Anglican Sacraments

[Sarahforgiven]

That’s easy. I do not accept the loss of the Apostolic Succession. I believe in the One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and said so at eucharist an hour ago.
And I believe that churches of the Anglican Communion are part of that church.

I believe our sacraments are valid. If I did not believe that, I would not take them. I also believe that the bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise that the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.

If I did not believe that, I would not be an Anglican.

I used to think that there was apostolic succession in the Anglican church, however I was listening to the apologists one day on the radio & they mentioned that one of the Popes did an extensive project on this & found the succession to be irreparably ruptured. It had to do with what one of the other posters mentioned. Apparently there was a time period where the valid priests with succession in England were replaced by non-ordained truly Protestant clergy …
(meaning the laying on of hands to pass the succession).
I am not saying you are incorrect, it would be really interesting to research in a scholarly way, from both sides. In the US since there was a revolution & breaking away from England, I was told that there were certain Bishops who ordained in the US church to preserve the succession.
I am sorry I can’t remember the Popes name. Maybe another member will know.
When I was in the Episcopal church we were taught thaw we did have succession, however I don’t ever remember being taught that the Eucharist is actually Jesus after the consecration, & I went to an Episcopal grade school, where we went to church twice a week.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

Funny. I’ve been wondering if there are any validly ordained bishops among the Anglicans. I would believe the head of the Church is a heretic if he ever allowed so called “ordination of women” or allowed homosexuality as valid. That would be equivalent to saying child molestation is okay as well. or even polygamy. All of these are disorders and no one loyal to God would ever submit to something so wrong.

If hell freezes over and the Church allowed such heresy, then Eastern Orthodoxy here we come. That would clear up the question of infallibility of the papacy. My wife, very much in love with the Catholic Church, agrees completely. I believe that our souls would be at risk to overlook something so incorrect.

The reason this comes to mind is because I’m scared…scared that I may have been better off going for the Orthodox Church over the Catholic Church. My fears are rooted in the knowledge of what used to be hidden agendas for ordaining women and promoting same sex attraction relationships. I am holding fast to Catholicism, but I have to admit I know far too many Catholics that have very wrong beliefs and think all of it doesn’t matter.

I’ve never met an Orthodox Christian with such a misguided agenda. But I’m sure they exist, which is what keeps me believing in the Church. Should all of the “Churches” change their position, I would then look into Judaism, because then it would be clear to me that all of them are making this whole thing up as they go.

Yes. I know, very rough words. My pastor says “shame of the hierarchy of the Anglican/Episcopalian Church. They are truly causing such an injustice to their their own people.”

 

[GKC]

I used to think that there was apostolic succession in the Anglican church, however I was listening to the apologists one day on the radio & they mentioned that one of the Popes did an extensive project on this & found the succession to be irreparably ruptured. It had to do with what one of the other posters mentioned. Apparently there was a time period where the valid priests with succession in England were replaced by non-ordained truly Protestant clergy …
(meaning the laying on of hands to pass the succession).
I am not saying you are incorrect, it would be really interesting to research in a scholarly way, from both sides. In the US since there was a revolution & breaking away from England, I was told that there were certain Bishops who ordained in the US church to preserve the succession.
I am sorry I can’t remember the Popes name. Maybe another member will know.
When I was in the Episcopal church we were taught thaw we did have succession, however I don’t ever remember being taught that the Eucharist is actually Jesus after the consecration, & I went to an Episcopal grade school, where we went to church twice a week.

You are referring to Leo XIII and Apostolicae Curae.

The “process” was not particularly long, consisting of about 30 hours of 10 working sessions, by an 8 man commission, and around 3 hours of discussion by a group of cardinals. The basic point of what the Pope signed was to assert that apostolic succession was broken in Anglicanism, usually taken to be at the consecration of Archbishop Parker, in 1559, for a couple of technical reasons.

