Episcopalian Sacraments: Valid or Not?

[TheRealJuliane]

Doesn’t the Anglican Church pre-date Martin Luther? I would not term it Protestant if that is the case. It is really in a sort of stand-alone category, as a bastardization of Catholicism, not truly Protestant because it is only Catholicism without Rome.

Never mind, I looked it up. The Protestant Reformation came slightly earlier than Henry’s dissolution of the Catholic Church in England. So I guess you could say that the Anglican/Episcopalian Church is Protestant, in nature if not fact.

 

[seanman611]

Making the argument that a gay priest invalidates the sacraments is a “slippery slope” argument, in my eyes.

I’m sure that there are gay Catholic priests currently serving parishes around the world. I’m sure that the vast majority are celibate, however, there are probably some who are not. Do the non-celibate gay Catholic priests around the world invalidate the Roman Catholic Church’s sacraments?? I think not. From what I understand, as long as the priest used the correct form, then the Mass is valid, regardless of the priest’s sins. Of course, the difference is that the TEC allows non-celebate gay priests/bishops and the Catholic Church does not. However, as I feel i’ve shown, having a non-celibate gay priest does not invalidate the sacraments.

Do I agree with ordaining non-celebate gay priests? Nope, however, a non-celebate gay priest, does not invalidate our sacraments. If that is the case, then a priest that lies, is prideful, selfish, and greedy must invalidate the sacraments as well. You can’t choose one sin and say that this one sin invalidates the sacraments, while others do not.

 

[martininthefiel]

Making the argument that a gay priest invalidates the sacraments is a “slippery slope” argument, in my eyes.

I’m sure that there are gay Catholic priests currently serving parishes around the world. I’m sure that the vast majority are celibate, however, there are probably some who are not. Do the non-celibate gay Catholic priests around the world invalidate the Roman Catholic Church’s sacraments?? I think not. From what I understand, as long as the priest used the correct form, then the Mass is valid, regardless of the priest’s sins. Of course, the difference is that the TEC allows non-celebate gay priests/bishops and the Catholic Church does not. However, as I feel i’ve shown, having a non-celibate gay priest does not invalidate the sacraments.

Do I agree with ordaining non-celebate gay priests? Nope, however, a non-celebate gay priest, does not invalidate our sacraments. If that is the case, then a priest that lies, is prideful, selfish, and greedy must invalidate the sacraments as well. You can’t choose one sin and say that this one sin invalidates the sacraments, while others do not.

The priest’s state of Grace, or lack thereof, in no way affects the validity of the Sacrament. That would be a classic heresy called, ‘Donatism’.

I believe the OP’s point was that the fact that TEC accepts non-celibate gay priests as normative speaks to the deviation from orthodoxy of the communion as a whole.

There is enough doubt as to the validity of Anglican Holy Orders due to defect in form in COE during the Reign of Edward VI, and, therefore, a break in Apostolic succession to make the moral worthiness of the priest a moot issue.

 

[seanman611]

The priest’s state of Grace, or lack thereof, in no way affects the validity of the Sacrament. That would be a classic heresy called, ‘Donatism’.

I believe the OP’s point was that the fact that TEC accepts non-celibate gay priests as normative speaks to the deviation from orthodoxy of the communion as a whole.

There is enough doubt as to the validity of Anglican Holy Orders due to defect in form in COE during the Reign of Edward VI, and, therefore, a break in Apostolic succession to make the moral worthiness of the priest a moot issue.

Yes, that was the OP’s point, but many Roman Catholics on here have suggested that because the majority of Bishops in TEC allow the ordination of non-celibate gays, that is what makes our orders invalid. While these actions are sad and outside of the majority in the communion, it doesn’t make the Anglican or Episcopal church’s orders invalid.

I could argue about the validity of Anglican orders in regards to other issues, but it won’t do anybody much good. Catholics are taught that Anglican orders are invalid and Anglicans are taught that our orders are valid. I don’t think anybody is going to change their mind on this anytime soon.

