not only that of the Roman Catholic Church but also the ecclesiastical structures of the Church of England itself. This commitment marked a significant shift, placing Scripture at the heart of worship and doctrine and reshaping the spiritual identity of the English Reformation.

Cranmer’s Liturgical Transformation

The death of King Henry VIII in 1547 brought a turning point for the Church of England, providing Cranmer the opportunity to transform how believers encountered God through worship. Cranmer’s vision for liturgy was deeply influenced by Reformation principles, particularly the idea of sola fide, which emphasized faith alone. His liturgies were designed to bring Scripture into a central role in common worship through systematic Bible reading and God-centered practices, recovering what had been lost in centuries of man-centered theology.

Cranmer saw value in preserving ceremonies that promoted church discipline and order, provided they upheld biblical principles. However, he was firm in rejecting any practices that diminished theological integrity or subjected liturgy to abuse. His liturgies reflected a deliberate denial of novelty and innovation, aiming instead for a balance of discipline and order for the purpose of Church unity. Ceremonies that had been misused or misunderstood were removed, and the liturgy was translated into the vernacular to ensure clarity and participation. This shift to worship in the common tongue sought to make liturgical practices accessible for both individual and corporate engagement with God. However, this effort was not without controversy, as debates arose regarding the differences between normative and regulative principles of worship. The normative approach allowed practices not explicitly forbidden by Scripture, whereas the regulative approach permitted only what was directly prescribed by Scripture, a distinction that remains a point of contention among denominations today.

The development and publication of the 1549 and 1552 editions of the Book of Common Prayer had a significant bearing on the English Reformation. These prayer books were a blend of early liturgical sources and carefully introduced reforms. Notable changes included a new approach to absolution and the administration of the sacraments, which articulated God’s redemptive means and intent with the presence of grace over human merit. Cranmer’s liturgies shifted the focus of worship from man-centered practices to a God-centered framework, aiming to glorify God through the edification of believers and the formation of their faith. This transformation of liturgy became a powerful means of spiritual formation, embedding the principles of the Reformation into the daily lives of the faithful and shaping the identity of the Church of England for generations to come.

Conflict, Settlement, & Resolution

The period between Queen Mary I and Queen Elizabeth I was marked by intense conflict and radical shifts in the English Reformation, reflecting the ongoing struggle between Catholicism and Reformed theology. Influences from prominent reformers like Calvin, Beza, and Luther shaped the theological landscape during this time. Elizabeth I, in particular, navigated this turbulent era with a deliberate approach to balancing reformation ideals with the consolidation of State power within the Church of England. Her reign saw the enactment of the Acts of Uniformity, which mandated conformity to Anglican worship practices and led to the expulsion of Puritan leaders—an event later criticized by J.C. Ryle, a 19th-century Anglican priest, as an unjust suppression of biblical faithfulness.

Significant changes were made to the 1552 Book of Common Prayer under Elizabeth’s direction to align it more with her preferences, distancing it from the Puritan movement. While the Puritans sought to live biblically faithful lives, their goals often clashed with the State’s interests in maintaining control over Church policies and financial structures. Elizabeth’s directives reflected a desire to support the broader Reformation movement in Europe while retaining a tight grip on the English Church. This tension between State authority and the Puritans’ desire for freedom to worship according to Scripture created lasting divisions. The Puritans advocated for worship guided by the regulative principle—where only practices explicitly authorized by Scripture are permitted—rejecting the State’s imposition of normative practices and ceremonial traditions not rooted in biblical mandates.

Thomas Cranmer’s theological contributions, such as justification by faith alone and the supremacy of Scripture, were pivotal to the Reformation but often conflicted with the Puritans’ vision of worship. The Puritans objected to what they saw as “priestcraft,” including ceremonial practices and artifacts that they believed undermined the purity of worship. They resisted the State’s directives to conform to the Church of England’s policies, particularly those that upheld normative worship practices inconsistent with their understanding of Scripture. Their opposition highlighted a deeper struggle between a God-centered approach to worship and a man-centered approach influenced by political expediency.

Theological figures such as Richard Hooker provided an Anglican counterpoint to Puritan concerns, much as Ulrich Zwingli had redefined the European Reformation by prioritizing the pulpit over the sacraments for the edification of the congregation. Hooker argued for the flexibility of the prayer book, rites, and ceremonies as tools for spiritual nourishment, seeing them as man-centered aids for worship. In contrast, the Puritans emphasized worship in spirit and truth, insisting that God’s glory must be the central focus. Despite the Elizabethan Settlement’s aim to govern Church affairs in alignment with State interests, divine sovereignty remained a critical theme of the Reformation. Beyond the political and social ambitions of the elite, the English Reformation served as a means for advancing Christ’s Kingdom through the gospel, affirming that Christ is King over both Church and State.

