homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » From Roman Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: From Roman Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Exactly that. No squealing involved in either side.

If you must know the details, I was following a discussion between some Anglicans and Orfies on-line - not on this site - and during the course of that, one of the Anglican priests observed that he'd noticed a few Orthodox families turning up at his church and taking communion because their own Orthodox parish was some distance away and hard to get to by public transport.

The Orthodox priest politely pointed out his Church's position on that and asked the Anglican priest if he would mind pointing it out to those Orthodox people the next time they came to his church so that they could then deal with it as they saw fit. He didn't make any demands, that they should immediately crawl around to their priest's house on their hands and knees sueing for forgiveness ...

The Anglican priest admitted that he had not been aware of any restrictions on Orthodox receiving communion in other churches and readily agreed to notify his Orthodox guests of this the next time they came so that they could then make an informed decision.

That's not snitching.

No-one went to the Bishop. No-one went to these people's local Orthodox priest behind their backs and squealed on them.

Disagreeing with the Orthodox position on closed communion is one thing. Getting all uppity over the not unreasonable actions of both clergy involved is something else again.

On the Antidoran being crunchy. My experience has been that the services are so long that if it isn't stale by the time I've been given it, the pieces I take home for my wife and kids certainly are by the time I get back to them. That might be one reason why they don't eat it.

My wife looks at it daft. She comes from a very low church Anglican background and thinks that something mumby-jumbo-ey has been done to it, thereby rendering it unsafe ...

No, seriously, she doesn't think she'll get lurgy from it but she takes a dim view of anything that seems 'High'.

I've known her mum not receive communion in moderately high parishes because she gets alarmed at what they do around the altar there.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank you for the clarification Gamaliel. I am still not entirely happy with the Anglican priest taking on the role of instructor to the Orhodoxen.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6616 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
How else could it have been done?

Would it have been right for the Orthodox priest to ask for the name and contact details for the other Orthodox priest whose parishioners were taking communion at an Anglican church and then gone and snitched on them?

Or to have asked the Anglican priest to provide him with the names and addresses of the Orthodox visitors so that he could then contact them on his fellow Orthodox priest's behalf?

Would you seriously expect the Orthodox priest who had become aware of the situation to turn a blind eye and ignore it? What kind of integrity would that have shown?

It seems to me that however we cut it and whatever we think of the theology and canonical issues involved, both men acted with integrity.

Given what I know of the situation I can't see how either of them could have acted otherwise without harming their own consciences.

Do you have any suggestions for how else they could have dealt with this very sensitive pastoral issue?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Turn it round, what if an Anglican priest became aware that some non-Orthodox were turning up an Orthodox parish and doing something or other that was meant to be the preserve of Orthodox Christians and the opportunity arose for him to point this out to the priest in charge?

Would he be abrogating responsibility by informing the Orthodox priest and expecting him to deal with it in some way?

What was the Orthodox priest in the instance I gave supposed to do? Find out where the Anglican parish was and drive over there one Sunday on the off-chance that Orthodox visitors might turn up on spec and stop them in the narthex and say, 'Oi! Don't think you can receive communion in here!' thereby causing a very public and embarrassing scene?

Or find out where the Orthodox parish was, contact the priest and demand that he lay on taxis or other forms of transport to ensure that all his parishioners can get to the Liturgy on a Sunday?

Sure, the UK isn't very big but if I didn't have a car and wanted to get to my nearest English-speaking Orthodox parish I'd either have to get on my bike or cadge a lift from an Orthodox family who live nearby to me or else pay for a taxi to take me there at great expense. There'd be no way I could do it by bus.

I'd imagine the Orthodox in the incident I've related are migrants without their own means of transport, but I don't know for sure.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suppose the problem is that the grace shown by the Anglican priest seems like a one-way street. We Anglicans (usually) dispense the Eucharist to whoever asks for it - generally believing that this decision is between God and the individual. So it is entirely plausible that an Orthodox person would receive next to a Baptist and a Roman Catholic - none of whom may, according to their own rubric receive in the Anglican church and who may not even officially recognise each others churches as Christian.

If they normally receive in their own church, that's formally enough.

The Anglican might understand that this openness would not be available to him if the situation was reversed - that's just the decision we've made to be hospitable to others, there is no obligation on anyone else to do the same.

