6 ms·

> I'm an anglican priest > reinforce what the Eucharist is about in the first place What would that be? I mean to you. I am Catholic and I am entirely aware o

> I'm an anglican priest > reinforce what the Eucharist is about in the first place What would that be? I mean to you. I am Catholic and I am entirely aware of what it is about to us. I am not trying to dunk on you or start an argument.

patmorgan23 4y ago
Remembering and embodying the ideals of Christ, by loving your neighbor and taking care of your community?
- exolymph 4y ago
  Catholic commenter is probably alluding to transubstantiation, the metaphysical transformation of bread and wine into Christ's body and blood, and asking whether that's also an Anglican thing. That's my interpretation.
cbfrench 4y ago
For me, what’s it’s primarily “about,” of course, is the making present in an unbloodied manner the eternal and propitious Sacrifice of Christ, “proclaim[ing] the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Cor 11:26). And in the Eucharist we receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ truly present under the species of bread and wine. I would imagine that our Eucharistic theologies are generally not dissimilar. But what I meant by that particular comment was that there was a fitting consonance between using bread whose proceeds went toward helping those in need and the works of love and mercy to which the Eucharistic Lord calls us. Edit: And I certainly didn’t read any dunking into your question! Anglican Eucharistic theology is sort of all over the place. The vast majority of Anglicans adhere to some understanding of the Real Presence (and the Anglican theological tradition has generally tended to exclude memorialist understandings of the Eucharist, fwiw). I tend to have a very “Anglo-Catholic” sacramental theology.
- User23 4y ago
  With full respect for your freedom of conscience, should you ever wish to discern whether to become Catholic the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter[1] makes retaining many if not the majority of your Anglo-Catholic traditions possible. They permit married priests and use a liturgy that is strongly influenced by the Book of Common Prayer while being in full communion with Rome. In fact, the chaplain for Catholic Answers is an Anglican priest who converted[2]. I find the segments where he’s on quite interesting. Many people are surprised to learn that there are Catholic priests who are married with children! [1] https://ordinariate.net/ https://ordinariate.net/ [2] https://www.catholic.com/profile/fr-samuel-keyes https://www.catholic.com/profile/fr-samuel-keyes
  - walrus01 4y ago
    Serious question, but isn't anything that is a "married priest" not actual catholicism, as it would be recognized and approved by church HQ in Rome? I'm confused because it does seem somehow officially okay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Ordinariate_of_the_Chair_of_Saint_Peter?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Ordinariate_of_the_Ch...
    - the_jesus_villa 4y ago
      Not answering your question but Patricia Lockwood (one of my favorite authors) wrote a very amusing memoir called Priestdaddy about growing up with a father who was a Catholic priest (having converted from Anglicanism I believe). The book also doesn't really answer your question, but it's fantastic despite the awful name.
    - aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
      Clerical Celibacy is a disciple rather than a dogma. It is especially prominent in the Latin rite. There are other rites in the Roman Catholic Church and some of them have married priests. When priests convert to Catholicism they are usually allowed to remain priests if they wish. They often have to be actually ordained. If they were married and ordained both stick. Neither is reversible. If they are married and "ordained" they can still be ordained.
    - 4y ago
- 4364Synapse 4y ago
  I don't have much to add to the conversation, but as an Anabaptist (Mennonite), it is great to see various denominations getting along in a manner expected of us. It warms my heart, and gives me hope, that the brotherhood of God's children is alive and well.
  - aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
    Well, HN is not for flame wars or religious dispute. And I don't think it would be very effective. More seriously, I think there is still hope for a full reunification. The Miaphysite heresy was resolved in 1990 after 1549 years. The Great Schism could go another 500 on that track record, and the protestants another 1000. At the rate things are going though, most denominations will just disappear from evaporation and increasingly lax doctrine long before that.
    - kjellsbells 4y ago
      > most denominations will just disappear from evaporation and increasingly lax doctrine long before that. Curious about this statement. Are you saying that doctrinal purity is required? I would have thought that Anglicanism especially tolerated an incredibly wide set of viewpoints. I still recall a one time Bishop of Durham saying that we had no right to insist on the veracity of the Virgin Birth. Is doctrinal laxity something measurable or simply a complaint the orthodox make when their fellow believers have moved away from them but are simply in the process of coalescing around a new set of principles?
      - alexvoda 4y ago
        I think purity and lack of purity are both required for a religion to be a successful meme. To much purity and the religion faces a "no true scotsman" decline resulting in schisms and deconversion To little, and it becomes too diluted to hold any significance. The way a religious macromeme manages the level of purity in an evolving social environment is natural selection at work.
      - aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
quercusa 4y ago
Not to speak for an Anglican, but the 39 Articles state: XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a lpartaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ. Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.
- cbfrench 4y ago
  Of course, the real question is what status the 39 Articles have in Anglican theology. They’re not a confessional document in the same way as the confessions you find in Lutheran or Calvinist traditions. (That tends not to be the Anglican style of doing theology, which tends to be much less systematic.) That isn’t to say they’re not instructive, just that their status as an authoritative statement is vexed and somewhat dependent on jurisdiction. They’re a part of the tradition, but they need to be contextualized alongside the rest of the tradition to be understood and valued properly, I believe. A better guide to our Eucharistic theology is the Book of Common Prayer. (Really, Books of Common Prayer, since each national church has its own.) Our Eucharistic liturgies tend to emphasize a “high” view of what transpires in the Mass.
Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
> I am Catholic and I am entirely aware of what it is about to us. Well, can you enlighten the rest of us?
Maursault 4y ago
hoc facite in Meam commemorationem Of course, He spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic, but even in clumsy translation to any language it remains a strong candidate for the most brilliant and, simultaneously, the most poetic idea ever spoken aloud.

