Worldwide Communion of Catholic Apostolic Churches (WCCAC) :: View topic

jodudan · Guest

Hello, and blessings to all
Does ICAN follow the apostolic succession protocol of Rome only, or does she incorporate the eastern sense of 'tradition' along with the laying of hands?? In other words, alot of old catholics ( at least on the web) can claim 'valid' succession via the laying on of hands, but in practice betray the faith with very liberal notions (i.e ordination of practicing gays, female priests, etc). The eastern sense notes that despite the laying on of hands, if somone departs from holy tradition they've left the faith and apostolic succession as well.......thanks!! joseph Shocked

BpAndre · Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 11:51 pm Post subject: Apostolic Succession

We do not follow a protocol, but rather the understanding given us by the ancient Church. I do not believe that Eastern and Western viewpoints are as diametrically oppossed as you would posit.

Much has been made, and by many, of the Eastern Orthodox Churches statements regarding apostolic succession. We know that the Western Church has indicated that Apostolic Succession is conveyed through porper form, matter and intent, upon a man, properly disposed to the office for which he is ordained. The Eastern Churches also regard as necessary proper form, matter and intent. The question then, is does the grace conveyed to the individual leave that person should he leave the church?

The church has affirmed that the grace given to us through certain sacraments permanently changes the character of our soul. Grace is God's gift to us, and is ours to receive, if properly disposed and open to receive the gift. For example, with the "Lapsi" of "The Lapsed" Christians who, under torture or fear of torture during persecution, sacrificed to idols, worshiped false gods or otherwise recanted thier Christianity, who later repented and wished to rejoin the church, were deemed to not be required to be re-baptized, but to do penance and after a time, be readmitted as full members again.

In the course of the "on again - off again" relationship between East and West, although many indicate the "Great Schism of 1054 AD" as the point of the permanent split between East and West, there have been periods of time afterwards where union was re-established, if only for a short time. Although each had accused the other of leaving the faith, upon reconcilliation, neither required the other to submit to reordination of the clergy.

Eastern Churches who have reconcilled with Rome have not seen fit to offer to re-ordain the Roman clergy, and Rome has niether re-ordained the Eastern clergy. So, although the Eastern Churches have at times claimed that those not in communion with them do not have valid orders, the practical aspects of this have shown that the Eastern Orthodox Churches do recognize the validity of Holy Orders from outside of thier own communion, if only on a practical level - but that is certainly where it counts.

Christ is the guarantor of the effectual nature of the sacraments, and not people. It is not the church that conveys the grace, but God, and it is in His permissive will that this be so. Although we see those who do not abide by the awesome responsibility of sacramental ordination, and see the sinful actions of such defilement, we too are sinners. No one is worthy to claim for themselves sacramental ordiantion, nor any of the other sacraments. They are gifts from God, not based upon our holiness, thank goodness! Otherwise, we would have no sacraments at all!

Now, some of the issues you have rasied go back to form, matter and intent. With respect to the attempted ordination of women, for instance, there is a clear defect of matter, and so no ordination takes place.

Just as through Sacred Tradition and Holy Scripture, Christ left us a sure manner to understand and faithfully echo forward the Good News, Christ also establsihed a sure means for us to know, through Tradition and Scripture and the Deposit of Faith, that He is the guarantor of the effectual nature of the sacraments, so we have no reason to doubt thier validlity. An understanding of the sacraments devoid of this, opens us up to a kind of sacramental scrupulosity, with individuals being accused of "loosing thier ordination" because thier church is no longer in communion with some other church, as in the Eastern Orthodox Churches - which is not one church, but many separate and autocephalous churches that recognize and refuse to recognize one another all throughout history. A "validity of ordination based on communion" is not part of ancient Christian theology.

Now, having said that, a man who was validly ordained who apostacizes is stil validly ordained and had fully effectual orders, but can no longer rightly call himself a Catholic or Orthodox minister of the sacraments.

For a validly ordained man who detours from the faith, he is still validly ordained, however remember that he, as we all, must answer to Christ for his actions.
_________________
Bishop Andre' Jhohn-William Queen, SCR
Vicar General
Catholic Apostolic National Church
Phone: 773.942.4660

jodudan · Newbie Joined: 11 Mar 2007 Posts: 8

Dear Bishop,
I must thank you for the education and honesty in solving an issue for me; i must say, 'Christ is in our midst' when you've spoken. Now, i'm almost done with this issue but one last question: so, if a church for example, claims apostolicity and catholicity yet ordains women under the concept of being 'inclusive', does the eucharist have any efficacy under such conditions? In other words, if no ordination has occurred do to defect in form/matter, then the bread and wine are not transmuted into the body and blood of Christ......I'm curious because i'm studying ordination and its impact on liturgical function...................thank you again, joseph

BpAndre · Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:22 am Post subject: Validity and Efficacy

Joseph,

Where there is a defect in form, matter or intent, then, objectively, there is no sacrament conferred. In the case of ordination/consecration, as an attempt to ordain a woman to any of the three sacramental offices is, on its face, invalid, any attempts by an individual who claims ordination or consecration resulting from the invalid act, are also invalid, null and without efficacy.

In other words, if the ordination is invalid, then any sacraments proper to Holy Orders confected by that person are also invalid.

