Convert historian Michael Davies speaking on Anglican orders & their validity from the teaching of Pope Leo XIII. For more please visit www.keepthefait...
Пікірлер: 178
@arthurdevain7543 жыл бұрын
Some people become quite upset when I refer to Mr. Justin Welby as the Archlayman of Canterbury.
@jesusl57863 жыл бұрын
😂😂😂
@highlanderhorses Жыл бұрын
LOL!!!
@Episcopalianacolyte5 ай бұрын
Spoken like a true donatist.
@nateg92364 ай бұрын
@UCKN0qAJ2vKRm3IfG6XMv_Nwspoken like a true Catholic
@sw3aty_forte3 ай бұрын
@@Episcopalianacolyte you have no idea what you're talking about.
@MMichiganSalveRegina8 жыл бұрын
Michael Davies is too good. I love listening to his talks
@deus_vult811111 ай бұрын
Too bad he accepted the invalid new rite of ordination by antipope paul vi
@valentinr.dominguez2892Ай бұрын
Excellent. Michael was magnificent how he explained this subject.
@richardsaintjohn83913 ай бұрын
By those antiquated standers the Apostles and their successors would have null and void Orders and the whole house of cards comes crumbling down.
@richardsellsaz68656 жыл бұрын
It was heretic Thomas Cranmer who is responsible for creating an invalid order within Anglicanism,
@markymarcb4932 Жыл бұрын
In Davies book, “The Order of Melchisedech” he gives step by step examples and proof about the Anglican orders being null and void of confecting true priestly ordinations for the priesthood. Then Davies goes into explaining how the post Vatican II ordinations are severely compromised and doubtful, with key phrases and sacred words being purposely dropped or omitted; yet without out-and-out telling us that the (new rite of ordination) has a serious chance of being invalid. Davies nullifies his excellent point with examples by refusing to tie it together at the end or just say it. He chickens out out of political correctness or fear.
@deus_vult811111 ай бұрын
Correct. Antipope Paul VI’s 1968 new rite of ordination was most definitely invalid. Along with the 1969 Novus Ordo Missae. It was all a plot by the Devil to take away the true priesthood and true mass from most of the world.
@მანუელკარდენაშვილი5 ай бұрын
Sounds like the novus ordo situation.
@joanmaxime97164 ай бұрын
Yes... it's scary.
@PantalonRouge5 ай бұрын
Fantastic.
@arnoldmaglalang55224 жыл бұрын
Henry 8 wanted divorce and remarriage end up remarriages of 6. Henry 8 is a political king and also declared himself leader of the Anglican Church.
@lnelsoncpa2 жыл бұрын
Kind of like Amoris Laetitia, huh?
@candiceazzara88772 жыл бұрын
God Bless you!!!
@Kitiwake8 ай бұрын
Thank you for this
@GregHohman2 жыл бұрын
@Michael Davies - Your thoughts on the Anglican Ordinariate allowed to enter the Holy Catholic Church by Pope Benedict XVI in 2014?
@joaquincapiro8919 Жыл бұрын
I believe they all had to be unconditionally re-ordained.
@zachm.65722 жыл бұрын
He’s mistaken on one point: when the Old Catholic bishops took part in the consecrations, they did it separately from the Anglican bishop(s) and using their own form (the same as it always had been and acceptable to Rome) in Latin.
@Kitiwake8 ай бұрын
While they are separated from the Holy See how could the new valid?
@ChristianSaintSavior6 жыл бұрын
Well researched work by Michael Davies, once again. Good talk and GOD bless!
@SuperGreatSphinx8 жыл бұрын
The Anglican ministry is both the leadership and agency of Christian service in the Anglican Communion. "Ministry" commonly refers to the office of ordained clergy: the threefold order of bishops, priests and deacons. More accurately, Anglican ministry includes many laypeople who devote themselves to the ministry of the church. Ultimately, all baptized members of the church are considered to partake in the ministry of the Body of Christ. " ... [I]t might be useful if Anglicans dropped the word minister when referring to the clergy... In our tradition, ordained persons are either bishops, priests, or deacons, and should be referred to as such." Each of the provinces of the Anglican Communion has a high degree of independence from the other provinces, and each of them have slightly different structures for ministry, mission and governance. However, personal leadership is always vested in a member of the clergy (a bishop at provincial and diocesan levels, and a priest at parish level) and consensus derived by synodical government. At different levels of the church's structure, laity, clergy and bishops meet together with prayer to deliberate over church governance. These gatherings are variously called conferences, synods, convocations, councils, chapters and vestries.
