This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Independent Catholicism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think the new article "Breakaway Catholic Churches" should be merged with this or deleted. -- Lima ( talk) 11:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Merged. Chicbyaccident ( talk) 10:37, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Is this section in the article meant to be an advertising repository of links to other various churches? Kjnelan (talk) 20:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
My change has been changed re this. I see the problem: does "multiple ordinations" refer to one ceremony where a multiplicity of men is ordained (which is quite acceptable to Catholics, but not really to Orthodox) or a multiplicity of ceremonies (subsequent to one another) where the same man is ordained repeatedly? -- Richardson mcphillips1 ( talk) 18:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I read in the "Independent Catholic churches" article (
this version) that:
Some bishops receive several consecrations in an attempt to secure a more diverse claim to apostolic succession, for example, Bishop Hugh George de Willmott Newman.
and
Independent clergy have often received multiple ordinations/consecrations in an attempt to ensure a broad and diverse claim to apostolic succession. Though perhaps less prevalent than in the past, the practice continues; for example, Archbishop Peter Paul Brennan of the African Orthodox Church, one of four who were conditionally ordained to the episcopate by the excommunicated Catholic Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo on 24 September 2006, claims to have been first consecrated on 10 June 1978, and subsequently conditionally consecrated a number of times prior to the ceremony conducted by Archbishop Milingo. Also, in 2007, various independent Catholic bishops in the UK underwent multiple mutual reconsecrations "as a gesture of unity".
I also read in the "Hugh George de Willmott Newman" article ( this version) that:
On April 10, 1944 Newman was consecrated a bishop by William Bernard Crow, whose own consecration derived from the Armenian Catholic Church. Over the ten years 1945 to 1955, Newman engaged in cross-consecrating, where he and another bishop would consecrate each other to give each the other's lines of succession.
Newman consecrated, or shared cross-consecration with, at least 32 bishops. Today, there are hundreds of bishops around the world, perhaps thousands, with a lines of succession deriving through Hugh de Willmott Newman.
I don't understand the concepts of "several consecrations in an attempt to secure a more diverse claim to apostolic succession"
, "shared cross-consecration"
, or "multiple mutual reconsecrations 'as a gesture of unity' "
.
The Newman article cites The Encyclopedia of American Religions. The 2009 edition of a newer version titled Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions states that:
Episcopally led churches have traditionally based their legitimacy on their ability to trace their line of succession from the original 12 apostles. That is, for a bishop to be validly consecrated, and thus able to validly ordain priests, that bishop must himself be consecrated by a validly consecrated bishop. Thus, the story of the independent Old Catholic jurisdictions in America is the story of the search for legitimacy through ever more valid consecrations. In the 1980s, it became common for independent bishops to receive multiple consecrations, especially after changing allegiance to a different jurisdiction. [1]: 84
At the same time, the independent movement developed an antiauthoritarian character. Most of its bishops were self-appointed and maintained relatively miniscule followings. They have pressed for recognition of orders while demanding an independence of jurisdiction from those who granted orders. As an attempt at legitimization, they have sought recognition or reconsecration by bishops of one of the Eastern Orthodox or non-Chalcedonian churches (often after being rebuffed by the archbishop of Utrecht, the head of the Old Catholic Church). [1]: 83
By the 1990s, the several lines of apostolic succession had become well established in the person of a large number of the independent bishops; thus the need for reconsecration services of newer bishops, so notable in the 1980s, became unnecessary. The different lineages were passed simultaneously, and the practice of multiple consecrations has largely disappeared. [1]: 84
[...] Willmott Newman can be credited with introducing an increasingly common practice among the autonomous bishops, that of seeking numerous reconsecrations in order to legitimize an otherwise minuscule ecclesiastical jurisdiction by having its bishop embody a wide variety of lines of apostolic succession, both East and West. Such jurisdictions would symbolize the ecumenical church. [1]: 84
Are these understood as conditional ordinations and consecrations? There should be a paragraph in the article about this.
