I would love to see the Anglican Communion and the Roman Church in full communion with one another. I honestly believe we have most things in common with one another. We both have full apostolic succession (sorry, Rome, but we do. All the way back to Peter and then to Jesus. Deal with it.) We both believe that Jesus is present at Holy Communion (granted, in a different form. Anglicans don't believe in a physical presence.) Why can't we just get along. It infuriates me that if a Roman Catholic comes to an Episcopal Church we will allow him or her to receive communion. As a matter of fact, we'll allow any Christian to receive communion. It's the Lord's table. Not Mother Anita's table. Not Charles' table. Not even the Episcopal church's table. The Lord's Table. But when I attend mass at a Catholic church, the sacrament of communion is denied me. I am not good enough for it, so says the pope. Well, the pope can go suck an egg. I don't need his permission to love and serve the Lord.
Whew! I get emotional over this. I should just let things go, but it's hard. I believe that Jesus came in the form of man to live among us to save ALL of us. I don't believe the Catholic church should change their doctrines on Holy Communion. I have no theological problem with them believing in transubstantiation. It doesn't undermine my faith at all. I do believe that they should say the same about my rejection of transubstantiation. Every time I receive communion I do it in the remembrance of Christ. So do they. We all accept Jesus' sacrifice. We all thank him for it. We all rejoice in the immeasurable love God has for us. I will publicly state here that I believe that any member of the Catholic Church and the Anglican Church and the Presbyterian Church and the Lutheran Church, and whatever church that sincerely serves God is my brother or sister in Christ. I believe we should just get along.
So quit fishing for our people, Rome.
Of course, on a side note, as a rather liberal Episcopalian, I'm ok with all the conservative cooks going over to Rome. Rome can have 'em!
Now, I know that at least some of my Catholic friends must read this blog. I'd honestly like to hear your comments. You know I love you.
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/world-news/detail/articolo/anglicani-anglicans-anglicanos-united-kingdom-gran-bretana-gran-bretagna-13118/
A few thoughts come to mind:
ReplyDelete(1) The Catholic Church doesn't require belief in transubstantiation. It requires belief in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The Church offers transubstantiation as an excellent explanation of that phenomenon - a model of faith seeking understanding - but one is welcome to reject the philosophical framework of substances, so long as one accepts in faith the true presence. The theologians throw some other fancy words in there, but that's the gist of it. I think a difference of belief still probably exists between Anglicans and Catholics - cf. those theologians' fancy words - but we do ourselves no favors by zooming in on transubstantiation itself, which is a red herring. Catholics are just as guilty of confusing this issue - maybe more so, since they should know better - than are Protestants.
(2) The fact that Catholics can receive communion at an Anglican church reminds me of a similar situation: Catholics are permitted by the Catholic hierarchy to receive the Eucharist in Orthodox Churches (ie, we believe they have succession, etc.). Likewise, we permit them to receive in ours. However, the Orthodox hierarchy does not have the same view of the matter, and so the Catholic Church asks both its own members and those of the Orthodox Churches not to receive in each other's churches, out of respect for the Orthodox teaching (with which it disagrees) and out of obedience to the Orthodox leadership. If that sounds unnecessarily messy, it is, but the brokenness of the Body of Christ is a messy business, and cannot always be healed as quickly or simply as we might like.
(3) It seems to me that one of the difficult questions in ecumenical dialogue - particularly between Catholics and Anglicans - is just how much one needs to believe to belong to the Church. How many doctrines are essential? Answers tend to be knee-jerk and unhelpful: either "How much is essential? EVERYTHING! You can't water down or throw out the TRUTH!" or "The Gospel is about love; it's about inclusion, not rules and doctrines." The first position confuses particular spiritualities and philosophical and theological speculations - which are, of themselves, good - with established doctrine. The latter position ignores the fact that even most "liberal" Christians would acknowledge certain doctrines as essential: the Incarnation, the Holy Trinity (three Persons - not two, not four...). We might welcome you to all our services and Bible studies, but if you don't believe those basic things, you're not a Christian. Meaningful dialogue focuses on those things that are truly essential, but Facebook polemics rarely shed much light on that matter.
(4) A friend of mine lived for some years in an ecumenical community in Ireland, Lebanon, and Belgium. They were committed to "ecumenism without compromise". The community committed itself to living as brothers in Christ, without (a) trying to convert one another or (b) settle upon the magic formula to which we can all agree (which is rarely ever found and usually meaningless when it is). As a practical matter, ecumenism cannot ask a brother to compromise his Catholic or Anglican or Presbyterian or Orthodox faith; it should support him in it and affirm that which is good in his faith. Differences should be acknowledged, certainly, and not papered over. Hasty attempts at forced unity are likely to result in a lot of frustration and bitterness. We need to work toward the unity of the Church, and pray for it each day; in the meantime, we carry on amidst those divisions as best we can.
Eloquently put, sir. Thanks for the comments, and let me say that I whole-heartedly agree with your statement in point 4 that we should pray for unity every day and support what is good in another's faith.
Delete