Cardinal Dissolves the Sacrament of Orders
In a recently published book liberal Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, claims that the Anglican orders are not invalid, writes The Tablet.
Coccopalmerio contradicts Leo XIII's bull Apostolicae curae (1896), which declares that they are “absolutely null and utterly void”.
Coccopalmerio instead claims: “We have had, and we still have a very rigid understanding of validity and invalidity: this is valid, and that is not valid. One should be able to say: ‘this is valid in a certain context, and that is valid in another context'.” These words imply that the sacrament of ordination has no value in itself, and amount to a denial of this sacrament.
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
With regard to those truths connected to revelation by historical necessity and which are to be held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed, the following examples can be given: the legitimacy of the election of the Supreme Pontiff or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, the canonizations of saints (dogmatic facts), the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations.
15 Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine16 and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church.
According to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Bergoglio is no in full communion with the Catholic Church for contradict the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae and openly promotes the heresy of religious indifferentism.
It breaks away from the Apostolic succession
In the rite of conferring and administering any sacrament one rightly distinguishes between the ceremonial part and the essential part, which is customarily called the matter and form. […] Now, the words which until recent times were everywhere held by the Anglicans as the proper form of priestly ordination, namely, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit,’ certainly do not in the least signify definitely the order of priesthood, or its grace and power, which is especially the power ‘of consecrating and of offering the true Body and Blood of the Lord,’ in that sacrifice which is no ‘nude commemoration of the sacrifice offered on the Cross’ [see n. 950]. Such a form was indeed afterwards lengthened by these words, ‘for the office and work of a priest’; but this rather convinces one that the Anglicans themselves saw that this first form was defective, and not appropriate to the matter. But the same addition, if perchance indeed it could have placed legitimate significance on the form, was introduced too late, since a century had elapsed after the adoption of the Edwardine Ordinal; since, moreover, with the extinction of the hierarchy, there was now no power for ordaining. (Denzinger-Hünermann 3315-3316. Leo XIII, Letter Apostolicae curae – On the Nullity of Anglican Orders, September 13, 1896)