Name of the Church

[Nicea325]

Why does the Church then still use Baptism certificates saying “According to the rite of the Roman Catholic Church”?

To distinguish it from other rites within the church and from other Christian communities. As I have seen certificates with the Melkite and Chaldean rites.

 

[CMatt25]

To distinguish it from other rites within the church and from other Christian communities. As I have seen certificates with the Melkite and Chaldean rites.

I know but Mathew Holford implied Roman was incorrect when he said Latin is correct instead.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Example: Do the Orthodox call themselves Eastern Orthodox or Orthodox?

Because the Orthodox consider their communion to be the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, their church’s official name is actually the Orthodox Catholic Church. Another common name they use for their faith is “Holy Orthodoxy.”

Because of their church’s actual name, some will go around calling themselves “Orthodox Catholics,” although for the sake of eliminating confusion (“Wait - you’re Catholic? What?”) most will simply call themselves Orthodox.

Those Orthodox who do prefer to call themselves Orthodox Catholics will refer to Catholics like you and me as “Papal Catholics” or “Roman Catholics” or just “Latins.”

If it’s Eastern Orthodox, then what happened to the Western Orthodox?

Interestingly enough, there are western-rite Orthodox in existence: some Orthodox communities in the western world have devised a rite based on the Tridentine Mass, but with an explicit epiclesis.

These “western-rite Orthodox” are not analogous to the eastern Catholic churches, though, for two reasons: (a) they’re not hierarchically distinct at all, and (b) they weren’t formed out of some already existing community but were basically just invented.

The earliest names given to those who believed in Jesus of Nazareth was…“Church of God”…“Church of Christ”…“Bride of Christ”…“Body of Christ”…“Church of the Firstborn”…“Temple made with Living Stones”…In all seriousness is anyone concluding that because an early church father used “universal ecclesia”…“catholic church”…THAT became the formal name AND because the Catholic church uses the “Catholic” part in their name…that this somehow proves the Catholic church of today is what the ECF had in mind when he wrote “catholic church”?

No, we’re not claiming that. It is, however, true that the Catholic Church can indeed trace itself seamlessly back to the Apostles. We are not the only communion that can do this, though - the Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, and a couple others can as well.

So the Catholic Church’s position that she is the very same church that Saint Ignatius of Antioch spoke of as “the Catholic Church” is not at all a far-fetched claim.

I know but Mathew Holford implied Roman was incorrect when he said Latin is correct instead.

“Roman” isn’t necessarily wrong, but “Latin” is better because it’s more specific. Here’s why:

If you speak of the Latin Church, it’s obvious what you’re referring to.

If you speak of the Roman Church… is that the whole Latin Church or do you actually mean the Diocese of Rome?

Frankly, whenever non-Catholics of a more polemical bent - whether Orthodox or Protestant - speak scathingly of “the Church of Rome,” I just roll my eyes and inform them that I’m a member rather of the Church [Diocese] of Columbus, OH. The bishop of my particular church, however, is in communion with the bishop of Rome - which makes my church part of the whole Catholic Church as well.

 

[joe370]

Fone Bone …

“Roman” isn’t necessarily wrong, but “Latin” is better because it’s more specific. Here’s why:

If you speak of the Latin Church, it’s obvious what you’re referring to.

If you speak of the Roman Church… is that the whole Latin Church or do you actually mean the Diocese of Rome?

Frankly, whenever non-Catholics of a more polemical bent - whether Orthodox or Protestant - speak scathingly of “the Church of Rome,” I just roll my eyes and inform them that I’m a member rather of the Church [Diocese] of Columbus, OH. The bishop of my particular church, however, is in communion with the bishop of Rome - which makes my church part of the whole Catholic Church as well.

Exactly!!!

 

[kaneata]

The earliest names given to those who believed in Jesus of Nazareth was…“Church of God”…“Church of Christ”…“Bride of Christ”…“Body of Christ”…“Church of the Firstborn”…“Temple made with Living Stones”…In all seriousness is anyone concluding that because an early church father used “universal ecclesia”…“catholic church”…THAT became the formal name AND because the Catholic church uses the “Catholic” part in their name…that this somehow proves the Catholic church of today is what the ECF had in mind when he wrote “catholic church”?

yup

 

[andrewstx]

Jack, I too was raised and dunked in the so-called “church of Christ”, but it did not take and as soon as I graduated HS and moved out I changed right away.

As you and I know in the cofc theology it is the name that counts. They call themselves the “church of Christ” and that makes them the cofc, at least to them.