Grace-Centered Worship

The enduring principles of the Reformation emphasize God’s grace as the rightful foundation of worship. At the heart of this is the supremacy of His revealed Word, which serves as the ultimate authority over all earthly governments and powers. Christ’s Kingdom reigns as His people love and worship Him, guided by His Word and Spirit. This worship is characterized by liturgy free from empty ritualism and tradition untainted by rigid traditionalism.

Through the gospel of grace, God is honored in ways that are pleasing to Him—worship that reflects His nature and commands. As the Creator and the source of all life and truth, He is worshiped with hearts overflowing with gratitude. Yet beyond thanksgiving, God is worshiped and adored primarily for who He is, in all His majesty, holiness, and love. This reverence ensures that worship is not merely an act of obligation but a profound expression of devotion and awe.

The Scriptures

Jensen emphasizes that the proclamation of God’s Word is the primary area of concern around the practice of Anglican worship, a principle deeply embedded during the English Reformation. He references Thomas Cranmer’s liturgical reforms, prioritizing Scripture reading and preaching in the vernacular, making the Bible accessible to all congregants. This shift was pivotal in transforming worship from a spectator matter into an engaging, participatory experience.

The chapter highlights the architectural and liturgical changes implemented to elevate the role of Scripture. Pulpits were placed prominently, symbolizing the importance of preaching, and services were restructured to include multiple readings from both the Old and New Testaments. Jensen notes that this emphasis was not merely about disseminating information but aimed at heart transformation, fostering a personal and communal encounter with God’s Word.

Jensen also discusses the theological implications of this focus. By centering worship on Scripture, the Reformers asserted the sufficiency and authority of the Bible in guiding faith and practice. This approach countered medieval practices that often placed tradition on par with Scripture, reaffirming the Reformation principle of sola scriptura. Albeit while McDermott within his book Deep Anglicanism, provides support for prima scriptura, the Reformed Anglican Church and its founding principles placed the final and supreme authority squarely on Scripture alone. Furthermore, the chapter explores the role of the preacher in Anglican worship. Jensen emphasizes that preaching is not merely an educational exercise but a means of grace through which God speaks to His people. He cites examples from Reformation preachers who viewed their sermons as instruments for spiritual renewal and moral exhortation, aiming to convict, comfort, and edify the congregation.

The Sacraments

The concept of sacraments, as a distinct category of ritual signs, is not explicitly found in Scripture but emerged from the Church’s reflection on its practices. The term sacramentum, originally referring to a Roman soldier’s pledge of allegiance, was applied to Christian rites in recognition of their promissory nature—both in declaring God’s promises and in expressing the believer’s commitment. Over time, this classification led to the development of sacramental theology, largely shaped by ecclesiastical tradition rather than direct biblical mandate. By the Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church had formalized a system of seven sacraments, as defined by Peter Lombard, which were believed to confer grace ex opere operato, meaning they were efficacious by their very performance. This notion of automatic grace transmission was a primary point of contention during the Reformation, with Protestant reformers challenging its theological legitimacy.

The seven sacraments, as formalized by the Roman Catholic Church and traditionally recognized within medieval Western Christianity, are:

1. Baptism – The sacrament of initiation into the Christian faith, believed to cleanse original sin and confer regeneration.
2. Eucharist (Holy Communion) – The sacrament in which believers partake of the Body and Blood of Christ under the forms of bread and wine, commemorating the Last Supper.
3. Confirmation – The sacrament that strengthens the grace received in baptism through the laying on of hands and anointing with chrism, signifying the reception of the Holy Spirit.
4. Penance (Confession, Reconciliation) – The sacrament through which sins committed after baptism are forgiven through confession, absolution by a priest, and acts of penance.
5. Matrimony (Marriage) – The sacrament in which a man and woman are united in a lifelong covenant, reflecting the union of Christ and the Church.
6. Holy Orders – The sacrament by which men are ordained as deacons, priests, or bishops, conferring upon them the grace and authority for their ministry.
7. Extreme Unction (Anointing of the Sick) – The sacrament administered to the seriously ill or dying, involving anointing with oil and prayers for healing, strength, and forgiveness.

