Apostolicae Curae Anglican Orders By POPE LEO XIII WITH DISCUSSION By REV. GERALD CLUB OUTLINE D. TREACY, S.T. ANGLICAN ORDERS Encyclical Letter OF POPE LEO XIII Apostolicae Curae (With Discussion Club Outline by Rev. Gerald C. Treacy, S.J.) THE PAULIST PRESS 401 West 59th Street New York 19, N. Y. For Discussion Club Outline: Imprimi Potest: John J. McMahon, SJ., Provincial j New York Province. Nihil Obstat: John M. A. Fearns, S.T.D., Censor Lihrorum. Imprimatur : © Francis Cardinal Spellman, Archbishop of New York. New York, February 8, 1949. Discussion Club Outline, Copyright,. 1949, by The Missionary Society of St. Paul the Apostle in the State of New York PRINTED AND PUBLISHED IN THE U. S. A. BY THE PAULIST PRESS, NEW YORK 19, N. Y. Odaddffied APOSTOLICAE CURAE ENCYCLICAL LETTER OF OUR HOLY FATHER BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE POPE LEO XIII ON Anglican Orders Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae, September 13, 1896. To Our Venerable Brethren, All Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops and Bishops of the Catholic World, In Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See, POPE LEO XIII Venerable Brethren, Health and Apostolic Benediction 1. We have dedicated to the welfare of the noble English nation no small portion of the apostolic care and charity by which, helped by His grace. We endeavor to fulfill the office and follow in the footsteps of ^Hhe Great Shepherd of the sheep’^ ^ Our Lord Jesus Christ. The Letter last year We sent to '^the English seeking the kingdom of Christ in the unity of the faith^^ is a special witness of Our good-will toward England. In it We recalled the memory of the ancient union of her people with Mother Church, and We strove to hasten the day of a happy reconciliation by stirring up men’s hearts to offer diligent prayer to God. And, again, more recently, when it seemed good 1 Heb. xiii. 20. [ 3 ] to Us to treat more fully the unity of the Church in a general Letter, England had not the last place in Our mind, in the hope Eat Our teaching might both strengthen Catholics and bring :he saving light to those divided from Us. 2. It is pleasing to acknowledge the generous way in which Dur zeal and plainness of speech, inspired by no mere human notives, have met the approval of the English people; and his testifies not less to their courtesy than to the solicitude of nany for their eternal salvation. The Edwardine Ordinal 3. With the same mind and intention We have now deter- mined to turn Our consideration to a matter of no less im- portance, which is closely connected with the same subject and with Our desires. For an opinion already prevalent, confirmed more than once by the action and constant practice of the Church, maintained that when in England, shortly after it was rent from the center of Christian unity, a new rite for con- ferring Holy Orders was publicly introduced under Edward VI., the true Sacrament of Orders, as instituted by Christ, lapsed, and with it the hierarchical succession. For some time, however, and in these last years especially, a controversy has sprung up as to whether the Sacred Orders conferred according to the Edwardine Ordinal possessed the nature and effect of a sacrament: those in favor of the absolute validity, or of a doubtful validity, being not only certain Anglican writers, but some few Catholics, chiefly non-English. The consideration of the excellency of the Christian priesthood moved Anglican writers in this matter, desirous as they were that their own people should not lack the twofold power over the body of Christ. Catholic writers were impelled by a wish to smooth the way for the return of Anglicans to holy unity. Both, indeed, thought that in view of studies brought up to the level of recent research, and of new documents rescued from oblivion, it was' not inopportune to re-examine the question by Our authority. And We, not disregarding such desires and opinions, and, above all, obeying the dictates of apostolic charity, have [ 4 ] considered that nothing should be left untried that might in any way tend to preserve souls from injury or procure their advantage. The Case Re-examined 4. It has, therefore, pleased Us to graciously permit the cause to be re-examined so that through the extreme care taken in the new examination all doubt, or even shadow of doubt, should be removed for the future. To this end We commissioned a certain number of men noted for their learning and ability, whose opinions in this matter were known to be divergent, to state the grounds of their judgments in writing. We then, having summoned them to Our person, directed them to inter- change writings and further to investigate and discuss all that was necessary for a full knowledge of the matter. We were careful also that they should be able to re-examine all docu- ments bearing on this question which were known to exist in the Vatican archives, to search for new ones, and even to have at their disposal all acts relating to this subject which are pre- served by the Holy Office—or as it is called the Supreme Coun- cil—and to consider whatever had up to this time been adduced by learned men on both sides. We ordered them, when pre- pared in this way, to meet together in special sessions. These to the number of