Thomas Ken in a devotional work entitled Manual of Prayers for the Use of Winchester Scholars, published in 1674, speaks of a ‘mysterious presence’ of Christ’s body and blood in the Eucharist and of this body and blood being received by those who communicate.  He says:

“I know, O my God, that I must look through the outward elements, and fix my faith on that which they signify, and which is the inward and invisible grace, even Thy own blessed body and blood, which is verily and indeed taken and received of the faithful in the Lord’s Supper.

But tell me, O Thou whom my soul loveth, how canst Thou give us Thy flesh to eat?

Lord, Thy hast told me that Thy words, they are spirit and they are life, and are therefore not carnally to be understood; Lord, I believe, help Thou mine unbelief.

I believe Thy body and blood to be as really present in the Holy Sacrament, as Thy divine power can make it, through the manner of Thy mysterious presence I cannot comprehend.

Lord, I believe that the bread that we break, and the cup that we drink, are not bare signs only, but the real communication of Thy body and blood, and pledges to assure me of it; and I verily believe that, if with due preparation I come to Thy altar, as certainly as I receive the outward signs, so certainly shall I receive the thing signified, even Thy most blessed body and blood, to receive which inestimable blessing, O merciful Lord, do Thou fit and prepare me.

I adore Thee, O blessed Jesu, my Lord and my God, when I consider the benefits which through Thy mercy we receive by Thy Holy Sacrament.

Glory be to Thee, O Lord, who there makest Thy own body and blood to become our spiritual food to strengthen and refresh our souls.

Glory be to Thee, O Lord, who by this heavenly food dost mystically unite us to Thyself; for nothing becomes one with our bodies more than the bodily food we eat, which turns into our very substance; and nothing makes us become one with Thee more than when Thou vouchsafest to become the very food of our souls.

Glory be to Thee, O Lord, who by this immortal food dost nourish our souls to live the life of grace here, and dost raise is up to life everlasting hereafter.  Lord, do Thou evermore give me this bread.” (Ken, Manual of Prayers for the Use of Winchester Scholars, cited in Stone, 1909: II, 456-457).

Ken in this passage distinguishes between outward elements and inward graces.  The outward are seen but the inward are not, although the outward (bread and wine) ‘signify’ the inward, which is the body and blood of Christ.  The body and blood of Christ, in words echoing the prayer book catechism, are said to be ‘verily and indeed taken and received’ by those who communicate.  The question which follows asks in what seems to be very immoderate words, that is, how Christ can give his ‘flesh’ to those who communicate.  The answer to this question however, suggests that no such immoderate notion is implied since the ‘flesh’ is described as ‘spirit and life’ and ‘not carnally to be understood’.  This is clarified however, in a statement of moderate realism, where the body and blood of Christ is said to be ‘really present in the Holy Sacrament’ as a mysterious presence beyond understanding.  Ken states that God, by divine power ‘can make it’ Christ’s body and blood.  This idea of ‘making’ implies some sort of change in the bread and wine, although this is not a change of substance, since elsewhere he denies that any such change occurs in the Eucharist.  Any change must be one of mystery and spirit.  Clearly this mysterious presence is more than mere remembrance since Ken describes the bread and wine as more than ‘bare signs’.  They are a ‘real communication’ of Christ’s body and blood, whereby through the outward signs the signified is received.  In the Eucharist the benefits of Christ are received.  Moderate realism is affirmed by Ken in this passage, as a real, yet spiritual and mystical presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Eucharist.

In another work entitled An Exposition on the Church Catechism, or The Practice of Divine Love, originally published in 1685, Ken speaks of the Eucharist.  Ken speaks of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist in a realist way.  In the second paragraph this is particularly so, and this language was modified in subsequent editions.  The second paragraph of the edition of 1686 is produced in italics for purposes of comparison and shows the changes made from the first to the second edition.  Ken says:

“Glory be to Thee, O adorable Jesus, Who under the outward and visible part, the Bread and Wine, things obvious and easily prepared, both which Thou hast commanded to be received, dost communicate to our souls the mystery of Divine Love, the inward and invisible grace, Thy Own most blessed Body and Blood, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in Thy supper, for which all Love, all Glory, be to Thee.

O God Incarnate, how Thou canst give us Thy flesh to eat and Thy Blood to drink, how Thy flesh is meat indeed and Thy Blood is drink indeed, how he that eateth Thy flesh and drinketh Thy Blood dwelleth in Thee, and Thou in him, how he shall live by Thee and shall be raised up by Thee to life eternal, how Thou Who art in heaven art present on the altar, I can by no means explain; but I firmly believe it all, because Thou hast said it, and I firmly rely on Thy Love and on Thy Omnipotence to make good Thy Word, though the manner of doing it I cannot comprehend.

[O God incarnate, how the bread and wine, unchanged in their substance, become Thy body and Thy blood, after what extraordinary manner Thou, who art in heaven, art present throughout the whole sacramental action to every devout receiver, how Thou canst give us Thy flesh to eat and Thy blood to drink, how Thy flesh is meat indeed and Thy blood is drink indeed, how he that eateth Thy flesh and drinketh Thy blood dwelleth in Thee and Thou in him, how he shall live by Thee and be raised up by Thee to life eternal, I can by no means comprehend, but I firmly believe all Thou hast said, and I firmly rely in Thy omnipotent love to make good Thy word, for which all love, all glory, be to Thee.]

