There is no historical basis on this claim. It is wrong that the name Catholic was started to be used only after the Schism. St. Ignatius of Antioch already called the Church Catholic. We know that St. Ignatius was a disciple of St. John the Evangelist. On the other hand, Orthodox as a proper name was adopted by the East only after the Schism.This post is completely false. You should read the first seven ecumenical councils which call the Church Orthodox. Previous to the schism there was no official name for the Church. The Church was called Catholic, it was called Orthodox but these were not official names. It is only after the schism that official names were claimed by certain churches.
An Orthodox could easily reverse this and say that the name Catholic was adopted in the west to distinguish themselves from the Orthodox faith, the true faith.
The Church had no proper name. It was simply the Church. The words Catholic and Orthodox were adjectives that specified the true Church from heresies. As I said above, the Church is called Orthodox in the seven councils. This is a fact of history. It is just as proper to call the Church Orthodox as it is to call it Catholic. It is only an anti-eastern sentiment that leads someone to say that the Orthodox only chose the term after the great schism in order to differentiate themselves from the west.There is no historical basis on this claim. It is wrong that the name Catholic was started to be used only after the Schism. St. Ignatius of Antioch already called the Church Catholic. We know that St. Ignatius was a disciple of St. John the Evangelist. On the other hand, Orthodox as a proper name was adopted by the East only after the Schism.
I disagree.The Church had no proper name. It was simply the Church. The words Catholic and Orthodox were adjectives that specified the true Church from heresies. As I said above, the Church is called Orthodox in the seven councils. This is a fact of history. It is just as proper to call the Church Orthodox as it is to call it Catholic. It is only an anti-eastern sentiment that leads someone to say that the Orthodox only chose the term after the great schism in order to differentiate themselves from the west.
Further:A little later, Clement of Alexandria speaks very clearly. “We say”, he declares, “that both in substance and in seeming, both in origin and in development, the primitive and Catholic Church is the only one, agreeing as it does in the unity of one faith” (Stromata, VII, xvii; P.G., IX, 552). From this and other passages which might be quoted, the technical use seems to have been clearly established by the beginning of the third century. In this sense of the word it implies sound doctrine as opposed to heresy, and unity of organization as opposed to schism (Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, Part II, vol. I, 414 sqq. and 621 sqq.; II, 310-312). In fact Catholic soon became in many cases a mere appellative—the proper name, in other words, of the true Church founded by Christ, just as we now frequently speak of the Orthodox Church, when referring to the established religion of the Russian Empire, without adverting to the etymology of the title so used
source: oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=CatholicOn the other hand when discussing the word Catholic, which already appears in his form of the baptismal creed, St. Cyril remarks: (§ 23) “Now it [the Church] is called Catholic because it is throughout the world, from one end of the earth to the other.” But we shall have occasion to quote this passage more at length later on.
It is not shocking at all if other groups call themselves Catholic. In fact, Seventh Day Adventists call themselves as the true Catholic Church based on the Alpha and Omega of Ellen Gould White.Further, as was mentioned above by Madaglan, the Orthodox call themselves Catholic as well. If you ever discussed with any of the Orthodox who used to be on this forum you would have noticed them calling themselves “Orthodox Catholics”. The word ‘orthodox’ means ‘true faith’. So in a sense they are distinguishing themselves from the west with the term but this is due to the fact that they don’t think we have the true faith. So they call themselves Orthodox while according to them we would be the heterodox.
source: oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=CatholicMoreover, St. Augustine insists upon the consensus of Christians in the use of the name Catholic. “Whether they wish or no”, he says, “heretics have to call the Catholic Church Catholic” (“De vera religion”, xii). “Although all heretics wish to be styled Catholic, yet if any one ask where is the Catholic place of worship none of them would venture to point out his own conventicle” (Contra Epistolam quam vocant Fundamenti, iv).
It takes twisting to turn it into a proper name. It is easy to think that the fathers like Ignatius and Clement and Irenaeus used the term as an official and proper name when you don’t translate it from the Greek into English. But the fact is that the word had a meaning. It meant ‘universal’. It indicated the Church as being everywhere and in all times. It indicated that the Church called all men to be a part of the one Church. Where as there was some relativism when it came to other faiths, the Church which was founded by Christ called every man and said it is only through Christ that you will recieve salvation. No other faith is acceptable. So, it was not a proper name as it is now.I disagree.
