Why Sacramental assurance matters

Order: the Revd David Hayes at his ordination service in St John and St Barnabas’s, Belle Isle, Leeds, with the Bishop of Beverley, on 5 July

“Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine! Oh, what a foretaste of glory is mine!” Anglicans, especially Catholic An­glicans, find “blessed assurance” and a “foretaste of glory” in the sacraments of the Church. After the General Synod debate on women bishops, Stephen Barney wrote asking for an explanation of the doctrine of sacra­mental assurance (Letters, 16 July). Others have questioned whether sacra­mental assurance is an Anglican doctrine.
I would like to try to explain it, and to show that it is an Anglican doctrine. The doctrine of the Church of England is to be found particularly in “the Thirty-nine Articles of Reli­gion, the Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordinal”, according to Canon A5; I will refer to these sources, among others.
Article XXV teaches that “Sacra­ments ordained by Christ . . . [are] effectual signs of grace”: they effect what they signify; they truly bring us the grace of God; they are the means by “which [God] doth work invisibly in us”. This gives the Church of Eng­land a Catholic doctrine of the sacra­ments.
The teaching of the Article is ex­panded in the Catechism in the Book of Common Prayer, which states that the sacraments are “a means whereby we receive [grace]”, and “a pledge to assure us thereof”. We have therefore the assurance that we receive the grace of God in the sacraments, pro­vided that the right conditions are met.
Traditional Catholic teaching re­quires the use of bread and wine at the eucharist, and the presidency of a priest ordained by a bishop in the apostolic succession. Both the Book of Common Prayer and Common Worship require the use of bread and wine, and the presidency of a priest ordained by a bishop. Article XXXVI refers to the Ordinal attached to the Book of Common Prayer, which re­quires that priests be ordained by bishops, as did the Act of Uniformity 1662.
The preface to the Ordinal makes it clear that the Church of England intended to continue the orders of bishops, priests, and deacons, as the Church had received them, going back to the time of the Apostles. In other words, the C of E explicitly intended to continue the ordained ministry of the Catholic Church.
The requirement of a priest, or­dained by a bishop in the apostolic succession, to preside at the eucharist is a requirement of Anglican for­mularies. One could cite various Anglican divines who took just such a Catholic and Anglican position — Jeremy Taylor, Lancelot Andrewes, John Cosin, and William Laud, to name but a few.
The problem for traditional Cath­olics in the Church of England is that we do not believe that in ordaining women, the C of E is continuing the orders of bishops and priests as the Church has received them. By “Church” here, we mean the un­divided Church of the past, together with the present-day Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, and a number of other Anglican provinces.
The ordination of women to the priesthood therefore initiated a pro­cess of reception in the Church of England and the wider Church. Reception is not a new concept in the history of the Church: it refers to the reception of the decisions of Councils of the Church by the whole people of the Church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Because the C of E claims that her orders are those of the whole or universal Church (Catholic, Ortho­dox, Anglican), the new development in the ordination of women must be subject to reception by the whole Church. Otherwise, our Church’s claim about her orders would be in jeopardy. Recognition of the need for reception underpinned theologically the provision that was made in 1992-93 for members of the Church of England not to receive the priestly ministry of women.
The introduction of women bishops would introduce a new phase into the process of reception, calling, theologically and practically, for provision for members of the C of E not to receive the episcopal ministry of women. According to Anglican ordinals, priests have to be ordained by bishops. Those who are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops cannot receive the ministry of those who have been ordained by women bishops, because ordination is an essentially episcopal ministry.
The problem then, particularly for lay traditionalists, would be how they can be sure that a priest presiding at the eucharist has been ordained by a male bishop, in a line of bishops and priests which is an explicit continua­tion of the orders of bishops and priests as the Church has received them. Without that assurance, they do not have the assurance of the grace of God in the sacrament.
This is not to denigrate the minis­try of women priests, or to say that the grace of God is not present when they preside at the eucharist. But it is to say that the same sacramental as­surance is not available when women preside at the eucharist, or ordain priests — because there is doubt that, in their ordination, the Church of England is continuing the Catholic orders of the universal Church.
Bishop Kenneth Kirk wrote in a paper for the Church Assembly in 1947 that “where the sacraments are concerned, the Church is always obliged to take the least doubtful course.” For this reason, we cannot receive the priestly or episcopal minis­try of women.
It is sometimes objected that Article XXVI says that the “un­worthiness of ministers” does not hinder the effect of the sacrament. If we read the Article in full, however, we see that the unworthiness referred to is not an issue about holy orders, but serious moral unworthiness: “wicked­ness”.
Indeed, the Article teaches the principle of sacramental assurance, namely, that the grace of God is present in the sacrament when it is rightly and duly administered, in accordance with the teaching and practice of the undivided Church. This requires the continuation of the orders of bishops and priests as the Church has received them, going back to the time of the Apostles.

