Hamon L’Estrange’s commentary on The Book of Common Prayer, entitled The Alliance of Divine Offices, was first published in 1659, just prior to the revision of the Prayer Book at the time of the Restoration in 1660.  The edition referred to in this case study however, is that of 1690, which was reprinted in 1846 as part of the Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology (edn. Parker: 1846).  The full title of L’Estrange’s work gives considerable indication of the contents of The Alliance of Divine Offices.  The full title is: The Alliance of Divine Offices exhibiting all the Liturgies of the Church of England since the Reformation; as also the Late Scotch Service-Book, with all their respective variations; and upon them all Annotations, vindicating the Book of Common Prayer from the main objections of its adversaries, explicating many parcels thereof hitherto not clearly understood, shewing the conformity it beareth with the primitive practice, and giving a fair prospect into the usages of the Ancient Church.  To these is added at the end The Order of the Communion set forth 2 Edw. VI.  The purpose therefore of this work was not only to set out all the liturgies of the Church of England since the Reformation, but to also show that the liturgy of the Church of England and that current for L’Estrange, that is, the Prayer Book of 1604, was consistent with primitive liturgical practice and theology. 

L’Estrange presents a commentary on the service of Holy Communion (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. 1846: 224-331) and this commentary will be used in this case study to assess L’Estrange’s eucharistic doctrine.

When speaking of the Offertory L’Estrange says that:

“The whole action of the sacred Communion is elemented of nothing but sacrifices and oblations.  So in our Church, so in the Apostolic, which should be the grand examplar of all; and though our Church varieth somewhat in the mode, from the first original, yet in the substance her practice is conformable.” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 270-271).

The sacrifices and oblations to which he refers are four in kind, with all seen to be in both the primitive and the English Eucharist.  These four are:

“ …the first is the bringing of our gifts to the Altar, that is, the species and elements of the sacred symbols, and withal some overplus, according to our abilities for the relief of the poor.

The second sacrifice is the consecration of the elements, and presenting them up to God by the prayers of the minister and congregation, whereby they become that Sacrament for which they are set apart and deputed.

The third is the sacrifice of praises and prayers unto God which are styled sacrifices.

The fourth is the oblation of ourselves, of our souls and bodies.” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 271).

The Eucharist can therefore in L’Estrange’s understanding rightly be called a sacrifice in four ways, in accordance with primitive practice in the Church.  Clearly the offertory is more than the giving of alms, since it relates to the offering of bread and wine, praise and thanksgiving and self as well.  It seems that L’Estrange is careful here to distinguish between moderate and immoderate notions of realism.  The second sacrifice is clearly not that of the literal or fleshy body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, whereby the elements are set apart and deputed, with no re-iteration of the historic sacrifice implied.  The offering of bread and wine is that set apart and deputed, that is, to exhibit the body and blood of Christ in a sacramental manner.

L’Estrange speaks of the “the creatures destined for bodily or mystical refreshment” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 307) when he speaks of the bread and wine of the Eucharist and of the prayers used in relation to them, saying that the prayers were of two kinds, “ευχαριστια, ‘thanksgiving’ to God for those benefits” and “ευλογια, ‘invocation’ of His blessing upon them” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 307).  He also describes the elements as “separated for the holy Communion” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 307).  This separation or consecration is brought about by:

“the word of God and prayer, the very way by which our Saviour Himself sanctified those elements in His first institution, Matt. xxvi. 26, ευλογησα, ‘calling upon God for His blessing’, and ευχαριστησα, ‘giving thanks’, in which action it must be supposed that Christ had more than a general design of saying grace, as we phrase it, for those elements as creatures ordained for common nutrients, viz. and intention of invocating God’s blessing upon them, in reference to those ends for which He meant by His institution to separate and depute them” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 315).

L’Estrange then notes that in the 1459 BCP both calling upon God for his blessing of the elements (epiclesis and directions to the priest to take the bread into his hands) and giving thanks were used, but the 1552 BCP removed the calling upon God for the blessing of the elements (both the epiclesis and the directions).  L’Estrange observes that one of the constituents of the consecration is therefore missing and that it would be better to restore this to the English liturgy, as the Scottish Prayer Book (i.e. that of 1637 – see case study) has done (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 317-318).  The argument for the re-inclusion of an epiclesis in the Eucharist did not carry through to the revision of the 1662 BCP, however, L’Estrange’s suggestion nonetheless gives some hint of his theology of the Eucharist.  The seeking of God’s blessing on the elements such that they become the body and blood of Christ is indicative of moderate realism, as expressed in the 1549 BCP and in the Scottish Prayer Book of 1637 (see case studies).  In seeking the re-insertion of an epiclesis and the directions to the priest, L’Estrange also seems to be advocating moderate realism in relation to eucharistic presence.

