Do Anglican bishops have Apostolic Succession?

[Moonbug]

Amen to that! There is a significant number of Catholics who retain some questions on how this infallible proclamation is applied. No one really denies it, even those who have serous doubt, but the careless way it has been interpreted makes many of us pause. Questions concerning married clergy, contraception, and the status of same sex marriage need to be studied. A fairly through study was done during and after Vatican II, but wasn’t published. I think Pope Francis is going to take a hard look at these problems.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Amen to that! There is a significant number of Catholics who retain some questions on how this infallible proclamation is applied. No one really denies it, even those who have serous doubt, but the careless way it has been interpreted makes many of us pause. Questions concerning married clergy, contraception, and the status of same sex marriage need to be studied. A fairly through study was done during and after Vatican II, but wasn’t published. I think Pope Francis is going to take a hard look at these problems.

I agree and I think some Catholics on CAF are going to be dismayed.

 

[chimo]

I have wondered about this.

There has been an unbroken line of bishops which can be traced back to before their split with the Roman Catholic Church. So do Anglican bishops have Apostolic Succession?

I’m interested in this both from the Catholic perspective, and the Anglican perspective. Anyone got any views on this?

Anglican bishops from Henry VIII were all valid because these bishops did not leave Rome but perhaps one can say were “kidnapped”. The situation in England was very different than from the rest of Europe at the time of this Reformation. Some say including Rome that the Bishops of the Anglican Church are not valid but I don’t believe them. Their apostolic succession were never tarnished until they began to ordain women. Once the ordination of women entered the Anglican Church their once called Catholic ministry was changed into a Protestant lay ministry. This does not mean all Anglican orders are now invalid because of woman’s ordination only those where women are effected. The Anglican bishops who have not entered into women’s ordination as well as the priest’s still have valid orders.

I don’t believe in Rome’s assertion that Anglican orders were invalid for I believe they did announced this some over 120 years ago because they were afraid of losing their own faithful to the Anglicans. Anglican orders were always valid and I know this because I grew up in a High Church setting and was exposed to their rich devotion and practices. The Church I grew up with does not accept women’s ordination so our priests were always faithful to the principals of Catholic devotion, rite and practice. We are probably one of the fewest Churches in the West that still worships towards the East and we only use Altar boys to help serve the Mass with the priest. I personally helped trained many of the boys. I know of Rome’s claims and when I was older and assisting at the Mass the priest left for another pastoral visit and I was asked to prepare the Ciborium, Chalice and Paten for the next Mass. I noticed when cleaning the Eucharistic vessels that one particle of the Holy Communion still left on the Paten. I took the particle to my mouth and as soon as I put the Lord into my mouth I was so moved that I had to go down on the floor as the presence of the Lord enveloped me. There was no doubt in my heart if the Holy Communion at Anglican Masses were considered by some invalid because this showed me that it was valid. I sense God did this for me because of the way Catholics were telling me that the Anglican Holy Communions were not valid. Anyway I receive an answer from God that day. He showed me that Anglican orders were valid as long as the priest can traced ordination to his Bishop. But the Anglican Church is losing her Catholic priesthood to the many women been ordained so that this part of the Anglican Church is only becoming a self stained lay ministry.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Anglican bishops from Henry VIII were all valid because these bishops did not leave Rome but perhaps one can say were “kidnapped”. The situation in England was very different than from the rest of Europe at the time of this Reformation. Some say including Rome that the Bishops of the Anglican Church are not valid but I don’t believe them. Their apostolic succession were never tarnished until they began to ordain women. Once the ordination of women entered the Anglican Church their once called Catholic ministry was changed into a Protestant lay ministry. This does not mean all Anglican orders are now invalid because of woman’s ordination only those where women are effected. The Anglican bishops who have not entered into women’s ordination as well as the priest’s still have valid orders.