twelve were held under the presidency of one of the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, appointed by Our- selves, and all were invited to free discussion. Finally We directed that the acts of these meetings, together with all other documents, should be submitted to Our venerable brethren, the Cardinals of the same Council, so that when all had studied the whole subject, and discussed it in Our presence, each might give his opinion. Documents Bearing on the Question 5. This order for discussing the matter having been de- termined upon, it was necessary, with a view to forming a true estimate of the real state of the question, to enter upon it, after careful inquiry as to how the matter stood in relation to [5] the prescription and settled custom of the Apostolic See, the origin and force of which custom it was undoubtedly of great importance to determine. For this reason, in the first place, the principal documents in which Our predecessors, at the request of Queen Mary, exercised their special care for the reconcilia- tion of the English Church, were considered. Thus Julius III. sent Cardinal Reginald Pole, an Englishman, and illustrious in many ways, to be his Legate a latere for the purpose, his angel of peace and love,^ and gave him extraordinary and unusual mandates or faculties and direction for his guidance. These Paul IV. confirmed and explained. And here, to interpret rightly the force of these documents, it is necessary to lay it down as a fundamental principle that they were certainly not intended to deal with an abstract state of things, but with a specific and concrete issue. For since the faculties given by these Pontiffs to the Apostolic Legate had reference to England only, and to the state of religion therein, and since the rules of action were laid down by them at the request of the said Legate, they could not have been mere directions for determin- ing the necessary conditions for the validity of ordinations in general. They must pertain directly to providing for Holy Orders in the said kingdorri, as the recognized condition of the circumstances and times demanded. This, besides being clear from the nature and form of the said documents, is also obvious from the fact that it would have been altogether irrelevant to thus instruct the Legate—one whose learning had been con- spicuous in the Council of Trent—as to the conditions neces- sary for the bestowal of the Sacrament of Orders. Letters of Pope Julius III 6. To all rightly estimating these matters it will not be difficult to understand why, in the Letters of Julius III., issued to the Apostolic Legate on March 8, IS 54, there is a distinct mention, first, of those who, ^Wightly and lawfully promoted^’ might be maintained in their Orders; and then of others who, ^‘not promoted to Sacred Orders,” might ^^be promoted if they [ 6 ] were jound to be worthy and fitting subjects/^ For it is clearly and definitely noted, as indeed was the case, that there were two classes of men: the first those who had really received Sacred Orders, either before the secession of Henry VIII., or, if after it and by ministers infected by error and schism, still according to the accustomed Catholic rite; the second, those who were initiated according to the Edwardine Ordinal, who on that account could be promoted, since they had received an ordination which was null. And that the mind of the Pope was this and nothing else is clearly confirmed by the Letter of the said Legate (January 29, 1555) subdelegating his fac- ulties to the Bishop of Norwich. Moreover, what the Letters of Julius III. themselves say about freely using the Pontifical faculties, even in behalf of those who had received their con- secration ^^minus rite and not according to the accustomed form of the Church, is to be especially noted. By this ex- pression those only could be meant who had been consecrated according to the Edwardine rite, since besides it and the Catholic form there was then no other in England. The Decision of Pope Paul IV 7. This becomes even still clearer when we consider the legation which, on the advice of Cardinal Pole, the Sovereign Princes, Philip and Mary, sent to the Pope in Rome in the month of February, 1555. The royal ambassadors—three men, ^^most illustrious and endowed with every virtue,^^ of whom one was Thomas Thirlby, Bishop of Ely—were charged to inform the Pope more fully as to the religious condition of the country, and especially to beg that he would ratify and confirm what the Legate had been at pains to effect, and had succeeded in effecting, toward the reconciliation of the kingdom with the Church. For this purpose all the necessary written evidence and the pertinent parts of the new Ordinal were submitted to the Pope. The Legation having been splendidly received, and their evidence having been ^‘diligently discussed^^ by several of the Cardinals, “after mature deliberation,*^ Paul IV. issued his Bull Praeclara carissimi on June 20th of the same year. In this, [ 7 ] whilst giving full force and approbation to what Pole had done, it is ordered in the matter of the Ordinations as follows: Those who have been promoted to Ecclesiastical Orders , . , by any one but by a bishop validly and lawfully ordained are bound to receive those Orders againT But