Do Anglicans receive communion in churches without apostolic succession?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Around Christmas time I saw one of the local ordained Anglican priests (who is a father of a friend of mine so I recognized him) at daily mass and received communion and followed along with all parts of the mass.

It was surprising to me he was there but perhaps this fits in with this thread.
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
Anesti33:
Should be no problem absolving an Anglican; it’s done all the time in RCIA.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate further? And is this something unique to Anglicans, or would other baptized Christians be able to avail themselves of this in RCIA?

And why is it done?

I don’t necessarily object, I’m just a little confused by what is described here.
Click to expand...
RCIA is the rite of Christian initiation for adults, which normally means baptism, confirmation and Eucharist. It has added rites and rules for the uncatechized, well catechized Christians from other denominations, etc. Many people lump them all together, particularly if the discernment process is not very visible. Sometimes others are included, like well catechized Catholics who missed their confirmation.

With Baptism central to the RCIA, it is natural to include a ritual forgiveness in the process. Reconciliation is one way to do that, so other Christians becoming Catholic are asked to receive Reconciliation before they are received into full communion. It also matches the confess before Communion that most of us learned at our first communion.

Eastern Christians are received if they will recite the Creed with us. This has some extra issues that are very different from the RCIA, ie they are received into the church that corresponds to their original faith not necessarily the Latin rite church where the ceremony is performed.

Those outside the process think everyone is the same “in RCIA.” Those directing the process know otherwise, hopefully.
 
Dovekin said:
[The Directory for the application of principles and norms on Ecumenism] also envisages that a grave and pressing need may be experienced in some mixed marriages.
Click to expand...
This quote from the British bishops in One Bread One Body explicitly says grave and pressing may refer to mixed marriages. There has been development on this since the 60’s that is not evident to those who have not followed closely.
 
Anesti33 said:
Off the top of my head, it involves a manifestation of the same faith in the Real Presence
Click to expand...
Apparently that would also include belief in valid Priesthood and Apostolic Succession. Those who do not have valid Eucharist in their denomination can’t receive Eucharist in Catholic Church. Otherwise this canon would pose a problem that many traditionalists claim it does.
 
Graham Leonard - I never knew he swam the Tiber. I remember him visiting my primary school, a CofE Primary School when he was Bishop of Truro. We also went on a school trip to the Cathedral to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the diocese, for a service he presided at
 
Yes, he was Bishop of Truro as you know during the 1970’s. I was confirmed by him at the Cathedral in the mid 70’s. During the 1980’s he was the Bishop of London. In 1993 he was received into the Catholic Church after a few months preparation and a few weeks later was conditionally ordained Priest by the Late Cardinal Basil Hume in April 1993. He was made a Monsignor by St John Paul II.
 
Last edited:
Pardon my ignorance, but I have a question about the question itself.

How do Anglicans understand apostolic succession?
 
Polak said:
How do Anglicans understand apostolic succession?
Click to expand...
There are a range of views. Some Anglicans - i.e. Anglo-Catholics - conceptualise apostolic succession quite closely to Catholics and Orthodox. This is usually denoted by the term esse: it is an essential feature of the Church’s being. Others - i.e. evangelical Anglicans - tend to see it more within the realm of bene esse: beneficial, but not essential.
 
Ok but what do those who conceptualise it as ‘esse’ believe it actually is? I mean, Catholics believe it is only possible in the Catholic Church and that other churches have broken away from apostolic succession by turning away from the Pope. Unless some Anglican Catholic also believe the Pope’s rule is legitimate?
 
Polak said:
Catholics believe it is only possible in the Catholic Church and that other churches have broken away from apostolic succession by turning away from the Pope.
Click to expand...
This is not accurate. Apostolic succession can and does exist outside of unity with the Holy Father. As long as you have a bishop with valid lines of succession (unbroken tactile line, with correct form and intention, from the Apostles down to him), apostolic succession remains intact.

