Anglicans and Orthodox and the Eucharist

[GKC]

So what? What does that have to do with Anglicans or any other Protestants for that matter?

As to protestants, nothing. I am not interested in what gender protestants select for their ministers. I’m interested in the sacerdotal priesthood, as the Church has understood it, ab initio and Anglicans understood it, until a generation ago.

GKC

*Anglicanus-Catholicus *

 

[CAS64]

I have no doubt of that at all; my bishop and others from our diocese are close observers of what is going forward. And it’s the main reason I am dubious of the whole enterprise. There is no real benefit in attempting to reconstruct the Episcopal Church, circa 25 years ago. We were separated from it, at that point, for roughly 8 years, on such issues.

GKC

I understand your feeling. At the risk of sounding Liberal, I do not for the life of me see where female ordination is a Biblical (or non-Biblical in this sense) issue.

 

[GKC]

I understand your feeling. At the risk of sounding Liberal, I do not for the life of me see where female ordination is a Biblical (or non-Biblical in this sense) issue.

Some support is certainly derived from what we know, scripturally. But, unlike the typical protestant position, what we know is not limited to what we know scripturally.

GKC

*Anglicanus-Catholicus *

 

[Dempsey1919]

Some support is certainly derived from what we know, scripturally. But, unlike the typical protestant position, what we know is not limited to what we know scripturally.

As an Anglican Catholic, do you believe in the reality of Apostolic Tradition? In other words, do Ango-Catholics reject the un-scriptural doctrine of Sola Scriptura?

 

[East_Anglican]

Some support is certainly derived from what we know, scripturally. But, unlike the typical protestant position, what we know is not limited to what we know scripturally.

GKC

*Anglicanus-Catholicus *

Like in Christ there is neither male or female?

If women can be ordained to the priesthood of all believers by the bishop of our souls then women can be ordained to the particular priesthood (if there is one) too.

You can’t use the ‘all Christs diciples were men’ argument or ‘The old covenant priesthood were all men’ argument because all Christs diciples and the old covenant priesthood were all Jewish too.

Dear all,

Please don’t jump and wreck a good thread so far. Start a new one by all means.

 

[East_Anglican]

As an Anglican Catholic, do you believe in the reality of Apostolic Tradition? In other words, do Ango-Catholics reject the un-scriptural doctrine of Sola Scriptura?

As The word says that The Holy Spirit shall guide us into all truth, the doctrine of sola scriptura is scripturally unsound.

 

[Dempsey1919]

Please don’t jump andwreck a good thread so far. Start a neew one by all means.

The belief in Apostolic Tradition is vital to both Catholic and Orthodox views on the Eucharist. Our knowledge of the Eucharist is not limited to what is written in the Gospels.

 

[theistgal]

+Iker would lay hands on hairspray for the making of deacons, but not priests.

It took me a while to figure out what you meant, but lol!

However, to be fair, I believe men use hairspray too - those with hair, anyway.

Would he lay hands on Grecian Formula?

 

[CAS64]

Some support is certainly derived from what we know, scripturally. But, unlike the typical protestant position, what we know is not limited to what we know scripturally.

GKC

*Anglicanus-Catholicus *

I agree. But do you believe that Tradition as we understand it completely puts the lid on female ordination?

 

[CAS64]

The belief in Apostolic Tradition is vital to both Catholic and Orthodox views on the Eucharist. Our knowledge of the Eucharist is not limited to what is written in the Gospels.

I think that you are leaving some folks out in this. Is this intentional?

 

[GKC]

I agree. But do you believe that Tradition as we understand it completely puts the lid on female ordination?

Yes.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Like in Christ there is neither male or female?

If women can be ordained to the priesthood of all believers by the bishop of our souls then women can be ordained to the particular priesthood (if there is one) too.

You can’t use the ‘all Christs diciples were men’ argument or ‘The old covenant priesthood were all men’ argument because all Christs diciples and the old covenant priesthood were all Jewish too.

Dear all,

Please don’t jump and wreck a good thread so far. Start a new one by all means.

The sacerdotal priest stands in persona cristi**** and therefore must be male as Christ is male. A mother cannot be a father. Secondly, scripture loudly shows us that the priesthood should only be male in that Israel had a male-only priesthood firstly and additionally Christ only ordained men as apostles. Some say that Christ was only ordaining men because people in those days were intolerant of an empowered woman and no one would have stood for it. Boloney. Jesus has never been one to be afraid to buck the system. If He had wanted female bishops, He’d have ordained them. For starters, can you think of two of the GREATEST Christian women of all time?..The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Lazarus’ sisters, Martha and Mary…all these women were cherished and loved by Jesus. Heck, Mary was chosen out of all women to be the Mother of God and Mary Magdalene blessed with seeing Jesus right after the resurrection in a special way. Jesus blessed women right and left…but He chose not to ordain these women. If He wouldn’t ordain these ladies, that speaks pretty strongly to the fact that women are not in consideration by God for this role.