Canon Simon Killwick is the Rector of Christ Church, Moss Side, Manchester, and chairman of the Catholic Group on the General Synod.

From Church Times

APOCRYPHA

The position of the Churches of the Anglican Tradition regarding the Apocrypha or Deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament is affirmed in the VI Article of Religion:

And the other books (as Hierome [Jerome] saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these following:

The Third Book of Esdras.
The Fourth Book of Esdras.
The Book of Tobias.
The Book of Judith.
The rest of the Book of Esther.
The Book of Wisdom.
Jesus the Son of Sirach.
Baruch the Prophet.
The Song of the Three Children.
The Story of Susanna.
Of Bel and the Dragon.
The Prayer of Manasses.
The First Book of Maccabees.
The Second Book of Maccabees.

The Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament are not part of the Hebrew Masoretic text officially canonised by Judaism at the rabbinical 'Council of Jamnia' in AD 90, but are books originally (so far as we know) written in the Greek language and incorporated into the Greek Old Testament of the Septuagint (LXX), translated from Hebrew to Greek in c. BC 150. Because we do not possess the Hebrew originals of the Deuterocanonical or 'second-canon texts,' they have been described as Apocryphal or 'hidden,' 'veiled,' for the Hebrew original texts are as yet unknown. Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Apostles and the earliest Christians read and used the Septuagint Old Testament in its koinetic Greek form, and so would have used the Apocryphal or Deuterocanonical books contained in them as part of Holy Scripture. The earliest Christian councils canonised these books and recognised them as part of the Old Testament, culminating in the modern use found in the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, as well as in Anglicanism. However, the Apostolic Churches have long made a distinction between the character of the Hebrew books and the Greek books, seeing the latter as more instructive and formational in nature, rather than doctrinal or dogmatic.

The Anglican and Eastern Orthodox Churches, sister Churches in the Apostolic Tradition, have achieved full agreement on the matter. The Moscow Agreed Statement of the Anglican and Orthodox Churches in 1956 asserts, 'the Conference agreed that the Canon of Holy Scripture was the same for both Churches.'

In 1672 the Synodical Tome of the Council of Jerusalem gives the Orthodox view that the Anaginoskomena (books which may be read) can be described as good and edifying, and are not to be rejected completely. This accords completely with Anglican Article VI.


The Bonn Conference of Anglicans, Old Catholics and Orthodox in 1874, however, referring to these books as Apocryphal or Deuterocanonical, did not consider that they enjoyed the same canonicity as the books in the Hebrew Canon.


In the 'Conditions of Intercommunion' offered by the Anglicans to the Orthodox in 1921, the Anglicans stated that these books are called either Deuterocanonical or Anaginoskomena or Apocryphal, and that our Church accepts the teaching about them given by Saint Athanasius and Saint Jerome, echoed in Article VI. This statement, with the term Apocryphal removed, was accepted almost word for word by the 1931 Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission in the second article of its Report.

The same unanimity was also shown at the 1956 Moscow Theological Conference, when it was declared by both sides that: 'Both Churches also accepted the uncanonical books, not as inspired by God, but as being useful and instructive.' But here, 'there was some difference between the speakers in their emphasis on the character of the inspiration of Holy Scripture, and on the measure of the human element in it.' This statement neatly summarises the Anglican position on the Apocrypha, which is considered by us an essential part of the Old Testament Canon; a Bible, thus, without the Apocrypha, is incomplete. Although the Apocryphal books may not be inspired by the Holy Ghost in the same way the Protocanonical texts are, they are considered an irreplaceable component of the biblical Canon - for they offer key instruction in the living of the Christian life and in the formation of Christian moral and ethical behaviour. Lex orandi, lex credendi: the Apocrypha is also an essential feature of the Book of Common Prayer liturgy; its hymns are sung as canticles in the Morning Office of the American Book, and the 1943 American Office lectionary includes several books of the Deuterocanonical tradition in the readings for Daily Morning and Evening Prayer throughout the Christian year. The BCP would be incomplete without the Apocrypha as well...

The Anglican doctrine of the sufficiency of Holy Scripture is fully in accordance with the teaching of Saint Athanasius and Saint Augus­tine: 'We believe that Holy Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation.' The Anglican Church professes this faith in the following phraseology: 'Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.'


The Eastern Orthodox express the corresponding teaching of their own Church based on the words of Saint Basil the Great. 'Holy Scripture is fulfilled, clarified, and interpreted by Holy Tradition.' A joint Anglican-Orthodox declaration joins the views in harmony: 'everything necessary for salvation can be found in Holy Scripture as completed, expounded, interpreted, and understood in the Holy Tradition, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit residing in the Church.'