This holds true in Orthodox churches, as well as the Old Catholics, those bishops who can trace their lines back to Duarte Costa, Thuc, et al. Admittedly, the Duarte Costa and Thuc lines get kind of dodgy here and there — a story too long to get into, you could spend hours studying these lines, and I have done precisely that.



Not suggesting that anyone seek out the ministrations of Duarte Costa- or Thuc-line bishops and priests, just stating the history of it.
 
Last edited:
With the necessary additions above, Anglicans who affirm Apostolic Succession (esse, at least) think of it just as the RC does. They’re Anglicans. They get to do that, regardless of Apostolicae Curae.
 
The Catholic Church believes it is apostolic throughout the Church. Though the Papacy is a sign of the Apostle Peter, the apostolic nature of the Church is from Christ. The emphasis is on an apostle as one who is sent rather than on the 12 Jesus sent.
CCC 863 The whole Church is apostolic, in that she remains, through the successors of St. Peter and the other apostles, in communion of faith and life with her origin: and in that she is “sent out” into the whole world. All members of the Church share in this mission, though in various ways. “The Christian vocation is, of its nature, a vocation to the apostolate as well.” Indeed, we call an apostolate “every activity of the Mystical Body” that aims “to spread the Kingdom of Christ over all the earth.”
Click to expand...
Anglicans believe pretty much the same thing. They envision it more broadly, seeing apostolic succession in places where there is no historic episcopate. The tactile laying on of hands is a convenient sign, but apostolic succession take place where people are sent to preach the good news.

In terms of the original question, it is a Catholic asking using terminology that is understood differently. Anglicans might answer “no, Anglicans do not receive communion in Churches without Apostolic succession” because they believe there is an Apostolic succession that encompasses Churches without an historic episcopate. Or they might understand what is being asked and answer “yes, Anglicans receive communion in Churches without an historic episcopate.”
 
Last edited:
You are right.

I thought one yes answer and one no answer might be enough to express the idea. But there are others in between.
 
The Church of England recognises from Scripture and the Church Fathers that since the time of the Apostles there have been Bishops, Priests and Deacons. As the 1662 BCP says, these orders should be continued, reverently used and esteemed in the Church of England.

At the time of the Reformation the Church of England ordained Bishops to the existing sees, indicating their intention to continue the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
In the Creed, the Church confesses itself to be apostolic. Apostolic tradition in the Church means continuity in the permanent characteristics of the Church of the Apostles.

The primary manifestation of apostolic succession is to be found in the apostolic tradition of the Church as a whole. Succession is an expression of the permanence and continuity of Christ’s own mission in which the Church participates.

To nourish the Church, God has given the apostolic ministry, instituted by our Lord and transmitted through the Apostles. The chief responsibility of the ordained ministry is to assemble and build up the body of Christ by proclaiming and teaching the Word of God, celebrating the Sacraments and guiding the life of the community.

Oversight of the Church and its mission is the particular responsibility of the Bishop. Bishops preach the Word, preside at Sacraments and administer discipline. They have pastoral oversight of the area to which they are called. They serve the apostolicity, catholicity and unity of the Church’s teaching, worship and sacramental life. They lead in thy Church’s mission.

Continuity in apostololic succession is signified in the ordination/consecration of a Bishop. At the laying on of hands, the whole Church calls upon God to pour out the Holy Spirit. To ordain by prayer and the laying on of hands is to do what the Apostles did, and the Church through the ages.

The Church of England does recognise as Churches some bodies like the Methodist and United Reformed Churches and Continental Churches such as the Evangelical Church in Germany and the French Lutheran and Reformed Churches. Whilst these Churches lack the threefold ministry and the historic episcopate, the Church of England acknowledges that these Churches are ‘instruments of His grace.’ However, in accordance with Scripture and tradition, episcopal ordination is necessary for clerical ministry in the Church of England.
 
I’m off to the side, as are Anglicans like myself. Or off in left field, maybe.
 
Yes, Porvoo and a CofE paper on Orders from the Faith and Order Commission.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top