In medieval theology, these sacraments were understood to be effective signs that conferred grace ex opere operato, meaning they worked by the very fact of being performed. This view was later challenged by Protestant reformers.

The evangelical Reformers of the sixteenth century sought to dismantle what they saw as the medieval church’s distortion of sacramental theology, which they believed had replaced Christ with the priest as mediator, emphasized human effort over divine grace, and relied on an unbroken human succession rather than the power of God’s word. While they agreed that the sacramental system needed to be radically reformed, they struggled to achieve a unified theology of the sacraments. Nowhere was this division more evident than in the debate over the Lord’s Supper. The Colloquy of Marburg in 1529, convened to unite Protestant thought, instead revealed an irreconcilable rift between Martin Luther and Huldrych Zwingli. Luther insisted on the real, bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist, interpreting “This is my body” literally, while Zwingli, influenced by John 6:63, saw the Supper as a purely spiritual participation in Christ. Their impasse, though recognized in the colloquy’s closing statements as an area for continued prayer and charity, signified a fundamental doctrinal divide that would shape Protestant sacramental theology for centuries.

Despite this disagreement, the Reformers achieved substantial consensus on rejecting the Mass as a repeated sacrifice, affirming that it could not supplement or replace Christ’s once-for-all atonement. They also agreed that the laity should receive both elements of the Eucharist, in contrast to the prevailing Roman Catholic practice of withholding the cup. However, the core dispute over the nature of Christ’s presence in the Lord’s Supper persisted. Luther’s assertion of a real bodily presence conflicted with Zwingli’s symbolic interpretation, while figures like Martin Bucer sought a middle ground, advocating for a “spiritual presence.” This theological fracture would have lasting consequences, shaping not only Lutheran and Reformed traditions but also influencing later debates within the Church of England, where Bucer’s thought played a significant role in shaping Anglican sacramental doctrine.

The English Reformation initially remained cautious in addressing sacramental theology, largely due to Henry VIII’s conservative stance. Though the Ten Articles (1536) introduced elements of justification by faith, they retained traditional teachings on baptism and penance, and the Bishops’ Book (1537) reaffirmed a substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The Six Articles (1539) reinforced Catholic sacramental practices, including withholding the cup from the laity. Yet, theological shifts were beginning to take shape, as the rejection of purgatory undermined the Mass’s sacrificial character, and the doctrine of justification by faith alone diminished the medieval view of sacraments as necessary for salvation. Even before Henry’s death in 1547, radical perspectives circulated in England, particularly through the writings of William Tyndale, who argued that the sacraments were not mechanisms of grace but visible signs of God’s promises, received through faith as the word was preached. This intellectual ferment laid the groundwork for further Protestant influence in the English Church under Edward VI and beyond.

The Eucharist

The doctrine of the mystical real presence of Christ in the Eucharist affirms that, while the bread and wine remain materially unchanged, they become the true body and blood of Christ in a supernatural manner. This view, distinct from both transubstantiation and a merely symbolic interpretation, maintains that Christ’s presence is neither a physical transformation nor a mere memorial but a profound mystery apprehended through faith. Martin Luther articulated this understanding through his doctrine of sacramental union, arguing that Christ is “in, with, and under” the elements of bread and wine (Luther, Confession Concerning Christ’s Supper, 1528). This mystical presence, he insisted, is grounded in the very words of Christ: “This is my body… This is my blood” (Matthew 26:26–28). Luther rejected both the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which he saw as unnecessary philosophical speculation, and Zwingli’s symbolic view, which he believed stripped the sacrament of its divine power. Instead, he upheld that the Eucharist was a true means of grace, in which Christ offers himself to believers for the strengthening of their faith and union with him.

The mystical real presence finds resonance in patristic theology as well. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, for instance, instructed the faithful to “partake of the Body and Blood of Christ with full assurance that they are indeed his” (Catechetical Lectures, 22.6). Similarly, St. Augustine maintained that while the sacramental elements remain perceptible as bread and wine, they become, through the power of Christ’s word, the means by which the believer mystically communes with his true body and blood (Sermons, 227). This sacramental realism shaped much of the Anglican tradition, particularly in the theology of Richard Hooker, who affirmed that “the real presence of Christ’s most blessed body and blood is not denied to them that rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the holy sacrament” (Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, V.67.6). This perspective underscores that Christ is truly received in the Eucharist, not by physical transformation but through a divine mystery, whereby the faithful partake of his life-giving presence through the elements consecrated by his word and Spirit.

