Content deleted Content added
Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5 |
Shonebrooks (talk | contribs) m →Confessional Lutheranism: Added a SIC tag to avoid accidental 'fixing.' |
||
| (39 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) | |||
Line 2:
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2020}}
[[Image:Consécration-de-Déodat.jpg|thumb|[[Episcopal consecration]] of [[Deodatus of Nevers|Deodatus]]; {{Ill|Claude Bassot|fr}} (1580–1630)
'''Apostolic succession''' is the method whereby the [[Christian ministry|ministry]] of the [[Christian Church]] is considered by some [[Christian denomination]]s to be derived from the [[Twelve Apostles|apostles]] by a continuous succession, which has usually been associated with a claim that the succession is through a series of [[bishop]]s.<ref
This series was seen originally as that of the bishops of a [[Apostolic see|particular see founded by one or more of the apostles]]. According to historian [[Justo L. González]], apostolic succession is generally understood today as meaning a series of bishops, regardless of see, each consecrated by other bishops, themselves consecrated similarly in a succession going back to the apostles.<ref name=ETT/> According to the [[Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue Between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church]], "apostolic succession" means more than a mere transmission of powers. It is succession in a church which witnesses to the apostolic faith, in communion with the other churches, witnesses of the same apostolic faith. The "see (''[[cathedra]]'') plays an important role in inserting the bishop into the heart of ecclesial apostolicity", but once ordained, the bishop becomes in his church the guarantor of apostolicity and becomes a successor of the apostles.<ref>{{citation |title=The Mystery of the Church and of the Eucharist in the Light of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity |chapter=II,4 |chapter-url=https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/ch_orthodox_docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19820706_munich_en.html |year=1982}}</ref><ref name=Finland1988>{{citation |title=The Sacrament of Order in the Sacramental Structure of the Church with Particular Reference to the Importance of Apostolic Succession for the Santification and Unity of the People of God |chapter=Apostolic succession |chapter-url=https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/ch_orthodox_docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19880626_finland_en.html |year=1988}}</ref>
Line 9:
Those who hold for the importance of apostolic succession via episcopal [[Christian laying on of hands|laying on of hands]] appeal to the [[New Testament]] which, they say, implies a personal apostolic succession (from [[Paul of Tarsus|Paul]] to [[Saint Timothy|Timothy]] and [[Apostle Titus|Titus]], for example). They appeal as well to other documents of the [[early Christianity|early Church]], especially the [[Epistle of Clement]].<ref>Adam, Karl. ''The Spirit of Catholicism''. Doubleday, 1957 p. 20</ref> In this context, Clement explicitly states that the apostles appointed bishops as successors and directed that these bishops should in turn appoint their own successors; given this, such leaders of the Church were not to be removed without cause and not in this way. Further, proponents of the necessity of the personal apostolic succession of bishops within the Church point to the universal practice of the undivided early Church (up to AD 431), before it was divided into the [[Church of the East]], [[Oriental Orthodoxy]], the [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] and the [[Roman Catholic Church]].
Some Christians, including certain [[Nonconformist (Protestantism)|nonconformist Protestants]], deny the need for this type of continuity,<ref name="Webb2005">{{cite book |last1=Webb |first1=Jim |title=Born Fighting: How the Scots-Irish Shaped America |date=11 October 2005 |publisher=Crown |isbn=978-0-7679-2295-1 |page=115 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="ODCC">{{cite encyclopedia |year=2005 |title=apostolic succession |dictionary=The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church |publisher=Oxford University Press |editor1-last=Cross |editor1-first=F. L. |isbn=978-0-19-280290-3 |editor2-first=E. A. |editor2-last=Livingstone}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url=https://www.questia.com/library/encyclopedia/apostolic_succession.jsp|title=Apostolic Succession|encyclopedia=The Columbia Encyclopedia|edition=sixth|publisher=Columbia University Press|year=2004|access-date=24 August 2017|archive-date=4 June 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604100120/http://www.questia.com/library/encyclopedia/apostolic_succession.jsp|url-status=dead}}</ref> and the [[Historical episcopate|historical claims]] involved have been severely questioned by them; Anglican academic [[Eric Jay|Eric G. Jay]] comments that the account given of the emergence of the episcopate in Chapter III of the [[dogmatic constitution]] ''[[Lumen gentium]]'' (1964) "is very sketchy, and many ambiguities in the early history of the Christian ministry are passed over".<ref>Jay, Eric G. ''The Church: its changing image through twenty centuries''. John Knox Press: 1980, p.316f</ref>
== Definitions ==
Line 74:
Churches that claim some form of [[historical episcopate|episcopal apostolic succession]], dating back to the apostles or to leaders from the apostolic era,<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01648b.htm Apostolicity] [[Catholic Encyclopedia]] article</ref> include:
* the [[
* the [[Eastern Orthodox Church]]
* the [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox Churches]]
Line 88:
