"I'm Catholic, just not *ROMAN* Catholic....."

  • Thread starter Thread starter CleverUserName
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
GKC said:
In general, no, IAW Apostolicae Curae. Which is why no Anglican would expect you to genuflect toward our tabernacles.

The possible exceptions are too theoretical to consider.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus
Click to expand...
Thank you!
 
Rejoice_Always said:
Does the RC recognize that the Episcopalians have the sacrament? I know the RC recognizes the Orthodox position on the Real Presence etc (though they, of course, do not reserve it since it is often intincted). Thanks for any insight and clarification you may offer.
Click to expand...
Actually, we do reserve the Eucharist in a tabernacle. Lambs which are to be reserved have a small amount of wine poured into them, and are then left in the tabernacle to dry.
 
Rejoice_Always said:
Does the RC recognize that the Episcopalians have the sacrament? I know the RC recognizes the Orthodox position on the Real Presence etc (though they, of course, do not reserve it since it is often intincted). Thanks for any insight and clarification you may offer.
Click to expand...
As someone else has said, I believe that the Orthodox do in fact reserve the Sacrament, though not for the purposes of adoration.

The official RC position is that we Anglicans lost apostolic succession in the sixteenth century, mostly because we adopted an ordination liturgy that did not express a Catholic theology of ordination (and by implication of the Eucharist–particularly with regard to a sacrificial concept of the priest’s ministry in the Eucharist). GKC can give you far more precise details, if you want them and he has the time and inclination (he’s done this dozens of times on this forum, so I wouldn’t blame him for getting a bit tired of the routine!).

That means that no matter what we may now believe, in the official RC view our priests are not Catholic priests and cannot “confect” the Eucharist.

Also, you need to realize that 16th-century Anglicans were far more Protestant than mainstream Anglicanism became later. There was a partial move toward Catholicism in the 17th century, and a far stronger and more radical one in the 19th century. This latter move in particular is controversial in some Anglican circles, but less so in the U.S. than elsewhere, partly because “low-church” Protestants have lots of other choices in the U.S., whereas in England (for instance) the mainstream of evangelicalism is arguably to be found within the national Church. (Hence my cracks about England and Australia in the previous post.)

Edwin
 
GKC said:
Anglicans are not things that one can generally generalize about.

But it is not rare. My parish did it, under our late rector.

GKC
Click to expand...
My parish in NC did it. The other two parishes I’ve participated in on a regular basis did/do not, although my parish in NJ did have a vigil on Holy Thursday evening, and my parish here did so one year. For the most part, though, my present priest (who hails from Maryland/northern Virginia, though his low-church origins have been modified by long sojourn in the Midwest) tends to avoid such Anglo-Catholic practices (my wife and I have been trying to get him to do veneration of the Cross on Good Friday for several years, to no avail).

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
My parish in NC did it. The other two parishes I’ve participated in on a regular basis did/do not, although my parish in NJ did have a vigil on Holy Thursday evening, and my parish here did so one year. For the most part, though, my present priest (who hails from Maryland/northern Virginia, though his low-church origins have been modified by long sojourn in the Midwest) tends to avoid such Anglo-Catholic practices (my wife and I have been trying to get him to do veneration of the Cross on Good Friday for several years, to no avail).

Edwin
Click to expand...
Vigil is always performed. Veneration of the Cross is not as regular, but was the former priest’s custom.The change in rectors also moved the sung Angelus after the sung Mass to a spoken Angelus at the Wed. evening Mass.
 
Contarini said:
As someone else has said, I believe that the Orthodox do in fact reserve the Sacrament, though not for the purposes of adoration.

The official RC position is that we Anglicans lost apostolic succession in the sixteenth century, mostly because we adopted an ordination liturgy that did not express a Catholic theology of ordination (and by implication of the Eucharist–particularly with regard to a sacrificial concept of the priest’s ministry in the Eucharist). GKC can give you far more precise details, if you want them and he has the time and inclination (he’s done this dozens of times on this forum, so I wouldn’t blame him for getting a bit tired of the routine!).

