Catholic man marries Episcopal Woman

  • Thread starter Thread starter jduffey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
po18guy said:
I was not baptized when my wife and I were married. The priest grilled me at some length before he agreed to marry us. I received his blessing rather than the Eucharist, during the mass.
Click to expand...
Different issue. Catholics recognize Anglicans as having valid baptism.
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
I fail to understand why episcopalians think that everyone should be welcome to step forward at a Roman Catholic Mass and take communion? Why is it so hard to comprehend what the Eucharist means to Roman Catholics? It’s not just the Real Presence of Christ, it is THE most visible sign of unity we have? It’s not just a sign of unity visibly but a sign of unity of doctrine. We believe in the papacy, seven sacraments, the creeds, the communion of and intercession of the saints, transubstantiation, the Immaculate nature of Mary, and so much more. Episcopalians have not committed to those beliefs so why should they be so bold as to assert that they should have the right to drink from the Lord’s chalice at a Catholic Mass? Why can’t episcopalians respect that?

I used to be an episcopalian and even back then, when I was at odds with Catholic doctrine on everything from soup to nuts, I would NEVER go take communion at a Roman Catholic Church in those days!! Now that I am a revert to Catholicism since 2003, I am of the same mindset and dedicated to only Catholic teachings. I would NOT drink from the episcopal cup because that is a sign of unity with their beliefs.

I do not accept a female priesthood, homosexual marriages, Anglican orders, justification through faith alone, many of the 39 Articles, and the Anglican rite of worship does not look at the Mass as a living sacrifice. There are a million things with which I disagree with Anglicanism so I don’t see why I would presume to march into their church and drink from their chalice?

And when I hear folks come in here and say, “how do you feel about your poor bride not being accepted in a Roman Church and being forbidden communion?” I just shake my head…

Christ comes BEFORE our spouses, our friends, our kids, our selfishness. If we truly hold fast to our Catholic faith, why is it so hard to recognize that a fiancee who is not of our faith is not ready to partake of our communion? She is not a bad person or inferior but rather loved greatly by God. But until she is ready to fully enter into the unity of Catholicism, it’s hypocritical and spiritually dangerous for her to take the Blessed Host.

It’s like saying that Ted Kennedy and Jesse Jackson should be able to speak at the Republican Convention? HUH? lol

Nothing outrages me more than protestants who go to a Catholic Mass and take communion and Catholics who do likewise with protestants. It’s an outrage and highly offensive. I have visited other churches and never would I presume to take communion with a group that is divergent to my beliefs. What’s even worse is that there are Roman Catholic priests, thankfully few, who sell out the Church’s unity and give communion to non-Catholics regularly.
Click to expand...
Excellent post, gurneyhalleck. I think it touches on something else on which I’ve been trying to get up a discussion: Theologoumenon. (Well, trying off-and-on anyways. Other activities keep getting in the way. :o )
 
Claire_from_DE said:
Well, for Catholics, only those who are in communion with us can receive communion with us and vice versa. When you read early church writings you see that the same rule existed then too. Members of those groups that split off from the Church could not receive communion until they came back to the Church. And those within the Church were forbidden to partake of any of the sacraments of the separated groups. The members of the separated groups were baptized and they were Christian but they didn’t accept everything the Church taught. Now the Catholic and the Orthodox churches are the only ones holding to this early church practice. But if you disagree with this practice you also disagree with the apostolic and post-apostolic church.
Click to expand...
Note that Christ had a perfect opportunity to share His Body during the feeding of the 4,000 and the 5,000, yet He did not. He shared it only with those who were one in Him, even the devil amongst them. A matter of timing certainly, but a stronger message that we “all be one” as He fervently prayed to the Father. That draws back to the insurmountable hurdle for so many - the denial of self and the taking up of one’s cross daily.

Denial of self leads to obedience and unity. Serving the ego leads to disobedience and division. The Holy Spirit unites. The demon divides.