Roman Catholics recognize the validity of the apostolic successions of the bishops, and therefore the rest of the clergy, of the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East, and [[Polish National Catholic Church]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.usccb.org/news/2006/polish-national-catholic-roman-catholic-dialogue-adopts-joint-declaration-unity|title=Polish National Catholic-Roman Catholic Dialogue Adopts a ""Joint Declaration on Unity"" {{pipe}} USCCB|website=www.usccb.org}}</ref> The Orthodox generally recognize Roman Catholic clerical orders as being of apostolic lineage, but have a different concept of the apostolic succession as it exists outside the canonical borders of the Eastern Orthodox Church, extending the term only to bishops who have maintained communion, received ordination from a line of apostolic bishops, and preserved the catholic faith once delivered through the apostles and handed down as [[Holy Tradition|holy tradition]]. The lack of apostolic succession through bishops is the primary basis on which Protestant denominations (barring some like Anglicans and Old Catholics) are not called ''churches'', in the proper sense, by the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, the latter referring to them as "ecclesial communities" in the official documents of the [[Second Vatican Council]].<ref name="vatican.va">"[https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.htmlResponsesto Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church]", published 10 July 2007.</ref>
[[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] also claims apostolic succession.<ref name="lds.org">{{cite web|url=https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/restoration-of-the-priesthood?lang=eng|title=Restoration of the Priesthood|publisher=The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints|website=ChurchofJesusChrist.org|access-date=18 January 2022|archive-date=18 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220118183049/https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/restoration-of-the-priesthood?lang=eng|url-status=dead}}</ref> According to Latter-day Saint tradition, in 1829, [[Joseph Smith]] and [[Oliver Cowdery]] received the [[priesthood (Latter Day Saints)|priesthood]] from a visit from heaven of [[John the Baptist]], conferring the [[Aaronic priesthood (Latter Day Saints)|Aaronic priesthood]], followed by Jesus'
==Apostolic founders==
Line 112:
! Church !! [[Andrew the Apostle|Andrew]] !! [[Saint Peter|Simon Peter]] !! [[Paul the Apostle|Paul]] !! [[Barnabas]] !! [[Philip the Evangelist|Philip]] !! [[Mark the Evangelist|Mark]] !! [[Simon the Zealot|Simon]] !! [[Thomas the Apostle|Thomas]] !! [[James the Just|James]] !! [[Jude the Apostle|Jude Thaddeus]] !! [[Bartholomew the Apostle|Bartholomew]] !! Notes
|-
| [[
|-
| [[
|-
| [[Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria]] || || || || || || x || || || || || || via [[Patriarchate of Alexandria|Alexandria]]
Line 163:
|-
| [[Russian Orthodox Church]] || x || || || || || || || || || || || via [[Kyiv]]
|-
| [[Orthodox Church of Ukraine]] || x || || || || || || || || || || ||
|-
|}
==Teachings==
Teachings on the nature of apostolic succession vary depending on the ecclesiastic body, especially within various Protestant denominations. Christians of the [[Catholic Church]], [[Church of the East]], [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox]],
===
{{rquote|right|Wherefore we must obey the priests of the Church who have succession from the Apostles, as we have shown, who, together with succession in the episcopate, have received the mark of truth according to the will of the Father; all others, however, are to be suspected, who separated themselves from the principal succession.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103426.htm |title=Adversus Haereses (Book IV, Chapter 26) |publisher=Newadvent.org |access-date=26 July 2011}}</ref>|[[Irenaeus]]}}
Line 175 ⟶ 177:
[[File:Priestly ordination.jpg|thumb|Catholic ordination ceremony]]
[[Papal primacy]] is different though related to apostolic succession as described here. The
====Views concerning other churches====
Line 192 ⟶ 194:
| caption2 = A 17th century illustration of [[:s:Augsburg Confession#Article VII: Of the Church.|Article VII: Of the Church]] from the Lutheran ''Augsburg Confession'', which states "...one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered." Here the rock from Matthew 16:18 refers to the preaching and ministry of Jesus as the Christ, a view discussed at length in the 1537 ''[[Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope|Treatise]]''.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/treatise.php#para22 ''Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, paragraph 22''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080924092620/http://bookofconcord.org/treatise.php#para22 |date=24 September 2008 }} and following</ref>}}
In the
His argument was as follows. First, the ordination rite of [[Edward VI of England|Edward VI]] had removed the language of a sacrificial priesthood. Ordinations using this new rite occurred for over a century and, because the restoration of the language of "priesthood" a century later in the ordination rite "was introduced too late, as a century had already elapsed since the adoption of the [[Edwardine Ordinal]] ... the Hierarchy had become extinct, there remained no power of ordaining." With this extinction of validly ordained bishops in England, "the true Sacrament of Order as instituted by Christ lapsed, and with it the hierarchical succession." As a result, the pope's final judgment was that Anglican ordinations going forward were to be considered "absolutely null and utterly void". Anglican clergy were from then on to be ordained as
A reply from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York (1896) was issued to counter Pope Leo's arguments: ''[[Saepius officio]]: Answer of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to the Bull Apostolicae Curae of H. H. Leo XIII''.<ref name="Saepius_officio">[http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/saepius.htm] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090807095328/http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/saepius.htm|date=7 August 2009}}</ref> They argued that if the Anglican orders were invalid, then the Roman orders were as well since the Pope based his case on the fact that the Anglican ordinals used did not contain certain essential elements but these were not found in the early Roman rites either.<ref name=Saepius_officio/> Catholics argue, this argument does not consider the sacramental intention involved in validating Holy Orders. In other words,
[[File:Leo XIII.jpg|thumb|upright|Pope Leo XIII rejected Anglican arguments for apostolic succession in his bull ''Apostolicae curae''.]]
