Almighty God, unto whom all hearts be open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets are hid: cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of thy Holy Spirit (purifica per infusionem Sancti Spiritus cogitationes cordis nostri), that we may perfectly love thee, and worthily magnify thy holy name: through Christ our Lord. Amen.
(T)he Use of Rouen and that of Sarum were almost identical in the 11th century. A curious and interesting illustration of this will be found in an extract of a Rouen manuscript missal, assumed to be 650 years old ... . The Rouen Pontifical, of about 1007 A.D., quoted in the same work, shows a like affinity of that of Sarum and Exeter in later days.—Google Books: xxiii, The Sarum Missal in English (1884) by A.H. Pearson.
We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord whose property is always to have mercy. Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.
Now, there can be little doubt that when he wrote this (Almighty and everliving God...), Cranmer had come to believe, under Zwinglian influence, that the central phrase in the Eucharistic prayer, “This is my body”, was to be understood in a merely symbolic way, that transubstantiation (which under Henry VIII he had stoutly defended) was now to be understood as “a blasphemous deceit”, and that Christ’s spiritual presence in the sacrament was dependent on the faith of those receiving it. So when, in the post-Communion prayer I have just quoted, he gives thanks for “the spiritual food of the most precious body and blood of thy son our saviour Jesus Christ”, by the word “spiritual” he doesn’t mean that His Eucharistic presence is real and objective. But he wanted those who still hankered after the faith in which they were brought up to be able to suppose that the prayer actually bore a Catholic meaning. It’s all very slippery. The fact is, however, that it can indeed bear such a meaning: and the CDW has now implicitly defined that when used in the context of this authorised Catholic liturgy, it does bear it.
(Divine Worship: the Missal) is entirely repatriated from either post-Reformation or pre-Reformation Catholic sources, and authorised by the congregation for Divine Worship with the full backing and approval of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.