In practice, this means:

We approach other churches, missions, and communities with humility, not rivalry.

We recognise the validity of sacraments in many Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Old Catholic, and independent sacramental communities, where apostolic faith, proper sacramental form, and pastoral integrity are present.

We seek friendship, prayer, conversation, and practical collaboration where there is shared faith, shared sacramental life, and shared pastoral concern — especially for those who are marginalised, displaced, or left without care.

We are not interested in competition, title-collecting, status-seeking, or proving that we are “more Catholic” than anyone else.

Our concern is simple: the Gospel, the sacraments, and the people we are called to serve.

Independent, but not isolated

The Apostolic Old Catholic Mission is independent in governance, but we are not isolated.

We believe independence should never become loneliness, suspicion, or spiritual self-protection. The Church is wider than any one mission, jurisdiction, bishop, or community.

For that reason, we value interdependence: honest friendship, mutual prayer, shared counsel, and respectful collaboration with bishops, clergy, and communities across different apostolic and sacramental traditions.

We are a mission, not a church empire. We do not seek control over others, nor do we wish to be absorbed into another body. We seek faithful relationships that help us serve Christ more honestly and more fruitfully.

From friendship to formal agreement

The Mission values genuine ecumenical friendship. We gladly speak, pray, and work with others where there is trust, shared faith, and pastoral integrity.

At the same time, formal ecumenical or communion agreements are serious. They are not badges of approval, social connections, or quick gestures of goodwill.

They affect public trust, sacramental recognition, accountability, and the witness of the Church.

For that reason, the Mission will consider formal ecumenical or communion agreements only after careful prayer, conversation, and due diligence.

We will not rush into formal relationships simply because another body asks. We would rather move slowly and honestly than create confusion through haste.

What we look for

The Mission recognises that ecumenical relationships may take different forms. Not every relationship requires the same level of agreement, and not every friendship should become full communion.

For this reason, we use a tiered approach:

• Dialogue — for respectful conversation, listening, and mutual understanding.
• Association — for practical collaboration, shared projects, prayer, and pastoral friendship.
• Full Communion — for the deepest level of formal ecclesial recognition, shared sacramental life, and mutual recognition of ministry.

The deeper the relationship, the greater the level of discernment, documentation, and accountability required. These expectations are applied proportionately: an Agreement of Dialogue may begin while trust and understanding are still growing, while an Agreement of Full Communion requires the highest level of clarity, documentation, and confidence.

Before any formal agreement is considered, the Mission would normally expect clear evidence of:

• An active worshipping or pastoral community — not merely an online presence, social media identity, title, or website.
• Clear governance documents, such as statutes, canons, constitutions, or equivalent written structures.
• Identifiable leadership and real accountability — including clear lines of responsibility, decision-making, discipline, and pastoral oversight.
• Healthy succession planning — showing that the community is not built around one personality, one bishop, or a leader-for-life model with no accountability or continuity.
• Documentary evidence of ordinations and apostolic succession, where sacramental recognition is being discussed. This should include clear succession paths, ordination or consecration records, dates, names of ordaining or consecrating bishops, and the ecclesial context in which those orders were conferred.
• Evidence of proper formation or training before ordination or consecration — whether through recognised theological study, formation received elsewhere, supervised ministry, mentorship, or the community’s own formation process. The Mission will not treat ordination as credible where it appears to have been given casually, rapidly, or without serious discernment.
• Safeguarding, conduct, and clergy accountability standards — including written expectations for clergy behaviour, pastoral boundaries, complaints, discipline, and protection of vulnerable people.
• Evidence of appropriate criminal record checks, police clearance, safeguarding vetting, or local equivalent, especially for clergy or ministers who may come into contact with our people at shared services, pastoral events, retreats, formation gatherings, or community activities.
• Evidence of actual community life and ministry, such as public worship, pastoral work, photographs, community records, regular gatherings, charitable activity, or other credible signs of lived ministry.
• Broad theological compatibility with the Mission’s apostolic, sacramental, inclusive, and early-Church rooted identity.
• Respect for the Mission’s autonomy, governance, liturgical life, pastoral ethos, and public identity.
• A spirit of humility and service, rather than ambition, rivalry, title-seeking, or attempts to absorb, control, or claim authority over the Mission.

Matching the agreement to the relationship

The Mission may choose a lighter or deeper form of agreement depending on the evidence, maturity, and purpose of the relationship.

• An Agreement of Dialogue may be appropriate where there is goodwill and shared Christian concern, but where further understanding is still needed.
• An Agreement of Association may be appropriate where there is practical collaboration, mutual respect, and enough trust to work together while remaining clearly distinct.
• An Agreement of Full Communion will require the highest level of confidence, including clear sacramental theology, documented apostolic succession, proper formation, safeguarding standards, and evidence of stable community life.

Formal agreement is not about collecting signatures, exchanging titles, or creating the appearance of importance. It is about recognising a relationship that already shows signs of truth, charity, order, safeguarding, accountability, and shared Christian purpose.

Where these signs are absent, unclear, or still developing, the Mission may still remain open to friendship, conversation, and prayer — but not necessarily to association or full communion.

How decisions are made

Any formal agreement must be considered according to the Mission’s governance.

The Rector, acting in consultation with the Mission Council, will consider whether a proposed relationship serves the Mission’s calling and protects its integrity.

The purpose of any agreement must always be service, accountability, and Christian unity — never prestige, control, or appearance.

Our hope

Whether formal or informal, all our relationships are grounded in charity, truth, mutual respect, and a shared hope for the Church’s healing and renewal.

We affirm the spirit of the Lima Document, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry published by the World Council of Churches in 1982, which calls the churches toward visible unity through shared sacraments, ministry, and confession of faith — even as we remain realistic about the differences that still exist.
You can read the Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (Lima) Document here.