questionsforepiscopaloranyonewhoknows

[billkarr]

I’ve been to an Episcopal church and the priest and decon ate the host that where left over. I thought that you put the hosts in a tabernacle for services or shutins like the Catholics. I know that you don’t believe in transubstaciation but believe in real presence because Jesus said this is my Body and this is my blood and when the priest repeat these word that what the bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood. This might not be the right forum to ask these questions. So Does anyone know an episcopal forum? God bless

 

[Lazerlike42]

As you said, Episcopalians do not believe in transubstantiation. This means that when the service is over, the bread is nothing other than bread. IThey do not believe it is not the body of Jesus, so they have no need to keep it anywhere. In a Catholic Church, the bread is never bread after it is consecrated and is always the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ, so it is kept in a special place.

 

[Contarini]

No, Lazerlike, you are wrong. Episcopalians are not of one mind about the Real Presence, though we all believe in it in some sense (OK–it’s hard to say that all Episcopalians believe in anything, but in my experience people who hold a purely symbolic view are extremely rare and their opinions are certainly not supported by our liturgy). Many Episcopalians do believe that Christ remains present after the end of the liturgy. Even those who are not sure about it tend to be rather agnostic rather than saying that it is “just bread.” That, again, is pretty rare in my opinion.

Most Episcopal churches do have tabernacles. However, I know that some do not. Consuming the elements after the liturgy is surely a legitimate alternative.

In my former church in NC, our belief was different from that of Catholics only in being a little vaguer, and our practice was no different at all. My current parish is more Protestant, but we do have a tabernacle where consecrated hosts are reserved. The main problem is with the consecrated wine. The normal custom is to finish it off (isn’t this also the custom in the Catholic Church?). At the 8 AM liturgy I attend, the altar server (this service pretty much draws only adults, BTW) drinks about half of what is left, and the priest drinks the rest. However, some days there’s a lot left, and the priest doesn’t like to drink it all. When I’m the server I try to drink off as much as possible before handing it to her, but sometimes she still doesn’t finish it. Then I try to get to it in the sacristy before it gets dumped down the piscina (the same apparatus you have in the Catholic Church with a pipe that goes straight into the earth). The last time this happened I didn’t get to it before one of the members of the altar guild had mixed it with the water from the lavabo bowl. I admit that I was a bit queasy about drinking it (which was probably silly since I’m sure the rector has clean fingers!), so I let her (the altar guild lady) pour it down the piscina.

I tell this story in order to be honest–I know this is not how Catholics would do it. But we certainly do not think that consecrated bread and wine can be treated the same way as unconsecrated.

Edwin

 

[MariaG]

Contarini:

No, Lazerlike, you are wrong. Episcopalians are not of one mind about the Real Presence, though we all believe in it in some sense (OK–it’s hard to say that all Episcopalians believe in anything, but in my experience people who hold a purely symbolic view are extremely rare and their opinions are certainly not supported by our liturgy). Many Episcopalians do believe that Christ remains present after the end of the liturgy. Even those who are not sure about it tend to be rather agnostic rather than saying that it is “just bread.” That, again, is pretty rare in my opinion.

Most Episcopal churches do have tabernacles. However, I know that some do not. Consuming the elements after the liturgy is surely a legitimate alternative.

In my former church in NC, our belief was different from that of Catholics only in being a little vaguer, and our practice was no different at all. My current parish is more Protestant, but we do have a tabernacle where consecrated hosts are reserved. The main problem is with the consecrated wine. The normal custom is to finish it off (isn’t this also the custom in the Catholic Church?). At the 8 AM liturgy I attend, the altar server (this service pretty much draws only adults, BTW) drinks about half of what is left, and the priest drinks the rest. However, some days there’s a lot left, and the priest doesn’t like to drink it all. When I’m the server I try to drink off as much as possible before handing it to her, but sometimes she still doesn’t finish it. Then I try to get to it in the sacristy before it gets dumped down the piscina (the same apparatus you have in the Catholic Church with a pipe that goes straight into the earth). The last time this happened I didn’t get to it before one of the members of the altar guild had mixed it with the water from the lavabo bowl. I admit that I was a bit queasy about drinking it (which was probably silly since I’m sure the rector has clean fingers!), so I let her (the altar guild lady) pour it down the piscina.

