¹ This is an abridgement of a dissertation of the same title submitted as part of the LLM in Canon Law at Cardiff University in 2003. The full version contains more detailed assessment of orders and ordination in the Roman Catholic and Methodist Churches.

² For a discussion of the Meissen Declaration. see below.

³ Eg Doe, N, Canon Law in the Anglican Communion (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998), p 137;CrossRefGoogle ScholarBursell, R, Liturgy, Order and the Law (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996), pp 232, 233.Google Scholar

⁴ Eg the fashion dating from the 1940s for parish churches to declare themselves ‘out of communion’ with the Church of South India due to the supposed invalidity of its ministry and the author's experience of promoting Anglican-Methodist cooperation in the Diocess of Oxford and Ely in recent years.Google Scholar

⁵ Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 1113.Google Scholar

⁶ Gurrieri, J, ‘Sacramental Validity: The Origins and Use of a Vocabulary’ (1981) 41 The Jurist 21 at 28.Google Scholar

⁷ Ibid 21.

⁸ Ibid 22.

⁹ However. canon 951 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law admits of the possibility of valid ordination being administered other than by a bishop.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis 30 November 1947.Google Scholar

¹¹ Apostolic Constitution Approval of the new rites for the ordination of deacons, presbyters and bishops, 18 June 1968.Google Scholar

¹² Code of Canon Law 1983, canon 1009.Google Scholar

¹³ This principle can be traced to the Council of Trent.Google Scholar

¹⁴ For Eastern Orthodox clergy, see the Vatican II decree Orientalium Ecclesiarum. para 25.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Hill, C and Yarnold, E (eds) Anglican Orders: The Documents in the Debate (SPCK. 1997), p 82.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Leonard, G, ‘By Whose Authority’ in Longenecker, D (ed), The Path to Rome (Gracewing, 1999), p 28.Google Scholar

¹⁷ The words ‘valid’ and ‘validity’ do not appear at all in the resolutions or study materials of the 1998 Lambeth Conference.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Gurrieri, J, ‘Sacramental Validity: The Origins and Use of a Vocabulary’ (1981) 41 The Jurist 21 at 40–42.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ibid 41.

²⁰ Ibid 42.

²¹ Ibid 40. note 82.

²² Articles of Religion, Article XXV.Google Scholar

²³ Article XXV, describes sacraments as ‘certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God's good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him’. The article goes on to state that the remaining five ‘commonly called Sacraments…have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God’. The ARCICI report Ministry and Ordination, states that Article XXV does not deny that the five ‘commonly called Sacraments’ are sacraments but merely that they are not ‘necessary for salvation’.Google Scholar See Hill, C and Yarnold, E, Anglicans and Roman Catholics: The Search for Unity (SPCK 1994) p 35. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines sacraments as ‘the signs and instruments by which the Holy Spirit spreads the grace of Christ the head throughout the Church which is his Body’: Catechism of the Catholic Church, para 774.Google Scholar

²⁴ Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s11.Google Scholar

²⁵ Briden, T and Hanson, B, Moore's Introduction to English Canon Law (3rd edn, Mowbray, 1992), p 77.Google Scholar

²⁶ Ibid p 77.

²⁷ R Bursell, Liturgy, Order and the Law, pp 232, 233.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid, p 233, note 29.

²⁹ N Doe, Canon Law in the Anglican Communion, p 137.Google Scholar

³⁰ Ibid, note 45. He also cites the Prayer Books of the Church of the Province of South Africa and the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. The former states that ‘The central Act of ordination consists of the imposition of hands by a bishop, together with prayer for the Holy Spirit to give grace for the particular order being bestowed’. This is consistent with the contents of the section in the Alternative Service Book Ordinal entitled ‘The Ordination’.

³¹ ASB, p 338, note 1. This is consistent with the Revised Canons Ecclesiastical, Canon C 3, para 4.Google Scholar

³² ASB, p 338, note 2. This is consistent with Canon C 2, para 1.Google Scholar

³³ ASB, p 338, note 3. This is consistent with Canon C 3, para 4.Google Scholar

³⁴ Blake v Associated Newspapers Ltd (2003) 7 Ecc LJ 369, QBD.Google Scholar

³⁵ Evidence dated 23 June 2003 at p 7.Google Scholar

³⁶ For a fuller treatment of the issues at stake in this case, see Hill, C, ‘Episcopal Lineage: A Theological Reflection on Blake v Associated Newspapers Ltd (2003) 7 Ecc LJ pp 334–338.Google Scholar

³⁷ Hill, C in Together in Mission and Ministry: The Porvoo Common Statement with Essays on Church and Ministry in Northern Europe (Church House Publishing, 1993), p 47.Google Scholar

³⁸ Ibid.

³⁹ See The Meissen Agreement (Council for Christian Unity Occasional Paper No 2). para 16.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ In Called to Witness and Service: The Reuilly Common Statement with Essays on Church, Eucharist and Ministry (Church House Publishing, 1999), pp 51–57.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid p 53.

⁴² Ibid. I am grateful to the Rt Revd Christopher Hill. co-author of the Reuilly Common Statement, for further information on this subject.

