Anglician view on the real presence.

That is real presence. I don't think that RP was ever in dispute except maybe by people who looked to Zwingle but rather what form it took.

Depends what one means by real presence.

If one means that the bread becomes body, the wine becomes blood, then plenty reject it.

If one means no more than "Christ is with us in a particular way when we do this" then it's another matter.

You just summed up the debate in two lines and both sides would argue that their interpretation of real presence is the right one. Cranmer may not agree with what you think real presence is but it cannot be argued that the liturgy he wrote expressed that it was there in some form.

The issue is that when people ask "Do Anglicans believe jn real-presence" they often mean the first of my two definitions, as per Catholics, EOs and Lutherans.

Unless we mean the same thing by the phrase a yes or no answer is meaningless. We're all using the same words but not in a consistent way.

I understand what you are saying. However I think it devalues the Anglican posistion on real presence if we do not defend our stance on it. We need to say the yes we do believe in real presence but it differs from your understanding of it.

Do you think that Catholics, Orthodox and Lutherans would say we don't beleave in the real presence because it differs from you?

There's no point defending a stance without being clear what it is being defended.

I would think that most of them (including a lot of Anglicans) would say that Cranmer's understanding of the eucharist is not what they mean by the question.

They are asking "do you believe the host is really the body of Christ, the cup really contains the blood of Christ?". To that Cranmer would answer "no". To silently redefine the question and then say "yes" without making clear you're answering a different question isn't very good communication.

Article XXVIII
Of the Lord’s Supper


The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another; but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ’s death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ....


The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith.

Just to take wikipedia's definition as as good a version as any of what is generally being asked:
"Real Presence is a term used in various Christian traditions to express belief that in the Eucharist, Jesus Christ is really present in what was previously just bread and wine,..."
A Cranmarian answer to that is "no".