Old Catholic identity is often narrated through a single lens: Utrecht as the cradle, standard, and arbiter of the Old Catholic tradition. For many, to be “Old Catholic” is to be in continuity with Utrecht; to diverge from Utrecht is to be, at best, peripheral—and at worst, illegitimate. Yet this narrative, repeated often enough, obscures a more complex history. It risks elevating a later institutional posture into a definitive theological principle. A more honest historical account reveals that Utrecht itself bears a legacy far more dependent, contingent, and indebted to outside intervention than its contemporary self-presentation sometimes acknowledges.

​

1. Utrecht Before Vatican I: A Church Without a Bishop

It is true that the Chapter of Utrecht enjoyed certain ancient privileges—the right to elect its own bishop, a measure of canonical autonomy, and a strong Jansenist-influenced theological heritage. But for a very long period, these privileges were largely theoretical, because Utrecht did not actually have a bishop. Rome refused to confirm its elected candidates; the Chapter maintained its canonical claim; and for decades, the impasse simply continued.

Thus, the heroic and tidy image of Utrecht standing resolute before Vatican I, guarding ancient Catholic liberties, is a retrospective construction. In reality, Utrecht’s survival as a sacramental church with episcopal leadership depended entirely on the intervention of an outsider.

​

2. Bishop Dominique Marie Varlet: The Indispensable Outsider

The moment that changed everything came not from within the Netherlands, nor from a local church steeped in its own autonomy, but from a French missionary bishop who previously served as Vicar General of the Diocese of Quebec.  During this period, he encountered the clergy of Utrecht and, recognizing their situation, he consecrated bishops for them—multiple times.

 

Varlet’s actions:

• restored the continuity of Utrecht’s episcopate,

• enabled the Chapter’s ancient rights to become functional rather than theoretical,

• and provided the succession that would later become the cornerstone of the modern Old Catholic identity.

Without Varlet, there is no uninterrupted line of bishops, no later Utrecht Congress, and no institutional form of Old Catholicism recognizable today.

 

And yet, Utrecht has never seemed particularly eager to remember this dependency. Varlet is acknowledged, yes—but rarely celebrated. His legacy is often framed as a necessary irregularity rather than as the decisive gift it truly was.

​

3. Utrecht’s Apparent Lack of Gratitude—and Varlet’s Disappointment

Given how indispensable his actions were, one might expect Utrecht to view Varlet as a foundational benefactor. Instead, the historical tone is often muted, almost embarrassed. Utrecht did not canonically rehabilitate him. It offered no posthumous gestures of reconciliation. And in turn, Varlet himself became increasingly disillusioned with Utrecht, expressing reservations about what was happening there and the directions being taken.

In other words:
the relationship was far more complicated than the idealized heritage narrative suggests.

Utrecht owes its very ecclesial survival to a man it did not fully embrace and whose hopes for the community were only partially realized.

​

4. The Irony of Condescension Toward the Independent Sacramental Movement

Given this history, the modern tendency—especially in some continental circles—to look down upon the Independent Sacramental Movement (ISM) is historically ironic. When Utrecht critiques the ISM for:

• irregular origins,

• bishops emerging from unconventional circumstances,

• or ecclesial creativity outside mainstream structures,

it critiques precisely the conditions from which Utrecht itself was reborn.

 

The Old Catholic Church of Utrecht owes its episcopate to a suspended missionary bishop whose formative experiences were shaped in the New World and who acted out of conscience, pastoral concern, and a conviction that God’s grace supersedes canon law when the good of the Church requires it.

That is not an Old Catholic embarrassment.
That is the Old Catholic story.

​

5. A More Honest Historical Memory—For Everyone

The ISM does not need to attack Utrecht, nor deny its contributions, nor diminish its 19th-century willingness to resist ultramontanism. But the ISM also need not accept a narrative in which Utrecht alone embodies authentic Old Catholicism. The reality is this:

• Utrecht’s autonomy was long theoretical.

• Its episcopate was restored only by outside intervention.

• Its founder in practice—not merely in claim—was Varlet.

• Its later institutional posture should be evaluated critically, not assumed to be normative.

The Old Catholic movement is richer, broader, and more diverse than a single narrative centered in the Netherlands.

​

6. Why This Matters Today

Challenging the Utrecht-centric narrative is not about diminishing one church; it is about affirming that the Old Catholic impulse has always emerged in unexpected places, through:

• missionary bishops,

• pastoral necessity,

• theological conscience,

• conflicts of integrity,

• and the willingness to act when existing structures fail.

The ISM stands much closer to Varlet’s actual situation than Utrecht does today.

It is therefore not the ISM that should feel compelled to justify itself to Utrecht.
It is Utrecht that must remember its own origins with humility.

​

Conclusion: Memory, Identity, and Mutual Respect

A mature Old Catholic identity requires a truthful memory—one that does not erase complexity for the sake of institutional tidiness. Utrecht is part of the Old Catholic story. A significant part. But not the whole. And its own history—messy, dependent, rescued from ecclesial limbo by a single bishop’s courageous act—should lead not to condescension toward others, but to solidarity.

​

If Utrecht can learn to see in the ISM echoes of its own story, then the Old Catholic tradition may yet find a future marked not by hierarchy of legitimacy, but by shared memory, mutual respect, and the recognition that the Holy Spirit often works through irregular beginnings.