I tell this story in order to be honest–I know this is not how Catholics would do it. But we certainly do not think that consecrated bread and wine can be treated the same way as unconsecrated.

Edwin

Thanks for sharing Edwin. I am truly gladdened to hear that. For although I read the explanations from knowledgable Catholics on why Protestants do not have a true Consecration since they do not have valid orders, blah blah blah, and acknowledge that if that is what my church teaches, they are right. I still have doubt because I think to myself that all things are possible with Christ and I would be heartsick if Christ were actually present and not treated properly.

So just drink it all up and I’m sure your pastor will appreciate it!

God Bless,
Maria

 

[Pious]

Contarini:

Most Episcopal churches do have tabernacles. However, I know that some do not. Consuming the elements after the liturgy is surely a legitimate alternative.

Edwin

That is true, when I was a server in the Anglican church, we did not have a tabernacle in my former church, so any bread and wine that was left over was consumed by the vicar and myself if there was to much for the vicar.

 

[billkarr]

MariaG:

Thanks for sharing Edwin. I am truly gladdened to hear that. For although I read the explanations from knowledgable Catholics on why Protestants do not have a true Consecration since they do not have valid orders, blah blah blah, and acknowledge that if that is what my church teaches, they are right. I still have doubt because I think to myself that all things are possible with Christ and I would be heartsick if Christ were actually present and not treated properly.

So just drink it all up and I’m sure your pastor will appreciate it!

God Bless,
Maria

Thats other thing I don’t understand about the Catholic Church.They say that the Episcopal Church don’t have valid eucharist. That if you take it all you’re getting is bread and wine.Well if thats the case and I’m not saying it is, but wants the harm of taking it you can get the same thing at home. And by taking it it might show the Catholic Church promotes Chistian unity in witch Jesus wanted. Iam not putting Catholics down I’m one myself yet. Just questioning some of their beliefs and rules.

 

[carol_marie]

billkarr:

Thats other thing I don’t understand about the Catholic Church.They say that the Episcopal Church don’t have valid eucharist. That if you take it all you’re getting is bread and wine.Well if thats the case and I’m not saying it is, but wants the harm of taking it you can get the same thing at home. And by taking it it might show the Catholic Church promotes Chistian unity in witch Jesus wanted. Iam not putting Catholics down I’m one myself yet. Just questioning some of their beliefs and rules.

Are you asking what’s the harm of a Catholic taking communion in another church? The harm is that is promotes too much unity… it is basically taking what we hold most dear to our faith - the Eucharist - and substituting it for a symbol… and when we particiapte, it tells everyone that the substitute is perfectly ok - and it’s not.

I am all for recognizing what we DO have in common - namely the common belief in Jesus Christ as Lord - but there are difference between the Catholic Faith & Protestants and communion is a HUGE one that we shouldn’t pretend doesn’t exist. It’s a matter of standing firm on our principals.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The Byzantine Churches do this at the end of the Divine Liturgy. The Tabernacle only contains enough for emergency reasons. Anything left over a the end of the Divine Liturgy is consumed by the Deacon or Priest.

I had this discussion with one of the priests here in the formation house and he said that the Vatican frowns on the current way things are being done in the Roman Church. That is the use of the reserved Body from the Tabernacle for Mass. That the priest should consecrate enough for the Mass and what is in the Tabernacle should only be used in emergency cases.