The story of how Apostolicae Curae came about is long and complex, and I probably won’t do it, in detail, again on line (did it once, though from the first meeting of Halifax and Portal in 1890, on the island of Maderia, to the final Maldives meeting in 1927).

Yes, it is an interesting topic to study. At least I found it to be.

Many Anglicans are certainly taught many different things. It’s a pity.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Funny. I’ve been wondering if there are any validly ordained bishops among the Anglicans. I would believe the head of the Church is a heretic if he ever allowed so called “ordination of women” or allowed homosexuality as valid. That would be equivalent to saying child molestation is okay as well. or even polygamy. All of these are disorders and no one loyal to God would ever submit to something so wrong.

If hell freezes over and the Church allowed such heresy, then Eastern Orthodoxy here we come. That would clear up the question of infallibility of the papacy. My wife, very much in love with the Catholic Church, agrees completely. I believe that our souls would be at risk to overlook something so incorrect.

The reason this comes to mind is because I’m scared…scared that I may have been better off going for the Orthodox Church over the Catholic Church. My fears are rooted in the knowledge of what used to be hidden agendas for ordaining women and promoting same sex attraction relationships. I am holding fast to Catholicism, but I have to admit I know far too many Catholics that have very wrong beliefs and think all of it doesn’t matter.

I’ve never met an Orthodox Christian with such a misguided agenda. But I’m sure they exist, which is what keeps me believing in the Church. Should all of the “Churches” change their position, I would then look into Judaism, because then it would be clear to me that all of them are making this whole thing up as they go.

Yes. I know, very rough words. My pastor says “shame of the hierarchy of the Anglican/Episcopalian Church. They are truly causing such an injustice to their their own people.”

Lots of them, yes.

As to the RCC, I don’t think you need be so concerned.

GKC

 

[Jack_Bauer]

Lots of them, yes.

As to the RCC, I don’t think you need be so concerned.

GKC

I’m not as concerned as it appears. I merely use those remarks for emphasis, because I truly believe the Catholic Church is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church after many years of studying scripture and history. I’d love to say I understand theology, but in reality I actually feel much more comfortable with Eastern Catholic/Orthodox theology. But I do believe in the primacy of the bishop of Rome. I’d become Eastern Catholic if my wife would allow it.

 

[GKC]

I’m not as concerned as it appears. I merely use those remarks for emphasis, because I truly believe the Catholic Church is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church after many years of studying scripture and history. I’d love to say I understand theology, but in reality I actually feel much more comfortable with Eastern Catholic/Orthodox theology. But I do believe in the primacy of the bishop of Rome. I’d become Eastern Catholic if my wife would allow it.

I see. I feared you were about to be despairing.

GKC

 

[kylemccloughan]

I used to think that there was apostolic succession in the Anglican church, however I was listening to the apologists one day on the radio & they mentioned that one of the Popes did an extensive project on this & found the succession to be irreparably ruptured. It had to do with what one of the other posters mentioned. Apparently there was a time period where the valid priests with succession in England were replaced by non-ordained truly Protestant clergy …
(meaning the laying on of hands to pass the succession).
I am not saying you are incorrect, it would be really interesting to research in a scholarly way, from both sides. In the US since there was a revolution & breaking away from England, I was told that there were certain Bishops who ordained in the US church to preserve the succession.
I am sorry I can’t remember the Popes name. Maybe another member will know.
When I was in the Episcopal church we were taught thaw we did have succession, however I don’t ever remember being taught that the Eucharist is actually Jesus after the consecration, & I went to an Episcopal grade school, where we went to church twice a week.

So often, Catholics will try to use reason and common sense to explain why they believe that Anglicans are not in Apostolic Succession, but this is very problematic in so much as it would have to be applied (in all fairness) to themselves regarding truth. A good example would be the pope who condemned Joan of Arc to be burned at the stake stating that what she spoke was contrarian to Holy Scripture. A latter pope declared Joan of Arc to be a saint stating that the earlier pope erred in stating that she was anterior to Scripture in her declarations. How could this be when Catholics are taught that Scripture is interpretted accurately through the magisterium?? Which pope was wrong??

