What is an "independent" Catholic Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tamsulosin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I found out that the “Old Catholic” church I have been referring to is an Old Roman Catholic church. It was established by the Jesuits in 1869 and in 1926 the Holy See in Rome transferred all the the church property and assets to Archbishop Carmel Henry Carfora. Abbot Stephen Schappler of the Benedectine Order in Omaha and four other Roman Catholic priests were instrumental in reviving the church in the early 1960s. Since that time, every Bishop serving the church has graduated from the Pontifical North American College in Rome. The church is one of only 7 Old Roman Catholic churches in the US which are part of a Roman Catholic Archdiocese. They teach from the Baltimore Catechism rather than the Credo Old Catholic Catechism. Old Roman Catholic priests serving at the church have been transferred and have served at several Roman Catholic institutions around the world including the Ukrainian Catholic National Shrine of the Holy Family in Washington DC. The church has been a part of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of and on since 1869. They use the traditional Roman Catholic Tridentine Mass.
 
Deacon_Avi said:
I found out that the “Old Catholic” church I have been referring to is an Old Roman Catholic church. It was established by the Jesuits in 1869 and in 1926 the Holy See in Rome transferred all the the church property and assets to Archbishop Carmel Henry Carfora. Abbot Stephen Schappler of the Benedectine Order in Omaha and four other Roman Catholic priests were instrumental in reviving the church in the early 1960s. Since that time, every Bishop serving the church has graduated from the Pontifical North American College in Rome. The church is one of only 7 Old Roman Catholic churches in the US which are part of a Roman Catholic Archdiocese. They teach from the Baltimore Catechism rather than the Credo Old Catholic Catechism. Old Roman Catholic priests serving at the church have been transferred and have served at several Roman Catholic institutions around the world including the Ukrainian Catholic National Shrine of the Holy Family in Washington DC. The church has been a part of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of and on since 1869. They use the traditional Roman Catholic Tridentine Mass.
Click to expand...
Would you care to provide us with the name of this cathedral so that other people can check out your claims?
 
I ran across an interesting item in (yeah, I know) wikipedia about this group, including the name of this Abp Carfora, for whom there is separate item. Note that Catholic Hierarchy has no listing for him among the deceased bishops of the Church. 🤷
 
Deacon_Avi said:
I found out that the “Old Catholic” church I have been referring to is an Old Roman Catholic church. It was established by the Jesuits in 1869 and in 1926 the Holy See in Rome transferred all the the church property and assets to Archbishop Carmel Henry Carfora. Abbot Stephen Schappler of the Benedectine Order in Omaha and four other Roman Catholic priests were instrumental in reviving the church in the early 1960s. Since that time, every Bishop serving the church has graduated from the Pontifical North American College in Rome. The church is one of only 7 Old Roman Catholic churches in the US which are part of a Roman Catholic Archdiocese. They teach from the Baltimore Catechism rather than the Credo Old Catholic Catechism. Old Roman Catholic priests serving at the church have been transferred and have served at several Roman Catholic institutions around the world including the Ukrainian Catholic National Shrine of the Holy Family in Washington DC. The church has been a part of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of and on since 1869. They use the traditional Roman Catholic Tridentine Mass.
Click to expand...
This just gets weirder. FATHER Carmel Henry Carfora left the Church after being a Franciscan friar. He was never a licitly ordained Catholic Bishop though later, when he joined up with some other Old Catholics after they split from Utrect. If he accepted property from the Jesuits, he did so as a leader of the Old Roman Catholic Church, not on behalf of the Catholic Church. When Carfora died, his church split into five other independent churches.

Abbot Stephen Schappler was a Benedictine abbot at Conception Abbey but he died in 1961 and I can’t find any affiliaton between him and the Old Roman Catholic Church. Nor is there any mention of him on the history section of the Old Roman Catholic Church site.
 
Interesting. The ORCCNA seems to have only one “cathedral” in the United States, St. Mark’s in Louisville, which is the “cathedral” of their “Diocese” of Michigan and Central States. Here it is:

http://www.orccna.org/images/stmarksfront.jpg

Um, yeah. Not part of the Archdiocese of Louisville.
 
Good points here. My first thought was it’s SSPX. But there are some weird churches doing this now, they imitate as closely as possible the look, tone, etc of a traditional Catholic Church, but sneak that “independent” in there. Some have laicized priests.

However, I am hesitating because since Summorum Pontificum we have these special parishes set up by a bishop here and there, sometimes run by FSSP or such orders. Now obviously a parish like that is 100 percent legitimate, and probably even better managed than your typical parish.