The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation asserts that in the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine is completely transformed into the substance of Christ’s body and blood, while the appearances (species) of bread and wine remain unchanged. This teaching is firmly rooted in Christ’s words at the Last Supper: “This is my body… This is my blood” (Matthew 26:26–28), which the Church interprets literally. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) formally articulated this belief, stating that “the body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine, the bread being transubstantiated into the body and the wine into the blood by divine power” (Canon 1). This theological foundation was further solidified at the Council of Trent (1545–1563), which declared that through the consecration by a validly ordained priest, “a conversion is made of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His blood” (Session 13, Chapter 4). This understanding is grounded in Aristotelian metaphysics, particularly the distinction between substance (what something truly is) and accidents (its outward, perceptible qualities), as developed by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, where he states, “The presence of Christ’s true body and blood in this sacrament cannot be detected by sense, nor understanding, but by faith alone” (ST III, q. 75, a. 1).

This doctrine ensures that the Eucharist is not merely a symbolic act but the actual participation in Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice, making the Mass a true offering of Christ’s body and blood to the Father. St. Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 10:16–17 supports this claim: “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” The Church Fathers also affirmed this realism; St. Ambrose of Milan insisted that “before consecration, it is bread; but where the words of Christ come in, it is the body of Christ” (On the Mysteries, 9.50). Similarly, St. John Chrysostom taught that in the Eucharist, Christ himself is “present on the altar as he was in the manger” (Homily on Matthew, 82.5). For Roman Catholic theology, transubstantiation is essential to preserving the mystery of Christ’s presence, ensuring that in the Eucharist, the faithful receive not a mere sign, but Christ himself—body, blood, soul, and divinity—uniting them with his sacrificial love and the redemptive work of the Cross.

Martin Bucer (1491–1551) was a key figure in the Protestant Reformation, serving as a mediator between Lutheran and Reformed traditions and significantly influencing the development of Protestant sacramental theology. A former Dominican friar turned reformer in Strasbourg, Bucer sought to reconcile the contentious views on the Eucharist, advocating for a middle position between Luther’s insistence on Christ’s bodily presence and Zwingli’s symbolic interpretation. He proposed that Christ was spiritually, yet truly, present in the Lord’s Supper, received by faith through the working of the Holy Spirit (Grund und Ursach, 1524). His conciliatory approach shaped the Wittenberg Concord (1536), a temporary agreement between Lutheran and South German reformers. Later, after fleeing to England during the reign of Edward VI, Bucer played a crucial role in shaping the Anglican understanding of the Eucharist, particularly through his influence on The Book of Common Prayer (1552) and his treatise De Regno Christi (1550). His emphasis on a spiritual but real communion with Christ in the Eucharist laid the groundwork for Anglican sacramental theology, balancing the doctrine of real presence with the rejection of transubstantiation.

Thomas Cranmer’s mature theology of the Eucharist stood in direct contrast to the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, rejecting the idea that the substance of bread and wine underwent a physical transformation into Christ’s body and blood. His final position, as articulated in the foundational Anglican formularies under Edward VI, sought to maintain the real presence of Christ in the sacrament without resorting to what he saw as unnecessary metaphysical speculation. Unlike Luther, Cranmer denied any notion that Christ’s body and blood coexisted with the elements, and he firmly rejected the Roman Catholic assertion that a priest’s consecration effected a substantial change. Yet, his understanding was also distinct from Zwinglian memorialism, which he saw as reducing the Eucharist to a mere mental recollection. Instead, Cranmer upheld a doctrine of spiritual presence, in which Christ is truly received by the faithful, not through the physical nature of the elements, but through the power of the Holy Spirit uniting believers to Christ by faith. As he stated in his debate with Bishop Stephen Gardiner, the Eucharist is “a spiritual refreshing, wherein our souls be fed and nourished with Christ’s very flesh and blood to eternal life.” The sacramental signs remained bread and wine in their substance, but through faith, they became the effectual means by which believers participated in the reality they signified—Christ himself.

Cranmer’s Eucharistic theology was deeply influenced by the patristic tradition, particularly the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria. Following the Chalcedonian principle that Christ remains indivisibly both divine and human, Cranmer asserted that while Christ’s physical body remains in heaven, the Spirit raises the believer to partake of him there. The sacraments, therefore, were not automatic conduits of grace in themselves but divinely instituted signs through which Christ, in his fullness, is received by those who approach in faith. His final liturgical reforms, culminating in the Book of Common Prayer (1552), reflected this understanding. The Words of Administration—“Take and eat this, in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith, with thanksgiving”—emphasized that the Eucharist was a spiritual feeding, received inwardly through faith rather than by any physical transformation of the elements. Cranmer thus placed the real presence of Christ not in the sacramental elements themselves but in the faithful recipient, an understanding later affirmed by Richard Hooker, who wrote that Christ’s body and blood are “not, therefore, to be sought for in the sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of the sacrament.” By rooting the Eucharist in the divine promise and spiritual participation, Cranmer preserved both the reality of Christ’s presence and the evangelical principle that salvation is appropriated by faith rather than through the external operation of a ritual act.

