G
- Status
M
martininthefiel
Guest
Recent developments also affect the validity of Apostolic succession in the American church, to wit the ordination of women as both priests and bishops; and TEC’s entrance into full communion with ELCA. While attempts are being made to re-establish succession in Lutheran Holy Orders in newly ordained ministers, there has been no requirement the existing pastors be re-ordained according to an acceptable formula. Thus Lutheran ministers serving in Episcopal parishes should not be permitted to celebrate the Eucharist, or grant Absolution, yet, in practice, I do not believe this has been observed. When I was still a member of TEC, I refrained from receiving Communion if a Lutheran minister was involved in the Consecration, even as a con-celebrant.
In fairness to TEC, the Book of Common Prayer contains a ‘Rite of Reconciliation’ that contains all the necessary elements of Confession and Absolution. I used to make frequent Confessions when I was an Episcopalian. Unless I were in imminent danger of death, I would not do so now, because i am a Catholic, and, therefore, do not believe that the grant of Absolution by an Episcopal priest to be valid for the same reason I do not believe their Eucharist to be valid.
In fairness to TEC, the Book of Common Prayer contains a ‘Rite of Reconciliation’ that contains all the necessary elements of Confession and Absolution. I used to make frequent Confessions when I was an Episcopalian. Unless I were in imminent danger of death, I would not do so now, because i am a Catholic, and, therefore, do not believe that the grant of Absolution by an Episcopal priest to be valid for the same reason I do not believe their Eucharist to be valid.
J
JPeter
Guest
As far as Anglicans are concerned our Sacraments are valid and Roman Catholics are welcome to them as well as any Baptized Christian who believes in the real presence. The Roman Catholic Church does not consider our sacraments to be valid. The issue is their issue. The question is not whether you can commune with Anglicans, but do you want to remain faithful to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. We Anglicans have a broader understanding of what it means to be part of the Church. This is something you will have to study and pray about.
E
Erich
Guest
St. Justin Martyr (c. 150) wrote: “…No one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true…” (the reason being, so that communicants don’t “eat and drink judgment to themselves,” as mentioned in 1 Cor 11:27-34). And for the earliest centuries, even mere presence at the celebration of the Liturgy of the Eucharist was denied to those who were not initiated – including catechumens.
Recall that the Passover is given (in Exodus 12:43-48) a condition that only the circumcised shall be allowed to partake: all the circumcised and only the circumcised. Typologically reading circumcision as baptism and the Passover as the Holy Communion, it is easy to see how closed communion would become the norm among the earliest Christians (who were, of course, all Catholic).
Marcus Grodi has mentioned several times that an open communion table, even among Protestants, is a relatively recent thing. Even To Kill a Mockingbird mentions that the Methodists and the Baptists in that town could not share communion with one another, and that story was set in the 1930’s.
On the other end of the spectrum, I’ve even been to an ecumenical service in an open-communion denomination (I am pretty sure it was Episcopalian) where it was announced that all – including non-Christians! – were invited to the altar. Not sure if they were allowed to do that (according to their own rules) however.
Recall that the Passover is given (in Exodus 12:43-48) a condition that only the circumcised shall be allowed to partake: all the circumcised and only the circumcised. Typologically reading circumcision as baptism and the Passover as the Holy Communion, it is easy to see how closed communion would become the norm among the earliest Christians (who were, of course, all Catholic).
Marcus Grodi has mentioned several times that an open communion table, even among Protestants, is a relatively recent thing. Even To Kill a Mockingbird mentions that the Methodists and the Baptists in that town could not share communion with one another, and that story was set in the 1930’s.
On the other end of the spectrum, I’ve even been to an ecumenical service in an open-communion denomination (I am pretty sure it was Episcopalian) where it was announced that all – including non-Christians! – were invited to the altar. Not sure if they were allowed to do that (according to their own rules) however.
G
GKC
Guest
Closed communion, save for any baptized and confirmed (a little wiggle room on confirmed) in apostolic succession, was the norm until recently.
In my jurisdiction, that is still true. Though, as my late rector said, anyone presenting him/her self at the altar rail and who seems to know what he/she is doing, and with no other known impediment, would be communicated. No inquisitions at the rail.
GKC
posterus traditus Anglicanus
In my jurisdiction, that is still true. Though, as my late rector said, anyone presenting him/her self at the altar rail and who seems to know what he/she is doing, and with no other known impediment, would be communicated. No inquisitions at the rail.