References
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
-- BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I have today (19 Aug 2014) done some work on the "Holy orders" section of the "Independent Catholic churches" page and also some further re-work on the page on HGWW, with an objective of addressing the concerns and comments voiced above (dated 23 June 2014). I have tried to express the matters without resorting to un-defined jargon or technical terms. I hope User BoBoMisiu may now consider that the situation is improved. What I have now written is probably about the best I am going to be able to achieve without going into an over-lengthy explanation and teach-in. If it is judged to be less than satisfactory, perhaps someone else would like to attempt to improve the situation please. Diakonias ( talk) 20:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
The current editorial perspective negatively judges the subjects of the article at various points and so does not meet the neutrality guidelines. Such assertions are not backed by references. Additionally, the "ecclesiology" section only considers the responses of church bodies who are not the subject of the article. While relevant, it is too long in what it does cover and incomplete in not covering the actual ecclesiology of the subject churches. -- Metagignosko ( talk) 02:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Many have embraced the model of parish organisation in which a bishop, not a priest, is the pastor of a parish. This model enables those who wish to become bishops to rationalise the process even when there are no other members of the clergy in the group. Thus, a high percentage of Independent clergy end up seeking ordination to the episcopacy. Congregations tend to be minuscule and sometimes even non-existent.
In the United Kingdom there are several who make a substantial income by conducting marriages and/or funerals, from high church to humanist or even pagan in character, leading to the charge that these people see ministry as a career rather than as a vocation.
Yet, others would argue that the views of Utrecht, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy are of significant importance as is it they who are universally regarded as been the guardians of the definition of apostolic succession. The claims of the Independent movement to apostolic succession are rejected by the very churches which the Independent clergy accept as guardians, and to which they appeal.
An editor has decided to introduce the Roman Catholic terminology war here. I object. "Roman Catholic" is a term often used by, among other things, the actual people to whom it refers (including examples carved into stonework of churches, web sites, official documents from the See of Rome, and elsewhere). No aspect of the manual of style takes a position on such things, and the argument that the term should be avoided is itself the expression of a POV, which is in part designed to further an agenda in which the term "Catholic" refers only to those churches in communion with the Diocese of Rome. In articles which are (as this one) explicitly about other Catholic churches, it is particularly offensive to have this going on. -- Tb ( talk) 18:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I would appreciate actual discussion on the point. The new edits are, in my opinion, quite mistaken, and if they seek after compromise, I'd like to see the various parties express themselves before the change is made. -- Tb ( talk) 00:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
After reading the article I went into some doubt about what qualifies as such. My first reading seemed to be just a hodgepodge of self styled "catholic" minority denominations. Not until I perused some of the web references could i get a clear understanding of what the article is about (it is described in the introduction but I didn't get it at first, to much noise to info ratio).
According to this an ICC is a "community faith which has an episcopal order for which it claims is in apostolic succession and to have valid sacraments (esp. Eucharist)" but are not in communion with any of the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, or the Oriental Churches".
Readers will note that i have taken out two denominations from the not in communion clause. The Old Catholics and the Anglican Communion. The first because they fit perfectly into the definition of independent; without treating them, a good deal of the phenomenon is almost unintelligible -the article starts with them- and in more than one sense is the paradigmatic case. The Anglicans, at least the Anglo Catholics, claim to be catholic in the above definition, but are nowadays not acknowledged as such by none of the "Old Three". In this sense -and but for its volume- she is just another Independent "Church"
You will also note that the definition matches almost "verbatim" the requisites of Dominus Iesus for calling a christian denomination a Church, according to Rome. The Catholic Church happens to be the only one which has developed a certain juridical system on testing the "apostolic succession" (more on a case law style, but anyhow), which seems to have been more or less silently accepted as a "standard" (on a side note, i do am a RC, so i'm bound to it, anyway; and yes i know a number of Orthodox theologians would even deny validity to RC orders, ...)