This statement was accepted as it stands by the Doctrinal Committee of Romanian Orthodox and Anglicans in Bucharest in 1935 in the fifth article of their Report. At Moscow in 1956 it was stated jointly that 'Holy Scripture is explained and completed in the light of Tradition.' This has long been the Anglican position, which emphasises the unity of Scripture, Tradition and Church: 'the Church to teach, the Bible to prove.' The old Anglican adage is 'the Bible and the Primitive Church.'


The Anglicans and Eastern Orthodox both proclaim: ‘By Scripture, we mean the Canon of Scripture as it is defined by Saint Athanasius and as it has been received by the whole Catholic Church.’

From: PHILORTHODOX

Office of the Bishop

Bishop

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Bishops)

This article is about the title and office in religious bodies. For other uses, see Bishop (disambiguation). For bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, see Bishop (Catholic Church). For bishops of the Orthodox Church, see Bishop (Orthodox Church).
Johann Otto von Gemmingen, Prince-Bishop of Augsburg.
A bishop is an ordained or consecrated member of the Christian clergy who is generally entrusted with a position of authority and oversight. Within the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox Churches, in the Assyrian Church of the East, in the Independent Catholic Churches, and in the Anglican churches, bishops claim Apostolic succession, a direct historical lineage dating back to the original Twelve Apostles. Within these churches, bishops can ordain clergy including other bishops. Some Protestant churches including the Lutheran and Methodist churches have bishops serving similar functions as well, though not always understood to be within Apostolic succession in the same way.


The office of bishop was already quite distinct from that of the catholic order priest in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch (died c. 107), and by the middle of the second century all the chief centres of Christianity were headed by bishops, a form of organization that remained universal until the Protestant Reformation.[1]

MALE PRIESTHOOD

Anglicans believe that the sacred, threefold ministry of Deacons, Priests and Bishops is limited to males. To explain this, we must delve somewhat into the differences between the Catholic and the Protestant traditions of Christianity.
 
A Protestant minister is a minister. A Catholic priest is both a minister and a priest. The difference is both subtle and great. A “minister” is a preacher, pastor, teacher, counselor (and, of course, administrator). But he does not serve at the altar, he does not administer the Sacraments, and he does not stand in the unbroken line of descent from Christ’s Apostles.

This last point, the Apostolic Succession, is important. The threefold Apostolic Ministry has been a hallmark of the Church Catholic since the earliest days. However, the Protestant part of Christendom chose to discard this hallmark at the Reformation. It thereby discarded Catholicism and the Sacraments, and kept for itself only ministers, not priests.

It is unarguable that the Deity is not sexual, as that term is understood by human beings. Nevertheless, Christ was, in His human nature, a male. He consistently taught us to think of God as a Father. One cannot ignore this consistent imagery, plus the fact that Christ did not choose to include women among His Apostles, and thereby established the principle of a male priesthood. For two thousand year the Church Catholic has followed His lead in this matter.

There is certainly no bar to women in the ministry. Christ had many women in His following and they undoubtedly ministered in various ways to His disciples. There would seem to be nothing in Christ’s teachings or practice to prohibit women from serving as ministers in many aspects of Church life—as teachers, counselors, administrators, etc. They do serve in many of these areas in Catholic bodies. But in Catholicism, of which Anglicanism is a part, that ordained ministry carried with it priesthood, and thus women cannot be accepted into ordination. The Priest serves at the altar, and the altar is not just another piece of furniture, not just a repository for cross, flowers, and a Bible. It is the place where the great Sacramental Mysteries of God are celeb rated. When the Priest stands at the altar to celebrate the Last Supper, the Eucharist, the Mass, he does so as Christ’s icon, as Christ’s “other self;” he stands in the place of the God who came to us in human form as a man. When he pronounces the absolution, he is the delegated successor of the Apostles, men to whom Christ gave the power to “remit” and to “retain.”

The inability of women to serve in this way has nothing to do with their physical, mental, or moral ability to serve. Many could do all the things that priests do. In individual cases, they might do them better than given individual men. But the form of the priesthood as set by Christ, not by men, and we must remain loyal to Him.

This categorical principle of priesthood in no way stigmatizes women as inferior. It is a mystical, dominical, and theological differentiation between women and men, just as real as the physical differentiations between women and men. God has highly honored women. He chose Mary to be the Mother of Christ, making her that mysterious and paradoxical figure, “the Mother of God.” Christ highly honored women. He loved Mary and Martha. He forgave and loved Mary Magdalene. To women was entrusted the honor of discovering the empty tomb and thus being the first witnesses to the Resurrection. But as God in His wisdom chose to send His Son to the world as a man, so Christ, in His divine wisdom chose to use men as His Apostles and the prototypes of the priesthood. The pattern has been set of us. Can we change all this? The Catholic has always believed we cannot.

