Why did the Protestant Reformation happen?

[rcwitness]

A concept which Protestantism is based on is that the true church of Jesus owes no obedience to the current leadership of the Universal Church. There is no duty to defend the Eucharist which was given to the Apostles and then their successors.

Therefore, the Protestant reformers were able to justify avoiding the consequences of upholding the Eucharist by establishing a Eucharist separate from the Original Christ given One.

Whoever wishes to uphold/defend the gospel of the ‘Bread of Communion’ must take up the suffering which accompanies this task. So, the question is, did Martin Luther accept the cross of reform? Did he not contradict his own vows of celebacy and take a wife? Did he not fall victim to the presures of the political powers?

You see? In the end, Martin Luther was no different than the ones he accused. The Sacrament belong to those whom the holy annointing was given. To change the hearts of these ones takes both boldness AND humility. The reformation had individuals who were bold, and individuals who were humble, but the Protestant Reformation did not have the Authority of Jesus, because it was not able to establish a new covanent.

 

[JonNC]

=rcwitness;12165702]A concept which Protestantism is based on is that the true church of Jesus owes no obedience to the current leadership of the Universal Church. There is no duty to defend the Eucharist which was given to the Apostles and then their successors.

Therefore, the Protestant reformers were able to justify avoiding the consequences of upholding the Eucharist by establishing a Eucharist separate from the Original Christ given One.

I certainly wouldn’t view it this way. I see your Eucharist the sdame as mine, in that there is only one, His body and blood, given and shed for the remission of sin.

Whoever wishes to uphold/defend the gospel of the ‘Bread of Communion’ must take up the suffering which accompanies this task. So, the question is, did Martin Luther accept the cross of reform? Did he not contradict his own vows of celebacy and take a wife? Did he not fall victim to the presures of the political powers?

I think you may want to look into that more deeply. Much of the political power, though certainly not all, was vested in the Catholic Church.

You see? In the end, Martin Luther was no different than the ones he accused.

Now on this I agree, and in some ways, his language and demeanor were worse. I suspect perhaps a less drastic outcome had he only listened to his own advice regarding the 8th Commandment: ** We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything. **

Jon

 

[rcwitness]

I certainly wouldn’t view it this way. I see your Eucharist the sdame as mine, in that there is only one, His body and blood, given and shed for the remission of sin.

Right. But I dont think He gave His body and Blood for division. That’s why I say it is the duty of Christians to defend Our Eucharist. If we do not have the authority as leaders in the Church to bind and losen, then we have the duty to suffer and strive to compel one another to convert their hearts.

I think you may want to look into that more deeply. Much of the political power, though certainly not all, was vested in the Catholic Church.

Martin Luther was influenced by political royalty to Marry a prince whom was already married, correct? So the principal reformers acted as those which they protested. Yet, who was there to tell Martin his abuse of the sacrament was not in accordance with Apostolic Teaching?

Now on this I agree, and in some ways, his language and demeanor were worse. I suspect perhaps a less drastic outcome had he only listened to his own advice regarding the 8th Commandment: ** We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything. **

So, we both can appreciate the constant need for personal conversion.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=rcwitness;12166103]Right. But I dont think He gave His body and Blood for division. That’s why I say it is the duty of Christians to defend Our Eucharist. If we do not have the authority as leaders in the Church to bind and losen, then we have the duty to suffer and strive to compel one another to convert their hearts.

No argument here.

Martin Luther was influenced by political royalty to Marry a prince whom was already married, correct? So the principal reformers acted as those which they protested. Yet, who was there to tell Martin his abuse of the sacrament was not in accordance with Apostolic Teaching?

Honestly, I do not understand. Which prince are you speaking of?

So, we both can appreciate the constant need for personal conversion.

Oh, indeed. Constantly dying in the old Adam, and rising through Christ into new life.

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Right. But I dont think He gave His body and Blood for division. That’s why I say it is the duty of Christians to defend Our Eucharist. If we do not have the authority as leaders in the Church to bind and losen, then we have the duty to suffer and strive to compel one another to convert their hearts.

Martin Luther was influenced by political royalty to Marry a prince whom was already married, correct? So the principal reformers acted as those which they protested. Yet, who was there to tell Martin his abuse of the sacrament was not in accordance with Apostolic Teaching?

So, we both can appreciate the constant need for personal conversion.