There is a wild diversity of ICC, but with the exception of the Anglican "chaos", most seem not to claim inheritance from the Reformation. I'd say it could also a common characteristic, but I'll leave it for someone more expert in "denominational taxonomy"
The phenomenon of the episcopi vagantes, while important for some of the Independents (mostly american ones) is absolutely irrelevant for others. -- Wllacer ( talk) 17:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
According to this.... According to what specifically? Where is that definition? Is it something you've come up with as a result of your many searches? I'm not trying to be combative, I'd genuinely like to know as yours is the first attempt in a long time to actually try to fix this article.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Something of this kind should be in the article. Below is a proposed outline of a test of apostolic succession. Although I believe catholics and easterns would agree, this reflects mainly a RC approach. I'll try to get detailed references for each case, but for now i'm a little short of time. Assuming the ordination is valid (i.e. is both formally correct, the intention was present, and free of simony; more below) more or less the probability would be in this order (higher first):
Each case should include examples, such as:
And mention exceptions. For example, Milingo's ordinations are rejected for lack of intent (it's very doubtful that he still believes in the episcopal order, and there is some suspicion about his mental health; in the case of bishop Pierre_Martin_Ngô_Đình_Thục's the last cause is the most commonly referred (but not solely). For the Anglican Communion please see Apostolic_Succession#Roman_Catholic_judgments. Neither the SSPX, nor Rome formally consider (as of 2009) their relation as "schismatic" but merely as "canonicaly irregular" (See Canonical situation of the Society of St. Pius X). If the evolution would result in a total breakup, then orders had to be mutually recognizable. -- Wllacer ( talk) 21:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Most church[es] created by episcopi vagantes aren't even recognized outside themselves.I think that line should even enter the article somewhere, though I'd like to see the source for that as I have several sources against that statement; Apostolicae Curae, "The Old Catholic Church has received valid Episcopal consecration" Algermissen, Konrad. Christian Denominations., Ott, Ludwig (1952). Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. p. 456. which states: "Every validly consecrated bishop, including heretical, schismatic, simonistic, or excommunicated bishops, can validly dispense the Sacrament of Order, provided that he has the requisite intention, and follows the essential external rite (set. Certa). Cf. D 855, 860; CIC 2372." and several others.
Patrickinmpls, please put your comments separated from those of the other users, and sign them. I don't mind being formatted for the sake of discussion but not "edited". You made it in a way it looks as I had written it, which is NOT the case. As I presume you're a newcomer I simple move your comments and my counter arguments down here. -- Wllacer ( talk) 12:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
The movement was started by one or more legitimate bishops of one of the "Big Three"
— User:Wllacer 21:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Milingo's ordinations are rejected for lack of intent (it's very doubtful that he still believes in the episcopal order, and there is some suspicion about his mental health
— User:Wllacer 21:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I removed the sentence which stated: "In the mind of the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Catholic and Utrecht churches such beliefs as theosophy and reincarnation would render invalid any ordinations regardless of the rite employed in the ceremony."
I've searched through many RCC documents regarding this statement and while it is incongruent with RCC teaching, there is nothing which states the belief in such would render the ordination of anyone invalid. It is considered as improper teaching as evidenced by: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html, but again, nothing has been found to support the sentence.
That sentence was also POV which adds to the other discussions above. We need to remember this is an article ABOUT the Independent Catholic Movement, not a chance to condemn, ridicule, or denigrate. Kjnelan (talk) 17:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
We're including references to degree mills now? The so-called European-American University is well-known among legitimate and accredited academia, and among anti-degree/diploma-mill activists, as a mill. No question about it. How is it, then, that any Wikipedia article can, with a straight face, link to it? Plus, the specific thing to which that reference linked is gone, now, in any case... so it's basically a dead link (though if someone would first figure out that to which it was linking, and then search for it on the European-American University (and I use the word "university" loosely, in this case) website, who knows... said someone might be able to figure out what should be the new and corrected link. However, we shouldn't, in my opinion, allow reference links to degree mills, regardless...
