nlt@duke.UUCP (N. L. Tinkham) (02/22/85)
In reply to Vince Marchionni's article regarding some of the differences between Roman Catholic and Anglican worship and theology: > If I understood your postings then evidently you do recognize the valid form > of our ordination but I know that we don't recognize the validity of your > form. > > We do recognize as binding each others baptism and marriage since the > ministers of these need not be clergy in baptism and must be the couple > in marriage. Both the Anglican and the Roman traditions place high value on the concept of an unbroken Apostolic Succession. The "official" Anglican position (if there is such a thing) is that in both traditions the Succession is unbroken; the "official" Roman position is that the Succession has been broken in the Anglican tradition. Thus, the Anglican tradition recognizes Roman Catholic ordination as valid, but the Roman tradition does not recognize Anglican ordination. (I am not sufficiently well-informed at present to know when the alleged "break" was nor to decide which position is accurate.) > Which Creed do you use at Mass? (I thought it was Nicene). Yes, the Nicene Creed is used. > What is the position on the Real Presence? As I understand us we can not > recognize your consecration since the minister of the sacrament is not valid. It is difficult to find a precise definition of the Anglican understanding of the Real Presence. The most I am able to find in the Catechism is the following: "The sacraments are outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace, given by Christ as sure and certain means by which we receive that grace....The outward and visible sign in the Eucharist is bread and wine, given and received according to Christ's command.... The inward and spiritual grace in the Holy Communion is the Body and Blood of Christ given to his people, and received by faith." In my experience, although Anglicans will affirm that Christ is present in the Eucharist, they are reluctant to say exactly how. > I have difficulty in analyzing your words of consecration in relation to ours. > Please post yours and comment. The Prayer Book currently used in the United States provides six options for the wording of the prayer of consecration; they differ in the style of language used (traditional vs. contemporary) and in "tone" (stressing, e.g., penitence or the majesty of God or joy and celebration). The following excerpt is reasonably representative: [from Rite II, prayer A] "We celebrate the memorial of our redemption, O Father, in this sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. Recalling his death, resurrection, and ascension, we offer you these gifts. "Sanctify them by your Holy Spirit to be for your people the Body and Blood of your Son, the holy food and drink of new and unending life in him. Sanctify us also that we may faithfully receive this holy Sacrament, and serve you in unity, constancy, and peace; and at the last day bring us with all your saints into the joy of your eternal kingdom." Having heard the Roman Catholic prayer of consecration only a few times, I do not remember the words well enough to make a good comparison between the two. Perhaps you could post the words used in the Roman tradition, and then we can compare and discuss. (As I remember, though large portions of the service were identical, sometimes even word-for-word, the prayer of consecration was different.) Thanks, by the way, for the invitation to a constructive, interesting, non-flaming discussion. N. L. Tinkham duke!nlt