Catholic man marries Episcopal Woman

[emeraldcoast]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=109022&highlight=CSGM

Beat Navy!

LOL–I was way off!!! I am glad that I asked you what it meant because no Army CSGM would ever call himself a novice…

God Bless!

 

[Corki]

This is really off point here I know. The whole point of the Real Presence from the Catholic point of view is absolute Authoritarianism. The RCC says that if one does not believe in transubstantiation then one cannot believe in the Real Presence. This is a very exclusive view of the Real Presence

This is not an accurate representation of Catholic Church teaching. The Church does not doubt that people of other churches or denominations have a belief in the Real Presence. What the Church DOES say is that if your belief in the Real Presense is different than hers, there is not 100% agreement and thus the two are not in theological communion with each other.

The Church does not say that you, an Epicopalian don’t have or are entitled to a legitimate belief in the Real Presense confected in your church, nor the Lutheran who believes in consubstatiation in a Lutheran church. Rather, the Church says that** for Catholics**, we believe that this is different than our own understanding and thus for us not the same Eucharist.

 

[SIA]

This is not an accurate representation of Catholic Church teaching. The Church does not doubt that people of other churches or denominations have a belief in the Real Presence. What the Church DOES say is that if your belief in the Real Presense is different than hers, there is not 100% agreement and thus the two are not in theological communion with each other. **What? It is either flesh and blood or it is not? How can there be anything less than 100% agreement here unless there is disagreement? **

The Church does not say that you, an Epicopalian don’t have or are entitled to a legitimate belief in the Real Presense confected in your church, nor the Lutheran who believes in consubstatiation in a Lutheran church. Rather, the Church says that** for Catholics**, we believe that this is different than our own understanding and thus for us not the same Eucharist. I’m not Episcopalian!

 

[SIA]

It’s so easy to just say that a person is wrong about the RCC and I see alot of that in here. Anytime a Protestant says something about the RCC, a Catholic always steps up to find fault with his/her statement regardless of whether it is right or wrong. A Protestant can never make a statement here about a Catholic belief or dogma without being picked to death over it.

 

[Corki]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corki
This is not an accurate representation of Catholic Church teaching. The Church does not doubt that people of other churches or denominations have a belief in the Real Presence. What the Church DOES say is that if your belief in the Real Presense is different than hers, there is not 100% agreement and thus the two are not in theological communion with each other. **What? It is either flesh and blood or it is not? How can there be anything less than 100% agreement here unless there is disagreement? **
The Church does not say that you, an Epicopalian don’t have or are entitled to a legitimate belief in the Real Presense confected in your church, nor the Lutheran who believes in consubstatiation in a Lutheran church. Rather, the Church says that for Catholics, we believe that this is different than our own understanding and thus for us not the same Eucharist. I’m not Episcopalian!

Because the Church does not try to define what other faiths believe. She points out what we believe. We believe that the Communion in various churches such as Anglican, Lutheran etc. is not the Real Presense. But we don’t say that you can’t believe that.

It’s so easy to just say that a person is wrong about the RCC and I see alot of that in here. Anytime a Protestant says something about the RCC, a Catholic always steps up to find fault with his/her statement regardless of whether it is right or wrong. A Protestant can never make a statement here about a Catholic belief or dogma without being picked to death over it.

That’s because, as likely as not, the Protestant is mis-stating actual Catholic teaching.

Feel free to correct us is we mis-state the teachings of your faith but don’t get offended if we correct you when you mis-state ours.

 

[SIA]

Because the Church does not try to define what other faiths believe. She points out what we believe. We believe that the Communion in various churches such as Anglican, Lutheran etc. is not the Real Presense. But we don’t say that you can’t believe that.

That’s because, as likely as not, the Protestant is mis-stating actual Catholic teaching.

Feel free to correct us is we mis-state the teachings of your faith but don’t get offended if we correct you when you mis-state ours.

So then you are telling me that the Catholic church believes that the Real Presence exists in other churches besides the RCC and the Orthodox?

 

[Corki]

So then you are telling me that the Catholic church believes that the Real Presence exists in other churches besides the RCC and the Orthodox?

Not at all. I am saying that the Catholic Church does not tell members of those other churches that they should not believe what their own chuch is teaching them about the Real Presence. She doesn’t tell them that the teaching is true either. She doesn’t dictate to Protestants or others what they can believe. She is very clear as to what one is to believe as a Catholic, however.

