C
ConstantineTG
Guest
…and has a personal relationship with Jesus ChristThe Catholic Church which is Orthodox.
If the Orthodox and Catholics unite,would the church be called the Orthodox or Catholic church?
- Status
B
Bill_H_Lopez
Guest
All religions in the past actually broke away from our One, Holy, Catholic Religion…So therefore we would open our arms and our church doors to them, as newly converted Catholics.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Even Buddhists?
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Catadox, that would work, “According to the Glory.”
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
Oh boy…
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
B
Bezant
Guest
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
…believing him as Lord and Savior…and has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ
R
revert_jen
Guest
In that case would its real name be:That, or The Churches Formerly Known As Catholic and Orthodox
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
They would be known as what they are now known, no?
Maybe Roman Catholic and Orthodox Catholic (kinda like Coptic Catholic)…
Maybe Roman Catholic and Orthodox Catholic (kinda like Coptic Catholic)…
M
mark_a
Guest
I’ve read where it is not unusual for European and Asian Orthodox to refer to themselves as Orthodox Catholic so as to differentiate themselves from Roman Catholic.
I have no idea if that is correct, though.
L
LoyalViews
Guest
YMMV depending on the weather circumstances. Storms do happen.I see a five step process.
This should take about 50,000 years.
- All protestants unite into one group and call themselves "The United Protestant Assembly."
- All Catholic groups unite as one (including groups like SSPX) and call themselves
"The Catholic Church."- All Orthodox jurisdictions unite as one and call themselves "The Holy Orthodox Church."
- "The United Protestant Assembly" comes into full communion with “The Catholic Church” retaining the name, "The Catholic Church."
- "The Catholic Church" and “The Holy Orthodox Church” unite and call themselves "The Christian Church."
M
MaroniteRosary
Guest
Amen
M
Mickey
Guest
I’m a realist.
But I always remember that with God…all things are possible…therein lies my optimism.
But I always remember that with God…all things are possible…therein lies my optimism.
K
kitkatty
Guest
Good idea,but how about saying The Church of Christ, because with the East and West united that is exactly what we areand as it was.
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
I
iohanne
Guest
I am against innovation in terminology and surprisingly enough, I find myself against taking back the word “Christian.”
In the Sub-Apostolic age people were already referring to body of believers that was in communion with the successors of the Apostles as “the Catholic Church” in order to differentiate that body from local sectarian groups. The argument went along these lines: “You’re nothing but a local sect. What we believe and do is practiced by all other Christians everywhere and always. There are many other local sects like you everywhere and you all differ. We are the same because we have received our way of life from the Apostles.” Secondly, in the Creed that we all profess, we say, “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.” Finally, the word “orthodox” has been used since Nicaea, at least, and probably even before, in order to differentiate us from the heterodox. We should properly call ourselves “the Catholic Apostolic Church” keeping in mind that “the Catholic Church” was a title and a name for a long time when “orthodox” was still just an adjective attached to her. Even the Orthodox will claim that it is they who are the Catholic Church but they are simply the orthodox one. In a reunited Church, there is no need to differ between the Catholic communions since there would only be one. We could therefore return to our pre-schism title.
Secondly, if reunion were to occur, I can bet it would occur a long, long time before Protestants re-enter the Catholic fold. Since even Rome recognizes Protestant baptisms and their incomplete communion with us - in so far as they participate to limited degrees in the fullness of our Christian faith - we should accord them the name Christian and allow it to be in use as the umbrella term. The reason for this is simply that even in the Sub-Apostolic Age and the Patristic Age, we would not deny the Donatists baptism nor deny them the right to be called Christian. They were clearly “followers of Christ.” They differed in that they no longer could claim to be “universal” or “apostolic” or “orthodox.” In a world where the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches were to reunite, the Protestant sects would still be around and probably for a time longer. It would be wise to treat them like Donatists, since we accept their Baptism - something we cannot even do for the JWs or the Mormons - and because they claim to be “followers of Christ” and do love our risen Lord. They differ from us in that they no longer lack universality, apostolicity or orthodoxy. But in charity we should accord them the word “Christian” and reserve to us those titles that are properly ours: orthodox, catholic, apostolic.