 

[GKC]

So often, Catholics will try to use reason and common sense to explain why they believe that Anglicans are not in Apostolic Succession, but this is very problematic in so much as it would have to be applied (in all fairness) to themselves regarding truth. A good example would be the pope who condemned Joan of Arc to be burned at the stake stating that what she spoke was contrarian to Holy Scripture. A latter pope declared Joan of Arc to be a saint stating that the earlier pope erred in stating that she was anterior to Scripture in her declarations. How could this be when Catholics are taught that Scripture is interpretted accurately through the magisterium?? Which pope was wrong??

Hmm. Double post. Not interesting enough to say it twice.

GKC

 

[GKC]

So often, Catholics will try to use reason and common sense to explain why they believe that Anglicans are not in Apostolic Succession, but this is very problematic in so much as it would have to be applied (in all fairness) to themselves regarding truth. A good example would be the pope who condemned Joan of Arc to be burned at the stake stating that what she spoke was contrarian to Holy Scripture. A latter pope declared Joan of Arc to be a saint stating that the earlier pope erred in stating that she was anterior to Scripture in her declarations. How could this be when Catholics are taught that Scripture is interpretted accurately through the magisterium?? Which pope was wrong??

This is not one of my areas, but I don’t think history supports you on this. The Pope at the time of Joan’s trial was Eugene IV, not an exemplary character, but, as far as I know, not involved in the heresy trial at all, including not receiving an appeal, which the bishop in charge of the trial had not permitted, for the same political reasons behind the trial itself. Likely he could have stopped it, but didn’t. He stood aside.

Eugene succeeded Martin V, who had died just before the trial began, and had been Pope around 3 months when Joan was executed. As far as I know, he played no part in the trial or the sentencing, at all. I’m willing to learn more on that, if anyone can supply the facts.

I’m not sure how the “re-trial”, the examination into the methods and facts in the first trial, as to canonical niceties, was begun. It seems to have been started before Pope Callixtus III took the throne. At any rate, he either authorized the inquiry, or supported the on-going one, and the result was a repudiation of the first trial. When Benedict XV canonized her, she was an innocent maid again.

I am not sure the results of such a trial would be a part of the magisterium, if they were derived from legal proceedings, not as a part of the teaching office of the Church. Again, all this is AFAIK. I’m more assertive when I’m better read. However, I am certain that what was going on here, on all sides, was more politics than theology. 'Twas often thus.

GKC

 

[Jack_Bauer]

I see. I feared you were about to be despairing.

GKC

I left to become “a member of the Lord’s church” in 1989. At least that’s what I thought I was doing. The story is way too long and disgusting to get into, but I saw some pretty bad abuses, abuse and more abuse, not to mention was abused. It was the Church’s teaching I loved, but what shocked me was the fact that in my life I saw no one practicing it. If they were, they were not seen or not preaching loud enough in their silence to convey they were practicing it. The preaching was unfaithful or really watered down. Catechesis in my life was absent. However, after looking at my Catholic Cousins, half of them no longer practice Catholicism. And they all went to Catholic schools growing up. So I saw no belief or understanding there.

Once in 1998, to was by myself, standing in the kitchen, disturbed by recent events in our ecclesial community, what I thought was a church. I was disturbed by things happening in my life, in my family and my wife’s life. I said to myself - probably outloud as I often do with God in solitude, “the Catholic teachings I learned growing up, seemed really beautiful, but no one, not even the bishops, seem to believe it. If they did, they would do something about it. I guess my dad was right. The Catholic Church is dead. If its dead and no one believes the teachings that I thought were beautiful, then I’m still looking Lord. Is it the Orthodox Church then?” I then went into the self-talk thing where I begged God to show me the truth and that if its the Catholic Church then forgive me, but also lead me somehow back home." I said that, “if you show me a sign, something that makes sense, like convert my wife, I’d know it were true.” I told God that I was not trying to test Him but I was truly confused and knew that the church I belonged to at the moment, the Church of Christ, couldn’t be the real Church either because even though they claimed to follow the bible, I had discovered many of the same problems with them that I did with the Catholic Church leaders. Slowly over time I came to understand. My greatest regret is that it took me 18 years to find my way back home. But I can say without a doubt that God was leading me home, slowly, all the time I was away. He let me take my time and work through all of my misunderstandings about a faith that was somewhat forced upon me after moving from my anti-Catholic non-practicing Christian, mother. My conversion to the Church of Christ was a relief for mom, however, once she discovered what they believed, it was almost as bad as being Catholic.