 

[Glac]

Just to add: The fact that the consecrated bread is consumed after the service is actually a sign that we (I’m Anglican, albeit Church of England) believe it’s not ‘just bread’ anymore. The Finnish Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, but also believe that after the service the bread turns back to regular bread (well, church ‘wafers’, but you get the point), and just put the hosts back with the unconsecrated bread. So the same ‘wafer’ can get consecrated many times. I don’t know what Lutherans in other countries do/believe.

BTW, the Lutheran church where our services are held in Helsinki is, as far as I know, the only Lutheran church in Finland with a Tabernacle: it’s ours (i.e. the Anglicans’), and we keep some consecrated hosts there. The Lutheran Bishop didn’t allow for a lamp, though, but we know He is there (and yes, I know Catholics don’t believe this).

Glac

 

[Anglican77]

I am an Episcopal and I believe in transubstantiation. When we are give Communion, the Reverend or Lay Person says “This is body of Christ” or “This is the blood of Christ, cup of salvation”. Would they say “this is” if they really meant “this represents”?

 

[MariaG]

billkarr:

Thats other thing I don’t understand about the Catholic Church.They say that the Episcopal Church don’t have valid eucharist. That if you take it all you’re getting is bread and wine.Well if thats the case and I’m not saying it is, but wants the harm of taking it you can get the same thing at home. And by taking it it might show the Catholic Church promotes Chistian unity in witch Jesus wanted. Iam not putting Catholics down I’m one myself yet. Just questioning some of their beliefs and rules.

Because it is promoting a FALSE unity. Just because I am relieved at an emotional level that those who believe in the Real Presence and take good care of what they believe to be Our Lord, does not make it right to receive communion in their churches just as it is not right for them to have communion in ours.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[billkarr]

I’m a very liberal Catholic. I question the infallibity of the pope, why can’t priests get married or even women priests, I don’t go to private confession I wait until they have a comunal service. I believe in the real presence but not transubstanciation. Why should we name something we will never understand how it happens let it remain a mystery. I was told that I would make a better Episcopalian than Catholic. Thats why I started looking into the Episcopal Church. The only thing I don’t understand is why did they elect a gay bishop of N.H. and they might pass a same sex marriage service. How do the Episcopalians reading this feel about it. And if it would happen would you remain in the church? God bless you all

 

[THutch04]

To the first question:

In my old Episcopal church, we had a very small congregation, so the priest would break one large Host as he distributed. Consecrated wine would always be consumed if there was extra. I have seen other Episcopalian and Anglican churches that do have Tabernacles though.

As for the second question:

I hope they don’t pass a same-sex marriage service. I think that opens up the door for a lot more possibilities…I’m already leaving the Anglican (TAC) Church, but if I were Episcopalian and that happened, I would have to strongly consider leaving. There would be other reasons involved as well, but some of the recent developments certainly would not push me to remain in the Church.

 

[a_cermak]

I’m a former Catholic who has moved over to the Episcopal church. I have gay friends and family so I am pleased that they are allowing a commitment ceremony in my parish. I’m not sure if it should be defined as required for all parishes though. As for the gay bishop, why not? As long as he adequately does his job and teaches the faith correctly I don’t see a problem. Certainly he seems a good fit for his diocese. I don’t believe Bishop Spong is gay, but I’m far more scandalized by him.

The Episcopalian church has a wide diversity within it. There are 39 article Episcopals that don’t believe in the Real Presence and do believe in predestination and Anglo-Catholics who are Catholic in practice in all things except Papal Primacy. It all depends on the parish. That’s why it puzzles me that gay marriage would be the straw that broke the union. With all those knotty theological issues not dividing us, it seems odd that homosexual sexuality would.

For me, I’m grateful to have found a Church where I feel so at home. I’ve got the grace of the Sacraments and the blessing of not having to be judgemental or censorious towards my gay family and friends. I’ve got a Church where a woman is as acceptable as a man to God at the altar. And I’ve got a Church where I have the freedom to vote for any one or party I please with no one calling it sin.

