The Charismatic Episcopal Church

[GKC]

Anglican ordinations are NOT valid, neither are Episcopalian.

The Orthodox ordinations are.

This is why Roman Catholics, in times of emergency, can approach Orthodox sacraments, but those of Anglican and Episcopalian are not considered valid or licit.

Anglican orders are NOT “murky”. At the time of the founding of the Church of England, the wording of the ordination was changed and the succession of Peter was broken when they left the True Church, thus the Catholic Church declared these ordinations invalid.

This declaration was later challenged and a later Pope * published a definitive document specifying why exactly these ordinations are false.

If CEC ordinations were valid, then the Roman Catholic Church would not be re-ordaining any who become Catholic priests.*

The later Pope to whom you refer was Leo XIII, in 1896. But his Bull Apostolicae Curae, did not reffirm the point you refer to. It established it.

It will not surprise you to learn that Anglicans have a different view of the matter.

GKC

 

[chris_molter]

You’re mistaken, about Anglican Orders. Apostolicae Curae was issued long before the re-ordination of Anglican clergy in the 30’s which re-validated their orders from a Catholic viewpoint, with Old Catholic bishops participating in all their ordinations. So technically, the Anglican Orders (minus the invalid “female ordinations”) are a gray area, just like the Charismatic Episcopal Church. The Orthodox recognized the validity of Anglican Orders up until they began ordaining women in some areas of the Anglican Communion.

However, traditional Anglicans who maintain Apostolic Succession and do not ordain women are valid, but a gray area technically, since the Church has not yet acknowledged the re-validation that occured in the 30’s.

IIRC, not all Anglican “lines” were convalidated, though. I’d be very interested to see the various apostolic ‘lineages’ from various Anglican clergy (whether in the Canterbury communion or not). Does anyone know if such a record exists or if the info is available online?

Also, until Rome decides to ‘update’ its position on Anglican orders, technically Apostolicae Curae is still the official position of the Catholic Church, isn’t it?

As for the Orthodox, there’s a slight distinction: ‘they’ didn’t recognize Anglican orders. Some Orthodox jurisdictions did say that if Anglicans (as a whole) renounced their heresies they would be received without re-ordination. Since such a thing never happened (and seems rather unlikely in the future) those overtures are a dead letter.

 

[GKC]

IIRC, not all Anglican “lines” were convalidated, though. I’d be very interested to see the various apostolic ‘lineages’ from various Anglican clergy (whether in the Canterbury communion or not). Does anyone know if such a record exists or if the info is available online?

Also, until Rome decides to ‘update’ its position on Anglican orders, technically Apostolicae Curae is still the official position of the Catholic Church, isn’t it?

As for the Orthodox, there’s a slight distinction: ‘they’ didn’t recognize Anglican orders. Some Orthodox jurisdictions did say that if Anglicans (as a whole) renounced their heresies they would be received without re-ordination. Since such a thing never happened (and seems rather unlikely in the future) those overtures are a dead letter.

A short list of the coconsecrated (not cnovalidated, it was a consecration) Anglican bishops, through about 1964, is found in STEWARDS OF THE LORD, appendix II. The CoE and the TEC keep good records on these things, and the lines could easily be traced. Given the Anglican custom of 3 coconsecraators, the Dutch Touch has spread widely. You’d be hard pressed to find an Anglican bishop without it. My own recotor was ordained by a bishop who was consecrated by one who had a PNCC coconsecrator.

AC is the offical word yes. You should affirm it.

And, of course, the Orthodox say the same about Roman orders.

GKC

 

[mercygate]

As a member of the Charismatic Episcopal Church, I have been asked to respond to a recent inquiry on this forum regarding our position on the ordination of women. I am happy to do so. We do not ordain woman to any of the three historic orders of ordained ministry.

Florida CEC

Your denomination has sent a lot of good men into Holy Orders in the Catholic Church, and you have given us many fine laymen as well.

When you put Catholic sacramental theology in the same basket with a vigorous love for the Holy Spirit, you get quite a fireball!

 

[Matariel]

IIRC, not all Anglican “lines” were convalidated, though. I’d be very interested to see the various apostolic ‘lineages’ from various Anglican clergy (whether in the Canterbury communion or not). Does anyone know if such a record exists or if the info is available online?

I’m not sure, but I suppose they do. My bishop (who was Anglo-Catholic and very conservative and traditionalist) had his Apostolic Lineage on his office wall, and it also stated the Old Catholic and Independent Catholic consecrators in his line.

