OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 30, 2014, 06:53:24 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: PNCC  (Read 6917 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« on: June 13, 2011, 03:42:28 PM »

Hi all. I was just reading the latest from the Polish National Catholic-Roman Catholic dialogue. Mostly it wouldn't be relevant to this forum, but there was this one paragraph I want to share with the class:

Quote
The meeting also included a progress report from the Roman Catholic members on a proposal to ask the Holy See if the PNCC could be considered to be in the same position as the Orthodox on two matters. First, PNCC faithful would be allowed to act as godparents at Roman Catholic baptisms in addition to a Roman Catholic. Second, mixed marriages performed in the PNCC without a dispensation from canonical form, even if not lawful, would be considered valid by the Roman Catholic Church. This proposal is still under consideration by USCCB committees.

Btw, is there an Orthodox-PNCC dialogue?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2011, 04:16:53 PM »

Hi all. I was just reading the latest from the Polish National Catholic-Roman Catholic dialogue. Mostly it wouldn't be relevant to this forum, but there was this one paragraph I want to share with the class:

Quote
The meeting also included a progress report from the Roman Catholic members on a proposal to ask the Holy See if the PNCC could be considered to be in the same position as the Orthodox on two matters. First, PNCC faithful would be allowed to act as godparents at Roman Catholic baptisms in addition to a Roman Catholic. Second, mixed marriages performed in the PNCC without a dispensation from canonical form, even if not lawful, would be considered valid by the Roman Catholic Church. This proposal is still under consideration by USCCB committees.

Btw, is there an Orthodox-PNCC dialogue?

There was a dialogue with a few Old Catholic groups 100 years ago, but I don't know what happened to it. As for the PNCC specifically, I don't know.

Orthodox cannot be godparents at non-Orthodox baptisms or witnesses at non-Orthodox weddings, from what I know, and it is the same for non-Orthodox at Orthodox baptisms and weddings. There are always anecdotal exceptions. As for mixed marriages and the lawful/valid issue, I don't think it translates. If an Orthodox wants to marry a non-Orthodox, that person must at least have the form of baptism, or at least be a Christian. Also, the non-Orthodox spouse must agree that children had with the Orthodox spouse be brought up in the Orthodox Church. It doesn't always happen this way, and there are anecdotal exceptions as always.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2011, 07:20:32 PM »

I can relate to what you've said about rules and anecdotal exceptions to them ... I well remember the time I was at an Episcopal mass and a Catholic friend of mine went up for communion.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
synLeszka
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 532


« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2011, 11:28:52 AM »

Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny.. It seems funny, when our bishops search for "lost souls".
I wonder what use there is in calling yourself the "Polish National Church", when it is not Polish.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,477


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2011, 11:34:40 AM »

Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny.. It seems funny, when our bishops search for "lost souls".
I wonder what use there is in calling yourself the "Polish National Church", when it is not Polish.


Because when it came into being, it was made up entirely of Polish-Americans Catholics, most of whom were born in Poland.  You would also be hard pressed to find communicants of this church who don't have  Polish ancestry.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 11:35:55 AM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2011, 12:36:26 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny.. It seems funny, when our bishops search for "lost souls".
I wonder what use there is in calling yourself the "Polish National Church", when it is not Polish.

I am aware that the Polish Second Republic, as the arm of the Vatican, tried to rub it out, but the PNCC in Poland, renamed as the Polish Catholic Church, was finally fully legalized (sort of like that concordat you say is all important) on June 30, 1995 with the Bill on Mutual Relations Between the State and Polish Catholic Church in the Republic of Poland (Dz. U. Nr 97, poz. 482). Does your state usually deal with non-existent churches?
This is a map of Poland, no? Because it is a map of Polish Catholic Church

Where are you in Poland again?
http://www.polskokatolicki.pl/

Anyway, here's the cathedral in Warsaw

http://www.polskokatolicki.pl/swducha/news.php

Their leader Bp. Fraciszek Hodur was ordained in the US in 1907, when there was no Poland, and their religious and social precepts of the PNCC obligated them to serve that non-existent state and its independence, something the Russian, German and Austria Hungary empires were not keen on. Aren't you for Polish independence?

Btw, when the Greek Orthodox blew the opportunity of the Norwegians, the PNCC was the ones who ordained their Nordic Catholic Church.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2011, 12:56:03 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny.. It seems funny, when our bishops search for "lost souls".
I wonder what use there is in calling yourself the "Polish National Church", when it is not Polish.


Because when it came into being, it was made up entirely of Polish-Americans Catholics, most of whom were born in Poland.  You would also be hard pressed to find communicants of this church who don't have  Polish ancestry.

There cathedral in Chicago, IIRC, had some masses in Spanish and outreach (the neighborhood had changed).

Btw, when it was organized, Poland hadn't existed for decades, but it was organized in Polonia (i.e. the Polish diaspora in the US), the only place you could have "Polish National" anything.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,477


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2011, 01:18:58 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny.. It seems funny, when our bishops search for "lost souls".
I wonder what use there is in calling yourself the "Polish National Church", when it is not Polish.


Because when it came into being, it was made up entirely of Polish-Americans Catholics, most of whom were born in Poland.  You would also be hard pressed to find communicants of this church who don't have  Polish ancestry.

There cathedral in Chicago, IIRC, had some masses in Spanish and outreach (the neighborhood had changed).

That's interesting, because the PNCC church in Baltimore is in what is now a predominately Hispanic neighborhood, yet everything is still in English and Polish.  No outreach of any kind that I know of.

Quote
Btw, when it was organized, Poland hadn't existed for decades, but it was organized in Polonia (i.e. the Polish diaspora in the US), the only place you could have "Polish National" anything.

Excellent point.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 01:19:08 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2011, 01:44:47 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny.. It seems funny, when our bishops search for "lost souls".
Your bishops are also committing ecumenism with that "non-existant" Polish National Catholic Church:
http://www.usccb.org/seia/polish_national_catholic.shtml
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2011, 02:24:15 PM »

Ecumenism with a non-existant church?? Funny..

That is funny. Also confusing  Huh
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
synLeszka
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 532


« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2011, 05:12:19 AM »

Yes, it is confusing when the Polish Catholics (as opposed to Polish Roman Catholics) have three churches registered in Poland.
1.Kościół Polskokatolicki w RP
2.Polski Narodowy Katolicki Kościół w RP

Nr 2. was the original  branch of the PNCC in Poland. In 1951, it severed communion with the PNCC of the USA and Canada. The majority of Polish National Catholics in Poland belong to it.
The PNCC was used against the Roman Catholic Church by the Communists; its bishops and priests openly propagated Marxism. In my diocese, the Polish Catholics tried to takeover many parishes but they met open resistance from us. There is clergy is made up of ex-Roman Catholic priests who sold out. The older generation of priests here does not view them kindly.
The PNCC was established in Poland after 1918 not before. After WWI, with the falling away of Greek Catholicism to Ukrainianism, Roman Catholicism, Catholicism with an underlining of the ROMAN is viewed as the sole religion of the Polish Nation.  

You do not understand that there are no other religions in Poland with a significant presence. Even in Podlasie or southern Silesia, the Orthodox or Lutherans(respectively) do not form a majority in even one county(powiat).
There is a PNCC parish in Hucisko, the next village over. People from that village do not even know what the PNCC is. I remember a conversation with a bus driver from that village "oh yes, there is that weird church to which no one goes to. The fact that they are sectarians explains why we always shy away from the people who attend that church. Imagine, I did not know that we have a sect in our village".
 
« Last Edit: June 15, 2011, 05:20:21 AM by synLeszka » Logged
Irish Melkite
Information Mongeror
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite Greek-Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Newton
Posts: 988


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2011, 08:09:20 AM »

As noted, the PNCC in the US is not in communion with the PCC in Poland and has not been for years.

