Episcopalian Communion

[Irishgal49]

I am trying to understand why I can’t take communion in an Episcopalian Church? I believe the Catholic Church’s teaching on Transubstantiation completely. The Episcopalian Church says it believes in the “real presence” but haven’t really defined what that means exactly.

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack. I would feel like I was being a snob to say no when people are being kind and giving an invitation. If you go ahead and have communion why is that a sin? I guess I need to read on this more–any guidance on reading materials would be appreciated.

BTW, this is hypothetical, I’m not going there to church. I was just reading about them because someone said they were the “same” as Catholics in a lot of ways but I found them to be very vague and not specific on what they mean when they give theological viewpoints. I heard they were “Catholic Lite” but I wasn’t impressed. I got the impression you could “write your own ticket” and that usually gets me in trouble.

Thanks,

Lorrie

 

[ConstantineTG]

The simple answer is you can’t receive Communion from a Church not in Communion with your own. Valid or not, the Communion of Churches is important to receiving Communion.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

What ConstantineTG said is the primary point. This is also why you couldn’t receive (in ordinary circumstances) Communion at a schismatic Catholic Church.

A secondary point - even if they believe exactly the same thing about the Eucharist that we do (which I don’t believe is always the case - so far as I understand, Episcopalianism and Anglicanism in general allows many opinions on many issues), the sacrament would not be valid because they no longer have a valid priesthood (after the Anglicans messed with the ordination rite a while back).

 

[Church_Militant]

Ah faith Lass, let me see if I can better explain it to ya. :shamrock2:
Sure and it comes down to a matter of false witness as his blessed holiness John Paul the great explained in his encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia%between% (Note especially sections 43-46)

These links from up in the Ask an Apologist forum should be helpful for understanding why Catholics should not take communion in a non-Catholic church.

• May I receive Communion with Lutherans?
• Why can’t Catholics receive Protestant communion?

 

[CarlosBarrera]

I think ConstantineTG has the right idea. I would add to that by saying that those protestant groups such as the Episcopalians and Lutherans who have “Communion” have a very different idea of what the Eucharist is.

To them it’s more of a “Since we are all gathered here together, Christ is in our midst…So he’s in the bread and wine we have on the altar.”

They demote the Eucharist to nothing more than a symbol, whether or not they say they believe in the Real Presence.

 

[triumphguy]

I am trying to understand why I can’t take communion in an Episcopalian Church? I believe the Catholic Church’s teaching on Transubstantiation completely. The Episcopalian Church says it believes in the “real presence” but haven’t really defined what that means exactly.

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack. I would feel like I was being a snob to say no when people are being kind and giving an invitation. If you go ahead and have communion why is that a sin? I guess I need to read on this more–any guidance on reading materials would be appreciated.

BTW, this is hypothetical, I’m not going there to church. I was just reading about them because someone said they were the “same” as Catholics in a lot of ways but I found them to be very vague and not specific on what they mean when they give theological viewpoints. I heard they were “Catholic Lite” but I wasn’t impressed. I got the impression you could “write your own ticket” and that usually gets me in trouble.

Thanks,

Lorrie

Pretend you are an Irish Catholic Would you wear a White T shirt with a red cross and red hand on it for Easter? After all red and white look nice.

 

[Contarini]

I think ConstantineTG has the right idea. I would add to that by saying that those protestant groups such as the Episcopalians and Lutherans who have “Communion” have a very different idea of what the Eucharist is.

To them it’s more of a “Since we are all gathered here together, Christ is in our midst…So he’s in the bread and wine we have on the altar.”

They demote the Eucharist to nothing more than a symbol, whether or not they say they believe in the Real Presence.

That makes no sense at all. Those of us who believe in the Eucharist do not just believe it’s a symbol.

I have heard the view you attribute to Episcopalians and Lutherans from Catholics–I have never, as it happens, heard it from Lutherans (I have heard it from Episcopalians as well as from Catholics).

The presence in the community is important, and Catholics ignore it at their peril. But most Episcopalians do not reduce the Real Presence to Christ’s presence among us, though we link it to that presence; and Lutherans are even less likely to do so, I think.