I believe, O Crucified Lord, that the Bread which we break in the celebration of the Holy Mysteries is the Communication of Thy Body, and the cup of Blessing which we bless, is the Communication of Thy Blood, and that Thou dost as effectually and really convey Thy Body and Blood to our souls by the bread and wine, as Thou didst Thy Holy Spirit by Thy Breath to Thy disciples; for which all Love, all Glory be to Thee.

Lord, what need I labour in vain to search out the manner of Thy mysterious presence in the Sacrament, when my Love assures me Thou art there?  All the faithful who approach Thee with prepared hearts, they well know Thou art there; they feel the virtue of Divine Love going out of Thee, to heal their infirmities and to enflame their affections, for which all Love, all Glory be to Thee.

O Holy Jesus, when at Thy Altar I see the Bread broken and the Wine poured out, O teach me to discern Thy Body there.  O let those sacred and significant actions create in me a most lively remembrance of Thy sufferings, how Thy most blessed Body was scourged and wounded and bruised and tormented, how Thy precious Blood was shed for my sins; and set all my powers on work to love Thee and to celebrate Thy love in this dying for me.

Glory be to Thee, O Jesus, Who didst institute the Holy Eucharist in both kinds and hast commanded both to be received, both the Bread and the Wine, both Thy Body broken and Thy Blood shed.  Thy love, O Lord, has given me both, and both are equally significative and productive of Thy Love.  I do as much thirst after the one as I hunger after the other; I equally want both, and it would be grievous to my love to be deprived of either.

Ah Lord, who is there that truly loves Thee, when Thou givest him two distinct pledges of Thy Love, can be content with one only?  What lover can endure to have one half of Thy Love withheld from him?  And therefore all Love, all Glory be to Thee for giving both.” (Ken, An Exposition of the Church Catechism; or The Practice of Divine Love, cited in More and Cross, 1935: 457-458).

In paragraph one Ken distinguishes between the outward and inward parts of the Eucharist.  It is important to note that he states that Jesus is ‘under the outward and visible part, the Bread and Wine’ and that it is by this means that the inward part, the body and blood of Christ is communicated.  There is a clear linking between the sign and the signified in a realist manner.

The second paragraph is produced in two forms above – the version of the first edition of 1685 (plain type) and that of the second edition of 1686 (italic type).  There are important differences between the two.  In the 1685 edition Ken speaks of Christ giving his flesh to eat and his blood to drink in the Eucharist.  This very realist language is modified in the 1686 edition, emphasizing that the bread and wine remain in their substances, but that they become Christ’s body and blood.  The presence of Christ in heaven is found in both versions but in the 1685 edition Ken asks how despite the heavenly presence Christ is still present on the altar in a mysterious manner.  By 1686 reference to any presence on the altar had been removed, and reference was made simply to the fact that Christ was present.  There is some distancing in the second edition from any presence in the elements on the altar and more emphasis on a sacramental presence in the action of the Eucharist and in the receiver.  There seems to be some form of receptionism introduced into the second edition of 1686, although there is clearly still a realist sense of Christ’s presence in the eucharistic action as well as the receiver.  The reason for the change in wording from the first edition of 1685 to the second of 1686 is stated by Ken as being “to prevent all misunderstandings for the future” (The Prose Words of Thomas Ken, edn. Benham, n.d., 325).  It seems that the first edition wording was too realist and gave rise to an immoderate or fleshy interpretation regarding Christ’s presence in the Eucharist, although Ken himself states that he “made some few little alterations, not at all varying his meaning” (Dugmore, 1942: 119).

The third paragraph makes it clear that the bread which is broken and wine that is blessed ‘effectually and really’ convey the body and blood of Christ to the souls of those who receive.  Once again there is clear linking between sign and signified in the form of moderate realism.

The manner of the presence is addressed in paragraph four, with Ken stating that this is mysterious.  Even so Ken assures the reader that ‘Thou are there’, that the ‘virtue of Divine Love’ is felt and the healing and enflaming benefits of Christ are present.  Paragraph five confirms that for Ken the sign and signified are linked, since he advises that the communicant should look at the broken bread and poured out wine and discern Christ body and blood there.  Any remembrance of Christ’s passion is described as a ‘lively remembrance’ in the Eucharist in which Christ’s love is celebrated.  The final two paragraphs speak of the equality of both elements in the Eucharist.

This significant passage of Ken’s writing supplies evidence to show that he links sign and signified together strongly in clear realist language.  In the first edition this realist linking is focused on the elements and on the presence of Christ’s body and blood in them on the altar.  In the second edition of this work, the realist language continues, although the linking between sign and signified is now less focused on the bread and wine alone, even though he does introduce the notion in the second edition that as the bread and wine remain in their substances they ‘become’ the body and blood of Christ.  Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is now also referred to in the action of the Eucharist and in the reception of communion.  Taken as whole Ken’s words in both editions of this work present strong evidence for a moderate realist position in relation to the presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Eucharist.