The unbroken tactile succession from Jesus Christ and the Apostles is the most spiritually powerful initiatic heritage within Christianity, and is the primary criterion for sacramental validity.
A.E. Waite describes the issue thus: “The question of apostolical succession would seem also in the same position, because the truly valid transmissions are those of grace itself, which communicates from the source of grace direct to the soul; and the essence of the sacerdotal office is that those who have received supernatural life should assist others so to prepare their ground that they may also in due season, but always from the same source, become spiritually alive. If there is another and higher understanding of any apostolical warrant, I do not know what it is.”[1]
General considerations on the Apostolic Succession
>>General Considerations Pertaining to the Apostolic Succession in the Ecclesia Apostolica Divinorum Mysteriorum, by Archbishop Kersey
Apostolic Succession of E.A.D.M. from the Roman Catholic Church
>>Apostolic Succession of E.A.D.M. from the Roman Catholic Church
The Oecumenical Apostolic Succession
Although the Apostolic Succession is handed on irrespective of the character of its sacramental minister, and thus if conveyed validly is conveyed once only, those taking a perspective of œcumenical reunion must have regard to the fact that since the various churches themselves differ on this matter, and since the particular vicissitudes of bishops and churches may give rise to doubts of various kinds (whether or not well-grounded), it is certainly the case that in some churches a particular line of succession is accepted as valid while another is not.
Some bishops, keen to remedy any potential defect of this kind, have therefore engaged in the œcumenical work of the unification of the various successions present in the different churches, often within the bounds of a mission that seeks to bring about the restoration of unity to Christendom, whether in macrocosm or on a smaller scale through the union of particular missions.
This work is directly inspired by Resolution 9 of the 1920 Lambeth Conference: “Reunion of Christendom”. This stated that the “visible unity of the Church will be found to involve the wholehearted acceptance of…a ministry acknowledged by every part of the Church as possessing not only the inward call of the Spirit, but also the commission of Christ and the authority of the whole body.” The Resolution continues, “May we not reasonably claim that the episcopate is the one means of providing such a ministry? It is not that we call in question for a moment the spiritual reality of the ministries of those Communions which do not possess the episcopate. On the contrary we thankfully acknowledge that these ministries have been manifestly blessed and owned by the Holy Spirit as effective means of grace. But we submit that considerations alike of history and of present experience justify the claim which we make on behalf of the episcopate. Moreover, we would urge that it is now and will prove to be in the future the best instrument for maintaining the unity and continuity of the Church. But we greatly desire that the office of a bishop should be everywhere exercised in a representative and constitutional manner, and more truly express all that ought to be involved for the life of the Christian family in the title of Father-in-God. Nay more, we eagerly look forward to the day when through its acceptance in a united Church we may all share in that grace which is pledged to the members of the whole body in the apostolic rite of the laying-on of hands, and in the joy and fellowship of a eucharist in which as one family we may together, without any doubtfulness of mind, offer to the one Lord our worship and service.”
The Resolution then goes on to propose directly the creation of an Oecumenical Apostolic Succession:
“We believe that for all, the truly equitable approach to union is by way of mutual deference to one another’s consciences. To this end, we who send forth this appeal would say that if the authorities of other Communions should so desire, we are persuaded that, terms of union having been otherwise satisfactorily adjusted, bishops and clergy of our Communion would willingly accept from these authorities a form of commission or recognition which would commend our ministry to their congregations, as having its place in the one family life. It is not in our power to know how far this suggestion may be acceptable to those to whom we offer it. We can only say that we offer it in all sincerity as a token of our longing that all ministries of grace, theirs and ours, shall be available for the service of our Lord in a united church. It is our hope that the same motive would lead ministers who have not received it to accept a commission through episcopal ordination, as obtaining for them a ministry throughout the whole fellowship. In so acting no one of us could possibly be taken to repudiate his past ministry. God forbid that any man should repudiate a past experience rich in spiritual blessings for himself and others. Nor would any of us be dishonouring the Holy Spirit of God, whose call led us all to our several ministries, and whose power enabled us to perform them. We shall be publicly and formally seeking additional recognition of a new call to wider service in a reunited Church, and imploring for ourselves God’s grace and strength to fulfil the same.”
Such a work – while only partially implemented within the Anglican Communion – has been at the heart of the Apostolic Episcopal Church of New York since its establishment in 1925 by Reverend Arthur W. Brooks (1889-1948), a priest of the Protestant Episcopal Church, USA, and noted seminary professor and journalist with Walt Whitman’s renowned Brooklyn Eagle newspaper. The AEC was incorporated in the state of New York in 1932 as an independent ecumenical-ecclesiastical Christian communion.
As the official history of the AEC records[2], Brooks was elevated to the office of Archbishop of Ebbsfleet by the Patriarchate of the Chaldean Uniate Church on May 4, 1925, with the consent of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and thereafter established the AEC Synod at Christ’s Church by the Sea, Broad Channel Island, New York.