who those bishops not ‘^validly and lawfully ordained^^ were had been made sufficiently clear by the foregoing documents and the faculties used in the said matter by the Legate: those, namely, who have been promoted to the Episcopate, as others to other Orders ^^not according to the accustomed form of the Church’^ or, as the Legate himself wrote to the Bishop of Norwich, ^^the form and intention of the Church’^ not having been observed. These were certainly those promoted according to the new form of rite, to the examination of which the Cardinals specially deputed had given their careful attention. Neither should the passage much to the point in the same Pontifical Letter be overlooked, where, together with others needing dispensation, are enumerated those '^who had obtained as well orders as benefices nulliter et de facto/^ For to obtain orders nulliter means the same as by an act null and void, that is invalid, as the very meaning of the word and as common parlance require. This is especially clear when the word is used in the same way about orders as about ^‘ecclesias- tical benefices” These, by the undoubted teaching of the sacred canons, were clearly null if given with any vitiating defect. Moreover, when some doubted as to who, according to the mind of the Pontiff, could be called and considered bishops “validly and lawfully ordained,” the said Pope shortly after, on October 30th, issued further letters in the form of a brief, and said: “We, wishing to remove the doubt, and to opportunely provide for the peace of conscience of those who during the schism were promoted to Orders, by expressing more clearly the mind and intention which We had in the aforesaid Letters, declare that only those bishops and archbishops who were not ordained and consecrated in the form of the Church cannot be said to have been validly and lawfully ordained” Unless this declaration had applied to the actual case in Eng- land, that is to say to the Edwardine Ordinal, the Pope would [ 8 ] certainly have done nothing by these last Letters for the removal of doubt and the restoration of peace of conscience. Further, it was in this sense that the Legate understood the documents and commands of the Apostolic See, and duly and conscientiously obeyed them; and the same was done by Queen Mary and the rest who helped to restore Catholicism to its former state. The Practice of Three Centuries 8. The authority of Julius III. and of Paul IV., which we have quoted, clearly shows the origin of that practice which has been observed without interruption for more than three centuries, that Ordinations conferred according to the Ed- wardine rite should be considered null and void. This practice is fully proved by the numerous cases of absolute reordination according to the Catholic rite even in Rome. In the observance of this practice we have a proof directly affecting the matter in hand. For if by any chance doubt should remain as to the true sense in which these Pontifical documents are to be understood, the principle holds good that ^^Custom is the best interpreter of law” Since in the Church it has ever been a constant and established rule that it is sacrilegious to repeat the Sacrament of Order, it never could have come to pass that the Apostolic See should have silently acquiesced and tolerated such a custom. But not only did the Apostolic See tolerate this practice, but approved and sanctioned it as often as any particular case arose which called for its judgment in the matter. We adduce two facts of this kind out of many which have from time to time been submitted to the Supreme Council of the Holy Office. The first was (in 1684) of a certain French Calvinist, and the other (in 1704), of John Clement Gordon, both of whom had received their Orders according to the Edwardine ritual. In the first case, after a searching investigation, the consultors, not a few in number, gave in writing their answers—or, as they call it, their vota—and the rest unanimously agreed with their conclusion, for ^Hhe invalidity of the Ordination” and only on account of reasons of opportuneness did the Cardinals deem it [ 9 ] well to answer by a ^^dilata^^ [viz., not to formulate the con- clusion at the moment]. The same documents were called into use and considered again in the examination of the second case, and additional written statements of opinion were also obtained from consultors, and the most eminent doctors of the Sorbonne and of Douai were likewise asked for their opinion. No safe- guard which wisdom and prudence could suggest to insure the thorough sifting of the question was neglected. The Garden Case 9. And here it is important to observe that although Gordon himself, whose case it was, and some of the consultors had adduced, amongst the reasons which went to prove the in- validity, the Ordination of Parker, according to their own ideas about it, in the delivery of the decision this reason was altogether set aside, as documents of incontestable authenticity prove. Nor, in pronouncing the decision, was weight given to any other reason than the ^'deject of form and intention^’ ; and in order that the judgment concerning this form might be more certain and complete, precaution was taken that a copy of the Anglican Ordinal should be submitted to examination, and that with it should be collated the Ordination forms gath- ered together from the various Eastern and Western rites. Then Clement XI. himself, with the unanimous vote of the Cardinals concerned on the ‘^Feria ^ April 17, 1704, de~ creed: “John Clement Gordon shall be ordained from the beginning and unconditionally to all the Orders, even Sacred Orders, and chiefly of priesthood, and in case he has not been confirmed he shall first receive the Sacrament of Confirmation.’