The sacraments are not open to interpretation, nor are their form, matter and intent open to human whim or fancy. Any attempt to define the sacraments outside of Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the Deposit of faith, is always invalid, null and void. The sacraments, gifts from God that impart His grace to us, are not subject to human revision or modification in order to fit the "Spirit of the Age". You will, however, always see individuals and groups who believe that the Sacraments (indeed, the entire Church) should be reshaped and reworked to fit society's wishes. Such groups, over time, invariably devolve from a Christian family of faith into a moral social club, only loosely based upon the tenets of the faith.

But, as for me and my house...
_________________
Bishop Andre' Jhohn-William Queen, SCR
Vicar General
Catholic Apostolic National Church
Phone: 773.942.4660

BpAndre

Many believe that the Eastern Orthodox Churches rigidly hold to a diametrically different viewpoint of the validity of orders, than our own. This is not necessarily the case, as indicated by the encyclical from the Oecumenical Patriarch in 1922, on Anglican Orders, below. It can clearly be seen that proper form, matter and intent are key to a valid and effectual transmission of orders.

This was, of course, prior to the Anglican Communion's attempt to ordain women to the sacramental ministry, which the Eastern Orthodox Churches would regard as invalid.

************************************

Encyclical on Anglican Orders
from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922

[The Holy Synod has studied the report of the Committee and notes:]

1. That the ordination of Matthew Parker as Archbishop of Canterbury by four bishops is a fact established by history.

2. That in this and subsequent ordinations there are found in their fullness those orthodox and indispensable, visible and sensible elements of valid episcopal ordination - viz. the laying on of hands, the Epiclesis of the All-Holy Spirit and also the purpose to transmit the charisma of the Episcopal ministry.

3. 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.

4. That the practice in the Church affords no indication that the Orthodox Church has ever officially treated the validity of Anglican Orders as in doubt, in such a way as would point to the re-ordination of the Anglican clergy as required in the case of the union of the two Churches.
_________________
Bishop Andre' Jhohn-William Queen, SCR
Vicar General
Catholic Apostolic National Church
Phone: 773.942.4660

jodudan · Newbie Joined: 11 Mar 2007 Posts: 8

Dear Bishop,
At what point did the Roman church find that anglican orders were 'null and void' ...?? Am i correct in this? My understanding was that there is no apostolic succession through King Henry the V111, or any secular ruler for that sake. I understand the form, matter, and intent may be present, but interference in the lineage must present some sort of rupture.....As for the orthodox, it seems strange that a priest from the anglican church which asserts ( or seems to) that the bread and wine do not truly transmute into the body and blood of Christ, could be accepted into orthdoxy without re-ordination, or some sort of de-programming at least. I don't mean to offend anyone in this statement; perhaps its my ignorance speaking.......................joseph

BpAndre · Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:47 pm Post subject: Anglican Orders and Orthodoxy

The issue with Anglican Orders had nothing to do with the King of England, but rather with the Anglican Missal which changed the words, and thus the intention of the ordination. This is what Rome objected to as a "defect in intention", insofar as the change was seen to mean that the Anglican Church, with that change, no longer intended to do what the Church had, in its history, intended to do, and so changed the nature of the sacrament of Holy Orders. When this happened, the Pope declared Anglican Orders invalid, with that change.

What is interesting is the vast difference in Orthodox views then and a few years later, even before the Anglican Church began to liberalize its theology. The othodox position did shift, so it is not a "cast iron" theological policy.

Consider the following from the Romanian Orthodox Church, several years after the Oecumenical Patriarch's Statement:

Orthodox Statements on Anglican Orders

Romania, 1936

On March 20, 1936, the Sacred Synod of the Orthodox Church of Romania resolved as follows:

Resolution

Of the Sacred Synod concerning the Validity of Anglican Orders

Session of March 20th, 1936

The Patriarch, His Beatitude

Miron Cristea, presiding Secretary: Bishop Veniamin

His Holiness the Patriarch of Constantinople having notified the Sacred Synod that he had recognized the Validity of Anglican Orders, and having requested our Sacred Synod to examine that question and to inform him in reply of its opinion:

1. Accordingly, the Sacred Synod of the Orthodox Church of Rumania replied in 1925:

a. That from the historical point of view no obstacle exists to the recognition of the Apostolic succession of Anglican Orders.

b. That from the dogmatic point of view the validity of Anglican orders depends upon the Anglican Church itself and especially upon whether or not that Church recognizes Holy Orders to be a mystery (Sacrament)

"Having considered the conclusions of the papers on Apostolic Succession, Holy Orders, Holy Eucharist, Holy Mysteries in general, and Tradition and Justification,

"And having considered the declaration of the Anglican Delegation on these questions, which declarations are in accordance with the Doctrine of the Orthodox Church,

"The Rumanian Orthodox Commission unanimously recommends the Holy Synod (of the Rumanian Orthodox Church) to recognize the validity of Anglican orders."

****************************************

_________________
Bishop Andre' Jhohn-William Queen, SCR
Vicar General
Catholic Apostolic National Church
Phone: 773.942.4660

jodudan · Newbie Joined: 11 Mar 2007 Posts: 8

Dear Bishop,
I thank you again for your responses and pray you'll tolerate my need for questions answered; by the way, does ICAN have a publishing house or press?? Pardon my ignorance, but much of what you say could be beneficial in printed form.....................God be with you,
joseph