Do any Protestant communities have valid Apostolic Succession?

[GKC]

I was rather hoping they’d join the Continuum! Joking - Not sure what continuing church Canon law is regarding administering in both kinds, and tongues such as the people understandeth though…

What Continuing Church Canon law?

That said, Body/Blood is universal in all Anglicanism I know of. But I’m not so foolish as to make that a declaration.

As to language, I own a Latin BCP, somewhere around here. Would enjoy such a service, occasionally. But that’s just me.

GKC

 

[Indifferently]

What Continuing Church Canon law?

That said, Body/Blood is universal in all Anglicanism I know of. But I’m not so foolish as to make that a declaration.

As to language, I own a Latin BCP, somewhere around here. Would enjoy such a service, occasionally. But that’s just me.

GKC

I gather the Latin BCP was standard in Oxford and Cambridge once upon a time. I’d actually rather like yo use the offices in another language in the fixture.

Out of interest, do you use the BCP Offices as printed? I’m tempted to get hold of the Anglican Breviary to supplement (tlnot replace) them a bit.

 

[GKC]

I gather the Latin BCP was standard in Oxford and Cambridge once upon a time. I’d actually rather like yo use the offices in another language in the fixture.

Out of interest, do you use the BCP Offices as printed? I’m tempted to get hold of the Anglican Breviary to supplement (tlnot replace) them a bit.

The Breviary is highly recommended, but though I own 2 copies I usually stick to the BCP.

GKC

 

[Luth123]

Obviously no. But it has no meaning to Protestants. Jesus ate with tax collectors not the Jewish clergy. Only Catholics put any value in apostolic succession, since it distinguishes them in their eyes from other Christians.

Just like Christians put no value in the Jewish people being the chosen ones, since Christ saved everyone who belives regarless of succession. Protestants put no value in apostolic succession claims since Christ’s church is not a dictative succession.

 

[joe370]

Obviously no. But it has no meaning to Protestants. Jesus ate with tax collectors not the Jewish clergy. Only Catholics put any value in apostolic succession, since it distinguishes them in their eyes from other Christians.

Just like Christians put no value in the Jewish people being the chosen ones, since Christ saved everyone who belives regarless of succession. Protestants put no value in apostolic succession claims since Christ’s church is not a dictative succession.

Perhaps it matter in terms of God preserving and transmitting doctrinal truth only, so that all generations may have access to it. I cannot think of a better way to do so… Or not; who knows…

 

[joe370]

Obviously no. But it has no meaning to Protestants. Jesus ate with tax collectors not the Jewish clergy. Only Catholics put any value in apostolic succession, since it distinguishes them in their eyes from other Christians.

Just like Christians put no value in the Jewish people being the chosen ones, since Christ saved everyone who belives regarless of succession. Protestants put no value in apostolic succession claims since Christ’s church is not a dictative succession.

Do you believe that the Catholic Church is Christ’s church with established “dictative” succession? By the way, I know that apostolic succession does not matter to you, as you have already mentioned…

 

[Luth123]

Do you believe that the Catholic Church is Christ’s church with established “dictative” succession? By the way, I know that apostolic succession does not matter to you, as you have already mentioned…

No I don’t believe the Catholic Church is Christ’s Church, though may good faithful Catholics will certainly be saved. Christ’s Church is the combination of people from any Christian denomination including Catholics who honestly accept Jesus as their savior in their hearts and deeds.

 

[joe370]

No I don’t believe the Catholic Church is Christ’s Church, though may good faithful Catholics will certainly be saved. Christ’s Church is the combination of people from any Christian denomination including Catholics who honestly accept Jesus as their savior in their hearts and deeds.

Even us catholics can be saved…LOL…

 

[rfournier103]

Probably not by Catholic definition. There is the PNCC, and Old Catholics.

Jon

Is the Polish National Catholic Church like the ‘puppet “church”’ the Chinese government has set up in China?

And who are the Old Catholics?

 

[benjohnson]

Is the Polish National Catholic Church like the ‘puppet “church”’ the Chinese government has set up in China?

And who are the Old Catholics?

As I understand it:

Old Catholics → Grumpy with Vatican I and increasingly more secular.

PNCC → Polish Old Catholics, but increasingly more orthodox. No longer affiliated with the Old Catholics. Recently, they took one of the more orthodox scandinavian Lutheran groups under their wing. Good folk!

 

[rfournier103]

No I don’t believe the Catholic Church is Christ’s Church

I’m not surprised you don’t.

though may good faithful Catholics will certainly be saved.

Thank you for saying so.

Christ’s Church is the combination of people from any Christian denomination including Catholics who honestly accept Jesus as their savior in their hearts and deeds.

So… who’s in charge? Who is authorized to guide us whilest we are here on earth? You can say “God guides us”, but given that we have free will, and so many Protestants disagree on so many things; is God guiding some, and not others?

From 33 AD until say 394 AD-ish, what/whom governed the Church? If there WAS someone in charge, who was it?