^ It is important to bear in mind that this judgment was in no wise determined by the omission of the tradition of instruments, 2 [The term ‘‘Feria V” here used has a technical value. Ordinary meetings of the Supreme Council for the ratification of decrees usually take place on the Wednesdays, and are marked *Feria IV/* But the special and solemn sessions which, in matters of graver import, are held in the presence and under the presidency of the Pope himself, who thus in a special way makes the decisions his own, take place on Thursdays, and are marked ^‘Feria V/*—Translator’s Note.] [ 10 ] or in such a case, according to the established custom, the direction would have been to repeat the ordination condition- ally; and still more important it is to note that the judgment of the Pontiff applies universally to all Anglican Ordinations, because, although it refers to a particular case, it is not based upon any reason special to that case, but upon the defect of form, which defect equally affects all these Ordinations; so much bO, that when similar cases subsequently came up for decision the same decree of Clement XI. was quoted as the norma. The Essential Point 10. Hence it must be clear to every one that the controversy lately revived had been already definitely settled by the Apos- tolic See, and that it is to the insufficient knowledge of these documents that we must, perhaps, attribute the fact that any Catholic writer should have considered it still an open question. But, as We stated the beginning, there is nothing We so deeply and ardently desire as to be of help to men of good-will by showing them the greatest consideration and charity. Where- fore We ordered that the Anglican Ordinal, which is the essen- tial point of the whole matter, should be once more most carefully examined. The Essential and the Ceremonial 11. In the examination of any rite for the effecting and administering of a sacrament, distinction is rightly made be- tween the part which is ceremonial and that which is essential, usually called the matter and jorm. All know that the sacra- ments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, ought both to signify the grace which they effect, and effect the grace which they signify. Although the signification ought to be found in the whole essential rite—that is to say, m the matter and form—it still pertains chiefly to the form; since the matter is the part which is not determined by itself, but which is determined by the form. And this appears still more clearly in the Sacrament of Orders, the matter of which, [ 11 ] in so far as We have to consider it in this case, is the imposi- tion of hands, which indeed by itself signifies nothing definite, and is equally used for several Orders and for Confirmation. But the words which until recently were commonly held by Anglicans to constitute the proper form of priestly Ordination —namely, Receive the Holy Ghost certainly do not in the least definitely express the Sacred Order of Priesthood, or its grace and power, which is chiefly the power ^^oj consecrating and of offering the true body and blood of the Lord^^ ^ in that sacrifice which is no ^‘nude commemoration of the sacrifice offered on the Cross!’ ^ This form had indeed afterwards added to it the words ^^for the office and work of a priest’’ etc.; — but this rather shows that the Anglicans themselves perceived that the first form was defective and inadequate. But even if this addition could give to the form its due signification, it was introduced too late, as a century had already elapsed since the adoption of the Edwardine Ordinal, for, as the hierarchy had become extinct, there remained no power of ordaining. In vain has help been recently sought for the plea of the validity of Orders from the other prayers of the same Ordinal. For, to put aside other reasons which show this to be insufficient for the purpose in the Anglican rite, let this argument suffice for all: from them has been deliberately removed whatever sets forth the dignity and office of the priesthood in the Catholic rite. That form consequently cannot be considered apt or suffi- cient for the sacrament which omits what it ought essentially to signify. Episcopal Consecration 12. The same holds good of Episcopal consecration. For to the formula ^^Receive the Holy Ghost” not only were the words ^^for the office and work of a bishop” etc., added at a later period, but even these, as we shall presently state, must be understood in a sense different to that which they bear in the Catholic rite. Nor is anything gained by quoting the ^ Council of Trent, Sess. XXIII., de Sacr. Ord., Can. 1. 