...or so, at least, it is my opinion. Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) 06:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Deselms (
talk •
contribs)
"concern was: Does not appear to meet any of the notability requirements for inclusion". European-American University Press (www.lulu.com/spotlight/eaupress) uses lulu.com which is on the Wikipedia:List of companies engaged in the self-publishing business. The link is dead but Archived August 20, 2008, at the Wayback Machine. The archived section, from thedegree.org, that contains information on Mathew uses content attributed to the Old Catholic Church Wikipedia article. The link to the Wikipedia article is not a permanent link to a stable unique page version. I believe it violates the WP:CIRCULAR policy and I removed it. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Mathew was not the first. He joined the Ealing schism. Also, other independent ecclesial communities in Great Britain were organized earlier. For example, the adventist Catholic Apostolic Church was organised in 1835. Another example is Jules Ferrette's attempts. -- BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Independent Catholic churches. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I removed the Philippine Independent Church from this list because it is much closer to Anglican churches, or even the Polish National church than independent Catholic churches. It broke away from the Spanish dominated Catholic church during the Philippine Revolution/ Philippine-American War period. It shares a seminary with the Episcopal Church of the Philippines and has some unitarian beliefs. It is in communion withe the Anglican Communion. It doesn't claim to be Catholic. -- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 13:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved as there are no objections. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Brad v 02:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Independent Catholic denominations → Independent Catholicism – Since list of denominations moved to List_of_Christian_denominations#Independent_Catholicism, that would be a more proper name, since it covers the beliefes, positions etc. and not a list of denominations. Chicbyaccident ( talk) 10:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
What specifically is missing, Chicbyaccident? – Finnusertop ( talk ⋅ contribs) 16:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
The penultimate graph (as of this writing) of the intro section starts with "Various Independent Catholic groups have attracted a significant amount of criticism." I'm thinking that the graph doesn't belong up there and deserves its own heading further down the article. -- Schnaz ( talk) 18:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
I've tagged the article as needing a rewrite. As the article currently reads, it depends primarily on a single source (Plummer) and as such violates encyclopedic standards. The main rewriter of the article makes notes in his edits that clearly show a bias against the Roman Catholic Church; in some he erroneously refers it to the "Roman church" which is totally incorrect. His statement that Independent Catholic Churches are also totally incorrect in that Roman Catholicism does not accept any Western rite as valid except for the Roman rite itself. Someone, please fix this. I'm not enough of an expert, or I would do so myself. 2601:C8:4101:A1E:71BF:E646:157D:3180 ( talk) 04:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Independent Catholicism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I've combined all the
Plummer, p(p). ___
references by using {{ r}}.
There are many other Plummer refs that have their own name, e.g.
<ref name="auto1">Plummer, p. 23</ref>
<ref name="auto1"/>
These can probably be treated the same way, by globally replacing every string matching the regexp
<ref name="auto1"/?>*?>
with
{{r|Plummer|p=23}}
for all values of auton, but that's just not feasible for me at the moment on this phone.-- Thnidu ( talk) 02:39, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
I realize capitalization of "Independent" is inconsistent in this article. It's inconsistent throughout this topic area! I don't know if the situation can be improved. Elizium23 ( talk) 19:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
The 'one source' issue seems to have been addressed. Apollinari ( talk) 13:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic) and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Breakaway Catholics and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Breakaway Catholics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Breakaway Catholic Church and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Breakaway Catholic Church until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Independent Catholic Church USA and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Independent Catholic Church USA until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Independent catholic church usa and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Independent catholic church usa until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
@ Veverve: In the context of that sentence, "rite" is referring to liturgical traditions for which Christian liturgy is the main article, with a list of such rites (including the Roman Rite also given as an example in this article immediately after the linked text in question). I don't understand your objection. -- Scyrme ( talk) 18:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Breakaway Catholic Churches and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 16 § Breakaway Catholic Churches until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Steel1943 (
talk) 22:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the section on beliefs of Independent Catholics. New information in the last couple months has been released from the Vatican that the Society of St. Pius X is a part of the Catholic Church in communion with Rome. My proposed edit would be to simply delete their name from this section. Editor9174 ( talk) 14:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Independent Catholicism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think the new article "Breakaway Catholic Churches" should be merged with this or deleted. -- Lima ( talk) 11:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Merged. Chicbyaccident ( talk) 10:37, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Is this section in the article meant to be an advertising repository of links to other various churches? Kjnelan (talk) 20:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
My change has been changed re this. I see the problem: does "multiple ordinations" refer to one ceremony where a multiplicity of men is ordained (which is quite acceptable to Catholics, but not really to Orthodox) or a multiplicity of ceremonies (subsequent to one another) where the same man is ordained repeatedly? -- Richardson mcphillips1 ( talk) 18:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I read in the "Independent Catholic churches" article (
this version) that:
Some bishops receive several consecrations in an attempt to secure a more diverse claim to apostolic succession, for example, Bishop Hugh George de Willmott Newman.