The œcumenical vision of Bishop Brooks was formed amid the divisions of the First World War. At its close, he conceived a church that would not take the partisan line of the major denominations, but that would emphasise the brotherhood and unity of mankind across denominational and other artificial boundaries. His vision, as with that of the Ecclesia Apostolica Divinorum Mysteriorum (which was chartered by the Apostolic Episcopal Church in 2010) was of an essentially pre-Nicene body, avoiding the divisiveness that had entered the Church at the time of the Œcumenical Councils and the imposition of a centralised, dogmatic interpretation of the faith. Brooks’ views on Holy Orders are recorded in his work My Understanding of the Eastern Position on Ordination.
This vision gave birth to the Apostolic Episcopal Church; a fusion of East and West in its liturgy, practice and outlook, reaching out to all corners and expressions of Christendom and living the command of Our Lord that we should love one another despite our differences – and through this love, that peace and understanding should be allowed to flourish.
May 19, 1929, found Brooks co-ordinating a united Holy Communion service at Christ’s Church By The Sea, which featured the participation of clergy representing ten separate communions. Such work continued in the ensuing decades, and the “Broad Channel Banner” of 1942 reported that “Bishop Arthur W. Brooks of Christ Church by the Sea is sending every serviceman of Broad Channel, irrespective of his religion, a small Xmas Token.”
Each of the Primates of the AEC in succession to Brooks – Archbishops Wallace David de Ortega Maxey (1948-86), Nils Bertil Alexander Persson (1986-98) and Francis Cajetan Spataro (1998-) – have taken it upon themselves to further the development of the Œcumenical Succession. That succession originates in the view that the overflowing of Apostolicity into the smaller communions – sometimes being preserved by a mere thread – is in itself an expression and fulfilment of the Divine Plan.
This having been established, there can be few who would then not take the theological position that where the unification of the scattered successions is possible, it should not be attempted, with the aim that in time, such a unified succession should not merely be held in common among those bishops who are chosen to undertake the important work of the furtherance of such a mission, but that it should render the difficulties of the non-acceptance of this or that succession by this or that church obsolete.
Such a position has been held in turn by distinguished bishops of the past century both within and beyond the AEC, whose work has contributed to the strong position that the Œcumenical Succession finds itself in today. Fifty years ago, we found critics of this work from within the Anglican and Roman Catholic communions engaged in attacks on the validity of the Holy Orders of the prelates in question. Today, advances in historical scholarship and the dedicated work of many of their successors (often under difficult and trying circumstances) enable us to show the arguments of those critics as frequently entirely baseless, not to mention openly biased in their motivation to discredit bishops who often worked independently of the larger communions and were perceived, rightly or wrongly, as a threat to those larger communions as a result. The introduction of twentieth-century successions from the Roman Catholic (via the Catholic Apostolic Church of Brazil) and Anglican (via the Philippine Independent Church) communions into the Succession must be noted in particular as removing a number of hitherto-extant obstacles.
Intellectual and spiritual heritages
E.A.D.M. is also the heir to intellectual and spiritual heritages that are of wider provenance, and that continue a historic current of thought that has in the past entranced such figures as Helena P. Blavatsky, Charles W. Leadbeater, W.B. Yeats, René Guénon, Rudolf Steiner, Carl Jung and G.R.S. Mead. For E.A.D.M., the backbone of these heritages is the faith of the undivided Christian church, as understood according to the Vincentian canon: quod ubique, quod semper, quod ad omnibus. This compels us towards a pre-Nicene position, but not in any sense that later developments within Orthodoxy and Catholicism are necessarily rejected: they are simply regarded as part of the canon of Christian interpretation and teaching through the centuries rather than de fide. This pre-Nicene stance also results in our non-dogmatic and intellectually open character as a body, perhaps best expressed in our articulation of liberty of thought as a positive characteristic (rather than simply as the absence of dogma) and thus as the opposite of authoritarian doctrine.
Inevitably, this approach is not for all – that is why it co-exists with the external church in which such matters are clearly laid out and a definitive interpretation provided for those who require such. However, it will be of appeal to those for whom the ministry and message of Jesus Christ is enhanced, rather than diminished, by an unfettered, questing approach to His life and teachings and their implementation in today’s world. Our intellectual and spiritual heritage is peopled by men and women whose teachings and example are of lasting value. The E.A.D.M. offers a conduit for that wisdom as it is nurtured and propagated in our own era.
Man is the secret sense of all which seems;
That other doctrines are but idle dreams,
Let nature, far from all contention own,
While his grand doom is by her day star shown.
To vaster laws adjusted, he shall reign,
Earth for his throne, and his star crown attain,
The universal world his empire wait,
A royal court restore his ancien state.
Louis-Claude de Saint Martin (1743-1803) (The Unknown Philosopher)
Œcumenical Apostolic lineages
The œcumenical lineages encompass much of the historical tradition that is perpetuated within E.A.D.M. today, and are detailed in “The Apostolic Succession in the Apostolic Episcopal Church” by Archbishop Bertil Persson.
[1] Waite, Arthur Edward, The Hidden Church of the Holy Graal, London, Rebman, Ltd, 1909, p 67
[2] http://www.bertilpersson.com/aboutus.html (retrieved August 2010)
