Anglican orders not 'invalid' says Cardinal, opening way for revision of current Catholic position

[tuffsmurf]

Actually, it doesn’t come down to the fact of excommunication. Instead anglican orders are invalid because the rite of ordination itself was changed after the break with Rome such that it no longer represented the Catholic Church’s understanding of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Now that all of the validly ordained (pre Henry VIII) are dead, nobody is left who can validly hand on the Sacramemt or preserve Apostolic Succession in the anglican church.

How did the rite of ordination change?

 

[Fiasco]

And just who is “WE”?

The Cardinal President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts has articulated the points with great precision…and quite well.

In spite of the impressively long title, the Cardinal President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts is at odds with Cardinal Muller over you know what, and he may well be wrong in other areas.
Almost certainly wrong.

Frankly, I am horrified by the lack of the most basic knowledge of theology and ecclesiology which I encounter on this website. It hardly deserves the name “Catholic Answers” at all.

i feel the same, especially about those on the religious left who follow a fake “spirit of Vatican II”, rather than the genuine Spirit of the Council, called by Pope John, a pope i admire. The late, great Archbishop Sheen admired him, as well. In Heaven, they must be on even more friendly terms.

It is as if people here are decades behind where we currently are, both as a theological community in the academy and above all the dicasteries, which people here seem ignorant about, even at the most fundamental level.

Regarding Anglican orders, some people here may be the better part of five hundred years (1550) "behind where we currently are."
Also, not all of us are easily fooled, and we know condescension when we encounter it.
Fancy names don’t impress us.

What confuses me in recent times is the apparent fascination with the anglican church by some areas of the Catholic Church.

False ecumenism, often even being prepared to sell out at least part of the Faith.

Sometimes, it could be caused by the laudable but mistaken idea that there are three valid branches of Christianity:
Anglicanism
Catholicism
Eastern Orthodoxy.

 

[7_Sorrows]

What confuses me in recent times is the apparent fascination with the anglican church by some areas of the Catholic Church.

It is always the case that those making such comments are not British, otherwise they would see what a dire state of crisis the anglican churh is in in this country. It is hardly a model of “the way forward” and instead suggests quite the opposite.

When you say “in this country”, are you in England or America? In America, it is the Episcopal churches that are in dire states. Most Anglicans here are pretty traditional -
at least from my experience. They have not gone off the deep end yet!

 

[Memaw]

What the heck is going on???

Would be interesting to know if there has EVER been a valid Eucharistic Miracle resulting from any Anglican consecration. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Justin_Swanton]

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

Then please feel free not to read and not to engage.

Have a wonderful day.

 

[JPUSC]

Then please feel free not to read and not to engage.

Have a wonderful day.

 

[SteveLy]

**What it really comes down to is whether an excommunicated bishoped validily can ordain someone, **because that is basically what happened in the anglican church and some lutheran churches during the reformation. They claim they have preserved the apostolic succession in this way.

Does anyone know why the Church sees orthodox orders as valid but not anglicans?

Yes they can. Reading the history of the SSPX will provide details.

 

[Tim_D]

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

Instead of insults and condescension, how about explaining how Pope Leo XIII was incorrect in his determination that Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void?” And what do we make of the Edwardian ordinal’s divergence from the Catholic understanding of holy orders and the result of that divergence?

 

[SteveLy]

And just who is “WE”?

The Cardinal President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts has articulated the points with great precision…and quite well.

I remember when Cardinal Ratzinger addressed a parallel point in the 1990s, as a follow up to Unitatis Redintegratio and with regard to the work of the Lutheran dialogue.

Frankly, I am horrified by the lack of the most basic knowledge of theology and ecclesiology which I encounter on this website. It hardly deserves the name “Catholic Answers” at all.

It is as if people here are decades behind where we currently are, both as a theological community in the academy and above all the dicasteries, which people here seem ignorant about, even at the most fundamental level.

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

There are people who benefit from the more knowledgable members, even if it is not always readily apparent.

 

[Fiasco]

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

Don’t feel disappointed, because you’re not alone.

 

[mVitus]

Frankly the condescension towards Fr. Ruggero is quite startling. Crass attitudes of “fine, then leave” or trying to say he’s in error are quite offputting. Yes, this topic is a bit confusing, but that’s exactly why need an educated priest like Fr. Ruggero to explain some of the considerations being made

 

[JimG]

And just who is “WE”?

The Cardinal President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts has articulated the points with great precision…and quite well.

I remember when Cardinal Ratzinger addressed a parallel point in the 1990s, as a follow up to Unitatis Redintegratio and with regard to the work of the Lutheran dialogue.