Jon

Luther, the priest married Katherine, the nun.

 

[rcwitness]

Honestly, I do not understand. Which prince are you speaking of?

Jon

Sorry, maybe not a prince,
Philip I Landgrave of Hesse

And this was more of spiritual direction.

From December 1539, Luther became implicated in the bigamy of Philip I, Landgrave of Hesse, who wanted to marry one of his wife’s ladies-in-waiting. Philip solicited the approval of Luther, Melanchthon, and Bucer, citing as a precedent the polygamy of the patriarchs. The theologians were not prepared to make a general ruling, and they reluctantly advised the landgrave that if he was determined, he should marry secretly and keep quiet about the matter.[194] As a result, on 4 March 1540, Philip married a second wife, Margarethe von der Sale, with Melanchthon and Bucer among the witnesses. However, Philip was unable to keep the marriage secret, and he threatened to make Luther’s advice public. Luther told him to “tell a good, strong lie” and deny the marriage completely, which Philip did during the subsequent public controversy.[195] In the view of Luther’s biographer Martin Brecht, “giving confessional advice for Philip of Hesse was one of the worst mistakes Luther made, and, next to the landgrave himself, who was directly responsible for it, history chiefly holds Luther accountable”.[196] Brecht argues that Luther’s mistake was not that he gave private pastoral advice, but that he miscalculated the political implications.[197] The affair caused lasting damage to Luther’s reputation.[198]

 

[Abu]

JonNC #
I see your Eucharist the sdame as mine, in that there is only one, His body and blood, given and shed for the remission of sin.

Unfortunately, there can be no Eucharist – the real Body and Blood of Jesus of Nazareth – without a valid consecration. There can be no valid consecration without a valid priesthood which does not exist in Lutheranism.

The priesthood was created by Christ at the Last Supper within His Catholic Church and can be passed on only by valid consecration which Luther abandoned. Luther decreed: “The Church of Christ does not know this sacrament, it was invented by the pope’s Church.” [Cited by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in *Principles of Catholic Theology, Ignatius, 1987, p 261].

 

[Contarini]

Sorry, maybe not a prince,
Philip I Landgrave of Hesse

“Prince” is the traditional translation of the German “fuerst,” which was the term used for the various territorial rulers of the Holy Roman Empire. I often say “rulers” to avoid confusing people who think of Disney princes, but your terminology was the standard one.

And this was more of spiritual direction.

He, Melanchthon, and Bucer were all involved, but I don’t think Luther was actually present, as M and B were. They all agreed, though.

Theologically, Luther thought bigamy was preferable to divorce. I think he was probably right about that, though of course modern culture has gone the other way (and of course, it’s a question of which is worse, since neither is OK). He was willing to be pretty flexible with allies, and, again, Melanchthon and Bucer agreed.

This was, quite rightly, a major scandal and a major stain on the record of the Protestants I think you were right to cite this as an example of the Protestants catering to powerful people, although there was a genuine theological rethinking of marriage going on as well…

Edwin

 

[JonNC]

Sorry, maybe not a prince,
Philip I Landgrave of Hesse

And this was more of spiritual direction.

Hi Michael,
I thought you might have had Philip in mind, but I wasn’t sure.

Long before the marriage, Luther wrote this to Philip:

“As regards the other matter, my faithful warning and advice is that no man, Christians in particular, should have more than one wife, not only for the reason that offense would be given, and Christians must not needlessly give, but most diligently avoid giving, offense, but also for the reason that we have no word of God regarding this matter on which we might base a belief that such action would be well-pleasing to God and to Christians. Let heathen and Turks do what they please. Some of the ancient fathers had many wives, but they were urged to this by necessity, as Abraham and Jacob, and later many kings, who according to the law of Moses obtained the wives of their friends, on the death of the latter, as an inheritance. The example of the fathers is not a sufficient argument to convince a Christian: he must have, in addition, a divine word that makes him sure, just as they had a word of that kind from God. For where there was no need or cause, the ancient fathers did not have more than one wife, as Isaac, Joseph, Moses, and many others. For this reason I cannot advise for, but must advise against, your intention, particularly since you are a Christian, unless there were an extreme necessity, as, for instance, if the wife were leprous or the husband were deprived of her for some other reason. On what grounds to forbid other people such marriages I know not”

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=Abu;12166454]Unfortunately, there can be no Eucharist – the real Body and Blood of Jesus of Nazareth – without a valid consecration. There can be no valid consecration without a valid priesthood which does not exist in Lutheranism.