I don’t believe in Rome’s assertion that Anglican orders were invalid for I believe they did announced this some over 120 years ago because they were afraid of losing their own faithful to the Anglicans. Anglican orders were always valid and I know this because I grew up in a High Church setting and was exposed to their rich devotion and practices. The Church I grew up with does not accept women’s ordination so our priests were always faithful to the principals of Catholic devotion, rite and practice. We are probably one of the fewest Churches in the West that still worships towards the East and we only use Altar boys to help serve the Mass with the priest. I personally helped trained many of the boys. I know of Rome’s claims and when I was older and assisting at the Mass the priest left for another pastoral visit and I was asked to prepare the Ciborium, Chalice and Paten for the next Mass. I noticed when cleaning the Eucharistic vessels that one particle of the Holy Communion still left on the Paten. I took the particle to my mouth and as soon as I put the Lord into my mouth I was so moved that I had to go down on the floor as the presence of the Lord enveloped me. There was no doubt in my heart if the Holy Communion at Anglican Masses were considered invalid because this showed me that it was valid. I sense God did this for me because of the way Catholics were telling me that the Anglican Holy Communions were not valid. Anyway I receive an answer from God that day. He showed me that Anglican orders were valid as long as the priest can traced ordination to his Bishop. But the Anglican Church is losing her Catholic priesthood to the many women been ordained so that this part of the Anglican Church is only becoming a self stained lay ministry.

Are you Orthodox or Anglican?

 

[chimo]

Are you Orthodox or Anglican?

I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian who grew up within the Western Church. Over 100 years ago, a whole congregation of Eastern Orthodox came to Charlottetown, P.E.I. to settle there and they had no provisions to start their own Church. The local Anglican priest knew of their problem to secure a Church for their families so he asked them to attend to this High Church and they would not have to baptised or confirmed but remain Orthodox. They responded they would with the blessing of the Orthodox priest who had to come from Boston, Mass. to minister to them. So an entire Orthodox congregation grew up “catholic” as we learn about the Mass and Catholic devotion from a Western perspective. Some of the Orthodox continued to baptised their children within the Orthodox rite and I was one of them. When I got older I found out about my Orthodox connection when I was 28 and I grew to know more about Orthodoxy and the Eastern way. Today there is an Orthodox Church present in Charlottetown, P.E.I., the first for Prince Edward Island and I am a founding member of it.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian who grew up within the Western Church. Over 100 years ago, a whole congregation of Eastern Orthodox came to Charlottetown, P.E.I. to settle there and they had no provisions to start their own Church. The local Anglican priest knew of their problem to secure a Church for their families so he asked them to attend to this High Church and they would not have to baptised or confirmed but remain Orthodox. They responded they would with the blessing of the Orthodox priest who had to come from Boston, Mass. to minister to them. So an entire Orthodox congregation grew up “catholic” as we learn about the Mass and Catholic devotion from a Western perspective. Some of the Orthodox continued to baptised their children within the Orthodox rite and I was one of them. When I got older I found out about my Orthodox connection when I was 28 and I grew to know more about Orthodoxy and the Eastern way. Today there is an Orthodox Church present in Charlottetown, P.E.I., the first for Prince Edward Island and I am a founding member of it.

You are a great example of being a Catholic.

I also understand and appreciate my exposure to the Catholic faith in my childhood parish [LCMS] most Catholics would never know it was Lutheran Catholic worship is holy!

 

[chimo]

You are a great example of being a Catholic.

I also understand and appreciate my exposure to the Catholic faith in my childhood parish [LCMS] most Catholics would never know it was Lutheran Catholic worship is holy!

Yes and thank you for your words. I have also witnessed some Lutheran worship as a local congregation uses the Chapel at the Anglican Church I mentioned for once a month so I was exposed to these wonderful faithful people and got to know some of them. Contacts are so important today to bridge each other closer together. Yes you are right about Catholic worship. It is very holy.

 

[GKC]

Anglican bishops from Henry VIII were all valid because these bishops did not leave Rome but perhaps one can say were “kidnapped”. The situation in England was very different than from the rest of Europe at the time of this Reformation. Some say including Rome that the Bishops of the Anglican Church are not valid but I don’t believe them. Their apostolic succession were never tarnished until they began to ordain women. Once the ordination of women entered the Anglican Church their once called Catholic ministry was changed into a Protestant lay ministry. This does not mean all Anglican orders are now invalid because of woman’s ordination only those where women are effected. The Anglican bishops who have not entered into women’s ordination as well as the priest’s still have valid orders.