I only sought to please God. God loves me and has mercy on me. So I’m not going anywhere. The story in this post is true, only its extremely cut short.

 

[Cheshangle]

I used to think that there was apostolic succession in the Anglican church, however I was listening to the apologists one day on the radio & they mentioned that one of the Popes did an extensive project on this & found the succession to be irreparably ruptured. It had to do with what one of the other posters mentioned. Apparently there was a time period where the valid priests with succession in England were replaced by non-ordained truly Protestant clergy …
(meaning the laying on of hands to pass the succession).
I am not saying you are incorrect, it would be really interesting to research in a scholarly way, from both sides. In the US since there was a revolution & breaking away from England, I was told that there were certain Bishops who ordained in the US church to preserve the succession.
I am sorry I can’t remember the Popes name. Maybe another member will know.
When I was in the Episcopal church we were taught thaw we did have succession, however I don’t ever remember being taught that the Eucharist is actually Jesus after the consecration, & I went to an Episcopal grade school, where we went to church twice a week.

I don’t think “there was a time period where the valid priestswith succession in England were replaced by non-ordained truly Protestant clergy”, unles you’re thinking of the Methodists, whose orders, unlike Anglican ones, are not in the Apostolic Succession.

 

[Cheshangle]

Funny. I’ve been wondering if there are any validly ordained bishops among the Anglicans. I would believe the head of the Church is a heretic if he ever allowed so called “ordination of women” or allowed homosexuality as valid. That would be equivalent to saying child molestation is okay as well. or even polygamy. All of these are disorders and no one loyal to God would ever submit to something so wrong.

If hell freezes over and the Church allowed such heresy, then Eastern Orthodoxy here we come. That would clear up the question of infallibility of the papacy. My wife, very much in love with the Catholic Church, agrees completely. I believe that our souls would be at risk to overlook something so incorrect.

The reason this comes to mind is because I’m scared…scared that I may have been better off going for the Orthodox Church over the Catholic Church. My fears are rooted in the knowledge of what used to be hidden agendas for ordaining women and promoting same sex attraction relationships. I am holding fast to Catholicism, but I have to admit I know far too many Catholics that have very wrong beliefs and think all of it doesn’t matter.

I’ve never met an Orthodox Christian with such a misguided agenda. But I’m sure they exist, which is what keeps me believing in the Church. Should all of the “Churches” change their position, I would then look into Judaism, because then it would be clear to me that all of them are making this whole thing up as they go.

Yes. I know, very rough words. My pastor says “shame of the hierarchy of the Anglican/Episcopalian Church. They are truly causing such an injustice to their their own people.”

Yes, I’ve come across attempts to compare the ordination of women to child molestation, and they’re pretty weak aren’t they? Even odious, perhaps.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

Yes, I’ve come across attempts to compare the ordination of women to child molestation, and they’re pretty weak aren’t they? Even odious, perhaps.

Well, that’s an issue you need to take up with God. The Church doesn’t allow it, so the case is closed for good.

 

[Cheshangle]

Well, that’s an issue you need to take up with God. The Church doesn’t allow it, so the case is closed for good.

I’m quite aware that in the case of your church the issue of women’s ordination is closed for good. That doesn’t put it on a par with child molestation though.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

I’m quite aware that in the case of your church the issue of women’s ordination is closed for good. That doesn’t put it on a par with child molestation though.

