Apostolic Succession

[mortify]

Does the fact that at times more than one Pope reigned, or that one man had another murdered so he could aspire to be Pope, or that one Pope ensured his son would become next pope (and etc) effect the validity of Apostolic Succession in any way?

[Dismas]

[quote name='mortify' post='1439833' date='Dec 29 2007, 10:38 PM']Does the fact that at times more than one Pope reigned, or that one man had another murdered so he could aspire to be Pope, or that one Pope ensured his son would become next pope (and etc) effect the validity of Apostolic Succession in any way?[/quote]
1. An antipope is not a valid pope, but may or may not be a valid bishop.

2. If a man murders to become pope, that does not invalidate his investiture. It does, however, affect whether that pope lives in a state of sanctifying grace. What's the point of being pope if you go to hell afterwards?

3. Nepotism, while a scourge upon any hierarchy, does not invalidate the investiture of the papacy, but it does harm the spiritual health of the Church militant in a mundane way, and often supernaturally.

[Socrates]

[quote name='mortify' post='1439833' date='Dec 29 2007, 11:38 PM']Does the fact that at times more than one Pope reigned, or that one man had another murdered so he could aspire to be Pope, or that one Pope ensured his son would become next pope (and etc) effect the validity of Apostolic Succession in any way?[/quote]
In short, no.

In the case of "more than one Pope reigning," only one man is in actuality Pope, while the other is an antipope.

You'd have to be more specific as to the charge of murder (including your source), as I don't recall reading of this, though it may be possible.
Basically, the personal morality of the man who becomes Pope has no bearing on the legitimacy or authority of the papacy and apostolic succession. (A pope's actions may even beaver dam his own soul, but do not destroy apostolic succession.)
Remember, the first Pope, St. Peter himself, denied Christ three times before becoming Pope.

What it comes down to is whether you believe Christ knew what He was talking about when He told Peter of the Church, "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18)

[reyb]

[quote name='mortify' post='1439833' date='Dec 29 2007, 11:38 PM']Does the fact that at times more than one Pope reigned, or that one man had another murdered so he could aspire to be Pope, or that one Pope ensured his son would become next pope (and etc) effect the validity of Apostolic Succession in any way?[/quote]

Why do you ask about it? Is there any Pope who commit murder in the history of RRC?

[reyb]

[quote name='reyb' post='1440216' date='Dec 30 2007, 10:25 PM']Why do you ask about it? Is there any Pope who commit murder in the history of RRC?[/quote]
....sorry for RRC it should be Catholic Church for Roman Catholic Church

Edited December 31, 2007 by reyb

[Starets]

One of the antipopes is accused of having murdered someone. He went by John XXIII and in some church history books i have hread that predate the reign John XXIII of blessed memory, he is referred to as John XXIII. Very confusing when I read that back in the mid 70's. the book i was reading had initially been published in the 50's. that book was K S Latourette's A History of Christianity. I no longer have that book so i cannot doublecheck it!

According to my former archbishop there was a pope who retired. I didnt ask him the mnbame. we got too tied up in discussing Pope St Celestine V, who resigned.

[reyb]

[quote name='Staretz' post='1440508' date='Dec 31 2007, 01:11 PM']One of the antipopes is accused of having murdered someone. He went by John XXIII and in some church history books i have hread that predate the reign John XXIII of blessed memory, he is referred to as John XXIII. Very confusing when I read that back in the mid 70's. the book i was reading had initially been published in the 50's. that book was K S Latourette's A History of Christianity. I no longer have that book so i cannot doublecheck it!

According to my former archbishop there was a pope who retired. I didnt ask him the mnbame. we got too tied up in discussing Pope St Celestine V, who resigned.[/quote]
Thank you for info.

[mortify]

I just meant that if we look at Apostolic succession (AS) as a chain, wouldn't a break in the chain make it useless? For example the stories of certain Italian nobles rising to the power of the Papacy, and then even ensuring their illegitimate son assumes the Papacy, isn't that a break in the chain of AS?