Cranmer’s Eucharistic theology, as articulated in the Book of Common Prayer (1552) and his debates with figures like Stephen Gardiner, presents a nuanced understanding of Christ’s real presence in the sacrament that both aligns with and diverges from the Lutheran position as codified in the Book of Concord (1580). While both Cranmer and Lutheranism reject transubstantiation and affirm the necessity of faith for proper reception, they differ fundamentally in their understanding of how Christ is present in the Eucharist. Lutheran sacramental theology, particularly as expressed in the Augsburg Confession (1530) and the Formula of Concord (1577), upholds the doctrine of sacramental union, wherein Christ’s body and blood are truly and substantially present “in, with, and under” the elements of bread and wine. According to the Small Catechism, Luther taught that “the Sacrament of the Altar is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, under the bread and wine, instituted by Christ Himself for us Christians to eat and to drink” (SC VI). The Large Catechism further asserts that Christ’s words, “This is my body,” are to be taken literally, meaning that all communicants, whether faithful or unfaithful, receive Christ’s body and blood objectively, though to their spiritual benefit or detriment depending on their faith (LC V). This contrasts with Cranmer’s view, which maintains that Christ’s presence is mediated solely through the faith of the believer and that the elements remain unchanged as signs that point to a spiritual reality rather than containing it.

Another key divergence lies in the role of faith in receiving the sacrament. While Cranmer asserted that the Eucharist is a means by which believers are lifted spiritually to partake of Christ in heaven, Lutheran theology maintains that Christ descends to be truly present in the sacrament itself. The Formula of Concord explicitly rejects the Reformed view that the sacrament is merely a sign, declaring that “we believe, teach, and confess that in the Holy Supper, the body and blood of Christ are truly and essentially present” and “are truly given and received with the bread and wine” (FC SD VII.6–7). Unlike Cranmer, who viewed the Eucharist as an instrument that, by faith, enables the believer to partake of Christ spiritually, Lutherans argue that the sacrament itself imparts grace objectively, working faith where it may not yet exist. In this sense, Lutheran catechetical teaching sees the Eucharist as an external means of grace, operating through God’s promise rather than the subjective faith of the recipient. While both traditions affirm the real presence, Cranmer’s Eucharistic theology places emphasis on the faith of the recipient as the means by which Christ is received, whereas Lutheranism affirms the sacrament’s efficacy as rooted in Christ’s word, independent of human faith, ensuring that all who partake receive the true body and blood of Christ, whether to their benefit or judgment.

Reception of the Eucharist

Cranmer articulated three ways in which one may partake of the Lord’s Supper: spiritual only, spiritual and sacramental together, and sacramental only. The fullest and proper reception occurs when both the outward elements and the inward faith unite, bringing true spiritual nourishment. However, one may either receive Christ spiritually without the sacrament or partake of the elements without faith, in which case the sacrament becomes a judgment rather than a means of grace.

1. Spiritual Reception Only

• A person may truly feed on Christ without physically partaking of the Eucharist.
• The spiritual reality of communion with Christ is independent of the sacramental elements.
• This occurs when one receives Christ by faith apart from the physical act of eating and drinking.

2. Spiritual and Sacramental Reception Together

• The ideal and full reception of the Lord’s Supper occurs when one partakes of both the elements and the spiritual reality they signify.
• This requires both outward participation in the sacrament and inward faith in Christ.
• The communicant receives the grace of Christ through the sacramental means as a true spiritual nourishment.

3. Sacramental Reception Only

• It is possible to partake of the physical elements of bread and wine without receiving the true spiritual benefits of the sacrament.
• This occurs when an unrepentant or unbelieving person outwardly participates in Communion without faith.
• Instead of receiving grace, such a person eats and drinks judgment upon themselves (1 Cor. 11:29).

