Yeah, but I'm not asking either of us to believe it, just accept that it is a state of being which enables (Catholics and Anglican) bishops to Do A Thing - which was the question I thought you were asking. I'm not necessarily saying the Thing is worthwhile, or even exists.
I suppose that the argument from someone who believed but didn't approve of the office-holders would be that the magic still works even if they are corrupt. It's the acts, not the actors, which are important. They're just conduits. And a bishops is still a bishop even if they were ordained by a bad bishop - A says the usual term is "valid but irregular". Note that there is some complexity about the validity of what happens after excommunication - I'm staying away from that whole morass of LeFevrists, Dutch Old Catholics and the impossibility of ordaining women, because it's just too late at night for that kind of thing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2009-03-10 12:02 am (UTC)I suppose that the argument from someone who believed but didn't approve of the office-holders would be that the magic still works even if they are corrupt. It's the acts, not the actors, which are important. They're just conduits. And a bishops is still a bishop even if they were ordained by a bad bishop - A says the usual term is "valid but irregular". Note that there is some complexity about the validity of what happens after excommunication - I'm staying away from that whole morass of LeFevrists, Dutch Old Catholics and the impossibility of ordaining women, because it's just too late at night for that kind of thing.