It is
Timothy Dufort, writing in ''[[The Tablet]]'' in 1982, attempted to present an ecumenical solution to the problem of how the
The question of the validity of Anglican orders has been further complicated by the Anglican ordination of women.<ref>R. William Franklin(ed). ''Anglican Orders''. Mowbray 1996 pp.72,73(note 11), 104</ref> In a document it published in July 1998, the [[Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]] stated that the Catholic Church's declaration on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations is a teaching that the church has definitively propounded and that therefore every
===Eastern Orthodox===
Line 211 ⟶ 213:
While Eastern Orthodox sources often refer to the bishops as "successors of the apostles" under the influence of Scholastic theology, strict Orthodox ecclesiology and theology hold that all legitimate bishops are properly successors of Peter.<ref>See Meyendorff J., Byzantine Theology</ref> This also means that presbyters (or "priests") are successors of the apostles. As a result, Eastern Orthodox theology makes a distinction between a geographical or historical succession and proper [[Ontology|ontological]] or ecclesiological succession. Hence, the bishops of [[Pope|Rome]] and [[Bishop of Antioch|Antioch]] can be considered successors of Peter in a historical sense on account of Peter's presence in the early community. This does not imply that these bishops are more successors of Peter than all others in an ontological sense.<ref name=Cleenewerck>Cleenewerck, Laurent. His Broken Body. Washington, D.C.: EUC Press, 2007 {{Self-published source|date=June 2015}}</ref>{{rp|86–89}}
The [[Eastern Orthodoxy|Eastern Orthodox]] have often permitted non-Eastern Orthodox clergy to be rapidly ordained within Orthodoxy as a matter of pastoral necessity and [[Economy (Eastern Orthodoxy)|economia]]. Priests entering Eastern Orthodoxy from Oriental Orthodoxy and
In 1922 the Eastern Orthodox [[Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople]] recognised Anglican orders as valid, holding that they carry "the same validity as the Roman, Old Catholic and Armenian churches possess".<ref name="WrightDutton2006"/><ref name="Franklin1996">{{cite book|last=Franklin|first=R. William|title=Anglican Orders: Essays on the Centenary of Apostolicae Curae 1896-1996|date=1 June 1996|publisher=Church Publishing, Inc.|language=en|isbn=9780819224880|page=117|quote=In 1922 the Ecumenical Patriarch and Holy Synod of Constantinople were persuaded to speak of Anglican orders. They did so in Delphic terms by declaring that Anglican orders possessed "the same validity as the Roman, Old Catholic and Armenian Churches possess". Jerusalem and Cyprus followed in 1923 by provisionally acceding that Anglican priests should not be reordained if they became Orthodox. Romania endorsed Anglican orders in 1936. Greece was not so sure, arguing that the whole of Orthodoxy must come to a decision, but it spoke of Anglican orders in the same somewhat detached un-Orthodox language.}}<!--|access-date=3 March 2016--></ref> In the encyclical "From the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox churches", [[Meletius IV of Constantinople]], the Oecumenical Patriarch, wrote: "That the Orthodox theologians who have scientifically examined the question have almost unanimously come to the same conclusions and have declared themselves as accepting the validity of Anglican Orders."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/patriarc.htm|title=Encyclical on Anglican Orders from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922|year=1998|publisher=[[University College London]]|language=en|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020125091106/http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/patriarc.htm|archive-date=25 January 2002}}</ref> Following this declaration, in 1923, the [[Eastern Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem]], as well as the [[Church of Cyprus|Eastern Orthodox Church of Cyprus]] agreed by "provisionally acceding that Anglican priests should not be re-ordained if they became Orthodox";<ref name="WrightDutton2006">{{cite book|last1=Wright|first1=John Robert|last2=Dutton|first2=Marsha L.|last3=Gray|first3=Patrick Terrell|title=One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism: Studies in Christian Ecclesiality and Ecumenism |year=2006|publisher=[[Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing]]|language=en |isbn=9780802829405|page=273|quote=Constantinople declared, cautiously, in 1922 that Anglican orders "have the same validity as those of the Roman, Old Catholic and Armenian Churches", an opinion echoed by the churches of Jerusalem, Cyprus, Alexandria, and Romania. Heartened, Labeth bishops broadened the dialogue, sponsored the translation of "books and documents setting forth the relative positions" of the two churches, and asked the English church to consult "personally or by correspondence" with the eastern churches "with a view to ... securing a clearer understanding and ... establishing closer relations between the Churches of the East and the Anglican Communion."}}<!--|access-date=3 March 2016--></ref><ref name="Franklin1996"/> in 1936, the [[Romanian Orthodox Church]] "endorsed Anglican Orders".<ref name="Franklin1996"/><ref name="Parry2010">{{cite book|last=Parry|first=Ken|title=The Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity|date=10 May 2010|publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]]|language=en |isbn=9781444333619|page=202|quote=The Orthodox Church resumed its former links with other Christian Churches. Delegates from Romania participated in the pan-Orthodox conferences in Constantinople (1923), Mount Athos (1930), the first Conference of the Professors of Theology in the Balkans (Sinaia, 1924) and the first Congress of Theology Professors in Athens (1936). It also took part in the incipient ecumenical movement. Professors and hierarchs participated in several conferences of the three main inter-war branches: 'Practical Christianity' held in Stockholm (1925) and Berne (1926), 'Faith and Organization' in Lausanne (1927), and 'World Alliance for the Union of Peoples through the Church' in Prague (1928) and Norway (1938), with subsequent regional conferences held in Romania (1924, 1933, 1936). The links with the Anglican Church were consolidated soon after the Anglican orders had been acknowledged by the Holy Synod, and subsequent to Patriach Miron's visit to Britain in 1936.}}<!--|access-date=3 March 2016--></ref><ref name="Ware1977">{{cite book|author=Kallistos Ware|title=Anglican-Orthodox dialogue: the Moscow statement agreed by the Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission, 1976|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1KM9AAAAYAAJ|year=1977|publisher=[[Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge]]|isbn=9780281029921|language=en|quote=As a result of the Conference, the Romanian Commission decided unanimously to recommend the Romanian Holy Synod to accept the validity of Anglican Orders, and this the Synod proceeded to do in March 1936.|author-link=Kallistos Ware}}</ref>
