Episcopal church marriages down 66% since 2003

[VincentIII]

There are a good many Episcopalians in the U.S. who consider all seven to be sacraments. Myself included, and I'm not super Anglo-Catholic.

Would most Episcopal clergy be okay with the laity believing that all seven are sacraments? The belief might seem like a non-issue, but some clergy might say that bundling those other events with Baptism and Communion blurs the special significance of those two sacraments.

 

[seeking.IAM]

Would most Episcopal clergy be okay with the laity believing that all seven are sacraments? ...

It is always risky to try to speak for most clergy since I haven't met most of them. The Episcopal Church is not a dogmatic church. I suspect its clergy are quite used to divergent opinions on a variety of subjects, and would not be overly troubled by this belief among laity.

 

[Albion]

Would most Episcopal clergy be okay with the laity believing that all seven are sacraments? The belief might seem like a non-issue, but some clergy might say that bundling those other events with Baptism and Communion blurs the special significance of those two sacraments.

There's a lot of latitude tolerated among Anglicans, so of course there are pastors who would take one view of what you're asking about while there are others who would go the opposite way. And what they personally believe doesn't tell us whether they're concerned that some members of their congregation hold the other belief.

Probably the most we could do in discussion is identify what the official belief is and what it is that most members accept.

 

[Deegie]

There are also "a good many" Roman Catholics who believe that the Eucharist only symbolizes the body and blood of Christ. Indeed, there are all sorts of people in many different denominations who hold personal beliefs that are at odds with the official beliefs of the churches to which they belong.

The difference being that I don't believe TEC has any such official position that there are only two sacraments. If there were, I could not teach against it publicly.

 

[Albion]

The difference being that I don't believe TEC has any such official position that there are only two sacraments.

Well, it does.

But as you probably know, no such official positions prevent anyone in The Episcopal Church, bishops included, from teaching against them.

 

[Paidiske]

Didn't TEC drop the requirement for assent to the Articles some time ago? So now what they say is no longer seen as an official position in the same way it is in other places?

 

[Arcangl86]

Didn't TEC drop the requirement for assent to the Articles some time ago? So now what they say is no longer seen as an official position in the same way it is in other places?

The Articles are considered historical documents. However the current BCP has a Catechism, which i think has official standing.

 

[Paidiske]

And what does it say about the number of sacraments?

 

[seeking.IAM]

From the Catechism, Book of Common Prayer, 1979

Q. What are the sacraments?
A. 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.

Q. What are the two great sacraments of the Gospel?
A. The two great sacraments given by Christ to his Church
are Holy Baptism and the Holy Eucharist.

Q. What is Holy Baptism?
A. Holy Baptism is the sacrament by which God adopts us
as his children and makes us members of Christ's Body,
the Church, and inheritors of the kingdom of God.

Q. What is the Holy Eucharist?
A. The Holy Eucharist is the sacrament commanded by
Christ for the continual remembrance of his life, death,
and resurrection, until his coming again.

Other Sacramental Rites

Q. What other sacramental rites evolved in the Church
under the guidance of the Holy Spirit?
A. Other sacramental rites which evolved in the Church
include confirmation, ordination, holy matrimony,
reconciliation of a penitent, and unction.

Q. How do they differ from the two sacraments of the
Gospel?
A. Although they are means of grace, they are not
necessary for all persons in the same way that Baptism
and the Eucharist are.

 

[Paidiske]

Such Anglican ambiguity.

 

[Deegie]

Such Anglican ambiguity.

Exactly. The Catechism was worded in such a way as to allow for both positions. Indeed, I think the last Q&A posted by @seeking.IAM above shows that the other five are still sacraments since they are described as "means of grace", which is basically the definition of a sacrament.

 

[Paidiske]

I wouldn't go that far, myself (the rest of the bit about "given by Christ..." surely matters too?). But clearly TEC wants to leave a bit more wiggle room for a more-than-two sacraments position.

Here, where we're required to assent to the Articles, I don't feel that position is open.

 

[Albion]

The Articles are considered historical documents.

They're placed in the most recent BCP in a section that is now entitled "Historical Documents."

But I cannot find anywhere where the ordination ceremonies omit the vow to abide by the doctrines of the church or, for that matter, anywhere that states that the Articles are no longer what they had been previously.

 

[Paidiske]

If - as I understand it - TEC clergy are no longer required to assent to the Articles under oath, then that lack of requirement for assent has changed the standing the Articles have. It's the oath of assent which binds the clergy not to speak/teach against the Articles; the ordination vow to abide by the doctrines of the church is much more general.

 

[Albion]

If - as I understand it - TEC clergy are no longer required to assent to the Articles under oath, then that lack of requirement for assent has changed the standing the Articles have.

Could be, but unless the Articles have been formally demoted in recent years, they are the church's doctrine, or part of it, and the candidates for ordination to both the priesthood and episcopate solemnly promise to conform to the church's doctrines.

 

[Deegie]

The Articles are no longer part of the “doctrine, discipline, and worship” of TEC. At least not as any TEC clergy I know understand them.

I’ve asked a few of my colleagues this weekend since this came up. And regardless of whether they are two sacrament or seven sacrament priests, every one has agreed that both positions are within the bounds of Episcopal orthodoxy.

 

[Deegie]

Could be, but unless the Articles have been formally demoted in recent years, they are the church's doctrine, or part of it, and the candidates for ordination to both the priesthood and episcopate solemnly promise to conform to the church's doctrines.

Sorry for the second post. But the term "doctrine" is specifically defined in the disciplinary canon of the national church as follows: "Doctrine shall mean the basic and essential teachings of the Church and is to be found in the Canon of Holy Scripture as understood in the Apostles and Nicene Creeds and in the sacramental rites, the Ordinal and Catechism of the Book of Common Prayer." (Canon IV.2)

Thus, I think relegating the Articles to the Historical Documents section has the distinct effect of removing their doctrinal authority.

 

[Paidiske]

While I know some Anglican clergy here who would personally disagree about one or two of the five, generally speaking it is understood that the Articles bind us to a two-sacrament position, publicly.

But I mean, honestly, most of the time, the amount of difference it's going to make to parish life is pretty much zero... It's not as if we don't do the other five!

 

[Albion]

Sorry for the second post.

Not a problem.

But the term "doctrine" is specifically defined in the disciplinary canon of the national church as follows: "Doctrine shall mean the basic and essential teachings of the Church and is to be found in the Canon of Holy Scripture as understood in the Apostles and Nicene Creeds and in the sacramental rites, the Ordinal and Catechism of the Book of Common Prayer." (Canon IV.2)

And that may be the real answer to this question.

 

[Silverback]

Just for an example of practicing ‘Mainline’ Christians for practical input for the discussion.

My wife and I got married in 2013 and chose to get married at the local courthouse for simplicity purposes.

Our guest list included my wife’s son and bride. My daughter and both of my parents. (Full stop)

My wife and I did the same thing in 1986, just three friends attended...just as married with all the same issues associated with it.

It cost $15.00...plus gas.