As to ethnicity, neither all the faithful nor all the parishes of the PNCC have Polish roots. The Slovak, Czech, Bohemian, and Lithuanian National Catholic Churches (and I think that I've forgotten one other) were all subsumed into the larger PNCC at various points in time over the past half century (or somewhat longer period than that). The last time I checked, several years ago, there were still two former Lithuanian NCC parishes that maintained independence and declined to merge with the PNCC.

Because some of those non-Polish parishes which were subsumed declined to adopt the 'Polish' in their styling, one will occasionally see individual PNCC parishes that are styled as St ________'s National Catholic Church (with no ethnicity indicated in the name).

Many years,

Neil
« Last Edit: June 15, 2011, 08:18:55 AM by Irish Melkite » Logged

"Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin Rite to manifest one's Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church."

- Melkite Archbishop Joseph (Tawil), of blessed memory
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2011, 08:23:53 AM »

By the way, Neil (or anyone), do you happen to know the approximate total membership of the PNCC?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Irish Melkite
Information Mongeror
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite Greek-Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Newton
Posts: 988


WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2011, 09:07:00 AM »

Peter,

There are 5 dioceses, and roughly 150 parishes and missions. The Church has claimed as many as 25,000 members not too many years ago, but it conducted a census a couple of years ago and came up with a count of about half that, as I recollect.

Many years,

Neil
Logged

"Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin Rite to manifest one's Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church."

- Melkite Archbishop Joseph (Tawil), of blessed memory
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2011, 09:12:00 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
Yes, it is confusing when the Polish Catholics (as opposed to Polish Roman Catholics) have three churches registered in Poland.
1.Kościół Polskokatolicki w RP
2.Polski Narodowy Katolicki Kościół w RP

Nr 2. was the original  branch of the PNCC in Poland. In 1951, it severed communion with the PNCC of the USA and Canada. The majority of Polish National Catholics in Poland belong to it.
The PNCC was used against the Roman Catholic Church by the Communists; its bishops and priests openly propagated Marxism. In my diocese, the Polish Catholics tried to takeover many parishes but they met open resistance from us. There is clergy is made up of ex-Roman Catholic priests who sold out.
Like the RC Archbishop of Warsaw?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanis%C5%82aw_Wielgus#Information_about_cooperation_with_the_Communist_Security_Service

The older generation of priests here does not view them kindly.
Is that the same generation who did not look on your "Eastern Catholics" (the Orthodox Catholics, that goes without saying) kindly, and got rid of them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vistula

The PNCC was established in Poland after 1918 not before.
Of course not before: before 1918 Poland didn't exist.

As I stated above, the doctrine of the PNCC for Polish independence set it at odds with the Germans, Russians and Austrians.

After WWI, with the falling away of Greek Catholicism to Ukrainianism, Roman Catholicism, Catholicism with an underlining of the ROMAN is viewed as the sole religion of the Polish Nation.
Only by Polish Fascists, who, as we have seen, tried to rub out "Greek Catholicism" to rectify the Second Polish Republic's "Problem."

but history had a different solution


You do not understand that there are no other religions in Poland with a significant presence.
I quite understand the concept of ethnic cleansing, like the results of Operation Vistula reshuffling the Ukrainians (Orthodox or in submission to the Vatican)

fortunately, Poland got rid of most of its Orthodox by the ending of Polish occupation of their lands.  Yet there are those brave souls who stand fast still in Poland (in Arabic we would call them "samid"-it means those who remain during an occupation) and make the Polish Church even larger than the ancient Church of Jerusalem.

Even in Podlasie or southern Silesia, the Orthodox or Lutherans(respectively) do not form a majority in even one county(powiat).
The salt of the earth needs only to be present to keep a land salty (Mat. 5:13).

There is a PNCC parish in Hucisko, the next village over. People from that village do not even know what the PNCC is. I remember a conversation with a bus driver from that village "oh yes, there is that weird church to which no one goes to. The fact that they are sectarians explains why we always shy away from the people who attend that church. Imagine, I did not know that we have a sect in our village".
Soooo the ignoramus shuns people without knowing the reason why.  Nice authority, syne.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
username!
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,065



« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2011, 09:21:36 AM »

Interestingly enough, my family is in the USA because of Operation Vistula, and one person I know who goes to church nearby is from a central asian country and ended up there among other places growing up because his family too was displaced by Operation Vistula.  Neat, two people from worlds away both descendents of tyrannical Polish and Russian opression living happily now 30 miles away from each other.  They may have removed the Ukrainian from South-East Poland, but their descendents are alive and well.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2011, 09:22:54 AM »

Thanks!

Peter,

There are 5 dioceses, and roughly 150 parishes and missions. The Church has claimed as many as 25,000 members not too many years ago, but it conducted a census a couple of years ago and came up with a count of about half that, as I recollect.

Many years,

Neil
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
username!
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,065



« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2011, 09:23:43 AM »

Hi all. I was just reading the latest from the Polish National Catholic-Roman Catholic dialogue. Mostly it wouldn't be relevant to this forum, but there was this one paragraph I want to share with the class:

Quote
The meeting also included a progress report from the Roman Catholic members on a proposal to ask the Holy See if the PNCC could be considered to be in the same position as the Orthodox on two matters. First, PNCC faithful would be allowed to act as godparents at Roman Catholic baptisms in addition to a Roman Catholic. Second, mixed marriages performed in the PNCC without a dispensation from canonical form, even if not lawful, would be considered valid by the Roman Catholic Church. This proposal is still under consideration by USCCB committees.

Btw, is there an Orthodox-PNCC dialogue?
I don't get the RCC- PNCC dialogue.  The PNCC has general confession, allows priests and bishops (I think) to marry.  The PNCC has deviated from RCC doctorine so much I don't know why the RCC will give them communion but won't give say, Lutherans communion, heck minus women pastors there isn't much difference between the PNCC and the Lutherans or the Episcopalians.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #18 on: June 15, 2011, 09:29:06 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
As noted, the PNCC in the US is not in communion with the PCC in Poland and has not been for years.
Are you refering to the withdrawal of the PNCC from the Union of Utrecht?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #19 on: June 15, 2011, 09:43:16 AM »

I don't get the RCC- PNCC dialogue.  The PNCC has general confession, allows priests and bishops (I think) to marry.  The PNCC has deviated from RCC doctorine so much I don't know why the RCC will give them communion but won't give say, Lutherans communion, heck minus women pastors there isn't much difference between the PNCC and the Lutherans or the Episcopalians.

I can't help notice that you mention the issues of general confession and marriage of priests and bishops, but not of the immaculate conception, papal infallibility and universal ordinary jurisdiction.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,417



« Reply #20 on: June 15, 2011, 01:40:29 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
As noted, the PNCC in the US is not in communion with the PCC in Poland and has not been for years.
Are you refering to the withdrawal of the PNCC from the Union of Utrecht?

The PNCC refused to go along with the ordination of women and therefore there was a kind of mutual expulsion between them and the Utrecht churches, with more or less the same happening between them and ECUSA (the "less" being that we don't really function that way: as far as I know we still recognize all their sacraments).
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #21 on: June 15, 2011, 01:56:15 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
As noted, the PNCC in the US is not in communion with the PCC in Poland and has not been for years.
Are you refering to the withdrawal of the PNCC from the Union of Utrecht?

The PNCC refused to go along with the ordination of women and therefore there was a kind of mutual expulsion between them and the Utrecht churches, with more or less the same happening between them and ECUSA (the "less" being that we don't really function that way: as far as I know we still recognize all their sacraments).

Mutual?  Who held to the orginal practice and doctrine and who inovated, and where did the inovators get their authority?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,417



« Reply #22 on: June 15, 2011, 03:21:06 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
As noted, the PNCC in the US is not in communion with the PCC in Poland and has not been for years.
Are you refering to the withdrawal of the PNCC from the Union of Utrecht?

The PNCC refused to go along with the ordination of women and therefore there was a kind of mutual expulsion between them and the Utrecht churches, with more or less the same happening between them and ECUSA (the "less" being that we don't really function that way: as far as I know we still recognize all their sacraments).

