Can Episcopals take Communion in Catholic Churches?

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Reception of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church requires more than just believeing that it is the Body and Blood of Christ.

You can not say that you believe as we do becuase if you did then you would be a Catholic.

 

[MikeB]

:The Holy Spirit gave you the knowledge that the Eucharist was the Real Presence of Jesus Christ. Now you need to come home to the only Church that believes as you do.:

Well no. I was taught when becoming Episcopalian that the Eucharist was the true Body and Blood of Christ. We had Eucharistic Adoration at my parish. It’s just as laughable when you pretend to know more about what we believe than we do as when Protestants do the same thing to you.

In Christ,

Edwin

Edwin, if I have offended I apoligize as that is not my purpose. If you truly believe in the ReaL Presence I applaud you. I am only going on what I have read and as an example I include the following:

http://www.holycrossredmond.org/think/dear_ms_p_15.htm

Article XXVVIII of The 39 Articles of Religion (the basic tenets of the Episcopal Church), has this to say about the Eucharist:

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.

"Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.

“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.”

The Episcopal Church does not espouse the doctrine of transubstantiation. In our church we “feed on Him in our hearts, by faith, with thanksgiving.”

Again I didnot mean to offend.

 

[GKC]

MikeB.:

Edwin, if I have offended I apoligize as that is not my purpose. If you truly believe in the ReaL Presence I applaud you. I am only going on what I have read and as an example I include the following:

http://www.holycrossredmond.org/think/dear_ms_p_15.htm

Article XXVVIII of The 39 Articles of Religion (the basic tenets of the Episcopal Church), has this to say about the Eucharist:

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.

"Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.

“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.”

The Episcopal Church does not espouse the doctrine of transubstantiation. In our church we “feed on Him in our hearts, by faith, with thanksgiving.”

Again I didnot mean to offend.

The 39 Articles are not the basic tenets of the Episcopal Curch, nor any Anglian Church, Anglicanism being credal, not confessional… Indeed the only individuals for whom the Articles are binding (in a limited way) are the clergy of the Church of England, due to the Erastian nature of the CoE. But Anglicans, generally, affirm or deny the Articles, as they chose. They are an historical document, being one of the ways Elizabeth I choose to givern her fractious church, and one of the few things I like about the ECUSA 1979 Prayer Book is that the Articles are placed in a section so labelled.

Some Anglicans affirm the Articles, some cut them from the Prayer Book and use them to kindle the new fire at Easter. But they are not normative for Anglicanism. This often comes as a surprise to non-Anglicans.

You certainly don’t offend me.

GKC

traditional Anglican

 

[Katholikos]

GKC:

Some Anglicans affirm the [39] Articles, some cut them from the Prayer Book and use them to kindle the new fire at Easter. But they are not normative for Anglicanism. This often comes as a surprise to non-Anglicans.

GKC

traditional Anglican

What is “normative” for an Anglican? “Anglican” is an umbrella term that encompasses three major and entirely different sets of beliefs, or divisions – and many gradations in between. As I understand it, an Anglican can believe what he chooses to believe.

JMJ Jay

 

[JGC]

Katholikos:

By what authority?

I can’t quote the relevant canon law but if you have a Catholic understanding of the sacrament and unable to reach a minister of your own Church and approach the priest of your own freewill then the priest may allow you to recieve communion. Been in this boat myself.

 

[MikeB]

GKC:

The 39 Articles are not the basic tenets of the Episcopal Curch, nor any Anglian Church, Anglicanism being credal, not confessional… Indeed the only individuals for whom the Articles are binding (in a limited way) are the clergy of the Church of England, due to the Erastian nature of the CoE. But Anglicans, generally, affirm or deny the Articles, as they chose. They are an historical document, being one of the ways Elizabeth I choose to givern her fractious church, and one of the few things I like about the ECUSA 1979 Prayer Book is that the Articles are placed in a section so labelled.

Some Anglicans affirm the Articles, some cut them from the Prayer Book and use them to kindle the new fire at Easter. But they are not normative for Anglicanism. This often comes as a surprise to non-Anglicans.

You certainly don’t offend me.

GKC

traditional Anglican

So my understanding is that you can choose what or how much to believe. What is the governing authority?

 

[Katholikos]

JGC:

I can’t quote the relevant canon law but if you have a Catholic understanding of the sacrament and unable to reach a minister of your own Church and approach the priest of your own freewill then the priest may allow you to recieve communion. Been in this boat myself.

