Do any Protestant communities have valid Apostolic Succession?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rfournier103
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
liturgyluver said:
It’s always good to be in agreement with you, knowing your encyclopaedic knowledge of this topic. I hope you are well.
Click to expand...
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.

GKC
 
GKC said:
No, not Henry. That happened under Edward. Hence, the Edwardine Ordinal. And that wasn’t the change that caused the supposed problem. The change was to the form of consecration/ordination. Nothing to do with King or Jesus.

GKC
Click to expand...
Thank you I stand corrected on the technicallity. I submit my comment to his faithfulness the Bishop of Rochester John Fisher “If I were to consent,” he declared, “that the King is the head of the English Church, I should be guilty of tearing the seamless robe of Christ, the one Catholic Church”.

St.Thomas More was beheaded because he refused to subscribe to the laws proclaiming the King’s spiritual supremacy.

My comment reflected the contemporary sentiments of these two great Anglican Saints.

Thanks for you and Liturgyluver generous (name removed by moderator)ut, it is well recieved.🙂 keep up the good work

Peace be with you
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
Thank you I stand corrected on the technicallity. I submit my comment to his faithfulness the Bishop of Rochester John Fisher “If I were to consent,” he declared, “that the King is the head of the English Church, I should be guilty of tearing the seamless robe of Christ, the one Catholic Church”.

St.Thomas More was beheaded because he refused to subscribe to the laws proclaiming the King’s spiritual supremacy.

My comment reflected the contemporary sentiments of these two great Anglican Saints.

Thanks for you and Liturgyluver generous (name removed by moderator)ut, it is well recieved.🙂 keep up the good work

Peace be with you
Click to expand...
You are very welcome, and I will try. Thank you.

GKC
 
the PNCC.

We have a different view on the matter (see Saepius Officio).
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
Many of the protestant reformers left the Catholic church with valid priestly faculties but these died with them, because they had no Bishop to ordain a bishop or validate priest’s and deacons.

The Anglican Church did have (apostolic successors) bishops’ but these also died with their apostolic faculties, because King Henry the VIII changed the Ordination of bishops to obedience to his own royal crown instead of solely to ordaining his bishop’s to the King Jesus, which broke the apostolic succession in the Anglican Church.

There are some western Catholics that are in schism with the bishop of Rome, who maintain a valid priesthood and some valid bishops, but these are not yet fully separated from the valid priesthood and sacraments.
Click to expand...
While what you say in the first paragraph is generally true, some Scandinavian
Lutherans brought bishops with them, and have maintained lines since. Rome has never made a statement about their validity, AFAIK. At best, however, I suspect Rome would consider them illicit.

There is also the fact that the CC has also, in the past employed presbyter ordination, such as the Cistercian Abbots in the century before Luther, and I believe it is, in part, on this precedent that the Lutheran reformers claimed validity of their presbyter ordinations in Germany.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
While what you say in the first paragraph is generally true, some Scandinavian
Lutherans brought bishops with them, and have maintained lines since. Rome has never made a statement about their validity, AFAIK. At best, however, I suspect Rome would consider them illicit.

There is also the fact that the CC has also, in the past employed presbyter ordination, such as the Cistercian Abbots in the century before Luther, and I believe it is, in part, on this precedent that the Lutheran reformers claimed validity of their presbyter ordinations in Germany.

Jon
Click to expand...
Those churches, very unfortunately, were forced by their governments to “ordain” women, so I suspect much of their succession has been lost.
 
JonNC said:
There is also the fact that the CC has also, in the past employed presbyter ordination, such as the Cistercian Abbots in the century before Luther, and I believe it is, in part, on this precedent that the Lutheran reformers claimed validity of their presbyter ordinations in Germany.
Click to expand...
I came across an English example recently. In 1400, Boniface IX bestowed on the Abbot of the Augustinian monastery of St Osyth in Essex the right of ordaining to the Diaconate and Priesthood. The Bishop of London was not impressed and complained about his loss of jurisdiction and rights of patronage. Consequently, in 1403, Boniface revoked his concession to the Abbot.

Perhaps ironically, William Barlow was a member of the community at St Osyth in later years.
 
JonNC said:
While what you say in the first paragraph is generally true, some Scandinavian
Lutherans brought bishops with them, and have maintained lines since. Rome has never made a statement about their validity, AFAIK. At best, however, I suspect Rome would consider them illicit.

There is also the fact that the CC has also, in the past employed presbyter ordination, such as the Cistercian Abbots in the century before Luther, and I believe it is, in part, on this precedent that the Lutheran reformers claimed validity of their presbyter ordinations in Germany.

Jon
Click to expand...
They would certainly consider them illicit, since they are not in communion with the Holy See. But as to valid … Some day I’d like to hear, definitively.

GKC
 
Indifferently said:
You seem very confident. What about the PNCC?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that the PNCC or the OCs would be characterized by the RCC as protestant. I could be wrong on that. But if so, it would mean that yes, there are protestants with valid apostolic succession, in the eyes of the RCC.

GKC
 
GKC said:
I’m not sure that the PNCC or the OCs would be characterized by the RCC as protestant. I could be wrong on that. But if so, it would mean that yes, there are protestants with valid apostolic succession, in the eyes of the RCC.

GKC
Click to expand...
What about SSPX? I suppose they are we facto Old Catholics now since they defy papal magisterial authority. Don’t mention that to one though… I think they bite.
 
Indifferently said:
What about SSPX? I suppose they are we facto Old Catholics now since they defy papal magisterial authority. Don’t mention that to one though… I think they bite.
Click to expand...
I’ve met some SSPXers. Lived through it.

I defer to a RCC evaluation of them, but I think schismatic is as far as they might go.

GKC
 
rfournier103 said:
This is the continuation of a side-topic from another thread. I think it deserves it’s own thread…
Click to expand...
Eastern Orthodoxy certainly does. if the first Protestant aka non-Catholic church, dates back only to the 16th century, then how could any of those churches make such a claim? No disrespect to any protestant churches of course; just curious…
 
GKC said:
I’ve met some SSPXers. Lived through it.

I defer to a RCC evaluation of them, but I think schismatic is as far as they might go.

GKC
Click to expand...
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…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top