ANGLICANS & OPEN COMMUNION

  • Thread starter Thread starter HagiaSophia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HagiaSophia

Guest
Hadn’t even been aware that this is in the offing for Anglicans:

"…More and more of the churches in the Diocese of Northern California are adopting the custom of Open Communion or as our Task Force describes it, “Administering the Sacrament of the Eucharist to Those Who Have Not Been Baptized”. I have been issuing a carefully worded open invitation at Confirmations and other major events in the Diocese. At our last Diocesan Convention in November of 2003, a Resolution was put forth to prohibit this custom. The motion was ultimately defeated after a number of supplemental resolutions were introduced. I agreed at that Convention to appoint a Task Force to review this practice and make a report to the Diocesan Convention in 2006…

pontifications.classicalanglican.net/
 
In the Traditionalist Anglican sect to which I belong, communion is ‘open to all baptised believers’ and has been for decades. I’m told this started in the 1920’s or a bit later in ECUSA. The Traditionalists tended to resist it till the 1970’s, and I suppose some schisms still do.
 
40.png
flameburns623:
In the Traditionalist Anglican sect to which I belong, communion is ‘open to all baptised believers’ and has been for decades. I’m told this started in the 1920’s or a bit later in ECUSA. The Traditionalists tended to resist it till the 1970’s, and I suppose some schisms still do.
Click to expand...
In my traditional Continuing Anglcain diocese, it’s Trinitarian Baptistism, Apostolic confirmation and affirmation of the Real Presence. Of course, as our rector says, it’s difficult to hold an inquisition on Trent, XIIIth Session, Canon 1, at the altar rail.

GKC
 
iam glad that iam catholic, because we dont have to deal with these issues in the church.
 
40.png
GKC:
In my traditional Continuing Anglcain diocese, it’s Trinitarian Baptistism, Apostolic confirmation and affirmation of the Real Presence. Of course, as our rector says, it’s difficult to hold an inquisition on Trent, XIIIth Session, Canon 1, at the altar rail.

GKC
Click to expand...
So true!

I think the best any Church can do is to accept the Real Presence (which, sadly, so many do not) and tell its believers that they should not partake unless they believe in this. St. Paul laid out eye-watering prescriptions for the taking of communion without understanding its true nature (cf.1 Cor 11), and I’m glad to see the aforementioned Anglican, some Protestant, all Orthodox, and all Catholic Churches still adhering to this.
 
Code:
40.png
fcb2001:
iam glad that iam catholic, because we dont have to deal with these issues in the church.
Click to expand...
No, we only have to deal with bishops who allow openly pro-abortion “Catholic” politicians to receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord unworthily! Just a bit of a problem!

Antonio :o
 
40.png
fcb2001:
iam glad that iam catholic, because we dont have to deal with these issues in the church.
Click to expand...
This same issue is being addressed by many of our parishes as well as others; the recent Ratzinger letter to the American bishops wasn’t just “ordinary mail”. All of the mainstream Christian groups are battling internally over liturgy, ordination of certain candidates, the place of women in the church, translations of prayers, adinistration of sacraments and scandals. The Anglicans are not alone in having a large group of dissenters within traditional belief…
:crying:
 
40.png
mean_owen:
Officially, communion of the nonbaptized is still a no-no in the ECUSA:

episcopalarchives.org/cgi-bin/acts_new/acts_resolution.pl?resolution=1979-A043

episcopalarchives.org/cgi-bin/acts_new/acts_resolution-complete.pl?resolution=1982-A048

IIRC, someone tried but failed to get a resolution trough in favor of open communion in the last GC.
Click to expand...
But even the blogger I quoted (who I take it is an Anglican clergyman) says regarding baptism:

…“And so this young priest took this understanding of Baptism and catechumenate out into the world. No other issue has caused me more trouble than this in my ministry of twenty-four years! Indeed, it is probably safe to say that it destroyed my ministry in one parish and has caused me nothing but grief in my present parish. How I wish I could in good conscience offer “open baptism.” Disciplined baptismal policy always offends, no matter how gently and graciously it is articulated. No one wants to hear that there are conditions and requirements that must be fulfilled if baptism is to be administered with sacramental and spiritual integrity. No one wants to hear that the faith and commitment of the parents necessarily and rightly affects the Church’s decision to baptize a baby. No one wants to hear the word no…” :confused:
 
HagiaSophia: I’m not trying to be obtuse, but I’m not quite sure I see your point. If it is that, for some, even Baptism is cheap, I’d guess you’re right. I believe that Pontificator was saying that there should be disciplines and guidelines to prevent such abuses of the sacrament. They clearly aren’t followed in all cases. Surely you could find similar examples of such disciplines not being adhered to in other churches/ecclesial communities, perhaps even your own.

Incidentally, you are correct about Pontificator. To the best of my knowledge, he is still an Anglican (Episcopal) clergyman. (I “know” him from other forums.) He’s none too happy with the current state of affairs in the Episcopal Church, but he generally articulates his points without the nastiness that seems so common elsewhere.
 
40.png
mean_owen:
HagiaSophia: I’m not trying to be obtuse, but I’m not quite sure I see your point. If it is that, for some, even Baptism is cheap, I’d guess you’re right.
Click to expand...
My own church having just gone through, with the benefit of full world headlines, the debate of Eucharist and politicians, I was surprised to find that Anglicans are having problems with people who think of sacraments as some sort of “right” rather than a privilege which must be prepared for. The bloggers comments on sacraments on demand, could have well been written by members in my own church.
40.png
mean_owen:
I believe that Pontificator was saying that there should be disciplines and guidelines to prevent such abuses of the sacrament. They clearly aren’t followed in all cases. Surely you could find similar examples of such disciplines not being adhered to in other churches/ecclesial communities, perhaps even your own.
Click to expand...
I liked very much what he had to say, I have just found his weblog and he explains to a non-Anglican the issues he feels strongly about in such a way as to make it understandable. I believe I have said in two or three other places in this forum that all of Christianity is under siege - but as an RCC, up to this time, I have been mainly aware of our own internal problems. Having some good Anglican sites has helped me understand much of what is going on there and I find it not too dissimilar to what the RCC is experiencing.
40.png
mean_owen:
Incidentally, you are correct about Pontificator. To the best of my knowledge, he is still an Anglican (Episcopal) clergyman. (I “know” him from other forums.) He’s none too happy with the current state of affairs in the Episcopal Church, but he generally articulates his points without the nastiness that seems so common elsewhere.
Click to expand...
That’s one reason I am enjoying him so. Plus he’s a good writer and gets to the point.

So far I only have one point of disagreement with him, and its the same point I have disagreement with in the RCC - perhaps it’s cultural thing. I find it difficult to deny baptism to infants based on the non-practice of their parents. But that’s a whole other thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top