Frankly, I am horrified by the lack of the most basic knowledge of theology and ecclesiology which I encounter on this website. It hardly deserves the name “Catholic Answers” at all.

It is as if people here are decades behind where we currently are, both as a theological community in the academy and above all the dicasteries, which people here seem ignorant about, even at the most fundamental level.

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

I was quoting the Cardinal here. It was he who used the term “we” in saying: "“We have had, and we still have a very rigid understanding of validity and invalidity: this is valid, and that is not valid. One should be able to say: ‘this is valid in a certain context, and that is valid another context’.”

I presume he was speaking of the Church as a whole or of theologians in general. But I was having trouble understanding the rest of the quote wherein he says that validity of ordination might depend on context.

 

[Padres1969]

Would be interesting to know if there has EVER been a valid Eucharistic Miracle resulting from any Anglican consecration. God Bless, Memaw

I’ve heard tell of a few. But of course none are verified the same way Catholic miracles are since there’s no real formal structure for confirming them in most Anglican Churches as far as I’m aware. GKC might be able speak more to that.

 

[Padres1969]

And just who is “WE”?

The Cardinal President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts has articulated the points with great precision…and quite well.

I remember when Cardinal Ratzinger addressed a parallel point in the 1990s, as a follow up to Unitatis Redintegratio and with regard to the work of the Lutheran dialogue.

Frankly, I am horrified by the lack of the most basic knowledge of theology and ecclesiology which I encounter on this website. It hardly deserves the name “Catholic Answers” at all.

It is as if people here are decades behind where we currently are, both as a theological community in the academy and above all the dicasteries, which people here seem ignorant about, even at the most fundamental level.

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

One of the reasons it’s nice to have you on here Don Ruggero. You’re a source of knowledge for the rest of the site.

 

[Memaw]

And just who is “WE”?

The Cardinal President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts has articulated the points with great precision…and quite well.

I remember when Cardinal Ratzinger addressed a parallel point in the 1990s, as a follow up to Unitatis Redintegratio and with regard to the work of the Lutheran dialogue.

Frankly, I am horrified by the lack of the most basic knowledge of theology and ecclesiology which I encounter on this website. It hardly deserves the name “Catholic Answers” at all.

It is as if people here are decades behind where we currently are, both as a theological community in the academy and above all the dicasteries, which people here seem ignorant about, even at the most fundamental level.

Reading and engaging this forum, I have essentially concluded, is simply a waste of time.

WE is US and what the Church has told us. Are we to believe the Holy Spirit has been misleading us about this??? Sorry you feel we are a lost cause , I guess you might as well NOT waste your time looking down on us ignorant people. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

I’ve heard tell of a few. But of course none are verified the same way Catholic miracles are since there’s no real formal structure for confirming them in most Anglican Churches as far as I’m aware. GKC might be able speak more to that.

Tell us of the ones you have heard of!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

Frankly the condescension towards Fr. Ruggero is quite startling. Crass attitudes of “fine, then leave” or trying to say he’s in error are quite offputting. Yes, this topic is a bit confusing, but that’s exactly why need an educated priest like Fr. Ruggero to explain some of the considerations being made

Correction is one thing but insults are another. Priest CAN be wrong, they are not perfect and they should have the humility to deal with that!!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[JimG]

Canonist Edward Peters has some further discussion of the matter of Anglican orders in this CWR article, which clarified some issues for me.

 

[Memaw]

Fr. John Hardon, S.J.† spoke often about this. A change in the Rite of Ordination made after the split from Rome was fatal to its validity. Certainly to Catholic and possibly also to the Orthodox.

Frankly, this sounds an awful lot like the same old talk about normalizing same sex unions, or communion for the re-married. “Can’t we all just get along” theological entropy.

Fr. John Hardon S.J. was a very Holy Priest, kind and never to busy to talk. I met him many times at Fr. Robert Fox’s Marian Congress. He worked very closely with the Vatican and I would trust anything he said. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Padres1969]

Tell us of the ones you have heard of!! God Bless, Memaw

I don’t have a link to it as it was related to me offline, but one such occurrance was at an Anglican (Episcopal if I’m remembering correctly) Church. The altar guild of this particular church encountered an instance of the pre-consecrated wine having dripped on to the altar linen during a mass. And when they attempted to clean it out using whatever method is typically used to clean “wine” from altar linen after mass and were unsuccessful it was determined that it was in fact blood where before consecration had been wine.

But again, there’s no formal confirmation of this as there’s to my knowledge no formal process of confirmation in the Episcopal Church. So your mileage may vary.