Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Quite interesting. I think the view of Memorial's would be found in evangelical of low Church Anglicans, because most Anglicans, if I understand correctly, believe in the real presence.
Do the 39 articles not lean in the direction of receptionism? In my experience, 40 years ago, Low Church Anglicanism tended to practice "closed" or "close" communion while the High Church and Anglo-Catholics were more open. But there were also those who leaned in the direction of calvinist memorialism... all using the BoCP?
) But it's not receptionism. It's emphasizing that it is God who acts at the Altar, God who pours out grace and love.
I don't think I see receptionism in the 39 articles, but the articles do leave more room for ambiguity than the statements of some other denominations do. Anglicanism deliberately chooses to allow diversity of belief on a number of theological topics, and this is one. Real presence, yes. The exact nature and mechanism of that presence -- we have freedom to disagree. Evangelical Anglicans and Reformed Anglicans and Anglo-Catholics all using the same BCP, yes. Note that we also have the freedom to say "God is present here, and I don't know how."
(Note, by the way, that at least in the American church, the 39 articles are an important historical document for us, but they are not binding on us. The American church moved in a more "Catholic" direction in the last century or so.)
There is an interesting ambiguity in the invitation to the Altar at the end of our Eucharistic Prayer:
The Gifts of God for the People of God.
(Optional extra sentence
The first sentence emphasizes God's action. The second sentence emphasizes our faith, and perhaps leans toward receptionism. Some priests will say only the first sentence; others say both.
Closed vs open communion is a separate question. A common argument for open communion is almost the opposite of receptionism: the view that God's grace comes to us even when we don't perceive it or understand it. Come, if you are seeking God, come to this Altar and receive God's grace with us. We can discuss the theology of it later, at coffee hour. Experience it first, and analyze it later.
You may agree with that, or not. (I suspect you'll disagree.
Thanks for the clarification; the "second" sentence to me reads not so much as receptionism; rather Spiritual reception akin to that of Methodism.I don't think I see receptionism in the 39 articles, but the articles do leave more room for ambiguity than the statements of some other denominations do. Anglicanism deliberately chooses to allow diversity of belief on a number of theological topics, and this is one. Real presence, yes. The exact nature and mechanism of that presence -- we have freedom to disagree. Evangelical Anglicans and Reformed Anglicans and Anglo-Catholics all using the same BCP, yes. Note that we also have the freedom to say "God is present here, and I don't know how."
(Note, by the way, that at least in the American church, the 39 articles are an important historical document for us, but they are not binding on us. The American church moved in a more "Catholic" direction in the last century or so.)
There is an interesting ambiguity in the invitation to the Altar at the end of our Eucharistic Prayer:
The Gifts of God for the People of God.
(Optional extra sentence
The first sentence emphasizes God's action. The second sentence emphasizes our faith, and perhaps leans toward receptionism. Some priests will say only the first sentence; others say both.
Closed vs open communion is a separate question. A common argument for open communion is almost the opposite of receptionism: the view that God's grace comes to us even when we don't perceive it or understand it. Come, if you are seeking God, come to this Altar and receive God's grace with us. We can discuss the theology of it later, at coffee hour. Experience it first, and analyze it later.
You may agree with that, or not. (I suspect you'll disagree.
Thanks for the clarification; the "second" sentence to me reads not so much as receptionism; rather Spiritual reception akin to that of Methodism.
Agreed.I can see that reading, yes. We're very good at ambiguity.
