Do Roman Catholics consider Episcopalian sacremental confession valid?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nella
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Contarini said:
IThe Orthodox do, for one thing. The one church with indisputably valid orders is the Orthodox Church.
Click to expand...
Many can’t know for sure. They have a doctrine that one loses their orders or cannot receive orders if they become heterodox or schismatical. Therefore, if any EO bishop at some point down the line secretly held a heresy in his heart, he would break the line, all his ordinations and consecrations would be invalid, and so forth all the way down the line.

So, from a Catholic point of view, ours and their valid orders are a certainty, but from the Orthodox point of view, there’s no certainty at all.
 
Genesis315 said:
Many can’t know for sure. They have a doctrine that one loses their orders or cannot receive orders if they become heterodox or schismatical. Therefore, if any EO bishop at some point down the line secretly held a heresy in his heart, he would break the line, all his ordinations and consecrations would be invalid, and so forth all the way down the line.

So, from a Catholic point of view, ours and their valid orders are a certainty, but from the Orthodox point of view, there’s no certainty at all.
Click to expand...
Greetings,

I mean no offense but I am curious where you got this information from about the Orthodox. Can you post it.

Rev North
 
Genesis315 said:
Many can’t know for sure. They have a doctrine that one loses their orders or cannot receive orders if they become heterodox or schismatical. Therefore, if any EO bishop at some point down the line secretly held a heresy in his heart, he would break the line, all his ordinations and consecrations would be invalid, and so forth all the way down the line.

So, from a Catholic point of view, ours and their valid orders are a certainty, but from the Orthodox point of view, there’s no certainty at all.
Click to expand...
This is a strained argument. You can equally argue that if some Catholic bishop at some point had apostasized and deliberately chose not to intend to consecrate bishops, this would break the line of succession. In both traditions, you would have to have a public act to make orders invalid, I think. I would like to see documentation for the idea that the Orthodox think a secret heresy would break the line of succession. This sounds like one of those artificial arguments people manufacture for polemical purposes. They really accomplish nothing.

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
This is a strained argument. You can equally argue that if some Catholic bishop at some point had apostasized and deliberately chose not to intend to consecrate bishops, this would break the line of succession. In both traditions, you would have to have a public act to make orders invalid, I think. I would like to see documentation for the idea that the Orthodox think a secret heresy would break the line of succession. This sounds like one of those artificial arguments people manufacture for polemical purposes. They really accomplish nothing.

Edwin
Click to expand...
The Rev has started a thread on this:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=2688939#post2688939
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top