Receptionist view of the eucharist allowed?

Discussion in 'Sacraments and Holy Orders' started by Will_, Feb 27, 2018.

  1. Will_

    Will_ Member

    Posts:
    35
    Likes Received:
    28
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Greetings! I was wondering if anyone here could shed some light on this question, which I am asking for a friend: are clergy in churches such as the Anglican Catholic Church or the Anglican Province of Christ the King allowed to hold a "receptionist" view when it comes to the Eucharist?

    I know there are probably diverse views allowed among the laity, but I am not sure about the clergy.

    Thanks, Will
     
  2. DivineOfficeNerd

    DivineOfficeNerd Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    108
    Likes Received:
    121
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Laudian Anglo-Catholic
    I am under the impression that clergy in the ACC and the PCK are not bound to that position canonically, though it is universally expected in those provinces. The provinces are not culturally favorable towards the position, and this contributed to the formation of UECNA.
     
  3. Will_

    Will_ Member

    Posts:
    35
    Likes Received:
    28
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Thanks for your kind reply. Would I be correct, then, in thinking that someone who holds a receptionist position might be better suited to seek ordination in another province or church rather than the ACC or APCK?

    Again, thanks very much.
     
    DivineOfficeNerd likes this.
  4. DivineOfficeNerd

    DivineOfficeNerd Active Member Anglican

    Posts:
    108
    Likes Received:
    121
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Laudian Anglo-Catholic
    That would probably be correct. I would recommend either the UECNA (United Episcopal Church of North America) or the REC (Reformed Episcopal Church). The latter is more populous, and can be found easier. UECNA tends to be rarer.
     
  5. Will_

    Will_ Member

    Posts:
    35
    Likes Received:
    28
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Thank you! I will pass this on to the friend who was asking me about it. I could very well see the guy who was behind this question being a fit for the REC or UECNA. As you say, the UECNA is not that widespread but who knows where the Lord will lead this young man.

    Appreciate your help,

    Will
     
  6. Cameron

    Cameron Active Member

    Posts:
    147
    Likes Received:
    152
    Country:
    Newfoundland
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Can I ask if by 'receptionist', does the inquirer mean "sacramental union" or "pneumatic presence", or perhaps even the "objective reality" of the substance of bread and wine?

    When I try to define 'receptionist' I think of something similar to the former philosophies I mentioned. That, in the reception of the Host and Chalice that Christ is truly present because of the faith of the believer, and thus receives grace as such.
     
    WendyP likes this.
  7. Will_

    Will_ Member

    Posts:
    35
    Likes Received:
    28
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Your second paragraph sums it up well. I would word it something like "in the Eucharist, the bread and wine remain as such but that with them the faithful communicant receives the body and blood of Christ, feeding on them in his heart by faith."

    To me this is a doctrinal position held by many Anglicans, but I was not so sure about it being acceptable for Anglo-Catholic clergy.
     
    WendyP likes this.
  8. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    931
    Likes Received:
    750
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    The classical Anglican view on the Sacrament is basically considered spiritual real presence. We affirm the same things as the Roman Catholics do in terms of consecration, reception, Real Presence; but without making the mistake of considering the consecration physical, which would subject Christ's body to degeneration, to be eaten by mice, and to be flushed when doing #2 on the toilet. Similarly, we do not worship the host, and our view can't be disproven by science seeing no physical changes in the host at the consecration. We have a more robust view, scientifically and theologically, but it's similar in a general sense.

    Receptionism is something different from spiritual real presence. For a time it held some currency among some 19th century evangelicals in the Church of England who considered the above view (spiritual real presence) to be too far from their theological brethren: Methodists, Baptists and others, who in the 19th century were very successful and seemed to point to a new way of Christianity, which did not need traditional religion to be successful.

    The way receptionism differs from the classical perspective is it argues that there is no presence of Christ in the Host or the Chalice. Christ appears "in us" when we receive. They still reject Zwinglian memorialism, but add this caveat that Christ doesn't appear in the elements at any time. The reason this is wrong is for the simple reason that in the Anglican liturgy the communicant is told these words: "Take, eat, this is my body".
     
    JoeLaughon and Lowly Layman like this.
  9. Cameron

    Cameron Active Member

    Posts:
    147
    Likes Received:
    152
    Country:
    Newfoundland
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Ah gotcha. I'll tell you from firsthand experience; my grandfather was a vicar of the very High Church, Anglo-Catholic, Oxford Movement flavour. He believed in transubstantiation but never used the word - the substance changed completely, into the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

    Now as for the modern clerics, I know the ACC mostly believe in the same doctrine. But as Stalwart says above, the belief in Christ appearing "in us" when we receive, I could see this also as being acceptable in the ACC or APCK, etc... A friend of mine is a member of the Anglican Catholic Church, and his view is very similar to this with the caveat that he believes that the substance of the Eucharist in spiritually changed to allow each person to receive Christ - but only if he, the communicant, receives in good faith and recognition/and, arguably, awareness.
     
    WendyP likes this.
  10. Will_

    Will_ Member

    Posts:
    35
    Likes Received:
    28
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Cameron and Stalwart,

    Thanks for your replies as well. You have been most helpful, particularly regarding there being some difference between the "spiritual real presence" view and receptionism. I needed that reminder!

    I will ask my friend if it might be a good idea to review Francis Hall's volume on the Sacraments as he does a good job on explaining the "spiritual real presence", and I have known Continuing Anglican Churchmen who were OK with that explanation.
     
    Cameron and Lowly Layman like this.
  11. WendyP

    WendyP New Member

    Posts:
    28
    Likes Received:
    14
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    Christian
    Thank you, I have found this thread very useful in helping me grasp different understandings of the Eucharist. I've wondered what bearing quantum mechanics has on the question, although I find it hard to follow discussions on the subject - very complex!
     
  12. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    American Anglican

Share This Page