Holy Trinity Anglican Church

The Theology of the Sacred Diaconate

Deacons of the Anglican Tradition are permitted to administer the Blessed Sacrament at Mass and to those who cannot attend the Eucharistic celebration in church; they may preach; they may baptise in the absence of a priest; they also bear the great responsibility of teaching and preaching the Gospel through catechesis and instruction of the young and converts to the Faith; deacons may teach Confirmation, enquirers' and Sunday school classes; they may teach classes on Holy Scripture, just as they proclaim the Scriptures in the liturgy of the Mass and Offices; they also possess the profound 'ministry of the Altar and of charity' - biblically and historically, deacons serve the needs of the poor and sick and function to collect and distribute the alms of the Church to those in need. In this respect, deacons uniquely represent the bishop as ministers of charity and mercy, and have so functioned since Apostolic times (Acts 6). In the liturgy, the deacon proclaims the Holy Gospel and traditionally administers the Chalice of Our Lord's Precious Blood. The role and ministry of the deacon in the Anglican Rite are succinctly summarised in the Ordinal (BCP 533).

Deacons of the modern Roman Rite, since the II Vatican Council and contrary to earlier Tradition, are today permitted to solemnise marriages and confer the nuptial blessing at such rites; they are permitted to bless persons, places and objects as the need may arise. However, modern Roman deacons are not permitted to administer the Sacrament of the Unction of the Sick: that sacrament, like the Holy Eucharist and the Sacrament of Penance, depends on the grace of the sacerdotium, the sacramental priesthood, for a valid administration. It should be noted that neither traditional rite Roman deacons nor Eastern Orthodox deacons are permitted to bless things and solemnise Matrimony, which actions are entirely novel and were only introduced by Vatican II, never before being part of the diaconal ministry as received from Christian antiquity. Deacons of the ancient Oriental Orthodox Churches follow the same pattern of ministry as the Anglican, Eastern Orthodox and traditional Latin Churches. The traditional Anglican form of the diaconate is that inherited from Apostolic Tradition and the practice of the undivided Catholic Church of the first millennium.

The deacon is in fact ordained to assist the episcopal or priestly celebrant at the altar and in the celebration of the Mysteries, because that ministry of service and servanthood is the essence of the charcater of the diaconate: the diakonos, servant, is conformed to the image of Jesus Christ the Deacon, Christ the Servant, by the sacramental ontological character of ordination. The Deacon is 'ordered' to the altar; he is admitted to the order of servanthood in the liturgical life of the Church and therefore mystically represents the Angels in heaven who attend to the eternal and divine Liturgy of the heavenly court. The New Testament deacon is the New Testament fulfillment and antitype of the Old Testament Levite, who was ordained to assist in the sacrifices and worship of the Old Testament sacramental system. An icon of the heavenly Ministers of the Altar, the angelic host, and the perfection of the Levitical ministry of sacrifice and offering, the Catholic and Apostolic deacon is consecrated to God by the Sacrament of Holy Orders to participate in the action of the Mass and to take his rightful place in the administration of the sacraments as a Minister, a servant and steward of the Mysteries of God. Deacons have administered the Chalice at Mass since Apostolic times, and in the primitive Church enjoyed a more prominent role in the celebration of Mass than that of the presbyterate: the priests as a council would be seated behind the altar, while the bishop celebrated at the altar with his deacons beside him, assisting the bishop in the offertory and the administration of Holy Communion. In the first four centuries, the bishop was always the chief celebrant of the Mass and the other sacraments in his region, the High Priest of the local Church; the deacons were his special and unique assistants in the liturgical action. Presbyters, priests of the second order of ministry, only came fully to share in the sacramental ministry of the bishop after the third century. But the unique and essential role of the deacon has always remained in tact. The deacon 'serves the Table of the Lord' (Acts 6.2) in an altogether primary and distinctive sense, by Apostolic institution. The deacon is associated with the sacramental ministry of the bishop and of the Church because that is his liturgical ministry given from the Apostles themselves.

Ordination is the conferral and reception of the commission and authority of Jesus Christ to act in His Name and Person, and of the grace to execute the ministry of the Church; a commission and authority to act as an authentic representative of Christ and His Church. Deacons receive through Apostolic Succession the grace of this commission and authority, a power given from the Apostles and conveyed by Apostolic hands in the episcopate. Thus, deacons are true Ministers of the Word and Sacraments of God, true Ministers of the Church of God, according to their specific Order conferred by diaconal ordination. The diaconate is the third sacred Order in the hierarchy constituted by Our Lord and the Apostles, a real sharing in the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Deacons take their place next to priests and bishops as participants in the Threefold Apostolic Ministry, a Ministry of divine institution and appointment.

Deacons may assist in the administration of the Chalice at Mass and may bear the Blessed Sacrament in both kinds to those who are unable to attend the Mass in church, but are strictly forbidden to offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice according to the canons and decrees of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea I (AD 325). Deacons do not possess the grace of priestly ordination and thus cannot validly consecrate the Mass.