Christ’s peace.
 
emeraldcoast said:
Why not?? Someone posted what the CC teaches as to whom they welcome to the Lord’s Table and I posted what my church teaches. These are pretty big difference to Jesus’ invitation to share in the Eucharist.

God Bless!
Click to expand...
It’s not relevant because the OP asked what he needed to do **as a Catholic **regarding marriage. What the Episcopal church teaches, believes, or allows is not relevant to what a Catholic may or may not do.
 
1ke said:
It’s not relevant because the OP asked what he needed to do **as a Catholic **regarding marriage. What the Episcopal church teaches, believes, or allows is not relevant to what a Catholic may or may not do.
Click to expand...
jduffey said:
So, I , a Catholic, was just engaged to my girlfriend, an Episcopal. We are beginning to plan our wedding, wondering how to work out the officiants. We are both dedicated to our faiths and also to each other. We have discussed conversion and know that neither is ready, but might be possibile in the future. For now and for the wedding, she would prefer to marry in an Episcopal church, hoping that we can go through marriage counseling within both churches and have a Catholic priest present to officiate with the Episcopal priest. confusing, I know.

I think this can be done, but a question remains about the order of the liturgies and what can be done for the Liturgy of the Eucharist, how communion happens, catholics and episcopalians present together, etc, etc. Very confusing, and I wanted to have some idea before we went out to talk to both of our churches. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Are you forgetting the other party to the marriage, 1ke? Sorry but it is not just about the Catholic member.

Peace!
 
Are you forgetting the other party to the marriage? Sorry but it is not just about the Catholic member.
Click to expand...
Well presumably the episcopalian is figuring out her side from her minister or an epicopalian forum. It would be silly for her to come here and ask what’s expected from her. That’s what 1ke is getting at; this IS the Catholic, so the Catholic teaching is what’s important right now.
 
Rawb said:
Well presumably the episcopalian is figuring out her side from her minister or an epicopalian forum. It would be silly for her to come here and ask what’s expected from her. That’s what 1ke is getting at; this IS the Catholic, so the Catholic teaching is what’s important right now.
Click to expand...
I must of messed up then, I thought he was also seeking help from those that are non-Catholic also since he posted in the non-Catholic forum.

“We have discussed conversion and know that neither is ready, but might be possibile in the future.” Maybe he will be the one to convert…:eek:
God Bless!
 
emeraldcoast said:
Are you forgetting the other party to the marriage, 1ke? Sorry but it is not just about the Catholic member.

Peace!
Click to expand...
That is still not relevant. The religion of the other party has no bearing on what a Catholic may or may not do, only on what steps a Catholic must take to marry validly. Which has already been explained.
 
1ke,

Emeraldcoast is correct. The opening post presented his situation and asked “Any thoughts?”

If he had instead asked “Can anyone tell me what the Roman Catholic Church’s rules (I’m not asking about Episcopalian rules) are that pertain to this situation?”, then emeraldcoast’s comments could not be said to be relevant to the question, at least not directly.

Hope that helps,
 
Peter_J said:
1ke,

Emeraldcoast is correct. The opening post presented his situation and asked “Any thoughts?”

If he had instead asked “Can anyone tell me what the Roman Catholic Church’s rules (I’m not asking about Episcopalian rules) are that pertain to this situation?”, then emeraldcoast’s comments could not be said to be relevant to the question, at least not directly.

Hope that helps,
Click to expand...
We’ll agree to disagree. I’m not sure why the OP posted on the non-Catholic forum. He asked if what he posted was possible. It’s not.

He hasn’t been back either, so I’m not sure what that means.
 
SIA said:
How sad it is. Jesus didn’t intend for this and he even said that we should be as one. The Catholic church has done so much to create separation and ill will amongst other God loving Christians and it is so very sad.
Click to expand...
Not so!

