Provoo Communion Validates Anglican Orders

[aidanbradypop]

I doubt the Vatican would agree, also. And while we as Lutherans would welcome recognition of our orders from Rome, as we recognize catholic orders, we actually don’t feel we need it to know that our orders are valid.

And this is where the Reformation took the wrong turn. How can one claim to be apart of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and deny what the Church says? When it suits someone, they afirm it, but if it goes against them, they do not care?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I doubt the Vatican would agree. They could declare the daytime sky paisley instead of blue and it wouldn’t make it so.

And I don’t think your second statement holds any water.

North Americans, as a group, probably know little to nothing about the alleged “apostolic succession from Sweden, Finland, etc” claims. And most Catholic North Americans would not accept the validity unless it was recognized by the Pontiff.

And the irony, as Jon points out, is that Lutherans, in general, are indifferent about apostolic succession. It appears the trend among worldwide Lutherans is to fall in line with episcopacy. “Called to Common Mission” that Episcopalian and Lutheran bishops signed about 15 years ago yields to the Anglican insistence of apostolic succession. So now the ELCA and other Lutheran groups in America and Canada ordain with a bishop present who has been consecrated by a bishop in apostolic succession.

Lutherans are fine with acknowledging apostolic sucession among Anglicans but as the Archbishop of Uppsala, the primate of Sweden, stated in 1925, the Lutheran Orders are uninterrupted in apostolic succession. So if there is any question about Anglican succession, it is a mute point now that they are in communion with Lutherans.

 

[JonNC]

And this is where the Reformation took the wrong turn. How can one claim to be apart of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and deny what the Church says? When it suits someone, they afirm it, but if it goes against them, they do not care?

I tho l I said we do care , that we desire and welcome recognition . Considering that there are times in history that the CC allowed for presbyter ordinations, one might think this not a huge obstacle. OTOH, one might think that the efforts of Lutherans to stay connected to or reconnect to the episcopacy would be greeted with support, if not recognition.
It seems the picking and choosing is done on both sides.

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

I tho l I said we do care , that we desire and welcome recognition . Considering that there are times in history that the CC allowed for presbyter ordinations, one might think this not a huge obstacle. OTOH, one might think that the efforts of Lutherans to stay connected to or reconnect to the episcopacy would be greeted with support, if not recognition.
It seems the picking and choosing is done on both sides.

Jon

Meaning?

 

[JonNC]

Meaning?

Meaning, Dustin, that your comment that we don’t care, or we separate ourselves from the OHCAC when it suits us, can be applied in both ways.
Now, to be sure, I don’t believe we do this. I also believe that our respective clergy see themselves much more closely connected than apologists on either side recognize.

Jon

 

[benjohnson]

Well, I don’t exactly *like *to use sarcasm, but it can be the most appropriate response to some of the absurd attacks on Christians on the web.

I’m just happy that it’s just a “Lutherans Are Evil Day” - if I remember correctly, it used to be a week long celebration.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Meaning, Dustin, that your comment that we don’t care, or we separate ourselves from the OHCAC when it suits us, can be applied in both ways.
Now, to be sure, I don’t believe we do this. I also believe that our respective clergy see themselves much more closely connected than apologists on either side recognize.

Jon

Fair enough. I can only go by what I experience here in my area. Apostolic Succession seems to be a thing of the past so to speak and really carries no weight with most Lutherans here in my area. Thanks for letting me know it still means something to some

 

[JonNC]

=EvangelCatholic;10983055]And the irony, as Jon points out, is that Lutherans, in general, are indifferent about apostolic succession. It appears the trend among worldwide Lutherans is to fall in line with episcopacy. “Called to Common Mission” that Episcopalian and Lutheran bishops signed about 15 years ago yields to the Anglican insistence of apostolic succession. So now the ELCA and other Lutheran groups in America and Canada ordain with a bishop present who has been consecrated by a bishop in apostolic succession.

This, in my view, was a positive outcome of CCM. It brought the importance of AS back into the consciousness of American Lutherans.

