Episcopalians and the Eucharist

[2nmga]

Does the Catholic Church allow Episcopalians to receive the Eucharist if they believe in the Real Presence? Is this the only requirement of an Episcopalian?

 

[demerzel85]

Hmm…I think its the primary requirement for anyone to actually receive the Eucharist. Yet inter-communion is very much discouraged.

 

[baltobetsy]

Intercommunion is allowed only in very specific circumstances, like danger of death, lack of access to the sacrament in one’s own church because of distance, etc. And yes, there would be the requirement to believe in the Real Presence as well. I’m sure someone will come up with the appropriate citation fairly soon.

If the Episcopalian truly believes in the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament in the Catholic Church, he should look into becoming Catholic. The Episcopal Church is a really “big tent,” with room for lots of interpretations and beliefs about the sacrament. Some believe Jesus is really present, just as Catholics do, some believe it’s only a symbol, and there are all kinds of positions in between, and they’re all acceptable beliefs for Episcopalians.

It is not acceptable for the subgroup of Episcopalians who believe the sacrament is the Real Presence to simply come to Mass and receive.

Betsy

 

[palmas85]

Does the Catholic Church allow Episcopalians to receive the Eucharist if they believe in the Real Presence? Is this the only requirement of an Episcopalian?

Episcopalians/Anglicans do not in most cases accept the Real Presence. They have a belief that somehow the bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of Chtist through the belief of the communicant although they are real hazy on what and when it happens. They and the Lutherans are closer in belief in the real presence than most other Protestant groups, but they still fall short of accepting transubstantiation in the understanding of the Catholic Church.

It is interesting to note that they do not really see this as a major stumbling block in the ongoing discussions between the Churches, which I think shows that to them the belief in the Real Presence is of secondary importance in the scheme of things.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Does the Catholic Church allow Episcopalians to receive the Eucharist if they believe in the Real Presence? Is this the only requirement of an Episcopalian?

The Catholic Church does not allow Episcopalians to receive the Catholic Eucharist. Only Catholics in full union with the Catholic Church are allowed to. Except in very specific emergency circumstances requiring a Bishops permission.

 

[jbuck919]

Episcopalians/Anglicans do not in most cases accept the Real Presence. They have a belief that somehow the bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of Chtist through the belief of the communicant although they are real hazy on what and when it happens. They and the Lutherans are closer in belief in the real presence than most other Protestant groups, but they still fall short of accepting transubstantiation in the understanding of the Catholic Church.

It is interesting to note that they do not really see this as a major stumbling block in the ongoing discussions between the Churches, which I think shows that to them the belief in the Real Presence is of secondary importance in the scheme of things.

I’m sorry, this is just not true. Most Anglicans and many Lutherans believe in literal transubstantiation. The reason they are not welcome to Communion in the Catholic church is that they are not Catholic, and believe their own sacrament to be valid when the Catholic Church has judged it not so.

 

[LRThunder]

I’m sorry, this is just not true. Most Anglicans and many Lutherans believe in literal transubstantiation. The reason they are not welcome to Communion in the Catholic church is that they are not Catholic, and believe their own sacrament to be valid when the Catholic Church has judged it not so.

Somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but I think it comes down to the issue of apostolic succession. When the Episcopal/Anglicans/Lutherans broke away, they no longer had apostolic succession and that is the critical difference between the Catholic eucharist and other communion.

 

[Saint_Sinner]

I was taught that transubstantiation was true in the Episcopal Church. But this belief by itself is not sufficient for Communion. We need to get back to where… "There is one body and one Spirit–just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call-- one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. " Eph 4:4-6

Complete unity is needed and an end to the scandal of Christian schism.

 

[prv]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

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!"237 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.

1399 The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. “These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all - by apostolic succession - the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy.” A certain communion in sacris, and so in the Eucharist, "given suitable circumstances and the approval of Church authority, is not merely possible but is encouraged."238

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."239 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."240

1401 When, in the Ordinary’s judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions.241

 

[THutch04]

Speaking from my experience growing up Episcopalian and belonging in both Episcopal and Anglican communities, many do accept the Real Presence. We were taught that when we are receiving the Eucharist we are receiving the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. We were not taught any definition such as transubstantiation or consubstantiation (honestly I’ve never met any strict Episcopalian or Anglican who held to consubstantiation). It was told to us that defining what specifically happens to the Eucharist is “putting a definition on what cannot be defineable.”

The Catholic Church does not welcome Episcopalians and Anglicans to Communion because of Apostolicae Curae, issued by Pope Leo XIII stating that Anglican (and therefore Episcopalian) Holy Orders were “absolutely null and utterly void.” Without a valid Ordination, one cannot confect the Eucharist.

 

[a_cermak]

I am an Episcopalian and I certainly do believe in the Real Presence. However, because I understand the Catholic Church’s rules, I would not go up to Communion, even though, in my case, I would be technically welcome to (I was baptized and confirmed Catholic and there is no overt act to join the Episcopalians as they accept all Catholic Sacraments). I would consider it an act of rudeness in most circumstances.

