Wikipedia

Apostolic succession: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Reverted good faith edits by 208.104.186.216 (talk): Rv - not just a Catholic doctrine, sentence already says it is a belief of some Christian denominations
No edit summary
Line 169:
 
==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]], [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] and the [[RomanEastern CatholicOrthodox Church]] teach apostolic succession. Among the previously mentioned churches opinions vary as to the validity of succession within [[Old Catholic]], [[Anglican Communion|Anglican]], [[Moravian Church|Moravian]], and [[Lutheran]] communities.
 
===Roman Catholic Church===
{{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 177:
 
[[File:Priestly ordination.jpg|thumb|Catholic ordination ceremony]]
[[Papal primacy]] is different though related to apostolic succession as described here. The Roman Catholic Church has traditionally claimed a unique leadership role for the Apostle [[Saint Peter|Peter]], believed to have been named by Jesus as head of the Apostles and as a focus of their unity, who became the first Bishop of [[diocese of Rome|Rome]], and whose successors inherited the role and accordingly became the leaders of the worldwide Church as well. Even so, Roman Catholicism acknowledges the papacy is built on apostolic succession, not the other way around. As such, apostolic succession is a foundational doctrine of authority in the Catholic Church.{{Blockquote|text=If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, 'Upon this rock I will build my Church'....|author={{bibleverse|Matthew|16:18}}}} Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus..."<ref>St. Augustine; Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]</ref> The Roman Catholic position is summarised this way: "The Lord says to Peter: 'I say to you,' he says, 'that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it ....'<ref>{{bibleverse|Mt.|16:18}}</ref> On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep,<ref>{{bibleverse|Jn|21:17}}</ref> and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity.... If someone [today] does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?"<ref>(Cyprian of Carthage; The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition [A.D. 251]). [http://www.catholic.com/tracts/peters-successors Peter's Successors] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150920072354/http://www.catholic.com/tracts/peters-successors |date=20 September 2015 }}. Catholic Answers.</ref>
 
Roman Catholicism holds that Christ entrusted the Apostles with the leadership of the community of believers, and the obligation to transmit and preserve the "deposit of faith" (the experience of Christ and his teachings contained in the doctrinal "tradition" handed down from the time of the apostles and the written portion, which is Scripture). The apostles then passed on this office and authority by ordaining bishops to follow after them.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://old.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p3.shtml#861 |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church, #861–862 |publisher=Old.usccb.org |date=14 December 1975 |access-date=18 July 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120729121143/http://old.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p3.shtml |archive-date=29 July 2012}}</ref>
 
Roman Catholic theology holds that the apostolic succession effects the power and authority to administer the [[Sacraments of the Catholic Church|sacraments]] except for [[baptism]] and [[matrimony]]. (Baptism may be administered by anyone and matrimony by the couple to each other.) Authority to so administer such sacraments is passed on only through the sacrament of [[Holy Orders]], a rite by which a priest is ordained (ordination can be conferred only by bishop). The bishop, of course, must be from an unbroken line of bishops stemming from the original apostles selected by Jesus Christ. Thus, apostolic succession is necessary for the valid celebration of the sacraments.<ref name=ITC1973/>
 
====Views concerning other churches====
Line 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 Roman Catholic Church, [[Pope Leo XIII]] stated in his 1896 [[Papal bull|bull]] ''[[Apostolicae curae]]'' that the Catholic Church believes specifically that Anglican orders were to be considered "absolutely null and utterly void".
 
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 Roman Catholic priests upon entry into the Catholic Church.<ref name=Neill/>{{rp|105}}
 
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, Roman Catholics believe that the ordination rites were reworded so as to invalidate the ordinations because the intention behind the alterations in the rite was a fundamental change in Anglican understanding of the priesthood.<ref>Franklin, R. William. "Introduction: The Opening of the Vatican Archives and the ARCIC Process" in Franklin, R. William (ed)''Anglican orders'' Mowbray:1996</ref>
 
[[File:Leo XIII.jpg|thumb|upright|Pope Leo XIII rejected Anglican arguments for apostolic succession in his bull ''Apostolicae curae''.]]
 