@kyoto8911Ай бұрын
this video is slanderous, and really just offensive. “We mean not to abase the Lord's supper, or to teach that it is but a cold ceremony only, and nothing to be wrought therein (as many falsely slander us we teach). For we affirm that Christ doth truly and presently give his own self in his sacraments; in baptism, that we may put him on; and in his supper, that we may eat him by faith and spirit, and may have everlasting life by his cross and blood. And we say not, this is done slightly and perfunctorily, but effectually and truly.” John Jewel, An Apology of the Church of England.
@MsHburnett3 жыл бұрын
Marvelous history
@nielcapasso38333 жыл бұрын
they are not valid just by the fact of the statements at the back of the book of common prayer. get off it if catholic bishops have said so it's BS.
@bruderklaus99765 жыл бұрын
Orders can only happen in the one true apostolic church. Outside the church, there are no sacraments. So, all this fuzzy speculation about the validity of schismatic orders is a waste of time. The Orthodox church didn't even accept Rome as a church, so it didn't accept any of their orders or sacraments. Sadly, that changed in the last century due to modernist influences in Orthodoxy.
@thereselastname91974 жыл бұрын
Orthodox priests are valid and all sacraments are valid but they are in schism becuase they do not believe the authority of the Pope...papal primacy...there are Orrhodox Catholics in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.
@laserdolphin64833 жыл бұрын
Okay, dontanist heretic.
@Tsalagi9783 жыл бұрын
@@thereselastname9197 because Papal Supremacy didn’t exist in the first 800 years of Christianity. There is no bishop of bishops. Christ alone is head of the Church.
@Tsalagi9783 жыл бұрын
Not entirely true. Few Orthodox ever ordained anew RC clergy and before the the 1930’s Anglican clergy whenever they converted to Orthodoxy. They were incardinated and received by Chrismation. Oikonomia.
@markymarcb49323 жыл бұрын
You miss the whole point, and you call others “ignorant”. Not only are you willfully “ignorant”, you’re a bigot and you’re in denial! Christ ascended and left a governing authority for His flock. That was St Peter and the Apostles. Man, dude, you’re warped. You’re all over the place on here. You trying to convince us or yourself?...
@mordechaimordechai8 жыл бұрын
Great uploads lately!!! Thank you.
@Christabbaword6 жыл бұрын
You can not have version of churches: Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Protestant. No Eunuchs - New Wine - Earthly Church that belong to apostles. and Children of Abraham and Sarah - Old Wine - The Promise. Luke 22:29 And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, Luke 5:39 39 And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for they say, ‘The old is better.’” You see because the rules do not apply to children of mother Sarah same as the earthly church which are heavier. Romans 4:4 Paul was a servant and He stood with the church. However he will revive a share of gentiles those who beloved the message. But No baptism there. Baptism belongs to the church. Matthew 18:17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
@richardsellsaz68656 жыл бұрын
YOU would have to be a member of a Christian denomination yourself.Whatever church you attend is of some denomination.even the supposed 'Non-denominational" churches are off-springs of some denomination.Most of those are in the Baptist tradition.
@Christabbaword6 жыл бұрын
Richard Sells AZ Why Christ ordered Eunuchs if parents can baptize their own children. You can call on Jesus and believe the message and be saved but in order to produce a holy child you need a proper seed of baptism provided by eunuch in the place of their brother Jesus that became my father. Otherwise you just another child of Hagar child of slavery that God sentenced the entire world under her. Acts 19 3So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied. 4Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”
@richardsellsaz68656 жыл бұрын
Parents don't baptize their children.It is the church clergy that baptize children.Just the way it is church clergy that perform marriages too,etc...
@Kitiwake8 ай бұрын
@@richardsellsaz6865so your really think the Catholic church is a denomination? Denominated from what?