But if the Orthodox priest then says that the Orthodox couple should not be receiving, this puts him in a bit of a quandary. The Orthodox couple should be able to receive according to the Anglican rules but not the Orthodox ones. This is an Anglican service which they've volunteered to attend.

How can the Anglican priest talk to the Orthodox couple about it without showing he had been discussing them with the Orthodox priest? Why should he given that they're doing nothing wrong according to the Anglican church?

Maybe they're thinking of leaving the Orthodox community anyway, and according to the usual Anglican formation, it is up to the individual and God if they take part in an Anglican Eucharist.

It is a very awkward situation.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9825 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's news to me that Baptists aren't allowed to take communion in Anglican churches according to their own rubrics, which Baptist churches are we talking about?

I regularly took communion in Anglican churches when I was a Baptist.

As for the Orthodox/Anglican incident I related, the Orthodox priest didn't ask his Anglican counterpart not to receive the Orthodox as they came up for communion or try to forbid him from doing so - as if he would have been able to anyway, but he simply informed the Anglican priest of the Orthodox position and asked him to let the Orthodoxen know lest they weren't aware of it.

It would be entirely up to the Orthodox families what they did with that information.

If they were on their way out of Orthodoxy and wanted to become Anglican, then that's another issue. But as far as the Anglican priest was aware they were simply coming to his church for communion because their own was relatively inaccessible.

From my encounters with the Orthodox I've found some 'ethnic' or 'cradle' Orthodox to be fairly hazy about what their Church teaches - same with many RCs I've known over the years. I don't say that as a criticism, simply an observation. More than once I've found myself explaining some aspect or other of RC teaching - as far as I understood it - to RCs who appeared unaware of what their own Church taught on the matter.

I've also heard that some of the Greeks in the UK assume that the Anglicans are simply the British equivalent of the Orthodox and aren't necessarily aware that there are differences in practice/doctrine and so on.

I don't know the background of the Orthodox families in the story.

If I were one of the Orthodox concerned, I think I'd prefer to have the situation pointed out to me so that I could then make an informed decision as to what to do about it.

So, if that were the case, then the Orthodox priest will have been doing them a favour.

It'd be up to them what they did next. Whether they continued taking communion with the Anglicans or went to see their own priest about it or stopped going to church, any church, altogether ...

It would be entirely up to them.

It would be their responsibility.

The only responsibility that the clergy involved, on both sides, would have is to point out the situation and to act according to the rubrics of their own Church.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can't see how it's the responsibility of any Anglican priest to deal with the failure of other parts of the church to educate their faithful about their own rules. Doubly so when the rules are predicated on the assumption that said priest is a charlatan.
Posts: 2787 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's news to me that Baptists aren't allowed to take communion in Anglican churches according to their own rubrics, which Baptist churches are we talking about?

You are showing your ignorance and also picking up on a detail that doesn't matter anyway. Put it down.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9825 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I only asked, mr cheesy. If I'm ignorant, then please enlighten me.

I know it's not a major point, but I genuinely wasn't aware that there were any Baptist rubrics, at least not in the BUGB, about whether Baptists couldn't or shouldn't receive communion elsewhere, whether in Anglican settings or any other.

I was simply curious, that's all.

I wouldn't be surprised if such was the case among Grace Baptists or Reformed Baptists, but I was genuinely unaware it was an issue to more 'General Baptists'.

If it is, then I'll bow to your superior knowledge and thank you for telling me something I didn't know.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:

I was simply curious, that's all.

I wouldn't be surprised if such was the case among Grace Baptists or Reformed Baptists, but I was genuinely unaware it was an issue to more 'General Baptists'.

If it is, then I'll bow to your superior knowledge and thank you for telling me something I didn't know.

I didn't say anything about Baptist Union nor did I specify the kind of Baptists - it doesn't matter anyway. There are many different kinds of Baptists, some of whom would get into trouble in their church for taking the Eucharist in an Anglican church.

Way to go to completely miss the point by focussing on an irrelevant detail.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9825 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I only asked, mr cheesy. If I'm ignorant, then please enlighten me.

I know it's not a major point, but I genuinely wasn't aware that there were any Baptist rubrics, at least not in the BUGB, about whether Baptists couldn't or shouldn't receive communion elsewhere, whether in Anglican settings or any other.

I was simply curious, that's all.

I wouldn't be surprised if such was the case among Grace Baptists or Reformed Baptists, but I was genuinely unaware it was an issue to more 'General Baptists'.