Line 218 ⟶ 220:
=== Oriental Orthodox Churches ===
The [[Armenian Apostolic Church]], which is one of the Oriental Orthodox churches, recognises
===Anglican Communion===
Line 225 ⟶ 227:
The [[Anglican Communion]] "has never officially endorsed any one particular theory of the origin of the historic episcopate, its exact relation to the apostolate, and the sense in which it should be thought of as God given, and in fact tolerates a wide variety of views on these points".<ref>Jay, Eric G. ''The Church'' John Knox Press(1980), p.291 quoting the Anglican-Methodist Unity Commission Report 1968 p.37</ref><!-- According to ''The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology'', The Anglican Communion "retained episcopacy, believing it to be not merely an administrative expedient of contingent historical origin but an essential part of the church as founded by Christ".<ref name="RichardsonJohn1983">{{cite book|last1=Richardson|first1=Alan|last2=John|first2=John Bowden|title=The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PN7UMUTBBPAC&pg=PA182|year=1983|publisher=Westminster John Knox Press|isbn=9780664227487|page=182}}</ref>--> Its claim to apostolic succession is rooted in the [[Church of England]]'s evolution as part of the Western Church.<ref>{{cite web |author=Brian Reid |url=http://www.anglican.org/church/ChurchHistory.html |title=The Anglican Domain: Church History |publisher=Anglican.org |date=26 August 1998 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725010717/http://anglican.org/church/ChurchHistory.html |archive-date=25 July 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Apostolic succession is viewed not so much as conveyed mechanically through an unbroken chain of the laying-on of hands, but as expressing continuity with the unbroken chain of commitment, beliefs and mission starting with the first apostles; and as hence emphasising the enduring yet evolving nature of the Church.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cofe.anglican.org/info/papers/pmreview/pmrappendix1.doc |title=Document Library |publisher=Cofe.anglican.org |date=11 July 2011}}</ref>
When [[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]] broke away from the jurisdiction of Rome in 1533/4, the English Church ({{lang|la|Ecclesia [[Anglicanism|Anglicana]]}}) claimed the [[episcopal polity]] and apostolic succession inherent in its
In 1833, before his conversion to
===Lutheran churches===
Variation exists within Lutheranism on this issue.<ref name="Melton2005">{{cite book|last=Melton|first=J. Gordon|title=Encyclopedia of Protestantism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bW3sXBjnokkC&pg=PA91|year=2005|publisher=Infobase Publishing|isbn=9780816069835|page=91|quote=Martin Luther seemed personally indifferent to apostolic succession, but branches of the Lutheran Church most notably the Church of Sweden, preserve episcopal leadership and apostolic succession.}}</ref> There are two primary camps: episcopal succession, and succession of presbyters.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fenn |first=Matthew |title=The Validity of Lutheran Orders - Piepkorn |url=https://www.academia.edu/7466978}}</ref> Although Lutherans believe that "no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments unless he be regularly called" ,<ref>[[Augsburg Confession]], [https://bookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/of-ecclesiastical-order/ ''
====Lutheran claims to apostolic succession ====
Line 240 ⟶ 242:
The Lutheran [[Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland|Church of Finland]] was at that time one with the Church of Sweden and so holds the same view regarding the see of Åbo/Turku.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Gassmann|first1=Günther |last2=Larson |first2=Duane Howard|last3=Oldenburg |first3=Mark W. |title=Historical Dictionary of Lutheranism |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Htz8M1Xlqi4C&pg=PA23|year=2001|publisher=Scarecrow Press|isbn=0810839458|quote=In addition to the primary understanding of succession, the Lutheran confessions do express openness, however, to the continuation of the succession of bishops. This is a narrower understanding of apostolic succession, to be affirmed under the condition that the bishops support the Gospel and are ready to ordain evangelical preachers. This form of succession, for example, was continued by the Church of Sweden (which included Finland) at the time of the Reformation.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author1=Alan Richardson |author2=John Bowden John |title=The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PN7UMUTBBPAC&pg=PA182|year=1983|publisher=Westminster John Knox Press|isbn=0664227481|quote=The churches of Sweden and Finland retained bishops and the conviction of being continuity with the apostolic succession, while in Denmark the title bishop was retained without the doctrine of apostolic succession.}}</ref>
In 2001, Francis Aloysius Sullivan wrote: "To my knowledge, the Catholic Church has never officially expressed its judgement on the validity of orders as they have been handed down by episcopal succession in these two national Lutheran churches."<ref>{{cite book|last=Sullivan|first=Francis Aloysius|title=From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rn4PIZYLCskC&q=church+of+sweden+apostolic+succession&pg=PA4|year=2001|publisher=Paulist Press|isbn=0809105349|page=4|quote=To my knowledge, the Catholic Church has never officially expressed its judgement on the validity of orders as they have been handed down by episcopal succession in these two national Lutheran churches.}}</ref> In 2007, the Holy See declared: "Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century [...] do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church."<ref>{{cite web|author1=Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith|title=Responses to some questions regarding certain aspects of the doctrine on the church|url=https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2007/07/10/0385/01035.html|publisher=La Santa Sede|date=10 July 2007|quote=...those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century [...] do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church.