Baptism

The Reformers, despite their doctrinal differences, found common ground in their rejection of the medieval understanding of baptism as an automatic means of salvation (ex opere operato). However, they struggled to formulate a unified positive doctrine, particularly regarding the nature of baptismal regeneration. While the radical Anabaptists rejected infant baptism entirely, arguing for “believer’s baptism” as a conscious profession of faith, the magisterial Reformers—Luther, Calvin, and the English Anglican divines—retained the practice of baptizing infants, though with varying theological emphases. By the time of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, Anglican liturgy included a service for the baptism of those “of riper years” but maintained the expectation that infant baptism was normative. The central question remained: did baptism, particularly in the case of infants, signify true regeneration? The Anglican formularies avoided the Roman Catholic claim that baptism conferred grace automatically while also resisting the Reformed tendency to make baptism a mere sign of an inward, already completed work of grace. Instead, Cranmer and his successors articulated a middle way, affirming that baptism is both a sign and an instrument of grace, truly incorporating the baptized into the visible Church and making them recipients of God’s covenant promises.

Historically, baptism carried both religious and mundane meanings in Jewish and Greco-Roman contexts. The Greek word baptizō simply referred to washing or immersion, used for common actions such as cleansing hands or vessels. However, ritual washings had long been practiced in Judaism as acts of purification, and by the time of John the Baptist, baptism had taken on a distinct role as a rite of entry into the community of God’s people. John’s baptism, which called Jews to repentance, signified a break from mere ethnic identity and emphasized the necessity of spiritual renewal. His ministry prefigured Christian baptism in its call to repentance but differed in its function. Whereas Jewish purification rites and circumcision served as outward marks of covenant membership, John’s baptism pointed toward an eschatological transformation—a coming reality in which baptism would not only cleanse but also initiate a person into the new covenant established by Christ. The Reformers, particularly the English Anglo-Catholics, saw this continuity in baptism’s role, maintaining the connection between the Old Testament covenantal signs and the Church’s sacrament of initiation, yet insisting that its efficacy was ultimately dependent on God’s promise and the work of the Holy Spirit rather than the mere performance of the rite.

John’s prophecy of one who would baptize “with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Luke 3:16) underscored the transformative nature of Christian baptism, distinguishing it from its Jewish predecessors. While the external washing with water remains essential, it is ultimately a sign pointing to the deeper reality of spiritual regeneration through the work of the Holy Spirit. Anglican theology, influenced by figures such as Richard Hooker and later John Henry Newman, sought to preserve both the sacramental and spiritual dimensions of baptism. It affirmed that in baptism, the Holy Spirit is truly at work, incorporating the baptized into the mystical body of Christ and granting them a real participation in the life of grace. However, this participation is not automatic; it requires faith to be fully effectual in the life of the believer. The Reformers, while rejecting medieval sacerdotalism, did not strip baptism of its sacramental power. Instead, they restored its biblical foundation as both a means of grace and a covenantal sign, in which God’s promises are bestowed upon the baptized and are received in faith, whether immediately or as they mature into their baptismal identity.

J.C. Ryle (1816–1900), the first Anglican Bishop of Liverpool and a staunch advocate of Reformed evangelicalism within the Church of England maintained a view of baptism that contrasted sharply with the Anglo-Catholic and High Church sacramentalism of his time. While he upheld infant baptism as a biblical and historic practice, he strongly resisted the notion that baptism, in itself, automatically conveyed regeneration. In his work Regeneration (1877), Ryle argued that baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace but not the means by which that grace is necessarily imparted. He emphasized that true regeneration—the new birth in Christ—is the work of the Holy Spirit and is evidenced by a life of repentance and faith rather than by the mere reception of the sacrament. He criticized the Tractarian movement and the Oxford theologians, particularly John Henry Newman and Edward Pusey, for reviving a doctrine of baptismal regeneration that, in his view, dangerously obscured the necessity of personal faith and conversion. For Ryle, baptism was a covenantal sign, marking a child as a member of the visible Church and placing them under God’s promises, but it did not itself ensure salvation apart from a living faith in Christ.

In contrast to the Anglo-Catholic position, which emphasized the ex opere operato nature of the sacrament as a means of grace, Ryle aligned more closely with Reformed Anglicanism in insisting that baptism’s efficacy was conditional upon faith. He saw no biblical warrant for the belief that all baptized infants were necessarily regenerated at the moment of baptism, though he did affirm that God could use the sacrament as a means of grace in the life of the elect. This position placed him in continuity with the evangelical tradition of the Church of England, as seen in the Thirty-Nine Articles, particularly Article 27, which describes baptism as a sign of regeneration but does not equate it with regeneration itself. While Anglo-Catholics like Newman saw baptism as effecting spiritual rebirth in all recipients, Ryle maintained that only those who later demonstrated genuine faith and perseverance in Christ could be considered truly regenerated. Thus, his theology of baptism reinforced the primacy of personal conversion, the necessity of a faith that endures, and the danger of trusting in sacramental rituals without a corresponding inward transformation.

