Not all Anglicans do believe in the Real Presence. Among Anglicans, you will find views of the Eucharist that range from what is virtually identical to transubstantiation to a mere memorial.
Exactly right! The reason for me is this: It causes scandal because by receiving it is saying that it’s the same thing. It might cause no scandal to the Protestants, but it does for the Catholics, especially naive catholics. Causing scandal is a sin! Ergo…you figure out the math?
The womenpriests do! Of course that is a WHOLE other issue!
But, I wonder if they have the same understanding as Catholics of transubstantiation – that is the substance of the bread and wine cease to exist and it is now the substance of the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, and not just that Jesus is present there ‘in’ the bread and wine like Jesus is present when 2 or 3 gather in His Name (or something similar)?
Only to Catholics it’s not just the real presence of Christ, it IS the Body and Blood of our savior.
Hmmm… Good question. I have no idea, but I doubt that they believe the bread has the Soul and Divinity of Christ.
thing is, the Orthodox aren’t bombarded with these questions and comments regarding the Real Presence or Open Communion
receiving Communion in a church implies unity with that church, that you agree what it teaches. “Non denominational” churches teach mostly Baptist doctrine and it conflicts with Catholic teaching on many points. Also, their Communion isn’t the Eucharist, it’s not consecrated.
I was refering to Catholic belief vs protestant in the understanding of the real presence. So I will add Othodox and Catholic vs protestant.
Note also that Orthodox and Catholic don’t share in each other’s Holy Communion, either, even though both understand it to be the Real Presence of Christ, and acknowledge each other’s to be a valid Communion - so, there is more to the lack of communion with Protestants than just the difference in belief about the Real Presence, as well - it’s also a matter of actual membership in the organization.
The position of the Catholic Church is that the Orthodox have valid Holy Orders, so their sacraments are valid. However, many traditional Orthodox (including a number of bishops) deny that the Catholic Church is a true Church, therefore, they also deny that Catholics have true sacraments.
Canon 844.2 tells us that a Catholic “may” receive the Sacraments from a non-Catholic Church that has valid Sacraments (and the Orthodox have valid Sacraments) ONLY when confusion or danger of error or indifferentism is avoided and ONLY when it is IMPOSSIBLE physically or morally to receive them from a Catholic minister
Thanks…I did not read your post as closely as I should have. I owe you an apology for putting words in your mouth.
Because we are compelled to fully accept all the teachings of the Church at which we are receiving commuion, for us to do this at a non-denom or other such protestant church would be a lie.
Lutherans, Anglicans/Episcopalians (officially), United Methodists Presbyterians, Reformed Church in America, Morovians, and the United Church of Christ all believe in some type of real presence but do not define it in identical terms.
Therein is the real split as I don’t see, feel, believe, or accept that a Catholic priest’s ordination is any more, and absolutely NO LESS, valid than that of any mainstream protestant pastor.
The ordination of a Catholic priest has a different intention than the “ordination” of a mainstream Protestant pastor. Is a Baptist pastor “ordained” to offer sacrifice?
Ah, the Anglican question. Japhy is right, even though a certain group like the Anglicans have an “ordination”, it’s invalid. For Anglicans, it’s because #1 they don’t have the understanding of the sacrificial priesthood and therefore their ordinations are invalid (which has ben pretty much confirmed by their willingness to confer “ordinations” on women, who cannot be validly ordained), and #2 falling from that is that they don’t have any valid bishops to give ordination anyways.