The following is one of the earliest testimonies to the ordination of the deacon outside the New Testament, the Apostolic Tradition of Saint Hippolytus of Rome: note carefully what this record of AD 215 says about the theology of the Diaconate:

When one ordains a deacon, he is chosen according to what has been said above, with only the bishop laying on his hand in the same manner. In the ordination of a deacon, only the bishop lays on his hand, because the deacon is not ordained to the priesthood, but to the service of the bishop, to do that which he commands. For he is not part of the council of the clergy, but acts as a manager, and reports to the bishop what is necessary. He does not receive the spirit common to the presbyters, which the presbyters share, but that which is entrusted to him under the bishop's authority. This is why only the bishop makes a deacon. Upon the presbyters, the other presbyters place their hands because of a common spirit and similar duty. Indeed, the presbyter has only the authority to receive this, but he has no authority to give it. Therefore he does not ordain to the clergy. Upon the ordination of the presbyter he seals; the bishop ordains.

The bishop says this over the deacon:

O God, you who have created all and put it in order by your Word, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, whom you sent to serve by your will, and to manifest to us your desire, give the Holy Spirit of grace and earnestness and diligence to this your servant, whom you have chosen to serve your church and to offer up in holiness in your sanctuary that which is offered from the inheritance of your high priests, so that serving without reproach and in purity, he may obtain a higher degree, and that he may praise you and glorify you, through your son Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom to you be glory, and power, and praise, with the Holy Spirit, now and always, and throughout the ages of the ages. Amen.

A deacon may baptise in the absence of a priest because the validity of Holy Baptism does not depend on its administration by one in sacerdotal orders and character; its validity depends solely on the proper administration of the matter and form instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ, to wit, water in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Because Baptism is generally necessary for salvation for all men (St John 3.5), Our Lord has instituted it in such a way that any person who intends seriously to administer the Sacrament of Holy Baptism may validly do so - because it is the rite itself, given by Christ, which effects the grace of the sacrament. Any baptised Christian, lay or ordained, may validly baptise in emergency, in extremis. But in order to maintain the regula fidei and the bene esse of the Church, her good order and canonical obedience to the Catholic Faith and Tradition, it is required where and when possible that one in Holy Orders, a duly ordained cleric of the Church, baptise. A deacon no less than a priest is an ordained representative of the Holy Catholic Church. A deacon possesses the indelible character of Holy Orders and thus sacramentally represents Jesus Christ, no less than a priest - only in a different manner according to a different grace of ordination. For a Baptism to be canonically regular and in accordance with the Church's ordering of her own life, a deacon, ordained for this purpose as a herald of the Gospel and a minister of the Word and Sacraments, should always preside if a priest cannot be present. Deacons are truly ordained.

For the reasons listed above, because the deacon is a true and sacramentally ordained minister of the Word and Sacraments according to his own full and complete order in the Church, he may in the absence of the priest celebrate the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified and administer the consecrated gifts of the Body and Blood of Christ to the faithful: he is ordered to the altar and has the commission and authority so to act, under the authority of the bishop and priest. Anglicans call this rite in the absence of the priest the 'Deacon's Mass,' a colloquial term for us; Roman Catholics call it a 'Communion service,' wherein the Eucharistic Elements are not consecrated but the Pre-Sanctified Gifts are offered in Holy Communion to the people. In the Orthodox Church, the Deacon's Mass is called the Deacon's Typika. All Catholic Churches have a form of service in which the deacon administers Holy Communion from the reserved Sacrament.

A deacon is not permitted to bless sacramentally persons, places or objects, even using holy water blessed by a priest, because the deacon does not possess the necessary character of Holy Orders to bless in the Name of Christ and the Church in a sacramental way. Bishops and priests possess the sacramental character of the sacerdotium, which entails the blessing of people, places and objects in the Name of Christ, thus conveying the blessing of Almighty God and of the Church in a sacramental action. Such ministry of blessing is an integral part of the ministry of the priesthood; priestly grace is required for one so to act in the Name and Person of Christ and the Church, in persona Christi capitis. Holy water is a sacramental of the Church, blessed by the Church to invigorate and encourage the faith of those who use it, but it is not a sacrament and does not convey grace in the manner of a sacrament. Sacramentals are aids to faith, meant to inspire devotion and drive away evil, but they do not have the nature of the sacraments themselves. Sacramental blessings, priestly blessings, are just that - they require a sacrament, in this case, the Sacramental Man, the 'walking sacrament' of the priest, to convey them. Now, of course, please let it be clearly understood that this fact of theology does not preclude the ability of any Christian to pray and to bless in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and all Christians should so pray and bless in the Lord's Name. Parents should bless their children; loved ones should bless their needy, their sick, the lonely and those in trouble; Christians should pray for one another and bless one another in the Name of Jesus. But the specific sacramental action of sacramental blessing is reserved in the Church's liturgical life to those endowed with the Spirit of the Priesthood, the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God. (BCP 546, BCP 294).