It is Roman Catholic doctrine that the teaching of ''Apostolicae curae'' is a truth to be "held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed", as stated in a commentary by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.<ref name=CDF1998>{{citation |chapter-url=http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM |chapter=Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio fidei |author=Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith |title=L'Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English |edition=15 July 1998 |pages=3–4 |publisher=EWTN |access-date=24 September 2007 |archive-date=29 April 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150429153305/http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM |url-status=dead }}</ref> Cardinal [[Basil Hume]] explained the conditional character of his ordination of [[Graham Leonard]], former Anglican bishop of the Diocese of London, to the priesthood in the following way: "While firmly restating the judgement of ''Apostolicae Curae'' that Anglican ordination is invalid, the Roman Catholic Church takes account of the involvement, in some Anglican episcopal ordinations, of bishops of the Old Catholic Church of the Union of Utrecht who are validly ordained. In particular and probably rare cases the authorities in Rome may judge that there is a 'prudent doubt' concerning the invalidity of priestly ordination received by an individual Anglican minister ordained in this line of succession."<ref name="ewtn">{{cite news | title = Statement of Cardinal Hume on the Ordination of Anglican Bishop Leonard as a Roman Catholic Priest | url = http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/LEONARD.TXT | work = The Catholic Resource Network | publisher = Trinity Communications | year = 1994 | access-date = 22 February 2015 }}</ref> At the same time, he stated: "Since the church must be in no doubt of the validity of the sacraments celebrated for the Roman Catholic community, it must ask all who are chosen to exercise the priesthood in the Catholic Church to accept sacramental ordination in order to fulfill their ministry and be integrated into the apostolic succession."<ref name="ewtn"/> Since ''Apostolicae curae'' was issued many Anglican jurisdictions have revised their ordinals, bringing them more in line with ordinals of the early Church.
 
Timothy Dufort, writing in ''[[The Tablet]]'' in 1982, attempted to present an ecumenical solution to the problem of how the Roman Catholic Church might accept Anglican orders without needing to formally repudiate ''Apostolicae curae'' at all. Dufort argued that by 1969 all Anglican bishops had acquired apostolic succession fully recognized by Rome,<ref name="dufort">Timothy Dufort, ''The Tablet'', 29 May 1982, pp. 536–538.</ref> since from the 1930s [[Old Catholic]] bishops (the validity of whose orders the Vatican has never questioned)<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur395.htm |title=Archived copy |access-date=17 December 2018 |archive-date=22 June 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190622191447/http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur395.htm |url-status=dead }}</ref> have acted as co-consecrators in the ordination of Anglican bishops. This view has not yet been considered formally by the Holy See, but after Anglican Bishop [[Graham Leonard]] converted to Roman Catholicism, he was only reordained in 1994 {{em|conditionally}} because of the presence of Old Catholic bishops at his ordination.
 
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 Roman Catholic is required to give "firm and definitive assent" to this matter.<ref name=CDF1998/> This being said, in May 2017, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, has asked whether the current Roman Catholic position on invalidity could be revised in the future.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/7068/anglican-orders-not-invalid-says-cardinal-opening-way-for-revision-of-current-catholic-position-|title=Anglican orders not 'invalid' says Cardinal, opening way for revision of current Catholic position|website=The Tablet}}</ref>
 
===Eastern Orthodox===
Line 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 Roman Catholicism have usually been received by "vesting" and have been allowed to function immediately within Eastern Orthodoxy as priests. Recognition of Roman Catholic orders by the Russian Orthodox Church was stipulated in 1667 by the [[Moscow Sobor of 1666–1667|Synod of Moscow]],<ref name="Cleenewerck" />{{rp|138}} but this position is not universal within the Eastern Orthodox communion.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://oca.org/questions/romancatholicism/validity-of-roman-catholic-orders|title=Validity of Roman Catholic Orders|year=1996|publisher=[[Orthodox Church in America]]|language=en|access-date=3 March 2016|quote=Some Orthodox would say that Roman Catholic priests do possess grace; others would say that they do not.}}</ref> For example, Fr. John Morris of the [[Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America]], states that "Apostolic Succession is not merely a historical pedigree, but also requires Apostolic Faith. This is because Apostolic Succession is not the private possession of a bishop, but is the attribute of a local Church. A bishop who goes in schism or is cast out of office due to heresy does not take his Apostolic Succession with him as a private possession."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.antiochian.org/node/17076|title=An Orthodox Response to the Recent Roman Catholic Declaration on the Nature of the Church|last=Morris|first=John|date=October 2007|publisher=[[Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America]]|language=en}}</ref> The validity of a priest's ordination is decided by each autocephalous Eastern Orthodox church.<ref>{{cite web|title=Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs {{!}} Ordination Joint Committee of Orthodox and Catholic Bishops, 1988|url=http://www.usccb.org/seia/ordinati.shtml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110723002517/http://www.usccb.org/seia/ordinati.shtml |archive-date=23 July 2011 |date=23 July 2011 }}</ref>
 
