Yup, that's what I learned, too.

When I read that, I wondered if she meant transubstantiation, not transfiguration.

Granted, I don't know of any Protestant churches that believe in transubstantiation (except for some Anglicans who might or not might consider themselves Protestant), but some other groups -- Lutherans, Presbyterians/Reformed and others -- hold views that to some Baptists I know look a lot like transubstantiation.

OOPS! MC, as usual, is right - I meant transubstantiation. I blame the lack of sleep!

For the bolded do you mean the idea of the Real Presence? And you have a incredibly wide range of views in the Anglican Communion, though the 39 Articles do reject transubstantiation. But not all members of the Communion still follow the 39 Articles of Religion.

Yes, that's what I mean. And yes, on this topic, the 39 Articles reflect more of a Reformed understanding.

I think that broadly speaking, one could say that approaches to the Eucharist/Communion/the Lord's Supper fall into two main categories -- a Real Presence category and a memorialist (or Zwinglian or "No Presence") category.

In the memorialist view, the bread and wine are viewed as symbols only and Jesus is considered to be present in a way no different from his presence "whenever two or three are gathered" in his name. In my experience, this is the view shared by most if not all Baptists as well as many other evangelical Protestants.

In the Real Presence view, the consecrated bread and wine are viewed as more than symbols and Christ is believed to be present in a unique way, with communicants truly feeding on his body and blood. Where the groups that hold to some kind of Real Presence belief will differ is in their understanding of exactly what happens to the bread and wine (or how they are more than symbols) and how Christ is uniquely present. Transubstantiation is the way the Roman Catholic Church defines and describes the Real Presence (and many Anglo-Catholics will hold this view as well), while the Lutheran and Presbyterian/Reformed traditions will affirm the Real Presence but not transubstantiation -- they understand the Real Presence differently. But as I said, I have known people who hold to the memorialist view for whom the distinctions between Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed understandings blur and all amount to pretty much the same thing.

The Wiki actually has a good summary-type article about it: Real Presence.

Hey SWTX I got a question for you. Do you think the Anglican Use parishes will join the new Ordinate or stay as they are in whichever diocese they are part of?

Joining the new Ordinate - that's certainly what OLOW is going to do. I know we're having some sort of Anglican Use convention, when I imagine we'll find out more details. Our rector made a point of encouraging us to give to our diocesean fund even though we will be leaving the Diocese of Galveston-Houston because 1.) we are still a part of the diocese for now and 2.) geographically we want them to succeed in their mission(s).

Hmm I just looked and noticed that I have four prayer books. Is it possible to be a liturgy addict?

Are you ready for the new Roman Catholic liturgy?

Oh I can't wait until they reprint the Book of Divine Worship and it is affordable. I'm assuming they will just use that since it does exists.

ETA: I think it is worth saying that liturgically I am very very Anglo-Catholic.

It feels weird to say, but I'm not. It almost makes it a bit easier to give myself the distance I need from the Church itself.

Wait I'm confused. What new Liturgy?

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/opinion...b0cea95b7.html

I agree that the translations, while possibly more accurate, are clumsy. Overall, it'll make Mass less nostalgic and familiar to me which helps.

Ugh that is horrible.

ETA: Knowing about that, do you think that Rome is going to rewrite the Anglican Rite or keep it the way it is?

No idea. Here's the Revised Roman Missal site. I doubt they'll do much when they seem to be (trying) recruiting heavily from the Anglicans right now.