and
Independent clergy have often received multiple ordinations/consecrations in an attempt to ensure a broad and diverse claim to apostolic succession. Though perhaps less prevalent than in the past, the practice continues; for example, Archbishop Peter Paul Brennan of the African Orthodox Church, one of four who were conditionally ordained to the episcopate by the excommunicated Catholic Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo on 24 September 2006, claims to have been first consecrated on 10 June 1978, and subsequently conditionally consecrated a number of times prior to the ceremony conducted by Archbishop Milingo. Also, in 2007, various independent Catholic bishops in the UK underwent multiple mutual reconsecrations "as a gesture of unity".
I also read in the "Hugh George de Willmott Newman" article ( this version) that:
On April 10, 1944 Newman was consecrated a bishop by William Bernard Crow, whose own consecration derived from the Armenian Catholic Church. Over the ten years 1945 to 1955, Newman engaged in cross-consecrating, where he and another bishop would consecrate each other to give each the other's lines of succession.
Newman consecrated, or shared cross-consecration with, at least 32 bishops. Today, there are hundreds of bishops around the world, perhaps thousands, with a lines of succession deriving through Hugh de Willmott Newman.
I don't understand the concepts of "several consecrations in an attempt to secure a more diverse claim to apostolic succession"
, "shared cross-consecration"
, or "multiple mutual reconsecrations 'as a gesture of unity' "
.
The Newman article cites The Encyclopedia of American Religions. The 2009 edition of a newer version titled Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions states that:
Episcopally led churches have traditionally based their legitimacy on their ability to trace their line of succession from the original 12 apostles. That is, for a bishop to be validly consecrated, and thus able to validly ordain priests, that bishop must himself be consecrated by a validly consecrated bishop. Thus, the story of the independent Old Catholic jurisdictions in America is the story of the search for legitimacy through ever more valid consecrations. In the 1980s, it became common for independent bishops to receive multiple consecrations, especially after changing allegiance to a different jurisdiction. [1]: 84
At the same time, the independent movement developed an antiauthoritarian character. Most of its bishops were self-appointed and maintained relatively miniscule followings. They have pressed for recognition of orders while demanding an independence of jurisdiction from those who granted orders. As an attempt at legitimization, they have sought recognition or reconsecration by bishops of one of the Eastern Orthodox or non-Chalcedonian churches (often after being rebuffed by the archbishop of Utrecht, the head of the Old Catholic Church). [1]: 83
By the 1990s, the several lines of apostolic succession had become well established in the person of a large number of the independent bishops; thus the need for reconsecration services of newer bishops, so notable in the 1980s, became unnecessary. The different lineages were passed simultaneously, and the practice of multiple consecrations has largely disappeared. [1]: 84
[...] Willmott Newman can be credited with introducing an increasingly common practice among the autonomous bishops, that of seeking numerous reconsecrations in order to legitimize an otherwise minuscule ecclesiastical jurisdiction by having its bishop embody a wide variety of lines of apostolic succession, both East and West. Such jurisdictions would symbolize the ecumenical church. [1]: 84
Are these understood as conditional ordinations and consecrations? There should be a paragraph in the article about this.