}}</ref> This statement speaks of the Protestant movement as a whole, not specifically of the Lutheran churches in Sweden and Finland. The 2010 report from the Roman Catholic – Lutheran Dialogue Group for Sweden and Finland, ''Justification in the Life of the Church'', states: "The Evangelical-Lutheran churches in Sweden and Finland [...] believe that they are part of an unbroken apostolic chain of succession. The Catholic Church does however question how the ecclesiastical break in the 16th century has affected the apostolicity of the churches of the Reformation and thus the apostolicity of their ministry."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://sakasti.evl.fi/sakasti.nsf/0/DA1B501CC09E109FC22577AE002A3DD8/$FILE/Report%20Justification%20in%20the%20Life%20of%20the%20Church.pdf|title=Roman Catholic – Lutheran Dialogue Group for Sweden and Finland, ''Justification in the Life of the Church'', section 297, page 101}}{{Dead link|date=September 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> Emil Anton interprets this report as saying that the
Negotiated at [[Järvenpää]], Finland, and inaugurated with a celebration of the Eucharist at [[Porvoo Cathedral]] in 1992, the [[Porvoo Communion]] agreement of unity includes the mutual recognition of the traditional apostolic succession among the following churches:
Line 255 ⟶ 257:
The [[Evangelical Catholic Church (Lutheran)|Evangelical Catholic Church]], a Lutheran denomination of Evangelical Catholic churchmanship based in North America, taught:<ref name="ECC2008"/>
{{blockquote|''The Evangelical Catholic Church'' sees Episcopal administration and Apostolic Succession as analogous to the formulation of the doctrines of the Trinity, Christology, Grace and the sacraments, i.e., a divinely willed, Spirit-directed development within The Church, the character of which is really and truly ecumenical because it took place uniformly both in the East and in the West. In the tripartition of the priestly office (deacon, priest, bishop) vibrates the triadic rhythm of the eternal divine life; in the monarchial bishop the ascended Christ, the invisible Head of The Church, becomes visible; and in the chain of bishops, consecrated by episcopal imposition of hands, the unbroken continuity is visualized, which unites The Church of the 21st Century with The Church of The Apostles. Thus the bonds of ''The Evangelical Catholic Church'' with those first days in Nazareth and Galilee remain unbroken, assured both by its faithful proclamation of The Gospel in all its apostolic purity and by its regular episcopal ordination of Bishops in ''Apostolic Succession''. ''The Evangelical Catholic Church'' claims both a valid Apostolic Succession and a faithful transmission of The Gospel in all its truth and purity.<ref name="ECC2008">{{cite web |title=The Church: What We Believe |url=http://www.apostle1.com/barwin-ev-cath-church/the-church-what_we_believe.htm |publisher=[[Evangelical Catholic Church (Lutheran)|Evangelical Catholic Church]] |language=en |date=2008 }}{{Dead link|date=September 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>
In recent years a number of Lutheran churches of the [[Evangelical Catholic]] and High Church Lutheran churchmanship in the United States of America have accepted the doctrine of apostolic succession and have successfully recovered it, generally from [[Independent Catholic Churches|Independent Catholic churches]].<ref name="pastorzip.org">{{cite web |url=http://www.pastorzip.org/uslutheranlinx.html |title=Pastor Zip's US Lutheran Web Links – Evangelical Catholics |publisher=Pastorzip.org |access-date=26 July 2011 |archive-date=27 July 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110727164653/http://www.pastorzip.org/uslutheranlinx.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> At present, most of these church bodies have memberships numbering in the hundreds
* The [[The Lutheran Evangelical Protestant Church|Lutheran Evangelical Protestant Church (LEPC)]] were some of the earliest Lutherans in America. They have autonomous and congregationally oriented ministries and consecrate male and female deacons, priests and bishops in apostolic succession with the laying on of hands during celebration of Word and Sacrament.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gcepc.us/ |publisher=Lutheran EPC |title=Lutheran Evangelical Protestant Church (LEPC) |access-date=10 June 2013}}</ref>
* The [[Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church]] recovered the apostolic succession from [[Old Catholic]] and [[Independent Catholic]] churches, and adopted a strict [[episcopal polity]]. All of its clergy have been ordained (or re-ordained) into the historic apostolic succession.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.christalcc.org/files/Constitution_ALCC_3_.pdf |title=ALCC Constitution, Article V, Section 4, lines 3,4 |access-date=26 July 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110725164729/http://www.christalcc.org/files/Constitution_ALCC_3_.pdf| archive-date= 25 July 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> This Church was formed in 1997, with its headquarters in Kansas City, Missouri.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.christalcc.org/ALCC.html |title=Christ Lutheran Church ALCC |publisher=Christalcc.org |access-date=26 July 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110725165126/http://www.christalcc.org/ALCC.html| archive-date= 25 July 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref>
* The [[Lutheran Orthodox Church]], founded in 2004 traces its historic lineage of apostolic succession through
* The [[Lutheran Church - International]] is another North American Lutheran church which reports that it has recovered the historic apostolic succession.<ref name="pastorzip.org"/>
====Indifference to the issue====
