I don’t like the definition of “Roman Catholic”, but I am repeating the definition of “Roman Catholic”. Should the use of the “Roman Catholic” for the whole church be encouraged, I think not. However, the term can be applied to the whole church, regardless of your personal preference or mine.You keep saying that if you’d like, but I’m not a Roman Catholic, and neither are members of any of the 22 sui iuris Eastern Catholic Churches in communion with the Bishop of Rome. We are Ruthenian Catholics, Ukrainian Catholics, Melkite Catholics, Coptic Catholics, Chaldean Catholics, Maronite Catholics, etc. Our liturgical traditions are not those of the Church of Rome, and our bishops are not members of the hierarchy of the Church of Rome. Furthermore, to insist on calling us Roman Catholics implies that the norm or standard for what is and is not Catholic is that which is Roman, and that simply is not the case. Please, let’s stay away from the mentality that Eastern Catholics are “Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite”, or “Roman Catholics of the Maronite Rite”, and so on. Such a mentality is best left in the past, because it has been so harmful to Eastern Catholics.
Yes, I should have said that it is very, very rare.It is incorrect to say that there are zero
Yes. Case in point: the Mormon church. The term was originally a slur, and LDS did not call itself this name. But over time, this changed.As Constantine has pointed out, Christians are always happy to accept for themselves names which start out as derogatory slurs.
Oh, sure, it can be applied to the whole church. I’m quite aware that people do it all the time. However, I maintain that it is misleading, imprecise, and incorrect to do so–even when done by popes. BTW, in the event of any future restoration of full communion with the other Apostolic Churches, I feel quite sure that they will not go along with the entire Church being labeled as “Roman Catholic.”I don’t like the definition of “Roman Catholic”, but I am repeating the definition of “Roman Catholic”. Should the use of the “Roman Catholic” for the whole church be encouraged, I think not. However, the term can be applied to the whole church, regardless of your personal preference or mine.
I think that if we persist in emphasizing that Roman Catholic means Roman Rite ONLY then we will make a lot of headway with embracing the slur. But it’d be nice if all Eastern Catholics avoided applying it to themselves because, yeah, confusing.Oh, sure, it can be applied to the whole church. I’m quite aware that people do it all the time. However, I maintain that it is misleading, imprecise, and incorrect to do so–even when done by popes. BTW, in the event of any future restoration of full communion with the other Apostolic Churches, I feel quite sure that they will not go along with the entire Church being labeled as “Roman Catholic.”
You see, I merely provide a definition, and even hinted that it is impolite to use for Eastern Catholics. I don’t know why you think harping this to me will fix this situation…Oh, sure, it can be applied to the whole church. I’m quite aware that people do it all the time. However, I maintain that it is misleading, imprecise, and incorrect to do so–even when done by popes. BTW, in the event of any future restoration of full communion with the other Apostolic Churches, I feel quite sure that they will not go along with the entire Church being labeled as “Roman Catholic.”
Check out post 14 in this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=723619.I don’t like the definition of “Roman Catholic”, but I am repeating the definition of “Roman Catholic”. Should the use of the “Roman Catholic” for the whole church be encouraged, I think not. However, the term can be applied to the whole church, regardless of your personal preference or mine.
I am already sympathetic. Jumping on me for delivering bad news does nothing to further your cause.Check out post 14 in this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=723619.
This post, by a highly educated, well-informed forum member backs up my assertion that the term “Roman Catholic” does not properly refer to the entire Church.
It seems to me that all the bishops in all the Rits are members of the ecclesial struture put in place by Christ. They are all in communion with one another, and with the successor of Peter. So I am confused with what you are saying here.Code:...and our bishops are not members of the hierarchy of the Church of Rome. .
Yes, they are all in communion with one another, and with the successor of Peter. However, the bishops of, say the Melkite Catholic Church, are not bishops of the Latin Church, just as bishops of the Latin Church are not bishops of the Melkite Church.Thanks for your fine post. All of it made sense to me except this part:
It seems to me that all the bishops in all the Rits are members of the ecclesial struture put in place by Christ. They are all in communion with one another, and with the successor of Peter. So I am confused with what you are saying here.
It’s The Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church is correct only for Latin Catholics.What is the official name of the Church, “The Catholic Church” or “The Roman Catholic Church”?
Thank you for clarifying. I see them all as members of the hierarchy of “Rome” to the degree that “Rome” is the visible center of unity in the Church in the world. All are bishops in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, and all are in unity with one another and the successor of Peter, in Rome.Yes, they are all in communion with one another, and with the successor of Peter. However, the bishops of, say the Melkite Catholic Church, are not bishops of the Latin Church, just as bishops of the Latin Church are not bishops of the Melkite Church.
The correct term is Catholic Church. The term Roman Catholic Church didn’t come around until the late middle ages/Renaissance. The proper name is the Universal Church not the Roman Universal Church. Roman is just the rite practised by the Catholic Church. Don’t get me wrong you’re not completely wrong by calling it the Roman Catholic Church, however, it is improper to call it such.What is the official name of the Church, “The Catholic Church” or “The Roman Catholic Church”?
“Catechism of the Catholic Church”
Though that Catechism is targetted for Roman Catholics.“Catechism of the Catholic Church”
You keep saying that if you’d like, but I’m not a Roman Catholic, and neither are members of any of the 22 sui iuris Eastern Catholic Churches in communion with the Bishop of Rome. We are Ruthenian Catholics, Ukrainian Catholics, Melkite Catholics, Coptic Catholics, Chaldean Catholics, Maronite Catholics, etc. Our liturgical traditions are not those of the Church of Rome, and our bishops are not members of the hierarchy of the Church of Rome. Furthermore, to insist on calling us Roman Catholics implies that the norm or standard for what is and is not Catholic is that which is Roman, and that simply is not the case. Please, let’s stay away from the mentality that Eastern Catholics are “Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite”, or “Roman Catholics of the Maronite Rite”, and so on. Such a mentality is best left in the past, because it has been so harmful to Eastern Catholics.
Those who are Roman Catholics are those who are members of the sui iuris Catholic Church whose head is the Bishop of Rome, who is also the visible head of the Church on Earth. However, “Roman” is not somehow determinative for or an essential element of the whole Church, or even the office of the papacy (being the successor of Peter, not being Roman, is what is essential to the papacy). If that were the case, then that means that the Church was lacking something determinative or essential between the time she was established by Christ and the time St. Peter established the Christian community at Rome as an actual Church.
The contention here is that if we are just Rites under the Roman Catholic Church, then yes this description is accurate. It does say that the Pope is our head, rather than someone who we are in communion with.
- By their definition, all 23 sui iuris Churches are “Roman Catholic”, whether you agree with the term or not.
Think about this, the term “Christian” as found in the Bible is a slur. It has defined us pretty well post-1st Century
- The target of a slur does not define what that slur is.
Same as #2. Do we just participate in Rites or do we belong to Churches?
- Let’s stop the nikpicking. We are all part of the Catholic Church with the Bishop of Rome as its head, no matter which rite you chose to participate in.
We participate in the Rite of our choice in the Catholic Church. There are not “Churches”. There is only one Church. Just as there are several rooms, but one house. One room in that house does not define that house, no matter the size of that room.The contention here is that if we are just Rites under the Roman Catholic Church, then yes this description is accurate. It does say that the Pope is our head, rather than someone who we are in communion with.
Think about this, the term “Christian” as found in the Bible is a slur. It has defined us pretty well post-1st Century
Same as #2. Do we just participate in Rites or do we belong to Churches?
No.By their definition, all 23 sui iuris Churches are “Roman Catholic”, whether you agree with the term or not.