 

[Peter_J]

This is really off point here I know. The whole point of the Real Presence from the Catholic point of view is absolute Authoritarianism. The RCC says that if one does not believe in transubstantiation then one cannot believe in the Real Presence. This is a very exclusive view of the Real Presence which in my opinion does not square with what Scripture teaches us. If you wish to believe that your priest posesses the ability to change bread and wine into the flesh and blood of Christ that’s perfectly fine with me because ultimately, you are receiving the body blood soul and divinity of Christ in my mind, not because of what your priest does; but because of what Christ does not exclusively for Catholics or Orthodox, but for Christians who believe and follow him. Jesus passed the bread and wine around at the last supper and said that it was his flesh and blood, but remember; he was about to share it with people who didn’t understand him or what he was about to do and one of them was about to give him up to be crucified. This is a very non-exclusive sharing by Christ. I simply do not believe that one must believe in transubstantiation to believe in the real presence of Jesus at communion time.

I hear what you’re saying; but I don’t believe that one has to believe in the theory of “transubstantiation” in order to believe in the real presence. In particular, I am quite convince that the Orthodox believe in the real presence.

 

[Peter_J]

That’s because, as likely as not, the Protestant is mis-stating actual Catholic teaching.

Nice profiling.

 

[sola_scriptura]

Good luck to the Catholic and Episcopal couple!!! How did this thread plunge into a discussion on the Eucharist?

 

[1ke]

So then you are telling me that the Catholic church believes that the Real Presence exists in other churches besides the RCC and the Orthodox?

The Real Presence exists only where a priest with valid Holy Orders confects it. That is what the Catholic Church teaches.

That would be the Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, and a handful of schismatic groups such as SSPX, etc., that derive from validly ordained Catholic bishops.

This does **not **include the EC, Lutheran, or other protestant ecclecial communities. It does not matter what these groups “believe” about their own communion, those without Holy Orders cannot confect the Eucharist.

That is the Catholic position, since you asked.

 

[1ke]

Good luck to the Catholic and Episcopal couple!!! How did this thread plunge into a discussion on the Eucharist?

Because the OP had in his mind the idea that there could be some kind of intercommunion or concelebration that includes a Catholic priest and an EC priest or each of them giving communion to their own group of people.

None of these things are permissable for a Catholic.

 

[1ke]

This is not an accurate representation of Catholic Church teaching. The Church does not doubt that people of other churches or denominations have a belief in the Real Presence. What the Church DOES say is that if your belief in the Real Presense is different than hers, there is not 100% agreement and thus the two are not in theological communion with each other.

Corki, The CC also says that these groups do not have a valid Eucharist.

Their sincere belief that they do is not sufficient to make it so.

The Church does not say that you, an Epicopalian don’t have or are entitled to a legitimate belief in the Real Presense confected in your church, nor the Lutheran who believes in consubstatiation in a Lutheran church. Rather, the Church says that** for Catholics**, we believe that this is different than our own understanding and thus for us not the same Eucharist.

Uh, yes it does. The Church absolutely says that these groups do not have a valid Eucharist.

You are implying that the Church has an “I’m OK, your OK” attitude towards these groups and it does not.

 

[Peter_J]

Corki, The CC also says that these groups do not have a valid Eucharist.

That statement doesn’t contradict anything that Corki has said.

 

[Corki]

Corki, The CC also says that these groups do not have a valid Eucharist.

Their sincere belief that they do is not sufficient to make it so.

This is true, that’s not what I said.

Uh, yes it does. The Church absolutely says that these groups do not have a valid Eucharist.

You are implying that the Church has an “I’m OK, your OK” attitude towards these groups and it does not.

No, that’s not what I am implying. The Church absolutely says these goups do not have a valid Eucharist. But this doesn’t mean that non-Christians are somehow wrong or sinning if they believe sincerely what **their own faith tradition **teaches. That doesn’t mean that Catholics can believe it or that we don’t wish that other Christians shared in what we call the Fullness of Truth. This is exactly why there is imperfect union and why intercommunion is not possible.