 

[GKC]

The priest’s state of Grace, or lack thereof, in no way affects the validity of the Sacrament. That would be a classic heresy called, ‘Donatism’.

I believe the OP’s point was that the fact that TEC accepts non-celibate gay priests as normative speaks to the deviation from orthodoxy of the communion as a whole.

There is enough doubt as to the validity of Anglican Holy Orders due to defect in form in COE during the Reign of Edward VI, and, therefo re, a break in Apostolic succession to make the moral worthiness of the priest a moot issue.

Defect of form and intent is alleged in Apostolicae Curae.. Each must be considered, together.

The worthiness of the priest is not a factor. That would be Donatism.

GKC

 

[CMatt25]

I know Episcopalians sometimes refer to themselves as being a bridge inbetween Catholic and Protestant. But I’ve read posts on this thread that Catholics believe Episcopalians are Protestant. Someone though posted not to lump all Protestants together. And another posted the Protestant Reformation came before Henry’s situation.

I myself have only been to a Protestant church for a wedding and have only worshiped in Catholic churches. Yet have long felt an urge to attend a Protestant one at least once in my lifetime. Not necessarily to join but to experience it. Of many spiritual needs one I have is to feel welcomed to receive as I am and as I come, and to not be turned away. Though let me point out I know full well Catholics teach not to commune with Episcopalians. I just look at it more as Christians expressing a basic unity in Him. Anyway I know of an Episcopal priest who from what I can tell seems to me to be exemplifying Christ’s love for all, as she serves His people, and I believe shows His compassion for the poor in an outreach her church runs. There’s another Episcopal church in my area that sounds to have great music which I would find uplifting.

So if I were to attend an Episcopal service, would I be able to count it as Protestant? Or would Catholics say yes and Episcopalians say no?

 

[nightranger]

So if I were to attend an Episcopal service, would I be able to count it as Protestant? Or would Catholics say yes and Episcopalians say no?

I believe most Catholics would say yes (protestant) and most Episcopalians no (they would consider themselves part of the Catholic Church).
But really, it doesn’t matter. Episcopalians are in fact protestants, and Catholics are not.

 

[seanman611]

So if I were to attend an Episcopal service, would I be able to count it as Protestant? Or would Catholics say yes and Episcopalians say no?

I would think that the service would be too similar to the RC service to really count. If you want a truly Protestant experience, most methodist, baptist, and presbyterian churches are pretty Protestant to the core.

 

[JonNC]

I respectfully differ. How can a completely invalid sacrament (Anglican Eucharist), have any "grace? " What else would I do other than disregard it?
Does that mean Lutheran Eucharist has grace as well? Presbyterian? Methodist? Baptist? Perhaps if *I *hold a communion service with grape juice and crackers, it has “grace” as well.

Just a quote from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger about this very subject:

I count among the most important results of the ecumenical dialogues the insight that the issue of the eucharist cannot be narrowed to the problem of ‘validity.’ Even a theology oriented to the concept of succession, such as that which holds in the Catholic and in the Orthodox church, **need not in any way deny the salvation-granting **presence of the Lord in a Lutheran Lord’s Supper.

This, from a letter to Lutheran Bishop Johannes Hanselmann. On the net, it is here:
nccbuscc.org/seia/koinonia.shtml#N_166_
and further in his book, Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion

Jon

 

[CMatt25]

I would think that the service would be too similar to the RC service to really count. If you want a truly Protestant experience, most methodist, baptist, and presbyterian churches are pretty Protestant to the core.

I suppose you have a point. Maybe I’d have to think of it as just my first non *Roman *Catholic service. But attend another if I wanted it to be Protestant according to everyone.

 

[martininthefiel]

It is not another religion. The religion is called ‘Christianity’. We are all members of the One, Holy, catholic, and Apostolic Church, and while I believe very strongly in the Sacramental church, I do not deny that Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptists, etc. are fellow Christians.

I think there is value in discovering how other denominations worship, so long as one is clear about following Church discipline in regard to one’s participation, and that one does not use their services as a substitute for fulfilling one’s obligation as a Catholic.

 

[nightranger]

[No message]