A better example would be the apostolic succession of the Anglican Church, which was valid for a while. It got terminated with the change in the consecration formula which finalle broke the succession. It was determined as broken by Pope Leo XIII in late 19c.
I simply don't know about Lutheran Church as a whole. I heard an expression "Continuing Lutherans"; it is possible that they retained the apostolic succession as a sub-Church even to this day. Maybe Jo Kus knows more.
Luther personally was never a bishop. The apostolic succession continues through bishops, not priests. It is true that loss of communion with Rome alone would not break the succession but rather split it. It does, however, require communion in the essentials of the faith, and since that is lacking with the most Lutherans, their succession as a whole is not longer valid.
Finally, priesthood is an indelible mark that cannot be removed. Luther (or any other defrocked priest) retains an ability to forgive sins and consecrate the Eucharist, but the flock is asked not to partake of it. It is a valid Eucharist but not licit.
I will welcome any correction to this; it is a highly technical matter and I am not a canon lawyer.
“I simply don’t know about Lutheran Church as a whole (apostolic succession of Lutheran bishops, K). I heard an expression “Continuing Lutherans”; it is possible that they retained the apostolic succession as a sub-Church even to this day. Maybe Jo Kus knows more.”
I am pinging our brethren lightman and redgolum for their informed input on the apostolic succession of Lutheran bishops. My understanding is that there are, or were until recently, some in Scandinavia.
Luther could not ordain anyone. Without a bishop, he was without apostolic authority. Priests do not have autonomous authority; they are bishop's lieutenants and work under the authority of one.
His 'church' is therefore not the Church but a man-made institution. By throwing out most of the sacraments, this institution made itself expressly heretical. Some renegade Scandinavian bishops who joined his movement much later basically joined heretics. their authority then is the same as that of Arian "bishops."
This is sad because the conservative Lutheran Church retains many of the elements of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Its atonment doctrine of ransom is that which is taught by the Orthodox Church from the beginning and throughout the Church until the 11th century, when Anselm's error took over in the west.
Just like the High Anglicans, the Lutherans probably stand the greatest chance of eventually rejoining the Church. That would be a great day in Christendom.
How on earth can "apostolic succession" be valid "for a while"? Either you can trace yourselves to the apostles or you can't. Validity, in my mind would not enter into the issue.
No, Lutherans are not considered "Apostolic" because they cannot trace a line of ordained bishops to the Apostles like the Orthodox or even the Coptics. This includes the Anglicans, as well, although they make the claim they are Apostolic, English history shows there is no continuity between the great English bishops of the Catholic Church and the usurpers.
Regards