They call themselves “Christian” and that makes them again in their minds the only Christians.

It makes no difference to them that they were started in 1906 by Disciples of Christ dissadents.

Is this campbellite particularness coming back to haunt you? Nothing wrong if it is.

Like they say in a forum of former cofc members “it is easy to get the boy out of the cofc, but hard to get the cofc out of the boy”.

 

[Jack_Bauer]

Jack, I too was raised and dunked in the so-called “church of Christ”, but it did not take and as soon as I graduated HS and moved out I changed right away.

As you and I know in the cofc theology it is the name that counts. They call themselves the “church of Christ” and that makes them the cofc, at least to them.

They call themselves “Christian” and that makes them again in their minds the only Christians.

It makes no difference to them that they were started in 1906 by Disciples of Christ dissadents.

Is this campbellite particularness coming back to haunt you? Nothing wrong if it is.

Like they say in a forum of former cofc members “it is easy to get the boy out of the cofc, but hard to get the cofc out of the boy”.

Do you know the website for ex-churchofchrist. and cocotocatholic?

 

[Cavaradossi]

For what it’s worth, the Eastern Orthodox self-identify both as the Orthodox Church and as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. From what I understand, the Oriental Orthodox do so too. The markers Eastern and Oriental are only to prevent confusion between the two groups.

 

[JonNC]

Where does the name of your church come from and when was it first used. Evidence would be nice. So many people erroneously refer to the Catholic Church as “Roman” Catholic Church without realizing where the term derived. It’s Catholic Church, folks. It may work but it’s not the official name of the Church. It’s just been adopted.

Example: Do the Orthodox call themselves Eastern Orthodox or Orthodox? If it’s Eastern Orthodox, then what happened to the Western Orthodox?

I see:
Baptist, First Baptist, Southern Baptist
Disciples of Christ, Christian Church, Church of Christ
Assemblies of God, Church of God,
Methodism: World Methodist, United Methodist, etc.
Lutheran: 3 or 4 synods that I know about
Church of the Nazarine
Church of the First Born
Dancing Church
Cowboy Church

I can think of many more, but will stop there. There are many spiritualities within the Church, evident by the presence of religious orders. Even the Charismatics are a spirituality. But all must follow the precepts and teachings of the Church. Divergence is dissent, and thus separates oneself from the Church…

The name “Lutheran Church”, like “Roman Catholic Church” has its roots in a polemic from its oponents. It was simply acquired by Lutherans, though not by Luther’s preference. Even in central Europe today, one will find the name “Evangelical Church of the Augsburg Confession” which is probably more accurate.

Jon

 

[Jack_Bauer]

The name “Lutheran Church”, like “Roman Catholic Church” has its roots in a polemic from its oponents. It was simply acquired by Lutherans, though not by Luther’s preference. Even in central Europe today, one will find the name “Evangelical Church of the Augsburg Confession” which is probably more accurate.

Jon

It’s interesting. When I first started Googling for Catholic Church sites and beliefs to reconcile my beliefs and discern if I believed it I found all of this so called “Catholic” churchs that professed to be Catholic. The list includes Sedevantists, “liberal” agenda breatk offs excommunicated as a result, Old Catholic, etc. I spoke to my Franciscan Friar assistant pastor about it and he instructed me to only read real Catholic websites, USCC and Vatican website along with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I realized then to narrow down my searches to those sites originally. But I included listening to a new local Catholic radio show that had just imerged when we first broke from our original faith, Church of Christ, We went to a local so called “non-denominational” bible church and found them to really be Baptists with a bunch of fallen away Catholics [20 to 40% to my guestamation]. We were immediately not impress with their shallow and flaky beliefs/teachings. However, it was there that I firsrt came across the evidence that early Christian writing were still available along with the many Gnostic writings. Once I read the early Christian writings and began to assess which were considered good and those that were simply off the wall, I narrowed my search to those writers: Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, Eusibius, Ambros, Augustine, etc. just to name a handful.

The rest the story gets bazaar and ended up leading me home. My conviction provoked my wife to do her own research and she read the Catechism of the Catholic Church and would tell me things she read and that they made sense, more sense that what she was taught growing up. Apparently, I never heard all of the crazy things our previous faith taught. But as I learned I began a journey away from them.

Church of Christ believes many of the things Catholic teach. But they are only superficial in comparison. Later I discovered that it broke away from the Disciples of Christ, yet they deny it. How convenient to reinvent the Church and your history.