Episcopalian Communion Service

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luds
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Luds

Guest
At the invititation of a friend of ours, my wife and attended a mass at her Episcopalian church. Prior to the communion service, the attendant invited all baptized Christians to come forward and receive the bread and wine. After a short deliberation, my wife and I decided to stay seated in the pew when our time came. The refusal to participate hurt our friend’s feelings. It was, and still is, my belief that participating in their symbolic ritual somehow would have some how diminished or shown a lack of reverance for the priviledge of receiving the true body and blood of Jesus at our Catholic mass.

Am I being wrongheaded in this stance?
 
Nope, I don’t think so. Don’t partake in what you don’t believe. I wouldn’t dare take Roman Catholic communion. It isn’t right.

I would assume it is the same vice versa.

~mango~
 
I wouldn’t dare take Roman Catholic communion. It isn’t right.
Click to expand...
What is not right in taking the Catholic Communion?

Can you explain what it is that is not right?

Pio
 
40.png
Luds:
At the invititation of a friend of ours, my wife and attended a mass at her Episcopalian church. Prior to the communion service, the attendant invited all baptized Christians to come forward and receive the bread and wine. After a short deliberation, my wife and I decided to stay seated in the pew when our time came. The refusal to participate hurt our friend’s feelings. It was, and still is, my belief that participating in their symbolic ritual somehow would have some how diminished or shown a lack of reverance for the priviledge of receiving the true body and blood of Jesus at our Catholic mass.

Am I being wrongheaded in this stance?
Click to expand...
You were right, and are right… I support you… your church supports you and told you this years ago… it is a shame the hurt anyones feelings, but if explained properly, it shouldn’t be too big an issue… thanks for living your faith, and being an example of what all of us should be doing, even when political correctness barks… 👍
 
40.png
mango_2003:
Nope, I don’t think so. Don’t partake in what you don’t believe. I wouldn’t dare take Roman Catholic communion. It isn’t right.

I would assume it is the same vice versa.

~mango~
Click to expand...
You are correct also… I find it extremely odd when someone partakes in the communion service (if communion means unity) of a faith you had no communion with… Remember, this is not a question of worthyness, it’s a question of do you believe and accept the total teachings of the faith whose service you are attending… 👍
 
40.png
hlgomez:
What is not right in taking the Catholic Communion?

Can you explain what it is that is not right?

Pio
Click to expand...
If you are a canadian (from canada)… you move to the United States… you can live here, own property, raise your children, partake of all the priviledges this country has to offer and no one will raise an eyebrow… but, when it comes to voting in a local or national election you have to be a citizen. You have to be a member who believes, accepts, and professes all that we accept inorder to be in communion, or one with us, to have a place at the table as it were… no one’s going to care if you don’t vote… your not a member… it’s not a question of you being good enough, you just don’t believe as we do… so don’t get bent or insulted, it’s just a unity thing… we wouldn’t think of going to canada, not being a citizen and voting in their elections… that’s all it is… it’s not a question of are you REAL and WORTHY CHRISTIAN… of course you are… your just not a CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN… nothing personal, just business… as the Godfather would say… 👍
 
40.png
hlgomez:
What is not right in taking the Catholic Communion?

Can you explain what it is that is not right?

Pio
Click to expand...
It’s not right for me to take it. I don’t believe in transubstantiation. It would be nothing but wrong for me to partake.

~mango~
 
Luds - You were correct in not partaking of the bread and wine that the Episcopalians offered as a remembrance of the Lord’s Supper.

At my father’s memorial service, I told my mother before hand that my family would not be partaking in their communion service (Episcopal Church). She understood, thankfully, and her feelings were not hurt. I am saddened that my family is not all Roman Catholic, but that’s another story.

No one should have their feelings hurt for you not partaking in something that does not square away with their beliefs.

Mango - you are correct in not receiving…but whether you believe it or not, transubstantiation is a fact! 🙂 One day, perhaps you will come to that realization and in the meantime I shall be in prayer for your conversion…being a convert, I know it can and does happen! God Bless
 
Many years back my wife was music director at an Episcopal Church. At Communion time we used to go forward for a blessing by the minister. I suspect the custom of blessings at Communion time crept into the Catholic Church from this Episcopatian practice.
 
JOE!!!😦 Was that you that started that awful “come on forward for a blessing” thing? Oh my! Well, since you have confessed it, will you please come forward and do something about it! 😉 God Bless
 
Do Episcopals believe in communion as their (root) Anglicans do (Luther’s “consubstantiation”) or has it become the common “memorial bread and wine” view that many other denominations stick to?

Just curious.
 
Book of Common Prayer, which is the catechism/prayer book for the Episcopal Church, you will read**…“Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; it is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture; overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions**.”

That is taken from page 608, Articles of Religion XXVIII Of the Lord’s Supper
 
40.png
chimakuni:
Book of Common Prayer, which is the catechism/prayer book for the Episcopal Church, you will read**…“Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; it is repugnant **to the plain words of Scripture; overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.”

That is taken from page 608, Articles of Religion XXVIII Of the Lord’s Supper
Click to expand...
And one of the things I post most frequently on boards like this is a little history. The Articles are not binding on any Anglican, except, in a limited sense, on CoE clergy, due to the Erastian nature of that church. They were part of the Elizabethan Compromise; how Elizabeth I decided to govern her fractious church. They are history; statecraft as religion, and no Anglican is required to affirm any of them (though many do). Indeed, one of the few things I like about the 1979 Prayer Book is that the Articles are placed in a section entitled "Historical Documents.

Anglicanism is creedal, not confessional; and you can find Anglo-Catholic parishes who cut the Articles out of the BCP and use them to kindle the new flame at Easter. And Anglicans who affirm Trent, Session XIII, canons 1 and 2. That is, just what you believe. It’s why we have a Tabernacle, with the reserved Sacrament, and hold Benediction (Adoration of the Body), and use a piscina, and allow no one not ordained to handle or distribute the consecrated elements (no EEMs for us).