J.C. Ryle’s view of baptismal regeneration as a hypothetical declaration based on a charitable supposition reflects his cautious yet pastoral approach to the doctrine (see his book Knots Untied). He maintained that while every baptized child is presumed to be regenerate in a provisional sense—because baptism places them within the covenant community and under the promises of God—this status is not an infallible guarantee of actual spiritual renewal. Instead, the declaration of regeneration in the baptismal service is made on the assumption that the child will later demonstrate true faith and perseverance in Christ. This aligns with his broader evangelical conviction that regeneration is ultimately verified not by the sacrament itself but by the fruits of a transformed life. Ryle thus viewed baptism as a sign of grace given conditionally—that is, effectual only in those who, upon reaching maturity, manifest genuine faith. If a baptized person later rejects the faith, it is evidence that they were never truly regenerated. This perspective allowed Ryle to uphold the historic practice of infant baptism while avoiding both the Anglo-Catholic notion of automatic regeneration and the Reformed Baptist rejection of infant baptism altogether. His position reinforced the necessity of personal conversion while preserving the sacramental language of Anglican tradition, interpreting it within the framework of biblical faith and perseverance.

Liturgical Prayers

Jensen covers the structure and content of prayers within Anglican liturgy, highlighting their theological richness and pastoral sensitivity. He explains that the prayers crafted during the Reformation were designed to reflect the doctrines of grace, human sinfulness, and divine mercy. This intentionality aimed to lead worshippers through a journey of confession, assurance, thanksgiving, and supplication.

Jensen analyzes specific prayers from the Book of Common Prayer, noting their scriptural foundations and rhythmic beauty. He points out that these prayers were constructed to be both theologically profound and accessible, enabling congregants to internalize and articulate their faith. The use of collective language in prayers fostered a sense of communal identity and shared belief, reinforcing the unity of the church body.

The chapter also addresses the balance between set prayers and extemporaneous prayer. Jensen argues that while the fixed forms provide a doctrinally sound framework, there is room for spontaneous expressions, especially in pastoral contexts. This balance ensures that worship remains rooted in the Word and tradition while responsive to the immediate needs of the congregation.

Additionally, Jensen reflects on the posture and attitude of prayer in Anglican worship. He emphasizes humility, reverence, and dependence on God’s grace as essential components. The prayers are designed to orient worshippers’ hearts toward God, acknowledging human frailty and divine sovereignty.
In conclusion, chapters 3 and 5 of Jensen’s work illuminate the Reformation Anglican commitment to Scripture and prayer as central elements of worship. By reinstating the supreme authority of God’s Word and crafting prayers that convey deep theological truths, the Reformers sought to create a worship experience that was both edifying and transformative, grounded in grace and expressed through gratitude.

Music, Hymnody, & Psalms

Congregational singing has become an integral aspect of contemporary Christian worship across denominations, influenced significantly by the hymn traditions of the evangelical movement since the 18th century and the Pentecostal and charismatic movements of the 20th century. This influence is particularly evident within global Anglicanism, where congregational singing now accompanies other musical contributions from choirs, orchestras, or bands. In modern times, as Anglicanism has expanded globally, churches in Africa and Asia incorporate local musical styles into worship, moving away from the need to emulate traditional English customs. This diversification reflects a broader acceptance of regional cultural expressions within the framework of Anglican liturgical practices.

The historical relationship between music and worship in the Church of England has been complex and shaped by the theological priorities of the Reformation. Unlike their Continental counterparts, Anglican Reformers did not prioritize congregational hymn singing to the same extent. However, royal support ensured the survival of choral music traditions in cathedrals and college choirs, preserving a distinct strand of Anglican liturgical identity. Central to the Anglican Reformation was the emphasis on the theology of the Word, which shaped worship as a grateful response to God’s grace rather than an exercise in aesthetic display. Reformers such as Thomas Cranmer and John Jewel believed music should serve this spiritual purpose rather than merely offer artistic beauty.

