The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Augoustinos, Poliscifi, The Cub, P H, Hardrada
5604 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (P H), 67 guests, and 466 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
OL EuroEast II (2007) Group
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,743
Posts411,992
Members5,604
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98835 10/24/02 02:18 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
Eric Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
In reference to the Orthodox view of Anglican orders: I thought the Orthodox view was that if bishops separate themselves from the Orthodox church then they cannot validly confect any sacraments - holy orders included. Since there is no confusion about whether or not the Anglicans are in the Orthodox church (they're not) then I fail to see what the question is.
From the Orthodox viewpoint it would seem Anglican orders are not valid. Others have expressed contrary views here so I'm soliciting feedback given what I just said.

And before anyone says I'm being mean it isn't my intent to do so. There are many anglo-catholics that I like quite a bit. I'm just stating what I think is the Orthodox stance on this issue.

(Kindly) replies solicited.

Eric


"Where Peter is, there is the Church." - St. Ambrose
Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98836 10/24/02 04:40 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 256
Marshall Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 256
Dear friends and brethren,

Yes a woman cannot be ordained or celebrate the Eucharist and I reject this. It is things like priestesses and lack of doctrinal authority that break my heart and move me to examine "transferring" to Rome or the East. Part of my pilgrimage is the Byzantine Forum. Thanks for your assistance so far.

Eric,

Might I suggest you read my original post where I listed several examples in which your Orthodox hierarchs (including Constantinople) clearly stated that Anglican orders are "valid". And yes they say "valid". Either the Orthodox have changed their minds to hold your position or your position is not the Orthodox position.

respectfully your brother through Holy Baptism,
Marshall

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98837 10/24/02 06:06 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Mexican Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
But those statements come from the 1930's, things have changed after the introduction of female priesthood in the Anglican Church, Their orders don't seem to have credibility anymore.

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98838 10/24/02 07:36 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
Eric Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
Marshall wrote:
Quote

Eric,

Might I suggest you read my original post where I listed several examples in which your Orthodox hierarchs (including Constantinople) clearly stated that Anglican orders are "valid". And yes they say "valid". Either the Orthodox have changed their minds to hold your position or your position is not the Orthodox position.

I followed your suggestion and did so. Interesting. I am going to do more reading on this.

The Project Canterbury site had a paper on the concept of Western Orthodoxy. FYI - the Antiochian Orthodox archdiocese in this country has made an effort at implementing it. It really hasn't taken off as much as hoped for and has 20+ parishes (about 7% of the total in the archdiocis?) that are Western Rite. They use 2 rites - one a slightly changed version of the Anglican liturgy and the other a slightly changed pre-Vatican 2 Roman liturgy. I have attended both and find them very beautiful.

Eric


"Where Peter is, there is the Church." - St. Ambrose
Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98839 10/24/02 08:16 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 50
F
Father Serafim Offline
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 50
Dear Marshall,
The Orthodox have changed their minds, since the 20's. At that time of course Constantinople was being supported politically by the Anglican Church and the Patriarch belonged to the "Harmony" Lodge,which might explain how he, for one, made this unOrthodox statement. Today no Anglican bishop would be invited to serve at the Divine Liturgy in Jerusalem (the Mother Church) for example. As for Anglican tradition - didn't that disappear in the 70s? I used to live in Walsingham at that time. There is also the problem of comprehensiveness - you can deny the true presence or even deny the divinity of Christ - i.e. Rev Don Cupitt (Is he still spreading his godless lectures around the world!)

Of course there are devout Anglicans but I think most of these have found Orthodoxy.

My son is a reader in Ediburgh, where the parish is made up of ex-Anglicans. BTW they did not reject Anglicanism but found Orthodoxy to be a fulfillment. I believe the spiritual future for Britain will be within the Orthodox tradition, especially when the British begin to venerate their own saints.

"Faith outside the Church is not the same as Faith inside the Church. Faith within the Church is the fullness of Faith" New Hieromartyr Valentin Sventsitsky (1925)

Yours in Christ,
Fr Serafim


Russian Ascetics of 20th Century
http://www.fatherserafim.info
Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98840 10/24/02 08:38 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 569
Robert Horvath Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 569
Glory to Jesus Christ!