The easiest way is to call your diocese or look on the list of parishes on the diocese website. An “independent” (they refuse the bishop’s authority and are not in union with the Pope) will not even be listed with your diocese. It’s as if, really, they are protestant.

The one tricky part, confession. Probably not valid if priest is not properly ordained but with the SSPX it’s weird because they were ordained by proper bishops in many cases. That’s why you can go to Mass there even though it’s illicit (but not a good idea). Rather complicated. I have also lost track of the back and forth wrangling with the Vatican, that priest who is doing the negotiating for SSPX is simply impossible.

I would be really curious and I’d call the diocese and ask for the office of the Vicar of Clergy or whomever is suitable, and ask them to tell you what that “parish” is all about.

Then I’d call the “independent” Church and say “There is no such thing as an Independent Catholic Church, what are you trying to pull anyway?” But that’s just me! FOR YOUR SAKE, just go straight to the Diocese or even your priest and ask if the Confession was valid.

Then stay away from there, basically sounds like they are heretics or even apostates. It would be fascinating if you could share with us what you discover.
 
To Ladymarchmain:I am the original poster.I followed the advice.I called my Diocese,and talked with the Canon law lawyers the front desk people direct me to, who told me they would find out.
They called me back with the answer:the priest was an ordained one,they were familiar with the history of that church, and priest, and that my confession was valid.😛

I did not phone the " Roman Catholic Church, Latin Rite-An independent church"( I went to, naively, for confession purposes), though I still can do that if you think it would be “fascinating”😃
 
Archbishop Carmel Henry Carfora: Before leaving Roman Catholicism in favor of the Old Catholics in 1908 over a dispute with his ecclesiastical superiors, he had been ministering to Italian American immigrants, first in New York City, then in West Virginia, as a Capuchin Franciscan priest, having entered the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin in 1895. (Wikipedia) Rudolph Francis Edward St. Patrick Alphonsus Ghislain de Gramont Hamilton de Lorraine-Brabant, Prince de Landas Berghes et de Rache, Duc de St. Winock consecrated Father Carmel Henry Carfora on October 4th 1916. Although Prince de Landes-Berghes was Old Catholic, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Havana Cuba considered his Apostolic succession and orders to be valid. Carfora taught a creed based on strict interpretation pre-Vatican I Roman Catholic theology and practice, with the exception of permitting a married priesthood following the Byzantine Catholic custom. He did in fact; accept church property as the leader of the Old Roman Catholic Church (then known as the North American Old Roman Catholic Church). The church had Lithuanian, Polish, Italian, Portuguese, Mexican and West Indian congregations.

Pietro Francesco (Vincenzo Maria) Orsini de Gravina, O.P., Pope Benedict XIII is in the Apostolic Line of succession of the Old Catholic Church as is Scipione Cardinal Rebiba and Archbishop Gerardus Gul.

Bishop Carmel Henry Carfora did not die until 1958. After his death in 1960, Abbot Stephen Schappler and four other Roman Catholic priests wrote letters to the Roman Catholic Archdiocese asking that all Old Roman Catholic properties in certain areas be renovated and put into the control of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese. This in fact happened in 1962. None of the Old Roman Catholic churches in Roman Catholic control (7) are members of the Old Roman Catholic Church in North America (ORCCNA). This is why they use the Baltimore Catechism rather than the Credo Old Catholic Catechism. Many of the churches use the Novus Ordo Missae. None of them ordain women nor do they use Anglican or Episcopalian rites. Although they are a part of the Roman Catholic community, they are not under the Holy See in Rome. Their bishops have always been ROMAN CATHOLIC and are graduates of the Pontifical North American College in Rome.
 
This might just be my personal experience talking, so feel free to state your own. But it seems to me that – at least in general – if the Church calls itself “St. ______ Roman Catholic Church” it isn’t part of the Catholic Church. It’s “independent,” whatever that happens to mean in any particular case (but usually that means schism of one sort or another).

If it’s part of the Catholic Church, it tends to be “St. _____ Catholic Church.” No need to say “Roman,” because that’s just the particular rite.

So, if I see a parish calling itself “Roman Catholic” rather than just “Catholic,” that adds to the various reasons I might find myself checking with the local diocese to make sure it’s legit.

I’m sure there are exceptions to this rule of thumb; does anyone challenge its usefulness generally?
 
My last two parishes call themselves Roman Catholic and I can assure you they are in communion with Rome. My diocese calls itself Roman Catholic, and it is in communion with Rome. Burlington, Brooklyn, Portland Maine, and Albany are some dioceses which come up on a Google search for “Roman Catholic Diocese”. I think you are mistaken about this.
 