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 220:
 
=== Oriental Orthodox Churches ===
The [[Armenian Apostolic Church]], which is one of the Oriental Orthodox churches, recognises Roman Catholic episcopal consecrations without qualification.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Roberson |first1=Ronald G. |date=2010 |title=The Dialogues of the Catholic Church with the Separated Eastern Churches |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40731267 |journal=U.S. Catholic Historian |volume=28 |issue=2 |pages=135–152 |issn=0735-8318 |jstor=40731267 |access-date=7 February 2021}}</ref>
 
===Anglican Communion===
Line 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 Roman Catholic past. [[Reformed tradition|Reformed]] theology gained a certain foothold,<ref name=Neill>Neill, Stephen. ''Anglicanism'' Pelican (1960)</ref>{{rp|49,61}} and under his successor, [[Edward VI of England|Edward VI]] what had been an administrative schism – as the Church under Henry was separated from Rome but remained essentially Roman Catholic in its theology and practice – became a {{em|Protestant}} reformation under the guiding hand of [[Thomas Cranmer]].<ref name=Neill/>{{rp|67}} Although care was taken to maintain the unbroken sequence of episcopal consecrations – particularly in the case of [[Matthew Parker]],<ref name=Neill/>{{rp|131}} who was consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury in 1559 by two bishops who had been ordained in the 1530s with the Roman Pontifical and two ordained with the Edwardine Ordinal of 1550 – apostolic succession was not seen as a major concern that a true ministry could not exist without episcopal consecrations: English Reformers such as [[Richard Hooker]] rejected the Roman position that Apostolic Succession is divinely commanded or necessary for true Christian ministry.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Archer |first1=Stanley |year=1993 |title=Hooker on Apostolic Succession: The Two Voices |journal=The Sixteenth Century Journal |volume=24 |issue=1 |pages=67–74 |jstor=2541798 |doi=10.2307/2541798|s2cid=159634928 |quote=While he argues that the rank originated with the Apostles, enjoyed divine approval, and flourished throughout Christendom, he rejects the view inherent in the Catholic position that the office is divinely commanded or is a result of divine law. }}</ref> American Episcopal theologian Richard A. Norris argues that the "''foreign'' Reformed [Presbyterian] churches" were genuine ones despite the lack of apostolic succession because they had been abandoned by their bishops at the Reformation.<ref name=Norris>Norris, Richard A. "Episcopacy" in ''The Study of Anglicanism'' Sykes, Stephen & Booty, John (eds) SPCK(1988)</ref>{{rp|304}} In very different ways both [[James II of England|James II]] and [[William III of England]] made it plain that the Church of England could no longer count on the 'godly prince' to maintain its identity and traditions and the 'High Church' clergy of the time began to look to the idea of apostolic succession as a basis for the church's life. For William Beveridge (Bishop of St Asaph, 1704–8) the importance of this lay in the fact that Christ himself is "continually present at such imposition of hands; thereby transferring the same Spirit, which He had first breathed into His Apostles, upon others successively after them",<ref name=Norris/>{{rp|305}} but the doctrine did not really come to the fore until the time of the [[Tractarian]]s.<ref>Webster, John B. "Ministry and Priesthood" in ''The Study of Anglicanism'' Sykes, Stephen & Booty, John (eds) SPCK(1988), p.305</ref>
 
