[quote=Gene C.]Hi all,
Thanks for the participation so far.
Gottle’s link revealed the following paragraph on Orthodox participation in Anglican consecrations:
- Greek Orthodox
There have been at least four Anglican consecrations at which bishops of the Patriarchate of Constatinople assisted, and succession from at least three of them can be traced today. The first such bishop was LYCURGUS, Archbishop of Syra and Tinos, who on the 2nd February 1870 assisted John Jackson, Bishop of London, at the consecration of Henry Mackenzie as Bishop of Nottingham, who on the 25th April 1877 assisted Archbishop Tait at the consecration of Edward White Benson as Bishop of Truro (see main list).
Thank you and Gottle, for that info. If it holds up as historically valid, it’s very interesting. Some of my Orthodox acquaintances have said there was none such. What I thought I knew of orthodox opinions of both Alican and Roman orders would have supported that.
Is there any significant meaning to this?
For Rome, I doubt it. Benson eventually became Archbishop of Canterbury, so his touch got around.
Also, I am confused on this issue. Rome does not recognize Anglican orders as valid, but the Orthodox do. Rome recognized Orthodox orders as valid. So if a valid Orthodox bishop participated in an Anglican ordination, wouldn’t that make it “valid”?
Maybe, but still illicit. Same as the issue with the Old Catholics/PNCC. Where there are many co-consecrations in the last 75 years or so. It’s hard to find an Anglican bishop without some sort of Dutch touch lineage.
AFAIK, and again following on some published Orthodox opinions on Anglican orders, back in the 1920s, and from what Orthodox folks have told me, the kicker is that the Orthodox consider Roman and Anglican orders in a like manner. Being outside the Church (Orthdoxy), neither’s orders are valid, *per se * (this, I was told, is why no Orthodox had acted as co-consecrators for Anglicans). But neither’s orders are invalid, either. What Rome (and Anglicans) would consider valid, though outside Orthodoxy, the Orthodox consider *potentially * valid.
I would be glad to hear from any knowledgeable Orthodox on this, myself.