I don’t believe in Rome’s assertion that Anglican orders were invalid for I believe they did announced this some over 120 years ago because they were afraid of losing their own faithful to the Anglicans. Anglican orders were always valid and I know this because I grew up in a High Church setting and was exposed to their rich devotion and practices. The Church I grew up with does not accept women’s ordination so our priests were always faithful to the principals of Catholic devotion, rite and practice. We are probably one of the fewest Churches in the West that still worships towards the East and we only use Altar boys to help serve the Mass with the priest. I personally helped trained many of the boys. I know of Rome’s claims and when I was older and assisting at the Mass the priest left for another pastoral visit and I was asked to prepare the Ciborium, Chalice and Paten for the next Mass. I noticed when cleaning the Eucharistic vessels that one particle of the Holy Communion still left on the Paten. I took the particle to my mouth and as soon as I put the Lord into my mouth I was so moved that I had to go down on the floor as the presence of the Lord enveloped me. There was no doubt in my heart if the Holy Communion at Anglican Masses were considered by some invalid because this showed me that it was valid. I sense God did this for me because of the way Catholics were telling me that the Anglican Holy Communions were not valid. Anyway I receive an answer from God that day. He showed me that Anglican orders were valid as long as the priest can traced ordination to his Bishop. But the Anglican Church is losing her Catholic priesthood to the many women been ordained so that this part of the Anglican Church is only becoming a self stained lay ministry.

I agree with parts of this, and with the overall implication. But Apostolicae Curae advanced specific reasons for judging Anglicans orders as null and void, relating to the sacramental requirements of valid form and valid intent, losing thereby the necessary apostolic succession, at a specific point in time. It is a complicated issue, but the logic of invalid form and/or intent, as alleged, is theoretically as relevant to the sacrament of orders as valid subject, which is the problem with female ordination.

GKC

 

[Moonbug]

It is truly a difficult issue to come to terms with. Many obscure details of those times are only further obscured by time. But some facts are well established. Queen Elizabeth removed all the bishops who still swore allegiance to the Pope. Catholic orders were expelled from England and their property confiscated. Loyal teachers were barred from teaching and wealthy Catholics had their wealth confiscated by the Crow. Loyal priests were run to the ground and executed by being drawn and quartered, a especially gruesome way to die. Shakespeare’s maternal grandfather was executed this way. This purge of all things Catholic went on from the coronation of Elizabeth till after her death, roughly a 100 year period. During this time all the bishops in England were required to take an oath recognizing the Crown as head of the Church. During this period all the bishops loyal to “The Old Faith” had died. This period was a hard, brutal time for Catholics in England.

There is a recent documentary DVD I would recommend you watch. The name of it is , “IN SEARCH OF SHAKESPEARE” by Michael Wood who is a well know producer of documentaries for the BBC. The subject concerns Shakespeare’s life and times. It is a well researched film on what was happening during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It is made available through PBS here in America, and probably Canada, and can be found in almost any public library worth the name.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

It is truly a difficult issue to come to terms with. Many obscure details of those times are only further obscured by time. But some facts are well established. Queen Elizabeth removed all the bishops who still swore allegiance to the Pope. Catholic orders were expelled from England and their property confiscated. Loyal teachers were barred from teaching and wealthy Catholics had their wealth confiscated by the Crow. Loyal priests were run to the ground and executed by being drawn and quartered, a especially gruesome way to die. Shakespeare’s maternal grandfather was executed this way. This purge of all things Catholic went on from the coronation of Elizabeth till after her death, roughly a 100 year period. During this time all the bishops in England were required to take an oath recognizing the Crown as head of the Church. During this period all the bishops loyal to “The Old Faith” had died. This period was a hard, brutal time for Catholics in England.

There is a recent documentary DVD I would recommend you watch. The name of it is , “IN SEARCH OF SHAKESPEARE” by Michael Wood who is a well know producer of documentaries for the BBC. The subject concerns Shakespeare’s life and times. It is a well researched film on what was happening during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It is made available through PBS here in America, and probably Canada, and can be found in almost any public library worth the name.

Wow, I guess I need to read up on this period of history.

 

[NovusAugustus]

Does anyone here know the difference between a communion and a Church (using capital C to distinguish from physical churches)?

