Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Nov 15, '10, 3:25 pm
Crusading Canuk's Avatar
Crusading Canuk Crusading Canuk is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2010
Posts: 431
Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Default Anglican Orders

First of all, the reason I'm putting this in the Traditional forum is so I get a truely Catholic answer instead of the Protestant or modernist automatic yes. I know the history of Anglicanism and am aware of how some Anglican Bishops such as Cramner were just heretics without Apostolic Descent but others seemed to be validly oradined. I'm no expert on the matter but is there a chance that any Anglican orders or even individual priests have valid Apostolic decent? By the way I have no desire to attend Anglican "mass" and am aware that the ordaniation of "women priests" automatically breaks Apostolic Descent.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Nov 15, '10, 4:37 pm
malphono malphono is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2008
Posts: 7,429
Religion: Syro-Maronite (trisat shoubho)
Default Re: Anglican Orders

I don't think so. The Apostolic Succession among the Anglicans was clearly broken. Some will undoubtedly bring up the "Dutch Touch" and other such things (PNCC, EO, etc), but the fact is that the role of episcopal co-consecrators is rather extraneous, and it is the principal consecrator whose Apostolic Succession is of prime importance. (A single bishop can validly -- and, with the proper permission, litictly -- ordain a new bishop.) That said, the only possible exception would be a case where the principal consecrator was an Old Catholic (or PNCC, or EO, etc) bishop having Apostolic Succession (which leaves out a lot of Old Catholics these days, what with their acceptance of priestesses and bishopesses). However, to my knowledge, (and I could well be wrong about the practice -- perhaps Bernadette M knows more about it), that doesn't happen. As far as I know, Anglican bishops are ordained by Anglican bishops. "Dutch Touch" and other such co-consecrators notwithstanding.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Nov 15, '10, 4:42 pm
ProVobis ProVobis is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 29,300
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

My understanding is that Pope Leo XIII invalidated the Anglican orders (bishops and priests). That means the Apostolic Succession was broken. I'll leave it to scholars to determine exactly when this succession had been broken.

However, I'm not completely certain but it seems the Anglican Mass would have been invalidated by Quo Primum if not by Pope Leo. (The Anglican Use Mass is a different story.)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Nov 15, '10, 4:57 pm
MarkThompson MarkThompson is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2010
Posts: 5,330
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Leo XIII did not invalidate Anglican orders. He declared and confirmed that they were invalid as a result of the various facts of the history of the Church of England. To give an analogy (and not to go down a rabbit hole here), John Paul II did not "excommunicate" Marcel Lefebvre, he officially confirmed that Lefebvre was already excommunicated.
__________________
Qui meditabitur in lege Domini die ac nocte, dabit fructum suum in tempore suo.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Nov 15, '10, 5:23 pm
floresco's Avatar
floresco floresco is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2010
Posts: 2,062
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

You can see the pronouncement by Pope Leo XIII on the Nullity of Anglican Orders here: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13curae.htm
__________________
"What I trust that I may claim all through what I have written is this -- an honest intention, an absence of private ends, a temper of obedience, a willingness to be corrected, a dread of error, a desire to serve Holy Church" - Bl. John Henry Cardinal Newman
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Nov 15, '10, 6:03 pm
ProVobis ProVobis is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 29,300
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Then there is the question on the infallibility of Apostolicae Curae:

from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Quote:
The authority of "Apostolicae Curae"
The question has been raised whether the pronouncement of the Bull "Apostolicae Curae" is or is not to be taken as an infallible utterance of the Holy See. But even if it were not it would not follow that it can be disregarded, and its eventual withdrawal confidently anticipated. What may be safely assumed is that it fixes the belief and practice of the Catholic Church irrevocably. This at least Leo XIII must have meant to signify when in his letter to Cardinal Richard, of 5 November, 1896, he declared that his "intention had been to pass a final judgment and settle (the question) forever" (absolute judicare et penitus dirimere), and that "Catholics were bound to receive (the judgment) with the fullest obedience as perpetuo firmam, ratam, irrevocabilem".

Still, as a matter of speculative interest, it may be asked whether the definition is strictly infallible, and the answer may be stated shortly thus. It belongs to a class of ex cathedral utterances for which infallibility is claimed on the ground, not indeed, of the terms of the Vatican definition, but of the constant practice of the Holy See, the consentient teaching of the theologians, as well as of the clearest deductions from the principles of faith.

