The Roman Catholic Church derives much of its claim to legitimacy from the teaching of "apostolic succession". Other churches also believe that their priests derive their authority in an unbroken chain of succession. I believe that the Roman Catholic Church acknowledges this of some other churches, accepting that the Eastern Orthodox priests and bishops have apostolic succession. Is this true? And which other churches would have their claims to apostolic succession recognised by the Roman Catholic Church?
|
The Papal Bull "Apostolicae Curae" declared the Anglican orders invalid because the sacramental form was changed in such a way to render them invalid. There's the "Old Catholic" (they reject Vatican I) line which may be valid. I think this is in dispute. The Orthodox line is considered valid because they didn't change the sacramental form of consecration of Bishops. Some further information is available here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Episcopi_vagantes |
||||
|
|
There are some groups from the Eastern Catholic churches that are recognized, and in communion with Rome, but for much of the Eastern Orthodox churches this is not the case, and the issue of apostolic succession is a sticking point on full communion. From this link I will paste what is most likely the complete answer. There are some Episcopalean churches that have left their faith and converted to be Catholic, and those priests are allowed to be married, but they are now in communion. But, for any head of the church (the Pope) the RCC only recognizes the current Pope as being the successor of Peter, no other leader is seen as having that mantle. http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=421289
|
|||
|
|
James Black's answer was a good, but a tad confusing. The apostolic succession is authority behind the teaching office of the bishop. The Churches in communion with Rome are various rites of the Universal Church. That is why it's such a fallacy to even use the term Roman Catholic. It's really the just the Latin Rite and the Pope is the leader of all the churches who acknowledge the Chair of Peter, those Churches lack nothing in their distinct liturgies and traditions. Moreover, Bl. John Paul II called the eastern and western churches the 'two lungs' of the church. Suffice it to say, if you're in one of those lungs, your Bishops are recognized as legit - that's the churches that are in communion with Rome and the Eastern Orthodox schismatic churches who broke off in 1052. |
|||
|
|


