The question of Anglican Orders (again)
The comment contained these words:
"I agree [not with me] that the real argument that could remain to support Apostolicae Curae is the doubt on the intent. To make it short, the deliberate omission of all reference of a sacrificing power in the Ordinals (for bishops and priests) does raise some doubts. Therefore, the fundamental question that remains is: Why such an omission?"
"Had such an omission been decided at any time other than the Reformation, Bicknell’s position could easily be supported. But the very circumstances of this omission (associated with protestant reformation) are, at best, suspect." (Addition of links - mine)
1. The Reformation period was a time in which illiteracy and ignorance had prevailed for centuries.
The nature of sacrifice
"The sacrifice of the Eucharist is not something additional; it is the Eucharist itself in one of its chief aspects. Whatever it means, it is included in our Lord's words of institution. Hence, in conferring authority to minister the Sacraments, she [the Church] confers authority to offer the Eucharistic sacrifice." 3
Indeed, whatever one may think when reading carelessly the Book of Common Prayer service of Holy Communion, it is not possible to be in church with a priest at the altar, the Words of Institution spoken by him reverently while the people worship, without realizing the sacrificial nature of what has just happened.
The service takes us to the cross, the time and place of the "once for all" (Heb. 10:10) sacrifice of Christ.
1 He is mistaken also as to the one argument that Rome continues to make about "defect of Intention." The real reason they give is very weak indeed, and was answered in a past essay of mine:
"Even though the Rites in the Ordinal make very clear which office it is that a man is ordained to, Rome has clung to its position that the Imperative lines have failed to identify the Orders of bishop and priest (whereas the word "deacon" is in the Imperative of that Rite) until the 1662 revision. That is not true. The use of the Scriptures that were quoted most certainly (and clearly to those who know Scripture) identified the episcopate with the words from II Timothy 1:6, and the priesthood with words from John 20: 22, 23. This was not only commonly understood, but also it was already traditional, translated out of a Latin Ordinal that had been used for centuries. Simply put, there was no defect in Intention, and the whole argument by Rome in 1896 was completely bogus."
In effect, Rome, having reduced its argument to this one last point, has lost the debate in any honest way of thinking.
2. In places the BCP rubrics call the altar the "holy table." This is in keeping with Old Testament use of the word "table" for the altar of sacrifice, such as Malachi 1:7-12.
3. Bicknell, E.J. A Theological Introduction to The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, 1919, 1955, London