**Canon 844 §4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgment of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, Catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed. **

One must be either (1) be in danger of death, or (2) have permission of the local Bishop based on a grave and pressing need.

If one is not Catholic, the likelihood of obtaining a bishop’s permission to receive Holy Communion – unless one is on his deathbed – is somewhere between zip and zilch. A person must not only “have a grave and pressing need” but also “demonstrate the Catholic faith” – i.e. convince the bishop that one believes what the Church teaches (in that case, why not become a Catholic?),* and* be “unable to approach a minister of their own community.”

It is not lawful for a priest to invite those who are not Catholic to receive the Eucharist. To do so is a grave sin and should be brought immediately to the bishop’s attention.

JMJ Jay

 

[GKC]

Katholikos:

What is “normative” for an Anglican? “Anglican” is an umbrella term that encompasses three major and entirely different sets of beliefs, or divisions – and many gradations in between. As I understand it, an Anglican can believe what he chooses to believe.

JMJ Jay

Fair question. And your description of Anglicanism historically, is also fair. There have been ranges of beliefs in Anglicanism, ever since Bess applied the Articles (statecraft as religion) to ensure that nobody got into a fatal uproar over it all.

One dimension is doctrinal and runs from the reformed/evangelical on one side over to the Anglo-Catholic on the other. Another is concerned with ritual; low church on one end, high church on the other. These 2 dimensions are often correlated at the extremes; Anglo-Catholic usually being ritualist and high church, reformed more likely to be low church. It’s not hard and fast, but that’s how it works, generally.

Anglicanism is, as I said, creedal; the 3 major Creeds of Christendom are normative for Anglicanism. Some Anglicans will affirm the first 4 general councils, others the first 7. Some evoke the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral (Scripture, the Nicene creed, the 2 Dominical Sacraments, and the historic Episcopate) as the essence of Anglicanism. Others speak of the 3 legged stool of Anglican belief (scripture, reason, church tradition). The Vincentian Canon was often appealed to. This was the range of the discussion within Anglicanism, until about 50 years ago. Since then things have gotten messy.

There is no central authority that has an authoritative voice, Mike B. All 38 provinces of the official Anglican Communion are independent. And in truth, there is little effective authority above the level of the diocese. While orthodoxy was the rule, that was no problem. Now it is. The results are obvious.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

 

[NewChristian27]

boppysbud:

I cant beleive that no-one objected to the post that stated that Episcopalians give communion to dogs.

That is absolutely false, and the original source was forced to issue a retraction the very next day.

What REALLY happened was that at one Episcopal church that pets were welcomed to the altar rail to recieve a blessing, not Episcopal Communion on the Feast of Saint Francis of Assisi. The pets were never given the bread and wine of the Episcopal Communion.

I think we all just chose to ignore it.

 

[motorman]

Axion:

Actuallyy quite a few European catholic Priests will give communion to Anglicans who ask to receive when there is no Anglican church locally

Then these preists are not following the teaching of the Catholic church and need to be prayed for. They need to be confronted by their Bishop!

God Bless

h

 

[Contarini]

Mike,

The website you reference would be at one end (in my experience at least) of Anglican opinion (though there are some very low-church folks, in Sydney for instance, who might possibly go further–but I’m not sure), and I admit that my rector was near the other. (I actually cited the 39 Articles to him on this issue when I was going through the ECUSA version of RCIA, and he responded that IV Lateran trumps the Articles because it was a Council of the whole Western Church.) Most Episcopalians I know would say something like, “it’s the body and blood of Christ and we don’t know how,” and would claim that the sole difference between us and you on this point is that you insist on tighter philosophical differences than we do. I admit, however, that as a denomination we don’t firmly and officially teach the Real Presence in a specifically Catholic sense. We teach that Christ is present and we allow for a good deal of variation on the “how.”