While the Catholic Church, AFAIK, has never made a definitive statement regarding Lutheran orders, particularly those where bishops were retained, one can assume that you here state the Catholic view.

The priesthood was created by Christ at the Last Supper within His Catholic Church and can be passed on only by valid consecration which Luther abandoned. Luther decreed: “The Church of Christ does not know this sacrament, it was invented by the pope’s Church.” [Cited by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in *Principles of Catholic Theology

, Ignatius, 1987, p 261].

Luther was speaking of “sacrament”, but we have never abandoned ordination, as our confessions make clear, regardless of what Luther said about it.
From the Apology:

But if ordination be understood as applying to the ministry of the Word, we are not unwilling to call ordination a sacrament. For the ministry of the Word has God’s command and glorious promises, Rom. 1:16: The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. Likewise, Is. 55:11: So shall My Word be that goeth forth out of My mouth; it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please. 12] If ordination be understood in this way, neither will we refuse to call the imposition of hands a sacrament. For the Church has the command to appoint ministers, which should be most pleasing to us, because we know that God approves this ministry, and is present in the ministry [that God will preach and work through men and those who have been chosen by men]. 13] And it is of advantage, so far as can be done, to adorn the ministry of the Word with every kind of praise against fanatical men, who dream that the Holy Ghost is given not through the Word, but because of certain preparations of their own, if they sit unoccupied and silent in obscure places, waiting for illumination, as the Enthusiasts formerly taught, and the Anabaptists now teach.

Regarding Cardinal Ratzinger’s quote, he also wrote this to Bavarian Lutheran Bishop Johannes Hanselmann:

I count among the most important results of the ecumenical dialogues the insight that the issue of the eucharist cannot be narrowed to the problem of ‘validity.’ Even a theology oriented to the concept of succession, such as that which holds in the Catholic and in the Orthodox church, need not in any way deny the salvation-granting presence of the Lord [Heilschaffende Gegenwart des Herrn] in a Lutheran [evangelische] Lord’s Supper.

Jon

 

[Contarini]

Hi Michael,
I thought you might have had Philip in mind, but I wasn’t sure.

Long before the marriage, Luther wrote this to Philip:

Jon

Right. But Luther did, in fact, come to approve of the marriage (as the lesser evil) and the ensuing attempt to cover it up.

Edwin

 

[JonNC]

Right. But Luther did, in fact, come to approve of the marriage (as the lesser evil) and the ensuing attempt to cover it up.

Edwin

I agree, Edwin. Luther would have done far better to have stood by his original position, as stated in his letter. Whether he approved or merely acquiesced is a question, but probably not relevant anymore than academically.

Jon

 

[rcwitness]

Hi Michael,
I thought you might have had Philip in mind, but I wasn’t sure.

Long before the marriage, Luther wrote this to Philip:

Jon

That was definitely the good advice. Should have stuck with that. The point was that he was influenced by political powers eventually. I even contend that the worse part of the participation in the scandal was…

Luther told him to “tell a good, strong lie” and deny the marriage completely,

The point isn’t to bring Luther and the reformers down, but to recognize they were no better than the leaders which were in power. I realize the contention for Luther did not lie soley in the fact that men were abusing their positions, but more on doctrine.

And if I’m not mistaken, Luther claimed to be greater than any Bishop in 1000 yrs. So, at times he does consider his faith to place him in a greater position of authority. This is where I don’t see his stance, and the reformers, as having substantial authority to seperate themselves from the duty and obedience to the leaders of his time. If the reformers were correct in rebuking bad behavior, they were in a sense standing with a greater authority, but that does not exempt themselves from the authority of existing Bishops and the Pope. That’s why I believe whoever is under the authority of another, must only suffer their faults in order to convert their hearts, but cannot remove them from their office or themselves from their duty to obey them.

The Faith Alone vs Faith and Works can be debating to death. In the end, there is a truth in Faith Alone, which I don’t think the Cat Church denies. Yet, there is the reality that cooperation of our will is considered the work which completes saving faith, allowing God’s Will to be done. Just as Mary said, “…Let it be done according to thy Word”

This kind of cooperation is submisive and reliant on the assistance of the Holy Spirit to convert and guide. But it is not passive and idle. It is active and inspired by God’s love between Himself and His Son.

