Old Catholic Church

[PietroPaolo]

I think that’s going too far. Mormons largely made up their reinvented idea of baptism while appropriating the word. Luther didn’t do that. Luther felt that he was reforming the church and removing corruptions and errors that had crept in. It’s logically consistent (if just as erroneous) for him to decide that the place where error had crept in was the definition of Transubstantiation and that the solution was to turn back the clock to the more vague definition of “Real Presence” that had previously been used and still was used in many EO circles.

Forgive the pun, but that action is of a wholly difference SUBSTANCE than Joseph Smith’s reinvention of baptism…

Joseph Smith would have claimed he was merely “removing corruptions and errors” that crept in too, he just argued those errors crept in much earlier in Church History than Luther did. Doesn’t every heresiarch claim the same?

 

[steido01]

Joseph Smith would have claimed he was merely “removing corruptions and errors” that crept in too, he just argued those errors crept in much earlier in Church History than Luther did. Doesn’t every heresiarch claim the same?

No. Joseph Smith invented shiny plates and hieroglyphic scribbles. Luther looked to a previously-held catholic position. Whether correct in his position or not, Luther never attempted to be anything other than catholic.

 

[PietroPaolo]

No. Joseph Smith invented shiny plates and hieroglyphic scribbles. Luther looked to a previously-held catholic position. Whether correct in his position or not, Luther never attempted to be anything other than catholic.

And Luther invented shiny new doctrines, but neither man claimed he was doing that. Smith claimed he was restoring the “previously-held catholic (sic) position” before the Great Apostasy, through the aid of the Book of Mormon, sure, but he didn’t claim he was founding a new religion, he made the same claim as Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and the Old Catholic Church made. Whether any of these claims are correct or not is beside the point.

 

[manualman]

And Luther invented shiny new doctrines, but neither man claimed he was doing that. Smith claimed he was restoring the “previously-held catholic (sic) position” before the Great Apostasy, through the aid of the Book of Mormon, sure, but he didn’t claim he was founding a new religion, he made the same claim as Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and the Old Catholic Church made. Whether any of these claims are correct or not is beside the point.

You’re changing the subject though. On some subjects, Luther did what you say here (i.e. Sola Scriptura). But the LCMS poster above is generally right about what he did on the Real Presence issue.

That’s not to defend Luther’s conclusions on the matter. IMO it’s roughly similar to denying the Nicene explanations of the Trinity and saying “well we know that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but that’s really about all we know about what exactly that means and what it doesn’t. We certainly don’t know enough to say that each is a PERSON within the Trinity. It’s open to interpretation…”

 

[PietroPaolo]

You’re changing the subject though. On some subjects, Luther did what you say here (i.e. Sola Scriptura). But the LCMS poster above is generally right about what he did on the Real Presence issue.

That’s not to defend Luther’s conclusions on the matter. IMO it’s roughly similar to denying the Nicene explanations of the Trinity and saying “well we know that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but that’s really about all we know about what exactly that means and what it doesn’t. We certainly don’t know enough to say that each is a PERSON within the Trinity. It’s open to interpretation…”

To be fair, the original subject was on the Old Catholic Church and my original comment was regarding the tendency for eccelsial bodies to fall into increasing heterodoxy after splitting with the Church on one matter. Luther certainly rejected the concept of the Real Presence as taught by the Catholic Church both today and in Luther’s day, whether or not he called his new doctrine “the Real Presence” and whether or not he believed he was restoring an older concept rather than inventing a new one is beside the point.

 

[andrewstx]

I think that the term Old Catholic has become a free for all, and is used by schismatic and even heretical groups especially here in the U.S…

But it was originally applied to only the Union of Utrect they ejected Vatican I and the pope’s infallibility. They were still in the church and retained apostolic secession and orders.

They have no followers in America.

There are hundreds of so called “Old Catholic” groups in America, with a large presence in internetland. There are bishops with no clergy or a small following and a garage or living room for the cathedral.

There was a “bishop” in my small town of 9,000, his cathedral was his trailer where he lived with his male lover.

 

[Peter_J]

Yeah I’ve heard that as well. They recently ordained a gay senior as a priest. The man had been wanting to be a catholic priest but after talking to his priest at his colleges Newman center, he was told to give up homosexuality. He refused, lobbied for the priest to be fired and became an old catholic church priest.

gwhatchet.com/2013/04/04/students-mobilize-to-remove-priest/
m.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/7/two-gay-gwu-students-want-priest-removed-campus/

Hmmm … I’m going to assume they told him to give up homosexual activity. If I’m wrong, sue me.

 

[Peter_J]

I think that the term Old Catholic has become a free for all, and is used by schismatic and even heretical groups especially here in the U.S…

But it was originally applied to only the Union of Utrect they ejected Vatican I and the pope’s infallibility. They were still in the church and retained apostolic secession and orders.

They have no followers in America.

There are hundreds of so called “Old Catholic” groups in America, with a large presence in internetland.

That’s sums it up pretty well: there’s the Old Catholic Union of Utrect, and then there’s the term “Old Catholic” with no strict rules about who gets to call themselves that.

As far as the actual Old Catholic Union of Utrect, I guess they’re still doing alright; although they seem to be gradually becoming more and more like the Church of England. The more conservative PNCC (Polish National Catholic Church) in the USA used to be part of that Union, until a decade or so ago.