Godfollower said:
This might just be my personal experience talking, so feel free to state your own. But it seems to me that – at least in general – if the Church calls itself “St. ______ Roman Catholic Church” it isn’t part of the Catholic Church. It’s “independent,” whatever that happens to mean in any particular case (but usually that means schism of one sort or another).

If it’s part of the Catholic Church, it tends to be “St. _____ Catholic Church.” No need to say “Roman,” because that’s just the particular rite.

So, if I see a parish calling itself “Roman Catholic” rather than just “Catholic,” that adds to the various reasons I might find myself checking with the local diocese to make sure it’s legit.

I’m sure there are exceptions to this rule of thumb; does anyone challenge its usefulness generally?
Click to expand...
All the Catholic parishes in my Diocese for the most part include “Roman Catholic Church” in their signage and so forth to make the distinction that they are indeed true Catholic Churches in union with Rome.
 
I have an idea.
To avoid misunderstanding and confusion only churches in communion with Rome could exhibit a certain emblem in their signs.Sort of like a seal of approval.
You could be in Europe or in other USA state than your own , visiting, and you do not have to call any Diocese to find out info about a church to see if you can have a valid confession there or not:newidea:
I wish they did that.
 
… Furthermore, as the SSPX claim no jurisdiction, the Catholic Church is not certain at the present whether the SSPX constitutes a Church like the **Eastern Orthodox **or the Polish National Catholic Church, or whether the SSPX is simply a loose federation of acephalous (independent) priests and episcopal vagantes (wandering bishops) like the Old Catholic Movement in North America. The Polish National Catholic Church is regarded as a valid Catholic church by the See of Rome and it is a part of the Old Catholic Movement (Old Roman Catholic) although it broke away from the See of Utrecht in Holland. In 2005,

Prime Bishop Nemkovich of the Polish National Catholic Church attends the funeral of Pope John Paul II at St. Peter’s Basilica and meets with Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI). At the time, the Polish National Catholic Church was a part of the Old Catholic Church in the US. In November of 2003, the **Polish National Catholic Church **broke ties with the Synod of Bishops of Utrecht and finally left the See of Utrecht in 2005. In 2003, the Holy See granted that the Polish National Catholic Church was faithful to the Catholic faith. Therefore, two years BEFORE the Polish National Catholic Church officially broke ties with the See of Utrecht and still an Old Catholic Church, it was recognized as a valid church by Rome.
 
Modern Texts of Confirmation:

“When a Catholic sacred minister is unavailable and there is urgent spiritual necessity, Catholics may receive the Eucharist, penance or anointing from sacred ministers of non-Catholic denominations whose Holy Orders are considered valid by the Catholic Church. This includes all Eastern Orthodox priests, as well as priests of the Old Catholics or Polish National Church,”… Thomas P.Doyle, O.P., from his book, “Rights and Responsibilities: A Catholic’s Guide to the New Code of Canon Law.”

“The Roman Church recognizes the validity of Old Catholic orders and sacraments,” …Felician A. Foy., O.F.M., from Catholic Almanac, Indiana, 1974.

“The Old Catholic Church has received valid episcopal consecration,” …Reverend Konrad Algemissen, from his book, “Christian Denominations.”
 
Deacon_Avi said:
Modern Texts of Confirmation:

“When a Catholic sacred minister is unavailable and there is urgent spiritual necessity, Catholics may receive the Eucharist, penance or anointing from sacred ministers of non-Catholic denominations whose Holy Orders are considered valid by the Catholic Church. This includes all Eastern Orthodox priests, as well as priests of the Old Catholics or Polish National Church,”… Thomas P.Doyle, O.P., from his book, “Rights and Responsibilities: A Catholic’s Guide to the New Code of Canon Law.”

“The Roman Church recognizes the validity of Old Catholic orders and sacraments,” …Felician A. Foy., O.F.M., from Catholic Almanac, Indiana, 1974.

“The Old Catholic Church has received valid episcopal consecration,” …Reverend Konrad Algemissen, from his book, “Christian Denominations.”
Click to expand...
That’s all pretty common knowledge. But the situation you described earlier in this thread doesn’t meet these condidtions. It is not the case that “a Catholic sacred minister is unavailable” or that there is “urgent spiritual necessity”. So a Catholic in a city with a Catholic parish and Catholic priests may not receive the Sacraments licitly from an Old Catholic priest. The exception being, when in danger of death.
 
