Apostolic Succession

Formerly "Intra-TOC Private Discussions."


Post Reply
jdigrande
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed 28 March 2018 2:36 am
Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: RTOC

Apostolic Succession

Post by jdigrande »

I am somewhat confused by this subject. The Masonic Patriarch of Constantinople (Joachim III) stated in 1902 that the Latins had Apostolic Succession and were accepted into the Orthodox Church with their their current rank of ordinations.

So if the Pope in 1902 had suddenly converted and realized his errors, the he would have been accepted back into the church as Pope of Rome?

The Latins were formally anathematized as a Church in 1285 over the Filioque.

1054 was only a personal anathema in that later in the 11th century both churches still considered each other in the Church. That is why the so called lifting of the anathemas between the Masonic Patriarch of Constantinople (Athenogoras) and Paul VI meant very little subjectively and nothing objectively in that Masons have no power to do anything in the Orthodox Church.

Doesn't the line of Latin apostolic succession end there in 1285? 1443, 1672, the Pan Orthodox Councils and 1935 and 83 further cemented the original anathema of 1285. How can someone under formal anathema have apostolic succession? And how can this be maintained over hundreds of years?

d9popov
Member
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri 9 June 2017 8:29 pm

Apostolic Succession

Post by d9popov »

True apostolic succession and spiritual validity/efficacy is ended by schism or heresy, with the timetable up to God. But the external form of apostolic succession can be maintained. By oikonomia, the Church can decide not to use the full external form when receiving someone, if the person received the external form in heresy or schism. See Basil, Canon 1.

Post Reply