Talk:Apostolic succession

Active discussions

Apostolic succession and the Church of DenmarkEdit

I was surprised to see this passage in the article:

Of note is the fact that at least one of the Scandinavian Lutheran Churches in the Porvoo Communion of Churches, the Church of Denmark has bishops, but strictly speaking they were not in the historic apostolic succession prior to their entry into the Porvoo Communion, since their episcopate and holy orders derived from Johannes Bugenhagen, who was a pastor, not a bishop. In 2010, the Church of Denmark joined the Porvoo Communion of Churches, after a process of mutual consecrations of bishops had led to the introduction of historic apostolic succession.

As far as I know, no such process of mutual consecrations has taken place, and I am unable to find any information to corroborate this claim. The Church of Denmark generally claims *not* to possess apostolic succession and tends to be rather dismissive of any attempt to claim that such a "mechanical" succession is necessary, or even desirable – even to the point of some priests objecting to the participation of clergy within the traditional apostolic succession in the laying on of hands at their ordination – so it would be very surprising if the Danish bishops had submitted to "process of mutual consecrations of bishops" to introduce apostolic succession – indeed, I'm pretty sure they would consider the very idea of such a process insulting. Moreover, the Church of Denmark in its accession to Porvoo published a letter saying that it insists on the fact that when a bishop is unavailable, the archdeacon ("domprovst", the senior priest at the cathedral) can fill in for the bishop and validly perform his duties, including the ordination of new priests, even if he is not himself a bishop. I think this statement is misleading at best, and likely false. It certainly needs to be supported by references. --Pinnerup (talk) 08:32, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Scandinavian LutheransEdit

Scandinavian Lutheran do, as far as I know, not claim apostolic succession to be necessary. It may be a historical fact that it's been kept after the reformation, but there's nothing in the doctrinal or theological foundations of these churches that would make apostolic succession necessary.1700-talet (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2019 (UTC)


why we dont add the Template:Eastern Orthodox Church sidebar, Template:Roman Catholic Church and the Template:Anglicanism, since this article is in all of them? (The Sr Guy (talk) 20:50, 16 February 2020 (UTC)).

I oppose this suggestion. Wikipedia has to be very careful to not show any degree of bias. If you read the article, several other denominations have some sort of perspective on apostolic succession. Most of those have templates. It's inappropriate to single one, two, or three templates as if those are favored. And even if we did include only three, which one goes at the top, which also would suggest greater importance? This is unnecessary because the article is not about a concept specific to denominations, and all of information is well explained in the article. It also would crowd the article to include the template for every denomination that claims some type of apostolic succession, resulting in most of the right side of the page taken up by templates. Sundayclose (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Return to "Apostolic succession" page.