signs are by no means to be confused with the things signified, nonetheless
the former continue to be connected to the latter in such a manner that
enables the sacramental offering and receiving of the promise signified
through the means of the sign. Thus according to the language of‘instru-
mental realism’, there is in the sacrament a dynamic interplay of word,
action, and recognition. As Hookerinimitably formulates this in thefifth
book of theLawes,The Real Presence of Christs most Blessed Body and Blood, is not therefore to be
sought for in the [external] Sacrament, but in the worthy Receiver of the
Sacrament...As for the Sacraments, they really exhibite; but, for ought we can
gather out of that which is written of them, they are not really, nor do really
contain in themselves, that Grace, which with them, or by them, it pleaseth God
to bestow.^73According to Hooker, therefore, the Reformed hermeneutic redefines the
meaning of sacramental presence as an action. Real presence presupposes
the faithful worshipper who is able to interpret the unity of the three things
that‘make the substance of the sacrament’, namely the mystical divine gift
offered, that is the thing signified; the physical elements which depict that gift,
namely the external visible signs of bread and wine; andfinally the scriptural
words of institution which articulate the link between the two.^74 Presence is
consequently an act of interpretation, and therefore inseparable from the
conversion of the conscience.‘Whereupon’, Hooker concludes,‘there ensueth
a kinde of Transubstantiation in us, a true change, both of Soul and Body, an
alteration from death to life.’^75 This redefinition of presence cautiously avoids
the two extremes of either separating or confusing sign and thing signified.
Thus viewed, sacraments necessarily become dynamic hermeneutical events
where the instrumentality of signs works through the act of interpretation
on the part of the receiver. In this respect the sacraments exemplify Alexandra
Walsham’s concept of the dynamic linkage of idea and action;^76 and they
represent moreover an ontological path between the two extremes of enchantment
and disenchantment. Conversely, where the sacrament had been designated by
ensueth. For that which produceth any certain effect, is not vainly nor improperly said to be, that
very effect whereunto it tendeth. Every cause is in the effect which groweth from it. Our Souls
and Bodies quickned to Eternal Life, are effects; the cause whereof, is the Person of Christ: His
Body and Blood are the true Well-spring, out of which, this Lifefloweth. So that his Body and
Blood are in that very subject whereunto they minister life: Not onely by effect or operation, even
as the influence of the Heavens is in Plants, Beasts, Men, and in every thing which they quicken;
but also by a far more Divine and Mystical kinde of Union, which maketh us one with him, even
as He and the Father are one.’(^73) Hooker,LawesV.67.5; 2:334.17–33. (^74) See Hooker,LawesV.58.2; 2:249.161–250.3.
(^75) Hooker,LawesV.67.11; 2:338.13–340.1.
(^76) Alexandra Walsham,‘The Reformation and the“Disenchantment of the World”Reassessed’,
The Historical Journal51/2 (2008), 497–528; see esp. 527.
Erasmian Humanism and Eucharistic Hermeneutics 115