 

[JonNC]

=rcwitness;12167927]That was definitely the good advice. Should have stuck with that. The point was that he was influenced by political powers eventually. I even contend that the worse part of the participation in the scandal was…

Luther told him to “tell a good, strong lie” and deny the marriage completely,

I agree, in that Luther knew this was not right, though I am not sure if it was the influence of the powerful, or just the stronger dislike for divorce. Again, an academic point.

The point isn’t to bring Luther and the reformers down, but to recognize they were no better than the leaders which were in power. I realize the contention for Luther did not lie soley in the fact that men were abusing their positions, but more on doctrine.

Maybe, maybe not.

And if I’m not mistaken, Luther claimed to be greater than any Bishop in 1000 yrs. So, at times he does consider his faith to place him in a greater position of authority. This is where I don’t see his stance, and the reformers, as having substantial authority to seperate themselves from the duty and obedience to the leaders of his time.

Luther said a lot of bombastic tings, often in a hyperbolic way, though I am not willing to defend any belief on his part that he thought himself better than others.

If the reformers were correct in rebuking bad behavior, they were in a sense standing with a greater authority, but that does not exempt themselves from the authority of existing Bishops and the Pope. That’s why I believe whoever is under the authority of another, must only suffer their faults in order to convert their hearts, but cannot remove them from their office or themselves from their duty to obey them.

Perhaps, but it has been often the case within the history of the Church, even before the Reformation, where this has not happened, and who is to say which authority was greater when considering the East-West split.
Further, it is difficult, I believe, to stand with an authority that has expelled you. It is far too complex an issue to simply say, one should not exempt oneself from authority.

The Faith Alone vs Faith and Works can be debating to death. In the end, there is a truth in Faith Alone, which I don’t think the Cat Church denies. Yet, there is the reality that cooperation of our will is considered the work which completes saving faith, allowing God’s Will to be done. Just as Mary said, “…Let it be done according to thy Word”

This kind of cooperation is submisive and reliant on the assistance of the Holy Spirit to convert and guide. But it is not passive and idle. It is active and inspired by God’s love between Himself and His Son.

I agree, though I would probably refrain from saying the bolded. It appears to contradict the final paragraph, to which I say Amen.

Jon

 

[rcwitness]

I agree, in that Luther knew this was not right, though I am not sure if it was the influence of the powerful, or just the stronger dislike for divorce. Again, an academic point.

Do you think this would have been an issue if some peseant asked all these men?

Maybe, maybe not.

I lean towards probably. Remember, the higher the leadership position, the more subject we are to the devil.

Luther said a lot of bombastic tings, often in a hyperbolic way, though I am not willing to defend any belief on his part that he thought himself better than others.

Well, I think many of us Catholics have lots of respect for much of his personal and Catholic faith. He was very gifted to be able to translate what he did. His faith is not always overshadowed by his controversy, at least not by me and Benedict.

Perhaps, but it has been often the case within the history of the Church, even before the Reformation, where this has not happened, and who is to say which authority was greater when considering the East-West split.
Further, it is difficult, I believe, to stand with an authority that has expelled you. It is far too complex an issue to simply say, one should not exempt oneself from authority.

And that’s where most of my appreciation for him does lie, in his very challenging situation and times. Being in a time of less than noble leadership. But not all leading Catholics were bad either.

I agree, though I would probably refrain from saying the bolded. It appears to contradict the final paragraph, to which I say Amen.

Here I would again turn to your appreciation for Mary. She was set apart in a way as to assist her Holiness, and yet she needed to submit her will in order to be the model Christian to all who would love her Son. This submitting, I see as the mustard seed, and the Lord is able to do mighty deeds with our conversion.

 

[JonNC]

=rcwitness;12168305]Do you think this would have been an issue if some peseant asked all these men?

An issue? No. Had they given tacit approval? Probably not.

Well, I think many of us Catholics have lots of respect for much of his personal and Catholic faith. He was very gifted to be able to translate what he did. His faith is not always overshadowed by his controversy, at least not by me and Benedict.

I’ve noticed your deference in your writing, and it is appreciated. ISTM when we gain an appreciation for others, it leads to better communication and closer relations. Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict has been an excellent example of that.