Mutual?  Who held to the orginal practice and doctrine and who inovated, and where did the inovators get their authority?

They got their authority by existing as an institution. "Mutual" means that they both broke off communion with each other. It is not necessary to accompany every historical statement with a polemic.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,928


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #23 on: June 15, 2011, 10:22:06 PM »

I don't get the RCC- PNCC dialogue.  The PNCC has general confession, allows priests and bishops (I think) to marry.  The PNCC has deviated from RCC doctorine so much I don't know why the RCC will give them communion but won't give say, Lutherans communion, heck minus women pastors there isn't much difference between the PNCC and the Lutherans or the Episcopalians.

While they do utilize general confession and allow married men to be ordained priests and bishops they are conservative theologically; rejecting divorce, homosexual unions, women priests, etc.  I would also point out that slightly over 50% of their priests are former Roman Catholic priests.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #24 on: June 16, 2011, 01:59:51 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
As noted, the PNCC in the US is not in communion with the PCC in Poland and has not been for years.
Are you refering to the withdrawal of the PNCC from the Union of Utrecht?

The PNCC refused to go along with the ordination of women and therefore there was a kind of mutual expulsion between them and the Utrecht churches, with more or less the same happening between them and ECUSA (the "less" being that we don't really function that way: as far as I know we still recognize all their sacraments).

Mutual?  Who held to the orginal practice and doctrine and who inovated, and where did the inovators get their authority?

They got their authority by existing as an institution.
That's called self consecration. No, it doesn't count.
"Mutual" means that they both broke off communion with each other.
I don't quite remember it that way:
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-01-021-f
Quote
Old Catholics, New Doctrines
The Demise of the Union of Utrecht
by William J. Tighe

The Union of Utrecht has fallen—or embraced a modern Anglican ecclesiology on the issue of women’s ordination, which amounts to much the same thing....In 1895 A. J. Kozlowski formed an independent Catholic parish in Chicago for his fellow immigrant Poles. In due course he was excommunicated. His response was to turn to the bishops of the Utrecht Union, who accepted him into their fellowship and in 1897 consecrated him a bishop. In 1897–1898 a similar situation arose in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where a recently ordained priest of the Scranton diocese, the Polish-born Francis Hodur (1866–1953), agreed to serve an independent Polish parish there and for so doing was ultimately excommunicated. He went on to organize the Polish National Catholic Church, and in 1907 the European bishops chose to consecrate him as Kozlowski’s successor. Not only has the PNCC, with six dioceses and perhaps 150,000 adherents in the United States and Canada, been the most successful church of its communion, but in recent years the most orthodox as well.

In the early 1920s the PNCC began missionary activity in newly independent Poland: the result of this was the Polish Catholic Church. Originally an extension of the PNCC, it became a separate member-church of the Union of Utrecht after the new Communist government of Poland forced it to sever its links with its American parent in 1951.  The PNCC was not the first Old Catholic presence in Poland, however. In 1906, when Rome attempted to suppress a vastly popular Polish devotional society (Mariae Vita, the Life of Mary) for the “unbalanced excesses” of its focus on Marian devotion and Eucharistic adoration, its leaders refused to submit. Upon their ensuing excommunication they joined the Old Catholics and for a time drew much support from the rural peasantry. By the early 1920s, however, the Mariavites (as they were termed) had adopted a number of practices that were well out of the Old Catholic mainstream. Among these were “mystical marriages” between priests and nuns (unions not necessarily permanent or exclusive), whose offspring were held to have been born without Original Sin, and beginning in 1929, the ordination of women as deacons, priests, and bishops. In 1924 the Mariavites were cast out of the Union of Utrecht. Having been trailblazers in the cause of the ordination of women, and having abandoned “mystical marriages,” perhaps it is high time they were readmitted to the Union.
or rather, the liberal successor of the Union of Utrecht-as the only member steadfast to it has withdrawn and the other, inovating, members derive their "authority" from a Union which they have voided.  How is that?  Because the Union of Utrecht and the communion it set up ruled on the issue.  The dissidents, now wanting otherwise, they threw out the rules.  But when you do that, how do you stand on them?
Quote
In September 1974, at the annual meeting of the International Old Catholic Bishops Conference (IBC) a provision was made for decision-making among their churches. All matters affecting the harmony and communion of the churches of the Union of Utrecht would require the endorsement of the IBC before individual member churches could act on their own. A majority vote would suffice in most instances, but on matters “touching the Faith” unanimity of the bishops would be required—and it would take the request of only one bishop among them to require that a particular matter be treated as one “touching the Faith.”

In 1976 the IBC emitted a forthright statement on the issue of women’s ordination. “The International Old-Catholic Bishops Conference of the Union of Utrecht,” it ran,

in accordance with the ancient undivided church does not agree with a sacramental ordination of women to the catholic-apostolic ministry of deacon, presbyter and bishop.

The Lord of the Church, Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit called twelve men to be his Apostles, in order to perpetuate his work of the salvation of mankind.

The catholic churches of the East and West have called men only to the sacramental apostolic ministry.

The question of ordination of women touches the basic order and mystery of the Church.

The churches which have preserved continuity with the ancient undivided Church and its sacramental ministerial order should jointly discuss this question of sacramental ordination of women, being fully aware of eventual consequences resulting from unilateral decisions.

Admitting that Old Catholics were not agreed on the merits of arguments for and against ordaining women, the IBC bishops declared that they were certain that no individual Catholic church (such as the Church of England, the Old Catholic Church of Germany, or the Orthodox Church of Greece) nor even an individual Catholic Communion of Churches (the Anglican Communion, the Old Catholic Union of Utrecht, the Orthodox Church, or the Roman Catholic Church) possessed the competence to authorize the ordination of women to any order of the threefold ministry: only an ecumenical council recognized as such by these Catholic bodies could do so.
This is fully in accord with the essence of the Union of Utrecht's own self proclaimed understanding of its itself, expressed by the opening words of its own statute:
http://www.utrechter-union.org/pagina/148/a_preamble:_the_ecclesiological_
Quote
The “Union of Utrecht” is a union of churches and their bishops governing them who are determined to maintain and pass on the faith, worship, and essential structure of the undivided Church of the first millennium. On September 24, 1889, at Utrecht this determination was recorded in three documents that form the “Convention of Utrecht”: the “Declaration”, the “Agreement”, and the “Regulations”. By their uniting to form a Bishops' Conference, which other bishops joined later, the full communion of the Churches represented by them found its expression
Did any bishop of the undivided Church of the first millenium authorize the ordination of women to any order of the threefold ministry?  Not they did not.  The Union of Utrecht's Bishops' Conference upheld the essential structure of the undivided Church of the first millenium on this issue, as they did in the September 24, 1889 aforementioned "Declaration of Utrecht":
Quote
(1) We adhere to the principle of the ancient Church laid down by St Vincent of Lérins in these terms: ‘Id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum’. Therefore we abide by the faith of the ancient Church as it is formulated in the ecumenical symbols and in the universally accepted dogmatic decisions of the ecumenical synods held in the undivided Church of the first millennium.

http://www.utrechter-union.org/pagina/152/appendix:_the_declaration_of_utr
but that is not what the New "Old" Catholics did:
Quote
When Bishop Vobbe announced in 1995 that he would proceed in a year’s time to ordain two women to the priesthood, the IBC suspended him from full voting membership. Undeterred, on May 27, 1996, he proceeded to “priest” two women (both former Roman Catholics of course) in Konstanz.

Urgent consultations and exchanges among the IBC bishops soon revealed that there was no agreement among them on how to resolve the situation. Those of the PNCC wished to reaffirm the 1976 IBC statement and expel the German Old Catholic Church from the Union of Utrecht if it stood by its action. The Austrian bishop announced that he would begin ordaining women in 1997 no matter what decision the IBC reached, but expressed the hope that it would permit the individual churches to decide for themselves.