4 Ibid., Sess. XXII., de sacrif. Missae, Can. 3. [ 12 ] prayer of the preface Almighty God/^ since it in like manner has been stripped of the words which denote the summum sacerdotium. It is not here relevant to examine whether the Episcopate be a completion of the priesthood or an Order distinct from it, or whether when bestowed, as they say per saltumy on one who is not a priest, it has or has not its effect. But the Episcopate undoubtedly by the institution of Christ most truly belongs to the Sacrament of Orders and constitutes the sacerdotium in the highest degree, namely, that which by the teaching of the holy Fathers and our liturgical customs is called the ^'summum sacerdotium, sacri ministerii summa.^* So it comes to pass that, as the Sacrament of Orders and the true sacerdotium of Christ were utterly eliminated from the Anglican rite, and hence the sacerdotium is in no wise conferred truly and validly in the Episcopal consecration of the same rite, for the like reason, therefore, the Episcopate can in no wise be truly and validly conferred by it ; and this the more so because among the first duties of the Episcopate is that of ordaining ministers for the Holy Eucharist and sacrifice. The Historical Circumstances 13. For the full and accurate understanding of the Anglican Ordinal, besides what we have noted as to some of its parts, there is nothing more pertinent than to consider carefully the circumstances under which it was composed and publicly authorized. It would be tedious to enter into details, nor is it necessary to do so, as the history of that time is sufficiently eloquent as to the animus of the authors of the Ordinal against the Catholic Church, as to the abettors whom they associated with themselves from the heterodox sects, and as to the end they had in view. Being fully cognizant of the necessary con- nection between faith and worship, between ^Hhe law of believ- ing and the law of praying” under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the liturgical order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. For this reason in the whole Ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacri- [ 13 ] fice, of consecration, of the sacerdotium, and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice, but, as we have just stated, every trace of these things, which had been in such prayers of the Catholic rite as they had not entirely rejected, was delib- erately removed and struck out. In this way the native char- acter—or spirit as it is called—of the Ordinal clearly manifests itself. Hence, if vitiated in its origin it was wholly insufficient to confer Orders, it was impossible that in the course of time it could become sufficient since no change had taken place. In vain those who, from the time of Charles I., have attempted to hold some kind of sacrifice or of priesthood, have made some additions to the Ordinal. In vain also has been the contention of that small section of the Anglican body formed in recent times that the said Ordinal can be understood and interpreted in a sound and orthodox sense. Such efforts. We affirm, have been and are made in vain, and for this reason, that any words in the Anglican Ordinal, as it now is, which lend them- selves to ambiguity, cannot be taken in the same sense as they possess in the Catholic rite. For once a new rite has been initiated in which, as we have seen, the Sacrament of Orders is adulterated or denied, and from which all idea of consecra- tion and sacrifice has been rejected, the formula ^^Receive the Holy Ghost,’' no longer holds good; because the Spirit is infused into the soul with the grace of the sacrament, and the words ^^jor the office and work of a priest or bishop” and the like no longer hold good, but remain as words without the reality which Christ instituted. 14. Several of the more shrewd Anglican interpreters of the Ordinal have perceived the force of this argument, and they openly urge it against those who take the Ordinal in a new sense and vainly attach to the Orders conferred thereby a value and efficacy which they do not possess. By this same argument is refuted the contention of those who think that the prayer '^Almighty God, giver of all good things,” which is found at the beginning of the ritual action, might suffice as a legitimate form of Orders, even in the hypothesis that it might be held to be sufficient in a Catholic rite approved by the Church. [ 14 ] Defect of Intention IS. With this inherent deject of form is joined the defect of intention, which is equally essential to the sacrament. The Church does not judge about the mind and intention in so far as it is something by its nature internal; but in so far as it is manifested externally she is bound to judge concerning it. When any one has rightly and seriously made use of the due form and the matter requisite for effecting or conferring the sacrament he is considered by the very fact to do what the Church does. On this principle rests the doctrine that a sacra- ment is truly conferred by the ministry of one who is a heretic or unbaptized, provided the Catholic rite be employed. On the other hand, if the rite be changed, with the manifest inten- tion of introducing another rite not approved by the Church and of rejecting what the Church does, and what by the institu- tion of Christ belongs to the nature of the sacrament, then it is clear that not only is the necessary intention wanting to the sacrament, but that the intention