 

[1ke]

No, that’s not what I am implying. The Church absolutely says these goups do not have a valid Eucharist. But this doesn’t mean that non-Christians are somehow wrong or sinning if they believe sincerely what **their own faith tradition **teaches. That doesn’t mean that Catholics can believe it or that we don’t wish that other Christians shared in what we call the Fullness of Truth. This is exactly why there is imperfect union and why intercommunion is not possible.

Thanks for clarifying. We are on the same page, for the most part. I would agree that the Church teaches they are not sinning. However, I would suggest that the Catholic Church teaches they are objectively in error.

 

[sola_scriptura]

Because the OP had in his mind the idea that there could be some kind of intercommunion or concelebration that includes a Catholic priest and an EC priest or each of them giving communion to their own group of people.

None of these things are permissable for a Catholic.

I’ve seen interfaith marriages between Catholics & non-Catholics before, where there would be a Catholic priest & a cleric from the other religion present (however, the cases I can recall of this were between Catholics & non-Christians, specifically Jews).

However, the practice you’re pointing to does sound a bit absurd? I think the Anglican church recognizes Roman Catholic sacraments so I wonder why there would be a need for a separate service?

I’m all for flipping a coin?

Just kidding, but on a serious note I would think you guys could quickly find an answer to this question on Google?

 

[1ke]

I’ve seen interfaith marriages between Catholics & non-Catholics before, where there would be a Catholic priest & a cleric from the other religion present (however, the cases I can recall of this were between Catholics & non-Christians, specifically Jews).

Absolutely. A Catholic may receive permission to marry outside the Catholic form and a priest may be a witness at the non-Catholic ceremony. He may not be the officiant in that circumstance. Conversely, a Rabbi or other minister could certainly be present as a witness and honored guest at a Catholic wedding of an interfaith couple. He may not officiate in that circumstance.

However, the practice you’re pointing to does sound a bit absurd? I think the Anglican church recognizes Roman Catholic sacraments so I wonder why there would be a need for a separate service?

What the Episcopal church recognizes does not change the fact that a Catholic may not participate in Episcopalian communion nor may a Catholic priest participate in an Episcopal liturgy, or do anything that appears to be concelebrating, nor may Episcopalians receive the Catholic Eucharist. And a Catholic priest certainly could NOT bring the Eucharist to an Episcopal church and give it out there.

Just kidding, but on a serious note I would think you guys could quickly find an answer to this question on Google?

I answered the OP’s question back on the first page of this thread, so you don’t even need Google.

All the bickering about the Eucharist has gone on well after that reply (and the OP has not been back).

 

[sola_scriptura]

Absolutely. A Catholic may receive permission to marry outside the Catholic form and a priest may be a witness at the non-Catholic ceremony. He may not be the officiant in that circumstance. Conversely, a Rabbi or other minister could certainly be present as a witness and honored guest at a Catholic wedding of an interfaith couple. He may not officiate in that circumstance.

What the Episcopal church recognizes does not change the fact that a Catholic may not participate in Episcopalian communion nor may a Catholic priest participate in an Episcopal liturgy, or do anything that appears to be concelebrating, nor may Episcopalians receive the Catholic Eucharist. And a Catholic priest certainly could NOT bring the Eucharist to an Episcopal church and give it out there.

I answered the OP’s question back on the first page of this thread, so you don’t even need Google.

All the bickering about the Eucharist has gone on well after that reply (and the OP has not been back).

ahh okay … at any rate – you’re summation of this issue seems right to me. I’m not Catholic so I’m certainly no expert on this. Frankly I’m not sure if I’d want to marry outside of my faith, I got enough problems

The way I see it – keep it simple. I want a wife who holds my religious views. I wouldn’t even want to convert someone for the sake of marriage – because someone who converts for the sake of anything besides an actual change in view – probably has a weak faith (and a wishy washy Christian IMO is far worse than one whom I merely disagree with).

 

[Joe_Kelley]

ahh okay … at any rate – you’re summation of this issue seems right to me. I’m not Catholic so I’m certainly no expert on this. Frankly I’m not sure if I’d want to marry outside of my faith, I got enough problems

The way I see it – keep it simple. I want a wife who holds my religious views. I wouldn’t even want to convert someone for the sake of marriage – because someone who converts for the sake of anything besides an actual change in view – probably has a weak faith (and a wishy washy Christian IMO is far worse than one whom I merely disagree with).

Well stated.