And yes, I know all about Apostolicae Curae

GKC
 
40.png
GKC:
Anglicanism is creedal, not confessional;
Click to expand...
Can somebody please explain the difference between a ‘creedal’ church and a ‘confessional’ one? Which category does the RCC fall under? TIA

Space ghost, thank you for your explantions 🙂

Becky
 
Point blank, if you are Catholic, you are forbidden from participating in the “Last Supper” rituals of other denominations, as they make a mockery of our Most Holy Eucharist. Likewise, if you are not Catholic, you are not allowed to participate in the Most Holy Eucharist until you are baptised, made a profession of faith, and have been through the sacrement of Reconciliation. I’ll pull up the appropriate canon laws for those who question the dogma of the Church in this matter.

Can. 897 The most August sacrament is the Most Holy Eucharist in which Christ the Lord himself is contained, offered, and received and by which the Church continually lives and grows. The eucharistic sacrifice, the memorial of the death and resurrection of the Lord, in which the sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated through the ages is the summit and source of all worship and Christian life, which signifies and effects the unity of the People of God and brings about the building up of the body of Christ. Indeed, the other sacraments and all the ecclesiastical works of the apostolate are closely connected with the Most Holy Eucharist and ordered to it.

Can. 898 The Christian faithful are to hold the Most Holy Eucharist in highest honor, taking an active part in the celebration of the most august sacrifice, receiving this sacrament most devoutly and frequently, and worshiping it with the highest adoration. In explaining the doctrine about this sacrament, pastors of souls are to teach the faithful diligently about this obligation.

Can. 908 Catholic priests are forbidden to concelebrate the Eucharist with priests or ministers of Churches or ecclesial communities which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church.

Can. 912 Any baptized person not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion.

Can. 913 §1. The administration of the Most Holy Eucharist to children requires that they have sufficient knowledge and careful preparation so that they understand the mystery of Christ according to their capacity and are able to receive the body of Christ with faith and devotion.

Can. 1367 A person who throws away the consecrated species or takes or retains them for a sacrilegious purpose incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; moreover, a cleric can be punished with another penalty, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state.
 
40.png
Becky:
Can somebody please explain the difference between a ‘creedal’ church and a ‘confessional’ one? Which category does the RCC fall under? TIA

Space ghost, thank you for your explantions 🙂

Becky
Click to expand...
Greetings Becky,

A creedal church is one whose basic doctrines and beliefs are contained in the historic Church creeds: Nicene, Apostle’s, Athanasian. A confessional church is one whose doctrines are formally set out in a “confession”, such as the Westminister or Augsburg Confessions. For Anglicans, the Articles simply aren’t a formal “confession” of belief, though you can certainly find Anglicans who treat them that way.

GKC
 
Point blank, a creedal religion has a set of precepts that they believe in. I.e., I believe in one God, the Father Alimighty…

A confessional faith has precepts that you agree with. There is a mighty big difference between agreeing with something and believing in it. John Kerry agrees that abortion is wrong, but believes he cannot legislate against it. When you believe in something, you do feel that it is immoral to act contrary to it. When you agree with something, there is no real moral compulsion to act contrary to it.

Better example, if I agree that smoking is bad for me, it doesn’t stop me from smoking. Many smokers agree that smoking is hazardous. However, if you believe that smoking will kill you, you won’t smoke. The difference is conviction. I am a Creedal Catholic, there are many Confessional Catholics, whom some appropriately refer to as cafeteria Catholics. They agree with the Church, but don’t feel necessarily obliged to obey it.
 
40.png
chimakuni:
JOE!!!😦 Was that you that started that awful “come on forward for a blessing” thing? Oh my! Well, since you have confessed it, will you please come forward and do something about it! 😉 God Bless
Click to expand...
:rotfl:
 
40.png
Luds:
At the invititation of a friend of ours, my wife and attended a mass at her Episcopalian church. Prior to the communion service, the attendant invited all baptized Christians to come forward and receive the bread and wine. After a short deliberation, my wife and I decided to stay seated in the pew when our time came. The refusal to participate hurt our friend’s feelings. It was, and still is, my belief that participating in their symbolic ritual somehow would have some how diminished or shown a lack of reverance for the priviledge of receiving the true body and blood of Jesus at our Catholic mass.

Am I being wrongheaded in this stance?
Click to expand...
You are being very right-headed in your stance.

Using logic, rather than emotionalism, you can see that receiving a wafer not consecrated by a duly ordained priest actually makes a mockery of the True Sacrament which Christ instituted. I’d be more concerned about offending Jesus.

Also, attending the Episcopalian service did not relieve you from your obligation to attend a Catholic Mass.

These kind of hurt feelings situations will naturally arise when one assumes that one belief system is just as good, right, or true as another. That is relativism. It is likely that your friend’s feelings are hurt because you do not regard her denomination as just as good as your Faith, and her “communion” as good as the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Communion. (Reasonably speaking, how could you?)

In reality, there is but One True Church which Christ founded, and all who wish to follow Christ are rather obliged to accept it…or, they are accepting the doctrines of men.

I know this sounds harsh, impersonal, and un-neighborly, but I don’t mean it as such.

Even the Church forbids non-Catholics receiving our Eucharist, and us communicating in other churches.

Pax Christi. <><
 
I would not take communion in a service in which I had no faith.

If my friends were offended, I would try to explain that since I do not accept the validity of the practice (the symbolic consumption of bread and grape juice/wine with no presence), by participating in this practice, I would be essentially mocking it, in a way.
Even if they don’t buy it, I think it makes a good story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top