Talk:Reformed Catholic Church

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity
Christianity Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism. See also the Catholicism Portal. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] History

The Office of the Church Historian was created in May of 2006, and we have been working on research from the years 2000 to 2007.

Because of the exhaustive and extensive nature of accurate historical research we have determined to conduct professional reporting. However, this means that we are slower than many wish we would be in our finalized reporting, which we understand the disappointment. We are working on having the RCC Histories, First Edition completed and available online/and in paper book by spring 2008. RCCHistorian 07:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)RCCHistorian

[edit] Incorrect statement of (Roman) Catholic position w.r.t. Reformed Catholic Church

The article says: The Reformed Catholic Church holds a valid line of succession, and are considered "catholic" as stated in the Vatican document "Dominus Iesus."

This statement does not represent the position of the Catholic Church correctly. The portion of Dominus Jesus quoted in Reference 1 is not intended to refer to all communities that possess or claim valid orders; rather, it is intended to refer to the historic churches that retain valid orders: that is, the Orthodox Churches and the Ancient Eastern Churches. It may even refer to the one Utrecht-union community closest to the Catholic Church, namely the Polish National Catholic Church. However, a Vatican document is not likely to recognize a community of 20th-century origin which is not in communion with Utrecht and which practices women's ordination as constituting a true particular church. Chonak 06:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

  • [Note: An anonymous user, 71.205.236.134, removed the preceding paragraph by me, in an edit on 2006-11-08. I assume that he is a fairly new editor who doesn't realize that this is a bad practice. Changing other editors' talk-page comments makes it impossible to follow the course of prior discussion, so I have restored the relevant paragraph, and I ask the editor to please refrain from modifying other editors' talk entries. The anonymous user's comment follows. Chonak 04:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)]


The statement above was the wording used on a previous edition of the RCC article. The wording has been reconsidered and changed to reflect difference of opinion on this particular issue. The revised version is below:

They perceive that they are considered "catholic" by Rome because of the Vatican document, “Dominus Iesus.” This document was written by-then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and ratified by Pope John Paul II. After his election to the papacy, Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) also ratified it.

[The preceding two (unsigned) paragraphs were added by anonymous user 71.205.236.134..]

I appreciate 71.205.236.134's effort to correct the impression that the earlier version gave. To improve the statement further, please cite a published source. "They perceive..." doesn't indicate exactly who in the Reformed CC (or what Reformed CC publication) stated this interpretation of Dominus Jesus. Statements of fact, opinion, or interpretation cited in Wikipedia articles need to be attributed to some published source. Thanks! Chonak 04:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Differences vis-a-vis (Roman) Catholic Church

The article says: The Reformed Catholic Church holds that its Masses and Tenants of Faith are the same as those of the Roman Catholic Church and that they maintain a valid line of succession.

Part of that is incorrect, as far as I can tell. The Reformed CC's website statement of Tenets of Beliefs ("tenants" is a misspelling) contradicts the teaching of the (Roman) Catholic Church in some points: e.g., the morality of contraception. And of course there are other differences, apart from the sexual issues on which the statement of "Tenets" focuses: a Christian body which is not in full communion with the Pope is not in agreement with the Church's teaching on papal primacy. I'll look for a way to revise this. Chonak 03:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Revised. Chonak 04:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


The section on RCC Teachings and Beliefs needs to be rewritten with an eye toward precision and clarification. It says, for example, that the Reformed CC:

  • Do not believe that anybody has the right to withhold any of the sacraments from any person for any reason, Marriage, Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Holy Unction, Holy Orders or Absolution.

It's hard to believe that this is the actual Reformed CC practice. Are Reformed CC bishops willing to baptize, ordain, marry, or consecrate absolutely anybody, regardless of any reason: regardless of the person's age, psychological health, religious beliefs, moral character, or (God forbid) criminal record? I trust that is not actually the case. Chonak (talk) 02:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

  • Does this subject meet the notability criteria for inclusion in WP? Chonak 04:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I believe it does, but then again, I have been accused of bias before. --Kf4bdy talk contribs 05:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
To clarify my concern, here's the primary criterion for notability.
An article's subject is notable if it has been the subject of non-trivial published works by multiple separate sources that are independent of that subject itself.
The aim of the criterion is to foster qualities desired in a good encyclopedia article: verifiability and neutral point of view, and avoid pitfalls such as self-promotion and "original research". So far I haven't come across any non-trivial published works about the Reformed CC, apart from its own web sites. Perhaps this body is just too new to have gained the attention of outside observers. I wouldn't suggest deleting the article, but we ought to be a little rigorous and cut out whatever in the article cannot be attributed to published sources. Chonak 01:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you completely. I would hate for this to be deleted like the one on my church was, but I think your ideas on cleaning it up are good. --Kf4bdy talk contribs 07:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)