L’Estrange also argues that:

“This blessed Sacrament is commemoratio Dominicae passionis, ‘a commemoration of our Saviour’s passion’”, since this “was His express command when he instituted the holy rite, τουτο ποιετε ει την εμην αναμνησι, ‘do this in remembrance of Me’: which words import somewhat more than a calling of His passion to mind, a meditating and thinking upon it when we are conversant about the sacred action, as it vulgarly apprehended.  Sure I am the primitive Church stretched it farther, and held herself obliged thereby, not only to a mental, but a vocal commemoration” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 320).

Citing evidence from the Scripture and the Fathers, L’Estrange makes the point that commemoration was part of the ancient liturgies.  In approving of the ancient example he gives approval to the moderate realist notion of commemoration, where Christ’s death, resurrection, ascension become part of the offering or pleading in the Eucharist or as he calls it the ‘sacred action’.

In reference to the words of administration in the various Prayer Books, L’Estrange refers first to the words used in the 1549 BCP, saying that they could be seen to be too realist in their wording.  He says that they might “be suspected as over-serviceable to the doctrine of transubstantiation” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 323).  By this it seems that transubstantiation implies for L’Estrange, immoderate realism or a fleshy presence of Christ in the Eucharist.  In the 1552 BCP however, he states, that while “the commemoration being let in, and the body and blood shut out, that real presence, which all sound Protestants seem to allow, might probably be implied to be denied” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 323).  This refers to the fact that the words ‘The body/blood of Christ etc.’ were removed from the 1552 Prayer Book, leaving only a statement of reception by faith (see comment on 1549 and 1552 Prayer Books in the Cranmer case study).  L’Estrange is therefore critical of any attempt which aims at lessening the idea of a real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and thereby he affirms moderate realism.  He also states that in the Prayer of Queen Elizabeth (see 1559 BCP case study) the difficulty of the 1552 Prayer Book was overcome by placing reference to the commemoration and the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist together in the words of administration.  He says:

“Excellently well done therefore was it of Queen Elizabeth’s Reformers, to link them both together; for between the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, and the sacramental commemoration of His passion, there is so inseparable a league, as subsist they together, unless they consist.  A sacramental verity of Christ’s body and blood there cannot be, without the commemoration of His death and passion, because Christ never promised His mysterious (yet real) presence, but in a reference to such commemoration.  Nor can there be a true commemoration without the body and blood exhibited and participated; because Christ gave not those visible elements, but His body and blood to make that spiritual representation.” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 323-324).

Here then is the clearest expression yet of L’Estrange’s theology of Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist.  He refers to the presence of Christ as ‘a sacramental verity’, linked with the commemoration of his sacrifice, as a mysterious and yet real presence.  The body and blood of Christ is exhibited in the Eucharist and participated as a spiritual presence and commemoration of the sacrifice.  This is clearly moderate realism, where sign and signified are linked.

Further in relation to eucharistic sacrifice L’Estrange speaks of the words ‘and here we offer and present’ (Prayer of Oblation used after the reception in the Prayer Books of 1552, 1559 and 1604, as well as subsequently in the Prayer Book of 1662) as properly referring to the “‘indivisible sacrifice’, of both bodies and souls” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 325) which L’Estrange states is absent from the Roman Mass because of the emphasis on “the sacrifice of their Mass” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 325).  Here L’Estrange seems to distance himself from any notion of immoderate realism in the Eucharist, such that the sacrifice is re-iterated on the altar or performed as a good work (hence, ‘the sacrifice of their Mass’), but at the same time he is limiting the notion of eucharistic sacrifice in the manner of moderate realism to that of ‘bodies and souls’.  This limits any idea of a pleading of the sacrifice to the Prayer of Consecration, or “the action of participation” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 326), as he calls it, at this point after reception, when the only proper response seems to be that of the sacrifice of bodies and souls.  Despite this he speaks of the Eucharist in a more general way, saying that: “The blessed Eucharist is a sacrifice, wherein our Saviour Christ is considered as an immaculate Lamb, offered upon the Altar to God the Father for the remission of sins.” (L’Estrange, The Alliance of Divine Offices, edn. Parker, 1846: 326).  The hesitancy of speaking in a realist way at times by L’Estrange is matched by very realist statements at other times.

L’Estrange in his work The Alliance of Divine Offices gives clear indications of moderate realism in relation to both eucharistic presence and eucharistic sacrifice.  The Eucharist is called a sacrifice and oblation and the bread and wine are known as the body and blood of Christ.  Sign and signified are linked together in a moderate realist fashion.  At the same time immoderate realism is denied.