Do Anglican bishops have Apostolic Succession?

[GKC]

My understanding is that whatever apostolic succession the Anglicans may have gained from their alliance with the Old Catholics they promptly forfeited when they began “ordaining” women, because such an act represents so stark a departure from the legitimately Catholic understanding of the sacrament of Holy Orders that they can no longer be regarded as having the intention to do what the Church does when ordaining.

That would not necessarily follow. Any valid lines infused into Anglicanism, and spread by that fact, generally, would not be negated by an attempt to ordain invalid subjects, specifically. That would require a consideration of each individual case.

GKC

 

[SteveVH]

Some Anglicans (you remember motley), point to the logic in the joint episcopal consecrations since 1932, as an end run around Apostolicae Curae, per the logic in Ott, p. 458. Others discount Apostolicae Curae, ab initio. AC means that all RCs should affirm that Anglican orders are null and void. Anglicans may have a different opinion of the matter (and the intent, and the form).

The addition to the mix of Lutherans is outside my sphere of competence, though I can affirm that there are Continuing Anglican prelates who are in contact with functionally similar Lutheran bishops in Sweden. I’ve recieved from such a bishop.

GKC

Thank you.

 

[GKC]

It is not a matter of “liberal branches” unless one is only referring to the ELCA and Episcopalians in the U.S and perhaps the Lutheran Church of Canada and the Anglican Church of Canada where they even held joint assemblies this summer. These full communions were necessary because of the Anglican insistence that episcopacy be the standard in north America. But neither Lutherans nor Episcopalians had Apostolic Succession until the ‘mother churches’ in Europe participated in the laying on of hands at ordinations/ consecrations.

In Europe, on the other hand, Lutherans, specifically Scandinavian and Baltic national churches, have always had apostolic succession. The formation of this Lutheran Communion in Provoo Finland eventually included the various Anglican national churches [Church of England, Church of Ireland, etc.] Provoo was the start of these efforts to unite all catholic churches [Lutheran and Anglican] under episcopacy and apostolic succession toward the greater goal of reunification with the Church of Rome.

The conclusion in your first para is shaky, from an Anglican perspective.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Thank you.

You are very welcome.

GKC

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The conclusion in your first para is shaky, from an Anglican perspective.

GKC

Can you elaborate?

The ‘Call to Common Mission’ between Episcopalians and Lutherans [ELCA] and a similar accord between Canadian Anglicans and Lutherans was the recognition of sacramental ministry and a first step toward unification. American Lutherans had already adopted episcopacy so the next step was to also accept apostolic succession; both of which was provided by full communion with Anglicans and the laying on of hands of Lutheran bishops such as Krister Stendahl, the bishop of Stockholm.

Is that a sound explanation?

 

[GKC]

Can you elaborate?

The ‘Call to Common Mission’ between Episcopalians and Lutherans [ELCA] and a similar accord between Canadian Anglicans and Lutherans was the recognition of sacramental ministry and a first step toward unification. American Lutherans had already adopted episcopacy so the next step was to also accept apostolic succession; both of which was provided by full communion with Anglicans and the laying on of hands of Lutheran bishops such as Krister Stendahl, the bishop of Stockholm.

Is that a sound explanation?

“But neither Lutherans nor Episcopalians had Apostolic Succession until the ‘mother churches’ in Europe participated in the laying on of hands at ordinations/ consecrations.”

Which Anglicans (and they are motley, we know) would have asserted that they did not have Apostolic Successions, prior to then?

GKC

 

[SteveVH]

Which Anglicans (and they are motley, we know) would have asserted that they did not have Apostolic Successions, prior to then?

GKC

My question, exactly, and the source of my confusion.

 

[GKC]

My question, exactly, and the source of my confusion.

I can’t enlighten you on it, I fear.

GKC

 

[SteveVH]

I can’t enlighten you on it, I fear.

GKC

It’s quite alright. I understand.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

“But neither Lutherans nor Episcopalians had Apostolic Succession until the ‘mother churches’ in Europe participated in the laying on of hands at ordinations/ consecrations.”