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='mortify' post='1439833' date='Dec 29 2007, 09:38 PM']Does the fact that at times more than one Pope reigned, or that one man had another murdered so he could aspire to be Pope, or that one Pope ensured his son would become next pope (and etc) effect the validity of Apostolic Succession in any way?[/quote]

nope. As evil as man can be, no man is able to mess up the papacy so bad so as to invalidate it. There have been times where more than one man claimed the throne. Only one man, and his successors, actually possessed it. There can be times where the office is obtained through evil means, doesn't mean that the office is legit. There can be times where there is no pope at all for a time, doesn't invalidate the office. All these things mean is that Satan does what he can. Fortunately his best isn't good enough.

[Dismas]

[quote name='mortify' post='1440939' date='Jan 1 2008, 11:50 AM']I just meant that if we look at Apostolic succession (AS) as a chain, wouldn't a break in the chain make it useless? For example the stories of certain Italian nobles rising to the power of the Papacy, and then even ensuring their illegitimate son assumes the Papacy, isn't that a break in the chain of AS?[/quote]
The papacy is protected only from false teaching, not from false actions. You can have the wickedest man in the world, have him plot to be succeeded by the next wickedest man in the world, and it doesn't change things. Sure, the Church would suffer a dire consequence to such evils, but it would survive, as would the papacy.

The promises of Christ state that the Papacy will be infallible in teaching (when teaching to all Christendom), and will endure until the Last Day, along with His Church. Christ does not promise that all popes will be holy in word and action, or even attain heaven, or even come close. This is why, while I give my fraternal blessings toward the Traditionalists within the Church, and even have a worldview in line with the hermeneutic of continuity, I would as soon as beat the living **** out of an SPPX'er as call him brother.

P.S. Please note that I would gladly kiss the hands of any validly ordained priest, regardless of his disposition towards H.H. Pope Benedict XVI, and were I not bankrupt, gift a good portion of my wealth to the FSSP.

P.P.S. Just because I would kiss his hands doesn't mean I wouldn't also give a good beating to a priest who dares insult the Vicar of Christ.

[Socrates]

[quote name='mortify' post='1440939' date='Jan 1 2008, 12:50 PM']I just meant that if we look at Apostolic succession (AS) as a chain, wouldn't a break in the chain make it useless? For example the stories of certain Italian nobles rising to the power of the Papacy, and then even ensuring their illegitimate son assumes the Papacy, isn't that a break in the chain of AS?[/quote]
You'd first have to prove that there was indeed a "break in the chain" - in that a Pope was not validly elected Pope. So far you've just given vague rumors, rather than a substantiated case. (And "dirty deeds" to influence votes do not in themselves invalidate a papal election. God can indeed "draw straight with crooked paths.")

Again, are you implying that Christ's promise that "the gates of hell will not prevail" is a vain one?

[mortify]

Suppose we put it this way, is there anything that can end Apostolic Succession? Would the fact that during the Arian heresy many heretics assumed the position of bishopric in many sees end apostolic succession in those sees?

I'm really focusing more on Apostolic succession than the Papacy.

[thessalonian]

A heretic can have valid orders is the bottom line. The Orthodox, Nestorians, Coptics and some others have valid bishops, though they do or at times have rejected the papacy. Though many times the Arians ousted the legitimate Bishop and inserted their own.

[reyb]

but, how this Apostolic Succession really works?

[CatholicAndFanatical]

[quote name='reyb' post='1441194' date='Jan 2 2008, 09:46 AM']but, how this Apostolic Succession really works?[/quote]

Do you mean how does this work?

Read the Acts of the Apostles and you see how Apostolic Succession works, also, look at how Pope Benedict was chosen as the next Pope. They were chosen the same way.

In Acts of the Apostles you see that one of theApostles were martyred and they had to chose another one. Peter and the then 10 Apostles casted lots to chose who should be the next Apostle to take his place, because scriptures tell it 'May another take His Office'. So they casted lots and ask Jesus to help choose who should take the Office. They chose Matthias as the next Apostle (Bishop).

They laid hands on him and gave him the Holy Spirit. He then became an Apostle, as if he was an Original. No more, no less. When another Apostle died (or when they went into new territory and built a Church) they casted lots for someone to take the lost Apostles place (or to install a new Apostle).

This, in short is Apostolic Succession.

This is exactly how and why we can trace every Bishop to a Pope and every Pope all the way back to Peter.