is adverse to and destructive of the sacrament. Pope Leo^s Judgment 16. All these matters have been long and carefully con- sidered by Ourselves and by Our Venerable Brethren, the Judges of the Supreme Council, of whom it has pleased Us to call a special meeting on the ^'Feria the 16th day of July last, upon the solemnity of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. They with one accord agreed that the question laid before them had been already adjudicated upon with full knowledge of the Apostolic See, and that this renewed discussion and examina- tion of the issues had only served to bring out more clearly the wisdom and accuracy with which that decision had been made. Nevertheless We deemed it well to postpone a decision in order to afford time, both to consider whether it would be fitting or expedient that We should make a fresh authoritative declara- tion upon the matter, and to humbly pray for a fuller measure [IS] of divine guidance. Then, considering that this matter of prac- tice, although already decided, had been by certain persons, for whatever reason, recalled into discussion, and that thence it might follow that a pernicious error would be fostered in the minds of many who might suppose that they possessed the Sacrament and effects of Orders, where these are nowise to be found, it has seemed good to Us in the Lord to pronounce Our judgment. Anglicon Ordinol Defective 17. Wherefore, strictly adhering in this matter to the decrees of the Pontiffs Our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by Our authority, of Our own motion and certain knowledge We pronounce and declare that Ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been and are absolutely null and utterly void. The Pope's Appeal 18. It remains for Us to say that even as We have entered upon the elucidation of this grave question in the name and in the love of the Great Shepherd, in the same We appeal to those who desire and seek with a sincere heart the possession of a hierarchy and of Orders. Perhaps until now aiming at the greater perfection of Christian virtue, and searching more devoutly the divine Scriptures, and redoubling the fervor of their prayers, they have, nevertheless, hesitated in doubt and anxiety to follow the voice of Christ, which so long has in- teriorly admonished them. Now they see clearly whither He in His goodness invites them and wills them to come. In returning to His one only fold, they will obtain the blessings which they seek, and the consequent helps to salvation of which He has made the Church the dispenser, and, as it were, the constant guardian and promoter of His Redemption amongst the nations. Then indeed ^'they shall draw waters in joy from the fountains of the Saviour,^ His wondrous sacraments, whereby His faithful souls have their sins truly remitted, and [ 16 ] are restored to the friendship of God, are nourished and strengthened by the heavenly Bread, and abound with the most powerful aids for their eternal salvation. May the God of Peace, the God of all consolation, in His infinite tenderness enrich and fill with all these blessings those who truly yearn for them. We wish to direct Our exhortation and Our desires in a special way to those who are ministers of religion in their respective communities. They are men who from their very office take precedence in learning and authority, and who have at heart the glory of God and the salvation of souls. Let them be the first in joyfuly submitting to the divine call, and obey it, and furnish a glorious example to others. Assuredly with an exceeding great joy their Mother, the Church, will welcome them and will cherish with all her love and care those whom the strength of their generous souls has amidst many trials and difficulties led back to her bosom. Nor could words express the recognition which this devoted courage will win for them from the assemblies of the brethren throughout the Catholic world, or what hope or confidence it will merit for them before Christ as their Judge, or what reward it will obtain from Him in the heavenly kingdom! And We Ourselves in every lawful way shall continue to promote their reconciliation with the Church in which individuals and masses, as We ardently desire, may find so much for their imitation. In the meantime, by the tender mercy of the Lord our God, We ask and beseech all to strive faithfully to follow in the open path of divine grace and truth. Definitive Decree 19. We decree that these Letters and all things contained therein shall not be liable at any time to be impugned or ob- jected to by reason of fault or any other defect whatsoever of subreption or obreption or of Our intention, but are and shall be always valid and in force, and shall be inviolably ob- served both juridically and otherwise, by all of whatsoever - degree and pre-eminence; declaring null and void anything [ 17 ] which in these matters may happen to be contrariwise at- tempted, whether wittingly or unwittingly, by any person what- soever by whatsoever authority or pretext, all things to the contrary notwithstanding. 