Deacon_Avi said:
Modern Texts of Confirmation:

“When a Catholic sacred minister is unavailable and there is urgent spiritual necessity, Catholics may receive the Eucharist, penance or anointing from sacred ministers of non-Catholic denominations whose Holy Orders are considered valid by the Catholic Church. This includes all Eastern Orthodox priests, as well as priests of the Old Catholics or Polish National Church,”… Thomas P.Doyle, O.P., from his book, “Rights and Responsibilities: A Catholic’s Guide to the New Code of Canon Law.”

“The Roman Church recognizes the validity of Old Catholic orders and sacraments,” …Felician A. Foy., O.F.M., from Catholic Almanac, Indiana, 1974.

“The Old Catholic Church has received valid episcopal consecration,” …Reverend Konrad Algemissen, from his book, “Christian Denominations.”
Click to expand...
Sure, but there are plenty of heretics and schismatics who can celebrate sacraments validly. The fact remains, of course, that the so-called Old Catholics are heretics (Birth control is a-okay! Papal infallibility is a lie!") and schismatics. Sounds pretty sinful and spiritually dangerous to associate with, “technically valid” sacraments or not.
 
Tamsulosin said:
I went to a new Roman Catholic Church near my home,(one) because in about 30 years I had never stepped in it and I was curious,two, because I found their confession times convenient.
In some ways, it was different than the one I attend regularly.When I came out I looked again at the sign and saw it said “independent” Catholic Church.:confused:
What does that mean?I hope my confession is valid.
Click to expand...
Independent indicates a Mass by a priest professing traditional Roman Catholicism, not including Old Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy, and operating independently of any local diocesan bishop, but without being associated with one of the larger traditional organizations specifically broken out in these listings (viz., CMRI, SSPV, SSPX). Calendar & Rubrics: Usually the true Traditional Latin Mass and Divine Office, as before the “modernizing” revisions of 1956, 1960, and 1962, depending upon the individual Mass site. Principles: Operates by virtue of Church-supplied jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of Canon 209 (1917)/Canon 144 (1983) and under the theological principle of epikeia arising from the state of urgent necessity in the Church (v. Fr. Paul L. Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.B., M. Div., A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism).

I have attended an Independent Chapel that was recognized to be valid by Rome. Though don’t get me wrong, I am sure there are some Independent Masses that are invalid.

Oremus Pro Invicem
 
Gara3987 said:
Independent indicates a Mass by a priest professing traditional Roman Catholicism, not including Old Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy, and operating independently of any local diocesan bishop, but without being associated with one of the larger traditional organizations specifically broken out in these listings (viz., CMRI, SSPV, SSPX). Calendar & Rubrics: Usually the true Traditional Latin Mass and Divine Office, as before the “modernizing” revisions of 1956, 1960, and 1962, depending upon the individual Mass site. Principles: Operates by virtue of Church-supplied jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of Canon 209 (1917)/Canon 144 (1983) and under the theological principle of epikeia arising from the state of urgent necessity in the Church (v. Fr. Paul L. Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.B., M. Div., A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism).

I have attended an Independent Chapel that was recognized to be valid by Rome. Though don’t get me wrong, I am sure there are some Independent Masses that are invalid.

Oremus Pro Invicem
Click to expand...
There is a difference between valid and licit. If a priest has been validly ordained, the Mass would be valid. But I have never seen an independent Catholic Church that had licit Masses - in fact its a contradiction. Independent chuches, as you pointed out are operating independent of any diocisan Bishop. That same diocisan Bishop is the only person who can grant faculties to a priest to say Mass, hear Confessions or to witness marriages.

I am not a canonist but Canon 144 does not seem to apply. It is about supplied jurisdiction in cases of doubt. In the modern world, the is no reason to have doubts about whether a given priest has faculties since a simple phone call can resolve the doubt.
 
It is not as simple as it sounds.What do you say:Hello Rev. do you have faculties to offer sacraments?What if there is a recording? Say you are abroad or in a different state vacationing.
As I said before only duly authorized Catholic churches should have some diocesan symbol on their sign.Problem finished.
 
Tamsulosin said:
It is not as simple as it sounds.What do you say:Hello Rev. do you have faculties to offer sacraments?What if there is a recording? Say you are abroad or in a different state vacationing.
As I said before only duly authorized Catholic churches should have some diocesan symbol on their sign.Problem finished.
Click to expand...
Usually it really is simple. If the parish is listed on the diocisan website, the only priests allowed to say Mass there are those with faculties. This probably covers 95%+ of all the Masses a person is likely to encounter. Same thing if you are on vacaction in another state.

Sites such as Masstimes.org list Masses and does not included seperated, schismatic or other independent Masses. They also list Masses overseas but not as comprehensive as in the US.

However, I agree there should be some kind of stamp of approval that is easily noted by the public.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top