I don’t know if this helps. I did a little lookingon the Vatican.va website and found nothing. But I did find this:
answers.com/topic/utrecht-union
Jon
answers.com/topic/utrecht-union
Jon
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
H
Hesychios
Guest
The Little Church of Utrecht was the original Christian church in the region of Holland/Netherlands. It was suppressed by the Dutch Calvinists and became a church of recusants (as in England). They had a some secret friends in municipal governments though, and were able to sometimes wink at the law. There is still an example of a Catholic church built into an attic one can see if visiting the country.
http://www.sacred-destinations.com/...kring-museum-pictures/slides/eos_am_2_208.jpg
attic parish, now a museum
It reminds me of the Catholic church in Maryland, who after the Calvert family became Anglican had to build churches that looked like houses. Everyone knew what was going on, but it satisfied the letter of the law.
The church fared much better in the distant countryside where occasional border changes, etc helped Catholicism to survive. The conservative farmers were not always well served due to shortage of priests and bishops but they could cross the border for baptisms if they really needed to.
At some point, following tolerance by the government, the Papacy appointed a new hierarchy for Catholics in Holland, although the “underground” Catholic church had survived and continued to select it’s own bishops as per earlier Catholic Church practice.
The new Papal hierarchy (to them, the “New” Catholic church) was able to start serving the hinterland more quickly because of the resources of outside (foreign) missionary priests, and the Church of Utrecht lost out on a considerable portion of it’s own Archdioceses faithful.
Ever since those days the church of Utrecht has sustained itself with what the Papacy recognizes as valid orders, although it continues to select it’s own bishops. It did not participate in the Council of 1870AD, and probably was not invited, but that did make it a willing resource for those Catholic theologions and priests who objected to the new dogmatic pronouncements of that Council, and so the Union of Utrecht was born. They were referred to as Old Catholics in reference to the fact that they continued the Pre-Vatican I church. Their last recognized Council presumably being Trent.
Since that time the Union of Utrecht overall has seemed to become very liberal, the issue of female ordination being principal. The one derived church which is most notable and conservative is the Polish National Catholic Church, actually centered on Poles of the United States, not so much in Poland. It is no longer in communion with Utrecht or the other Old Catholic churches AFAIK, although it’s orders derive from that group.
The PNCC is one of the select few non-Papal Catholic churches mentioned by name whose members are allowed to receive communion in a Roman Catholic Mass, this in spite of the fact that they do not recognize Papal universal jurisdiction as a doctrine.
I have to question whether members of the other Old Catholic churches are allowed the same privilege of receiving the Eucharist in a Roman Catholic church. Due to their present liberal trajectory I doubt it.
M
http://www.sacred-destinations.com/...kring-museum-pictures/slides/eos_am_2_208.jpg
attic parish, now a museum
It reminds me of the Catholic church in Maryland, who after the Calvert family became Anglican had to build churches that looked like houses. Everyone knew what was going on, but it satisfied the letter of the law.
The church fared much better in the distant countryside where occasional border changes, etc helped Catholicism to survive. The conservative farmers were not always well served due to shortage of priests and bishops but they could cross the border for baptisms if they really needed to.
At some point, following tolerance by the government, the Papacy appointed a new hierarchy for Catholics in Holland, although the “underground” Catholic church had survived and continued to select it’s own bishops as per earlier Catholic Church practice.
The new Papal hierarchy (to them, the “New” Catholic church) was able to start serving the hinterland more quickly because of the resources of outside (foreign) missionary priests, and the Church of Utrecht lost out on a considerable portion of it’s own Archdioceses faithful.
Ever since those days the church of Utrecht has sustained itself with what the Papacy recognizes as valid orders, although it continues to select it’s own bishops. It did not participate in the Council of 1870AD, and probably was not invited, but that did make it a willing resource for those Catholic theologions and priests who objected to the new dogmatic pronouncements of that Council, and so the Union of Utrecht was born. They were referred to as Old Catholics in reference to the fact that they continued the Pre-Vatican I church. Their last recognized Council presumably being Trent.
Since that time the Union of Utrecht overall has seemed to become very liberal, the issue of female ordination being principal. The one derived church which is most notable and conservative is the Polish National Catholic Church, actually centered on Poles of the United States, not so much in Poland. It is no longer in communion with Utrecht or the other Old Catholic churches AFAIK, although it’s orders derive from that group.
The PNCC is one of the select few non-Papal Catholic churches mentioned by name whose members are allowed to receive communion in a Roman Catholic Mass, this in spite of the fact that they do not recognize Papal universal jurisdiction as a doctrine.
I have to question whether members of the other Old Catholic churches are allowed the same privilege of receiving the Eucharist in a Roman Catholic church. Due to their present liberal trajectory I doubt it.
M
- Status
- Not open for further replies.