Correlation:

Women’s ordination, begets same sex attraction agenda, same sex attraction account for one third child molestation crimes yet only represent few percent of the population. Huh, seriously, there is a correlation. Not just my opinion.

 

[melbanglican]

Correlation:

Women’s ordination, begets same sex attraction agenda, same sex attraction account for one third child molestation crimes yet only represent few percent of the population. Huh, seriously, there is a correlation. Not just my opinion.

Are you sure that you are not just articulating your prejudices? Do you have evidence of this (bizarre) ‘correlation’? Has anyone done the research? I’m sure that we’d all love to see it!

 

[hn160]

Correlation:

Women ordination, begets same sex attraction agenda, same sex attraction account for one third child molestation crimes yet only represent few percent of the population. Huh, seriously, there is a correlation. Not just my opinion.

I would say that once a church sanctions women ordination, then the slippery slope starts with other things open communion, changes in interpreting the Bible to make it acceptable to the worldview, then comes homosexual ordination and homosexual marriage. I seen this happen in the ELCA, this is why I went to the LC-MS.
A Lutheran theologian Charles Porterfield Krauth said that error creeps into the Church in three stages: the first stage error tells Truth, that it ( error ) is small, just let it be, error will not disturb the peace of the Church. In the second stage error demands equal status saying that both error and Truth can co-exist for the peace of the Church. In the third stage, error tell Truth, that Truth will have to leave the Church because it is disturbing the peace of the Church. This is happening in the ELCA and the TEC.

 

[melbanglican]

I would say that once a church sanctions women ordination, then the slippery slope starts with other things open communion, changes in interpreting the Bible to make it acceptable to the worldview, then comes homosexual ordination and homosexual marriage. I seen this happen in the ELCA, this is why I went to the LC-MS.
A Lutheran theologian Charles Porterfield Krauth said that error creeps into the Church in three stages: the first stage error tells Truth, that it ( error ) is small, just let it be, error will not disturb the peace of the Church. In the second stage error demands equal status saying that both error and Truth can co-exist for the peace of the Church. In the third stage, error tell Truth, that Truth will have to leave the Church because it is disturbing the peace of the Church. This is happening in the ELCA and the TEC.

I feel compelled to ask the same questions of you as I did of ‘Jack Bauer’. Are you sure that you are not just articulating your prejudices? Do you have evidence of this (bizarre) ‘correlation’? Has anyone done the research? I’m sure that we’d all love to see it! (One Lutheran theologian doth not an overwhelming argument make!)

 

[hn160]

I feel compelled to ask the same questions of you as I did of ‘Jack Bauer’. Are you sure that you are not just articulating your prejudices? Do you have evidence of this (bizarre) ‘correlation’? Has anyone done the research? I’m sure that we’d all love to see it! (One Lutheran theologian doth not an overwhelming argument make!)

Take a look at herchurch.org/, tell me if what I said isn’t true. This church is in good standing with the ELCA.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

I feel compelled to ask the same questions of you as I did of ‘Jack Bauer’. Are you sure that you are not just articulating your prejudices? Do you have evidence of this (bizarre) ‘correlation’? Has anyone done the research? I’m sure that we’d all love to see it! (One Lutheran theologian doth not an overwhelming argument make!)

This is the example of intolerance towards truth. It’s a contradiction. But i wouldn’t expect anymore from a non-Catholic. However, I know an Episcopalian priest that is against everything that I’ve said and is being sued by a female bishop. The interesting thing is that a fallen away Catholic engaged in the helping out quite a bit and formerly a Catholic school teacher, is so liberal (confused) in her beliefs that she accepts it all. I’m afraid that Catholics are what have created all of the divisions in the first place.

Lutheran? I’m interested in understanding more about Lutherans. I have a friend that said something about being part of the Missouri Synod? Is that what you are saying you’re part of?