GKC
posterus traditus Anglicanus
M
martininthefiel
Guest
The current rule in TEC is supposed to be that all Baptised Christians, regardless of denomination, are permitted to receive Communion. In the past few years, it has, regrettably, evolved into an absolutely open Communion, where everyone is welcome to receive, and there is a move to make this an official policy.
Up until the 1970’s, one had to have been Confirmed in a Church in communion with TEC to receive. The Rubrics in the 1979 pray book changed this. Initially, it meant that non-Episcopalians could receive, but non-Confirmed Episcopalians could not. That was quickly remedied.
There has been a de-emphasis of Confirmation in TEC, anyway, with Baptism and Chrismation at Baptism, much as in the Eastern Churches, being the norm.(although it is not explicitly stated as such).
However, if the rules are followed to the letter, one is supposed to be a member of a denomination which allows its members to receive in other Communions. TEC position is that Catholics, and others should ‘follow their consciences’ in regard to receiving in an Episcopal Church.
IMHO, the totally open Communion rail is a very unfortunate development.
Up until the 1970’s, one had to have been Confirmed in a Church in communion with TEC to receive. The Rubrics in the 1979 pray book changed this. Initially, it meant that non-Episcopalians could receive, but non-Confirmed Episcopalians could not. That was quickly remedied.
There has been a de-emphasis of Confirmation in TEC, anyway, with Baptism and Chrismation at Baptism, much as in the Eastern Churches, being the norm.(although it is not explicitly stated as such).
However, if the rules are followed to the letter, one is supposed to be a member of a denomination which allows its members to receive in other Communions. TEC position is that Catholics, and others should ‘follow their consciences’ in regard to receiving in an Episcopal Church.
IMHO, the totally open Communion rail is a very unfortunate development.
S
Symphorian
Guest
Church of England policy:
Members of the Church of England who have been confirmed according to the rites of the Church of England.
Members of the Church of England who are ready and desirous to be so confirmed.
Members of the Church of England who have received episcopal confirmation through unction or the laying on of hands in other churches.
People who are baptized and communicant members in good standing of other Trinitarian churches.
Anyone who is baptized and who is in immediate danger of death.
Baptized children who are covered by the Admission of Baptized Children to Holy Communion.
An open altar policy is (AFAIK) illegal but is sometimes practiced.
Members of the Church of England who have been confirmed according to the rites of the Church of England.
Members of the Church of England who are ready and desirous to be so confirmed.
Members of the Church of England who have received episcopal confirmation through unction or the laying on of hands in other churches.
People who are baptized and communicant members in good standing of other Trinitarian churches.
Anyone who is baptized and who is in immediate danger of death.
Baptized children who are covered by the Admission of Baptized Children to Holy Communion.
An open altar policy is (AFAIK) illegal but is sometimes practiced.
G
GKC
Guest
The thought has occurred to me, on more than one subject.Hey GKC,
Perhaps the mods would allow you to make a “sticky”, so you don’t need to retype a response every time a thread like this needs it.
Jon
GKC
G
GKC
Guest
One Episcopal diocese has recently advocated removing the requirement for baptism. I would not be surprised to see this brought up at the next General Synod.
GKC
M
masuwerte
Guest
My parish priest always gives a disclaimer that Holy Eucharist is available to all, and presumably only, baptised Christians.
J
JPeter
Guest
It may have been at one time. Today we understand some other Churches to hold to the same essentials that we do. Anglicanism is rather simple. We don’t define things to the extent of the Catholic Church. Communion is not fully open either. I’m in a Traditional Anglican Parish. We will likely be joining the ACNA or maybe even the Western Rite Orthodox before too long. ECUSA fell off a while back. We don’t have ANY female Priests if there were such a thing. The center of our worship is the Holy Eucharist. Other traditional names for this service are: the Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord’s Supper, and the Divine Liturgy. It is the service specifically commanded by Jesus in the New Testament. The Eucharist joins our offering of worship to Christ’s offering of Himself upon the altar of the cross. As He promised (Matthew 26; Mark 14; Luke 22; John 6; I Corinthians 11) Jesus is truly, spiritually present under the outward forms of the consecrated Bread and Wine, to infuse our lives with the spiritual strength of His life.
By receiving Holy Communion, we give our Solemn Assent, our “Amen,” to the entire Anglican Eucharistic Service. We express our belief that the Eucharist is a spiritual sacrifice which must be administered by a bishop or a priest whose ministry derives in succession from the Apostles themselves. We express also our faith in Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist. Because of the seriousness of these affirmations, this Church does not presume to invite those who in good faith cannot yet accept these beliefs to compromise their conscience by receiving Holy Communion at our Altar. It is for these reasons that we are not an “open Communion” Church. Those who do so believe, and who have been confirmed by a Bishop in Apostolic Succession, and who are spiritually prepared, are welcome to receive Holy Communion.