Lutherans are fine with acknowledging apostolic sucession among Anglicans but as the Archbishop of Uppsala, the primate of Sweden, stated in 1925, the Lutheran Orders are uninterrupted in apostolic succession. So if there is any question about Anglican succession, it is a mute point now that they are in communion with Lutherans.

Oh, I think, from a Catholic perspective, the question of the validity of either Lutheran or Anglican orders is anything but moot. And honestly, the ordination of women by both adds to the questions.

Jon

 

[GKC]

This, in my view, was a positive outcome of CCM. It brought the importance of AS back into the consciousness of American Lutherans.

Oh, I think, from a Catholic perspective, the question of the validity of either Lutheran or Anglican orders is anything but moot. And honestly, the ordination of women by both adds to the questions.

Jon

Concur, your last para.

GKC

 

[JonNC]

Fair enough. I can only go by what I experience here in my area. Apostolic Succession seems to be a thing of the past so to speak and really carries no weight with most Lutherans here in my area. Thanks for letting me know it still means something to some

You’re experience is with American Lutherans among whom, sadly, this might be the thought, but the confessions are clear:

24] The Fourteenth Article, in which we say that in the Church the administration of the Sacraments and Word ought to be allowed no one unless he be rightly called, they receive, but with the proviso that we employ canonical ordination. Concerning this subject we have frequently testified in this assembly that it is our greatest wish to maintain church-polity and the grades in the Church [old church-regulations and the government of bishops], even though they have been made by human authority [provided the bishops allow our doctrine and receive our priests]. For we know that church discipline was instituted by the Fathers, in the manner laid down in the ancient canons, with a good and useful intention.

If it was our greatest desire then, it ought to be now.

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Fair enough. I can only go by what I experience here in my area. Apostolic Succession seems to be a thing of the past so to speak and really carries no weight with most Lutherans here in my area. Thanks for letting me know it still means something to some

Lutherans in America were in the wilderness, so to speak for a few centuries. Cut off from the mother churches in Europe in a new country proud to be separated from Europe, Lutherans followed perfectly acceptable procedures of presbyters ordaining fellow priests.

But American Lutherans are not the Church of Sweden/ Finland, Estonia, etc where Lutheranism has deep roots in apostolic succession. There has been a tradition in America of rejecting the ‘Old World’ and for good reason, such as Germany forcing Lutherans and Reformed to merge in 1800’s. Resentment of anything monarchial or episcopal resulted in the LCMS, for example, rejecting episcopal governance even though the first bishop of the LCMS came from Germany. It is a complicated history.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Lutherans in America were in the wilderness, so to speak for a few centuries. Cut off from the mother churches in Europe in a new country proud to be separated from Europe, Lutherans followed perfectly acceptable procedures of presbyters ordaining fellow priests.

But American Lutherans are not the Church of Sweden/ Finland, Estonia, etc where Lutheranism has deep roots in apostolic succession. There has been a tradition in America of rejecting the ‘Old World’ and for good reason, such as Germany forcing Lutherans and Reformed to merge in 1800’s. Resentment of anything monarchial or episcopal resulted in the LCMS, for example, rejecting episcopal governance even though the first bishop of the LCMS came from Germany. It is a complicated history.

I understand you believe Lutherans in Sweden, Finland etc have a valid AS but do you also believe Rome claims them to be valid? That is where I am getting confused.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I understand you believe Lutherans in Sweden, Finland etc have a valid AS but do you also believe Rome claims them to be valid? That is where I am getting confused.

I fully understand that the Church of Rome does not consider the apostolic succession of Lutherans to be valid if it is separated from authority of the Pope. How does the Roman Catholic church view apostolic succession among Orthodox churches?

 

[aidanbradypop]

I fully understand that the Church of Rome does not consider the apostolic succession of Lutherans to be valid if it is separated from authority of the Pope. How does the Roman Catholic church view apostolic succession among Orthodox churches?

Valid. They are in schism not cut off so to speak

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Over in the Apologetics’ Section this questions came about:

Apostolic succession question

DavidFilmer did a magnificent job explaining valid succession vs. valid ordination.