All of the aforementioned also apply to the Sacrament of the Unction of the Sick, but even more so, because the Sacrament of Unction requires a bishop or priest for the valid administration of the sacrament by divine institution. Holy Scripture records the practice of the Sacrament of Unction from New Testament times: 'Is any among you sick? Let him call for the presbyters (priests) of the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven' (Saint James 5.14-15). Our Lord anticipated the practice of this sacrament by giving power to His Apostles (and their successors in the episcopate and priesthood) to administer healing to the sick by means of anointing them with oil: 'So they went out and preached that men should repent. And they cast out many demons, and anointed with oil many that were sick and healed them' (Saint Mark 6.13). Only bishops and priests may administer this Sacrament, as Saint James clearly teaches. A priest should administer Unction using holy oil blessed by a bishop for this purpose. The outward and visible sign is the anointing of a baptised Christian who is ill, by a priest, with oil blessed by a bishop. Typically, the oil is applied to the forehead, and sometimes to the hands or specific place of pain. The prayer is one for blessing and spiritual healing from God (BCP 320). The inward and spiritual grace is divine power, peace, strength and forgiveness of all sins. This sacramental economy was given by the Lord Jesus Christ to His Church. 

(Copied from Philortodox with permission)

Eucharistic Notes for Lent

1. The Church of the medieval period, of the later Middle Ages, espoused the doctrine of Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Thomistic doctrine, that the Eucharistic Consecration caused the substances of bread and wine to be destroyed and replaced by the substances of the Body and Blood of Christ, hence the corrective offered by the Church of England in Article of Religion XXVIII in which it is said that Transubstantiation 'overthrows the nature of a sacrament.' The immediate reason: unfortunately, the late medieval Church had ceased properly to understand Saint Thomas's meaning of substance as a non-material essence and saw 'substance' as materiality. If the material substances of bread and wine (which is what is specifically targeted in the Article) cease to exist, the outward and visible sign of the Blessed Sacrament is vitiated and the Sacrament does not exist.

2. The Eucharistic Change, or transformation of the bread and wine into Our Lord's Body and Blood by the Word of Christ and the Invocation of the Holy Ghost, is a true and literal Change, for one objective thing (the elements) becomes another objective Thing (Our Lord), but it is not a material change - the Change occurs on the supernatural and metaphysical, the supramaterial, level, inaccessible to our understanding and perception.

3. In Saint John 6, Our Lord uses a reference to the 'gnawing' and 'chewing' of His Flesh and Blood - and He is unwilling to reduce His teaching to a metaphor or analogy. Our Lord intended the Bread of Life discourse to be taken literally, which indeed it was, as was demonstrated by the reaction of the crowd.

4. There is also the quintessential point of presenting Holy Scripture and the teaching of the Church Fathers in their proper context, and we are called to exegesis, to bring out the actual meaning of the text, rather than eisigesis, the attempt to infuse a preconceived notion into the text. The contextual reading of the Scriptures itself provides the fullest warrant for belief in the Real Objective Presence. As one has brilliantly pointed out, affirming the sacramental principle in opposition to gnosticism, 'Our Lord would not instruct us to do this and then not give us a way of accomplishing it.' Contextual reading of the Bible is the key to all of Catholic doctrine.

5. The examination of the Old Testament is all-important: the divine institution by YHWH in ancient Israel of covenant sacrifice, priesthood, liturgical worship, the use of bread and wine sacramentally and the centrality of the Lamb. The Todah sacrifice, the Eucharistic or Thank Offering of bread and wine in the Old Covenant, is an absolutely essential reference - and it is vital to recognise it. References to Melchizedek, the showbread, the manna and the Passover all prove the continuity of the Eucharist with the Old Testament.

6. The axiom for the proper Catholic interpretation of Scripture: the Mass and Catholic Priesthood are the fulfillment of the Old Testament sacramental and sacrificial system, as Our Lord Jesus Christ is the unique embodiment, personification and fulfilment of Israel and the Old Covenant. The Eucharist is the perfection and accomplishment, the full manifestation, of that to which the old sacrifices and sacraments gave symbolism, sign and foretaste. There is a hermeneutic of continuity, not rupture, between the Old and New Testaments, or as Saint Augustine saith, 'The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed, the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed.' Christ is the final and full revelation of what was conveyed in the Old Covenant in prefigure and shadow. Jesus Christ is the true Priest, Victim, Sacrifice and Altar, the Lamb, truly made present in the celebration of the Mass, and under the form of bread and wine.