I have come to the understanding in my spiritual journey that I no longer need to defend my Faith and that that it totally unnecessary for me. If someone does not agree with my beliefs that is fine. God is with their primary experience of Him as well. I think that groups like ROCOR and the SSPX are examples of what we as Christians should not become, in that we must avoid having a siege mentality and this sense that our experience of God is the only valid way or the "best" or the "fulness." I have sensed the presence of God in many spiritual Traditions, Christian and non-Christian, and if someone is interested in my Faith I will share it with them, but I refuse to talk to people about the holy things who regard them as error and do not believe in dialogue. The Eastern Theology of Mystery is the key in healthy ecumenical relations; the Eastern Church will never state that God cannot work outside of Orthodoxy or Catholicism; and by participation in ecumenism we affirm the presence and experience of God in the lives of those, humans like us, who although do not articulate belief and faith like we do nevertheless can still be vehicles for Salvation and grace. And it is in this spirit that I treat the Anglicans. What is important to me is if they experience God in their Tradition and if they are at home; then may the blessing of the Lord be upon them! Unlike the Latins, Eastern Christians have a positive view of Creation and Humanity (Not to say the Latins are not equally valid in their explication of the beginning of Salvation history 2+2=4 & 3+1=4); we do not believe in Original Sin or Guilt. His Creation is good and His Spirit fills all things. So as an Eastern Catholic, although my particular Church is not as progressive as the Anglican and Episcopal Churches, I affirm their experience of the divine as just as valid and efficacious as mine; and I feel ok about that. I also recognize that most Eastern Catholics do not feel that way; and I am ok with that. It is just in my spiritual journey that I have felt the need to not be tribal in my experience of God. I believe proper ecumenical thought is based on an appreciation of similarities and an honoring of differences. And I particularly do not buy this idea some call it the Traditional mind of the Church that we as Catholics already have Unity and that Unity entails bringing people under Rome. I think that is an illusion. I believe true Unity is first a unity of all of humanity in a spirit of solidarity and peace and NOT a one world religion as some paranoid Tradititionalists (a Traditionalist is a fundamentalist and not necessarily a Tradition-minded person) say is happening. Secondly, especially in regard to the Apostolic Churches eventual organic Unity not "under" Rome, but a unity "with" them as equals. Thirdly the regularlization of the Protestant Churches by their Mother Church, the Latin Church: possibly by allowing the development of various rites to preserve their traditions like the Anglican Use personal parishes.

So I hope this helps alittle bit:)

In Christ,

Robert

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98841 10/24/02 09:49 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 405
M
Maximus Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 405
Robert,

The Latin Catholic Church would teach that other religions can be used by God for salvation. Infact if you want to get to the real meat of it no Latin mystical theologian worth his salt, would deny that it can't be possible for God to use a serial rapist for some betterment. But the Latin Church would not be so blind as to suggest that the Christ of the New Testament institutes and blesses serial rape.

Now either the Church is what it says it is or it is not. According to your logic it is not nor has it ever been Apostolic in succession. Nor is the Eucharist or sacrament of reconciliation of any real importance. By your logic the Christian Church is less sacramental in mission then it is principal. Thus you disregard "What you bind on earth is bound in Heaven." Profession in Christ, God, Nature, is all that is needed as long as one is a principled human. No sacarment of reconciliation is needed for the human because no mortal sins matter. So in the end you go further then the Protestant in their "by grace alone" through profession in Christ to "by grace alone" through the profession of the higher power of your choice. Do you know if your coming or going?

Robert - Latin Catholicism does not have a bad view of humanity. It is not it's monasticism that bands all female animal life from her monastic grounds. I think that is your tradition with her own sexual issues. Latin Catholicism teaches that all human life is good, so what about original sin? What you suggest children only learn bad behavior? Fine. I suggest that Children have to be taught good behavior i.e. don't mock the child with a physical disability.

The irony here is that I don't even profess Christianity yet I have to defend Her integrity from Her Christian family.

I have to tell you if nothing matters - religious wise - why in Gods name do I need to be Catholic or any other person without orginized religion for that matter?