Despite this focus on the Word, opinions on the role of music in worship varied among the European Reformers. Figures like John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli were wary of music’s potential to distract from spiritual devotion, with Calvin limiting worship music to unaccompanied psalm singing and Zwingli rejecting church music entirely. In contrast, Martin Luther embraced music as a powerful tool for teaching and spreading Reformation theology among the laity. This enthusiasm for hymnody was so influential that it spurred the Roman Catholic Church’s counter-Reformation efforts to compose hymns in response, underscoring music’s role as both a devotional aid and a medium for religious education and reform.

The history of church music in England during the Reformation reflects a significant shift from medieval practices to those aligned with the theological priorities of the Protestant movement. In medieval times, music was largely the domain of trained professionals, performed in Latin by monastic choirs using plainsong and, later, complex polyphony. While these compositions, crafted by figures like John Taverner, were admired for their beauty, they were criticized for being unintelligible to congregants, leading to concerns about whether such music truly served its intended purpose of edifying believers. The Reformation, driven by the doctrine of justification by faith and the emphasis on Scripture’s clarity, sought to make worship more accessible by using vernacular language and simplifying musical forms so that the congregation could understand and participate.

The Reformation in England, influenced by the broader Protestant movements on the Continent, brought about significant reforms in church music, particularly under figures like Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer and other English reformers sought to replace elaborate choral arrangements with simpler, more intelligible music that allowed congregational participation. Although institutions like the Chapel Royal continued to maintain sophisticated choral traditions, the emphasis shifted toward fostering a worship experience rooted in Scripture and community engagement. Influenced by Lutheran practices, English reformers promoted metrical psalms and straightforward hymnody designed for lay participation, which gradually replaced the dominance of professional choirs. By the latter part of the 16th century, composers such as Thomas Tallis and William Byrd adapted their musical styles to align with these reforms, creating music that reflected the theological principles of accessibility and clarity.

Under Queen Elizabeth I’s reign, congregational singing became firmly established as an integral part of English worship. Official injunctions encouraged psalm singing by the laity in a clear and understandable manner. Accounts from contemporaries, such as John Jewel, illustrate the widespread enthusiasm for congregational music, with reports of large gatherings of people singing together in worship. This shift not only transformed the practice of music within the Anglican Church but also reinforced the Reformation’s central principle of making religious worship accessible to all believers, fostering personal devotion, and creating a sense of communal participation in praise and worship. The move from professionalized music to congregational singing reflected the broader theological shift toward individual faith and direct engagement with Scripture.

The theological tension between cathedral music and Reformation principles lies in the purpose of worship and the role of music within it. Critics argue that elaborate choral performances risk becoming an end in themselves, detracting from the gospel’s core message by prioritizing aesthetic beauty over edification. However, proponents maintain that when properly understood, cathedral music can serve as a profound expression of worship, enhancing the proclamation of God’s Word. Reformers like Cranmer sought to adapt traditional forms to align with evangelical theology, ensuring music supported the gospel message rather than obscured it. Today, this tradition retains relevance, especially among younger generations seeking depth and transcendence in worship experiences. The challenge remains to ensure that the beauty of cathedral music complements, rather than competes with, the Reformation’s emphasis on Scripture and congregational participation.

Citations & Notes

[1] The Catechism of the Catholic Church addresses the human condition following original sin, emphasizing that humanity is deprived of original holiness and justice, rather than being utterly depraved. This distinction is evident in several passages:

• Paragraph 417: “Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called ‘original sin.'” USCCB https://www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/107/index.html
  
• Paragraph 405: “Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice…” USCCB https://www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/107/index.html

These references clarify that, according to Catholic teaching, original sin results in a deprivation—a loss of original righteousness—rather than total depravity. This means human nature is wounded and inclined to sin but retains the capacity for good, especially through divine grace.

[2] Definitions of Metanoeite (root transliteration as nous):

BDAG: Matt. 3:2: To feel remorse, repent, and be converted as a prerequisite for experiencing the Reign of God in John the Baptist’s and Jesus’s preaching. William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 640.

LSJ: To perceive afterward and change one’s mind or purpose, change one’s opinion, and think it is not. Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 1115.

Louw-Nida: 41.52 μετανοέω; μετάνοια, ας f: to change one’s way of life as the result of a complete change of thought and attitude concerning sin and righteousness—‘to repent, to change one’s way, repentance.’μετανοέω: ἐξελθόντες ἐκήρυξαν ἵνα μετανοῶσιν ‘they went out and preached that the people should repent’ Mk 6:12. Though it would be possible to classify μετανοέω and μετάνοια in Domain 30 Think, the focal semantic feature of these terms is behavioral rather than intellectual. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), 509.