@karmayeshengondrubs45944 жыл бұрын
The idea of one church declaring the orders of another church “null and void” is arrogant nonsense. God does not play games with the salvation of millions of His children.
@internetenjoyer10444 жыл бұрын
@@jacob6515 if it was God's Church it wouldn't be wrong all the time. The Bull declaring Anglican orders was proved wrong on many occasions, and in any case the material circumstances have changed since anglicans have recieved orders from churches thsat the Roman church considers to be valid anyway
@frogleg104 жыл бұрын
@@jacob6515 Who says the RC Church is the 1 church other than someone from the RC Church. Ridiculous argument
@laserdolphin64833 жыл бұрын
Anglicans have no church, because they are outside the church.
@Travis13652 жыл бұрын
@Kevin Cobb He is right.
@ragejinraver2 жыл бұрын
@@frogleg10 I suggest you take a nice look into history my friend. Jesus Christ founded only one Church and it's only the . Holy Roman Catholic Church which outside of her there's no salvation
@Episcopalianacolyte5 ай бұрын
200 Years had passed and 14 popes prior to Leo XIII did not make that declaration. It was not "ex cathedra" when the pope made it. The pope committed the heresy of *donatism.* When the Apostles ordained the first episkopos, they _did not do what the church has always done._ All that is needed is a validly ordained bishop and priest laying hands on the ordinands head with the intent being that he is to be a priest and the HOLY SPIRIT does the work. Lest we forget, the first Anglican Bishops were, in fact, validly ordained by the Roman Catholic church. The HOLY SPIRIT, not the pope, ordains priests and bishops.
@josephgallardo38486 жыл бұрын
I've been ever religion Catholic and Baptist for over 40ys Seven day Adventists church of Christ, God Mormon Methodist Jehovah witness protestant even China church of ALMIGHTY God none compares to the Anglican Church at least my providence church I've even been through all bible studies but what I've learn most is that all Christians have forgotten John 17 the prayer Jesus prayed to The FATHER In Jesus HOLY Name HALLELUYAH AMEN!
@richardsellsaz68656 жыл бұрын
You sound VERY confused if what you said is true.There is only ONE Church and that is the Catholic Church that Jesus Christ Himself established in 33 A.D.
@arnoldmaglalang55224 жыл бұрын
If you do not have One Pope you have to many. Pope Luther. Pope Henry 8. Pope Calvin. Pope John Smyth. 40 thousand popes different names of churches and founders.
@brothertobit21295 жыл бұрын
So if an Anglican priest is ordained in the Sarum Pontifical, it would be valid?
@Александр-н5з5ъ4 жыл бұрын
Yes. Because the ordaining bishop is also a layman
@Avnatanyel4 жыл бұрын
@@Александр-н5з5ъ I assume you mean, no, because the bishop is a layman.
@laserdolphin64833 жыл бұрын
No, because there is a rupture in the apostolic sucession. A layman cannot ordain a preist only a bishop.
@CatholicK53573 жыл бұрын
Only if by a properly ordained bishop. But a Catholic Bishop would not ordain an Anglican Priest. However, the old Sarum Pontifical could in theory be brought back into use in England to ordain Catholic priests, if permitted by the Catholic Church.
@dwightschrute9002 жыл бұрын
That would be an interesting turn/twist, if Rome allowed it
@frogleg104 жыл бұрын
What a bunch of arrogant crap, the idea of one church declaring the orders of another church null and void. With the ordination of women and especially the elevation of women to the episcopate has rendered them null and void according to St. Paul.
@sfreply4 жыл бұрын
Anglican Orders are Null and Invalid
@alhilford23454 жыл бұрын
@@sfreply : Correct!
@shortfusedfox25934 жыл бұрын
FWIW their orders aren't null and void just because the Church declared them so. The Church declared them so because they were *already* null and void.
@thomassharp27194 жыл бұрын
Anglican Orders are null and invalid
@brady14073 жыл бұрын
A question, for one arrogant enough to contradict the Church without any research: Can you baptize someone with the wrong words? Or would you baptize someone again who was "baptized" with the formula: I dunk you in water in the name of the Trinity?