What is an "independent" Catholic Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tamsulosin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Will_S said:
So the Church supplies the faculty to absolve in cases of “factual or legal common error and in positive and probable doubt of law or of fact”.
Click to expand...
The ignorancia crassa (someone is in error because he deliberately decides not to seek the truth) is not sufficient reason for error of doubt.
 
Tamsulosin said:
To clarify to Stylites;
The sign outside the church and that can be seen from the road says"Roman Catholic Church’" It bears the name of a well known saint.
Then there is like an explanation,less noticeable,which I had not seen as I entered it(but upon leaving) describing it as an "independent Church’
Click to expand...
Though this may be new to you, such places have been in existence for a long time, basically since the 1970s. In the archdiocese in which I formerly lived, there were four different chapels (one SSPX, others independent) that were not a part of the archdiocese. The deception involved is therefore not new. As dioceses become aware of the existence of such chapels, they generally issue public statements that clearly state that these venues are not authentic Roman Catholic parishes, but obviously someone new to an area may not be aware of this. As *Summorum Pontificum *and now Universae Ecclesiae expand the number of EF Masses, this may become even more of an issue in some places.

The following advice is not foolproof, but applies in most situations…As a practical rule of thumb , when a parish or chapel has been established by a diocese, it is not a tiny building that looks like it was converted from some commercial use. It is usually a more sizable edifice, even if it is still small compared to larger parishes, and most will in their bulletins make it clear that they are part of the local diocese. Another clue is a picture, not only of the Holy Father, but of the local bishop, near the entrance of the Church. (I realize that not all churches place these there, but many do, and the absence of such pictures, while not itself an indicator, should cause someone to ask questions BEFORE availing themselves of the sacraments.) If the chapel is an apostolate of the FSSP or ICRSS, the bulletin will clearly state that, usually with a statement that it is part of the diocese. Unless the chapel is part of such an apostolate–and therefore all sacraments will be in the old form–it is more likely (not definite, but more likely) that it will share facilities with an OF parish or apostolate. In that situation, not all Masses would be EF, another clue.

The best advice is to inquire on a diocesan website or call the chancery before going. Unless you know the apostolate is an FSSP or ICRSS one, there is a good chance that it may not be part of the diocese.
 
Thank you for the clarification.
I was ignorant about the existence of Roman Catholic Churches of Latin Rite that were not
part of the Diocese.Now I know better, and will not go back.
Unfortunately,I will I undergo an important surgery first thing tomorrow,and there is not time for more confessions.I am depending on that one.
 
Tamsulosin said:
To clarify to Stylites;
The sign outside the church and that can be seen from the road says"Roman Catholic Church’" It bears the name of a well known saint.
Then there is like an explanation,less noticeable,which I had not seen as I entered it(but upon leaving) describing it as an "independent Church’
Click to expand...
And have you called about the church?

Sorry, but it sounds like you are trying to convince yourself that it was a Catholic church even though it sounds like it wasn’t.
 
It is unbelievable how some of you seem to know all about these churches and I called the Diocese and they are very vague.They would study the matter and call me back.
 
Tamsulosin said:
It is unbelievable how some of you seem to know all about these churches and I called the Diocese and they are very vague.They would study the matter and call me back.
Click to expand...
Your diocese, being an authority on the matter, would be very careful about making statements. So they want to act carefully and make sure they have all the facts. People on internet forums just run their mouths and act authoritatively. Yes, including myself :D:D:D
 
Tamsulosin said:
It is unbelievable how some of you seem to know all about these churches and I called the Diocese and they are very vague.They would study the matter and call me back.
Click to expand...
We are traditionalists. Such places have been within our orbits for many, many years! :whistle:
 
I am grateful to to be told that my confession was valid,because the priest had been duly ordained.He set up shop by himself, so he does not belong to the Diocese.But the Diocese told me it was valid.I’m happy:)
 
Tamsulosin said:
I am grateful to to be told that my confession was valid,because the priest had been duly ordained.He set up shop by himself, so he does not belong to the Diocese.But the Diocese told me it was valid.I’m happy:)
Click to expand...
Glad to hear, Tamsu. Hope your surgery went well, too.
 
I attend a Roman Catholic church close to my home and every once in a while I attend an Old Catholic Cathedral which is a long bus ride from my home. The Old Catholic Cathedral is a part of the local Roman Catholic archdiocese even though they reject papal infallibility and the filioque. I asked the priest at the Roman Catholic Church if the Old Catholic sacraments were valid and he did confirm that all Old Catholic sacraments and orders are valid:

At the Vatican on 16 June 2000, Pope John Paul II ratified and ordered the publication of Dominus Iesus. This Declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was signed and published by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) in August of the same year.

In this Declaration, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes the validity of Orders and Sacraments of Old Catholic denominations:

“The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the [Roman] Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.”

“Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such … have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.” IV. Unicity and Unity of the Church, 17

Further more, although I have heard that “Old Catholic” churches ordain women and accept homosexuality, this is only regarding bizarre splinter groups which DO NOT constitute the majority of Old Catholic congregations.
 
Deacon_Avi said:
In this Declaration, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes the validity of Orders and Sacraments of Old Catholic denominations:
Click to expand...
Just for clarity the quoted passage explicitly referes to the Unitatis Redintegratio document #14 #15 which is
I. The Special Consideration of the Eastern Churches
Click to expand...
not about the Old Catholics. It is not correct to use Dominus Jesus for the validity of the sacraments of the Old Catholic Church.
 
Deacon_Avi said:
I attend a Roman Catholic church close to my home and every once in a while I attend an Old Catholic Cathedral which is a long bus ride from my home. The Old Catholic Cathedral is a part of the local Roman Catholic archdiocese even though they reject papal infallibility and the filioque.
Click to expand...
No, they are most certainly not part of the Archdiocese. How one could even imagine that beggars belief; I assume that you are either confused about what Old Catholics are, or confused about what an archdiocese is. The so-called “Old Catholics” are Protestants (of late vintage) who operate their own church independently of the Catholic Church.
I asked the priest at the Roman Catholic Church if the Old Catholic sacraments were valid and he did confirm that all Old Catholic sacraments and orders are valid:
Click to expand...
. . .
Click to expand...
“Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such … have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.” IV. Unicity and Unity of the Church, 17
Click to expand...
Oh gee, I guess if it’s valid they everybody ought to go! I mean, Dale Fushek was defrocked as a Catholic priest for child abuse and then excommunicated when he set up his own church called the “Praise and Worship Center,” but he’s got valid orders and can validly consecrate the Eucharist, so let’s all go! I mean, Dominus Jesus clearly states that it is a-okay for Catholics to go to services with any schismatic, heretical group, right?

Oh wait, that’s not what it says … ? :confused:
Further more, although I have heard that “Old Catholic” churches ordain women and accept homosexuality, this is only regarding bizarre splinter groups which DO NOT constitute the majority of Old Catholic congregations.
Click to expand...
Any branch that separates itself from the True Vine must, in the due course of time, wither and die.
 
I could be completely wrong here, but isn’t it possible for an “independent” church to have completely valid sacraments if the Diocesan Bishop has given the priest of this church permission to serve in the diocese?

Such a situation occurring now a days would be unlikely, but its my understanding that prior to Ecclesia Dea bishops would sometimes recognize and give permission to certain priests to serve in the diocese without establishing a formal relationship with them nor recognizing their churches as formally part of the dioceses.

This was a way bishops allowed the Traditional Latin Mass in their dioceses without formally acknowledging it (or perhaps more accurately allowed bishops to buy time while they waited for the Vatican to decide what it was going to do with the SSPX) . Thus the faculties of the priest was acknowledged, but not the community that formed around the priest. But, by the late 1980s with Ecclesia Dea, the excommunication of the Bishops of the SSPX, and the establishment of the FSSP, such arrangements came to an end as these “independent” churches were forced to formally become part of the Diocese or have their priests faculties revoked and formally declared schismatics.

But perhaps I am completely mistaken here?
 
Danquayle76 said:
I could be completely wrong here, but isn’t it possible for an “independent” church to have completely valid sacraments if the Diocesan Bishop has given the priest of this church permission to serve in the diocese?
Click to expand...
Wrong.

The validity of sacraments requires valid ordination and apostolic succession. You have to either be, or have been, a Catholic priest in order to have valid sacraments. LICIT, on the other hand… they will not be.
 
laszlo said:
The ignorancia crassa (someone is in error because he deliberately decides not to seek the truth) is not sufficient reason for error of doubt.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but that is not the situation we are discussing. We have been talking about someone who was truly ignorant that the confessor lacked faculties.
 
Quarles47 said:
Means that it’s a protestant church.😦
Click to expand...
No it’s not. Independent Catholic chapels generally have a validly ordained priest and valid sacraments, and they generally believe Catholic doctrine.

Some of them don’t believe there is currently a validly elected Pope, but others don’t believe that and are just leftover remnants of the time in which the Traditional Mass was unjustly and cruelly suppressed.

So they do have problems, yes, and they should reconcile with their local bishops and be regularized, yes. But they are not protestants.
 
Tamsulosin said:
I am grateful to to be told that my confession was valid,because the priest had been duly ordained.He set up shop by himself, so he does not belong to the Diocese.But the Diocese told me it was valid.I’m happy:)
Click to expand...
It sounds to me like the diocese mainly wanted to check on the priests orders before giving you an answer. Once they determined that the priest was validly ordained, the canons I quoted earlier assured that your confession was valid, because you did not know that the priest has no faculties.

However, you should not go back to that priest for confession since you now know that he has no faculties.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top