And that’s where most of my appreciation for him does lie, in his very challenging situation and times. Being in a time of less than noble leadership. But not all leading Catholics were bad either.

Indeed true. More importantly for us, the high quality of leadership over the last few decades.

Here I would again turn to your appreciation for Mary. She was set apart in a way as to assist her Holiness, and yet she needed to submit her will in order to be the model Christian to all who would love her Son. This submitting, I see as the mustard seed, and the Lord is able to do mighty deeds with our conversion.

Understood, though I do view her with much the same admiration and awe, even with our understanding of soteriology.

Jon

 

[Abu]

JonNC #160
we have never abandoned ordination, as our confessions make clear, regardless of what Luther said about it.

The validity of the “ordination” is what is absent.

David Schütz
Melbourne, Australia
‘Why are so many Lutheran pastors becoming Roman Catholic?’
‘I would also add that a growing understanding of the AUTHORITY of the Catholic Church led me to question the validity of my call to act as a public minister of word and sacrament. A Lutheran pastor who becomes Catholic does so in part because he recognises the invalidity of his Lutheran ordination, that is he comes to question the authority of the Lutheran Church to confer holy orders in the first place. As a result, he comes to see precisely that he is exercising a ministry TO WHICH HE HAS NOT BEEN CALLED by Christ. If you wish to compare this to a marriage, it is as if a man has discovered that he has been living in an invalidly contracted marriage – which is hence no marriage at all, but a form of adultery or fornication. Certainly, once I became convinced of this, I could no longer declare absolution “as a called and ordained servant of the Word” or take bread and wine and say “This is my Body”, “This is my Blood.” ‘
scecclesia.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/why-are-so-many-lutheran-pastors-becoming-roman-catholic/

‘This is a “retro-blog”. Over three years from 2006 to 2009, I posted entries from the diary that I kept between Easter 2000 and Easter 2001, which documented the day by day “real-time” account of the path I walked that lead me from being a Lutheran pastor to a Catholic layman.’
Schütz
yearofgrace.blogspot.com.au/

**Answer by Robert J. Flummerfelt, J.C.L. on 02-01-2005 (EWTN): **
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your question. Theoretically, I will answer your concerns as you posed them.

1. Yes, indeed a Lutheran deacon can convert and become a Latin Catholic deacon, however, he would need to be ordained to the diaconate as we do not recognize Anglican or Lutheran orders as valid.
   tinyurl.com/l5l6pm6

Answer by Dr. William Carroll on 05-25-2001 (EWTN):
The Church does not recognize Swedish Lutheran orders as valid, because the theological errors of the Swedish Lutheran church broke apostolic succession, like the invalid ordinations of the Anglicans in the time of Queen Elizabeth. - Dr. Carroll
tinyurl.com/pk9qgoz

**Idol Worship
Question from Joe on 07-05-2001: **
Hello and thank you for answering my question. My question is, can Anglicans and Lutherans be considered idol worship for any adoration given to they’re invalid Eucharist’s? Thank you and God bless

Answer by Dr. William Carroll on 07-07-2001(EWTN):
Certainly not. They probably sincerely believe it to be genuine, not accepting Pope Leo XIII’s ruling on the invalidity of Anglican orders, or the rulings of other Popes on the invalidity of Lutheran orders. - Dr. Carroll
tinyurl.com/nth6vlb

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The validity of the “ordination” is what is absent.

David Schütz
Melbourne, Australia
‘Why are so many Lutheran pastors becoming Roman Catholic?’
‘I would also add that a growing understanding of the AUTHORITY of the Catholic Church led me to question the validity of my call to act as a public minister of word and sacrament. A Lutheran pastor who becomes Catholic does so in part because he recognises the invalidity of his Lutheran ordination, that is he comes to question the authority of the Lutheran Church to confer holy orders in the first place. As a result, he comes to see precisely that he is exercising a ministry TO WHICH HE HAS NOT BEEN CALLED by Christ. If you wish to compare this to a marriage, it is as if a man has discovered that he has been living in an invalidly contracted marriage – which is hence no marriage at all, but a form of adultery or fornication. Certainly, once I became convinced of this, I could no longer declare absolution “as a called and ordained servant of the Word” or take bread and wine and say “This is my Body”, “This is my Blood.” ‘
scecclesia.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/why-are-so-many-lutheran-pastors-becoming-roman-catholic/

‘This is a “retro-blog”. Over three years from 2006 to 2009, I posted entries from the diary that I kept between Easter 2000 and Easter 2001, which documented the day by day “real-time” account of the path I walked that lead me from being a Lutheran pastor to a Catholic layman.’
Schütz
yearofgrace.blogspot.com.au/

**Answer by Robert J. Flummerfelt, J.C.L. on 02-01-2005 (EWTN): **
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your question. Theoretically, I will answer your concerns as you posed them.