Many German Lutherans appear to demur on this issue, which may be sourced in the [[Church Order (Lutheran)|church governance views]] of [[Martin Luther]].<ref>Martin Luther, ''An Appeal to the Ruling Class of German Nationality as to the Amelioration of the State of Christendom'' (1520), reprinted in Lewis W. Spitz, editor, ''The Protestant Reformation'' (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall 1966) at 51–59. E.g., "When a bishop consecrates, he simply acts on behalf of the entire congregation, all of whom have the same authority." ... "[T]he status of priest among Christians is merely that of an office-bearer; while he holds the office he exercises it; if he be deposed he resumes his status in the community and becomes like the rest. ... All these are human inventions and regulations." ''Ibid.'' at 54, 55.</ref> Luther's reform movement usually did not abrogate the ecclesiastic office of [[bishop]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_13_ecclesiasticalorder.php |title=Defense of the Augsburg confession, Article XVI, lines 24 |publisher=Bookofconcord.org |access-date=26 July 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110719173007/http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_13_ecclesiasticalorder.php| archive-date= 19 July 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref>Cf., Roland H. Bainton, ''The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century'' (Boston: The Beadon Press 1952) at 67–68.</ref> An important historical context to explicate the difference regarding apostolic succession among between the Scandinavian Lutheran churches and the German Lutheran churches is the [[Prussian Union (Evangelical Christian Church)|Prussian Union]] of 1817, whereby the secular government directed the Lutheran churches in Prussia to merge with non-Lutheran [[Reformed Church|Reformed church]]es in Prussia. The Reformed (Calvinist) churches generally oppose on principle the traditional doctrine of ecclesiastic Apostolic Succession, e.g., not usually even recognising the church office of bishop.<ref name="Goeckel2018"/><ref>Cf., [[Jean Calvin]], ''Ecclesiastical ordinances'' (Genève 1541, 1561), reprinted in Lewis W. Spitz, editor, ''The Protestant Reformation'' (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice–Hall 1966) at 122–129, 122.</ref> Later in the 19th century, other Lutheran and Reformed congregations merged to form [[United and uniting churches|united church bodies]] in some of the other 39 states of the [[German Confederation]], e.g., in Anhalt, Baden, Bremen, Hesse and Nassau, Hesse-Kassel and Waldeck, and the Palatinate.<ref>The [[Evangelical Church of Anhalt]], [[Evangelical Church in Baden]], [[Evangelical Church of Bremen|Bremian Evangelical Church]] (union of Lutheran and Reformed in 1873), [[Evangelical Church in Hesse and Nassau]], [[Evangelical Church of Hesse-Kassel and Waldeck]], and the [[Evangelical Church of the Palatinate]].</ref><ref>In 1866 the [[States of the German Confederation|German Confederation]] dissolved; in 1871 most of its former member states joined the German Empire led by Prussia. [[Hajo Holborn]], ''A History of Modern Germany 1840–1945'' [volume 3] (New York: Alfred A. Knoft 1969) at 187–188, 194–199 [1866]; at 223–227 [1871].</ref> Yet the partial nature of this list also serves to show that in Germany there remained many Lutherans who never united with the Reformed.<ref>E.g., the current umbrella federation of German protestant churches known as the [[Evangelical Church in Germany|EKD]] has as members 22 Church bodies: 9 regional Lutheran, 11 united Lutheran and Reformed, and 2 Reformed.{{Citation needed|date=February 2010}}</ref>
Other Lutheran churches are indifferent as a matter of doctrine regarding this particular issue of ecclesiastical governance. In America, the conservative [[Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod]] (LCMS) places its church authority in the congregation rather than in the bishop, and ordinations are typically performed by another pastor, although its founder, [[C. F. W. Walther]], while establishing congregational polity for the LCMS, considered polity (a church's form of government) to be a matter of adiaphora (something indifferent).<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/mackenziecfwwaltherandthelcmstoday.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/mackenziecfwwaltherandthelcmstoday.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=C. F. W. Walther and the Missouri Synod Today}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.lcms.org/about/beliefs/doctrine/brief-statement-of-lcms-doctrinal-position|title=Brief Statement of LCMS Doctrinal Position - The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod|website=www.lcms.org}}</ref>
Line 280:
Since the Bishop of London refused to ordain [[Anglican ministry|ministers]] in the [[British colonization of the Americas|British American colonies]],<ref name="William Joseph Whalen"/> this constituted an emergency and as a result, on 2 September 1784, Wesley, along with a priest from the Anglican Church and two other elders,<ref name="Richard Joseph Cooke – Ordination of Dr. Coke">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mVVIAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA145 |title=The historic episcopate: a study of Anglican claims and Methodist orders|quote= IN September, 1784, the Rev. John Wesley, assisted by a presbyter of the Church of England and two other elders, ordained by solemn imposition of the hands of the Rev. Dr. Thomas Coke to the episcopal office. |publisher = Eaton & Mains |year=1896}}</ref> operating under the ancient Alexandrian habitude, ordained [[Thomas Coke (bishop)|Thomas Coke]] a superintendent, although Coke embraced the title bishop.<ref name="James Grant Wilson, John Fiske – Ordination of Dr. Coke">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=takoAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA438 |title=Appleton's cyclopædia of American biography, Volume 6|quote= Being refused, he conferred with Thomas Coke, a presbyter of the Church of England, and with others, and on 2 Sept., 1784, he ordained Coke bishop, after ordaining Thomas Vasey and Richard Whatcoat as presbyters, with his assistance and that of another presbyter. |publisher =D. Appleton & Company |year=1889}}</ref><ref name="Abel Stevens – Coke">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=r2QFAAAAQAAJ&q=alexandria+wesley+ordination&pg=PA544 |title=A compendious history of American Methodism |quote= Wesley referes(sic) to the ordination of bishops by the presbyters of Alexandria, in justification of his ordination of Coke.|publisher =Scholarly Publishing Office|year=1885 }}</ref>