Indeed, the Anglican or “local option” solution appears to have carried the day as a result of two meetings of the IBC in 1997. The first, in March, a meeting of the IBC “bureau” or executive committee only, took place in Scranton. The absence of a common celebration of the Eucharist by the assembled bishops vividly symbolized the breach of their common faith. The five PNCC bishops (their numerically small Canadian diocese has been vacant for a number of years) form the largest cohort in the IBC, and with their three Polish brethren they would constitute a majority of the thirteen bishops. But between the March meeting in Scranton and a July meeting in Switzerland, the PNCC bishops, perhaps anticipating what was to come, appear to have abandoned their attempts to keep the Utrecht Union true to its principles, so that, in the event, they sent to Switzerland only one of their bishops, the prime bishop, John Swantek.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-01-021-f
According to the Order of the Union of Utrecht, one bishop would have sufficed, a la Athanasius contra mundi.  But when faced with that, the innovators decided, of course, to change the rules in the middle of the game:
Quote
It might appear obvious that a “local option” solution would contradict the 1976 IBC declaration and would therefore—as a matter “touching the Faith”—require the unanimous consent of the bishops to be adopted. But when the PNCC representative, Bishop Swantek, tried to assert this, the archbishop of Utrecht informed the assembled bishops that since back in 1976 one bishop (van Kleef, now deceased) had not assented to the declaration, it could not be regarded as a statement of faith (the Old Catholic equivalent of a dogmatic utterance) but only as the expression of the opinions of the individual bishops of the IBC at that time. Therefore, the current bishops could alter it by a simple majority vote of those present. It is not clear why, if the account presented here is accurate, Bishop Swantek could not have insisted that, whatever creative interpretation the archbishop wished to project retrospectively upon the events of 1976, in 1997 the question was to be treated as one “touching the Faith” and that, consequently, any motion to allow the individual churches to decide it for themselves required the unanimous consent of the bishops.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-01-021-f
especially as Bp. Swantek was "adher[ing] to the principle of the ancient Church laid down by St Vincent of Lérins in these terms: ‘Id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum.'  But since the New "Old" Catholics had abandoned that principle
Quote
What will become of the Union of Utrecht is far from clear. At the time of this writing, the PNCC bishops were preparing to decide whether to remain in the Utrecht Union. Alternatively, there appear to be numerous grounds on which the bishops of the PNCC might attempt to challenge or reverse the recent decision of the IBC—a decision that, according to one Swiss source, Bishop Gerny of Switzerland, who voted for it, nevertheless has since described as “invalid” because not unanimous. But they will have to decide if it is worth the effort to do so, since it is clear that most of the churches comprising the Utrecht Union have now jettisoned both the antiquity and the Catholicism of which their “Old Catholic” name, correctly or incorrectly, boasted. Instead, they have fallen into the pragmatic ecclesiological incoherence of Anglicanism, which the Roman Catholic Benedictine monk-scientist Stanley L. Jaki has characterized as “mimic Catholicism.”

Perhaps the most significant single event in the evisceration of the Union of Utrecht was Archbishop Kok’s 1976 decision to remain in communion with Anglican churches that had begun to ordain women to the priesthood. Although his reported motivation, that the Church today cannot afford to add new schisms to those of the past, was not a contemptible one, it nevertheless constituted an abandonment of the most critical function of a bishop in the Body of Christ: to banish erroneous doctrine and strange teaching and so to safeguard the flock that its master purchased at the cost of his blood. It also constituted an implicit endorsement of the modern, and quintessentially Anglican, notion that schism is worse than heresy.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-01-021-f
The PNCC continued to banish erroneous doctrine and strange teaching and
Quote
Rather than withdraw from the Old Catholic Communion, however, the PNCC chose to redefine its relationship with such churches as one of “a very real, although imperfect, communion.” The reasons for this are varied, and included a desire to avoid being thought to be isolated within the wider Christian community, a rather sentimental attachment to Old Catholic history, and a belief that continued membership in the Utrecht Union perhaps could save the storm-tossed ship from sinking or, at least, delay its descent. Then, too, the PNCC’s leadership held that the onus for any decision on its membership rested with the proponents of change, not those who saw themselves as upholders of classic Old Catholicism.

Joris Vercammen, the Old Catholic Archbishop of Utrecht and IBC President, implausibly argued that the PNCC could and should restore full communion even though it did not recognize Old Catholic female clergy. In other words, the touchstone of what it meant to be “Old Catholic” was to be in full communion rather than to share the same beliefs in faith, order, and morals. The PNCC’s representatives remained adamant that they could not endorse a restoration of full communion, for this would imply an acceptance of West European innovations.

The West Europeans thereupon resorted to a sleight of hand in order to break the impasse and to rid themselves of their conservative colleagues. According to the IBC’s Statute, the only offenses for which a bishop and, by extension, his church can be excluded from the Utrecht Union are serious errors in faith or morals or violations of the Statute itself. In light of their own conduct, the West Europeans realized that they would look ridiculous if they invoked one or more of these. Instead, they falsely claimed that the IBC’s 1997 decision required a restoration of full communion by 2003. Because the PNCC refused to do so, they argued, it had created a “separation.”

When put to a vote, this position was adopted by a vote of six to four, with one abstention. Ironically, but perhaps providentially, one of the affirmative votes came from a PNCC bishop, not because he shared its presuppositions but because he had long opposed continued membership in the Union. Immediately after the vote, the PNCC delegation withdrew from the conference, and the West Europeans made no effort to encourage its return.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=17-04-056-r
The so called Union of Utrecht sums this up in a footnote:
Quote
[1] As the IBC declaration of July 14, 1997, states, the full communion of the member churches of the Union of Utrecht does not presently exist, due to the lack of universal recognition of the ordination of women to the priestly ministry. [As the Polish National Catholic Church left the Union of Utrecht in 2003, this footnote is not valid any more.]
http://www.utrechter-union.org/pagina/148/a_preamble:_the_ecclesiological_
Rather, the Union of Utrecht is not valid any more, and as an institution has ceased to exist.  As such, the present institution has no authority to speak for it.  Even they have all but admitted that:
Quote
Art. 1    
This “Statute of the Old Catholic Bishops United in the Union of Utrecht” supersedes the “Agreement between the Old Catholic Bishops United in the Union of Utrecht” and the “Regulations of the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Union of Utrecht” of September 12, 1974, as well as its supplements of 1983, 1991, and 1994. It comes into effect on January 1, 2001.

As a result of the Bonn Agreement (1931), bishops of the Old Catholic Union of Utrecht have participated in the consecration of Anglican bishops. In recent years, several Anglican churches have established full communion with other churches or ecclesial communities (e.g. the 1992 Porvoo Common Statement). In the light of this development, the Old Catholic International Bishops’ Conference (IBC) declares the following:

1. To the extent that the Bonn Agreement governs the relations between individual Old Catholic and Anglican churches, participation by Old Catholic bishops in Anglican consecrations will continue, including those consecrations in which non-Anglican bishops take part in the laying on of hands.
2. The participation of Old Catholic bishops in such consecrations does not imply that either the Union of Utrecht as a whole or individual Old Catholic churches are in full communion with the churches represented by those non-Anglican bishops who also will take part in the laying on of hands.
3. The IBC expresses the hope that the churches of the Anglican Communion will consult with the Old Catholic Communion as part of the process of concluding and implementing agreements on full communion between Anglican churches and other churches and ecclesial communities.
Prague, November 2003
http://www.utrechter-union.org/pagina/151/d_concluding_provisions
http://www.utrechter-union.org/pagina/146/declaration_of_the_ibc_on_the_pa
Would any bishop of the undivided Church of the first millenium subscribe to such rubbish?
It is not necessary to accompany every historical statement with a polemic.
You assertion that your statement is historical is a polemic.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2011, 02:57:11 PM »

Good post, ialmisry. I imagine you can understand why I -- and, I dare say, most other traditional Catholics -- are uncomfortable with the communion-transcends-human-weakness approach.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #26 on: June 16, 2011, 03:09:49 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Good post, ialmisry
Thanks
I imagine you can understand why I -- and, I dare say, most other traditional Catholics -- are uncomfortable with the communion-transcends-human-weakness approach.
Magic, pure and simple.  "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
« Last Edit: June 16, 2011, 03:10:12 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #27 on: June 16, 2011, 04:57:32 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Good post, ialmisry
Thanks
I imagine you can understand why I -- and, I dare say, most other traditional Catholics -- are uncomfortable with the communion-transcends-human-weakness approach.
Magic, pure and simple.  "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

I see it a bit differently. I think that from the Protestant Reformation up until Vatican II, there was too much emphasis on immanent unity and too little on transcendent unity; since Vatican II there has been too much emphasis on transcendent unity and too little on immanent unity.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
username!
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,065



« Reply #28 on: June 16, 2011, 05:08:32 PM »

I don't get the RCC- PNCC dialogue.  The PNCC has general confession, allows priests and bishops (I think) to marry.  The PNCC has deviated from RCC doctorine so much I don't know why the RCC will give them communion but won't give say, Lutherans communion, heck minus women pastors there isn't much difference between the PNCC and the Lutherans or the Episcopalians.