Preparation for Holy Communion generally takes the form of private prayers. In many Anglican parishes, those physically able to do so refrain from eating ordinary food prior to morning Communion, or for three hours prior to an evening Communion.
Most Christians would not be denied at our alter. A baptist or Christian who rejects the Eucharist as a means of grace would have to come to a deeper understanding and we would never give it to the unbaptized.
By receiving Holy Communion, we give our Solemn Assent, our “Amen,” to the entire Anglican Eucharistic Service. We express our belief that the Eucharist is a spiritual sacrifice which must be administered by a bishop or a priest whose ministry derives in succession from the Apostles themselves. We express also our faith in Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist. Because of the seriousness of these affirmations, this Church does not presume to invite those who in good faith cannot yet accept these beliefs to compromise their conscience by receiving Holy Communion at our Altar. It is for these reasons that we are not an “open Communion” Church. Those who do so believe, and who have been confirmed by a Bishop in Apostolic Succession, and who are spiritually prepared, are welcome to receive Holy Communion.
Preparation for Holy Communion generally takes the form of private prayers. In many Anglican parishes, those physically able to do so refrain from eating ordinary food prior to morning Communion, or for three hours prior to an evening Communion.
Most Christians would not be denied at our alter. A baptist or Christian who rejects the Eucharist as a means of grace would have to come to a deeper understanding and we would never give it to the unbaptized.
G
GKC
Guest
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Re: Are Anglican Orders/Sacraments valid?There’s probably been a thread of this nature before, but please bear with me.
I’ve just recently received the sacrament of reconciliation in the Catholic Church for the first time in maybe eight years, and the Eucharist for the first time in three!
I also attend an Episcopal Church (USA). I didn’t receive sacraments from them, because I was in a state of sin. However, now that I’m able to receive sacraments again, I’m thinking about receiving the Eucharist and Reconciliation from them, too. I was unsure about this, since technically they’re protestant.
However, I did some research, and it looks like the sacraments at my Ep. church are more or less the same as at my Catholic church–that is, they have apostolic succession like Catholics. Does this mean that I should treat them the same as, say, an Eastern Orthodox Church? If so, what are the rules about receiving sacraments therefrom?
Please be patient with me, as I’m still learning.
If you are Catholic, the answer is no, according to Apostolicae Curae.
If you are Anglican, the answer is yes; and there are valid historical factors to support valid Anglican Orders/valid Anglican Sacraments.
However, Catholics cannot consider any valid argument that supports the validity of Anglican Orders, because Catholics must submit to Apostolicae Curae. Catholics do not have the freedom of religious mind and will to disagree with Apostolicae Curae.
So, we can discuss this all day long. At the end of the day, Catholics will say Anglican Orders are* invalid*; and Anglicans will say Anglican Orders are valid.
Peace,
Anna
M
martininthefiel
Guest
Once again, Anna, you are 100% correct. I am weary of this topic.
I am obliged to defer to the Catholic Church’s teaching on this subject, but I also see the Anglican point-of-view. Let’s agree to disagree and move-on to our real mission to serve the world in Christ’s Name. We are all members of the Body. One Holy, catholic and Apostolic Church.
BTW, I am much more concerned about the schismatic movements within American Anglicanism. The attempts to by outside bishops to sew division within TEC are damnable IMHO. Coming home to Rome is one thing, joining unauthorised episcopal provinces is quite another. It only emphasizes the ‘preciousness’ of Anglo-Catholicism.
I am obliged to defer to the Catholic Church’s teaching on this subject, but I also see the Anglican point-of-view. Let’s agree to disagree and move-on to our real mission to serve the world in Christ’s Name. We are all members of the Body. One Holy, catholic and Apostolic Church.
BTW, I am much more concerned about the schismatic movements within American Anglicanism. The attempts to by outside bishops to sew division within TEC are damnable IMHO. Coming home to Rome is one thing, joining unauthorised episcopal provinces is quite another. It only emphasizes the ‘preciousness’ of Anglo-Catholicism.
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Well said.
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
martininthefiel,
Since the OP is Catholic, I would not attempt to pull OP/Brofessor away from the Catholic Church. It seems the OP is asking Catholics to weigh in; and*** Apostolicae Curae*** is the final word for Catholics.
I may not agree with *** Apostolicae Curae***; but I respect this as the Catholic position.
Peace,
Anna
- Status