Edwin

 

[CarlosBarrera]

That makes no sense at all. Those of us who believe in the Eucharist do not just believe it’s a symbol.

I have heard the view you attribute to Episcopalians and Lutherans from Catholics–I have never, as it happens, heard it from Lutherans (I have heard it from Episcopalians as well as from Catholics).

The presence in the community is important, and Catholics ignore it at their peril. But most Episcopalians do not reduce the Real Presence to Christ’s presence among us, though we link it to that presence; and Lutherans are even less likely to do so, I think.

Edwin

With all do respect, I have spoken to many Episcopalians and Lutherans on this subject through this forum, by email, Facebook, and even through missionary work, and what I have said is what I have gathered based on my conversations with them.

 

[runningdude]

I am trying to understand why I can’t take communion in an Episcopalian Church? I believe the Catholic Church’s teaching on Transubstantiation completely. The Episcopalian Church says it believes in the “real presence” but haven’t really defined what that means exactly.

Episcopalian teaches itself to be a “third branch” of Catholicism. It sees itself, the Catholic Church, and the Orthodox Churches as all equivalent to each other. It often extends this to Lutherans and other Protestants. Because of this false “equivalency”, they wrongly believe that their communion is objectively identical to the Catholic Church’s.

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack. I would feel like I was being a snob to say no when people are being kind and giving an invitation. If you go ahead and have communion why is that a sin? I guess I need to read on this more–any guidance on reading materials would be appreciated.

Episcopalians invite everybody, so that all can experience’s Christ love through communion. It is a noble intention, but problematic for Catholics.

As Catholics, we have access to the true Body of Christ. By receiving from Anglicans who claim their church and communion are equivalent to our own, we are implicitly accepting this claim.

We are called to proclaim the truth of Jesus Christ through our every action. Merely “snacking” at another church doesn’t cut it!

BTW, this is hypothetical, I’m not going there to church.

I recently attended a memorial service at an Episcopalian Church, and all members of the congregation were invited to receive the bread and wine, so it is important to know why it is not permitted to do so! Fortunately, I had a lot of other Catholic relatives that also sat out, so I didn’t stick out for not receiving .

I was just reading about them because someone said they were the “same” as Catholics in a lot of ways but I found them to be very vague and not specific on what they mean when they give theological viewpoints. I heard they were “Catholic Lite” but I wasn’t impressed. I got the impression you could “write your own ticket” and that usually gets me in trouble.

They have a lot of the “smells and bells” of Catholicism. The liturgy I attended was very reverent, though celebrated by a woman minister. The words used were nearly identical to the Mass before the recent revisions. It even used communion rails!

It shares many spiritual elements with Catholicism with an Anglican (Episcopalian) touch, many of them beautiful in their own right. This is why Pope Benedict carved out a special nook for the Anglican converts to maintain some of these traditions in the Personal Anglican Ordinates established in several countries.

Thanks,

Lorrie

 

[bzkoss236]

Communion is more than just believing in the Real Presence or Transubstantiation, it is “communion” after all. This means that for us (as Catholics) to partake in communion, we also have to share the same beliefs to really be in communion with the rest of the people there.

 

[steve_b]

I am trying to understand why I can’t take communion in an Episcopalian Church? I believe the Catholic Church’s teaching on Transubstantiation completely. The Episcopalian Church says it believes in the “real presence” but haven’t really defined what that means exactly.

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack. I would feel like I was being a snob to say no when people are being kind and giving an invitation. If you go ahead and have communion why is that a sin? I guess I need to read on this more–any guidance on reading materials would be appreciated.

BTW, this is hypothetical, I’m not going there to church. I was just reading about them because someone said they were the “same” as Catholics in a lot of ways but I found them to be very vague and not specific on what they mean when they give theological viewpoints. I heard they were “Catholic Lite” but I wasn’t impressed. I got the impression you could “write your own ticket” and that usually gets me in trouble.

Thanks,

Lorrie

As far as what they believe look at articles #28 and #29 of the 39 Articles. The Eucharist is purely a simbol. They deny and reject anything goes on in the consecration to change the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus. Therefore, they don’t reverence the Euicharist, they don’t worship the Eucharist, because it’s merely a simbol. To worship the Eucharist for them, given it’s merely a simbol, would be idolotry.