In the far, far, far, far, far, far future when Christians have survived as long as Jews have, maybe when Protestants have re-entered the Catholic fold, we can reclaim the word “Christian” in order to properly emphasize our unity over and against the other religions and ideologies of the world. However…
I’m not sure the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are even capable of reuniting at this point much less can I imagine Protestants re-uniting with us. At that point, I feel like Christ would have returned and we’d be living in the eschaton and we’d simply be His Mystical Body and His Bride. But who knows? I am no prophet. Our Lord prayed for the unity of His Mystical Body on the cross when His Incarnate Body was broken. May it come true for the sake of all billions of souls. But as I see it now, reunion with anyone is a long way off.
In the Sub-Apostolic age people were already referring to body of believers that was in communion with the successors of the Apostles as “the Catholic Church” in order to differentiate that body from local sectarian groups. The argument went along these lines: “You’re nothing but a local sect. What we believe and do is practiced by all other Christians everywhere and always. There are many other local sects like you everywhere and you all differ. We are the same because we have received our way of life from the Apostles.” Secondly, in the Creed that we all profess, we say, “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.” Finally, the word “orthodox” has been used since Nicaea, at least, and probably even before, in order to differentiate us from the heterodox. We should properly call ourselves “the Catholic Apostolic Church” keeping in mind that “the Catholic Church” was a title and a name for a long time when “orthodox” was still just an adjective attached to her. Even the Orthodox will claim that it is they who are the Catholic Church but they are simply the orthodox one. In a reunited Church, there is no need to differ between the Catholic communions since there would only be one. We could therefore return to our pre-schism title.
Secondly, if reunion were to occur, I can bet it would occur a long, long time before Protestants re-enter the Catholic fold. Since even Rome recognizes Protestant baptisms and their incomplete communion with us - in so far as they participate to limited degrees in the fullness of our Christian faith - we should accord them the name Christian and allow it to be in use as the umbrella term. The reason for this is simply that even in the Sub-Apostolic Age and the Patristic Age, we would not deny the Donatists baptism nor deny them the right to be called Christian. They were clearly “followers of Christ.” They differed in that they no longer could claim to be “universal” or “apostolic” or “orthodox.” In a world where the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches were to reunite, the Protestant sects would still be around and probably for a time longer. It would be wise to treat them like Donatists, since we accept their Baptism - something we cannot even do for the JWs or the Mormons - and because they claim to be “followers of Christ” and do love our risen Lord. They differ from us in that they no longer lack universality, apostolicity or orthodoxy. But in charity we should accord them the word “Christian” and reserve to us those titles that are properly ours: orthodox, catholic, apostolic.
In the far, far, far, far, far, far future when Christians have survived as long as Jews have, maybe when Protestants have re-entered the Catholic fold, we can reclaim the word “Christian” in order to properly emphasize our unity over and against the other religions and ideologies of the world. However…
I’m not sure the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are even capable of reuniting at this point much less can I imagine Protestants re-uniting with us. At that point, I feel like Christ would have returned and we’d be living in the eschaton and we’d simply be His Mystical Body and His Bride. But who knows? I am no prophet. Our Lord prayed for the unity of His Mystical Body on the cross when His Incarnate Body was broken. May it come true for the sake of all billions of souls. But as I see it now, reunion with anyone is a long way off.
J
JohnRoss
Guest
When compared with Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism is another religion.
As far as Orthodoxy and Catholicism are concerned there would need to be concessions on both sides.
Orthodox would never accept the Ultramontane vision of the papacy, nor Scholastic theology.
As far as Orthodoxy and Catholicism are concerned there would need to be concessions on both sides.
Orthodox would never accept the Ultramontane vision of the papacy, nor Scholastic theology.
S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
Well I would imagine that the Orthodox would be called Orthodox Catholics or Eastern Catholics (like present day Eastern Catholics), and all would be a part of the Catholic Church. But that’s just me, and I’m sure not everyone here agrees with me.
- Status