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

What is Tradition?

 + JMJ What Is Tradition? The basic premise, from my perspective, is that what was taught before cannot be contradicted by the 'present' magisterium, only deepened and expanded upon. I recall the Roman theologians called the SSPX protestants while the SSPX called them modernists.  I believe this was all surrounding the concept of Traditon. SSPX's Understanding of Tradition One accusation made against the SSPX is that they don't have a correct understanding of 'Tradition'.  This is how the SSPX understands Tradition: I finally profess that Tradition is not a dead memory, but the living transmission of the doctrine received from the Apostles. It remains living, in distinction to Revelation, which is closed. It is so both in the activity of the Magisterium of the Teaching Church and in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, of which the sentire cum Ecclesia is the result of the teaching of the Magisterium. Tradition may be called ‘living’, not in the sense t...

SSPX.ca: What is the position of the SSPX on Vatican II???

 + JMJ With all the mis-information about the SSPX rejecting the Second Vatican Council, I thought it would be useful to publish an article that focuses on the real issues that the SSPX has identified. Update: Why Did the SSPX Consecrate Bishops? ( Neither Schismatic, Nor Disobedient link ) In the linked document the SSPX outlined the key motivation and core issues with Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium (see above link for full document): 4. The Society Acted Precisely Because of the State of Necessity in Which the Faith Finds Itself  In the present situation of the Church, if the Society of Saint Pius X had not carried out the consecrations of July 1st, it would have found itself facing an inevitable alternative: either to disappear gradually, or to accept, at least in fact, the new liturgy as well as the false doctrines of Vatican II and the post-council. Without the consecrations of July 1st, the Fraternity would have found itself, in a few years, without bishop...

Thoughts on: Finding Common Ground Between Rome and the SSPX

 + JMJ In the ramp up to the consecrations the noise floor in the intergnat grew to a constant din.  This was one of the few the peeped its signal over the noise. https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/finding-common-ground-between-rome-and-the-sspx The key issue is contained in this paragraph: In the lead-up to the planned July 1, 2026, episcopal consecrations,  the SSPX rejected Rome’s offer  of doctrinal dialogue on the grounds that “we both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council.” Fr. Pagliarani also said that his previous attempt at dialogue in 2019 was shut down by Rome because of an assumed irreconcilability. It seems that, from the Society’s perspective, and perhaps from Rome’s too, their positions are incompatible. If memory serves, Rome killed any opportunity for an open discussion by stating that Vatican II was not up for debate. So it was a still-birth and ...

The News is an Addiction ...

 + JMJ People seem to be mesmerised by train wrecks.   They just can't turn away as the disaster creeps forward along train tracks towards the crossing where a car, truck, bus, trailer awaits its destruction. Trads have been watching the train wreck that is this crisis of the Catholic Church for decades. The trade war between the Canada and the US has reminded me that the news is addictive.   The first time I was addicted what from 2009 to  2014 when I was closely following the Rome / SSPX discussions.  I was at work watching a live-stream as Bishop Fellay disappeared into the Vatican. The lead-up to this moment had been intense as the 'resistance' got freaked out and the cultural cracks between doctrine and conspiracy theory widened. In the decade since then other things have emerged, wars, rumours of wars, conspiracies, celebrity Catholics etc. Now we have a new addiction and its name is Trump. Lately, no matter how much I try, I find myself wonderin...

Thoughts on the Thoughts of a former SSPX priest

 + JMJ Well Gary Campbell, former SSPX Priest and now laicised has posted a new article on WherePeterIs. https://wherepeteris.com/thoughts-of-a-former-sspx-priest-on-the-july-1-consecrations/ These words stuck out: Heck, they have built a five-star hotel, wine bar, and Walmart on the opposite bank of the Rubicon! They are not in danger of entering a state of schism, for they are  already  in a state of schism. I believe he doth protest too much. All the actual facts indicate that the SSPX was not in a state of schism before July 1st and an examination of the decree of excommunication highlights the either ineptitude of those in charge or a desire to leave the barn door open. The chasm between an act of disobedience and act of schism remains just what is has always been - an inconvenient barrier that person(s) in Rome seek to bridge but appear incapable of succeeding. The SSPX re-stated that they recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and feel obliged by conscience...