Especially in Post # 11

DavidFilmer:

That’s because valid succession is not enough to guarantee valid Ordination. Every Sacrament has five required elements: minister (which is where succession comes in), subject, matter, form, and intent. If any ONE of these is lacking, the sacrament is not valid. This is also the teaching of Anglican theologians (such as Francis Hall). In the case of Orders, only one of the five requirements has anything to do with valid succession.

The Anglicans (after being heavily influenced by Calvinism) lost their Orders (which had been recognized as valid for decades) through theological changes resulting in a lack of valid intent (and probably of valid form). A “valid” Bishop (which the Anglicans had in their early days) does not ordain someone without ALSO having valid intent and form, and these were determined to be insufficient. (In the case of Barbara Harris, the ordination would further be invalidated by lack of proper subject.)

Through the Oxford movement, the Anglican Church has regained much of what it had lost, but not in time to avert disaster. By the time they recovered, there were no validly ordained Bishops (ordained with valid succession AND valid form and intent) remaining. All of their validly ordained Bishops had died out, and the Anglican Church was left with a group of laymen in Bishop’s cassocks with valid succession but invalid ordination.

I still have a lot more reading to do regarding this subject but wanted to share this to the discussion.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I know this subject has likely been discussed before, but I am curious why the Roman Catholic church view Orthodox orders as valid but not Lutheran? Especially considering apostolic succession.

 

[GKC]

Over in the Apologetics’ Section this questions came about:

Apostolic succession question

DavidFilmer did a magnificent job explaining valid succession vs. valid ordination.

Especially in Post # 11

I still have a lot more reading to do regarding this subject but wanted to share this to the discussion.

That is a fair assessment of the conclusions of Apostolicae Curae. But it is not enough to say “and probably of valid form”. Form and intent are intertwined. It is only the use of the form in the Edwardine Ordinal that permits a judgment of invalid intent. Had the Anglicans continued to use the Pontificale Romanum, there would have been no way to judge intent.

For reading, I suggest J. J. Hughes two magisterial books, ABSOLUTELY NULL AND UTTERLY VOID, for the history of the theoloical, personal, political and historical details on this sad subject, and his STEWARDS OF THE LORD, for a consideration of a possible defense of the Anglican theology at the time. Fr. Hughes is a most interesting character in this story: the first Anglican priest to be ordained in the RCC sub conditione, after Apostolicae Curae. For the best RC account of it all, (then Jesuit Fr.) Francis Clark’s ANGLICAN ORDERS AND DEFECT OF INTENTION.

GKC

 

[GKC]

I know this subject has likely been discussed before, but I am curious why the Roman Catholic church view Orthodox orders as valid but not Lutheran? Especially considering apostolic succession.

No valid bishops.

I am aware of the position on the Scandinavian bishops; indeed my own bishop is in close contact with some of them. But, as has been pointed out, and as with the Dutch Touch/Polish Pat issues, one searches for an official RCC statement on the subject.

GKC

 

[GKC]

I fully understand that the Church of Rome does not consider the apostolic succession of Lutherans to be valid if it is separated from authority of the Pope. How does the Roman Catholic church view apostolic succession among Orthodox churches?

No, in general the key point in such a case is licitity. Valid possession and transmission of orders, though separated from Rome, is certainly possible. See Ott, FUNDAMENTALS OF CATHOLIC DOGMA, p.458.

GKC

 

[pablope]

I tho l I said we do care , that we desire and welcome recognition . Considering that there are times in history that the CC allowed for presbyter ordinations, one might think this not a huge obstacle.

True…but this was a special circumstance and with permission from the Pope. Nobody took it upon themselves to do so on their own.

And if you truly indeed follow long standing Church Traditon, both east and west…bishops would indeed be needed to confer Holy Orders, not presbyters.

So how can you then justify the Lutheran way of disregarding bishops and ordaining presbyters by presbyters…

OTOH, one might think that the efforts of Lutherans to stay connected to or reconnect to the episcopacy would be greeted with support, if not recognition.
It seems the picking and choosing is done on both sides.