A communion seems to be an agreement of common beliefs among Churches, but I have also seen what I thought to be a Church–the Old Catholic Church/Union of Utrecht–referred to instead as a communion.

 

[GKC]

Wow, I guess I need to read up on this period of history.

I would suggest something like Loades/ELIZABETH I, Smith/ELIZABETH TUDOR, Starkey/ELIZABETH:THE STRUGGLE FOR THE THRONE, Hogge/GOD’S SECRET AGENTS, and Guy/TUDOR ENGLAND. Likely to be found in libraries, too. And other titles, liekwise.

Watch for the details advanced here. And for Regnans in Excelsis.

GKC

 

[Moonbug]

I cant’ recommend “In Search of Shakespeare” too strongly. It is extremely well done, as all BBC documentaries are. The political is so woven into Shakespeare’s life, one gets a well researched history of his life. Wood fully catches the mood of the times. As I said you can find the DVD in just about any public library Another great site would be to go to “goggle” and type in “Anglican Eucharistic Theology.” You will get a number of cites but I would recommend “Wikipedia.”

Personally, I believe there is much to be said for your point of view. There are many Anglicans who believe they are receiving “The body and blood” of Christ at Mass. As Pope Francis would say: Who am I to Judge." As Christ would say: “WHERE THERE ARE THREE OR MORE OF YOU GATHERED IN MY NAME, THERE I SHALL BE.”

 

[Peter_J]

Does anyone here know the difference between a communion and a Church

I do, for one.

For example, we have the Melkite Church. It’s in full communion with Rome, so we can also say that it is part of the Roman Communion.

 

[Picky_Picky]

It is truly a difficult issue to come to terms with. Many obscure details of those times are only further obscured by time. But some facts are well established. Queen Elizabeth removed all the bishops who still swore allegiance to the Pope. Catholic orders were expelled from England and their property confiscated. Loyal teachers were barred from teaching and wealthy Catholics had their wealth confiscated by the Crow. Loyal priests were run to the ground and executed by being drawn and quartered, a especially gruesome way to die. Shakespeare’s maternal grandfather was executed this way. This purge of all things Catholic went on from the coronation of Elizabeth till after her death, roughly a 100 year period. During this time all the bishops in England were required to take an oath recognizing the Crown as head of the Church. During this period all the bishops loyal to “The Old Faith” had died. This period was a hard, brutal time for Catholics in England.

There is a recent documentary DVD I would recommend you watch. The name of it is , “IN SEARCH OF SHAKESPEARE” by Michael Wood who is a well know producer of documentaries for the BBC. The subject concerns Shakespeare’s life and times. It is a well researched film on what was happening during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It is made available through PBS here in America, and probably Canada, and can be found in almost any public library worth the name.

Those of us who are perhaps biased in Elizabeth’s favour would have another point of view. We would point out that the persecutions under Elizabeth followed those under her Catholic sister Mary, which included the burning to death of the Archbishop of Canterbury and other bishops; that Elizabeth was generally in favour of tolerance so long as her power and public order were maintained; that her reign began with a reasonably tolerant attitude to Catholics; that the tolerance was reduced after the revolt of the Catholic earls; and became full-scale persecution only after the Papal Bull that informed her Catholic subjects that she was a sinful heretic and that they should overthrow her. As we know today, it is difficult to maintain religious toleration in the face of terrorist attacks and conspiracies by religious extremists. But then, as I say, I’m biased in her favour: a remarkable woman.

 

[Moonbug]

Those of us who are perhaps biased in Elizabeth’s favour would have another point of view. We would point out that the persecutions under Elizabeth followed those under her Catholic sister Mary, which included the burning to death of the Archbishop of Canterbury and other bishops; that Elizabeth was generally in favour of tolerance so long as her power and public order were maintained; that her reign began with a reasonably tolerant attitude to Catholics; that the tolerance was reduced after the revolt of the Catholic earls; and became full-scale persecution only after the Papal Bull that informed her Catholic subjects that she was a sinful heretic and that they should overthrow her. As we know today, it is difficult to maintain religious toleration in the face of terrorist attacks and conspiracies by religious extremists. But then, as I say, I’m biased in her favour: a remarkable woman.