That means that no matter what we may now believe, in the official RC view our priests are not Catholic priests and cannot “confect” the Eucharist.

Also, you need to realize that 16th-century Anglicans were far more Protestant than mainstream Anglicanism became later. There was a partial move toward Catholicism in the 17th century, and a far stronger and more radical one in the 19th century. This latter move in particular is controversial in some Anglican circles, but less so in the U.S. than elsewhere, partly because “low-church” Protestants have lots of other choices in the U.S., whereas in England (for instance) the mainstream of evangelicalism is arguably to be found within the national Church. (Hence my cracks about England and Australia in the previous post.)

Edwin
Click to expand...
Yep.

GKC
 
Contarini said:
False.

Come to my parish and I’ll show you the reserved Sacrament. We will pardon you for refusing to genuflect.

Every Episcopal parish I can recall visiting has reserved the Sacrament–certainly all three that I’ve attended regularly in my 14 years of being an Episcopalian have done so.

Now I’m sure you can find some low-church parishes that don’t–probably a lot more in England and Australia and other such benighted places than in the U.S.!

Edwin
Click to expand...
**I stand firm that the belief in the Real Presence in the Episcopal Church and the Catholic Church are not the same. If they were - why do these two demoninations continue to be at odds?

BTW - why would you assume I would not genuflect - this is an insult to me. When I am in the presence of Jesus Christ - body blood soul and divinity - I ALWAYS genuflect. Will you do so in a Catholic Church?

**
ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur328.htm
 
Contarini said:
As someone else has said, I believe that the Orthodox do in fact reserve the Sacrament, though not for the purposes of adoration.

The official RC position is that we Anglicans lost apostolic succession in the sixteenth century, mostly because we adopted an ordination liturgy that did not express a Catholic theology of ordination (and by implication of the Eucharist–particularly with regard to a sacrificial concept of the priest’s ministry in the Eucharist). GKC can give you far more precise details, if you want them and he has the time and inclination (he’s done this dozens of times on this forum, so I wouldn’t blame him for getting a bit tired of the routine!).

That means that no matter what we may now believe, in the official RC view our priests are not Catholic priests and cannot “confect” the Eucharist.

Also, you need to realize that 16th-century Anglicans were far more Protestant than mainstream Anglicanism became later. There was a partial move toward Catholicism in the 17th century, and a far stronger and more radical one in the 19th century. This latter move in particular is controversial in some Anglican circles, but less so in the U.S. than elsewhere, partly because “low-church” Protestants have lots of other choices in the U.S., whereas in England (for instance) the mainstream of evangelicalism is arguably to be found within the national Church. (Hence my cracks about England and Australia in the previous post.)

Edwin
Click to expand...
I personally enjoy the anglican works The Principles Of Theology An Introduction To The Thirty-Nine Articles by Dr. W.H Griffth Thomas and Introduction To Dogmatic Theology On The Basis Of The Thirty-Nine Articles ( 1912 ) by E.A. Litton . 🙂
 
jmjconder said:
**I stand firm that the belief in the Real Presence in the Episcopal Church and the Catholic Church are not the same. If they were - why do these two demoninations continue to be at odds?

BTW - why would you assume I would not genuflect - this is an insult to me. When I am in the presence of Jesus Christ - body blood soul and divinity - I ALWAYS genuflect. Will you do so in a Catholic Church?

**
ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur328.htm
Click to expand...
I am certain that Contarini would do so. I do.

But he assumes you would not genuflect before an Anglican altar because the RCC teaching is that Anglicans do not confect a valid Eucharist. Body, blood, soul and divinity, per Trent, Session XIII, Canon 1.

GKC
 
I prefer the Catholic to Roman Catholic because I’ve ran into people who use the pc term ‘Roman Catholic’ for the term ‘Romist’. :blackeye:
 
Contarini said:
As someone else has said, I believe that the Orthodox do in fact reserve the Sacrament, though not for the purposes of adoration.