Robert I don't think you really know what Christianity is. And here lies one of the major problems I have with the Christian Church i.e Catholicism & Orthodoxy, and it's tight lipness. If the Church is the great navigator through the mystical waters to navigate you to the destination of paradise you want to reach. Then why in the bejeebers tell people to set sail on their own without it's navigational instructions, people lost at sea, the only thing they got to say is be sure to dot your i's and cross your t's and hold your fork the right way. Arriving back to the point of principle. All mysticsim in this case was only illusionary. The whole thing being a matter of deception and self deception.

Justin

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98842 10/24/02 10:25 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 569
Robert Horvath Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 569
Glory to Jesus Christ!

It is characteristically fundamentalist to deny we live in a post-modern culture. I do not live in that kind of mentality. As an Eastern Catholic I feel that with John Paul II we must learn how to live in that globalism that our world is now encountering. I just refuse to be tribal in regard to my religious faith. In a pluralistic society we must learn to appreciate our differences. My affirmation of other faiths does not mean that I am not an authentic Eastern Christian. I am tired of my Church, the Eastern Church, being represented by fundamentalists and extremists. I believe in the Golden Mean. That is where the Truth is. This whole issue of tribalism affected our Church in Eastern Europe. Terrible atrocities were committed by Byzantine Catholics and Orthodox against each other. They were identical Churches with only a difference of who one was in Communion with. They slaughtered each other! And yet they would go to Divine Liturgy to receive Christ in His Body and Blood; The Christ who was and is perfect Love poured out un-selfishly. Religion has been robed with Hate for far to long. As a Byzantine Catholic I refuse to be a fundamentalist and I refuse to believe that the qualifier for being Orthodox is to be ignorant and tribal. The teachings of Christ in the Gospels are the highest teachings of our Church; they are teachings of love and brotherhood - they condemn the Orthodoxy you profess as a "white washed tomb." Authentic Orthodoxy is transformational and vibrant and rooted in Gospel values. We cannot be Orthodox without love; we cannot be Christians without being Christ. We are Christ and because we are Christ we are called to manifest His personality and character which was reflected in the Gospels. I am Byzantine Catholic, but I am a human being first. And it is in that humanity that I am grounded in first and it is in that commonality that I have with all peoples that I can appreciate their faith choices and non-faith choices. We must be grounded in the awareness of our common humanity that is the key to NOT becoming a fundamentalist or a siege Christian. And it is that profound sense of humanity that keeps me grounded in balance and a sense of authentic Orthodoxy and Tradition-Mindedness.

In Christ,

Robert

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98843 10/25/02 01:32 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 788
Axios Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 788
Quote
At some point a little Latin logic may be needed. Otherwise what good argument could you give to the unchurched to belong to any Church, subscribe to any religion. If God/Christ created the Catholic Church He did so for a reason, otherwise to speak to the simple mind of humans any other way is just to stir confusion.
So we non-Catholics are a cause of confusion?

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98844 10/25/02 02:11 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
Eric Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 106
Fr. Seraphim wrote:
Quote

My son is a reader in Ediburgh, where the parish is made up of ex-Anglicans. BTW they did not reject Anglicanism but found Orthodoxy to be a fulfillment. I believe the spiritual future for Britain will be within the Orthodox tradition, especially when the British begin to venerate their own saints.
As more and more of them flock to Orthdodoxy I wonder if the desire to use one of the western rites within Orthodoxy will become stronger. The Antiochian archdiocese here in the U.S. has about 20+ such parishes but it has not grown that much beyond that.

Eric


"Where Peter is, there is the Church." - St. Ambrose
Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98845 10/25/02 11:18 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 405
M
Maximus Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 405
Quote
Originally posted by Axios:
Quote
At some point a little Latin logic may be needed. Otherwise what good argument could you give to the unchurched to belong to any Church, subscribe to any religion. If God/Christ created the Catholic Church He did so for a reason, otherwise to speak to the simple mind of humans any other way is just to stir confusion.
So we non-Catholics are a cause of confusion?
Axios,

Not at all. Let me try to explain. First I wish not to try and take a easy road of saying that the right road is in the center of eastern mysticism and western logic. And in doing so sound as if I am some how more humble and enlightened then the two sides of the Church.

But in all honesty I see the Latin over burden of legalism, and rule this to rule that, to logical end to this furthest end. To some how be deprived of that mysticism that was/is at the rooted of Christianity in the east - where it began. Yet one can *try* to be so mystical, as it seems some in the eastern tradition attempt, and lack all degree of logic that in the end you betray the integrity of Christianity.

