/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

They say Protestant churches have no line of succession because the Pope renounced their holy orders. Anglican and some Lutheran churches still have apostolic succession, but Catholics don't consider any of that valid. I've heard that the Eastern Orthodox Church has a similar view of Catholic succession but I'm not sure if that's true or not.

no unbroken line of succession by bishops, no apostolic succession. What protestant denomination have bishops? And could they trace their line down to the time of their schism?

but there's another problem: can someone ordained by a bishop from an ubroken line be have power while not being in communion with the church? probably not

Just to add, it's Bishops especially, and not just all orders, afaik?

The Protestant ethos is not a "laying on of hands", so to speak.. but an openended ideal, where just about anyone has all the powers of the Church, simply because they "believe" (and what it is that they believe can also vary amongst each other). But if that was the case, Jesus would have given the right to bind and loose to ALL of his disciples and not just the Apostles. He didn't do this.

Except they aren't. Prots have been cut off as they are literally protesting Jesus' decision to give the keys to the kingdom to St. Peter. The fact that you can't trace your succession to the Apostles is proof that you hold the traditions of men like Luther and Calvin over the teachings of those that were literally there with Christ.

Pope Clement I

>“Through countryside and city [the apostles] preached, and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the Spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers. Nor was this a novelty, for bishops and deacons had been written about a long time earlier. . . . Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry” (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).

>>806896

"Succession" is not a biblical concept.

>>806894

>What protestant denomination have bishops

Anglican, Methodists(forgot to mention them in my earlier post) and some Lutherans have bishops. When England broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and Scandinavian countries became Lutheran, all of the formerly Catholic bishops who converted still remained bishops and passed their bishopric down to their successors who passed it down to their successors and so on. Because of that Anglicans and certain Lutheran churches believe that their line of succession was never broken. Methodists have a more complicated claim of apostolic succession. As far as I know, the founders of the Methodist Church were Anglican priests, not bishops. But they point to an instance in the earlier Church where all of the bishops of Alexandria had died so the preists chose one of their own and elected him as bishop and that action was approved by the rest of the Church. The Methodists believe since that action was considered valid, their episcopates are valid as well because they originated through similar circumstances.

Whether or not any denomination can lay a claim to apostolic succession despite the retroactive invalidation of ordinations by the Vatican really depends on denomination. Some independent baptist congregations really don't have a line of ordinations, as the pastor is just some dude who figured he could be a pastor.

But really, why did you make this thread?