Ship of Fools: Kingston, Ontario

Thread: Kingston, Ontario Board: Ecclesiantics / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=008483

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

Unfortunately, the Via Media board seems dead but unmarked. (Blowing dust, tumble weeds...) I apologise for highjacking this board for a sectarian purpose, but I seem to have no option.

I may be spending some time in Kingston ON. Could people give some thumbnail sketches of the different Anglican churches in Kingston? My preference is for Merbecke, a Protestant eucharistic theology, high-ish style without being Anglo-Catholic. I've been only to two: St George's and Trinity on Wolfe Island.

Thoughts? Thanks much in advance.

Posted by Utrecht Catholic (# 14285) on :

Very strange to read this request.
What do you mean by a Protestant Eucharistic Theology ?
The Canadian Church has a collection of excellent Eucharistic Prayers,certainly richer than those of Common Worship,the Church of England.
Furthermore,these Prayers are quite Catholic.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

I can claim only a glancing acquaintance with Common Worship, so I'll take what you say for granted.

As to your question about my question, I have encountered Anglican priests who affirm transubstantiation, in clear contravention of Article XXVIII of the Articles of Religion; and, similarly, process at Corpus Christi. So, my question is not so strange.

Posted by Utrecht Catholic (# 14285) on :

You can still believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist,as the Eastern Orthodox do, without using the term Transubstantiation.
Do you still believe in everyting which is mentioned in the 39 Articles ? Some of them are really outdated,typical 16th century stuff.

I am not so in favour of Processions of the Blessed Sacrament, on the otherhand I am glad that many Anglican cathedrals and churches have the Reservation of the Blessed Sacrament.
A good and ancient practise.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

I understand the differentiation between the real presence and transubstantiation, and I know some Anglicans who "go all in".

As to everything in the Articles, your point is well taken, but for me XXVIII is not optional.

Completely off topic, I've wondered whether your name is a reference to the OCC. Yes?

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

Transubstantion, as I understand it, is a philosophical theory, not a doctrine. The BCP clearly believes in the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.

With regard to Utrecht Catholic's point, I don't know of any cathedral in the C of E which does not reserve the Sacrament. Maybe Bradford? And that's only 1/3rd of a cathedral these days anyway.

And the fact that 'the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about..' .etc doesn't mean that we can't do it.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Transubstantion, as I understand it, is a philosophical theory, not a doctrine. The BCP clearly believes in the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.

With regard to Utrecht Catholic's point, I don't know of any cathedral in the C of E which does not reserve the Sacrament. Maybe Bradford? And that's only 1/3rd of a cathedral these days anyway.

And the fact that 'the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about..' .etc doesn't mean that we can't do it.

1) I was under the impression that transubstantiation was doctrine in the RCC. I'm prepared to be corrected on this point.

2) Out of curiosity, how is it that Bradford is but 1/3 of a Cathedral? I'm not up on your UK ecclesia-politics.

3) It does depend on one's reading of XXVIII. You're right that it doesn't explicitly forbid veneration/procession of the sacrament, but I'd argue that from the tenor of the Article, and the Articles generally, one could easily interpret it as an abjuration of the practice; that, at the very least, not being commanded, it is, at least, suspect.

4) The points raised are worth discussion, but, while interesting, are irrelevant. My question was quite geographically specific. So, to re-rail the discussion, I welcome comment on Kingston.

5) I'm also quite willing to engage the ancillary points raised - on a separate thread.

Posted by marsupial. (# 12458) on :

Wish I could be more helpful, but my Kingston experience too is limited to St George's and may be older/less extensive than yours. I'm not sure we actually have any shipmates with regular experience of Kingston Anglicanism.

But while I'm here an old story about St. George's from a choir friend of mine. George Maybee was the music director at St. George's for many years from about 1942 until his death in 1973. Among many other more important things, he was known for always answering the phone "St. George's Cathedral, George speaking."

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by marsupial.:
But while I'm here an old story about St. George's from a choir friend of mine. George Maybee was the music director at St. George's for many years from about 1942 until his death in 1973. Among many other more important things, he was known for always answering the phone "St. George's Cathedral, George speaking."

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

From what others have informed me, the Diocese of Ontario in which Kingston is the See City, is historically low-church. Actually with the exception of the Diocese of Toronto, most of Ontario would probably fall on the low church end of the spectrum.

Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on :

As far as I can see the 'real presence' argument is completely tangential to this thread. Accepting it does not make you Catholic, well not unless you want to count John Calvin as Catholic.

Jengie

[ 04. May 2017, 09:48: Message edited by: Jengie jon ]

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Angloid:
[qb]

2) Out of curiosity, how is it that Bradford is but 1/3 of a Cathedral? I'm not up on your UK ecclesia-politics.

I'm sorry to have hi-jacked your thread, but since you indicate curiosity, the quick answer is that Bradford diocese has been subsumed in Leeds (aka "West Yorkshire and the Dales') which is now a diocese with three cathedrals.

But to follow up your OP, I'm at a loss to understand what you mean by 'a Protestant Eucharistic theology'. Some people would include all Anglicans, as well as Lutherans and Calvinists, under the heading of Protestants. That means that any theology of the eucharist adopted by any of them would be 'a protestant eucharistic theology.' So a term so broad as to be meaningless.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

I assume he means "an understanding other than transubstatiation," which is a specific understanding of the Real Presence that is indeed doctrine in the Roman Catholic Church.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

It is,as Nick Tamen so rightly points out the doctrine of the Catholic Church that Christ is really and truly present in the consecrated bread and wine - the REAL PRESENCE, as it is known.

The Catholic catechism quotes St John Chrysostom who declares ;It is not man that causes the things offered to become the Body and Blood of Christ......The priest,in the role of Christ pronounces the words,but their power and grace are God's THIS IS MY BODY,he says and these words transform the things offered.

The catechism quotes further St Ambrose of Milan,'Be convinced that this is not what nature formed,but what the blessing has consecrated.....The power of the blessing prevails over that of nature because by the blessing nature itself is changed.

The doctrine of the Catholic church ( and many others) is the Real Presence.The Council of Trent has merely said that ;this change the Holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called 'tansubstantiation'.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

Sorry - of course it is not 'tansubstantiation' but rather 'transubstantiation'.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

marsupial, thank you for the best laugh I've had today!

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

Anglican_brat's contribution fits with my own experience.

I will say, that what I thought to be a simple question (for Anglicans in Ontario) turned out to be an invitation for folk to bring anything to the table. That rather muddies the waters.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

And, I thank Nick Tamen for reiterating what I thought to be clear.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:

quote:
Originally posted by marsupial.:
But while I'm here an old story about St. George's from a choir friend of mine. George Maybee was the music director at St. George's for many years from about 1942 until his death in 1973. Among many other more important things, he was known for always answering the phone "St. George's Cathedral, George speaking."

And the conversation continues: "Is that Saint George?' 'Maybee.'

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

My only experience of that diocese was at the cathedral, and the early morning service was what we would call Prayerbook Catholic. Historically there is a strong Irish (therefore, low) strain in the diocese, but its first bishop, John Travers Lewis was Tractarian. I think it safe to say that it would be difficult to find parishioners who thought of transubstantion or real presence, but it might be possible in Kingston, as it is a university city.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0