I have nothing against Catholicism, I just don’t fit in there. Just as others wouldn’t feel comfortable in the Episcopal church. At least we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[carol_marie]

a_cermak:

I’m a former Catholic who has moved over to the Episcopal church. I have gay friends and family so I am pleased that they are allowing a commitment ceremony in my parish. I’m not sure if it should be defined as required for all parishes though. As for the gay bishop, why not? As long as he adequately does his job and teaches the faith correctly I don’t see a problem. Certainly he seems a good fit for his diocese. I don’t believe Bishop Spong is gay, but I’m far more scandalized by him.

The Episcopalian church has a wide diversity within it. There are 39 article Episcopals that don’t believe in the Real Presence and do believe in predestination and Anglo-Catholics who are Catholic in practice in all things except Papal Primacy. It all depends on the parish. That’s why it puzzles me that gay marriage would be the straw that broke the union. With all those knotty theological issues not dividing us, it seems odd that homosexual sexuality would.

For me, I’m grateful to have found a Church where I feel so at home. I’ve got the grace of the Sacraments and the blessing of not having to be judgemental or censorious towards my gay family and friends. I’ve got a Church where a woman is as acceptable as a man to God at the altar. And I’ve got a Church where I have the freedom to vote for any one or party I please with no one calling it sin.

I have nothing against Catholicism, I just don’t fit in there. Just as others wouldn’t feel comfortable in the Episcopal church. At least we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.

I am not trying to go into the attack mode here… I just wanted to point out that it seems like you’ve found a faith that fits **your **personal views - whereas, when I became Catholic, I believe I found a faith that reflects God’s views.

 

[Lazerlike42]

a_cermak:

I’m a former Catholic who has moved over to the Episcopal church. I have gay friends and family so I am pleased that they are allowing a commitment ceremony in my parish. I’m not sure if it should be defined as required for all parishes though. As for the gay bishop, why not? As long as he adequately does his job and teaches the faith correctly I don’t see a problem. Certainly he seems a good fit for his diocese. I don’t believe Bishop Spong is gay, but I’m far more scandalized by him.

The Episcopalian church has a wide diversity within it. There are 39 article Episcopals that don’t believe in the Real Presence and do believe in predestination and Anglo-Catholics who are Catholic in practice in all things except Papal Primacy. It all depends on the parish. That’s why it puzzles me that gay marriage would be the straw that broke the union. With all those knotty theological issues not dividing us, it seems odd that homosexual sexuality would.

For me, I’m grateful to have found a Church where I feel so at home. I’ve got the grace of the Sacraments and the blessing of not having to be judgemental or censorious towards my gay family and friends. I’ve got a Church where a woman is as acceptable as a man to God at the altar. And I’ve got a Church where I have the freedom to vote for any one or party I please with no one calling it sin.

I have nothing against Catholicism, I just don’t fit in there. Just as others wouldn’t feel comfortable in the Episcopal church. At least we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.

If you’re making decisions of your faith based on where you are most comfortable, you halfway to hell.

Remember,

“For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.”

“He that refuses instruction despises his own soul; but he that hears reproof gains knowledge.”

 

[a_cermak]

I also believe that God speaks through the Episcopalian liturgy, that He imbues Her Sacraments and that her priests are valid.

I am also comfortable there, but if I didn’t believe the above, I would not be Episcopalian.

 

[Lazerlike42]

a_cermak:

I also believe that God speaks through the Episcopalian liturgy, that He imbues Her Sacraments and that her priests are valid.

On what basis do you believe this?

 

[billkarr]

U OTE=Lazerlike42]On what basis do you believe this? If you attend a Catholic or Episcopal or any other church you should believe that the church is valid or why go there. I don’t think that gay should be bishops or priest. Because they teach the bible witch states their way of life is sinful. But they should have the right to go to any church they want and get the sacarments without a hassle. For we all sin no one is worthy of the eucharist and it not with held from us. For Jesus said those without sin cast the fist stone. Maybe I was wrong about what I said above. priest do sin so maybe their sin should not stop them from being one.