patmorgan23 4y ago

Remembering and embodying the ideals of Christ, by loving your neighbor and taking care of your community?

exolymph 4y ago
Catholic commenter is probably alluding to transubstantiation, the metaphysical transformation of bread and wine into Christ's body and blood, and asking whether that's also an Anglican thing. That's my interpretation.

cbfrench 4y ago

For me, what’s it’s primarily “about,” of course, is the making present in an unbloodied manner the eternal and propitious Sacrifice of Christ, “proclaim[ing] the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Cor 11:26). And in the Eucharist we receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ truly present under the species of bread and wine. I would imagine that our Eucharistic theologies are generally not dissimilar. But what I meant by that particular comment was that there was a fitting consonance between using bread whose proceeds went toward helping those in need and the works of love and mercy to which the Eucharistic Lord calls us. Edit: And I certainly didn’t read any dunking into your question! Anglican Eucharistic theology is sort of all over the place. The vast majority of Anglicans adhere to some understanding of the Real Presence (and the Anglican theological tradition has generally tended to exclude memorialist understandings of the Eucharist, fwiw). I tend to have a very “Anglo-Catholic” sacramental theology.

User23 4y ago
With full respect for your freedom of conscience, should you ever wish to discern whether to become Catholic the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter[1] makes retaining many if not the majority of your Anglo-Catholic traditions possible. They permit married priests and use a liturgy that is strongly influenced by the Book of Common Prayer while being in full communion with Rome. In fact, the chaplain for Catholic Answers is an Anglican priest who converted[2]. I find the segments where he’s on quite interesting. Many people are surprised to learn that there are Catholic priests who are married with children! [1] https://ordinariate.net/ https://ordinariate.net/ [2] https://www.catholic.com/profile/fr-samuel-keyes https://www.catholic.com/profile/fr-samuel-keyes
- walrus01 4y ago
  Serious question, but isn't anything that is a "married priest" not actual catholicism, as it would be recognized and approved by church HQ in Rome? I'm confused because it does seem somehow officially okay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Ordinariate_of_the_Chair_of_Saint_Peter?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Ordinariate_of_the_Ch...
  - the_jesus_villa 4y ago
    Not answering your question but Patricia Lockwood (one of my favorite authors) wrote a very amusing memoir called Priestdaddy about growing up with a father who was a Catholic priest (having converted from Anglicanism I believe). The book also doesn't really answer your question, but it's fantastic despite the awful name.
  - aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
    Clerical Celibacy is a disciple rather than a dogma. It is especially prominent in the Latin rite. There are other rites in the Roman Catholic Church and some of them have married priests. When priests convert to Catholicism they are usually allowed to remain priests if they wish. They often have to be actually ordained. If they were married and ordained both stick. Neither is reversible. If they are married and "ordained" they can still be ordained.
  - 4y ago
4364Synapse 4y ago
I don't have much to add to the conversation, but as an Anabaptist (Mennonite), it is great to see various denominations getting along in a manner expected of us. It warms my heart, and gives me hope, that the brotherhood of God's children is alive and well.
- aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
  Well, HN is not for flame wars or religious dispute. And I don't think it would be very effective. More seriously, I think there is still hope for a full reunification. The Miaphysite heresy was resolved in 1990 after 1549 years. The Great Schism could go another 500 on that track record, and the protestants another 1000. At the rate things are going though, most denominations will just disappear from evaporation and increasingly lax doctrine long before that.
  - kjellsbells 4y ago
    > most denominations will just disappear from evaporation and increasingly lax doctrine long before that. Curious about this statement. Are you saying that doctrinal purity is required? I would have thought that Anglicanism especially tolerated an incredibly wide set of viewpoints. I still recall a one time Bishop of Durham saying that we had no right to insist on the veracity of the Virgin Birth. Is doctrinal laxity something measurable or simply a complaint the orthodox make when their fellow believers have moved away from them but are simply in the process of coalescing around a new set of principles?
    - alexvoda 4y ago
      I think purity and lack of purity are both required for a religion to be a successful meme. To much purity and the religion faces a "no true scotsman" decline resulting in schisms and deconversion To little, and it becomes too diluted to hold any significance. The way a religious macromeme manages the level of purity in an evolving social environment is natural selection at work.
    - aeneasmackenzie 4y ago

quercusa 4y ago

Not to speak for an Anglican, but the 39 Articles state: XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper. The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a lpartaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ. Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.

cbfrench 4y ago
Of course, the real question is what status the 39 Articles have in Anglican theology. They’re not a confessional document in the same way as the confessions you find in Lutheran or Calvinist traditions. (That tends not to be the Anglican style of doing theology, which tends to be much less systematic.) That isn’t to say they’re not instructive, just that their status as an authoritative statement is vexed and somewhat dependent on jurisdiction. They’re a part of the tradition, but they need to be contextualized alongside the rest of the tradition to be understood and valued properly, I believe. A better guide to our Eucharistic theology is the Book of Common Prayer. (Really, Books of Common Prayer, since each national church has its own.) Our Eucharistic liturgies tend to emphasize a “high” view of what transpires in the Mass.

Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago

> I am Catholic and I am entirely aware of what it is about to us. Well, can you enlighten the rest of us?

Maursault 4y ago

hoc facite in Meam commemorationem Of course, He spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic, but even in clumsy translation to any language it remains a strong candidate for the most brilliant and, simultaneously, the most poetic idea ever spoken aloud.