Today, the [[United Methodist Church]] follows this ancient Alexandrian practice as bishops are elected from the presbyterate:<ref name="UMC – Election of a Bishop">{{cite web|url=http://www.gbhem.org/networking/ministry-elder|title=The Ministry of the Elder|publisher=[[United Methodist Church]]|access-date=10 June 2013|archive-date=28 May 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130528191618/http://www.gbhem.org/networking/ministry-elder|url-status=dead}}</ref> the ''[[Book of Discipline (United Methodist)|Discipline of the Methodist Church]]'', in ¶303, affirms that "ordination to this ministry is a gift from God to the Church. In ordination, the Church affirms and continues the apostolic ministry through persons empowered by the [[Holy Spirit in Christianity|Holy Spirit]]."<ref name="Alexander W. McLeod, Charles J. Shreve – Church Fathers">{{cite web|url=http://www.gbhem.org/atf/cf/%7B0BCEF929-BDBA-4AA0-968F-D1986A8EEF80%7D/DOM7DaysofPreparation.pdf |title=Seven Days of Preparation – A Guide for Reading, Meditation and Prayer for all who participate in The Conversation: A Day for Dialogue and Discernment: Ordering of Ministry in the United Methodist Church |quote=The ''Discipline'' affirms that "ordination to this ministry is a gift from God to the Church. In ordination, the Church affirms and continues the apostolic ministry through persons empowered by the Holy Spirit" (¶303). |publisher=[[United Methodist Church]] |access-date=31 December 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101226171839/http://www.gbhem.org/atf/cf/%7B0BCEF929-BDBA-4AA0-968F-D1986A8EEF80%7D/DOM7DaysofPreparation.pdf |archive-date=26 December 2010 }}</ref> It also uses [[Bible|sacred scripture]] in support of this practice, namely, 1 Timothy 4:14, which states: {{blockquote|Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by the laying on of the hands of the ''presbytery''.<ref name="P. Douglass Gorrie – Sacred Scripture">{{cite book|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=jxZBAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA223|title=Episcopal Methodism, as it was, and is;: Or, An account of the origin, progress, doctrines, church polity, usages, institutions, and statistics, of the Methodist Episcopal church in the United States|quote= "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by the laying on of the hands of the ''presbytery''." Here it is plain that the ministerial gift or power which Timothy possessed, was given him ''by'' the laying on of the hands of the body of the elders who ordained him. And in regard to the ''government'' of the church, it is equally plain that ''bishops'', in distinction from ''presbyters'', were not charged with the oversight thereof, for it is said – Acts xx. 17, 28, that Paul "called the elders (not the bishops) of the Church of Ephesus, and said unto them, 'Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers,' feed the church of God." On this passage we remark, 1st, that the original Greek term for the word "overseer" is "episcopos", they very word from which our term "bishop" is derived, and which is generally translated "bishop" in the English version of the New Testament. Now this term episcopos, overseer, or bishop, is applied to the ''identical'' persons called ''elders'' in the 17th verse, and to none other. Consequently, Paul must have considered elders and bishops as one, not only in office, but in order also; and so the Ephesian ministers undoubtedly understood him.|publisher = Miller, Orton & Mulligan|year=1852}}</ref>|[[Paul of Tarsus|St. Paul of Tarsus]]|[[KJV]]}}
The Methodist Church also buttresses this argument with the leg of [[sacred tradition]] of the [[Wesleyan Quadrilateral]] by citing the [[Church Fathers]], many of whom concur with this view.<ref name="Alexander W. McLeod, Charles J. Shreve – Church Fathers1">{{cite book|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=EScYAAAAYAAJ&q=bishop+methodist+succession&pg=PA41|title=The Methodist Ministry Defended, Or, a Reply to the Arguments in Favour of the Divine Institution, and the Uninterrupted Succession of Episcopacy|quote= Even "after the introduction of the practice by which the epithet Bishop was generally confined to one person, the older writers who dwell upon this, occasionally use that epithet as synonymous with presbyter, it not having been till the ''third'' century, that the appropriation was so complete as never to be cast out of view.|publisher = General Books LLC |year=1899}}</ref><ref name="P. Douglass Gorrie – Church Fathers">{{cite book|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=jxZBAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA223|title=Episcopal Methodism, as it was, and is;: Or, An account of the origin, progress, doctrines, church polity, usages, institutions, and statistics, of the Methodist Episcopal church in the United States|quote= But if Scripture is opposed to modern high church claims and pretensions, so is ''history'', on which successionists appear to lay so much stress.|publisher = Miller, Orton & Mulligan|year=1852}}</ref>
Line 290:
===Hussite Church and Moravian Church===
The [[Moravian Church]], as with the [[Hussite Church]], teaches the doctrine of apostolic succession.<ref name="Melton">{{cite book|last=Melton|first=J. Gordon|title=Encyclopedia of Protestantism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bW3sXBjnokkC&pg=PA91|year=2005|publisher=Infobase Publishing|isbn=9780816069835|page=91|quote=Martin Luther seemed personally indifferent to apostolic succession, but branches of the Lutheran Church most notable the Church of Sweden, preserve episcopal leadership and apostolic succesison. ... Among other Protestants that claim apostolic succession is the Moravian Church.}}</ref><ref name="Konečný1995">{{cite book |last1=Konečný |first1=Šimon |title=A Hope for the Czechoslovak Hussite Church |date=1995 |publisher=[[Reformed Theological Seminary]] |page=86}}</ref> The Moravian Church claims apostolic succession as a legacy of the old [[Unity of the Brethren (Czech Republic)|Unity of the Brethren]]. In order to preserve the succession, three Bohemian Brethren were consecrated bishops by Bishop Stephen of Austria, a [[Waldensian]] bishop who had been ordained by a
===Presbyterian/Reformed churches===
Line 308:
For [[the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] (LDS Church), the largest denomination in the Latter-day Saint movement, Apostolic Succession involves the leadership of the church being established through the [[Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church)|Quorum of the Twelve Apostles]]. Each time the [[President of the Church (LDS Church)|President of the Church]] dies, the most senior [[Apostle (LDS Church)|apostle]], who is designated as the [[President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles]], is [[Setting apart|set apart]] as the [[List of presidents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints|new church president]].