References
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
-- BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I have today (19 Aug 2014) done some work on the "Holy orders" section of the "Independent Catholic churches" page and also some further re-work on the page on HGWW, with an objective of addressing the concerns and comments voiced above (dated 23 June 2014). I have tried to express the matters without resorting to un-defined jargon or technical terms. I hope User BoBoMisiu may now consider that the situation is improved. What I have now written is probably about the best I am going to be able to achieve without going into an over-lengthy explanation and teach-in. If it is judged to be less than satisfactory, perhaps someone else would like to attempt to improve the situation please. Diakonias ( talk) 20:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
The current editorial perspective negatively judges the subjects of the article at various points and so does not meet the neutrality guidelines. Such assertions are not backed by references. Additionally, the "ecclesiology" section only considers the responses of church bodies who are not the subject of the article. While relevant, it is too long in what it does cover and incomplete in not covering the actual ecclesiology of the subject churches. -- Metagignosko ( talk) 02:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Many have embraced the model of parish organisation in which a bishop, not a priest, is the pastor of a parish. This model enables those who wish to become bishops to rationalise the process even when there are no other members of the clergy in the group. Thus, a high percentage of Independent clergy end up seeking ordination to the episcopacy. Congregations tend to be minuscule and sometimes even non-existent.
In the United Kingdom there are several who make a substantial income by conducting marriages and/or funerals, from high church to humanist or even pagan in character, leading to the charge that these people see ministry as a career rather than as a vocation.
Yet, others would argue that the views of Utrecht, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy are of significant importance as is it they who are universally regarded as been the guardians of the definition of apostolic succession. The claims of the Independent movement to apostolic succession are rejected by the very churches which the Independent clergy accept as guardians, and to which they appeal.
An editor has decided to introduce the Roman Catholic terminology war here. I object. "Roman Catholic" is a term often used by, among other things, the actual people to whom it refers (including examples carved into stonework of churches, web sites, official documents from the See of Rome, and elsewhere). No aspect of the manual of style takes a position on such things, and the argument that the term should be avoided is itself the expression of a POV, which is in part designed to further an agenda in which the term "Catholic" refers only to those churches in communion with the Diocese of Rome. In articles which are (as this one) explicitly about other Catholic churches, it is particularly offensive to have this going on. -- Tb ( talk) 18:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I would appreciate actual discussion on the point. The new edits are, in my opinion, quite mistaken, and if they seek after compromise, I'd like to see the various parties express themselves before the change is made. -- Tb ( talk) 00:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
After reading the article I went into some doubt about what qualifies as such. My first reading seemed to be just a hodgepodge of self styled "catholic" minority denominations. Not until I perused some of the web references could i get a clear understanding of what the article is about (it is described in the introduction but I didn't get it at first, to much noise to info ratio).
According to this an ICC is a "community faith which has an episcopal order for which it claims is in apostolic succession and to have valid sacraments (esp. Eucharist)" but are not in communion with any of the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, or the Oriental Churches".
Readers will note that i have taken out two denominations from the not in communion clause. The Old Catholics and the Anglican Communion. The first because they fit perfectly into the definition of independent; without treating them, a good deal of the phenomenon is almost unintelligible -the article starts with them- and in more than one sense is the paradigmatic case. The Anglicans, at least the Anglo Catholics, claim to be catholic in the above definition, but are nowadays not acknowledged as such by none of the "Old Three". In this sense -and but for its volume- she is just another Independent "Church"
You will also note that the definition matches almost "verbatim" the requisites of Dominus Iesus for calling a christian denomination a Church, according to Rome. The Catholic Church happens to be the only one which has developed a certain juridical system on testing the "apostolic succession" (more on a case law style, but anyhow), which seems to have been more or less silently accepted as a "standard" (on a side note, i do am a RC, so i'm bound to it, anyway; and yes i know a number of Orthodox theologians would even deny validity to RC orders, ...)