Further:
source: oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Catholic
It is not shocking at all if other groups call themselves Catholic. In fact, Seventh Day Adventists call themselves as the true Catholic Church based on the Alpha and Omega of Ellen Gould White.
Even during the time of Augustine, heretices already usurped and claimed that name.
source: oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Catholic
The Catholic Encyclopedia has erred on many things. I would never recommend it on Eastern Christian issues.Are you saying then that the Catholic Encyclopedia erred in stating that the Church founded by Christ has the proper name the “Catholic Church”?
I don’t have a problem at all about the Church’s name. What I have been pointing out is that it is erroneous to say that the Orthodox Church is the TRUE Catholic Church.The Catholic Encyclopedia has erred on many things. I would never recommend it on Eastern Christian issues.
The Church has claimed it as proper so that is fine but it was not always viewed like that. Ignatius and Irenaeus didn’t use the term in the sense of a proper name. Maybe you could make a case for the idea that the Latins developed it as a proper name but it was not the view of the Greek Fathers including those at the councils. When the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed was written and the word Catholic was included it was not done so as a proper name. It was used as a descriptive term just like the words One, Holy and Apostolic were descriptive terms to specify the nature of the Church. Whereas Augustine might have contrasted the Catholics with the heretics, the Greeks(including the Capadocians) contrasted the Orthodox believers with the heretics.
I really don’t see why you would have much problems with this idea. It doesn’t change anything about the Church. The title Catholic applies to the Church whether it is a proper name or not.
You made the accusation that the Orthodox have rejected the name Catholic and cling to the name Orthodox to distinguish themselves from the Catholics. You said this was out of an anti-papal attitude. These are both false. The Orthodox claim the name Catholic as applying truely only to them since they claim to be the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Whether the Orthodox are the True Church is a different issue. Whether you accept their claims is a different issue. I have no problems with you not accepting their claims.Emphasis mine.
I don’t have a problem at all about the Church’s name. What I have been pointing out is that it is erroneous to say that the Orthodox Church is the TRUE Catholic Church.
I never said that the Orthodox Churches rejected the name Catholic. Further, I never said that calling themselves Orthodox is anti-papal. What I said was that the anti-papists (those who rejected the authority of the Pope) call themselves Orthodox.You made the accusation that the Orthodox have rejected the name Catholic and cling to the name Orthodox to distinguish themselves from the Catholics. You said this was out of an anti-papal attitude. These are both false. The Orthodox claim the name Catholic as applying truely only to them since they claim to be the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Whether the Orthodox are the True Church is a different issue. Whether you accept their claims is a different issue. I have no problems with you not accepting their claims.
Then you misrepresented my statement. Take note: The name “Orthodox” was adopted by the anti-papists in the East to distinguish themselves from the Catholic Church led by the successors of Peter.This is what you said above in post 197,
This is unfounded claim by anti-papists. The name “Orthodox” was adopted by the anti-papists in the East to distinguish themselves from the Catholic Church led by the successors of Peter. And that became final only after the Great Schism. The Catholic Church had already existed prior to that.
I am not sure how the qualifying statement is supposed to change the meaning. You are still saying that they - the ‘anti-papists’ of the east - adopted the term in order to distinguish themselves from the Latins. The fact is that the term was no more official after 1054 than it was before. They used the term “Orthodox” after 1054 in the same way they used it in reference to the Church against the Monophysites or the Iconoclasts.Then you misrepresented my statement. Take note: The name “Orthodox” was adopted by the anti-papists in the East to distinguish themselves from the Catholic Church led by the successors of Peter.
I never said they used the name Orthodox Church to distinguish themsleves from the Catholic Church. You ignored the qualifying phrase “led by the successors of Peter”.
You said the Orthodox Churches are also Catholic. Okay. But they are not led by the successors of Peter, the Popes. When I said they called themsleves Orthodox to distinguish themselves from the Catholic Church led by the Popes, I meant they did not want to be considered Catholics under the rule of the Papacy. In other words, they remain Catholics (based on their terms) but not under the authority of the Popes. Do you see the difference?I am not sure how the qualifying statement is supposed to change the meaning. You are still saying that they - the ‘anti-papists’ of the east - adopted the term in order to distinguish themselves from the Latins.
Exactly my point.The fact is that the term was no more official after 1054 than it was before.