While they do utilize general confession and allow married men to be ordained priests and bishops they are conservative theologically; rejecting divorce, homosexual unions, women priests, etc.  I would also point out that slightly over 50% of their priests are former Roman Catholic priests.

So what makes a protestant a protestant in Rome's eyes?  Or can I join the RCC, move to Canada, split, form an American National Catholic Church because I want to own the church property, start messing with theology and traditions of the church, create my own bishops, import a few Roman Catholic priests who left active service to get married and then still be allowed to be recognised by the RCC as a church worthy enough to have shared commuion?
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #29 on: June 16, 2011, 05:31:35 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Mutual?  Who held to the orginal practice and doctrine and who inovated, and where did the inovators get their authority?

They got their authority by existing as an institution.
That's called self consecration. No, it doesn't count.
"Mutual" means that they both broke off communion with each other.
I don't quite remember it that way:
I'll just add the official PNCC note:
Quote
2003 November – PNCC voted out of the International Bishop Conference of the Union of Utrecht because the PNCC remained faithful to the Catholic Faith as well as the Declaration of Utrecht.
http://www.pncc.org/?page_id=6
« Last Edit: June 16, 2011, 05:33:31 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,928


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #30 on: June 16, 2011, 06:06:09 PM »

So what makes a protestant a protestant in Rome's eyes?  Or can I join the RCC, move to Canada, split, form an American National Catholic Church because I want to own the church property, start messing with theology and traditions of the church, create my own bishops, import a few Roman Catholic priests who left active service to get married and then still be allowed to be recognised by the RCC as a church worthy enough to have shared commuion?

Being a Protestant and rejecting the the priesthood, veneration of the Mother of God and the saints, Real Presence, etc.  There are lots of vagante "Old Catholic Churches" just as you describe and the Roman Catholic Church doesn't have intercommunion with any of them.  The PNCC disputes no major doctrine other than Papal infallibilityand universal jurisdiction.  Married bishops and general confession are disciplinary matters not doctrinal ones.  Unlike WRO, you will not find the PNCC rejecting post-schism western saints, the Sacred Heart, the Immaculate Conception, etc.  If you ever go to one of their parishes you would be pressed to tell the difference between a PNCC and RCC parish.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Irish Melkite
Information Mongeror
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite Greek-Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Newton
Posts: 988


WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 17, 2011, 02:33:55 AM »

Isa, my brother,

I've read your posts and, to be honest, can't figure out what point you're seeking to make regarding the PNCC vis-a-vis the Utrecht Union. The PNCC in the US broke from the Union in response to Utrecht's decision to proceed with the ordination of women to the presbyterate. It also no longer has any ties with the church of the same name in Poland (that affiliation was broken much earlier than was the one with Utrecht, as memory serves - 1951, I believe).

Many years,

Neil
Logged

"Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin Rite to manifest one's Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church."

- Melkite Archbishop Joseph (Tawil), of blessed memory
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #32 on: June 17, 2011, 07:09:20 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
Isa, my brother,

I've read your posts and, to be honest, can't figure out what point you're seeking to make regarding the PNCC vis-a-vis the Utrecht Union. The PNCC in the US broke from the Union in response to Utrecht's decision to proceed with the ordination of women to the presbyterate. It also no longer has any ties with the church of the same name in Poland (that affiliation was broken much earlier than was the one with Utrecht, as memory serves - 1951, I believe).

Many years,

Neil
As for the Utrecht Union of today, it bears as much a resemblance to the union of 1889 as sedevancantism does to the church of Vatican I: you can't claim to uphold Pastor Aeternus, and then reject your supreme pontiff on Vatican II, and the IBC can't claim to uphold the Union of Utrecht and chuck the conciliarism upon which it was based.  It was correct that
Quote
the PNCC’s leadership held that the onus for any decision on its membership rested with the proponents of change, not those who saw themselves as upholders of classic Old Catholicism.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=17-04-056-r
The Union of 1889 ceased to exist when the IBC "revised" its statute in 2001 to marginalize the last member of the Union of 1889, the PNCC (Yes, I'm aware that it didn't become a member until 1907.  But in 1997 it was the only one to stick to the "the “Declaration”, the “Agreement”, and the “Regulations” of September 24, 1889, at Utrecht, whereas all did as late as 1974, and nearly all did as late as 1995 when they suspended the innovator and schismatic Bp. Vobbe). As a section I didn't quote of the article I did:
Quote
The Union of Utrecht has fallen—or embraced a modern Anglican ecclesiology on the issue of women’s ordination, which amounts to much the same thing.

The “Union of Utrecht” is the term given, since 1889, to those Old Catholic churches that arose, for the most part, in the aftermath of Vatican I as a reaction to that council’s definition of the doctrine of papal infallibility in 1870. In recent decades this Old Catholic Communion has consisted of the Old Catholic Church of the Netherlands (with two bishops, one of whom, the archbishop of Utrecht, has much the same sort of role in the Utrecht Union as does the archbishop of Canterbury in the Anglican Communion), the Old Catholic Church of Germany (one bishop), the Christ-Catholic Church of Switzerland (one bishop), the Old Catholic Church of Austria (one bishop), the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) in the United States and Canada (six bishops), the Polish Catholic Church of Poland (three bishops), and some few congregations currently without bishops in the Czech Republic, Croatia, and Scandinavia.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-01-021-f

From the same article (emphasis added):
Quote
In the early 1920s the PNCC began missionary activity in newly independent Poland: the result of this was the Polish Catholic Church. Originally an extension of the PNCC, it became a separate member-church of the Union of Utrecht after the new Communist government of Poland forced it to sever its links with its American parent in 1951....Indeed, the Anglican or “local option” solution appears to have carried the day as a result of two meetings of the IBC in 1997. The first, in March, a meeting of the IBC “bureau” or executive committee only, took place in Scranton. The absence of a common celebration of the Eucharist by the assembled bishops vividly symbolized the breach of their common faith. The five PNCC bishops (their numerically small Canadian diocese has been vacant for a number of years) form the largest cohort in the IBC, and with their three Polish brethren they would constitute a majority of the thirteen bishops. But between the March meeting in Scranton and a July meeting in Switzerland, the PNCC bishops, perhaps anticipating what was to come, appear to have abandoned their attempts to keep the Utrecht Union true to its principles, so that, in the event, they sent to Switzerland only one of their bishops, the prime bishop, John Swantek.
The "Polish brethren" are the ones who became autocephalous in 1951, but remained in communion with the PNCC by retaining membership in the Utrecht Union.  Has all the Polish bishops, both the Mother and daughter churches (with the same diaspora as mother oddity of history that the Albanian Orthodox have) been present and voted, my point about Utrecht might have been clearer:
or rather, the liberal successor of the Union of Utrecht-as the only member steadfast to it has withdrawn and the other, inovating, members derive their "authority" from a Union which they have voided.  How is that?  Because the Union of Utrecht and the communion it set up ruled on the issue.  The dissidents, now wanting otherwise, they threw out the rules.  But when you do that, how do you stand on them?
Quote
In September 1974, at the annual meeting of the International Old Catholic Bishops Conference (IBC) a provision was made for decision-making among their churches. All matters affecting the harmony and communion of the churches of the Union of Utrecht would require the endorsement of the IBC before individual member churches could act on their own. A majority vote would suffice in most instances, but on matters “touching the Faith” unanimity of the bishops would be required—and it would take the request of only one bishop among them to require that a particular matter be treated as one “touching the Faith.”.