There was plenty of wrong doing on both sides’ In this period of English history, marked by great upheaval .you have the mindless bruits surface once the first physical blow is struck. For over a thousand years Catholicism had been the Christian faith of the people. Then, Henry VIII decides----but we know all that. However, you can’t deny that a number of people were put to death because they opposed his plan to divorce is wife. The charge of terrorism can easily be laid at the door step of both parties. There have been hundreds of books written about this tragic period, some scholarly and some pure propaganda. My minor in college was history, but beyond a general survey course on English history, I know little. I have read some well written works on the English Reformation, but must confess they mostly presented the :Old Faith" (Catholic) side.

If you get the chance, please watch the BBC documentary film titled," In Search of Shakespeare" buy Michael Wood. It reveals what it was like to live under the reign of Elizabeth. The film proves that she had spies in every hamlet and every village. The film claims that her spy system, created to ferret out all those who were disloyal to the Crown would be found and dealt with. The film suggest that, in its effectiveness, it was comparable to that of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. As I pointed out, it was researched and directed by Wood who is well known as one of England’s best documentary film makers, and it is produced by the BBC which can hardly be charged with being anti Anglican. Please watch the film and tell me what you think.

I understand your point of view, and I agree she was a most effective queen, and she ruled England with an iron hand. But being a female ruler in that period of history left her little choice.
She believed in the Reformation and was no doubt sincere, but she was ruthless.

 

[Picky_Picky]

There was plenty of wrong doing on both sides’ In this period of English history, marked by great upheaval .you have the mindless bruits surface once the first physical blow is struck. For over a thousand years Catholicism had been the Christian faith of the people. Then, Henry VIII decides----but we know all that. However, you can’t deny that a number of people were put to death because they opposed his plan to divorce is wife. The charge of terrorism can easily be laid at the door step of both parties. There have been hundreds of books written about this tragic period, some scholarly and some pure propaganda. My minor in college was history, but beyond a general survey course on English history, I know little. I have read some well written works on the English Reformation, but must confess they mostly presented the :Old Faith" (Catholic) side.

If you get the chance, please watch the BBC documentary film titled," In Search of Shakespeare" buy Michael Wood. It reveals what it was like to live under the reign of Elizabeth. The film proves that she had spies in every hamlet and every village. The film claims that her spy system, created to ferret out all those who were disloyal to the Crown would be found and dealt with. The film suggest that, in its effectiveness, it was comparable to that of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. As I pointed out, it was researched and directed by Wood who is well known as one of England’s best documentary film makers, and it is produced by the BBC which can hardly be charged with being anti Anglican. Please watch the film and tell me what you think.

I understand your point of view, and I agree she was a most effective queen, and she ruled England with an iron hand. But being a female ruler in that period of history left her little choice.
She believed in the Reformation and was no doubt sincere, but she was ruthless.

That’s not an unfair set of comments, and you’re quite right about the spy system (well, I would balk at “every hamlet and every village”, but that’s nitpicking). Of course she was faced not only with internal Catholic conspiracies but even outright war from Spain at the Pope’s instigation. But, yes, she was ruthless and they were violent times, with people on both (or in fact all) sides willing to indulge in the most dreadful violence and oppression. As to the Michael Wood documentary, I have seen it., and much enjoyed it. Popular history television of course runs the risk of oversimplifying and overegging, but Wood is very honest, I think, and I much admire his work – in writing as well as film. His stuff on the Dark Ages is especially good, and on the growth of the voice of the common people in the Middle Ages. Actually he seems to be able to turn out good work on any period.

 

[NovusAugustus]

I do, for one.

For example, we have the Melkite Church. It’s in full communion with Rome, so we can also say that it is part of the Roman Communion.

Okay, but what allows that communion to exist? A harmony of doctrine? Submitting to the Roman hierarchy? To me, the Roman Communion seems more coherent than other communions because our various Churches adhere to the same doctrines and hierarchy. What is confusing are groups like the Anglican Communion, where, for example, the Church of England and the Episcopal Church seem to have widely differing policies.

 

[Peter_J]

You are a great example of being a Catholic.

Or catholic.

 

[Peter_J]

Originally Posted by Peter J View Post
I do, for one.

Well, I guess answer would vary on that. It’s a little hard to say “what” exactly.