Probably the more relevant objection to your original post would have been that it implies a very individualistic American Protestant notion of why one belongs to a church–that one picks from a menu the church that fits one’s own personal beliefs. If I were doing so, I would unquestionably pick either Catholicism or Orthodoxy (at least now that ECUSA is going to pieces at an even faster rate than previously). But it seems to me that it’s a lot more honorable and Christian to stay within one’s own tradition and work to reform it. Unless, of course, one is convinced that all Christians have a duty to become Catholic or Orthodox. That’s the real issue in intercommunion. The Anglo-Catholics of the 19th century believed that Anglicanism was a valid branch of the Catholic Church, so they worked to make its doctrine of the sacraments (and other things) truly Catholic–not without at least some success, as the bemusement of most Anglicans today when you quote the 39 Articles at them shows. Newman came to believe that this was futile because Anglicanism was not truly part of the Catholic Church. And that, again, is the real issue.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[mercygate]

Edwin,

We should add to the mix, Cranmer’s Prayer of Humble Access, read just before Communion:

. . . 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 . . .

 

[katherine2]

You may be ill informed. If Anglicans are on the continent of Europe, they are under the jurisdiction of Old Catholic bishops, and Old Catholics are allowed to receive. its a sticky questions, but in such a case, the local authority has teh judgement call.

motorman:

Then these preists are not following the teaching of the Catholic church and need to be prayed for. They need to be confronted by their Bishop!

God Bless

h

 

[radesrochers]

No. Episcopalians (and other Protestants) are not invited to the table of the Lord in the Catholic Church.

Are you speaking for Jesus?

It is much more complicated than that. Episcopalians do not hold the same faith in the eucharist that Catholics (and Orthodox for that matter) do. Also, the Eucharist is something that binds Catholics together. To receive communion in a Catholic parish would imply a unity which doesn’t exist between Catholics and Episcopalians.

The Eucharistic Rite in the Episcopal Church is identical to the Catholic Church with the exception that for evangelical reasons all Christians are fully welcome in the Episcopal Church. The real problem is that many Catholics simply don’t want non-Catholics at their service - plain and simple! To quote Bishop Sean O’Malley of Boston, “many Catholics consider their religion to be private and do not want to embrace outsiders.”

As far as the ‘Eucharist binding Catholics together’ is concerned, does this include the majority, who attend church two or less times a year? Or does it include the individuals who are so bored with the service that they arrive late and leave immediately after receiving the Eucharist? Or does it include the many who sit trance-like at the service and neither recite prayers or sing? The old binding seems just a little weak to me.

Reception of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church requires more than just believeing that it is the Body and Blood of Christ.

You can not say that you believe as we do becuase if you did then you would be a Catholic.

Are you sure all Catholics believe as you do? Are you sure all Catholics believe the same thing? Are you sure all Catholics know the same thing? I recently read that about half (I could be a tad off.) of Catholic teenagers couldn’t name the Seven Sacraments. Just a bit shocking! I suspect that if adult Catholics were tested to determine if they had the same level of religious understanding as graduating RCIA’s, the results would also be shocking. I base this on close observation of practicing Catholics.

The fact of the matter is that all these rules are just ways to control and if one doesn’t want to be controlled then one can’t pray with us. The thought of a non-Catholic Christian coming into your Church and fully participating in the service scares the heck out of you so you make arbitrary rules. Cling to your rules as you watch your active membership continue to dwindle.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Two comments.

radesrochers:

Are you speaking for Jesus?

No, we are not, the Church is which is one of its functions.

The Eucharistic Rite in the Episcopal Church is identical to the Catholic Church with the exception that for evangelical reasons all Christians are fully welcome in the Episcopal Church.

No it is not, it may resemble it but it is not the same thing as it is being done in the Episcopal Church and not the Catholic Church.

Just to name one difference.

Its funny, it is the Church that calls one to communion. If you are not in communion with the Church then you can not partake of the Eucharist (except for very limited exceptions).

I find it funny how those outside of the Church love to complain about this.

There is a simple solution. If you are not a Catholic but what to partake of the Eucharist at a Catholic Mass (or Divine Liturgy) then enter the Church and become Catholic. Otherwise to not present yourself as you are not in communion with us.

 

[WBB]

I agree with ByzCath. Why do you want to receive communion in a Catholic Church if you don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches?