If it is, then I'll bow to your superior knowledge and thank you for telling me something I didn't know.

There is no issue with General Baptists (BUGB linked) sharing communion at an Anglican church provided they are invited to do so (there are a very few Anglican Churches who extend the invite only to "confirmed" believers). I've participated in this way on many occasions with no worries whatsoever.(I've even served at a couple).

The same is true in reverse - there are very very few Baptist churches with closed tables. Those that are, tend to have separate communion services. I can't think of one in England but there's a couple in Scotland.

Grace and other Baptists aren't prevented from sharing communion but not many would venture into a non Grace Church anyway. The ones that do would happily share communion.

Posts: 3694 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
For what it's worth, I've agreed with everything Gamaliel has said in the recent posts on this thread, and with virtually nothing that anyone else has said, except for Exclamation Mark who has just cross-posted with me. Gamaliel, as far as I'm concerned, you get a [Overused] .

[ 14. January 2017, 14:50: Message edited by: Enoch ]

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7233 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:


The same is true in reverse - there are very very few Baptist churches with closed tables. Those that are, tend to have separate communion services. I can't think of one in England but there's a couple in Scotland.

Just wrong. There are many churches - with and without the label Baptist - on the Baptist/Evangelical spectrum who have closed communion.

quote:
Grace and other Baptists aren't prevented from sharing communion but not many would venture into a non Grace Church anyway. The ones that do would happily share communion.
Grace Baptist is not a denomination but a group of churches in fellowship with each other. There are various other groups on this end of spectrum who are linked in various ways. So there is no consistent view on this.

Views on Anglicans vary. Some will not engage at all with Anglicans and believe that Communion services offered by the church are invalid.

If you are in a church that has closed communion and you then take communion in and Anglican church you may find that your membership is questioned.

That's just a fact, like it or lump it.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9825 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Arethosemyfeet - the Anglican priest didn't 'need' to comply with the Orthodox priest's request.

He could have said, 'Sod off, it's none of your business.'

But he didn't. He showed grace, even though he'd been put in an awkward position.

It wasn't the particular priest he was engaging with who was at fault for the failure of the Orthodox Church to educate it's adherents properly.

That would be like blaming the vicar down the road in a neighbouring parish for an Anglican in my own parish for not being aware of this, that or the other Anglican rubric.

Having an issue with closed communion is one thing, getting all uptight with an individual priest for mentioning that to an Anglican one is something else again.

Both men were in a dilemma. Should the Orthodox guy say something or let it slide? Should the Anglican accede to his request or ignore it for whatever reason?

I still think the pair of them acted appropriately under the circumstances. What if the Orthodox were ever to find out by some other means that they weren't supposed to receive communion at a 'heterodox' church?

They would be well within their rights to go to the Anglican priest and say, 'Did you know about this? If so, why didn't you tell us ...?'

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533

 - Posted      Profile for Pancho   Author's homepage   Email Pancho   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I can't see how it's the responsibility of any Anglican priest to deal with the failure of other parts of the church to educate their faithful about their own rules. Doubly so when the rules are predicated on the assumption that said priest is a charlatan.

When I worked at a store which sold CDs and DVDs, I once helped a lady who was looking for a certain comedy her son wanted to watch. I asked her about it, took her the section and helped her find it. We talked about it, I asked her questions, I found out it was for her son and his friend, and I found out they were about 11 or 12 years old. I asked her, "You realize this is a pot comedy, right?". She said no, she didn't, she didn't know it was that kind of movie. She immediately decided that no, she wasn't going to get that type of movie for her kid and she was very grateful that I had explained it to her. She left and I lost a sale.

It's not about dealing with the failures of another church to teach its faithful, it's about helping the individual before you and his or her needs. If you're aware of the consequences for that person then for your own good and that of the person it should be brought up. If you don't let people know what they're getting into if you know it might be a problem, then I think it's a kind of neglect of that person's needs. So you mention it, and if that person is okay with it, it's on them. If that person is not okay with it, there are other ways too help and you still have your own flock. Either way, your conscience is clear.

[ 14. January 2017, 17:15: Message edited by: Pancho ]

--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"

Posts: 1980 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Tomorrow morning I shall be preaching at an Anglican church which is as far up the candle as it goes in this neck of the woods.

Of course, Anglican rules forbid me from presiding at the Eucharist - but I shall certainly receive it with no trouble at all.