20. We will that there shall be given to copies of these Letters, even printed, provided that they be signed by a notary and sealed by a person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity, the same credence that would be given to the expression of Our will by the showing of these presents. [ 18 ] DISCUSSION CLUB OUTLINE LESSON I Paragraphs 1 -6 Pope Leo XIII in his efforts for Church unity showed great solicitude for the British people. In 1895 he had sent a spe- cial letter to “the English people who were seeking the King- dom of Christ in the unity of Faith/’ urging them to pray for the return of their nation to the Church of Christ. In the present letter written in 1896 the Pope takes up the question of Anglican Orders. A new rite for conferring Holy Orders was introduced un- der Edward VI. Controversy arose as to whether Orders con- ferred according to the Edwardine Ordinal possessed the na- ture and effect of a sacrament. Both Catholic and Anglican writers held divided opinions. And both asked that the ques- tion be re-examined. Pope Leo consented. A commission of experts was appointed by the Pope whose opinions on the sub- ject were known to be divergent. They were directed to pre- sent a written report of their findings. The Vatican archives were opened to them. Then the commission met under the presidency of a Cardinal. Twelve sessions were held. The con- clusions of these sessions were then discussed by a committee of Cardinals in the presence of the Pope. The next step was to investigate the prescriptions and set- tled custom of the Holy See in dealing with the question. The papal documents that dealt with the reconciliation of the Eng- lish Church under Queen Mary were considered. Thus Julius HI sent Cardinal Pole as his Legate to England and gave him extraordinary faculties and directions for his guidance. Paul IV confirmed and explained these powers and directives. These documents dealt with a concrete issue. This is clear from the letters Julius HI to his Legate where distinct igien- tion is made of those who “rightly and lawfully promoted/’ [ 19 ] might be maintained in their Orders, and then of others who* “not promoted to Sacred Orders,” might “be promoted if they were found to be worthy and fitting subjects.” There were two classes of men; those who had received Holy Orders according to the Catholic rite and those who had been ordained according to the Edwardine Ordinal, and who on that account could be promoted since their ordination was null and void. That the mind of the Pope was this and noth- ing else is clear from his Legate’s letter (January 29, 1555) subdelegating his faculties to the Bishop of Norwich. QUESTIONS What does Pope Leo say of his attitude toward the English people? What has been the constant practice of the Church regard- ing the Edwardine Ordinal? What is the controversy that the Pope mentions? State the aim of Catholic and Anglican writers in this dispute. Why did Pope Leo favor a reexamination of the question? Describe the procedure of the Commission on Anglican Orders. What was the object of Cardinal Pole’s mission to England? What does the nature of the Papal documents prove? What bearing have the Letters of Pope Julius III on the question? What does the letter of the Papal Legate to the Bishop of Norwich prove? LESSON II Paragraphs 7-11 The letters of Julius III and Paul IV clearly pronounce all ordinations invalid that took place according to the Ed- wardine Ordinal. The practice of reordaining those who had beer; ordained according to the Edwardine Ordinal has pre- vailed continuously for more than three centuries. Every time [ 20 ] recourse has been made to the Holy See regarding the validity of ordination according to the Edwardine rite, the answer has always been the same. Reordination has been required be- cause of defect of “form and intention’’ in the Edwardine rite, and ordination had to be conferred unconditionally. The Anglican Ordinal is the point at issue. The essential part in every rite for administering a sacrament is usually called the matter and form. In the sacrament of Orders the matter is the imposition of hands. The form, that is the words used must express the sacred Order of Priesthood, its grace and its power. This is the power “of consecrating and offering the true body and blood of the Lord” in that sacrifice which is no “nude commemoration of the sacrifice offered on the Cross,” as the Council of Trent declares. Now what is the rite according to the Anglican Ordinal? The imposition of hands and the words: “Receive the Holy Ghost.” Now the imposition of hands by itself signifies nothing definite, and is used for several Orders and for Confirmation. Afterwards the words: “for the office and work of a priest” were added to this form. This addition certainly shows that the Anglicans them- selves considered the first form defective and inadequate. And even if this addition could give to the form its due signification, it came too late as a century had passed since the introduction of the Edwardine Ordinal. The hierarchy had become extinct so there remained no power of ordaining. Whatever set forth the dignity and office of the priesthood in the Catholic rite was deliberately removed from the Anglican rite. The form conse- quently cannot be considered apt or sufficient for the sacra- ment which omits what it ought essentially to signify. QUESTIONS What did the bull of Paul IV say of the rite that was “not according to the accustomed form of the