Which Anglicans (and they are motley, we know) would have asserted that they did not have Apostolic Successions, prior to then?
GKC

Good question that perhaps Episcopalians better versed in the subject should answer.

 

[GKC]

Good question that perhaps Episcopalians better versed in the subject should answer.

I’ll wait here. But, motley though they may be, I’m not optimistic that any such exist, who would also believe in the episcopacy, at all.

GKC

 

[The_Serpent]

A post showing the original words used, and the Anglican change might illustrate this discussion more.

 

[GKC]

A post showing the original words used, and the Anglican change might illustrate this discussion more.

I suspect I know the answer, but I’ll ask anyway. Which words?

GKC

 

[cmodrmac]

in the USA the Episcopal Church is in full communion with the evangelical Lutheran Church - the Moravian Church and Old catholic communion (if this still exists)

Thhe Anglican Church is North America is in communion with no one

 

[Novocastrian]

“But neither Lutherans nor Episcopalians had Apostolic Succession until the ‘mother churches’ in Europe participated in the laying on of hands at ordinations/ consecrations.”

Which Anglicans (and they are motley, we know) would have asserted that they did not have Apostolic Successions, prior to then?

GKC

To my knowledge, all US Episcopalians have claimed succession through Samuel Seabury and the Scottish episcopate, though I’m sure you know far better than I!

 

[andrewstx]

in the USA the Episcopal Church is in full communion with the evangelical Lutheran Church - the Moravian Church and Old catholic communion (if this still exists)

Thhe Anglican Church is North America is in communion with no one

The union of Utrect still exists. But one must be careful when using the term “Old Catholic”. There are many churches that call them selves Old Catholic but are in communion with no-one. Some exist no-where but cyberspace. Others have a bishop with no followers having services in a garage or living room “cathedral”. Others are homosexual. Some are new age only connected to Christianity by a thread.

I think ACNA must be in communion with some-one, perhaps bishops in Uganda or the Southern Cone. But they are not in the official Anglican Communion.

 

[GKC]

The union of Utrect still exists. But one must be careful when using the term “Old Catholic”. There are many churches that call them selves Old Catholic but are in communion with no-one. Some exist no-where but cyberspace. Others have a bishop with no followers having services in a garage or living room “cathedral”. Others are homosexual. Some are new age only connected to Christianity by a thread.

I think ACNA must be in communion with some-one, perhaps bishops in Uganda or the Southern Cone. But they are not in the official Anglican Communion.

True. On all points. The Anglican Church of Nigeria comes to mind.

GKC

 

[GKC]

To my knowledge, all US Episcopalians have claimed succession through Samuel Seabury and the Scottish episcopate, though I’m sure you know far better than I!

That is correct, through the Non-Jurors. But that, of course, is an Anglican viewpoint.

GKC

 

[Novocastrian]

Okay. I am confused. Anglicans have Apostolic Succession by their full communion with Lutherans? This is something of which I was not aware. My understanding is that it is the Anglican Church that it in communion with the Old Catholics, not the Lutherans. Hey, you learn something everyday.

We have lines of succession through the Old Catholics and (in the Americas) the Lutherans. Yet our primary line of succession, which the Romans denied in Apostolicae Curae, is through the historic English episcopate, and in particular through the consecration of Matthew Parker, Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of All England, at Lambeth in 1559. His consecrators were William Barlow (former Bishop of Bath and Wells), John Scory (former bishop of Chichester), Miles Coverdale (former Bishop of Exeter) and John Hodgkins (Bishop of Bedford).

 

[andrewstx]

To my knowledge, all US Episcopalians have claimed succession through Samuel Seabury and the Scottish episcopate, though I’m sure you know far better than I!

The American Episcopal church originally got it’s orders from Scotland because the CofE could not consecrate anyone without his taking a vow of obedience to the crown.

After the revolutionatinary war, the Episcopal Church in the USA found itself in an unusual situation. They were an Episcopal church with no episcopate.