Sadly, this isn't possible at the RC church next door to ours - but that's not because the Baptists have any rubric to the effect. (Yes, I know that some, probably quite a few, Baptists would hesitate before receiving at a RC Mass. But that's not a "rule").

[ 14. January 2017, 17:29: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9218 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So, outside of transubstantiation churches, why would anyone care?

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16601 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:


They would be well within their rights to go to the Anglican priest and say, 'Did you know about this? If so, why didn't you tell us ...?'

And the Anglican priest would be well within their rights to say "I'm not going to go out of my way to discourage anyone from coming to the Lord's table", both to the Orthodox priest and to the communicants.
Posts: 2787 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533

 - Posted      Profile for Pancho   Author's homepage   Email Pancho   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So, outside of transubstantiation churches, why would anyone care?

St. Paul warned against receiving communion in an unworthy manner ( 1 Corinthians 11:27 ) so even if one's church doesn't profess belief in transubstantiation there are many Christians who would care.

--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"

Posts: 1980 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Point of information: is an Anglican priest legally required to offer communion to everyone living in the parish, should they request it?
Posts: 9218 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So, outside of transubstantiation churches, why would anyone care?

St. Paul warned against receiving communion in an unworthy manner ( 1 Corinthians 11:27 ) so even if one's church doesn't profess belief in transubstantiation there are many Christians who would care.
That works both ways: Christians who don't believe in it tend not to like receiving Communion in churches which do.
Posts: 9218 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533

 - Posted      Profile for Pancho   Author's homepage   Email Pancho   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So, outside of transubstantiation churches, why would anyone care?

St. Paul warned against receiving communion in an unworthy manner ( 1 Corinthians 11:27 ) so even if one's church doesn't profess belief in transubstantiation there are many Christians who would care.
That works both ways: Christians who don't believe in it tend not to like receiving Communion in churches which do.
Yes, I understand that. I was just trying to express the thought that lots of Christians care about the manner and place where they receive communion, whatever their beliefs about the Eucharist might be.

--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"

Posts: 1980 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So, outside of transubstantiation churches, why would anyone care?

St. Paul warned against receiving communion in an unworthy manner ( 1 Corinthians 11:27 ) so even if one's church doesn't profess belief in transubstantiation there are many Christians who would care.
But what does that mean? I would understand a non-believer or "heretic", but not so much between mainstream Christian churches.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16601 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It seems to me that the closed communion thing is the kind of thing that people from an open communion background love to bunch their panties over every fucking time it comes up. To the point of ripping the fibres even. It might as well be a dead horse.

Meanwhile we've completely railroaded this thread which was about one person's personal decisions, and how to navigate the world given his/her decisions.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62942 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not involved in any communion and, IMO, many of the issues are winner v. loser and special clubs rather than true barriers. Not saying all. But I am trying to understand the issue.

As to the OP, s/he hasn't been very present on the thread. If that is because the rest of us are too noisy, I apologise for my part of that.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16601 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533

 - Posted      Profile for Pancho   Author's homepage   Email Pancho   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So, outside of transubstantiation churches, why would anyone care?

St. Paul warned against receiving communion in an unworthy manner ( 1 Corinthians 11:27 ) so even if one's church doesn't profess belief in transubstantiation there are many Christians who would care.
But what does that mean? I would understand a non-believer or "heretic", but not so much between mainstream Christian churches.
I think that's getting away from the thread topic, and if you do a search you'll probably find other threads on open/closed communion, etc. on the Ship.

--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"

Posts: 1980 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Arethosemyfeet - the Anglican priest didn't 'need' to comply with the Orthodox priest's request.

He could have said, 'Sod off, it's none of your business.'

But he didn't. He showed grace, even though he'd been put in an awkward position.

So even though the Orthodox do not recognise the validity of Anglican orders, an Anglican soi-disant priest is to be trusted in passing on a doctrinal point to those who have come to him to receive God's Grace? I'm sorry, but in my book that's not on. If he has an open table, it's open to all who come to it; if there's a limit, such as ours of baptism, it's open to al within that limit.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6616 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Point of information: is an Anglican priest legally required to offer communion to everyone living in the parish, should they request it?