Church”? What point did the Pope make clear in subsequent letters? What does the three-century old practice of reordination prove? [ 21 ] What two examples does the Pope give to show the attitude of the Holy See? What was the decision of Clement XI in the case of John Gordon? Why did Pope Leo order a re-examination of the Anglican Ordinal? What is the essential part of a rite that effects a sacra- ment? Does the signification pertain to the matter or form of a sacrament? What words make the form of the sacrament in the Ed- wardine Ordinal? Prove the defect in this form. LESSON III Paragraphs 12-20 The same is true of Episcopal consecration. To the for- mula Receive the Holy Ghost, the words for the office and work of a bishop were later added. But these words do not have the same meaning as in the Catholic rite. Nor can the prayer of the Preface be appealed to since it has been stripped of the words which denote the supreme priesthood. The Episcopate by the teaching of Christ most certainly belongs to the Sacra- ment of Orders and constitutes the priesthood in the highest degree. As the Sacrament of Orders and the priesthood of Christ were utterly eliminated from the Anglican rite, the sacerdotium is in no wise conferred validly in the Episcopal consecration of the same rite. For like reason therefore the Episcopate can in no wise be validly conferred by it, and this is more evident from the fact that among the chief duties of the Episcopate is that of ordaining ministers for the Holy Eucharist and Sacrifice. For accurately understanding the Anglican Ordinal we need to consider the attitude and mind of its authors. They were hostile to the Catholic Church, and knowing the neces- sary connection between faith and worship they corrupted the liturgical order in many ways to suit the errors of the reform- [ 22 ] ers. And all this under the pretext of returning to the primi- tive form. In the whole Ordinal there is no mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood, and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice. Every trace of these things that occur in the Catholic rite was deliberately struck out. Hence it was vitiated in its origin and was wholly in- sufficient to confer Orders. In a rite in which the Sacrament of Orders is adulterated or denied and from which all idea of consecration and sacrifice has been removed, the formula Re- ceive the Holy Ghost no longer holds good. These words re- main but words without the reality which Christ instituted. Anglican interpreters of the Ordinal have seen the force of this argument. The same argument holds against those who claim that the prayer Almighty God, found at the beginning of the ritual action might suffice as a legitimate form of Orders. With this inherent deject in form is joined the deject in intention which is equally essential to the sacrament. If the rite is changed with the intention of introducing another rite not approved by the Church and of rejecting what the Church does, and what by the institution of Christ belongs to the na- ture of the sacrament, then it is clear that the necessary inten- tion is wanting to the sacrament, and in fact is adverse to and destructive of the sacrament. We and the Judges of the Supreme Council have weighed all these matters carefully. The Supreme Council agreed that the question had been already settled by the Apostolic See, and that the renewed discussion of the issue had only served to bring out more clearly the wisdom and accuracy of the decision arrived at. It seems good to Us now to pronounce judgment. Strictly adhering to the decrees of Our Predecessors, We pronounce and declare that Ordinations carried out accord- ing to the Anglican rite have been and are absolutely null and utterly void. We appeal to those who desire and seek sincere- ly a hierarchy and Orders. They will find both by returning to Christ’s one and only fold. Then in truth they shall draw waters with joy jrom the jountains oj the Saviour ^ His wondrous sacra- ments. We direct Our appeal especially to those who are min- [ 23 ] ^ isters of religion. Let them be the first to submit to the divine will and show a glorious example to others. With great joy will their Mother, the Church welcome all back to the one true fold. QUESTIONS What does Pope Leo say of Episcopal consecration accord- ing to the Anglican rite? What is the value of the argument from the preface Al- mighty God? What is among the first duties of the Episcopate? What was the attitude of the authors of the Ordinal toward the Catholic Church? What does the Pope say of the formula Receive the Holy Ghost? How does the Church judge the mind and intention? May a sacrament be conferred by a heretic or an unbap- tized person? What intention must the one conferring a sacrament have? What conclusion was reached by the Supreme Council? What are Pope Leo’s final words on the Anglican rite? ni [ 24 ] For convert work . , . A Catechism for Juquirers By Rev. Joseph I. Malloy, C.S.P. We know of no finer catechism for the pros- pective convert. If you are not familiar with this book and are instructing converts, you are missing a real aid, an indispensable help 96 pages. Over 500,000 sold. Paper binding only: 25c, $22.00 the 100 THE PAULIST PRESS 401 West 59th Street, New York 19, N. Y.