⁴³ Webster, J, ‘Ministry and Priesthood’ in Sykes, S and Booty, J (eds) The Study of Anglicanism (SPCK, 1988), p 290.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ The text of the Measure suggests that they should act jointly.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Sometimes referred to as ‘Full Communion’ and distinguished in the Measure from those Churches with whom the Church of England is not in communion but whose orders it recognises.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ The Canons of the Church of England (6th edn, Church House Publishing, 2000), pp 199–201.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ See Canon B 44, para 5, and Canon C 1, para 1.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ The Most Revd Robert Runcie on behalf of himself and the Archbishop of York, the Most Revd John Habgood.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ For the statement, see (1989) 1(5) Ecc LJ 9. See also N Doe, Canon Law in the Anglican Communion, p 352, note 63.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Eg the Revd Dr Susan Cole King and the Revd Joyce Bennett ordained as priests in the USA and Hong Kong, respectively, were both licensed to officiate as deacons in the Diocese of Oxford during this period.Google Scholar

⁵¹ A sub-group of the Division's Recruitment and Selection Committee.Google Scholar

⁵² Promulged January 1989.Google Scholar

⁵³ Canon B 43, para 1(3).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Canon B 43, para 2(b)(iii).Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Canon B 43, para 5.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ See above.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Para 15.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Para 22.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Code of Canon Law 1917. canon 951; Code of Canon Law 1983, canon 1012.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ See note 10 above.Google Scholar

⁶¹ See note 11 above.Google Scholar

⁶² Unitatis Redintegratio (see above), para 15.Google Scholar

⁶³ See the discussion of the conditional ordination of Dr Graham Leonard at p 6 above.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Eg ‘The report of the First Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission Ministry and Ordination’ (1973) in Hill, C and Yarnold, E (eds), Anglicans and Roman Catholics: The Search for Unity (SPCK, 1994), pp 29ff.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Ibid p 40.

⁶⁶ Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis 22 May 1994, and the subsequent explanatory document Responsum ad dubium circa doctrinam in Epist. Ap. ‘Ordinatio Sacerdotalis’ traditam of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. 28 October 1995.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Neill, S, Anglicanism (Penguin, 1958), p 372.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Ibid.

⁶⁹ Ibid.

⁷⁰ As evidenced by the conditional re-ordination of Dr Graham Leonard.Google Scholar

⁷¹ The Declaration of Utrecht.Google Scholar

⁷² Cross, F and Livingstone, E (eds) Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford 1997) p 1180.Google Scholar

⁷³ Neill, Anglicanism, p 373.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ ‘The Bonn Agreement’ in Evans, G and Wright, J (eds). The Anglican Tradition (SPCK, 1991), p 396.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Neill, p 373.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Evans and Wright, The Anglican Tradition, p 379.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ ‘The Inauguration Service’ in Sundkler, B, Church of South India – The Movement towards Union 1900–1947 (2nd edn) (Lutterworth Press, 1965), p 342.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Ibid p 342.

⁷⁹ Ibid p 341.

⁸⁰ An Anglican Methodist Covenant (Church House Publishing, 2001), para 61.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Anglican-Methodist Unity: 2 The Scheme (SPCK/Epworth Press. 1963), p 87.Google Scholar

⁸² Ibid pp 103 ff.

⁸³ Ibid p 87.

⁸⁴ Wendebourg, D, ‘The Reformation in Germany and the Episcopal Office’ in Visible Unity and the Ministry of Oversight (Church House Publishing, 1996), p 50.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Ibid p 66.

⁸⁶ The Meissen Agreement (Council for Christian Unity Occasional Paper No 2), para 17.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ According to Canon B43, para 5, ‘A bishop or priest who has accepted an invitation to take part in the ordination or consecration of a minister of a Church to which this Canon applies may not, by the laying on of hands or otherwise, do any act which is a sign of the conferring of holy orders, unless that Church is an episcopal Church with which the Church of England has established intercommunion’.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ The Meissen Agreement, para 17.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Ibid para 17.

⁹⁰ An agreement between the Nordic and Baltic Lutheran Churches and the Anglican Churches of the British Isles 1993.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Hill, C in Together in Mission and Ministry: The Porvoo Common Statement with Essays on Church and Ministry in Northern Europe (Church House Publishing, 1993), pp 53–58.Google Scholar

⁹² The Churches of Norway, Denmark and Iceland.Google Scholar

⁹³ Porvoo Common Statement, para 34.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Ibid para 53.

⁹⁵ Ibid para 57.

⁹⁶ The Canons of the Church of England, p 201.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Porvoo Common Statement, para 57.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Ibid para 9.

⁹⁹ Ibid para 58(b)(ii), (iii) and (iv). An example of this is the integration of the ministers of the Scandinavian Mission to Seafarers in London into the Bermondsey Deanery of the Diocese of Southwark.

¹⁰⁰ The Churches of Sweden and Norway have women bishops. See The Church of England Year Book (Church House Publishing, 2004), pp 418, 419.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ For instance the Priests (Ordination of Women) Measure 1992 allowed the ordination of women to the priesthood. Women ordained in other parts of the Anglican Communion prior to this did not require re-ordination after this point to minister in the Church of England. Their ordination prior to this was not, therefore, invalid but not recognised as lawful.Google Scholar