Not unless something has changed that I'm unaware of - when I was growing up the line was "anyone who would normally receive communion in their own church...", and if one were going by the strict rubric of the 1662 BCP then it was certainly possible to refuse communion on the grounds of grave unrepented sin:

quote:
If a Minister be persuaded that any person who presents himself to be a partaker of the holy Communion ought not to be admitted thereunto by reason of malicious and open contention with his neighbours, or other grave and open sin without repentance, he shall give an account of the same to the Ordinary of the place, and therein obey his order and direction, but so as not to refuse the Sacrament to any person until in accordance with such order and direction he shall have called him and advertised him that in any wise he presume not to come to the Lord's Table; Provided that in case of grave and immediate scandal to the Congregation the Minister shall not admit such person, but shall give an account of the same to the Ordinary within seven days after at the latest and therein obey the order and direction given to him by the Ordinary; Provided also that before issuing his order and direction in relation to any such person the Ordinary shall afford him an opportunity for interview.

Posts: 2787 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I have a offspring who is Anglican, dating an RC. They take communion at either. And yes, it was discussed at both. Closed and open are relative terms I guess.
Posts: 10832 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Point of information: is an Anglican priest legally required to offer communion to everyone living in the parish, should they request it?

Not unless something has changed that I'm unaware of - when I was growing up the line was "anyone who would normally receive communion in their own church...", and if one were going by the strict rubric of the 1662 BCP then it was certainly possible to refuse communion on the grounds of grave unrepented sin:

quote:
If a Minister be persuaded that any person who presents himself to be a partaker of the holy Communion ought not to be admitted thereunto by reason of malicious and open contention with his neighbours, or other grave and open sin without repentance, he shall give an account of the same to the Ordinary of the place, and therein obey his order and direction, but so as not to refuse the Sacrament to any person until in accordance with such order and direction he shall have called him and advertised him that in any wise he presume not to come to the Lord's Table; Provided that in case of grave and immediate scandal to the Congregation the Minister shall not admit such person, but shall give an account of the same to the Ordinary within seven days after at the latest and therein obey the order and direction given to him by the Ordinary; Provided also that before issuing his order and direction in relation to any such person the Ordinary shall afford him an opportunity for interview.

The position on the admission of children to communion has changed - it used to be that one first had to be confirmed but that is no longer the case. In other words I don't think a general duty to offer communion to anyone who desires, unlike with baptism or marriage, exists in the CofE.
Posts: 2787 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
It seems to me that the closed communion thing is the kind of thing that people from an open communion background love to bunch their panties over every fucking time it comes up. To the point of ripping the fibres even. It might as well be a dead horse.

Meanw.hile we've completely railroaded this thread which was about one person's personal decisions, and how to navigate the world given his/her decisions.

Not from me. I don't agree with closed communion, but it's not for me to make the rules for the Orthodox, the RC's, the Grace Baptists (a new one for me) or whoever. I'll go to their services and participate as much as I'm allowed to under their rules

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6616 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This tangent has become too 'noisy' and I apologise if I've played a part in turning the volume up to 11.

Context is everything and in the context of the discussion as it played out it seemed perfectly reasonable for the Orthodox priest to venture that request - simply that the Anglican pass something on as a point of information. Of course the Anglican priest could have told him where to get off, but he didn't. He was very gracious and could see the problem and also the Orthodox guy's suggestion as a possible solution.

Under the circumstances, I can't see what else he could have done without causing offence or picking a fight or disrespecting someone else's tradition.

If the two of them wanted to have a discussion about the validity or otherwise of particular forms of communion then I'm sure they could have done so.

As it was, there was a particular pastoral issue to resolve. Turning round to the Orthodox guy and saying, 'Fuck off, I don't give a rat's arse what you think you beardy bastard but I'm convinced of the validity of my own eucharistic celebration ...' isn't going to resolve anything.

Whereas, informing the Orthodox that he was more than happy for them to receive communion himself but it had come to his attention that the Orthodox rubrics didn't allow it, would certainly help as the Orthodox could then make an informed decision.

That's got nothing to do with the validity or otherwise of the Anglican Eucharist but everything to do with sorting out protocols in a win/win kind of way.

If I were the Orthodox involved, I'd be grateful to the Anglican priest for pointing it out, because then I could make an informed decision.

But this is a tangent and we've probably spent long enough on it.

I'm a member of The Fellowship of St Alban & Sergius so I do have some idea of how Anglican / Orthodox dialogue works out in practice. In some ways, reasonably well, in others, very badly ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
It seems to me that the closed communion thing is the kind of thing that people from an open communion background love to bunch their panties over every fucking time it comes up. To the point of ripping the fibres even. It might as well be a dead horse.

