Please explain what Valid Holy Orders are

[Tommy999]

Tommy, no worries. Pope Clement VII and King Henry VIII started the ruckus in 1534…

What you are witnessing is what I listed in post #13 and is following the usual course. The real issue is a difference in doctrinal philosophies of the RCC and the Anglican Church. The RCC has a hierarchical nature and follows the teachings of the Magisterium and declarations from the Pope. There’s little leeway, and it has served them well.

Anglicanism on the other hand is always open to questioning just about anything due to a biforcated theology based both in Roman Catholicicism and the Protestant Reformation. It makes for somewhat of a muddled mess.

Most Roman Catholics are taught basic theology and never question further. (Members of this forum tend to be unlike the average RC in that way) I have a bit of a rebellious nature and as such tend to question most things if only to understand them more fully.

Through that questioning, as witnessed in this thread, I am convinced that Anglican Orders have continued since Christ and are certainly present today. (If not I would move to Catholicism or Orthodoxy.) Actually it was in studying our Catholic roots that my greatest gains of knowledge in Anglicanism have occurred. My research raised certain questions which seem common sense to me and I think may cause others to delve more deeply into learning their faith instead of accepting it without question.

I have no thoughts that Catholics will change their Doctrine, but the discussion, even when a little at odds with each other, does allow us to move more deeply into our respective traditions.

Thanks again for starting the thread!

Glad to be of service, ChurchSoldier. Like you, I like to question things - perhaps not so much out of a rebellious nature, but because I like to be able to understand what’s taking place and not be in the dark. In my view, Catholicism has a lot more “bells and whistles” to understand, especially for someone like me who did not come from a similar background.

For example, on Easter, I watched a Catholic Mass on EWTN from Washington, DC, Basilica and saw the cardinal shaking an instrument that looked like a scepter into the crowd.

I didn’t understand what he held or its purpose, and it bothered me, so I asked about it and discovered it was an '‘Aspergillum’ used to sprinkle holy water. I could’ve just ignored it and accepted it as something important, but it has more meaning now that I understand its purpose.

The same goes for holy orders now – more or less.

 

[Tommy999]

John.15: 16 “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide; so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you”

Throughout the bible God has consistently chosen One man [male] to administer, guide and be in charge of His People. In New Testament times this begins with Peter, on whom Christ lays the responsibility of establishing and growing His “My Church” singular: Mt 16:18-19; and gives to Peter all of the Key;s for entry into God’s kingdom conditionally.

In Mt. 10 where Christ appoints His Chosen Apostles and sends them out with some of His Own Power and Authority, but commands them to go cf. “Only to the Hebrew nation” Mt. 10: 5-6; but then just before ascending “back to my Father and Your’s” He changes the mandate from only the Hebrew Nation to the Entire World. Mt. 28:16-20 & Mk. 16: 15-16. So in order to accomplish this new Mandate; succession And a priesthood becomes necessary.

This new priesthood follows on the Tradition of the Old Testament Priesthood: Exodus 31:10. But God empowers his new priesthood with FAR more authority and Powers including the Authority to forgive mens sins John 20:1923 & astonishingly to make Jesus actually and Really, Truly and Substantially Present in our midst at Mass. Mt. 26:26-28; Mk. 14:22-24, Lk. 22:17-19, John 6: 45-59, & Paul in 1st. Cor. 11:23-30.

God gives these men special Powers and Authority and tells them and US, that He [Christ] is sending them, JUST AS the Father sent Jesus. John 20:21

Just a God; Yahweh choose Aaron and his sons apart for priestly ministry; Christ sets apart through the Sacrament of Holy Orders and a special anointing that "marks them: and priest for Christ Ministry. Exodus 28: 1 & John 20: 21-23 " He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. [22] When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them:** Receive ye the Holy Ghost**. [23] Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. And they too like Aaron and his sons are set asside to minister on behalf of Christ.

God Bless you,

Patrick

Thanks a lot, PJM. The instructor in you is pretty evident from that explanation.
Would topics like these be part of RCIA programs in most parishes?

 

[Vico]

Thank you for your response.

What does the church say about those Middle Ages ordinations where no records are available as to form?

Also, it raises the question of intention in situations of Simony (purchasing a church office in this case) as was widely practiced in the Roman Catholic Church throughout the Middle Ages. Would there be proper intent when the purpose of the ordination was financial rather than spiritual? Certainly the Apostles spoke out against the intention of Simon (Magnus) who tried to buy the office and the church teaches Simony is a grave sin. You can’t be sinning and have proper intention simultaneously, they are mutually exclusive.

Without records, and knowing that Simony was widely practiced, how can the church be sure valid orders were kept? What is the reasoning in holding validity in these cases of doubt?

Thanks again for the reply.

CIC (canon law) Can. 1380 A person who celebrates or receives a sacrament through simony is to be punished with an interdict or suspension.

There is no requirement for sanctity of the bishop, for a valid ordination, it is ex opera operato, since Christ himself if the author of every sacrament. It was a Donatist error that the validity of such an act depended on the worthiness of the bishop performing it.

 

[PJM]

It is because the intention that is required for Holy Orders was changed, that the succession was lost. Each bishop must maintain the intention to do in ordination what was done before at his ordination.

“A new Ordinal or Order for making bishops, priests, and deacons was compiled, from which in like manner all mention of the sacrificial office of the priesthood was rigorously excluded. It was approved by Parliament in 1552.” – Catholic Encyclopedia

Nine major doctrinal difference occurred then:

1. • rejection of the Papacy,
   • denial of the Church Infallibility;
   • Justification by Faith only;
   • supremacy and sufficiency of Scripture as Rule of Faith;
   • the triple Eucharistic tenet
   • that the Eucharist is a Communion or Sacrament, and not a Mass or Sacrifice, save in the sense of praise or commemoration;
   • the denial of Transubstantiation and worship of the Host;
   • the denial of the sacrificial office of the priesthood and the propitiatory character of the Mass

   • the non-necessity of auricular Confession;

   • the rejection of the invocation of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints;

   • the rejection of Purgatory and omission of prayers for the dead;

   • the rejection of the doctrine of Indulgences.

1. 
   Very nicely done, thank you,
   
   Patrick

 

[ChurchSoldier]

CIC (canon law) Can. 1380 A person who celebrates or receives a sacrament through simony is to be punished with an interdict or suspension.

There is no requirement for sanctity of the bishop, for a valid ordination, it is ex opera operato, since Christ himself if the author of every sacrament. It was a Donatist error that the validity of such an act depended on the worthiness of the bishop performing it.

Reading p. 4 of the following paper discusses a cardinal not holding the validity of simoniac orders and a priest refusing to be consecrated by a simoniac Bishop due to invalidity. It also states the Popes of the time "doing what they could to stem Simony which really means they weren’t able to stop it and presumes it was a widespread enough practice that it got the attention of the Papal Office. kingssing.com/papers/c_and_c.pdf

This could be because the Popes received monies from the Simonic Sees, which I guess would certainly raise another set of questions too far off topic.

Thanks for the reply!