==Criticism==
Some Nonconformist Protestants, particularly those in the Calvinist tradition, deny the doctrine of apostolic succession, believing that it is neither taught in Scripture nor necessary for Christian teaching, life, and practice. Accordingly, these Protestants strip the notion of apostolic succession from the definition of "apostolic" or "apostolicity". For them, to be apostolic is simply to be in submission to the teachings of the original twelve apostles as recorded in Scripture.<ref>Martin E. Marty, ''A Short History of Christianity'' (New York: Meridian Books 1959) at 75–77 (traditional doctrine).</ref> This doctrinal stance reflects the Protestant view of authority, embodied in the doctrine known as [[Sola Scriptura]].
Line 318:
===Confessional Lutheranism===
[[Confessional Lutheran]] churches including [[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]] (WELS) and [[Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod]] (LCMS) reject Apostolic Succession as a biblical doctrine
{{quote|A person enters the public ministry through the divine call. God through his people places a person into the public ministry when they ask a qualified individual to proclaim the gospel and administer the sacraments in their name and on their behalf and he accepts the call. The divine call confers the office, not ordination. Ordination is the public declaration of the man's fitness for office and the public recognition or confirmation of the legitimacy of the call that was extended and accepted. Although it is still our custom to lay on hands during the right of ordination, the laying on of hands is not commanded by God and is not necessary.<ref name=WELS-DC>{{cite web |url=https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=68&cuItem_itemID=8947 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130602105457/http://arkiv.lbk.cc/faq/site.pl@1518cutopic_topicid68cuitem_itemid8947.htm |archivedate=2 June 2013 |work=WELS Topical Q&A |title= Divine Call - Apostolic Succession / Transmutation Authority|publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod |accessdate=23 Sep 2015 }}</ref>}}
====Views concerning the Roman Catholic Church====
The Wisconsin Synod teaches:<ref name=WELS-DCM>{{cite web |url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=942&cuItem_itemID=22266 |archiveurl=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20080629231826/http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=942&cuItem_itemID=22266 |archivedate=29 June 2008 |work=WELS Topical Q&A |title=Definition of Church and Ministry - Apostolic {{sic|Sucession|nolink=y}} |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod |accessdate=23 Sep 2015 |url-status=dead }}</ref>▼
Confessional Lutheran churches state that there is no evidence the Popes have historic succession from Peter other than their own claim that it is so.<ref>WELS Topical Q&A: [https://web.archive.org/web/20090927214241/https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=6106 Responses the Previous Questions], "There is no biblical or historical evidence for the claims of the Roman Catholic church that Peter was the first pope. In fact there is no evidence that there even was a pope in the first century. Even Catholic historians recognize this as a historical fact...We honor Peter and in fact some of our churches are named after him, but he was not the first pope, nor was he Roman Catholic. If you read his first letter, you will see that he did not teach a Roman hierarchy, but that all Christians are royal priests. The same keys given to Peter in Matthew 16 are given to the whole church of believers in Matthew 18."</ref>
▲The Wisconsin Synod
{{quote|"Since the first ordained Lutheran pastors were ordained by pastors who had been ordained in the Roman Catholic church and so on through the generations, we could claim historic succession as plausibly as can Roman Catholic priests if it simply were dependent on being ordained in a line of pastors. But for the historic succession to be considered legitimate by Rome or the Othodox or Anglicans it must be mediated through the correct bishops. Rome does not recognize as legitimate even the ordinations done by bishops in historic succession as in the Church of Sweden and the Church of England. Only through bishops connected to the pope is the historic succession legitimate in their eyes."}}▼
▲{{quote|"Since the first ordained Lutheran pastors were ordained by pastors who had been ordained in the Roman Catholic church and so on through the generations, we could claim historic succession as plausibly as can Roman Catholic priests if it simply were dependent on being ordained in a line of pastors. But for the historic succession to be considered legitimate by Rome or the Othodox {{sic}} or Anglicans it must be mediated through the correct bishops. Rome does not recognize as legitimate even the ordinations done by bishops in historic succession as in the Church of Sweden and the Church of England. Only through bishops connected to the pope is the historic succession legitimate in their eyes."}}
WELS Lutheran apologists state that there are a number of major problems with the Roman Catholic view on apostolic succession:<ref name=WELS-DCM/>▼
▲
* There is no evidence the popes have historic succession to Peter other than their own claim that it is so.
Line 335 ⟶ 336:
* There is no evidence in Scripture that the office must be conveyed by laying on of hands and no command that it must be by a special class of bishops.
* [[Acts 1]] actually proves the opposite of what the Catholic Church claims; it proves there cannot be "apostolic successors" today because Judas' replacement had to be an eyewitness of Jesus' ministry.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=4302 |title=WELS Topical Q&A: Roman Catholic |access-date=27 September 2009 |archive-date=27 September 2009 |archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20090927211642/https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=4302 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
WELS holds that it's their custom that ordination of pastors is by other pastors, and that neither the Bible nor the Lutheran confessions make this the only divinely mandated way of entering the pastoral ministry
==See also==
| |||