They would have apostolic succession through the cowardly bishops who agreed to join the kings new church, but they were ordaining to a purely ministerial priesthood rather than a sacrificial one, so their sacrament of holy orders was invalid.How can it be an apostolic church? It was beget by the disobedience of Henry VIII?
And which apostle is it connected to?
For lack of a better expression, this all sounds very “Jesuit” to me. Most Jesuits see the various Protestant groups as representing diverse charisms within the church (broadly understood) that sound be nurtured and pretty much left alone. Of course they wish unity with Rome, but not in the sense of uniformity. If one follows this line of thinking, maybe the ordinariate would indeed be obsolete?Bishop Gregory Venables says, of the new Pope, reportedly a close friend:
"…He is much more of a Christian, Christ centered and Spirit filled, than a mere churchman. He believes the Bible as it is written. I have been with him on many occasions and he always makes me sit next to him and invariably makes me take part and often do what he as Cardinal should have done. He is consistently humble and wise, outstandingly gifted yet a common man. He is no fool and speaks out very quietly yet clearly when necessary. He called me to have breakfast with him one morning and told me very clearly that the Ordinariate was quite unnecessary and that the church needs us as Anglicans. I consider this to be an inspired appointment not because he is a close and personal friend but because of who he is In Christ. Pray for him.”
This is hugely encouraging for Anglicans. Does this mean that the Ordinariates are dead? They will sort of disappear without much fanfare anyway, having not really got off the ground, and having no or minimal support from the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England anyway (don’t know about the situation in the States).
Also, when Venables says the Cardinal “invariably makes me take part and often do what he as Cardinal should have done” is this a change in attitude? Of course, the Pope has yet to experience - at a guess - the heresy and apostasy prevalent in Anglicanism in certain developed countries (which might serve to change his mind) but this is a very positive thing indeed.
Have we any reason to assume Bishop Venables is not telling the truth?
Thoughts?
Seeing as how the Jesuit order cut it’s teeth on the counter reformation, I’m pretty sure you are incorrect to put this on the society instead of some particular Jesuits.For lack of a better expression, this all sounds very “Jesuit” to me. Most Jesuits see the various Protestant groups as representing diverse charisms within the church (broadly understood) that sound be nurtured and pretty much left alone. Of course they wish unity with Rome, but not in the sense of uniformity. If one follows this line of thinking, maybe the ordinariate would indeed be obsolete?
Times have changed.Seeing as how the Jesuit order cut it’s teeth on the counter reformation, I’m pretty sure you are incorrect to put this on the society instead of some particular Jesuits.
Tell that to Mitch Pacwa, John Hardon, and Jorge Bergoglio.Times have changed.
Not to mention, Fr. Kenneth Baker, Fr. David Meconi, and Fr. Joseph Fessio. All Jesuits, all very faithful and holy. Anyone who has been paying any attention whatsoever to the goings on in the Catholic Church knows that the Society of Jesus has their problem children, probably a bit more than their fair share. However, there are also many good and holy priests in the society, and it is important to acknowledge that.Tell that to Mitch Pacwa, John Hardon, and Jorge Bergoglio.