Real presence question

Discussion in 'Sacraments, Sacred Rites, and Holy Orders' started by Religious Fanatic, Apr 10, 2018.

  1. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,710
    Likes Received:
    2,506
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    The articles and the prayerbook don't speak for themselves, just as Scripture doesn't. Everything exists in a web of meaning and context and tradition. According to the written words, episcopacy is necessary, and according to the lived and known tradition as recorded for hundreds of years from that point to today, no non-episcopal ordinations were accepted as valid. If you are episcopally ordained today, you may try to transfer your orders into an Anglican jurisdiction. If you aren't, you simply may not. Take that for what you will.

    I wholly agree. What you'd written supports my point entirely: the necessity of specific requirements in the administration and the rites of the Church. On this the divines, @Philip Barrington, and @Stalwart agree. However it is at odds with what you said originally, wherein the specific requirements were made to seem optional, and even, dispensable, since "it is all up to God anyway." It seems we have rejected this fideism now, together, for which I'm glad. Truce?
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2018
    JoeLaughon likes this.
  2. PotterMcKinney

    PotterMcKinney Active Member Typist Anglican

    Posts:
    314
    Likes Received:
    222
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    PECUSA
    I'm sure Cranmer would be quite surprised.
     
  3. JoeLaughon

    JoeLaughon Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    363
    Likes Received:
    320
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    ACNA
    The face value reading of the Ordinal seems more than suggestive of the necessity of episcopal ordination for holy orders.
     
    Botolph and Stalwart like this.