Skip to main content

Cardinal Questions Papal Teaching on Anglican Orders

+
JMJ

The confusion in the Church continues. 

The Emperor has no clothes (theologically speaking).



P^3





Curial Cardinal questions Papal Teaching on Anglican “Orders”

MAY 26, 2017
 
BY FSSPX.NEWS
news-header-image
At a recent ecumenical forum, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio called into question the formal declaration in 1896 by Pope Leo XIII that Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void.”

A Novel Approach to Validity 
 

The presentation by Cardinal Coccopalmerio, who since 2007 has been President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, was published in an anthology of papers and discussions from the “Malines Conversations” held in Rome. In his talk the Cardinal argued the Catholic Church today has “a very rigid understanding of validity and invalidity,” whereas “one should be able to say: this is valid in a certain context, and that is valid another context.” Such an approach, in his view, could lead to rapprochement in ecumenical relations with the Church of England. 
Startling headlines notwithstanding, Catholic teaching about the nullity of Anglican orders is part of the unchangeable papal Magisterium, set forth authoritatively in a papal Bull. Until now it had not been questioned in more than a century, which has included fifty years of Catholic-Anglican modern ecumenical dialogue. Coccopalmerio has no delegated authority from the Pope to engage in ecumenical dialogue; the statements that he made at the forum are his personal views as a canon lawyer.

The Question of Succession 


Giving the Cardinal the benefit of the doubt, lay canonist Edward Peters noted that in isolated cases Catholic or Orthodox co-consecrators of Anglican clergy may have established some claim to apostolic succession. In any event that “succession” would be short-lived, because the rare validly-ordained Anglican bishop would not ordain validly, lacking the proper intention. But Coccopalmerio does not discuss this historical argument at all.
What is the Cardinal talking about, then?
When someone is ordained in the Anglican Church and becomes a parish priest in a community, we cannot say that nothing has happened, that everything is ‘invalid’…This about the life of a person and what he has given…these things are so very relevant!” 
Coccopalmieroalso mentioned symbolic gestures, such as the alleged gift of an episcopal ring and a chalice by Pope Paul VI to the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1966. “With these gestures the Catholic Church already intuits, recognizes a reality.

The Teaching of Sacramental Theology


Catholic sacramental theology teaches that anyone, even a non-Christian, can baptize validly in an emergency, provided that in pouring the water and reciting the Trinitarian formula they intend to do “what the Church intends.” It also teaches that when two baptized Christians marry, their marriage is sacramental. In this sense and only in this one, the Cardinal is right: valid sacraments may occur even in an Anglican parish.
The Anglican rite has been declared certainly invalid in a definitive manner, because of "defect of form and intention" in the Bull Apostolicae Curae issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1896. Without valid Holy Orders, there is no Eucharist, there is no absolution. The existence of women “priests” and “bishops” in many parts of the Church of England today should be proof enough that something went drastically wrong with their “apostolic succession” after the sixteenth century.
Coccopalmerio tries to paper over these obvious theological facts by making a conceptual distinction: he says that there are “differences” between Christians and then there are “divisions” between them. He claims that “divisions” should exist only over fundamental beliefs like the divinity of Christ.
Today, Churches are divided, or, rather, they say that they are divided because they lack common elements which, however, are not fundamental because they are not a matter of faith. We say: you don’t have this reality, which is a matter of faith, and therefore you are divided from me. But in fact it isn’t a matter of faith, you only pretend it to be.
 
For Anglicans to belong to the Catholic Church which is the unique Spouse of Christ - outside which there is no salvation - there requires unity in the Faith, sacraments, and governance. Conserving some truths of faith and some sacraments does not allow possession in the virtue of Faith, not to mention their lack of unity to the Holy See, both of which preclude membership in the Catholic Church. 

Courtesy of DICI

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

War: SSPX

 + JMJ We seem to be in transition from the persecution of the SSPX and other faithful Catholics to a civil war within the Catholic Church i.e. a true schism. Several Bishops, Priests and Dioceses have rejected outright Fiducia Supplicans (link) . This, in my opinion (IMO), is a new inflection point on the way to what will amount to an civil war within the Catholic Church. Pope Francis had spent the past ten years putting the final touches on the fault-lines within the Church and this may be the final blow that actually awakens Our Lord sleeping in the bow of the Barque of St. Peter.  That is something that we need to remember, Our Lord is with his Church, even on its way to Calvary. So, what is about to happen is that, IMO, faithful Catholics will find themselves in the same situation as the SSPX.  Persecuted and fighting for the heart of the Catholic Church. The history of the SSPX provides a microcosm of what we might expect to happen in the Catholic Church during a 'civil war&#