Quote
It might appear obvious that a “local option” solution would contradict the 1976 IBC declaration and would therefore—as a matter “touching the Faith”—require the unanimous consent of the bishops to be adopted. But when the PNCC representative, Bishop Swantek, tried to assert this, the archbishop of Utrecht informed the assembled bishops that since back in 1976 one bishop (van Kleef, now deceased) had not assented to the declaration, it could not be regarded as a statement of faith (the Old Catholic equivalent of a dogmatic utterance) but only as the expression of the opinions of the individual bishops of the IBC at that time. Therefore, the current bishops could alter it by a simple majority vote of those present. It is not clear why, if the account presented here is accurate, Bishop Swantek could not have insisted that, whatever creative interpretation the archbishop wished to project retrospectively upon the events of 1976, in 1997 the question was to be treated as one “touching the Faith” and that, consequently, any motion to allow the individual churches to decide it for themselves required the unanimous consent of the bishops.

When the critical vote came, the “local option” solution won by a vote of six to two, with one abstention (I cannot but think that the abstention of a bishop in such a vote is proof of his incapacity for the discharge of his office). The German bishop, his membership in the IBC having been suspended, was not supposed to vote, but the majority of the bishops voted to restore him to full membership immediately before turning to the ordination question.  The majority thus consisted of the two Dutch bishops, the Austrian bishop, the German bishop, the Swiss bishop, and one of the Polish bishops; the minority, of the PNCC prime bishop and one of the Polish bishops; the third Polish bishop abstained. Had the full complement of PNCC bishops turned out, the result would have been a six-to-six stalemate (unless the abstainer could have been brought to express an opinion).
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-01-021-f
« Last Edit: June 17, 2011, 07:11:03 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,928


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #33 on: June 17, 2011, 08:15:37 PM »

It should be noted the Slovak Old Catholic Church withdrew from the Utrecht Union as well.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,928


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #34 on: June 17, 2011, 08:46:22 PM »

Declaration of Scranton

A Profession of Faith and Declaration formulated by the Polish National Catholic Bishops Assembled at Lancaster, New York April 28, 2008

We faithfully adhere to the Rule of Faith laid down by St. Vincent of Lerins in these terms: “Id teneamus, ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum.” (We hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, and of all people; for that is truly and properly Catholic.) For this reason we persevere in professing the faith of the primitive Church, as formulated in the ecumenical symbols and specified precisely by the unanimously accepted decisions of the Ecumenical Councils held in the undivided Church of the first thousand years.

Therefore, we reject the innovations of the First Vatican Council that on July 18, 1870 promulgated the dogma of papal infallibility and the universal Episcopate of the Bishop of Rome, which contradict the Faith of the ancient Church and which destroy its ancient canonical constitution by attributing to the Pope the plenitude of ecclesiastical powers over all dioceses and over all the faithful. By denial of his primatial jurisdiction we do not wish to deny the historic primacy which several Ecumenical Councils and the Fathers of the ancient Church have attributed to the Bishop of Rome by recognizing him as the Primus inter pares (first among equals).

We also reject the dogma of the Immaculate Conception promulgated by Pius IX in 1854 in defiance of the Holy Scriptures and in contradiction to the Tradition of the first centuries.

We further reject the dogmatization of the Catholic teaching of the bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Pius XII in 1950 as being in defiance of the Holy Scriptures.

We reject the contemporary innovations promulgated by the Anglican Communion and the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht. We also regard these innovations as being in defiance of the Holy Scriptures and in contradiction to the Tradition of the first centuries, namely: the ordination of women to the Holy Priesthood, the consecration of women to the Episcopate and the blessing of same-sex unions.

Considering that the Holy Eucharist (Holy Mass) has always been the central point of Catholic worship, we consider it our duty to declare that we maintain with perfect fidelity the ancient Catholic doctrine concerning the Sacrament of the Altar, by believing that we receive the Body and the Blood of our Savior Jesus Christ under the species of bread and wine. The Eucharistic celebration in the Church is neither a continual repetition nor a renewal of the expiatory sacrifice which Jesus offered once for all upon the Cross, but it is a sacrifice because it is the perpetual commemoration of the sacrifice offered upon the Cross; and it is the act by which we represent upon earth and appropriate to ourselves the one offering which Jesus Christ makes in Heaven, according to the Epistle to the Hebrews 9:11,12, for the salvation of redeemed humanity, by appearing for us in the presence of God (Hebrews 9:24). The character of the Holy Eucharist being thus understood, it is at the same time, a sacrificial feast by means of which the faithful in receiving the Body and Blood of our Savior enter into communion with one another (1 Corinthians 10:17).

We hope that Catholic theologians, by maintaining the faith of the undivided Church, will succeed in establishing an agreement in regard to all such questions that have caused controversy ever since the Church became divided.

We exhort the priests under our jurisdiction: to teach the essential Christian truths by the proclamation of the Word of God and by the instruction of the faithful; to seek and practice charity when discussing controversial doctrines; and in word and deed to set, in accordance with the teachings of our Savior Jesus Christ, an example for the faithful of the Church.

By faithfully maintaining and professing the doctrine of Jesus Christ, by refusing to accept those errors that have crept into the Church by human fault, and by repudiating the abuses in ecclesiastical matters and the tendency of some Church leaders to seek temporal wealth and power, we believe that we will effectively combat the great evils of our day, which are unbelief and indifference in matters of faith.

Most Rev. Robert M. Nemkovich
Rt. Rev. Thomas J. Gnat
Rt. Rev. Thaddeus S. Peplowski
Rt. Rev. Jan Dawidziuk
Rt. Rev. Sylvester Bigaj
Rt. Rev. Anthony Mikovsky
Rt. Rev. Anthony D. Kopka
Rt. Rev. John E. Mack
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #35 on: June 17, 2011, 08:59:17 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Declaration of Scranton

A Profession of Faith and Declaration formulated by the Polish National Catholic Bishops Assembled at Lancaster, New York April 28, 2008

We faithfully adhere to the Rule of Faith laid down by St. Vincent of Lerins in these terms: “Id teneamus, ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum.” (We hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, and of all people; for that is truly and properly Catholic.) For this reason we persevere in professing the faith of the primitive Church, as formulated in the ecumenical symbols and specified precisely by the unanimously accepted decisions of the Ecumenical Councils held in the undivided Church of the first thousand years.

Therefore, we reject the innovations of the First Vatican Council that on July 18, 1870 promulgated the dogma of papal infallibility and the universal Episcopate of the Bishop of Rome, which contradict the Faith of the ancient Church and which destroy its ancient canonical constitution by attributing to the Pope the plenitude of ecclesiastical powers over all dioceses and over all the faithful. By denial of his primatial jurisdiction we do not wish to deny the historic primacy which several Ecumenical Councils and the Fathers of the ancient Church have attributed to the Bishop of Rome by recognizing him as the Primus inter pares (first among equals).

We also reject the dogma of the Immaculate Conception promulgated by Pius IX in 1854 in defiance of the Holy Scriptures and in contradiction to the Tradition of the first centuries.

We further reject the dogmatization of the Catholic teaching of the bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Pius XII in 1950 as being in defiance of the Holy Scriptures.

We reject the contemporary innovations promulgated by the Anglican Communion and the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht. We also regard these innovations as being in defiance of the Holy Scriptures and in contradiction to the Tradition of the first centuries, namely: the ordination of women to the Holy Priesthood, the consecration of women to the Episcopate and the blessing of same-sex unions.