Meanw.hile we've completely railroaded this thread which was about one person's personal decisions, and how to navigate the world given his/her decisions.

Not from me.
[Roll Eyes]

quote:
So even though the Orthodox do not recognise the validity of Anglican orders, an Anglican soi-disant priest is to be trusted in passing on a doctrinal point to those who have come to him to receive God's Grace? I'm sorry, but in my book that's not on.


[ 14. January 2017, 21:11: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62942 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stoic29
Apprentice
# 18712

 - Posted      Profile for Stoic29     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm actually in favor of "closed communion" since the Eucharist cannot be detached from the community. In Orthodoxy the priest is supposed to guard the chalice. That should be true in any Eucharistic gathering.

--------------------
Öd’ und leer das Meer

Posts: 36 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2017  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Anglicans generally practice open communion, so that might be a problematic for you. In the Episcopal Church, some priests not only offer communion to all baptized Christians, which is the official teaching of the church, they offer it to anyone who presents him/herself at the communion rail. Jesus didn't require that people be baptized before he broke bread with them -- why should we be pickier than Jesus?
Posts: 24368 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, I still maintain that there is not a mainstream church that doesn't and/or hasn't gone beyond, behind or around Jesus.
Not arguing the justifications for this*, but still.


*Not in general. In specific I have and likely will again.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16601 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Well, I still maintain that there is not a mainstream church that doesn't and/or hasn't gone beyond, behind or around Jesus.

Does that invalidate their efforts to emulate him?
Posts: 24368 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Well, I still maintain that there is not a mainstream church that doesn't and/or hasn't gone beyond, behind or around Jesus.

Does that invalidate their efforts to emulate him?
Generally speaking, no. Though I reserve the right to qualify this when it comes to specifics.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16601 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Jesus didn't require that people be baptized before he broke bread with them -- why should we be pickier than Jesus?

I am not at all picky about who I break bread with. But breaking bread <> the sacrament of the eucharist. Jesus broke bread with a lot of people. He instituted the last supper with the twelve.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62942 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290

 - Posted      Profile for Horseman Bree   Email Horseman Bree   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In my local situation, any Orthodox have had to drive for two hours plus pay $50 bridge toll to get to an island where there is a functioning Orthodox community. I have no idea what the local Anglican priests do beyond telling people at the beginning of the service that any person baptised in the Names of the Trinity could take communion, as this was between that person and God. We have RCs who take the bread but not the wine; we have Baptists who do not communicate; we do not ask anyone about the reason for their (non)participation. Oh, and we do buffet suppers to which all our immediate physical neighbours are invited, and we don't fuss about breaking bread with (un)believers. That is not in our paygrade.

Being grumpy about this online just shows that a bit more discernment on the teachings of Jesus might be a good thing.

--------------------
It's Not That Simple

Posts: 5366 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290

 - Posted      Profile for Horseman Bree   Email Horseman Bree   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Going back a long ways upthread: Mr. Cheesy:
quote:
Personally, I think almost everyone I know in the corner of the Anglican church I'm most familiar with wouldn't be even slightly interested in justifying it as a "true church", they'd just talk about how God loves them and works through the church.
Some of the "angels-on-a-pin-head" arguments look kinda weird. What is so unChristian about breaking bread together?

I do know one priest (ACC) who would be mystified by the idea that a non-congregant might want to take Comminion, but all the rest I know would be in the mode I described just now. My own congregation would be in the mode described by mr. c. above: God loves people. Why is this so difficult?

And maundering on about which ancient quarrel will govern your choice of church totally misses the point about there being "church" in the first place. If trying to live by the Two Great Commandments is something that gets in the way of your Christian walk, then the problem is not the ancient quarrels. Rather, it is a misunderstanding of what we are all trying to do, here, now.

Standing in a parking lot, debating whether this makes you a car, is kinda irrelevant when you don't have the wheels.

--------------------
It's Not That Simple

Posts: 5366 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've just noticed the item about Orthodox communing in an Anglican church. For many years, this was common in my home town (stinky eastern Ontario rustbelt city of 50,000) where the small Arab Christian community went to the Anglican church for Easter and Xmas communion. As a young person, I asked about this and was told that this was all right because it was too expensive to pay for the priest to come from Montréal except for special occasions.