All are equal in Christ as the NT says but not all are to be “called” to the same roles. Men are not called to be mothers yet men are equal to women? We are all blessed in different ways. I fail to see why this women’s ordination social-justice slant trumps 2,000 years of solid theology in this matter? At best one would logically ere on the side of caution. And despite many liberal-minded Anglicans’ views of the Roman Catholic Church, they should look at Rome and Orthodoxy and take a cue from them regarding what constitutes a priesthood. It is not anti-woman to be against female ordination. It’s backed by scripture, tradition, reason, all parts of the Anglican three-legged stool. The first two are the most important…“God’s ways are not always our ways…” that’s a tough one to remember sometimes…

In Christ,
Scott

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Yes.

GKC

Ditto

 

[GKC]

Like in Christ there is neither male or female?

If women can be ordained to the priesthood of all believers by the bishop of our souls then women can be ordained to the particular priesthood (if there is one) too.

You can’t use the ‘all Christs diciples were men’ argument or ‘The old covenant priesthood were all men’ argument because all Christs diciples and the old covenant priesthood were all Jewish too.

Dear all,

Please don’t jump and wreck a good thread so far. Start a new one by all means.

Of course one can make such an argument, if one wishes to base it purely on what we know scripturally. Nothing simpler than for Christ to have included, amongst the apostles, any of the females occasionally named as prominent, in these discussions. Scripturally, we have no evidence he did. And since he came, as the Messiah, amongst the chosen people, nothing surprising in that his apostles, those sent forth to the rest of the world, were likewise Jewish.

Once you leave the realm of scripture, you enter the realm of Tradition. And there the consensus of the undivided Church is for a male priesthood, ontologically.

If you desire a female ministry, be my guest. Given the vagaries of human nature, odder things have been proposed. But you must not call it Catholic (as was once said of a certain translation of Homer, not that I would expect you to do so), or expect the Church to recognize your innovation as warranting the term “priest” in the Vincentian sense.

GKC

 

[GKC]

The sacerdotal priest stands in persona cristi**** and therefore must be male as Christ is male. A mother cannot be a father. Secondly, scripture loudly shows us that the priesthood should only be male in that Israel had a male-only priesthood firstly and additionally Christ only ordained men as apostles. Some say that Christ was only ordaining men because people in those days were intolerant of an empowered woman and no one would have stood for it. Boloney. Jesus has never been one to be afraid to buck the system. If He had wanted female bishops, He’d have ordained them. For starters, can you think of two of the GREATEST Christian women of all time?..The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Lazarus’ sisters, Martha and Mary…all these women were cherished and loved by Jesus. Heck, Mary was chosen out of all women to be the Mother of God and Mary Magdalene blessed with seeing Jesus right after the resurrection in a special way. Jesus blessed women right and left…but He chose not to ordain these women. If He wouldn’t ordain these ladies, that speaks pretty strongly to the fact that women are not in consideration by God for this role.

All are equal in Christ as the NT says but not all are to be “called” to the same roles. Men are not called to be mothers yet men are equal to women? We are all blessed in different ways. I fail to see why this women’s ordination social-justice slant trumps 2,000 years of solid theology in this matter? At best one would logically ere on the side of caution. And despite many liberal-minded Anglicans’ views of the Roman Catholic Church, they should look at Rome and Orthodoxy and take a cue from them regarding what constitutes a priesthood. It is not anti-woman to be against female ordination. It’s backed by scripture, tradition, reason, all parts of the Anglican three-legged stool. The first two are the most important…“God’s ways are not always our ways…” that’s a tough one to remember sometimes…

In Christ,
Scott

I’ll buy that.

GKC

 

[GKC]

It took me a while to figure out what you meant, but lol!

However, to be fair, I believe men use hairspray too - those with hair, anyway.

Would he lay hands on Grecian Formula?

I would not be at all surprised.

GKC

 

[GKC]

As an Anglican Catholic, do you believe in the reality of Apostolic Tradition? In other words, do Ango-Catholics reject the un-scriptural doctrine of Sola Scriptura?

Always remembering the danger of generalizing about Anglicans on any subject, I can confidentaly say that yes, Anglo-Catholics have absolutely no truck whatsoever with sola scriptura.

Probably.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus, most likely

 

[CAS64]

Yes.

GKC

I guess we just disagree on this.

 

[GKC]

i guess we just disagree on this.

ok.

GKC

 

[Peter_J]

This is a subject that comes up often. The RCC position on the Orthodox Eucharist is a little complicated, but, it is considered to be valid, but illicit.

I can’t count how many times on this forum I have seen this claim made, that the RCC considers the Orthodox eucharist to be illicit. And yet, I don’t recall even once seeing the claim backed up by a source (well, other than a wikipedia page, which has this claim followed by “[citation needed]”).

Now I admit that I don’t always comment on the lack of source; nevertheless it bothers me more than I can say that such a strong (and negative) claim is tossed about without any source.