Papal Bull Apostolicae Curae, Pope Leo XIII

From Apostolicae Curae, On the Nullity of Anglican Orders, Pope Leo XIII - September 15, 1896

  1. For the full and accurate understanding of the Anglican Ordinal, besides what we have noted as to some of its parts, there is nothing more pertinent than to consider carefully the circumstances under which it was composed and publicly authorized. It would be tedious to enter into details, nor is it necessary to do so, as the history of that time is sufficiently eloquent as to the animus of the authors of the Ordinal against the Catholic Church; as to the abettors whom they associated with themselves from the heterodox sects; and as to the end they had in view. Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between “the law of believing and the law of praying”, under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. For this reason, in the whole Ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood (sacerdotium), and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice but, as we have just stated, every trace of these things which had been in such prayers of the Catholic rite as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out.

Does it bother anyone that the official Vatican website does not include the above Papal Bull, in any language? Almost all of the other Leo XIII encyclicals appear to be there…but this one has been omitted. A Papal Bull is a weighty document, an Ex cathedra pronouncement. Does this Bull, declaring the nullity of Anglican Orders, conflict with today’s ecumenism?

Blessed Pius IX’s “Quanta Cura” was also Vacuumed out of the .va
vatican.va/offices/papal_docs_list.html#Q

Yes, isn’t it suprising? I’m even more surprised they left Pascendi and those ones of St. Pius X up.

Perhaps it’s not there since they don’t have **any **encyclicals of Bl. Pius IX up?

UNHOLY COW!
When did that happen???
Quanto conficiamur moerore

Is one of my favorites.
Gregory XVI Mirari vos arbitramur

Is also missing.

This is eerie!
Soon the 19th century will be null & void. It just didn’t happen.
What are they so fearfull of?

Maybe the Protestants/Reformers were right…they really DID keep the bible from the Igurnant masses!

OH, WAIT…I have an idea:
To destroy a Religion, you must first sever its traditions.

everyone loves a conspiracy:rolleyes:

Yes, yes.

I so wish they would put Ahinc Duos Annos online.

Please, don’t stop there. Gives us all trhe REAL reason…the simple, non-collusive one.
Ready:
GO

While we strive to think of one perhaps you could tell us why they have kept Pascendi online. Even more suprising, that’s the only one of his encyclicals on the Vatican site in all 5 languages.

Because it would be like taking CHEVROLET off the list of the Auto Manufacturers’ list. Everyone would notice the gaping hole.
It is too often referenced…as you point out…all over the world.
Besides, didn’t someone make this pope a SAINT?
Maybe IF PPIX is canonized they’ll bring back his writings.

Yes, but going according to the OP, Apostolicae Curae is also widely referenced…

But he ain’t a SAINT.
Did they have it in XX languages also?

It’s not a conspiracy…it just a fact.

SAYZ YOU!!
If more than 1 guy…err personage agreed then it’s a CONSPIRACY!http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/eye_anim.gif
http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/deadhorse.gifhttp://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/gossip.gif

No. When the Anglican priests convert, they are ordained in accordance with that Bull becuase their previous “ordination” was invalid. It’s common knowledge.

Also, Leo X’s Exsurge Domine–the least “ecumenical” of all documents–is on the Vatican website:

asv.vatican.va/en/doc/1520.htm

Wow. It does bother me. It should probably bother those who are faithful to what the Church teaches in this regard: that Anglican orders are forever and totally invalid. No priest, no Eucharist.

Why does it bother you? Do you know of any Anglican/Episcopalian converts who have not been “re-” ordained? Plus, any kind of large scale reunion (like has happened in the past with the schismatic east) has been totally ruled out with the Anglicans due to their ordination of women among many other things.

Sorry, you misunderstood me. It bothers me that the document is missing from the vatican’s website, or at least it appears to be. The Church’s teaching on this matter certainly doesn’t bother me.

That is great, I have never seen a “beating a dead horse” emoticon before! I will use that with frequency.

TNT, the third. :wink: :smiley: No offense Ace86.

Secondly the very fact that there are a document on the Vatican site insisting that the Anglicans NOT be called “Church(es)” is an indication that their orders are certainly not accepted.

The Vatican site doesn’t have 101 documents. Can’t imagine why, but they don;t. And it’s not like they are going to say “Apostolicae Curae? But it’s not on your website. We thoguht it had been revoked.”

Almost all the motu proprios are incomplete, even the encyclicals. The only one of the earlier Popes where they’ve got a lot is Leo XIII but even for him it is incomplete (but such excellent encyclicals)

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.