Why Evangelical megachurches are embracing (some) Catholic traditions

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It discusses the idea of validity of Anglican orders. Fascinating
 
Yep. But be cautious when using “generally” and “Anglicans” in the same sentence. Generally, you’re safe but sometimes…

Yes. Even handed article, that, on two of my long time hobbies and posting topics. Containing stuff I’ve posted on for many years.

History is fascinating. Complicated, too.
 
Last edited:
In general, some historical points I’ve made, over the years. On Hank and on Apostolicae Curae.
 
@TheLittleLady but what point does it make about Episcopalians or Anglicans believing in the Real Presence like Catholics?
 
Yes validity of Episcopal and Anglican orders has been discussed here ad nauseum in the
almost 11 years I have been here at CAF.
 
My guess might be that it shows that Anglicans, who don’t accept Apostolicae curae as anything affecting them, might think their orders were as valid, for confecting any sacrament, as was necessary.

It’s what Anglicans like me think. And certainly true for Anglicans who consider transubstantiation to be a perectly acceptable idea of how the wheels go around, in the Eucharist.
 
As there are many, many branches of Anglicanism/Episcopalism, one would need to undertake a study of each group/branch doctrinal papers.

@GKMotley is a resident expert, perhaps he could give a primer for the beliefs of various groups?
 
In my experience in being Episcopalian and
Anglican we were never taught you must believe in the Real Presence or that Jesus is present in the wine and Host. In fact I was never really taught anything. I always assumed we were re-enacting the Last Supper. Until I began looking into being Catholic, I didn’t even know Catholics believed and taught about the Real Presence.
I was never Anglo-Catholic so I don’t know what they believe.
As far as Episcopalians and Anglicans I always thought each person possibly had their own beliefs about Holy Communion,
but there was not a specific teaching like the
Catholic church.
 
@GKMotley yes your (name removed by moderator)ut here to all things
Anglican are definitely helpful and insightful.
 
There is a reason why we Catholics do things the way that we do.
They were handed down to us at the Last Supper.
 
GKMotley is not such a ninny. (He is likely some other sort of ninny).

He will make general (?) statements. Many branches, many flavors, many dimensions of Anglicans. Once possible to keep track. Now harder. New and more creative modes of motleydom have been made.

He will address particular questions, as best he may. Dodging where he must.
 
Last edited:
Careful. I once got into a trap asserting that, as against consubstantiation.

It wasn’t pretty.
 
Maybe, but my understanding is that the main branches of Lutheranism object to consubstatistion.
 
My understanding is to defer to the most assertive and coherent Lutheran.
 
Last edited:
Well yes, and no. While individual Anglicans are generally free to believe within certain broad strokes, the various churches do make certain pronouncements. For example TEC in their Book of Common Prayer do profess to real presence in the Eucharist, even if churches in the low tradition aren’t held to that.
 
Always helps to specify which Anglican one is speaking of. When in doubt, ask. When unable to, refrain from specificity. One never knows. And this covers many points of belief and faith and praxis.
 
I don’t know what Protestants you are talking about. When Lutherans have a communion service, they say that they do have the body and blood of Christ there. The difference is that they say it is both body and blood–and bread and wine. And, no, I never heard the word transubstantiation when I was a Lutheran. But we were told we were consuming the body and blood of Christ. It certainly is not “pretend” to Lutherans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top