Reformed Catholic Church?

[paidion]

I was at the local public library the other day and ran across a magazine ad for a Reformed Catholic Church. I suspect it’s a “protestant” counterpart of the Metropolitan Community Church, but I’m not sure.

Does anyone know anything about this group? Is there a Reformed Catholic Church in any other town/city besides mine?

shalom

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I was at the local public library the other day and ran across a magazine ad for a Reformed Catholic Church. I suspect it’s a “protestant” counterpart of the Metropolitan Community Church, but I’m not sure.

Does anyone know anything about this group? Is there a Reformed Catholic Church in any other town/city besides mine?

shalom

More and more Protestants these days are adding the term “Catholic” into their titles thinking it connects the with the past.

The fact is the Catholic Church rightfully owns and can defend that title and any attempts to wrestle it away is simply laughable.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

See old catholic church from their web site they are with the group that separated after the first Vatican counsel. .

 

[Rightlydivide]

I was at the local public library the other day and ran across a magazine ad for a Reformed Catholic Church. I suspect it’s a “protestant” counterpart of the Metropolitan Community Church, but I’m not sure.

Does anyone know anything about this group? Is there a Reformed Catholic Church in any other town/city besides mine?

shalom

Just another Catholic denomination with Apostolic Succession. There are hundreds of them.
I fully understand that you do not think of them as “Catholic” but neither do the very first Baptists, Lutherans etc etc
I believe they are fairly liberal…like someone said, they come out of the Old Catholic movement.

 

[Tony_Souza]

Just another Catholic denomination? Call me crazy, but isn’t “Catholic denomination” an oxymoron? I don’t know anything about this “old catholic church,” but when a person or group leaves the Catholic Church, when they leave Rome, they are, by definition, not Catholic. As they protest against Rome they are protestant. Apostolic succession has been lost, because the sect has rejected it. They have told the successors of Peter and all the apostles that they do not want to follow in the footsteps of Christ’s true Church. The only non-Catholic denomination which can still claim apostolic succession is the Eastern Orthodox Church. The split between them and Rome was more political than anything else, and a huge majority of their beliefs are still right in line with Rome.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Just another Catholic denomination? Call me crazy, but isn’t “Catholic denomination” an oxymoron? I don’t know anything about this “old catholic church,” but when a person or group leaves the Catholic Church, when they leave Rome, they are, by definition, not Catholic. As they protest against Rome they are protestant. Apostolic succession has been lost, because the sect has rejected it. They have told the successors of Peter and all the apostles that they do not want to follow in the footsteps of Christ’s true Church. The only non-Catholic denomination which can still claim apostolic succession is the Eastern Orthodox Church. The split between them and Rome was more political than anything else, and a huge majority of their beliefs are still right in line with Rome.

I have no dog in this fight. If it claims Apostolic Succession,
FYI hundreds claim this and have neat little charts
if it says is has the actual body and blood of Jesus, if it dresses like you guys, if it traces its lineage back to Peter as well, if they have a bunch of statues and such like you guys…how am I going to tell them they aint Catholic…???
Looks Catholic to me…
BUT, I understand your pain. I wonder how all those other Bible churches can call themselves Bible churches too when they do not follow the Bible…
welcome to my pain brother…

 

[paidion]

More and more Protestants these days are adding the term “Catholic” into their titles thinking it connects the with the past.

The fact is the Catholic Church rightfully owns and can defend that title and any attempts to wrestle it away is simply laughable.

According to the ad, the priest at this church is an actual Catholic priest. Whether or not he is in good standing or whatever, I don’t know. I just know what the ad stated.

My question was really about whether or not the Reformed Catholic Church is the same as the Metropolitan Community Church. I’m not defending the legitimacy/validity of either the MCC or the RCC; just wondering if they’re two sides of the same coin (so to speak).

shalom

 

[Tony_Souza]

There really is a very easy way to tell if apostolic succession is present. Is there an unbroken lineage that can be traced to the original apostles? The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are the churches with ligitimate claims. Any other Protestant denomination may be able to trace themselves back, but there is a small problem. Take, for instance, Lutheranism, since that is where this whole Protetant debacle started. Naturally, the Lutheran Church can trace itself back to Martin Luther, five hundred years ago. From there they may continue, through the Catholic Church, to the apostles. It is true that Luther was a priest. He was right along with apostolic succession. That is true. What is also true is that he rejected it. When he had some issues with the Church, some well founded, he decided not to follow tradition, and not to try to stay within Christ’s established, visible Church, by leaving the Church. Rather than work out the issues from within, which would have been real reform, he severed himself altogether from the Bride of Christ. When he snubbed his nose at the Church, he lost all claim to apostolic succession. Any other denomination has the exact same problem. At one point or other, they all rejected the teachings and authority of Christ’s Church.

 

[Rightlydivide]

There really is a very easy way to tell if apostolic succession is present. Is there an unbroken lineage that can be traced to the original apostles? The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are the churches with ligitimate claims. Any other Protestant denomination may be able to trace themselves back, but there is a small problem. Take, for instance, Lutheranism, since that is where this whole Protetant debacle started. Naturally, the Lutheran Church can trace itself back to Martin Luther, five hundred years ago. From there they may continue, through the Catholic Church, to the apostles. It is true that Luther was a priest. He was right along with apostolic succession. That is true. What is also true is that he rejected it. When he had some issues with the Church, some well founded, he decided not to follow tradition, and not to try to stay within Christ’s established, visible Church, by leaving the Church. Rather than work out the issues from within, which would have been real reform, he severed himself altogether from the Bride of Christ. When he snubbed his nose at the Church, he lost all claim to apostolic succession. Any other denomination has the exact same problem. At one point or other, they all rejected the teachings and authority of Christ’s Church.