There is a wild diversity of ICC, but with the exception of the Anglican "chaos", most seem not to claim inheritance from the Reformation. I'd say it could also a common characteristic, but I'll leave it for someone more expert in "denominational taxonomy"
The phenomenon of the episcopi vagantes, while important for some of the Independents (mostly american ones) is absolutely irrelevant for others. -- Wllacer ( talk) 17:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
According to this.... According to what specifically? Where is that definition? Is it something you've come up with as a result of your many searches? I'm not trying to be combative, I'd genuinely like to know as yours is the first attempt in a long time to actually try to fix this article.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Something of this kind should be in the article. Below is a proposed outline of a test of apostolic succession. Although I believe catholics and easterns would agree, this reflects mainly a RC approach. I'll try to get detailed references for each case, but for now i'm a little short of time. Assuming the ordination is valid (i.e. is both formally correct, the intention was present, and free of simony; more below) more or less the probability would be in this order (higher first):
Each case should include examples, such as:
And mention exceptions. For example, Milingo's ordinations are rejected for lack of intent (it's very doubtful that he still believes in the episcopal order, and there is some suspicion about his mental health; in the case of bishop Pierre_Martin_Ngô_Đình_Thục's the last cause is the most commonly referred (but not solely). For the Anglican Communion please see Apostolic_Succession#Roman_Catholic_judgments. Neither the SSPX, nor Rome formally consider (as of 2009) their relation as "schismatic" but merely as "canonicaly irregular" (See Canonical situation of the Society of St. Pius X). If the evolution would result in a total breakup, then orders had to be mutually recognizable. -- Wllacer ( talk) 21:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Most church[es] created by episcopi vagantes aren't even recognized outside themselves.I think that line should even enter the article somewhere, though I'd like to see the source for that as I have several sources against that statement; Apostolicae Curae, "The Old Catholic Church has received valid Episcopal consecration" Algermissen, Konrad. Christian Denominations., Ott, Ludwig (1952). Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. p. 456. which states: "Every validly consecrated bishop, including heretical, schismatic, simonistic, or excommunicated bishops, can validly dispense the Sacrament of Order, provided that he has the requisite intention, and follows the essential external rite (set. Certa). Cf. D 855, 860; CIC 2372." and several others.
Patrickinmpls, please put your comments separated from those of the other users, and sign them. I don't mind being formatted for the sake of discussion but not "edited". You made it in a way it looks as I had written it, which is NOT the case. As I presume you're a newcomer I simple move your comments and my counter arguments down here. -- Wllacer ( talk) 12:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
The movement was started by one or more legitimate bishops of one of the "Big Three"
— User:Wllacer 21:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Milingo's ordinations are rejected for lack of intent (it's very doubtful that he still believes in the episcopal order, and there is some suspicion about his mental health
— User:Wllacer 21:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I removed the sentence which stated: "In the mind of the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Catholic and Utrecht churches such beliefs as theosophy and reincarnation would render invalid any ordinations regardless of the rite employed in the ceremony."
I've searched through many RCC documents regarding this statement and while it is incongruent with RCC teaching, there is nothing which states the belief in such would render the ordination of anyone invalid. It is considered as improper teaching as evidenced by: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html, but again, nothing has been found to support the sentence.
That sentence was also POV which adds to the other discussions above. We need to remember this is an article ABOUT the Independent Catholic Movement, not a chance to condemn, ridicule, or denigrate. Kjnelan (talk) 17:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
We're including references to degree mills now? The so-called European-American University is well-known among legitimate and accredited academia, and among anti-degree/diploma-mill activists, as a mill. No question about it. How is it, then, that any Wikipedia article can, with a straight face, link to it? Plus, the specific thing to which that reference linked is gone, now, in any case... so it's basically a dead link (though if someone would first figure out that to which it was linking, and then search for it on the European-American University (and I use the word "university" loosely, in this case) website, who knows... said someone might be able to figure out what should be the new and corrected link. However, we shouldn't, in my opinion, allow reference links to degree mills, regardless...