Considering that the Holy Eucharist (Holy Mass) has always been the central point of Catholic worship, we consider it our duty to declare that we maintain with perfect fidelity the ancient Catholic doctrine concerning the Sacrament of the Altar, by believing that we receive the Body and the Blood of our Savior Jesus Christ under the species of bread and wine. The Eucharistic celebration in the Church is neither a continual repetition nor a renewal of the expiatory sacrifice which Jesus offered once for all upon the Cross, but it is a sacrifice because it is the perpetual commemoration of the sacrifice offered upon the Cross; and it is the act by which we represent upon earth and appropriate to ourselves the one offering which Jesus Christ makes in Heaven, according to the Epistle to the Hebrews 9:11,12, for the salvation of redeemed humanity, by appearing for us in the presence of God (Hebrews 9:24). The character of the Holy Eucharist being thus understood, it is at the same time, a sacrificial feast by means of which the faithful in receiving the Body and Blood of our Savior enter into communion with one another (1 Corinthians 10:17).

We hope that Catholic theologians, by maintaining the faith of the undivided Church, will succeed in establishing an agreement in regard to all such questions that have caused controversy ever since the Church became divided.

We exhort the priests under our jurisdiction: to teach the essential Christian truths by the proclamation of the Word of God and by the instruction of the faithful; to seek and practice charity when discussing controversial doctrines; and in word and deed to set, in accordance with the teachings of our Savior Jesus Christ, an example for the faithful of the Church.

By faithfully maintaining and professing the doctrine of Jesus Christ, by refusing to accept those errors that have crept into the Church by human fault, and by repudiating the abuses in ecclesiastical matters and the tendency of some Church leaders to seek temporal wealth and power, we believe that we will effectively combat the great evils of our day, which are unbelief and indifference in matters of faith.

Most Rev. Robert M. Nemkovich
Rt. Rev. Thomas J. Gnat
Rt. Rev. Thaddeus S. Peplowski
Rt. Rev. Jan Dawidziuk
Rt. Rev. Sylvester Bigaj
Rt. Rev. Anthony Mikovsky
Rt. Rev. Anthony D. Kopka
Rt. Rev. John E. Mack
Yes. -sigh-. So Orthodox, and yet not Orthodox.  So Catholic, but not Catholic.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
username!
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,065



« Reply #36 on: June 18, 2011, 03:02:49 AM »

So what makes a protestant a protestant in Rome's eyes?  Or can I join the RCC, move to Canada, split, form an American National Catholic Church because I want to own the church property, start messing with theology and traditions of the church, create my own bishops, import a few Roman Catholic priests who left active service to get married and then still be allowed to be recognised by the RCC as a church worthy enough to have shared commuion?

Being a Protestant and rejecting the the priesthood, veneration of the Mother of God and the saints, Real Presence, etc.  There are lots of vagante "Old Catholic Churches" just as you describe and the Roman Catholic Church doesn't have intercommunion with any of them.  The PNCC disputes no major doctrine other than Papal infallibilityand universal jurisdiction.  Married bishops and general confession are disciplinary matters not doctrinal ones.  Unlike WRO, you will not find the PNCC rejecting post-schism western saints, the Sacred Heart, the Immaculate Conception, etc.  If you ever go to one of their parishes you would be pressed to tell the difference between a PNCC and RCC parish.

I've been to their parishes.  So rule no. one in the RCC is to recognise the pope as universal head of the church, look it up on the vatican website.  So you can PROTEST Rome  and deny the pope but still share communion.  Hmm, sounds like a protestant to me.
Logged

Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,928


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #37 on: June 18, 2011, 07:54:00 AM »

I've been to their parishes.  So rule no. one in the RCC is to recognise the pope as universal head of the church, look it up on the vatican website.  So you can PROTEST Rome  and deny the pope but still share communion.  Hmm, sounds like a protestant to me.

And here I thought rule number one was to Love God with all my heart and my neighbor as myself.  The Orthodox also protest Rome and deny the pope but are welcome to still share Communion.  Does that make you protestant?
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #38 on: June 18, 2011, 10:29:21 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
I've been to their parishes.  So rule no. one in the RCC is to recognise the pope as universal head of the church, look it up on the vatican website.  So you can PROTEST Rome  and deny the pope but still share communion.  Hmm, sounds like a protestant to me.

And here I thought rule number one was to Love God with all my heart and my neighbor as myself.
It is. But Pastor Aeternus preaches another gospel.
The Orthodox also protest Rome

No, we are just not deluded by the Vatican.
and deny the pope

No, just not deluded by sovereign of the Vatican. We commemorate the Pope of the Catholic Church who confesses her Orthodox Faith.

It is the Vatican who, in contrast to its usual duplicitous policies in the East, denies its bishop-or rather, its three bishops-of Alexandria the title of the see, the original homeland of the title "Pope."
but are welcome to still share Communion.

Sure.  Proverbs 9:17.  The Orthodox hearken to the call of Proverbs 9:5.
Does that make you protestant?
Only the Vatican is defined by its relationship to their supreme pontiff.  Though our God is defined by what He is not, His Church is defined by what she is.

According to the Vatican, denying Pastor Aeternus is like denying one of the Gospels.  No Orthodox priest would give communion to anyone who denied a Gospel, nor would most Protestant pastors.  Only in the Vatican's ecclesiastical community is communion given to those who deny its defining dogma.  We, of course, preclude communion from those who accept the Vatican's defining dogma, as, by definition, that places them out of the Catholic communion of the Orthodox Church.

A better question than why it offers communion to the PNCC and the Orthodox (if we would take it), is why it doesn't offer it to its Protestant siblings?
« Last Edit: June 18, 2011, 10:31:35 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #39 on: June 18, 2011, 10:53:34 AM »

According to the Vatican, denying Pastor Aeternus is like denying one of the Gospels.  No Orthodox priest would give communion to anyone who denied a Gospel, nor would most Protestant pastors.  Only in the Vatican's ecclesiastical community is communion given to those who deny its defining dogma.

There are many, many Protestant pastors who would give communion to Catholics who affirm Pastor Aeternus. How does that fit into your schema?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #40 on: June 18, 2011, 11:15:06 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
According to the Vatican, denying Pastor Aeternus is like denying one of the Gospels.  No Orthodox priest would give communion to anyone who denied a Gospel, nor would most Protestant pastors.  Only in the Vatican's ecclesiastical community is communion given to those who deny its defining dogma.

There are many, many Protestant pastors who would give communion to Catholics who affirm Pastor Aeternus. How does that fit into your schema?
Heretics communing heretics. What does that have to do with Orthodox priests denying communion to someone denying a Gospel, or precluding communion from those who accept the Vatican's defining dogma, as, by definition, that places them out of the Catholic communion of the Orthodox Church?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #41 on: June 18, 2011, 11:42:19 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
Shouldn't the True Church of Christ know where the Sacraments are and are not?

That would be the case if the mission of the Church were to propagate epistemological certainty, which thankfully, it is not.

I agree. So, apparently, does the Vatican, judging by some of its decisions. For example, the fact that the former bishop of London, Graham Leonard, was conditionally ordained to the Catholic priesthood in 1994.