To understand what is meant it is necessary to bear in mind the distinction between a dogma and a dogmatic fact, the former being a doctrine of revelation, the latter a fact so intimately connected with a revealed doctrine that it would be impossible without inconsistency to assert the former and deny the latter. It may be urged that the Vatican Council merely defined that the Pope when speaking ex cathedra has "that infallibility which the divine Redeemer wished His Church to have in defining doctrine of faith and morals", without going on to define the range of infallibility which Our Lord wished His Church to have. But it must be remembered

•that the Vatican Council, had it not been forced to suspend its sittings by the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian war, intended to supplement this first definition by others which would have gone into details in regard to the object of infallibility;
•that to suppose that Church authority can define a doctrine to be true, but cannot decide whether it is contained in or denied by any particular writing — such as an ordination rite — is to suppose that the power of defining doctrine is largely nugatory; and
•that since the time of Jansenius there has been a practical consensus theologorum in holding that infallibility does extend to dogmatic facts, a judgment which would undoubtedly bring this Bull within the category of infallible utterances.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01491a.htm
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Nov 15, '10, 6:04 pm
MarkThompson MarkThompson is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2010
Posts: 5,330
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Quote:
Originally Posted by floresco View Post
You can see the pronouncement by Pope Leo XIII on the Nullity of Anglican Orders here: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13curae.htm
Yes. He confirms "that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void."
__________________
Qui meditabitur in lege Domini die ac nocte, dabit fructum suum in tempore suo.

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Nov 16, '10, 12:57 am
BernadetteM BernadetteM is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2008
Posts: 1,386
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

I really can't answer this question truthfully. It does seem that the Apostolic Constitution states that all former Anglicans must be ordained, but there seems to be some question whether some Anglican priests might have been validly ordained by the language it uses.

I suspect this is because of the Dutch Touch. If a spiritual experience is any proof, I did have one and due to that feel that there are some Anglican priests who can validly, but illicitly consecrate the Eucharist.

My former Anglo Catholic priest, who is now a Latin Rite priest is one whom I believe was validly ordained. Of course this is just an odd experience I had. As a former Anglo Catholic and in that parish I always felt that the Sacraments were valid. After I and others left, including the priest to become Catholic I never visited the parish. Well one Christmas I decided to attend the Midnight Mass and when I was there felt an emptiness. I knew that Christ wasn't in the Blessed Sacrament. It is difficult to explain the feeling.

Then at my Catholic parish last year I attended a lecture by a Catholic layman. When I sat down I felt this emptiness again and wondered what was wrong. Father got up in the back of the church and announced that he had removed the Blessed Sacrament from the tabernacle while the guest was speaking. Our parish is very traditional and that seems to be his reason, he didn't want someone standing in front of Jesus outside of either the Mass or Benediction.

It just clicked that it was the same feeling I had at my former parish, where one of the Continuing Anglican priests was the Rector and the celebrant on Christmas.

This might sound ridiculous to others, but I truely felt Jesus when I attended the parish and at my Catholic parish, but didn't feel His presence with this Anglican priest.

As I said this was just my personal experience and I do wonder why the Apostolic Constitution and Implements offered by Pope Benedict seems to indicate that there is a possibility that some of the incoming Anglicans might have valid orders.

The Anglican Communion has lost any hope of a valid priesthood at this point, As far as the Continuing groups some might have been validly ordained, but many may not have. I am not familiar with the groups.

I guess it is up to the Church and I abide by Her rules and accept that the Holy Spirit guides Her into all truth.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Nov 16, '10, 1:00 am
Vince1022 Vince1022 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: June 25, 2010
Posts: 1,614
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crusading Canuk View Post
First of all, the reason I'm putting this in the Traditional forum is so I get a truely Catholic answer instead of the Protestant or modernist automatic yes. I know the history of Anglicanism and am aware of how some Anglican Bishops such as Cramner were just heretics without Apostolic Descent but others seemed to be validly oradined. I'm no expert on the matter but is there a chance that any Anglican orders or even individual priests have valid Apostolic decent? By the way I have no desire to attend Anglican "mass" and am aware that the ordaniation of "women priests" automatically breaks Apostolic Descent.
I don't understand what you mean by "descent" and "decent"? Thanks for any help!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Nov 16, '10, 1:06 am
Vince1022 Vince1022 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: June 25, 2010
Posts: 1,614
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProVobis View Post
Then there is the question on the infallibility of Apostolicae Curae:

from the Catholic Encyclopedia:



http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01491a.htm
The current Catholic Encyclopedia (2003) notes that it has been suggested by some that the condemnation of Anglican orders might belong to teachings taught infallibly via the Ordinary Magisterium. As the entry notes, it's ambiguous.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Nov 16, '10, 11:34 am
ChadS ChadS is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2007
Posts: 2,133
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince1022 View Post
The current Catholic Encyclopedia (2003) notes that it has been suggested by some that the condemnation of Anglican orders might belong to teachings taught infallibly via the Ordinary Magisterium. As the entry notes, it's ambiguous.
Does it really matter if Leo XIII was speaking infallibly when he promulgated Apostolica Curae? Whether his pronouncement was infallible or not does not change the fact that the Anglicans had changed the words of ordination removing any mention of a sacrificial priesthood, this was long before the Anglicans had begun their descent into other sorts of nonsense. I think the change in wording was the problem and whether Leo XIII was speaking infallibly or not does not change the underlying issues. Even if a bishop is of a traditional bent and ordained priests using the 15-whatever edition of the Book of Common Prayer wouldn't make that priest validly ordained if the bishop in question wasn't validly ordained.