Look it up yourself.
anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

No one in protestantism has valid ordinations.

 

[Actaeon]

I am trying to understand why I can’t take communion in an Episcopalian Church? I believe the Catholic Church’s teaching on Transubstantiation completely. The Episcopalian Church says it believes in the “real presence” but haven’t really defined what that means exactly.

Largely, the episcopalian church rejects transubstantiation, though as you said they leave it a mystery as to how Christ is really present.

As such, they have no valid words of consecration. In other words, even IF they were validly ordained priests, their consecration of the eucharist would be invalid because of the prayers that they use in their form of “consecration” (to wit: when the Eucharist is consecrated it is because it literally becomes the Body and Blood of Christ objectively and for all people, while the Episcopal consecration states that may God allow it to become the Body and Blood for believers).

But all of that is made irrelevant by one simple fact: the ordinations of the priesthood of episcopals is not valid, they have no valid apostolic succession and therefore no truly ordained priesthood… thus they are incapable of confecting the sacrament.

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack.

You might see it that way, and if so you are insulting their beliefs by taking their communion as nothing more than a snack (which is a grave lack of charity).

But how OTHERS see it is important. Taking communion is a great Amen to the beliefs of the church: it asserts that you BELIEVE that their church is true and that their sacrament is real. When you take communion in another church, you denigrate the TRUE Communion of the catholic church to anyone who observes your external actions.

We do not take communion in other churches not because their communion is insignificant, but precisely because partaking in an insignificant communion degrades the appearance of the reverance we have for OUR Eucharist… which is so holy that we may not scandalize it in any way.

I would feel like I was being a snob to say no when people are being kind and giving an invitation.

I think it’s a little more degrading to take their invitation while harbouring the belief that what they’re proffering is nothing more than a mid-service snack time. At that point you’re left with two options: 1) allow them to believe that you took their communion as valid, and thus allow scandalizing of OUR Eucharist, or 2) clarify to everyone who saw you that you took their communion because it is nothing more than a snack and that their beliefs are so bunk that you can just sit there and munch, which would represent a SEVERE lack of Christian charity (and would itself be sinful).

Both paths lead to sin, so the correct path is to abstain.

 

[Irishgal49]

Largely, the episcopalian church rejects transubstantiation, though as you said they leave it a mystery as to how Christ is really present.

As such, they have no valid words of consecration. In other words, even IF they were validly ordained priests, their consecration of the eucharist would be invalid because of the prayers that they use in their form of “consecration” (to wit: when the Eucharist is consecrated it is because it literally becomes the Body and Blood of Christ objectively and for all people, while the Episcopal consecration states that may God allow it to become the Body and Blood for believers).

But all of that is made irrelevant by one simple fact: the ordinations of the priesthood of episcopals is not valid, they have no valid apostolic succession and therefore no truly ordained priesthood… thus they are incapable of confecting the sacrament.

You might see it that way, and if so you are insulting their beliefs by taking their communion as nothing more than a snack (which is a grave lack of charity).

But how OTHERS see it is important. Taking communion is a great Amen to the beliefs of the church: it asserts that you BELIEVE that their church is true and that their sacrament is real. When you take communion in another church, you denigrate the TRUE Communion of the catholic church to anyone who observes your external actions.

We do not take communion in other churches not because their communion is insignificant, but precisely because partaking in an insignificant communion degrades the appearance of the reverance we have for OUR Eucharist… which is so holy that we may not scandalize it in any way.

I think it’s a little more degrading to take their invitation while harbouring the belief that what they’re proffering is nothing more than a mid-service snack time. At that point you’re left with two options: 1) allow them to believe that you took their communion as valid, and thus allow scandalizing of OUR Eucharist, or 2) clarify to everyone who saw you that you took their communion because it is nothing more than a snack and that their beliefs are so bunk that you can just sit there and munch, which would represent a SEVERE lack of Christian charity (and would itself be sinful).

Both paths lead to sin, so the correct path is to abstain.