What am I saying? Here: One thing that floors me, is that "mans best friend" the dog. Has no idea that there has been serial sniper killings in America, no matter how close he is to his master. The loyal and loving K-9 has no clue an understanding of the hostage situation in Russia by Checen rebels. Nor does the K-9 or any other animal outside of humans have knowledge or understanding of the building war against Iraq. The K-9 in California has/had no clue or understanding of the World Trade Center collapse - 9-11. Yet we humans have been given the intellect to grasp these things, we are that much more of reasoned creatures. I propose that as reason and intellect goes, humanity are K-9's compared to angelic creatures. The angels may not need what humans need. They may not need a book - the Bible. They may not need a physical presence - the Incarnate Word and His Apostles. But according to Christianity their God gave them all of these things including sacraments in the physical form. Did Christ need to put mud on a persons eyes? But He did. Likewise the Church anointes with oil. If Christ is the Christian God then why do some Christians think that they have risen to a level of greater wisdom and cleverness then God. If Christ said "This is my body" and gave this body to His followers at the last meal? Then why do some Christians think they have risen to a greater level of wisdom and cleverness then Christ, and now say His body is N/A.

Perhaps if Christianity is true? Then as God gave the K-9 the man. Perhaps He gave Christianity the Church?

Justin

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98846 10/25/02 11:37 AM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 405
M
Maximus Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 405
Robert,

I am not Christian or any religion for that matter so how can I be fundamentalist.

Your so "mystical" you can't even accept 2 + 2 = 4. But I bet no matter how mystical you attempt to be you need to eat food i.e. intake protien, calories, and vitamines & minerals, unlike the angelic creatures. And I bet unlike angelic creatures who are not governed by our sense of time. You are.

So tell me - why should I not eat the limbs of other people? You can't say what is right and wrong, but some how in the end you try and say what is right and wrong (your mystical state eludes my logic). According to your logic it is fine for me to eat the limbs of other people because one opinion is as good as another. According to your logic, as an exChristian it is ok for me to convert to Islam or Mormonism and take several wives because one opinion is as good as another.

I like your Christianity better then Christs, it draws no line and suffers not.

What did Christ say? I paraphrase: I came not to bring peace but war. To turn son against father. and daughter against mother.

I like this new Christianity - a Christianity without martyrs.

Justin

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98847 10/25/02 12:25 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 569
Robert Horvath Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 569
Slava Isusu Christu!

Dear Max:

I am simply a Byzantine Catholic; that is my Faith; I hold to no other Christianity then that. I am sorry you have mis-read me. Go in peace.

Robert

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98848 10/25/02 02:52 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 448
M
Mike C. Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 448
Are Anglican orders valid? Yes, if they were ordained, as some posters mentioned, by Old Catholic or Polish National or Orthodox bishops.
Anlican orders are not valid because they lost the Apostolic succession. For over 100 years, with the installation of Cromwell and the "Long Parlament", they did away with the bishops and priests. Their services were more like a "Low Church" service. Only in the mid 1850's did they restore services to look more like the Roman Catholic Mass. Just because they have a ceremony doesn't mean that its valid.

By the way, I was at Cantebury Cathedral a few years ago, they had a sign at the Blessed Sacrement Chapel. "Please refrain from loud talking. The Sacrement is exposed". Interesting.

Re: Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism #98849 10/25/02 04:13 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,700
H
Hieromonk Elias Offline
Administrator
Member
Offline
Administrator
Member
H
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,700
You need more for valid orders, than simply a validly ordained bishop, using the right ordinal. What I hear in this thread might sould like a 'magical' attitude to the mystery, rather than an ecclesial attitude.

You need the call of the Church community (the 'axios'), the pastoral need (one is ordained to serve the Church, as much as to "be" a priest). So this is a more complex issue than merely to say that an Old-Catholic or Orthodox bishop was a co-ordainer at an Anglican ordination.

Essentially, one is ordained in the Church, to serve the Church. So one must look to the Anglican communion as a whole, to see to what extent they are a local or sister Church, and to what extent the Church lacks essential qualities of being a Church.

Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2019 (Forum 1998-2019). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3