Are Roman Catholic orders valid?

[gtsecc]

How do they get around Cardinal Rebiba?

Would you object to using Anglican Bishops to reconsecrate Roman Catholic Bishops so they could have valid succession?

[pmcleanj]

I'd have to wonder, whether they could possibly have the intent to "do as the church has always done". The role of a priest is to provide support to the Bishop, who is the primary Shepherd of Christ's flock. A Shepherd's role is to nurture, to care for, to protect and to guide.

However, clerical hierarchicalism, and the integration of church hierarchy into the Constantinian bureaucracy and its subsequent creation of "Princes of the Church", has perverted the role of Bishops to one of power politics. And that perversion continues to today, in the attempts of hierarchical Bishops to exercise power outside their own sees, and to manipulate secular governance.

[gtsecc]

Ah, so both the tactile laying on of hands and the intent are in question.

[DeoJuvante]

Aren't Anglican orders descended from Cardinal Rebiba as well?

[ETA: No, I see they're not.]

[TomUK]

Obiviously i know loads about Cardinal Rebiba, but hypothetically imagine you were speaking to someone who knew nothing at all about him - what would you say.

This hypothetical person has read the wikipedia article but they find it somewhat lacking.

[JasonV]

Here's what I have:

"The documentation naming the principal consecrator of Scipione Cardinal Rebiba is lost. However, he was appointed Bishop of Chieti, Italy in 1541 during the reign of Pope Paul III; appointed Cardinal in 1555 during the reign of Pope Paul IV and was installed as Bishop of Sabina e Poggio Mirteto, Italy in 1574 during the reign of Pope Gregory XIII, and furthermore was the nephew of Pope Urban VII, thus ensuring that his appointments and consecrations were genuine, making his apostolic succession unquestionable. This is further born out by the established fact that a majority of Roman Catholic prelates, including the reigning Pope, Benedict XVI, all trace their Apostolic Succession to this man."

This is from +Jason Sanderson of the LCC in New Hampshire. His orders derive from +Rebiba as well.

[RedneckAnglican]

Man....i Learn So Much Here...

[higgs2]

:hug: Ah Glen, what would we do without you!

[Aymn27]

Here's what I have:

"The documentation naming the principal consecrator of Scipione Cardinal Rebiba is lost. However, he was appointed Bishop of Chieti, Italy in 1541 during the reign of Pope Paul III; appointed Cardinal in 1555 during the reign of Pope Paul IV and was installed as Bishop of Sabina e Poggio Mirteto, Italy in 1574 during the reign of Pope Gregory XIII, and furthermore was the nephew of Pope Urban VII, thus ensuring that his appointments and consecrations were genuine, making his apostolic succession unquestionable. This is further born out by the established fact that a majority of Roman Catholic prelates, including the reigning Pope, Benedict XVI, all trace their Apostolic Succession to this man."

This is from +Jason Sanderson of the LCC in New Hampshire. His orders derive from +Rebiba as well.
without the proper paperwork how can we be sure? how can we know the intent of the consecrator? I say: they are null and void.....

[pmcleanj]

without the proper paperwork how can we be sure? how can we know the intent of the consecrator? I say: they are null and void.....

It certainly must be considered that an argument whose essence is "the appointment was nepotistic, and it justifies me, so it must be valid" is ... dubious?

[Wigglesworth]

Glen, you seem to have developed an interest in beginning threads that seem cryptic to those who share my ignorance.

:crossrc:

[JasonV]

without the proper paperwork how can we be sure? how can we know the intent of the consecrator? I say: they are null and void.....

Ok, but is this any different than the credibility of consecrations for the first few centuries after Christ? Or even the original Apostles themselves, we have no "paperwork" on them either.