In 1833, before his conversion to Roman Catholicism, [[John Henry Newman|Newman]] wrote about the apostolic succession: "We must necessarily consider none to be {{em|really}} ordained who has not been {{em|thus}} ordained". After quoting this,<ref name="Ramsey1960">Ramsey, Arthur Michael (1960). ''From Gore to Temple'', Longmans.</ref>{{rp|111}} [[Michael Ramsey]] continues: "With romantic enthusiasm, the Tractarians propagated this doctrine. In doing so they involved themselves in some misunderstandings of history and in some confusion of theology". He goes on to explain that they ascribed to early Anglican authors a far more exclusive version of the doctrine than was the case, they blurred the distinction between succession in office (Irenaeus) and succession in consecration (Augustine); they spoke of apostolic succession as the channel of grace in a way that failed to do justice to His gracious activity within all the dispensations of the New Covenant.<ref name="Ramsey1960"/>{{rp|11}} [[J. B. Lightfoot]] argued that monarchial episcopacy evolved upwards from a college of presbyters by the elevation of one of their number to be the episcopal president<ref name="Ramsey1960"/>{{rp|116}} and [[Arthur Headlam|A.C. Headlam]] laid great stress on Irenaeus' understanding of succession which had been lost from sight behind the Augustinian 'pipe-line theory'.<ref name="Ramsey1960"/>{{rp|117–18}}
 
===Lutheran churches===
Line 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 Roman Catholic Church does not deny or approve the apostolic succession directly, but will continue with further inquiries about the matter.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Anton|first1=Emil|title=Mitä ajatella Suomen ev.-lut. kirkosta? Osa 2: katolilaiset|url=https://hyviauutisia.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/mita-ajatella-suomen-ev-lut-kirkosta-osa-2-katolilaiset/|website=Hyviä uutisia|location=Apostolinen suksessio|language=fi|date=1 September 2014|quote=Kuten Vanhurskauttaminen kirkon elämässä -asiakirjasta kävi ilmi, omasta mielestään Suomen ev.-lut. kirkolla on apostolinen suksessio. Katolinen kirkko ei sitä suoraan myönnä eikä kiellä, vaan esittää lisäkysymyksiä.}}</ref>
 
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 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 Roman Catholic bishop in 1434.<ref name="Stocker1918">{{cite book|last=Stocker|first=Harry Emilius|title=Moravian customs and other matters of interest|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4ps9AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20|year=1918|publisher=Times publishing co., printers|page=20|quote=They were extremely solicitous to secure a ministry whose validity the Roman Catholics and others would be compelled to recognise. For this reason they resolved to seek the episcopal succession. At that time a colony of Waldenses lived on the Bohemian border. The synod was satisfied that these people possessed the regular authenticated episcopal succession. Their chief was Stephen. To him the Brethren sent a deputation consisting of three priests or presbyters. These were Michael Bradacius, a priest of the Roman Catholic, and a priest of the Waldensian Church, whose names have not been preserved. They were instructed to inquire into the validity of the Waldensian episcopate. Stephen received the deputies with great kindness, assembled his assistant bishops, and entered into a minute account of the episcopacy which they had. Fully satisfied with what they lad learned the deputies requested to be consecrated bishops. This request Bishop Stephen and his assistants fulfilled in a solemn convocation of the Waldensian Church. The new bishops immediately returned to the barony of Lititz where another synod was convened and three of the brethren were set apart for the work of the ministry, by the laying on of hands. In spite of the terrible persecutions suffered by the Ancient Church, this episcopate was most wonderfully preserved.}}</ref><ref name="Schaff2007">{{cite book|last=Schaff|first=Philip|title=The Creeds of Christendom: History of the Creeds – Volume I, Part II|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JbxML0B75ZIC&pg=PA567|year=2007|publisher=Cosimo, Inc.|isbn=9781602068902|page=567|quote=they sought regular ordination from a Waldensian bishop, Stephen of Austria, who was reported to have been ordained by a Roman bishop in 1434, and who afterwards suffered martyrdom in Vienna.}}</ref> These three consecrated bishops returned to [[Litice nad Orlicí|Litice]] in Bohemia and then ordained other brothers, thereby preserving the historic episcopate.<ref name="Stocker1918"/>
 
===Presbyterian/Reformed churches===
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolic_succession"