Now in a case of near death and an Episcopalian priest were not available, I would glady receive Anointing and Viaticum from a Catholic priest.

 

[Brendan]

The acceptance of the Eucharist in a Catholic Church is more than just accepting the concept of Real Presence.

It is the acceptance of the Real Presence as the Catholic Church teaches it, the Eternal unbloodied Sacrifice accomplished in persona Christi by the priest.

And that the Substance of the offering is well and truely changed, and remains changed as long as the accidents remain.

Anglican and Lutheran theology generally holds that the change in substance occurs in response to the faith of the assembly, not due to any special character of the celebrant. They also hold that the Substance reverts to bread and wine after the departure of the assembly (and thus no history of Eucharistic Adoration in those communities)

 

[a_cermak]

Brendan,

Some Episcopal Churches now do Eucharistic Adoration. My own parish does.

I’m not sure if it’s a continuation of the Oxford Movement or if it is the numbers of former Catholics having an impact on the Episcopal Church.

At my parish they even ring the bells.

 

[Walking_Home]

To manifest the Catholic Faith in the sacrament of Holy Communion-- includes not only the belief in the real presence but also in the need of the ministerial priesthood for consecration and confession (need to be in a state of grace).

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter%20III

[85.] Catholic ministers licitly administer the Sacraments only to the Catholic faithful, who likewise receive them licitly only from Catholic ministers, except for those situations for which provision is made in can. 844 §§ 2,3, and 4, and can. 861 § 2.[166] In addition, the conditions comprising can. 844 § 4, from which no dispensation can be given,[167] cannot be separated; thus, it is necessary that all of these conditions be present together.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

Canon 844

§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

 

[THutch04]

The acceptance of the Eucharist in a Catholic Church is more than just accepting the concept of Real Presence.

It is the acceptance of the Real Presence as the Catholic Church teaches it, the Eternal unbloodied Sacrifice accomplished in persona Christi by the priest.

And that the Substance of the offering is well and truely changed, and remains changed as long as the accidents remain.

Anglican and Lutheran theology generally holds that the change in substance occurs in response to the faith of the assembly, not due to any special character of the celebrant. They also hold that the Substance reverts to bread and wine after the departure of the assembly (and thus no history of Eucharistic Adoration in those communities)

I would disagree that a majority of Anglicans believe that (though I’ve known some that certainly do). And I can think of three Episcopal parishes in my county alone that practice Eucharistic Adoration.

 

[Chatter163]

I’m sorry, this is just not true. Most Anglicans and many Lutherans believe in literal transubstantiation. The reason they are not welcome to Communion in the Catholic church is that they are not Catholic, and believe their own sacrament to be valid when the Catholic Church has judged it not so.

Sorry, but it is quite true. Article 28 of Anglicanism’s 39 Articles explicitly deny transubstantiation by name, calling it a “Romish” doctrine. It is true that many Anglicans believe in it, and a few (such as I did, as a child in the Episcopal Church) even use the term. However, such individuals and groups are an extreme minority within that church and do NOT represent its mainstream, or any official teaching.

Also, Article 31 expressly denies the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist, another difficulty. Again, some Anglicans do believe in this, and use the term “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass,” but this does not change the fact that most do not use the term nor do they believe in it, and some are even repulsed by it.

Finally, the Episcopal Church has intercommunion with the Lutherans, and now accepts Lutheran ministers as clergy, even though they do not have the threefold ministry of bishops, priestasand deacons. What does that tell us?

 

[a_cermak]

In the States, the Articles are mainly considered a quaint artifact of an earlier period in time. They aren’t relevant to the Episcopal Church.

 

[Chatter163]

In the States, the Articles are mainly considered a quaint artifact of an earlier period in time. They aren’t relevant to the Episcopal Church.

Yes, but the point is that the Articles are still an expression, however dated, of what may be inferred to be Anglican doctrine. The fact that the Book of Common Prayer still lists them (even under the section “Historical Documents”) shows that they have relevance to the beliefs of that communion. They certainly have never been repudiated, and they still stand as an acceptable, if not authoritative, expression of traditional Anglican doctrine, no matter how embarrassing they may be to more Catholic-minded Anglicans.

 

[ComradeAndrei]

Regardless of what the Anglicans/Episcopalians believe, have believed, consider relevant etc. we know one thing for sure-they aren’t in Communion with the Holy See and as far as the Holy See is concerned (and thus all Catholics) they have invalid orders.

Thus, no matter how “catholic” the Anglican, we cannot allow intercommunion.

 

[mdgspencer]

This is not to knock the Episcopal Church, however it is true that in the 1890s the Catholic Church after an investigation said that Episcopal priests do not have valid orders, which would mean that during their services the bread and wine do not become the body and blood of Christ. If someone says that this occurs or that there is no real practical difference in this regards, this is not compatable with the Catholic view. I have heard, however, that some Episcopal priests received valid orders in the Twentieth Century from bishops in churches that have valid orders such as the Orthodox. This would be my own one qualification, though I doubt that there are many of these. I presume that when Episcopal priests become Catholic priests, they receive conditional ordination.