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/print.php?id=12-05-046-b
I came across this in the article:
Quote
Since 1992, Forward-in-Faith (an umbrella organization uniting the various groups that arose in opposition to the ordination of women) has forged strong links with “high-church” dissident groups in the Scandinavian Lutheran state churches, especially in Norway and Sweden, forming a sort of “counter Porvoo” to the newly forged links between these bodies. Certain elements in Forward-in-Faith conceived a strong interest in the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) in the United States (the one remaining fully orthodox constituent member church of the Old Catholic Union of Utrecht) as a possible source of episcopal oversight and “Catholic communion” should a formal split occur in the English Church. It is doubtful whether such a jerry-built structure would have attracted the support and commitment that it did, had not the Roman Catholic Church appeared so inhospitable to disenchanted Anglo-Catholics. Nevertheless, Forward-in-Faith followed with great interest the evolving relationship between the PNCC and a high-church or “evangelical catholic” group of clergy and laity within the Norwegian Lutheran State Church, the Samraad pa Kirkens Grunn, which seemed likely to leave the State Church and come under the aegis of the PNCC in early 1998. However, in late 1997 about half of the core clerical leadership of the Samraad became Roman Catholics, casting the remainder of the group into disarray.
The PNCC group fortunately did form, unfortunately because of shortsightenness on the part of the Orthodox, i.e. us.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-06-054-i
Quote
Out on a Limb in Norway
An Interview with Norwegian Dissident Roald Flemestad

The Reverend Dr. Roald Flemestad is a senior lecturer on dogmatic theology at Det Norske Diakonhjem (a church-related educational institute that educates “diaconal workers” in medicine and theology) in Oslo, and a former pastor in the (Lutheran) Church of Norway. He is now a priest in the newly formed Nordic Catholic Church, which has eleven clergy, ten of whom are former priests of the Church of Norway. Touchstone correspondent William J. Tighe conducted this interview in August 2000 in Oslo, Norway.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #42 on: June 18, 2011, 12:03:32 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
According to the Vatican, denying Pastor Aeternus is like denying one of the Gospels.  No Orthodox priest would give communion to anyone who denied a Gospel, nor would most Protestant pastors.  Only in the Vatican's ecclesiastical community is communion given to those who deny its defining dogma.

There are many, many Protestant pastors who would give communion to Catholics who affirm Pastor Aeternus. How does that fit into your schema?
Heretics communing heretics. What does that have to do with Orthodox priests denying communion to someone denying a Gospel, or precluding communion from those who accept the Vatican's defining dogma, as, by definition, that places them out of the Catholic communion of the Orthodox Church?


Actually, you were the one who brought up Protestant pastors.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #43 on: June 18, 2011, 12:07:50 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
Shouldn't the True Church of Christ know where the Sacraments are and are not?

That would be the case if the mission of the Church were to propagate epistemological certainty, which thankfully, it is not.

I agree. So, apparently, does the Vatican, judging by some of its decisions. For example, the fact that the former bishop of London, Graham Leonard, was conditionally ordained to the Catholic priesthood in 1994.

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/print.php?id=12-05-046-b
I came across this in the article:
Quote
Since 1992, Forward-in-Faith (an umbrella organization uniting the various groups that arose in opposition to the ordination of women) has forged strong links with “high-church” dissident groups in the Scandinavian Lutheran state churches, especially in Norway and Sweden, forming a sort of “counter Porvoo” to the newly forged links between these bodies. Certain elements in Forward-in-Faith conceived a strong interest in the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) in the United States (the one remaining fully orthodox constituent member church of the Old Catholic Union of Utrecht) as a possible source of episcopal oversight and “Catholic communion” should a formal split occur in the English Church. It is doubtful whether such a jerry-built structure would have attracted the support and commitment that it did, had not the Roman Catholic Church appeared so inhospitable to disenchanted Anglo-Catholics. Nevertheless, Forward-in-Faith followed with great interest the evolving relationship between the PNCC and a high-church or “evangelical catholic” group of clergy and laity within the Norwegian Lutheran State Church, the Samraad pa Kirkens Grunn, which seemed likely to leave the State Church and come under the aegis of the PNCC in early 1998. However, in late 1997 about half of the core clerical leadership of the Samraad became Roman Catholics, casting the remainder of the group into disarray.
The PNCC group fortunately did form, unfortunately because of shortsightenness on the part of the Orthodox, i.e. us.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-06-054-i
Quote
Out on a Limb in Norway
An Interview with Norwegian Dissident Roald Flemestad

The Reverend Dr. Roald Flemestad is a senior lecturer on dogmatic theology at Det Norske Diakonhjem (a church-related educational institute that educates “diaconal workers” in medicine and theology) in Oslo, and a former pastor in the (Lutheran) Church of Norway. He is now a priest in the newly formed Nordic Catholic Church, which has eleven clergy, ten of whom are former priests of the Church of Norway. Touchstone correspondent William J. Tighe conducted this interview in August 2000 in Oslo, Norway.

I remember that interview. As a matter of fact I was thinking about it recently, because of one line in it:

"The Roman Catholic Church never gave any indication of an option other than individual conversions."

Makes you wonder if things would have been different, if the "Ordinariate" idea had been around back then.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,808



« Reply #44 on: June 18, 2011, 12:21:44 PM »

So what makes a protestant a protestant in Rome's eyes?  Or can I join the RCC, move to Canada, split, form an American National Catholic Church because I want to own the church property, start messing with theology and traditions of the church, create my own bishops, import a few Roman Catholic priests who left active service to get married and then still be allowed to be recognised by the RCC as a church worthy enough to have shared commuion?

Being a Protestant and rejecting the the priesthood, veneration of the Mother of God and the saints, Real Presence, etc.  There are lots of vagante "Old Catholic Churches" just as you describe and the Roman Catholic Church doesn't have intercommunion with any of them.  The PNCC disputes no major doctrine other than Papal infallibilityand universal jurisdiction.  Married bishops and general confession are disciplinary matters not doctrinal ones.  Unlike WRO, you will not find the PNCC rejecting post-schism western saints, the Sacred Heart, the Immaculate Conception, etc. 
Actually, they do:
Declaration of Scranton

A Profession of Faith and Declaration formulated by the Polish National Catholic Bishops Assembled at Lancaster, New York April 28, 2008

We also reject the dogma of the Immaculate Conception promulgated by Pius IX in 1854 in defiance of the Holy Scriptures and in contradiction to the Tradition of the first centuries.

We further reject the dogmatization of the Catholic teaching of the bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Pius XII in 1950 as being in defiance of the Holy Scriptures.
In that they are following the Old Catholic Confession (of which they are the sole remnants):
Quote
The Declaration of Utrecht
In nomine ss. Trinitatis

 

Johannes Heykamp, Archbishop of Utrecht.
Casparus Johannes Rinkel, Bishop of Haarlem,
Cornelius Diependaal, Bishop of Deventer,
Joseph Hubert Reinkens, Bishop of the Old Catholic Church of Germany,
Eduard Herzog, Bishop of the Christian-Catholic Church of Switzerland,

 

assembled in the Archiepiscopal residence at Utrecht on the four and twentieth day of September, 1889, after invocation of the Holy Spirit, address the following Declaration

to the Catholic Church.

 

Being assembled for a conference in response to an invitation from the undersigned Archbishop of Utrecht, we have resolved henceforth to meet from time to time for consultations on subjects of common interest, in conjunction with our assistants, councillors, and theologians.

 

We deem it appropriate at this our first meeting to summarize in a common declaration the ecclesiastical principles on which we have hitherto exercised and will continue to exercise our episcopal ministry, and which we have repeatedly had occasion to state in individual declarations.

 

(1) We adhere to the principle of the ancient Church laid down by St Vincent of Lérins in these terms: ‘Id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum’. Therefore we abide by the faith of the ancient Church as it is formulated in the ecumenical symbols and in the universally accepted dogmatic decisions of the ecumenical synods held in the undivided Church of the first millennium.

 

(2) We therefore reject as contradicting the faith of the ancient Church and destroying her constitution, the Vatican decrees, promulgated July 18, 1870, concerning the infallibility and the universal episcopate or ecclesiastical plenitude of power of the Roman Pope. This, however, does not prevent us from acknowledging the historic primacy which several ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the ancient Church with the assent of the whole Church have attributed to the Bishop of Rome by recognizing him as the primus inter pares.

 

(3) We also reject the dogma of the Immaculate Conception promulgated by Pope Pius IX in 1854 as being without foundation in Holy Scriptures and the tradition of the first centuries.
http://www.utrechter-union.org/pagina/152/appendix:_the_declaration_of_utr

I'm guessing that the PNCC would have problems with "St. Bernadette" and the "Visionaries of Fatima."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tags: Poland Polish 
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.212 seconds with 71 queries.