Talk:Ultrajectine

Can I import a passage from the Catholic Encyclopedia verbatim for reference? 61.246.204.115 14:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Probably. See Wikipedia:Using Catholic Encyclopedia material for information on doing so. Just be sure to cite it, using Wikipedia:Citation templates. --Elkman 15:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Important: It might be useful to watch that the sources being used are objective, or at least, get a balance between information taken from those who are pro-Old Catholic, and those who are anti-Old Catholic... I notice an SSPX article and a reference to the Catholic Encyclopedia, and a mention of the ORCCNA website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.233.203 (talk) 02:20, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Important: Besides making this an article on the "secondary", "tertiary", "founders" of Ultrajectine Catholic tradition, we should put more emphasis on the ideas of the Ultrajectine tradition and how they differ from those of Roman Catholics. To speak of a moment and ignore it's fundamental ideas is vain, and perhaps even, biased. The theology and Ultrajectine understanding of Catholicism needs to be explained here to understand then the Old Catholic movement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.173.187.76 (talk) 22:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

In error?

Quoting the article:

'they often quote St. Vincent of Lerins, a Church Father recognized by Rome, saying: "We Catholics must ever hold fast that which is has been believed everywhere, always, and by all."'

I wonder if the quotation of St. Vincent is missing a word, or possibly has had a word added by mistake.

Eg., "We Catholics must ever hold fast that that which is has been believed everywhere, always, and by all."

OR

"We Catholics must ever hold fast that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all."

Response: the quotation is correct...Look it up if you like, but you can't delete what Ultrajectine Catholics believe because you don't like it. It is appropriate to the Wikipedia entry on Ultrajectinism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.233.203 (talk) 18:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Wanderer57 (talk) 16:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that he doesn't mean the quote should be removed as "wrong" or whatever, but that there's a grammatical error which is unlikely to be original. "...that which is has..." just doesn't sound right to me. Most likely the "is" is a typo, I would say. 62.74.229.177 (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Dutch sources

Which Dutch written sources use the term Ultrajectine? Or else: how is this subject called in Dutch? Sonty567 (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality??

Someone placed a neutrality template in the article. Of course it is not neutral, it is from Encyclopedia Catholica 1913! The text has to be reworded so that "(alleged)" and other POV-inlines are removed. The original text happily seems to confuse apostolic succession with "Roman Pontiff supremacy". Such confusions should also be disconfused. ... said: Rursus (^mbork³) 09:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)