7. There is an inseparable link between Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition; we invoke the magisterial Church Fathers of the first millennium to demonstrate the unchanging and perennial teaching of the Church on the Real Presence, a doctrine indisputable when consulting the faith and practice of the Church in the patristic era: true Catholicism is inherently patristic and liturgical, and looks to the sources, ad fontes, ressourcement, when seeking to present the substance of that Faith Once Delivered to the Saints and faithfully transmitted by the Church of the Apostles and Fathers.

Posted by Father Chad ( APA)
Posted with permission.

Vestments

Vestments are liturgical garments and articles associated primarily with the Christian religion, especially among Latin Rite and other Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodists, and Lutherans. Many other groups also make use of vestments, but this was a point of controversy in the Protestant Reformation and sometimes since - notably during the Ritualist controversies in England in the 19th century.
For other garments worn by clergy, see also clerical clothing.

Used by Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans and some other Protestants

Cassock

an item of clerical clothing; a long, close-fitting, ankle-length robe worn by clerics of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran and some Reformed churches.

Stole 

A long, narrow strip of cloth draped around the neck, a vestment of distinction, a symbol of ordination. Deacons wear it draped across the left shoulder diagonally across the body to the right hip while priestsbishops wear it draped around the back of the neck. It may be crossed in the front and secured with the cincture. Traditionally, this is done by priests, whereas bishops always wear it uncrossed, as they possess the fullness of the priesthood. Corresponds to the Orthodox orarion and epitrachelion and (see below).

Alb 

The common garment of any ministers at the eucharist, worn over a cassock. Most closely corresponds to the Orthodox sticharion (see below). Symbolizes baptismal garment. See also cassock-alb.

Cassock-alb

or cassalb is a relatively modern garment and is a combination of the traditional cassock and alb. It developed as a convenient undergarment (or alternative to a cassock at the Eucharist) worn by clergy and as an alternative to the alb for deacons and acolytes.

A white or off-white cassock-alb has replaced the traditional cassock and alb in some Anglican and Lutheran churches since the 1970s. On rules concerning its use, see The Church Times.

Pectoral cross 

A large cross worn on a chain or necklace around the neck by clergy of many Christian denominations. In some traditions it is associated with bishops. In the Roman Catholic tradition it is only worn by bishops. In choir dress the cross is gold with a green rope, red for cardinals. In house dress, it is silver with a silver chain.

Used by Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, and some (American) United Methodists

Surplice 

A decorative white tunic worn over the cassock.

Chasuble 

The outermost sacramental garment of priests and bishops, often quite decorated. It is only worn for the celebration of the Eucharist. Corresponds to the Orthodox phelonion (see below). See also chasuble-alb.

Dalmatic 

The outermost garment of deacons.

Amice 

a cloth around the neck used to cover the collar of street attire. It is worn by the celebrant, deacon, and subdeacon for the Mass.

Cincture 

or Girdle. Corresponds to the Orthodox zone.

Used by Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and some Lutherans

Tunicle 

The outermost garment of subdeacons.

Cope 

A circular cape reaching to the ankle, used by bishops, priests and deacons.

Rochet 

Similar to a surplice but with narrower sleeves. It is usually highly decorated with lace. Its use is reserved to bishops and certain canons.

Zucchetto 

Skull cap, similar to the Jewish yarmulke.

Mitre 

Worn by Bishops and some abbots. Despite the having the same name, this does not really correspond with the Eastern mitre (see below), which has a distinct history and which was adopted much later.

Pectoral cross 

The cross or crucifix worn by bishops. It is held by a chain (or cord in choir dress) around the neck and rests on the chest.

Used by some Roman Catholics and some Anglicans and Lutherans

Maniple 

A liturgical handkerchief bound about the wrist, it is only used during the Mass. The maniple fell out of common use with the 1970 post conciliar liturgical reform, but is gaining in popularity in many circles and is used today in the context of the Tridentine Mass and in some Anglo-Catholic and other parishes. According to some authorities, this corresponds to the Orthodox epigonation (see below).

Humeral veil 

Long cloth rectangle draped around the shoulders and used to cover the hands of the priest when carrying the monstrance. It is also worn by the subdeacon when holding the paten.

Biretta 

May be worn by clergy of all ranks except the Pope; its color can signify rank.

Used only by Roman Catholics

Pallium 

A narrow band of lamb's wool decorated with six black crosses, worn about the neck with short pendants front and back, worn by the Pope and bestowed by him to Metropolitan bishops and Archbishops. Corresponds to the Orthodox omophorion (see below).

Rationale 

An episcopal humeral worn over the chasuble. It is only used by the Bishops of Eichstätt, Paderborn, Toul, and Cracow (Kraków). Until the 17th century, it was also in use in the Bishopric of Regensburg[1] (Ratisbon).

Pontifical gloves 

The liturgical gloves worn by a bishop celebrating a Pontifical Solemn Mass. They are usually seen today only within the context of the Tridentine Mass.

Pontifical sandals 

The liturgical sandals worn by a bishop celebrating a Pontifical Solemn Mass. They are usually covered by the liturgical stockings, which are of the liturgical color of the Mass. They are usually seen today only within the context of the Tridentine Mass.

Fanon 

A double-layered mozzetta, now only occasionally worn by the Pope during solemn Pontifical High Masses.

Papal tiara 

Formerly worn by the Pope at his coronation and at key secular moments; it has fallen out of use but may be revived at any time if the reigning Pontiff wishes. This is strictly speaking not a vestment but an item of regalia since it was never worn within liturgical services with the exception of the blessing Urbi et Orbi.

Subcinctorium 

A vestment similar to a broad maniple but worn suspended from the right side of the cincture, decorated with a cross on one end and an agnus dei on the other; worn only by the Pope during a Pontifical High Mass.

Falda 

A vestment that forms a long skirt extending from under the hem of the alb; it is so long that train-bearers need to carry it; worn only by the Pope during a Pontifical High Mass and draped over the Pope's body at a Papal Funeral.

Used only by Anglicans

Tippet 

(or preaching scarf). A black scarf worn by bishops, priests and deacons at choir offices and some other non-sacramental services.

Chimere 

Red or black outer garment of bishops. Resembles a knee-length open-front waist coat.

Hood 

Academic hoods are usually worn by Anglican clergy at choir offices. It is also sometimes worn by Methodists and Reformed clergy with an academic gown ("Geneva Gown"), though this is fairly rare.

Apron 

A short cassock reaching just above the knee, worn by archdeacons (for whom it is black) and bishops (for whom it is purple). Now largely obsolete.

Gaiters 

Covering of the lower leg worn by archdeacons and bishops with the apron. Black, buttoned up the sides and worn to just below the knee. Like the apron, these are also largely obsolete.

Canterbury cap 

a soft square-shaped hat.

On Thomas Cranmer

...Archbishop Cranmer was a literary and liturgical genius, but theologically a convinced protestant, more in the mould, I think, of a high virtualist-Calvinist than a Zwinglian. Good scholarship in the last two decades seems finally to have debunked Dom Gregory Dix's claim that Cranmer was a disciple of Huldrich Zwingli, although the modern scholars admit that Archbishop Cranmer was definitely a continentally-minded protestant who denied the Objective Real Presence and Eucharistic Sacrifice, at least as those truths were defined by the Western Church in the late medieval period.

Some very clever Anglican historians have attempted to cast Thomas Cranmer as an orthodox Augustinian when it comes to Eucharistic doctrine, and to oppose his Augustinian 'symbolistic' or symbolical theology to the stronger sacramental realism of Saint Ambrose, a view I would dearly love to hold but one which probably does not bear the weight of historical fact. Mercifully, Anglicanism is not a protestant system dependent on one figure or theological school, not a Lutheranism or Calvinism, and certainly not the 'Cranmerianism' some opponents of Anglicanism intend to construct. The official formularies and liturgies of the Church of England from the days of her orthodoxy commit us to a Catholic and Orthodox doctrinal system, one which Archbishop Cranmer himself personally would likely not have held. Because we are a living branch of the Catholic Church and not a sect, we are not bound to Thomas Cranmer's personal views, but only to the official formularies that constitute Anglicanism's magisterium, in particular the Book of Common Prayer, which is more a compendium of ancient and patristic teaching than the work of one writer or theologian.

Archbishop Cranmer's contributions to the Common Prayer Book were purposely imprecise and flexible enough concerning the specific dogmas of the Real Objective Presence and the objectively-anamnetic Sacrifice of the Mass as to allow to spring up over time a variety of 'Eucharistologies' within the national Church, a result one could anticipate given those confused times and especially in the light of the remarkable diversity of views on the Eucharist that emerged throughout the reformation era. For the orthodox Catholic Anglicans of today, those engineered 'ambiguities' are corrected and remedied by the use of our additional authorised liturgical texts. Lord Halifax, of blessed memory, deeply desired to replace the 1662 English BCP permanently with the 1549 English BCP, which book he viewed as a vastly more Catholic liturgy in spite of its origin and theological provenance - there is a part of me that has always agreed with him, as the 1549, for the Mass and other Sacraments, is so much closer to Sarum and the ancient liturgies than any subsequent revision. But the Continuing Church has solved any theological ambiguities which may yet inhere in Cranmer's works by the introduction of such supplemental liturgical materials as the Missals and the Priest's Manual, which are now commonplace and undoubtedly part of the lex orandi of Continuing Anglicanism. The Book of Common Prayer is thoroughly orthodox and contains an unparalleled expression of ancient Catholic orthodoxy in that language which was normative in the early Church, language in mysterio, language which expresses necessary truths without over-elaboration or dogmatisation; but where questions of theology arise, the supplemental texts answer those questions in accordance with the Tradition, and with more precision...

Posted by Father Chad