I have not read all of the linages but absolutely, when you start looking at the Old Catholic lines, the Brazalian Catholic lines, these are people ordained by bishops who were ordained by bishops back to Peter.
Valid succession is your guys deal, not mine though.
Yes, I do think they are a group of people who accept homosexuality to answer the other question. I do not know that for certain. I recall a rainbow sticker thing on one of the little signs…may have been another group of …people that look like Catholic denominations to me…

 

[Catholic_Dude]

According to the ad, the priest at this church is an actual Catholic priest. Whether or not he is in good standing or whatever, I don’t know. I just know what the ad stated.

My question was really about whether or not the Reformed Catholic Church is the same as the Metropolitan Community Church. I’m not defending the legitimacy/validity of either the MCC or the RCC; just wondering if they’re two sides of the same coin (so to speak).

shalom

I saw the phrase “Reformed Catholic” and I MISTAKENLY thought it was in reference to the Protestant individuals out there on a few web pages that call themselves “Reformed Catholics” with the term “Reformed” in reference to Reformed Protestant Theology (aka Calvinism).

Apparently what you saw was an actual “church” group out there that others on this thread indicate are schismatic and/or heretics.

 

[paidion]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut, Rightlydivide, regarding the OP. I believe there is some sort of homosexual agenda within the Reformed Catholic Church. What I still don’t know is if this is more than one church (like the Metropolitan Church is in several cities), or if this one group is a renegade.

 

[paidion]

I saw the phrase “Reformed Catholic” and I MISTAKENLY thought it was in reference to the Protestant individuals out there on a few web pages that call themselves “Reformed Catholics” with the term “Reformed” in reference to Reformed Protestant Theology (aka Calvinism).

Apparently what you saw was an actual “church” group out there that others on this thread indicate are schismatic and/or heretics.

When I first read the ad I too thought of “reformed” in terms of theology (which didn’t make sense).

In all my dealings with various RC & non-RC groups,I’ve never run across anything called the “Reformed Catholic Church”. Didn’t know if this was a new thing or whether it’s been around for a while or if it associated with the web pages you refer to in your post.

I’m just trying to find out what they’re all about. (Guess I might have to find that ad again…)

shalom

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut, Rightlydivide, regarding the OP. I believe there is some sort of homosexual agenda within the Reformed Catholic Church. What I still don’t know is if this is more than one church (like the Metropolitan Church is in several cities), or if this one group is a renegade.

According to their website they are churches in this group through out the world.

 

[paidion]

According to their website they are churches in this group through out the world.

saw the site… it’s just as I thought…
… looks like the one here in town is a part of that…

shalom

 

[LDNCatholic]

Looks awful. Everything seems to be a ‘‘personal decision’’ yet they insist they follow scripture in all things?

Just what is a sin in their ‘‘religion’’?

 

[bengal_fan]

There really is a very easy way to tell if apostolic succession is present. Is there an unbroken lineage that can be traced to the original apostles? The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are the churches with ligitimate claims.

according to you. the anglican church has a “legitimate” claim. they never rejected apostolic succession (as you clam luther did) and they had bishops that went with them.

Any other Protestant denomination may be able to trace themselves back, but there is a small problem. Take, for instance, Lutheranism, since that is where this whole Protetant debacle started. Naturally, the Lutheran Church can trace itself back to Martin Luther, five hundred years ago. From there they may continue, through the Catholic Church, to the apostles. It is true that Luther was a priest. He was right along with apostolic succession. That is true. What is also true is that he rejected it. When he had some issues with the Church, some well founded, he decided not to follow tradition, and not to try to stay within Christ’s established, visible Church, by leaving the Church. Rather than work out the issues from within, which would have been real reform, he severed himself altogether from the Bride of Christ.

i think you need to get your history straight here. luther never wanted to leave the catholic church. he wanted to reform it from within. but the church had too many political motivations in and around that time and area that they viewed even the attempt to reform as a threat rather than as an opportunity to strive for perfection (even though we can never reach it, we strive for it). the church failed itself at that time. it eventually caught up and went for reform, but not before alienating hundreds and thousands of people first. luther didn’t leave, he was thrown out.

When he snubbed his nose at the Church, he lost all claim to apostolic succession. Any other denomination has the exact same problem. At one point or other, they all rejected the teachings and authority of Christ’s Church.

that is according to your opinion. they would say that they tried to follow Christ’s teachings more closely. both sides are right and both sides are wrong on many issues. the church had acted inappropriately in many ways and luther called them out on it. luther was wrong in trying to remove books from the bible as they had been agreed upon by church councils. he was well within his rights to ask for a debate on the nature of salvation. he did not question anything in the creeds at that time, but his debate was rejected. he was also well within his rights (as a priest and teacher) to ask for a debate on where the church’s authority ultimately comes from. he stressed scripture, the church at that time stressed tradition. later they were both put on an equal level, but in practice at the time, they were on opposite sides. luther would not (i believe and this is pure speculation) leave the catholic church as it is today. i also believe the church failed luther in many ways. if you read a lot of luther, i think it is fairly easy to see that he was manic depressive or bi-polar. although science hadn’t come that far yet to diagnose those things, the church seemed to show no compassion towards their priest who was struggling so much with deep issues. they just kicked him out. both sides were wrong on many things, and both sides have much to offer as well.