This is a very messy thicket to wade into trying to sort out what lines of Anglican holy orders retained or have valid episcopal lineages and which ones don't. I don't know how the Holy See will figure this all out with Anglicans and their ordinarys coming into full communion. I imagine some conversions of clergy could be de-railed if an Anglican priest is told he needs to be conditionally ordained to become Catholic -- seeing that as an affront to his prior ministry.

By the way I think Cranmer and a subsequent Archbishop of Canterbury or two were actually Catholic priests and bishops before becoming leaders of the English Reformation.

ChadS
__________________
Tiber Swim Team: Class of 2004
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Nov 17, '10, 5:43 pm
Matthew Holford's Avatar
Matthew Holford Matthew Holford is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 15, 2010
Posts: 2,921
Religion: Latin Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

I don't think the problem with Anglican Orders was a matter of breaking Apostolic Succession. While it might take considerable time and effort it would probably be possible to trace Anglican bishops back to around the time of Henry VIII and before who were validly and licitly ordained bishops.

I believe the problem began during the reign of Henry VIII's successor Edvard VI during whose reign the Ordinal was changed, the new one being referred to the Edwardine Ordinal. The wording was changed so I don't think that the form (one of the three requirements of a valid sacrament) was correct. This intentional change in wording may have meant that ordaining bishops did not have the correct intent. I don't know if the matter was changed.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Nov 17, '10, 9:23 pm
Vince1022 Vince1022 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: June 25, 2010
Posts: 1,614
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChadS View Post
Does it really matter if Leo XIII was speaking infallibly when he promulgated Apostolica Curae?
Apparently to some it does. Not to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChadS View Post
wouldn't make that priest validly ordained if the bishop in question wasn't validly ordained.
Right. Interesting, though, that now, due to the initiative of Pope Benedict, married Anglican priests can be received into the Catholic Church and continue their full ministry while priests (or those preparing for the priesthood) of the Roman Rite do not have that option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChadS View Post
By the way I think Cranmer and a subsequent Archbishop of Canterbury or two were actually Catholic priests and bishops before becoming leaders of the English Reformation.
Right.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Nov 18, '10, 7:41 am
ChadS ChadS is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2007
Posts: 2,133
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Anglican Orders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince1022 View Post
Right. Interesting, though, that now, due to the initiative of Pope Benedict, married Anglican priests can be received into the Catholic Church and continue their full ministry while priests (or those preparing for the priesthood) of the Roman Rite do not have that option.
From the beginning I've been confused about what exactly is meant by the term "Anglican Patrimony." What do Anglicans have that us mere Catholics don't already have? There are plenty of pre-Reformation English saints already recognized by the Catholic Church that we can venerate, we have the English martyrs that were martyred by Henry VIII and subsequent kings. Good preaching isn't an exclusively Anglican thing. The Book of Common Prayer needs to be altrered to make it more Catholic in its theology. The forms of worship in Anglican and Episcopalian churches are varied and their adherence to the BCP varies as well. It's possible an Anglican could join the Catholic Church under this ordinariate and have to use a form of worship that's relatively foreign to him. Depending what kind of Anglicanism he was brought up in a concept of a Euchairstic presence could be well formed or absent all together.

ChadS
__________________
Tiber Swim Team: Class of 2004
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Nov 18, '10, 10:38 am
rr1213 rr1213 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2006
Posts: 2,856
Religion: Catholic (former TEC & UMC)
Default Re: Anglican Orders

As noted already, the Pope has confirmed the invalidity of Anglican Orders. Since that declaration however, there have been efforts on the Anglican side to "reinvigorate" their orders through ordinations by schismatic bishops whose orders are presumably valid. In at least one situation, the Vatican instructed that an Anglican bishop (the former Anglican bishop of London) who was converting to the Catholic Church be ordained as a Catholic priest and that the ordination be done "conditionally". In that case, the Vatican believed that there was at least enough evidence of the possibility of valid orders to justify a conditional ordination. Whether that would be the case with respect to the majority of Anglican orders, I don't know. I doubt it though (although, as a former Anglican, I would be pleasantly surprised if their orders did turn out to be valid).
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Traditional Catholicism

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8569Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: Kellyreneeomara
5241CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: UpUpAndAway
4436Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: DesertSister62
4037OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: eschator83
3893Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3876SOLITUDE
Last by: tuscany
3462Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
3318Poems and Reflections
Last by: PathWalker
3237Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
3171For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: eschator83



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 4:05 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.