1. Yes, indeed a Lutheran deacon can convert and become a Latin Catholic deacon, however, he would need to be ordained to the diaconate as we do not recognize Anglican or Lutheran orders as valid.
   tinyurl.com/l5l6pm6

Answer by Dr. William Carroll on 05-25-2001 (EWTN):
The Church does not recognize Swedish Lutheran orders as valid, because the theological errors of the Swedish Lutheran church broke apostolic succession, like the invalid ordinations of the Anglicans in the time of Queen Elizabeth. - Dr. Carroll
tinyurl.com/pk9qgoz
**Idol Worship
Question from Joe on 07-05-2001: **
Hello and thank you for answering my question. My question is, can Anglicans and Lutherans be considered idol worship for any adoration given to they’re invalid Eucharist’s? Thank you and God bless

Answer by Dr. William Carroll on 07-07-2001(EWTN):
Certainly not. They probably sincerely believe it to be genuine, not accepting Pope Leo XIII’s ruling on the invalidity of Anglican orders, or the rulings of other Popes on the invalidity of Lutheran orders. - Dr. Carroll
tinyurl.com/nth6vlb

Regarding Apostolic Succession in the Church of Sweden:

1. The Roman Catholic Church has preserved the succession of episcopal consecrations; this succession was broken in continental Lutheranism, maintained in parts of Nordic Lutheranism, and has been reclaimed by the ELCA. What is the significance of either preserving or breaking this succession? That question must not be isolated and made to bear the entire weight of a judgment on a church’s ministry. Whether a particular minister or church serves the church’s apostolic mission does not depend only upon the presence of such a succession of episcopal consecrations, as if its absence would negate the apostolicity of the church’s teaching and mission.135 Recent ecumenical discussions of episcopacy and succession do not remove our former disagreements, but they do place them in a richer and more complex context in which judgments made exclusively on the basis of the presence or absence of a succession of consecrations are less possible.

Consider this agreement worked out by Catholic and Lutheran bishops/ theologians/ scholar’s:

The difference in the theological and ecclesiological evaluation of the episcopal office in historic succession loses its sharpness when Lutherans attribute such a value to the episcopate that regaining full communion in this office seems important and desirable, and when Catholics recognize that "the ministry in the Lutheran churches exercises essential functions of the ministry that Jesus Christ instituted in his church"269 and does not contest the point that the Lutheran churches are church.270 The difference in evaluating the historic episcopate is thereby interpreted in such a way that the doctrine of justification is no longer at stake and consequently it is also possible to advocate theologically the regaining of full communion in the episcopal.271
prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_church3.html#3.4

Papal Primacy and the Universal Church (1973)

In view of their own particular spiritual patrimony and, not least, their own firm convictions concerning the papacy itself, Lutherans will presumably not be in a position to adopt the same relationship to the see of Rome that is currently held by Roman Catholics. But we suggest in our Common Statement (par. 33), that a distinct canonical status may be worked out by which Lutherans could be in official communion with the church of Rome. Such a restoration of communion, we believe, would be of great benefit to Roman Catholics, and to Lutherans, enabling them both to share in a broader Christian heritage. In such a wider communion of churches the papacy would be able to serve as a sign and instrument of unity, not simply for Roman Catholics, but for others who have never ceased to pray and labor for the manifest unity of the whole church of Christ koed.hu/vocation/johngeorge.pdf

 

[Denise1957]

Regarding Apostolic Succession in the Church of Sweden:

Consider this agreement worked out by Catholic and Lutheran bishops/ theologians/ scholar’s:

You didn’t post any Catholic sources. Can you provide is a Vatican source which states that Lutheran orders are valid, and therefore the sacraments are valid?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

You didn’t post any Catholic sources. Can you provide is a Vatican source which states that Lutheran orders are valid, and therefore the sacraments are valid?

I think the Franciscan Friars of the Atonement in Rome are Catholic:

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_church3.html#3.4