EXELLENT! A lot of really awesome responses. This one comes closer to what I’m looking for–after all whose going to know I’m Catholic–the scandal aspect really isn’t there and who cares what i think, but the idea of respect for THEIR belief, that resonantes with me. It would be nothing more than snack time and of COURSE I wouldn’t asy that to them I wouldn’t want to disrespect their beliefs (or my own). I’m still a little confused why it’s a big deal but this seems to make a ton of sense. I’m totally reading all the responses–excellent thoughts, ideas, and I did read the references. I’lm still reading

 

[Irishgal49]

Communion is more than just believing in the Real Presence or Transubstantiation, it is “communion” after all. This means that for us (as Catholics) to partake in communion, we also have to share the same beliefs to really be in communion with the rest of the people there.

This is excellent except there are times when we are not in “communion” in the sense that maybe I can’t stand the priest or maybe Suzy behind me hates me. We are still the body of Christ but not really “in communion”. I do beleve we should try to be more and more each day but being in Communion with Rome is what i think the issue is. I don’t mean to be mean to our Church (and my mother) but I just wonder if they say you can’t do things because you might like them better and leave. I don’t see any reason why it’s a big deal and there is certainly nothing wrong in seeking to protect the members of the Church but I’m still reading and really enjoying your comments.

 

[EricFilmer]

I agree with what bzkoss236 stated in Post #10 and I’ll just elaborate further on this idea for the sake of the thread at hand…

I once took a class on Canon Law and when the professor addressed the issue at hand, he stated, “The Eucharist is a sign of unity, but it does not create unity where it does not actually exist.” There is one Church, and (generally speaking) all Christians hold to many commonalities in both worship and doctrine. But the sad reality is that the Body of the Church is, at the same time, currently fractured with many churches and denominations embracing a number different and even contradictory beliefs. The everyday norm is that we worship apart from one another and teach things in opposition of one another. Therefore, if when attending something like a wedding Mass or a funeral Mass (where people from different faith backgrounds tend to come together) and we all receive Communion together under the idea that “We are one in the Body of Christ” then the sign of unity is really a sign of hypocrisy on our behalf.

According to Catholic teaching, there are permissible ways of being eccumenical in which we can have fellowship with non-Catholic Christians and worship alongside them. But the line is drawn in the context of Communion.

CCC #1398: The Eucharist and the unity of Christians. Before the greatness of this mystery St. Augustine exclaims, “O sacrament of devotion! O sign of unity! O bond of charity!” The more painful the experience of the divisions in the Church which break the common participation in the table of the Lord, the more urgent are our prayers to the Lord that the time of complete unity among all who believe in him may return.

CCC #1400: Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, “have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders.” It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, “when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory.”

 

[Irishgal49]

Excellent Eric!

I like that answer. I appreciate so many responses, all coming from different angles.

 

[Contarini]

I agree with what bzkoss236 stated in Post #10 and I’ll just elaborate further on this idea for the sake of the thread at hand…

I once took a class on Canon Law and when the professor addressed the issue at hand, he stated, “The Eucharist is a sign of unity, but it does not create unity where it does not actually exist.”

Maybe Catholics need to have more faith in the Eucharist. . . .

On the other hand, I get why Eucharistic discipline is important. I don’t have a problem with non-Catholics being excluded from communion, so much as with the issue the OP refers to. Admittedly that’s personal–if I become Catholic I won’t be able to receive communion with my wife.

I believe that I have received grace in the Eucharist in Episcopal churches. Refusing to receive the Eucharist in the Episcopal Church seems like turning away from Jesus, not toward Jesus. Of the many practical reasons why I have misgivings about becoming Catholic, this may be the only one that has actual theological weight.

Edwin

 

[Irishgal49]

Maybe Catholics need to have more faith in the Eucharist. . . .

On the other hand, I get why Eucharistic discipline is important. I don’t have a problem with non-Catholics being excluded from communion, so much as with the issue the OP refers to. Admittedly that’s personal–if I become Catholic I won’t be able to receive communion with my wife.

I believe that I have received grace in the Eucharist in Episcopal churches. Refusing to receive the Eucharist in the Episcopal Church seems like turning away from Jesus, not toward Jesus. Of the many practical reasons why I have misgivings about becoming Catholic, this may be the only one that has actual theological weight.

