Do any Protestant communities have valid Apostolic Succession?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rfournier103
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
If you’ll forgive me for saying this, I don’t think you would ask that unless you had a severe misconception of Poland. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
I know Poland was under the control of the USSR, and I don’t know if they set up a ‘church’ that survives to this day. I guess the name throws me off. We don’t have an “National Catholic Church of the United States”… 🤷

I do know that Poland is 92%-ish Catholic. Like I said, the name is a little odd to me…
 
rfournier103 said:
I know Poland was under the control of the USSR, and I don’t know if they set up a ‘church’ that survives to this day. I guess the name throws me off. We don’t have an “National Catholic Church of the United States”… 🤷

I do know that Poland is 92%-ish Catholic. Like I said, the name is a little odd to me…
Click to expand...
Try googling Polish National Catholic Church.

GKC
 
PNCC are derived from Polish Roman Catholics in the USA. They complained that they were not being treated fairly by the Irish and French Clergy here. Priests from the Polish RC parishes split with the RCC over this, one was Consecrated a bishop by the Old Catholics in Europe. While for a period of time the merged two Sacraments, (I believe it was baptism and penance) into one and added the “Preaching of the Word of God” as the seventh Sacrament, allowed clergy to marry and started offering Mass facing the congregation and in the vernacular long before Vatican II. They still exist, although in much smaller numbers than before.
 
Perhaps there is something some of our Protestant brothers and sisters are not aware of and that is the early church was very scrupulous in terms of apostolic tradition handed down. If a valid bishop showed any signs of a difference in opinion of doctrines he was immediately removed from his Episcopal office. Sacred Tradition were always identified by common consensus amongst the bishops and priests. Anyone with a difference in opinion including validly ordained ministers were immediately removed from their office. Common consensus was the deciding factor in deciding which doctrines are true and which were false. Here’s what Tertullian had to say about it:

“It remains, then, that we demonstrate whether this doctrine of ours, of which we have now given the rule, has its origin in the tradition of the apostles, and whether all other doctrines do not ipso facto proceed from falsehood. We hold communion with the apostolic churches because our doctrine is in no respect different from theirs. This is our witness of truth.”

newadvent.org/fathers/0311.htm

This may somewhat be off track from the subject of this thread. I just wanted to point out the important relationship between Sacred Tradition and Apostolic Succession which is why the Catholic Church must be the true Church. It operates no different to how it was in the first few centuries. The dogmas defined in Ecumenical councils is through a consensus agreed by Bishops and priests, no different to the common consensus agreed by the early church.
 
Filioque said:
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…
Click to expand...
I think you have a muddled version of what is meant by “intention”. If it depended on the religious views of the individual bishop/priest, even RCs could not be sure they were receiving a valid sacrament on Sunday mornings.
 
Indifferently said:
I think you have a muddled version of what is meant by “intention”. If it depended on the religious views of the individual bishop/priest, even RCs could not be sure they were receiving a valid sacrament on Sunday mornings.
Click to expand...
The requirement for valid sacramental intent is to intend to do what the Church does
(facere quod facit ecclesia), in the sacramental action.

GKC
 
Peter_J said:
If you’ll forgive me for saying this, I don’t think you would ask that unless you had a severe misconception of Poland. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
P.S. I should add that one of the other misunderstandings here (not the one comparing Poland to China) about the PNCC is quite understandable (or at least I think it is b/c I had the same problem when I first heard about the PNCC (about 10 years ago, from a Touchstone article)). Namely, the PNCC started in the USA, not in Poland.
 
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.
Click to expand...
No, I think you’re right. At least I for one don’t consider PNCC to be protestant. (That’s not to say, of course, that our opinion determines whether someone is protestant or not.)
 
Peter_J said:
No, I think you’re right. At least I for one don’t consider PNCC to be protestant. (That’s not to say, of course, that our opinion determines whether someone is protestant or not.)
Click to expand...
I agree.

GKC
 
Augustine3 said:
Perhaps there is something some of our Protestant brothers and sisters are not aware of and that is the early church was very scrupulous in terms of apostolic tradition handed down. If a valid bishop showed any signs of a difference in opinion of doctrines he was immediately removed from his Episcopal office.
Click to expand...
That was done to preserve the church’s power, nothing more. Don’t kid yourself that it was based on God’s divine intervention. Our loving God would never throw out a true believer from the True Church. Only man excommunicates people out of the Catholic Church.
 
Luth123 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Thanks for stating the obvious; obviously no and I like your comment. Most Protestants I know don’t care.
Mary.
 
rfournier103 said:
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?

Leadership and authority are really what this thread is about…
Click to expand...
Luther: “Every man is born with a Pope in his belly”

Seriously denominational Protestants have hierarchy just like the Catholic Church. They even have a head, but he/she is only a sinful human… not a Pope.
 
Luth123 said:
Luther: “Every man is born with a Pope in his belly”

Seriously denominational Protestants have hierarchy just like the Catholic Church. They even have a head, but he/she is only a sinful human… not a Pope.
Click to expand...
protestants do not call him a pope…but their leader is some kind of pope…mostly their pastor…if not their pastor…they them selves are the arbiter of truth…they just do not admit it…nor call him bishop or pope.

They surrender authority…to whoever agrees with their interpretation…be it their pastor or it is themselves.
 
Luth123 said:
That was done to preserve the church’s power, nothing more. Don’t kid yourself that it was based on God’s divine intervention. Our loving God would never throw out a true believer from the True Church. Only man excommunicates people out of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
What did Jesus mean when he told Peter; “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven and whatever you bind on earth, I will bind in heaven, and what ever you loose on earth, I will loose in heaven”?

There were many Eastern heretical bishop’s and priest’s that were deposed or removed from teaching. The Church never has the power to remove the sacrament of Holy orders from a bishop or priest, but the Church has the divine given authority to excommunicate heretics from the flock if they do not repent, and forgive sins. So yes It is not God’s will that all should be lost, that is why God gave his Church the authority and power to forgive sins.

The Church never has any power of her own accord, only the divine authority she was given by Jesus to excersise and commissioned to baptise and teach all nations with the promise from Jesus that he will always be with his church.

Peace be with you
 
MaryT777 said:
We might be, um, seriously SAVED? Yahoo!
Refreshing for there are those non Catholics that believe we’re just damned.
Click to expand...
And I also don’t think the Pope is the Anti-Christ, he’s just like any other sinful human like you and me.

And I also don’t mind all the incessionary prayer, just make it clear it’s incessionary since this is always the confusion.
 
Indifferently said:
I think you have a muddled version of what is meant by “intention”. If it depended on the religious views of the individual bishop/priest,

even RCs could not be sure they were receiving a valid sacrament on Sunday mornings./QUOTE]

How do you know that?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top