They used the term “Orthodox” after 1054 in the same way they used it in reference to the Church against the Monophysites or the Iconoclasts.
That is why I said they wanted to distinguish themselves from the Catholic Church led by the successors of Peter. I am strongly against the idea that it is the Orthodox Church that is the TRUE Catholic Church because of their teaching that the Catholic Church led by the Popes is heretic.They did not see things as you see them. They did not see the pope of Rome as the successor of Peter. They did not see the Church led by the bishop of Rome as the Catholic Church. They saw the Churches that held to the creed of Nicea-Constantinople as the true Catholic Church. They looked at Rome as heretics who had abandoned the faith of the seven councils. In other words they did not see themselves as breaking from the Catholic Church which was founded by Christ. They saw it as Rome breaking from the Church.
You may be a Christian, you may believe all they tell you but you were catholiconce, according to your title, so I would like to know how you could ever walk away from OUR LORD in the Blessed Sacrament?? You will never find the TRUE PRESENCE of JESUS in the Eucharist, in any protestant Church. And the Sacrament of Confession, where are you going to get the grace for that. If I were you, I would do some heavy studying of the true Catholic faith, (not what they tell you about it), and pray my heart out that you allow the Holy Spirit to lead you back HOME. catholicanswers.com can be a bit help to you.One can follow jesus and do all that he asks and adhere to all his teaching and not be a roman catholic. I am a Christian just not roman catholic and I am every bit a christian as any other.
Thank you for your kind welcome.
I suppose that you, as a senior member of this forum, would be able to put forward the Catholic point of view in a good light with tact and ability.
As I have never had a theological / historical discusson with an actual Catholic,I was looking forward to hearing viewpoints
on various subjects, and mutual understanding, if not more.
Could you tell me, what it was that you found in my posts that caused you to lash out like that?
The statements I have included are not my own. They are historically accurate and correct, as far as I am able to
determine.
The majority of them are from Catholics.
if there are any problems with these statements, would you please point them out?
All these words I posted were said…
All the deeds they spoke of actually happended. It’s all true.
So, why to you choose to be angry because I point them out?
They won’t be anyless true tommorrow.
I answered the question put to me by this post, 'If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? ’
honestly, and to the best of my ability.
So may I ask you this question: why are you Catholic ?
I guess in your own way, you have shown me this forum’s way of dealingling with difficulties.
Ignore the actual issues, and attack the person who asks questions.
I was hoping for something with a little more substance…
I do apologize if I have offended you in some way.
May God’s blessing go with you ever, and may his protection rest on you and your family.
./QUOTE
Who attacked whom??? You can’t see the trees for the forest. I suggest you use a little more tact when you come barging in. If you really are Catholic then you need to study your Faith and your History.
They saw what “they” wanted to see and not what Jesus Christ WANTED for HIS One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, thats the problem. and they broke from the authority of the Pope,(successors of Peter). They broke from the valid authority of Peter, givien by Christ Himself.I am not sure how the qualifying statement is supposed to change the meaning. You are still saying that they - the ‘anti-papists’ of the east - adopted the term in order to distinguish themselves from the Latins. The fact is that the term was no more official after 1054 than it was before. They used the term “Orthodox” after 1054 in the same way they used it in reference to the Church against the Monophysites or the Iconoclasts.
They did not see things as you see them. They did not see the pope of Rome as the successor of Peter. They did not see the Church led by the bishop of Rome as the Catholic Church. They saw the Churches that held to the creed of Nicea-Constantinople as the true Catholic Church. They looked at Rome as heretics who had abandoned the faith of the seven councils. In other words they did not see themselves as breaking from the Catholic Church which was founded by Christ. They saw it as Rome breaking from the Church.
I didn’t attack anyone.
I answered the question ‘’ If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic?
I gave several references from Catholics.
I noticed that no one seems interested in the facts I presented.
You can’t deny the truth of what happenend during the sack of Constantinople.
If you find the history of your church unpalatable, it’s hardly my fault.
This is the reason I’m not a ‘roman’ catholic, just merely 'catholic.
I do wish you all well, and may God’s blessing be upon you.
I didn’t attack anyone.
You are correct. I was only looking to answer the question posted,What you posted initially was a long list of things that many people have seen before and, quite frankly, find it tiresome that people keep bringing it up as if it was some new discovery. And your list didn’t look like a starting point for discussion. .