Talk:Reformed Catholic Church

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 History 2 Incorrect statement of (Roman) Catholic position w.r.t. Reformed Catholic Church 3 Differences vis-a-vis (Roman) Catholic Church 4 Notability

[edit] History

This article could use some information about the history of the church (ie. when was it founded, why was it founded and who founded it). While it is beginning to take shape, I feel this article needs allot more work.

I also think that someone should address the information that was blanked off this talk page previously by an IP.

User:TureFacts wrote:

As of July 2006 the Reformed Catholic Church is in a chaotic turmoil with the Presiding Bishop, Phillip Zimmerman being expelled from the catherdral and his offices by clergy who he has illegally and against all Church Canons, laitized for questioning his authority.

By July, only three months after their Fall Synod, several brothers, priests, monsignors and a bishop have all been laitized by the Presiding bishop, in violation of their Constitutions and without discussion by the various vicars. Those removed from functioning in the Reformed Catholic Church have been informed by Archbishop Zimmerman, that he was revoking the validity of their ordinations, even though he is the one who ordained the majority of them. These actions are being seen by the catholic communities as improper and an abuse of power. Canon law and the long-standing traditions of the Church does not provide for invalidating an ordination, 'once a priest, always a priest.'

The presiding bishop has taken illegal actions against clergy who question his authority, financial status or his concealed actions. Statements of loyal clergy world-wide has been shown to be unsubstanciated, if not falsehoods. The 'laitized' clergy have refused to accept his decrees and have sought Episcopal Protection from other bishops.

This was then blanked off the talk page by User:70.61.191.122 whose only contrib was to this article. Instead of just blanking it, there should be some discussion about the veracity of the claims and whether they should be included in the article. (If they are true, facts are facts and they should be included.)

Just my two cents. --Kf4bdy ^{talk contribs} 17:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The same User just came back and blanked the page again. I have restored it and issued a warning. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[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)

[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)