The people involved either: a) knew darn well what the Orthodox church's teaching was but also knew that there was no priest available, or b) thought it was OK on the basis of a statement by Saint Raphael of Brooklyn (later clarified and reversed by him).

Since then, I have spoken with other Orthodox in similar situations, who take their children to Anglican churches as there are no Orthodox facilities available. Again, they know what the rules are, but feel that this is better than nothing. Orthodox clergy I have spoken to are aware of this in almost every situation and shake their heads in understanding despair.

In the situation abovementioned, about the only thing to be done is to let the wandering Orthodox know where they might find a church and leave it up to them. And if one of the kosher (canonical) Orthodox churches tries to set up a local franchise, then assist them with publicity, and let individuals decide what they wish to do.

Posts: 6093 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In the instance I cited, the Orthodox knew were the nearest Orthodox parish was but couldn't always get there on a Sunday due to travel difficulties.

What they didn't know was their own Church's rules about receiving communion elsewhere.

So pointing that out to them doesn't seem to be unreasonable. They can then decide whether to continue receiving communion at their nearest Anglican parish or not.

Pointing such a thing out to them in no way compromises the position of those who are happy to serve communion to any baptised Christian - or whoever comes up to receive it. How often do any priests check the 'credentials' of people who come up to receive communion?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
*snip* What they didn't know was their own Church's rules about receiving communion elsewhere.

So pointing that out to them doesn't seem to be unreasonable. They can then decide whether to continue receiving communion at their nearest Anglican parish or not.

Pointing such a thing out to them in no way compromises the position of those who are happy to serve communion to any baptised Christian - or whoever comes up to receive it. How often do any priests check the 'credentials' of people who come up to receive communion?

I think it is reasonable to suggest to people that they check on their own church's policies-- given the plural nature of Orthodoxy, all an Anglican can do is point out to (e.g.) Constantinople's or Belgrade's or Skopje's or Moscow's or Tuckahoe's or Kiev's or Antioch's perspective, so it's just better to tell them to find out themselves, rather than try to interpret Orthodox canon law and spiritual discipline for them (my own grumpy perspective is that Anglican clergy are often uneven in interpreting Anglican canon law and spiritual discipline for Anglicans).
Posts: 6093 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well yes, which is no more than the Orthodox priest was asking his Anglican counterpart to do. He wasn't expecting him to know all the ins and outs, simply asking him to direct the Orthodox to their own priest for clarification.

Anyhow, this is a tangent ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15404 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stoic29
Apprentice
# 18712

 - Posted      Profile for Stoic29     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Pointing such a thing out to them in no way compromises the position of those who are happy to serve communion to any baptised Christian - or whoever comes up to receive it. How often do any priests check the 'credentials' of people who come up to receive communion?

When I was Orthodox I served in the Altar, which meant that I also had to hold the Communion cloth under the Chalice while the Eucharist was administered to the faithful. If someone approached the Chalice that our priest did not recognize, he would politely question where they were from, are they properly prepared to receive the Gifts, etc. Some people were politely turned away and it was never a big deal.

When I traveled, I always contacted the parish priest before Sunday Liturgy to let him know that I was going to attend his parish and where I was from. They really appreciate this because they are entrusted to "guard the Chalice".

I imagine in Anglicanism this would not happen. But how would the Anglican priest know if there are "wolves" approaching the Lord's Table?

--------------------
Öd’ und leer das Meer

Posts: 36 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2017  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Anyhow, this is a tangent ...

Golly, wish someone had noted this half a page ago.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62942 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stoic29:


I imagine in Anglicanism this would not happen. But how would the Anglican priest know if there are "wolves" approaching the Lord's Table?

As we've been trying to tell you: he/she doesn't know. If he/she happens to know then on very rare occasions something can be done. But in most Anglican churches in most parts of the world, the priest is not going to ask you who you are before offering you the Eucharist.

That just isn't how it works.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9825 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
At least one of the priests at the Cathedral in Oban is in the habit of asking your name prior to celebrating, but I'm pretty sure that's so he can address you by name when administering the sacrament rather for exclusionary purposes.
Posts: 2787 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Stoic29
Apprentice
# 18712

 - Posted      Profile for Stoic29     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
That just isn't how it works.

Understood, and I certainly don't mean to be argumentative. But why not?

--------------------
Öd’ und leer das Meer

Posts: 36 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2017  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools