Anglican Holy Orders

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inquiringperson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Inquiringperson

Guest
Did Anglican Holy Orders used to be valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church?
 
Pope Leo XIII wrote in 1896 (Apostolicae Curae) that Anglican orders lack validity because the rite by which priests were ordained was not correctly performed from 1547 to 1553 and from 1558 to the 19th century, thus causing a break of continuity in apostolic succession and a break with the sacramental intention of the Church. Prior to 1896, there was doubt regarding their validity, but it is current Catholic belief that they would have been invalid from 1547–basically the whole history of the Anglican Church.
 
That all has the potential for change with the development of the Anglican Ordinariate. Those who seek full communion with the universal Church, and undisputed validity of Holy Orders now have a door open to them. Praise God!
 
Inquiringperson said:
Did Anglican Holy Orders used to be valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church?
Click to expand...
See bmonk’s post for more exact dates.

In the very early years of Anglicanism: yes, they did have valid orders.

From the time of England’s King Edward (Henry VIII’s son) their attempts at ordination have been null and void–and still are today.
 
po18guy said:
That all has the potential for change with the development of the Anglican Ordinariate. Those who seek full communion with the universal Church, and undisputed validity of Holy Orders now have a door open to them. Praise God!
Click to expand...
That doesn’t make their Anglican orders valid. They will have to be ordained again validly by a Catholic bishop.
 
Anglican (Episcopal) priests must be ‘re-ordained’ to become priests in the Ordinariate, although the process is streamlined, and they can be married at the time of ordination to Catholic Holy orders. Bishops cannot be married.
 
JGMendes4049 said:
That doesn’t make their Anglican orders valid. They will have to be ordained again validly by a Catholic bishop.
Click to expand...
I too thought about that post for a while.

I take the meaning to be that now that there is an Ordinariate, those ordained within the Ordinariate (and yes, for the moment the ordinations will have to be done by a bishop, since the Ordinary himself is a priest) will be valid.
 
FrDavid96 said:
I too thought about that post for a while.

I take the meaning to be that now that there is an Ordinariate, those ordained within the Ordinariate (and yes, for the moment the ordinations will have to be done by a bishop, since the Ordinary himself is a priest) will be valid.
Click to expand...
The Ordinariate, as I see it, is not so much a “thing” at this time, as it is a process. As each of us does at mass, communion is something that we enter into. Am I wrong here?
 
If no Holy Order exists, then one must be entered into under the authority of the Church, correct?
 
po18guy said:
The Ordinariate, as I see it, is not so much a “thing” at this time, as it is a process. As each of us does at mass, communion is something that we enter into. Am I wrong here?
Click to expand...
In the US, it’s still in the “potential” stage. In the UK, it’s reality.
Naturally, the validity of any Ordinariate hinges upon the completion of its requirements.
Again, I’m just not getting what you’re trying to say here. I don’t understand what you mean by the “validity” of the Ordinariate (actual or potential).

I’m trying to understand what you’re saying, so bear with me as I try please.

The Ordinariate won’t be just a process, it will (or “is” in England) a group of people, similar to a diocese. There is a process for establishing an Ordinariate, and a process for joining one, but the Ordinariates themselves will exist by virtue of the fact that the Holy Father establishes them.
 
FrDavid96 said:
In the US, it’s still in the “potential” stage. In the UK, it’s reality.
Naturally, the validity of any Ordinariate hinges upon the completion of its requirements.
Again, I’m just not getting what you’re trying to say here. I don’t understand what you mean by the “validity” of the Ordinariate (actual or potential).

I’m trying to understand what you’re saying, so bear with me as I try please.

The Ordinariate won’t be just a process, it will (or “is” in England) a group of people, similar to a diocese. There is a process for establishing an Ordinariate, and a process for joining one, but the Ordinariates themselves will exist by virtue of the fact that the Holy Father establishes them.
Click to expand...
Sorry for any confusion. What I am trying to say is that, for Anglicans, including clergy, who desire to enter into full communion with the universal Church, there is a means by which they soon may do so. As I understand, this would involve ordinations of those Anglican clergy, since no valid ordination is held to have existed before.
 
po18guy said:
If no Holy Order exists, then one must be entered into under the authority of the Church, correct?
Click to expand...
OK. I’m starting to get it now.

Once the Ordinariate is established in the US, if the Ordinary (read “similar to a bishop”) is actually a validly ordained bishop, then he will be able to ordain his own priests. Otherwise, he will make arrangements for a Catholic bishop to ordain the priests.

Whoever the Ordinary might be, if he was a previous Anglican cleric (pretty much a given), he will have to be ordained a priest or a bishop by a Catholic bishop–once that happens he will have valid Apostolic Succession.

We can only speculate here on who the Ordinary might be. It’s possible that he might be a Catholic priest (former Episcopalean) who already became Catholic and has subsequently been validly ordained. It might be someone who is not at-present Catholic, but who will be joining the Ordinariate at the same time it’s established. That’s about what happened in England. The new Ordinary was appointed at the same time the Ordinariate was established. He was ordained a priest one day, then the next day installed as the Ordinary. Since he isn’t a bishop, though, he needs to make arrangements for a Catholic bishop to do the ordinations.
 
po18guy said:
Sorry for any confusion. What I am trying to say is that, for Anglicans, including clergy, who desire to enter into full communion with the universal Church, there is a means by which they soon may do so. As I understand, this would involve ordinations of those Anglican clergy, since no valid ordination is held to have existed before.
Click to expand...
Yes. Exactly.
 
FrDavid96 said:
OK. I’m starting to get it now.

Once the Ordinariate is established in the US, if the Ordinary (read “similar to a bishop”) is actually a validly ordained bishop, then he will be able to ordain his own priests. Otherwise, he will make arrangements for a Catholic bishop to ordain the priests.

Whoever the Ordinary might be, if he was a previous Anglican cleric (pretty much a given), he will have to be ordained a priest or a bishop by a Catholic bishop–once that happens he will have valid Apostolic Succession.

We can only speculate here on who the Ordinary might be. It’s possible that he might be a Catholic priest (former Episcopalean) who already became Catholic and has subsequently been validly ordained. It might be someone who is not at-present Catholic, but who will be joining the Ordinariate at the same time it’s established. That’s about what happened in England. The new Ordinary was appointed at the same time the Ordinariate was established. He was ordained a priest one day, then the next day installed as the Ordinary. Since he isn’t a bishop, though, he needs to make arrangements for a Catholic bishop to do the ordinations.
Click to expand...
I do sense interest in it from certain disaffected Anglicans and Episcopalians on these forums. There must have been some sense of the potential interest in the establishment of an Anglican Ordinariate long before the time and effort was placed into developing its framework.
 
Well, if I would lay dying in some odd place far off any Catholicism but a Anglican priest would be there, I’d gladly receive last rites and Holy Communion from him, even if there is something missing; and than happily meet my maker and our Lord Jesus Christ. God’s love is greater than human restrictions.

Yours
Bruno
 
FrDavid96 said:
See bmonk’s post for more exact dates.

In the very early years of Anglicanism: yes, they did have valid orders.

From the time of England’s King Edward (Henry VIII’s son) their attempts at ordination have been null and void–and still are today.
Click to expand...
That’s not quite right. The orders were still valid during Herry VIII’s reign as he did not change any of the rites or liturgies - in fact the Latin mass continued as before. It was during the reign of Edward VI that a new prayer book was introduced and the ordination rite was changed - only very slightly though - and it was the form of ordination rite that was in place between 1550 and 1662 that Pope Leo said was invalid. Although the rites were called “The form of ordering for priests” and “The form of ordering for Bishops” Pope Leo’s Bull said that because no explicit mention was made at the moment of laying on of hands of the grade of Ministry being conferred this made the rite defective. This was changed and made explicit in the 1662 prayer book.

The form used since 1662, and used today is valid, but the argument is because it was deficient between 1550 and 1662 that apostolic succession was lost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top