Also, until Rome decides to ‘update’ its position on Anglican orders, technically *Apostolicae Curae *is still the official position of the Catholic Church, isn’t it?

Because there is new information involved, and Apostolicae Curae does not contain this new information, because it was earlier, it doesn’t really apply. I think technically it is a grey area, much like the Charismatic Episcopalians.

Except, of course, in the case of the neo-Collyridians, those who have ordained female “bishops” and “priests”. They are clearly invalid, as it’s impossible for women to be ordained.

As for the Orthodox, there’s a slight distinction: ‘they’ didn’t recognize Anglican orders. Some Orthodox jurisdictions did say that if Anglicans (as a whole) renounced their heresies they would be received without re-ordination. Since such a thing never happened (and seems rather unlikely in the future) those overtures are a dead letter.

They also say the same of Roman Catholics.

 

[mercygate]

I’m not sure, but I suppos they do. My bishop (who was Anglo-Catholic and very conservative and traditionalist) had his Apostolic Lineage on the wall, and it also stated the Old Catholic and Independent Catholic consecrators in his line.

Because there is new information involved, and Apostolicae Curae does not contain this new information, because it was earlier, it doesn’t really apply. I think technically it is a grey area, much like the Charismatic Episcopalians.

As for the Orthodox, there’s a slight distinction: ‘they’ didn’t recognize Anglican orders. Some Orthodox jurisdictions did say that if Anglicans (as a whole) renounced their heresies they would be received without re-ordination. Since such a thing never happened (and seems rather unlikely in the future) those overtures are a dead letter.

They also say the same of Roman Catholics.
Anglican Orders are not “grey.” But as you note, the introduction of valid, though illicit, Apostolic lines has moved the distinction to a case-by-case basis. I know of no Anglican Priests, who have been received as Priests in the Catholic Church without question. Rather, there is a very small number (two?) who have been ordained “conditionally” rather than de novo.

It is a very hard pill for a serious, catholic-minded Anglican to swallow when confronted by the nullity of his Orders.

 

[GKC]

As for the Orthodox, there’s a slight distinction: ‘they’ didn’t recognize Anglican orders. Some Orthodox jurisdictions did say that if Anglicans (as a whole) renounced their heresies they would be received without re-ordination. Since such a thing never happened (and seems rather unlikely in the future) those overtures are a dead letter.

They also say the same of Roman Catholics.
Anglican Orders are not “grey.” But as you note, the introduction of valid, though illicit, Apostolic lines has moved the distinction to a case-by-case basis. I know of no Anglican Priests, who have been received as Priests in the Catholic Church without question. Rather, there is a very small number (two?) who have been ordained “conditionally” rather than de novo.

It is a very hard pill for a serious, catholic-minded Anglican to swallow when confronted by the nullity of his Orders.

Yes, two priests ordained sub conditione: Fr. John J. Hughes (Author of the best two books defending the Anglican position on Apostolicae Curae, written as a RC priest) and Fr. Graham Leonard, one time Anglican Bishop of London.

GKC

 

[mercygate]

They also say the same of Roman Catholics.

Anglican Orders are not “grey.” But as you note, the introduction of valid, though illicit, Apostolic lines has moved the distinction to a case-by-case basis. I know of no Anglican Priests, who have been received as Priests in the Catholic Church without question. Rather, there is a very small number (two?) who have been ordained “conditionally” rather than de novo.

It is a very hard pill for a serious, catholic-minded Anglican to swallow when confronted by the nullity of his Orders.

Yes, two priests ordained sub conditione: Fr. John J. Hughes (Author of the best two books defending the Anglican position on Apostolicae Curae, written as a RC priest) and Fr. Graham Leonard, one time Anglican Bishop of London.

GKCWhat’s going on with the quote feature for the last couple of weeks. It is VERY confusing!Heck! I can’t even make the quote feature work when I’m complaining about the quote feature.

 

[GKC]

Anglican Orders are not “grey.” But as you note, the introduction of valid, though illicit, Apostolic lines has moved the distinction to a case-by-case basis. I know of no Anglican Priests, who have been received as Priests in the Catholic Church without question. Rather, there is a very small number (two?) who have been ordained “conditionally” rather than de novo.

It is a very hard pill for a serious, catholic-minded Anglican to swallow when confronted by the nullity of his Orders.