Edwin

Hi Edwin,

For me I don’t see a logical or valid theological reason for this. I understand what the Church says but there seems to be no real coherent reason for this “ban”. I can see how that could be difficult for you. In my mind, taking communion somewhere where they practice open communion would, worst case scenario, be simply drinking wine or grape juice and eating bread. I mean theologically the worst case scenario is you took things that didn’t become the body and blood of Jesus.

Are you studying to become Catholic? I see you are Episcopalian? I hear a lot of people telling me that Liberal Catholics belong in the Episcopal Church. Do you see a lot of Catholics coming in?
Lorrie

 

[R_C]

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack. I would feel like I was being a snob to say no when people are being kind and giving an invitation. If you go ahead and have communion why is that a sin?

Thanks be to God that obedience does not require understanding

However, we are Christians. God does no longer call us servants, but friends, because we are granted understanding (Jn 15:15). Of course, our capacity to understand and our knowledge are naturally limited, thus by obedience we trust in the teachings of Holy Church.

Assuming they are not meaning it the way we are why is it a big deal if I have “refreshments” because that would be all that it is right? So where’s the crime in a shot of wine and an oyster cracker? I see it as just having a snack.

Only the intention matters. Would you really approach the Altar of the Most High God thinking that you are just having refreshment, and consider it having a snack when God’s minister hands you the sacred mystery? Wait a minute…you don’t see that Mass that way? Then act accordingly, and be coherent in your actions by not assisting at all. Because if, contrary to the instructions of Holy Church, you do choose to assist, then you are acknowledging it as a Holy Mass, and you should act accordingly.

For the rest, I guess you can find answer and explanations here

 

[EricFilmer]

Maybe Catholics need to have more faith in the Eucharist. . .

On the other hand, I get why Eucharistic discipline is important. I don’t have a problem with non-Catholics being excluded from communion, so much as with the issue the OP refers to. Admittedly that’s personal–if I become Catholic I won’t be able to receive communion with my wife.

I believe that I have received grace in the Eucharist in Episcopal churches. Refusing to receive the Eucharist in the Episcopal Church seems like turning away from Jesus, not toward Jesus. Of the many practical reasons why I have misgivings about becoming Catholic, this may be the only one that has actual theological weight.

Edwin

As a former Anglican I understand where you are coming from, and in my Protestant days I resented the fact that the Catholic Church did not deem it permissible for me to receive the Eucharist at a Catholic Mass. Nevertheless, I disagree with your statement that the Catholic position is somehow a lack of faith in the power of Communion to create unity among disunity. After all, several Protestant denominations have some form of Communion which is distributed to all those who desire to receive. And yet there are still separate denominations. When I was an Anglican I frequently received Communion in Methodist churches and a variety of other Protestant services, and yet I felt no real unity with them. I was in these places because I was with friends and family who were members, and when the services were over I was happy to return to my local Anglican church.

Without getting into the topic of who has and who hasn’t a valid Eucharist, let me emphasize that the Catholic Church’s position concerning the reception of the Eucharist challenges us (although sometimes in an uncomfortable way) to seek true unity rather than using things such as wedding Masses and funeral Masses as excuses for people to come together and pretend for an hour that the Body of Christ is not plagued by division.

Moreover, Catholics themselves are not supposed to receive the Eucharist until they have undergone specific instructions in the sacrament. Wouldn’t it be odd to have such a requirement for Catholics and at the same time say it is ok for non-Catholics (without any such instructions and possibly not even accepting the doctrine of the Real Presence) to step up and receive the Eucharist at a Catholic Mass?

And furthermore, ever since the ancient Church, the Eucharist has been considered one of the three sacraments of initiation into the Church. The process was baptism, confirmation and then the reception of the Eucharist. Simply put, joining the Church was a sacramental process, and culminated in the reception of the Eucharist as a sign of unity with the Church. For people undergoing RCIA, they spend months learning about Catholicism and then at a special Mass (usually the Easter Vigil) they undergo that wonderful moment of being welcomed to receive the Eucharist for the first time with the parish family that they are now sacramentally joined to. But this whole process and the idea it represents would be disrupted if Communion in Catholic Masses were suddenly open to whoever was interested in receiving.