Leadership and authority are really what this thread is about…

 

[Peter_J]

Do any Protestant communities have valid Apostolic Succession?

I don’t think we can actually answer that; we can just say that there aren’t any protestant groups about whom the Vatican has said “They do have valid Apostolic Succession.”

P.S. Although it also occurs to me that we could definitively answer the question, in the negative, if we take lack-of-valid-orders as part of the definition of the term “protestant”. In other words, we could say that if any of them do have valid orders, then they are automatically not protestant. (Personally, I find that form of rhetoric highly problematic.)

 

[Peter_J]

Technically, I don’t think the Catholic church has quite declared Lutheran apostolic sucuession as invalid. But… I have a good guess as what it would say given what has been said about Anglican apostolic sucuession.

Good point.

 

[Filioque]

The Swedish Lutherans kept an episcopacy with valid orders, however in the 20th century when they started ordainng women and later consecrating them the lines become muddled, as from a Catholic position they could not be validly ordained or consecrated, therefore could not pass on apostolic succession.

It’s important to note that there are many Protestant Churches that use the title bishop, but they have not recieved a valid ordination to the priesthood, or consecration to the episcopacy and therefore are bishops by title only and not from the Catholic perspective holders of the office by virtue of Apostolic Succession.

 

[GKC]

The Swedish Lutherans kept an episcopacy with valid orders, however in the 20th century when they started ordainng women and later consecrating them the lines become muddled, as from a Catholic position they could not be validly ordained or consecrated, therefore could not pass on apostolic succession.

It’s important to note that there are many Protestant Churches that use the title bishop, but they have not recieved a valid ordination to the priesthood, or consecration to the episcopacy and therefore are bishops by title only and not from the Catholic perspective holders of the office by virtue of Apostolic Succession.

I think a case by case decision might need to be made. I know of Swedish Lutherans who are analogous to the Continuing Anglicans, and do not lay hands on hairspray.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus

 

[PJM]

=rfournier103;10714461]This is the continuation of a side-topic from another thread. I think it deserves it’s own thread…

Protestantism begin with Ol’ King Henry VIII [or there about]

Christ COULD NOT wait some 1,200 years for this to happen.

When Henry started HIS OWN mini-catholic church; HE was and remains in Schism with the Roman CC.

There ae no Protestant churches dating back to the Apostles.

There are some Eastern Churchs that do.

 

[Filioque]

I think a case by case decision might need to be made. I know of Swedish Lutherans who are analogous to the Continuing Anglicans, and do not lay hands on hairspray.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus

My whole reason for the statement about being muddled.

While I know broad and high church Anglicans who deny the authority or validity (tounge in cheek) of Apostolica Curae, from a Roman point of view the same applies to the “Dutch Touch” as some Apostolic lines among the Anglican and Episcopalian Clergy were “restored” by the participation of the Old Catholics in early 20th Century consecrations. Not all however (from the RC position). There are also those including a couple of TAC Bishops who have told me personally that they do not believe in the Mass as a sacrifice and do not intend to ordain priests to offer sacrifice. So it becomes as you mentioned a case by case inquiry. Aside from John Jay Hughes I only have heard of a couple of Anglicans who were ordained conditionally after investigation of their orders after conversion to the RCC…

 

[GKC]

My whole reason for the statement about being muddled.

While I know broad and high church Anglicans who deny the authority or validity (tounge in cheek) of Apostolica Curae, from a Roman point of view the same applies to the “Dutch Touch” as some Apostolic lines among the Anglican and Episcopalian Clergy were “restored” by the participation of the Old Catholics in ewrly 20th Century consecrations. Not all however (from the RC position). There are also those including a couple of TAC Bishops who have told me personally that they do not believe in the Mass as a sacrifice and do not intend to ordain priests to offer sacrifice. So it becomes as you mentioned a case by case inquiry. Aside from John Jay Hughes I only have heard of a couple of Anglicans who were ordained conditionally after investigation of their orders after conversion to the RCC…

If you know of any other, except the late Graham Leonard, who was ordained sub conditione, I’d like to hear of it.

As for the Dutch touch, it began with joint consecrations of Anglican bishops (and vice versa), in 1932, following the Agreement of Bonn (and started with the PNCC, in 1946) and continues. That means that (assuming the OCs did infuse valid/illict episcopal lines into Anglicanism, and other sacramental factors are valid), such lines are propagated as the Anglican bishops perform their own episcopal functions. Which expands the necessity for checking each case. Theoretically.

I’m never surprised at what any Anglican bishop might say. I’ve never met one who held the Mass wasn’t THE sacrifice. But I only hang out among Anglo-Catholics.

GKC

 

[Peter_J]

Is the Polish National Catholic Church like the ‘puppet “church”’ the Chinese government has set up in China?

If you’ll forgive me for saying this, I don’t think you would ask that unless you had a severe misconception of Poland.

 

[Peter_J]

You’re very kind. Encyclopaedic might be a little strong, but generally I have more info than the average on the subject. Unless Joe shows up. Joe knows more than I do.

Average Joe?