Talk:Independent Catholicism

message: I think the new article "Breakaway Catholic Churches" should be merged with this or deleted. --Lima (talk) 11:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: (my former comment erased). I've have a look on both articles and, definetively they don't deal with the same subject. There is some overlap (most breakaway RC churches qualify as Independent but not the reverse). So I would vote NO for a merger/deletion. See below a more detailed rationale --Wllacer (talk) 17:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The last thing that Wllacer wrote (that breakaway churches are independent, but independent are not necessarily breakaway) is really salient; and, is, ultimately, the reason why the two articles should remain separate. Breakaway churches are formed, for the most part, by dissatisfied members of the chruch body that's being broken away from. And, of course, such breakaway churches are, by definition, independent (of the broken-away-from body). But many independent churches are formed for entirely other reasons, with no specific dissatisfaction, necessarily, with any larger church body, involved; and with the founders of the new church not even necessarily being members of the broken-away-from church. So it is just plain categorically incorrect to treat "breakaway" as synonymous with "independent." Breakaway churches are, in fact, a subset of independent churches. For that reason, seriously, even the mention of this part of the argument involving "breakaway" vs "independent" really needs to be removed from the top of this talk page because it fundamentally distracts the reader from whatever OTHER issues there might legitimately be regarding this article. And I haven't looked at the "Talk" page for the Breakaway article yet, but I now will and if there's a discussion like this going on there, I'm going to post this point there, too. Just tryin' to help. --Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) 19:39, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breakaway Catholic Churches 

message: I read in the "Independent Catholic churches" article () that:
and
I also read in the "Hugh George de Willmott Newman" article () that:
I don't understand the concepts of , , or .
The Newman article cites The Encyclopedia of American Religions. The 2009 edition of a newer version titled Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions states that:
Are these understood as conditional ordinations and consecrations? There should be a paragraph in the article about this.
--BoBoMisiu (talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple ordinations 

message: Mathew was not the first. He joined the Ealing schism. Also, other independent ecclesial communities in Great Britain were organized earlier. For example, the adventist Catholic Apostolic Church was organised in 1835. Another example is Jules Ferrette's attempts. --BoBoMisiu (talk) 02:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ealing schism

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Independent Catholic churches. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090623220009/http://sourcebook.oldcatholichistory.org:80/index.php?name=Sections&req=viewarticle&artid=1&allpages=1&theme=Printer to http://sourcebook.oldcatholichistory.org/index.php?name=Sections&req=viewarticle&artid=1&allpages=1&theme=Printer
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed the Philippine Independent Church from this list because it is much closer to Anglican churches, or even the Polish National church than independent Catholic churches.  It broke away from the Spanish dominated Catholic church during the Philippine Revolution/Philippine-American War period.  It shares a seminary with the Episcopal Church of the Philippines and has some unitarian beliefs.  It is in communion withe the Anglican Communion.  It doesn't claim to be Catholic. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 13:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippine Independent Church 

message: What specifically is missing, ? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me, not sure what you mean? Chicbyaccident (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  you had placed in December. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:35, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right. The "confusing tag" suffices. Chicbyaccident (talk) 23:57, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I take it that it's not a very well written article in general. But now is your opportunity to give you two cents as to what in particular is confusing or lacking about it. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomplete 

message: The penultimate graph (as of this writing) of the intro section starts with "Various Independent Catholic groups have attracted a significant amount of criticism." I'm thinking that the graph doesn't belong up there and deserves its own heading further down the article. --Schnaz (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significant Criticism 

message: I've tagged the article as needing a rewrite.  As the article currently reads, it depends primarily on a single source (Plummer) and as such violates encyclopedic standards.  The main rewriter of the article makes notes in his edits that clearly show a bias against the Roman Catholic Church; in some he erroneously refers it to the "Roman church" which is totally incorrect.  His statement that Independent Catholic Churches are also totally incorrect in that Roman Catholicism does not accept any Western rite as valid except for the Roman rite itself.  Someone, please fix this.  I'm not enough of an expert, or I would do so myself.  2601:C8:4101:A1E:71BF:E646:157D:3180 (talk) 04:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  2017 Edits & Bias 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Independent Catholicism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130928173447/http://www.concentric.net/~cosmas/indcath.htm to http://www.concentric.net/~Cosmas/indcath.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've combined all the 
* Plummer, p(p). ___
references by using . 
There are many other Plummer refs that have their own name, e.g.
* Plummer, p. 23
*  
These can probably be treated the same way,  by globally replacing every string matching the regexp
*  <ref name="auto1"/?>*?> 
with
*  
for all values of , 
but that's just not feasible for me at the moment on this phone.--Thnidu (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plummer 

message: I realize capitalization of "Independent" is inconsistent in this article. It's inconsistent throughout this topic area! I don't know if the situation can be improved. Elizium23 (talk) 19:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim has been made that "'Independent' Catholic is a proper noun". I don't think so. "The Independent Catholic Church International" is a proper noun, but not "independent Catholic", which is not the name of an organization. I also don't see why on 11 July capitalization should have been added eight times where it wasn't before in this article. Nor do I see why, on the other hand, capitalization was removed from the title of the book A Brief History of Independent Catholicism in North America.  Bealtainemí (talk) 07:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: A survey of WP:RS reveals a similar inconsistency regarding capitalization. Such is the nature of the game. What did Emerson say about consistency? Elizium23 (talk) 08:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Why then add capitalization where it wasn't before? Why remove it from a book title where it existed?  And what reliable source says "independent Catholic" is a proper noun?  Bealtainemí (talk) 08:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: The 'one source' issue seems to have been addressed.Apollinari (talk) 13:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove the 'reliant on one source' tag? 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reformed Catholic Church (Old Catholic)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Breakaway Catholics and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Breakaway Catholics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Breakaway Catholics" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Breakaway Catholic Church and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Breakaway Catholic Church until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Breakaway Catholic Church" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Independent Catholic Church USA and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Independent Catholic Church USA until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 00:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Independent Catholic Church USA" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Independent catholic church usa and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Independent catholic church usa until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 00:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Independent catholic church usa" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: In the context of that sentence, "rite" is referring to liturgical traditions for which Christian liturgy is the main article, with a list of such rites (including the Roman Rite also given as an example in this article immediately after the linked text in question). I don't understand your objection. -- Scyrme (talk) 18:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, my argument was wrong. However, "liturgy" is hyperlinked before in the same sentence, so this would be overlinking; I have changed the hyperlinks of the sentence accordingly. Veverve (talk) 18:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough. -- Scyrme (talk) 18:36, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Breakaway Catholic Churches and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 22:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Breakaway Catholic Churches" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Regarding the section on beliefs of Independent Catholics. New information in the last couple months has been released from the Vatican that the Society of St. Pius X is a part of the Catholic Church in communion with Rome. My proposed edit would be to simply delete their name from this section. Editor9174 (talk) 14:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I oppose. Unless the SSPX becomes administratively part of the Catholic Church, i.e. they actually submit to the Holy See wich is Pope Francis and there is an official act declaring it, the SSPX is not part of the Catholic Church. The diplomatic about-faces and other lies and inconsistent private statements by people linked to the Holy See or by the Pope himself are irrelevant. Veverve (talk) 16:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Edit