That is the way it has always been. One does not share communion with people who dispute doctrine. This is such an ancient rule that all of the original Apostolic churches follow it, I am somewhat surprised that Anglicanism has abandoned the original discipline, but reflecting on it I can see the Elizabethan compromise would have been impossible without doing so.
SIA said:
The Episcopalians woul be ever so willing to share in communion with Catholics, but they only refuse and continue to uphold this stale mate if you will. It is senseless.
Click to expand...
Not senseless, proper. It is integrity. Opening the altar to people who do not share the faith is a novelty.

Orthodox are in full agreement with this policy and adhere to it even more rigidly.
 
What the OP wants would be possible in the Old Roman Catholic Church, they have joint masses with Episcopalians all the time and their Sacraments are considered valid by the Vat, since their Orders are valid (the Sacraments aren’t licit which means the priests in question don’t have permission from the Catholic Ordinary to practice in his Diocese, but they are just as valid as a normal Catholic priest.)
 
Hesychios said:
Not so!

That is the way it has always been. One does not share communion with people who dispute doctrine. This is such an ancient rule that all of the original Apostolic churches follow it, I am somewhat surprised that Anglicanism has abandoned the original discipline, but reflecting on it I can see the Elizabethan compromise would have been impossible without doing so.
Not senseless, proper. It is integrity. Opening the altar to people who do not share the faith is a novelty.

Orthodox are in full agreement with this policy and adhere to it even more rigidly.
Click to expand...
?? They do share the faith. The people believe as you do that the Eucharist is the real flesh and blood of Christ.
 
a_cermak said:
What the OP wants would be possible in the Old Roman Catholic Church, they have joint masses with Episcopalians all the time and their Sacraments are considered valid by the Vat, since their Orders are valid (the Sacraments aren’t licit which means the priests in question don’t have permission from the Catholic Ordinary to practice in his Diocese, but they are just as valid as a normal Catholic priest.)
Click to expand...
While their Sacraments in general may be valid, marriage is a Sacrament that requires not only validly ordained priests but also that the priest have faculties to perform valid marriages for Catholics, which they don’t. In order for a Catholic to be married in another Church, he/she needs dispensation from the Bishop which would be very doubtful for the Old Catholic Church.
 
Corki said:
While their Sacraments in general may be valid, marriage is a Sacrament that requires not only validly ordained priests but also that the priest have faculties to perform valid marriages for Catholics, which they don’t. In order for a Catholic to be married in another Church, he/she needs dispensation from the Bishop which would be very doubtful for the Old Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
And when does Rome ever successfully pass it off that they genuinely wish to have dialogue with other churches when they act in such an exclusive condescending manner?
 
SIA said:
And when does Rome ever successfully pass it off that they genuinely wish to have dialogue with other churches when they act in such an exclusive condescending manner?
Click to expand...
Well, for one thing we don’t randomly pick people from internet discussion forums to represent us in said dialogues.
 
SIA said:
?? They do share the faith. The people believe as you do that the Eucharist is the real flesh and blood of Christ.
Click to expand...
If that is all they believe, as marvelous as it is (and a great first step) that is still not sufficient.

They must accept what Holy Orthodoxy teaches, and reject what Holy Orthodoxy rejects. They will need to live as though they truly believe it.

Uniformity of teaching is the one mechanism holding the Orthodox church together. There is no other, and it works fine.

Once we open the communion up to the possibility of alternate claims to truth being equally valid, we undermine the teaching authority of the church. It is like opening Pandora’s box. We will have broken with our predecessors in the Faith and lost our inheritance.

There is only one standard, the received Truth from Jesus Christ through the Apostles. Any teaching that does not satisfy the Vincentian Canon is subsidiary and should not be seriously considered.
 
Corki said:
While their Sacraments in general may be valid, marriage is a Sacrament that requires not only validly ordained priests but also that the priest have faculties to perform valid marriages for Catholics, which they don’t. In order for a Catholic to be married in another Church, he/she needs dispensation from the Bishop which would be very doubtful for the Old Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression a deacon could be the official witness for a Catholic marriage. True the wedding could not be a Mass, but I thought that was what a deacon could do.

If the wedding was a Nuptial Mass, then I’d agree 100% with your post.

Somebody correct me if I’m mistaken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top