The official RC position is that we Anglicans lost apostolic succession in the sixteenth century, mostly because we adopted an ordination liturgy that did not express a Catholic theology of ordination (and by implication of the Eucharist–particularly with regard to a sacrificial concept of the priest’s ministry in the Eucharist). GKC can give you far more precise details, if you want them and he has the time and inclination (he’s done this dozens of times on this forum, so I wouldn’t blame him for getting a bit tired of the routine!).

That means that no matter what we may now believe, in the official RC view our priests are not Catholic priests and cannot “confect” the Eucharist.

Also, you need to realize that 16th-century Anglicans were far more Protestant than mainstream Anglicanism became later. There was a partial move toward Catholicism in the 17th century, and a far stronger and more radical one in the 19th century. This latter move in particular is controversial in some Anglican circles, but less so in the U.S. than elsewhere, partly because “low-church” Protestants have lots of other choices in the U.S., whereas in England (for instance) the mainstream of evangelicalism is arguably to be found within the national Church. (Hence my cracks about England and Australia in the previous post.)

Edwin
Click to expand...
Thank you for expanding on this, Edwin. 👍
 
seanman611 said:
What amazes me is that Eastern Orthodox Christians have been using the term “Catholic” for centuries and nobody whines about it. Anglicans have a shared history with Roman Catholics as well, however, some Roman Catholics seem “irked” that some Anglicans use the term. Get over it would be my response. 😃
Click to expand...
I concur.
 
jmjconder said:
**I stand firm that the belief in the Real Presence in the Episcopal Church and the Catholic Church are not the same. If they were - why do these two demoninations continue to be at odds?

BTW - why would you assume I would not genuflect - this is an insult to me. When I am in the presence of Jesus Christ - body blood soul and divinity - I ALWAYS genuflect. Will you do so in a Catholic Church?

**
ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur328.htm
Click to expand...
Well, you stand firmly correct, and in error, at the same time! There are Episcopalians who believe in transubstantation, and there are Episcopalians whose beliefs about the Eucharist range from essentially Lutheran, to Calvinist, to Zwinglian.
 
seanman611 said:
What amazes me is that Eastern Orthodox Christians have been using the term “Catholic” for centuries and nobody whines about it.
Click to expand...
Maybe its just taken as a standing reminder that the Catholics and Orthodox really need to get back together …
 
jmjconder said:
**No it does not. However it does bother me that you are referencing an article that is not Caholic.

All Catholics are with Eastern or Western Rite. All of them are in union with the Pope. The MAIN and ESSENTIAL difference between Catholics and other demoninations is the belief in the REAL PRESENCE - body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ at the Mass and after. The Episcopal Church does not reserve the Eucarhist…and why not - if it is truly Jesus Christ why would it suddenly not be. This teaching of the Episcopal Church actually contradicts itself.

If a 18 K gold necklace is truly 18 K - how can it suddenly NOT BE? If the Euahrist is the Body of Jesus Christ - how can it suddenly NOT BE?**
Click to expand...
Most Byzantine Rite parishes wouldn’t reserve the Eucharist as well. The priest will consume what is left of the Eucharist at the end of the Divine Liturgy. I don’t see how reserving the Eucharist has anything to do with the belief in the Real Presence.
 
jmjconder said:
**No it does not. However it does bother me that you are referencing an article that is not Caholic.

All Catholics are with Eastern or Western Rite. All of them are in union with the Pope. The MAIN and ESSENTIAL difference between Catholics and other demoninations is the belief in the REAL PRESENCE - body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ at the Mass and after. The Episcopal Church does not reserve the Eucarhist…and why not - if it is truly Jesus Christ why would it suddenly not be. This teaching of the Episcopal Church actually contradicts itself.

If a 18 K gold necklace is truly 18 K - how can it suddenly NOT BE? If the Euahrist is the Body of Jesus Christ - how can it suddenly NOT BE?**
Click to expand...
I am a former Episcopalian and every Episcopal church I have been in reserved the Eucharist, maybe not in a tabernacle front and centre, but often in an aumbry built into or hanging from a wall on the side. But they do reserve.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top