...or so, at least, it is my opinion. Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) 06:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Deselms (
talk •
contribs)
"concern was: Does not appear to meet any of the notability requirements for inclusion". European-American University Press (www.lulu.com/spotlight/eaupress) uses lulu.com which is on the Wikipedia:List of companies engaged in the self-publishing business. The link is dead but Archived August 20, 2008, at the Wayback Machine. The archived section, from thedegree.org, that contains information on Mathew uses content attributed to the Old Catholic Church Wikipedia article. The link to the Wikipedia article is not a permanent link to a stable unique page version. I believe it violates the WP:CIRCULAR policy and I removed it. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Mathew was not the first. He joined the Ealing schism. Also, other independent ecclesial communities in Great Britain were organized earlier. For example, the adventist Catholic Apostolic Church was organised in 1835. Another example is Jules Ferrette's attempts. -- BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Independent Catholic churches. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I removed the Philippine Independent Church from this list because it is much closer to Anglican churches, or even the Polish National church than independent Catholic churches. It broke away from the Spanish dominated Catholic church during the Philippine Revolution/ Philippine-American War period. It shares a seminary with the Episcopal Church of the Philippines and has some unitarian beliefs. It is in communion withe the Anglican Communion. It doesn't claim to be Catholic. -- Iloilo Wanderer ( talk) 13:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved as there are no objections. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Brad v 02:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Independent Catholic denominations → Independent Catholicism – Since list of denominations moved to List_of_Christian_denominations#Independent_Catholicism, that would be a more proper name, since it covers the beliefes, positions etc. and not a list of denominations. Chicbyaccident ( talk) 10:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
What specifically is missing, Chicbyaccident? – Finnusertop ( talk ⋅ contribs) 16:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
The penultimate graph (as of this writing) of the intro section starts with "Various Independent Catholic groups have attracted a significant amount of criticism." I'm thinking that the graph doesn't belong up there and deserves its own heading further down the article. -- Schnaz ( talk) 18:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
I've tagged the article as needing a rewrite. As the article currently reads, it depends primarily on a single source (Plummer) and as such violates encyclopedic standards. The main rewriter of the article makes notes in his edits that clearly show a bias against the Roman Catholic Church; in some he erroneously refers it to the "Roman church" which is totally incorrect. His statement that Independent Catholic Churches are also totally incorrect in that Roman Catholicism does not accept any Western rite as valid except for the Roman rite itself. Someone, please fix this. I'm not enough of an expert, or I would do so myself. 2601:C8:4101:A1E:71BF:E646:157D:3180 ( talk) 04:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Independent Catholicism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I've combined all the
Plummer, p(p). ___
references by using {{ r}}.
There are many other Plummer refs that have their own name, e.g.
<ref name="auto1">Plummer, p. 23</ref>
<ref name="auto1"/>
These can probably be treated the same way, by globally replacing every string matching the regexp
<ref name="auto1"/?>*?>
with
{{r|Plummer|p=23}}
for all values of auton, but that's just not feasible for me at the moment on this phone.-- Thnidu ( talk) 02:39, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
I realize capitalization of "Independent" is inconsistent in this article. It's inconsistent throughout this topic area! I don't know if the situation can be improved. Elizium23 ( talk) 19:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
The 'one source' issue seems to have been addressed. Apollinari ( talk) 13:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic) and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Breakaway Catholics and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Breakaway Catholics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Breakaway Catholic Church and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Breakaway Catholic Church until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Independent Catholic Church USA and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Independent Catholic Church USA until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Independent catholic church usa and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Independent catholic church usa until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk) 00:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
@ Veverve: In the context of that sentence, "rite" is referring to liturgical traditions for which Christian liturgy is the main article, with a list of such rites (including the Roman Rite also given as an example in this article immediately after the linked text in question). I don't understand your objection. -- Scyrme ( talk) 18:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Breakaway Catholic Churches and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 16 § Breakaway Catholic Churches until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Steel1943 (
talk) 22:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the section on beliefs of Independent Catholics. New information in the last couple months has been released from the Vatican that the Society of St. Pius X is a part of the Catholic Church in communion with Rome. My proposed edit would be to simply delete their name from this section. Editor9174 ( talk) 14:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)