J
what exactly is the Anglican understanding of Apostolic Succession.
I think this is where some fancy Latin words actually helped my understanding:
It is my understanding that within Anglicanism there are three general opinions on the apostolic succession/historic episcopacy: Esse, bene esse, and plene esse.
Those who believe it is of the esse (think essence) of the church believe, as CSMR said, that it is necessary for the existence of the church and for a valid ministry to exist.
Those who believe that it is bene esse (for the good of the church) believe that apostolic succession is a good tradition, but not essential to the existence of the church.
Those who believe that it is plene esse (for the fullness of being in the church) believe that the church can exist without apostolic succession, but the fullest expression of the church is found where there is apostolic succession.
The first Christians had no doubts about how to determine which was the true Church and which doctrines the true teachings of Christ. The test was simple: Just trace the apostolic succession of the claimants.
Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles. All over the world, all Catholic bishops are part of a lineage that goes back to the time of the apostles, something that is impossible in Protestant denominations (most of which do not even claim to have bishops).
Bingo!a very concise definition from
Our Roman brothers and sisters have provided us with this excellent definition. They do claim that, due to a change in wording in the ceremony at one point, that the Apostolic Succession of the Anglican Communion is no longer valid. They also argue that "intent" plays a part in this lack of validity in that the Priests and Bishops of the Anglican Communion lack the proper intent to carry on The Apostolic Succession in a proper manner.
I suspect that the real reason behind the condemnation of the validity of Apostolic Succession in the Anglican Communion from Rome is our stubborn propensity to refuse to acknowledge and submit to the Papal authority of the Church of Rome.
Just as one Anglican speaking, I am really not interested in whether Rome finds our Apostolic Succession valid or not.
It may be more exact to divide by separating fact and value:
There (is)/(may or may not be) a line of bishops leading back via a line of ceremonies to the apostles, and this is (essential)/(advantageous)/(unimportant) for the ministry of the Anglican church.
The 39 articles, which holds varying degrees of weight in different parts of the church, does not definitively rule out any of these positions, although its lack of any mention of apostolic lineage in its discussion of church order suggests a disinterest in the question.
Albion, you mentioned that there is some information that may be reason to reject the "esse" definition. Can you pass along one or two items for our study?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?