 

[oat_soda]

The fact of the matter is that all these rules are just ways to control and if one doesn’t want to be controlled then one can’t pray with us. The thought of a non-Catholic Christian coming into your Church and fully participating in the service scares the heck out of you so you make arbitrary rules. Cling to your rules as you watch your active membership continue to dwindle.

speaking of dwindling membership, the episcopal church is down 33 percent, to 2.3 million, since 1965. the reason you can receive the eucharist is because we have true authority -the pope says no and until he changes his mind, episcopalians are not welcome to receive communion. and why would he? your church is an abomination. it was founded by an adulterer who killed two of his wives after he forced all of england to be separated from the catholic church. now the episcopalians ordain women like a pagan cult and an openly gay bishop who divorced his wife (sound familiar). they are also talking of making women bishops and having the laity preside over the eucharist. not that it matters since your religion doesn’t have valid orders.

so the real question is, why do you want to receive communion from a church who rejects the validity of episcopalian orders?? to receive the eucharist is to affirm that you are catholic, which you can’t say until you are properly disposed.

 

[MikeB]

radesrochers:

Are you speaking for Jesus?

The Eucharistic Rite in the Episcopal Church is identical to the Catholic Church with the exception that for evangelical reasons all Christians are fully welcome in the Episcopal Church. The real problem is that many Catholics simply don’t want non-Catholics at their service - plain and simple! To quote Bishop Sean O’Malley of Boston, “many Catholics consider their religion to be private and do not want to embrace outsiders.”

As far as the ‘Eucharist binding Catholics together’ is concerned, does this include the majority, who attend church two or less times a year? Or does it include the individuals who are so bored with the service that they arrive late and leave immediately after receiving the Eucharist? Or does it include the many who sit trance-like at the service and neither recite prayers or sing? The old binding seems just a little weak to me.

Are you sure all Catholics believe as you do? Are you sure all Catholics believe the same thing? Are you sure all Catholics know the same thing? I recently read that about half (I could be a tad off.) of Catholic teenagers couldn’t name the Seven Sacraments. Just a bit shocking! I suspect that if adult Catholics were tested to determine if they had the same level of religious understanding as graduating RCIA’s, the results would also be shocking. I base this on close observation of practicing Catholics.

The fact of the matter is that all these rules are just ways to control and if one doesn’t want to be controlled then one can’t pray with us. The thought of a non-Catholic Christian coming into your Church and fully participating in the service scares the heck out of you so you make arbitrary rules. Cling to your rules as you watch your active membership continue to dwindle.

Where the problem lies is that Catholics believe (maybe not all) the the Eucharist is the Real Presence of Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is a celebration of believers - a “communion” among believers. If you do not believe as Catholics do then why would you partake or why should we be required to give the Body and Blood of our Savior if you do not believe it is His Real Presence?
As to the number of people sitting in the pews who are zombie-like those can be found in every denomination. As to the number of teenagers who cannot name the Seven Sacraments, these are probably the same ones who cannot name the vice-president either! I would also check to see which churches are losing members the most. I recently read an article about the Southern Baptist membership and how it is losing members at an alarming rate.

 

[GKC]

MikeB.:

Where the problem lies is that Catholics believe (maybe not all) the the Eucharist is the Real Presence of Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is a celebration of believers - a “communion” among believers. If you do not believe as Catholics do then why would you partake or why should we be required to give the Body and Blood of our Savior if you do not believe it is His Real Presence?
As to the number of people sitting in the pews who are zombie-like those can be found in every denomination. As to the number of teenagers who cannot name the Seven Sacraments, these are probably the same ones who cannot name the vice-president either! I would also check to see which churches are losing members the most. I recently read an article about the Southern Baptist membership and how it is losing members at an alarming rate.

The issue is not really the Real Presence, it’s communion. Anglicans are not in communion with Rome, and shouldn’t expect to be treated as if we were. But on the point about the Real Presence, look over this thread. Many Anglicans, as we’ve said here, believe precisely what is declared in Session XIII, Canon I, of the Council of Trent, with respect to the RP. It’s quite Biblical.

GKC

 

[Writer]

We are former Episcopalians who will be in Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA) until the middle of next year, or so. We have been attending the Catholic Church since the summer. We accept the blessing on Sundays, but won’t take the Eucharist until we’re confirmed at Easter–out of respect to the church and its traditions. Why would you want to take communion at a church with which you are not in communion yourself?

As an aside, the Episcopal Church is offering something akin to “Women’s Eucharist” now. If you want to be ill, go the official webpage of the Episcopal Church, then go to “Women Ministries”. It has its roots in Druid beliefs, as I understand. The new motto for the Episcopal Church should be “Episcopal Church, Where to go if one doesn’t stand for anything!” Dismounting soapbox now…