Yes, two priests ordained sub conditione: Fr. John J. Hughes (Author of the best two books defending the Anglican position on Apostolicae Curae, written as a RC priest) and Fr. Graham Leonard, one time Anglican Bishop of London.

GKCWhat’s going on with the quote feature for the last couple of weeks. It is VERY confusing!

Beats me.

On the other matter, the fact that Fr. Leonard was ordained
sub conditione, rather than absolutely, was as much related to his Anglo-Catholic doctrine, as the issue of the Dutch Touch. AFAIK, it was the same with Fr. Hughes.

GKC

 

[SisterMoon]

I used to be in the Charismatic Episcopal Church. I am now Roman Catholic. Here is a website which outlines some of the problems they face.

cecexodus.com/

– Read the List of Issues

In short:

You can’t have apostolic succession WITHOUT apostolic submission.

Please message me if you want more details.

Blessings!

 

[GKC]

I used to be in the Charismatic Episcopal Church. I am now Roman Catholic. Here is a website which outlines some of the problems they face.

cecexodus.com/

– Read the List of Issues

In short:

You can’t have apostolic succession WITHOUT apostolic submission.

Please message me if you want more details.

Blessings!

Curious. Are you suggesting that the Orthodox, or the OCs or the PNCC do/did not possess apostolic succession?

GKC

 

[SisterMoon]

No. I’m not saying that.

Practically speaking, the CEC got an excommunicated bishop to lay hands on someone who laid hands on someone else who laid hands on their clergy. I have no idea if that’s valid but illicit or invalid. I’m just happy to be both valid and licit and in the ark now.

The problem is that the CEC does not believe that the Orthodox or Catholics are completely correct. They believe that since these two bodies “divorced,” we living today do not need to “pick a side.” So what they do then is pick and choose what they like from each, making up their own religion as they go along. They say they stand squarely on the apostolic faith of the first several centuries, but it’s just not true. One parish uses the filioque, another doesn’t. One believed Mary had other kids, one doesn’t. Birth control is up to the local bishop (if he even addresses it). Some churches are pro-homosexual unions, some are vehemently against. It’s a free for all. They’re not submitting to anyone…really.

I’m RC, but I know many ex-CECers who are Orthodox. We would all claim that the CEC is a FAR cry from what we are a part of now. Real apostolic succession and submission.

I don’t know anything about the PNCC, so I will defer to whatever Rome says about them.

 

[GKC]

No. I’m not saying that.

Practically speaking, the CEC got an excommunicated bishop to lay hands on someone who laid hands on someone else who laid hands on their clergy. I have no idea if that’s valid but illicit or invalid. I’m just happy to be both valid and licit and in the ark now.

The problem is that the CEC does not believe that the Orthodox or Catholics are completely correct. They believe that since these two bodies “divorced,” we living today do not need to “pick a side.” So what they do then is pick and choose what they like from each, making up their own religion as they go along. They say they stand squarely on the apostolic faith of the first several centuries, but it’s just not true. One parish uses the filioque, another doesn’t. One believed Mary had other kids, one doesn’t. Birth control is up to the local bishop (if he even addresses it). Some churches are pro-homosexual unions, some are vehemently against. It’s a free for all. They’re not submitting to anyone…really.

I’m RC, but I know many ex-CECers who are Orthodox. We would all claim that the CEC is a FAR cry from what we are a part of now. Real apostolic succession and submission.

I don’t know anything about the PNCC, so I will defer to whatever Rome says about them.

Rome says that they have apostolic succession, and valid orders.

I read your statement as saying that submission to something, not clearly understood, was a prerequisite to possessing apostolic succession.

I’m glad you are happy where you are.

GKC

 

[Mannyfit75]

Rome says that they have apostolic succession, and valid orders.

I read your statement as saying that submission to something, not clearly understood, was a prerequisite to possessing apostolic succession.

I’m glad you are happy where you are.

GKC

the CEC does not have apostolic succession and valid orders according to the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does recognize the validity of the Eastern Orthodox Apostolic Succession and Seven Sacraments.

 

[GKC]

the CEC does not have apostolic succession and valid orders according to the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does recognize the validity of the Eastern Orthodox Apostolic Succession and Seven Sacraments.

Manny, you need to read a little more carefully. The statement was about the PNCC, replying to the last line in the previous post, and did not refer to the CEC at all.

GKC

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manny, you need to read a little more carefully. The statement was about the PNCC, replying to the last line in the previous post, and did not refer to the CEC at all.

GKC

My bad

 

[GKC]

My bad

Pax, frater.

GKC