"ROMAN" Catholic Church

[NonDenom]

mlldrl;2528917]Again, they can call themselves ANYTHING they’d like but that doesn’t make it so. They may think of themselves as catholic (small c) if they like but to be Catholic (big C) means you are in union with the Pope. You may reject that but it is the truth. Always has been always will be until the end of the world.

Hi mlldrl
Thats fine, but the church that Jesus started is in fact the catholic (univedrsal) church.

 

[teajay]

I think that it depends upon the context. When the Roman Catholic Church is describing itself, internally, it does see itself as the Catholic Church - communion with the Bishop of Rome is* essential* for them.

In a secular context, “Roman Catholic”, though, is a valid way for the Roman Catholic Church to identify itself. It is there used as a label to differentiate one form of Christianity from another in a way that doesn’t require others to implicitly accept the Roman Catholic Church’s authority claims. It’s a kind of compromise that is necessary in a secular society.

So internally the Roman Catholic Church sees itself as the Catholic Church but when dealing with outsiders, the secularised name “Roman Catholic Church” is used as a necessary compromise.

I’ve noticed that there is a bit of inconsistency though in how this principle is applied. For example, the use of the words “reform” or “reformed” or “reformation” imply changes that are consistent with certain basic foundations of authority. The Roman Catholic Church does not accept that “reform” produced the various protestant churches but rather revolution, so it would be appropriate for other organisations to secularise their own names in the way that the Roman Catholic Church has done (at least when dealing with outsiders). Scholars that accept this point refer to the events of the sixteenth century as the Protestant Reformation rather than simply the Reformation. But often non-scholars either forget to do so or don’t even care. If Roman Catholics are adding the word “Roman” to their description for a certain purpose, it’s difficult to argue that they (Roman Catholics) and others should still have to refer to other groups by names like “Church of Christ”, “Reformed Catholic Church” or even “non-denominational” when the use of those terms implies acceptance of things that Roman Catholics, and probably most Protestants and non-Christians, don’t accept at all.

 

[Petergee]

Yes I pointed out way back in post 78 that the standard names used for most if not all groups of Christians are names which most if not all other Christians would reject the literal meaning of. But we use the names they use for themselves, out of politenss, convention and convenience. Others should do the same for the Catholic Church, instead of thinking up lame excuses to use pejorative terms like “Roman Catholic”. The Catholic Church never uses the term “Roman Catholic” (with the very limited exception mentioned by Orion in post 130 of joint statements between Catholics and Anglicans, to avoid people thinking the statement was about groups within the Anglican church. )

 

[ElizabethPH]

The United States is heavily Protestant and historically prejudiced against Catholics (Can anyone remember Kennedy and the big stink of all that?) and many have unknowingly adopted the “standard” of the US, as if it were the Standard of the entire Catholic Church.

Your PROTESTANT cousins have defined you, and placed a name on you that is inaccurate. And while they may be and consider themselves to be catholic, if you ask them what church they go to, would they say catholic or tell you which denomination they went to?

What you need to realize is that to call the entire Catholic Church, ROMAN Catholic is completely offensive to our Eastern brethren, so even if YOU personally do not find it offensive, there are many who are part of the Catholic Church who are in no way “Roman” at all, who find it completely offensive.

It makes them feel like unwanted step children, instead of brothers and sisters in Christ who are in FULL communion with the bishop of Rome.

So even if you, a Latin Rite Catholic do not find the term offensive, you should respect those who are united with the bishop of Rome and learn to refer to the entire Catholic Church as Catholic instead of Roman Catholic.

Respectfully,

Maria

You know I didn’t mean to be offensive.

 

[MariaG]

You know I didn’t mean to be offensive.

Yes, I know.

But now that you know that there are many Catholics of the Eastern Rites who are offended when people, especially Catholics, who refer to the entire Catholic Church that is united with the bishop of Rome as “Roman” Catholic, shouldn’t you change the way you speak?

God Bless,
Maria

 

[ElizabethPH]

Yes, I know.

But now that you know that there are many Catholics of the Eastern Rites who are offended when people, especially Catholics, who refer to the entire Catholic Church that is united with the bishop of Rome as “Roman” Catholic, shouldn’t you change the way you speak?

God Bless,
Maria

You bet ya!! thanks Maria

 

[Church_Militant]

mkbsdlkbasklbn

 

[MariaG]

You bet ya!! thanks Maria

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Did the Catholic Church refer to itself as the Roman Catholic Church when it left Rome for a few years and was not located there?

I’m not trying to make any point I’m just curious.

 

[Petergee]

Did the Catholic Church refer to itself as the Roman Catholic Church when it left Rome for a few years and was not located there?

I’m not trying to make any point I’m just curious.

You mean “when the Pope left Rome and lived in Avignon”. The whole Church doesn’t live in Rome, just the Pope.
No. The Catholic Church has never called itself the “Roman Catholic Church”. That term was invented by Anglicans 400 years after the Avignon exile of the popes.

 

[bobzills]

The Catholic Church has never called itself the “Roman Catholic Church”. .

There are lots and lots of places where the term Roman Catholic Church is used on the Vatican website. See post 128.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Maybe a better question would be did the Pope refer to himself as the Bishop of Rome when he was in Avignon? Did he refer to himself as both the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Avignon?

Wasn’t Peter Bishop of Antioch and later Bishop of Rome?

 

[bobzills]

Maybe a better question would be did the Pope refer to himself as the Bishop of Rome when he was in Avignon? Did he refer to himself as both the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Avignon?

Wasn’t Peter Bishop of Antioch and later Bishop of Rome?

This may be true, but the fact is that the head of the Catholic Church today is in the Vatican at Rome. And the Vatican itself has posted the term “Roman Catholic Church” lots and lots of times on its own website. If there were something amiss with the term Roman Catholic Church, why does the Vatican post this term lots and lots of times on its own website?

 

[Petergee]

This may be true, but the fact is that the head of the Catholic Church today is in the Vatican at Rome. And the Vatican itself has posted the term “Roman Catholic Church” lots and lots of times on its own website. If there were something amiss with the term Roman Catholic Church, why does the Vatican post this term lots and lots of times on its own website?

As pointed out and which you have ignored, it is by no means “lots and lots of times” but only for a very few very restricted uses in joint statements with Anglicans etc where the other party has obviously insisted on this use to avoid confusion among its own splinter groups, and the Catholics as usual are bending over backwards (too far IMO) to be accommodating and polite, even to the point of letting such statements include pejoratives about Catholics. You know for a fact that such references are a minuscule fraction of the countless times the Catholic Church refers to itself as the Catholic Church, so please cease this trolling and grossly misleading assertion.

 

[bobzills]

As pointed out and which you have ignored, it is by no means “lots and lots of times” but only for a very few very restricted uses in joint statements with Anglicans etc where the other party has obviously insisted on this use to avoid confusion among its own splinter groups, and the Catholics as usual are bending over backwards (too far IMO) to be accommodating and polite, even to the point of letting such statements include pejoratives about Catholics. You know for a fact that such references are a minuscule fraction of the countless times the Catholic Church refers to itself as the Catholic Church, so please cease this trolling and grossly misleading assertion.

It is not true that the term Roman Catholic is only used in joint statements as this individual has alleged. For example, see the link:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_i/biography/documents/hf_jp-i_bio_01021997_biography_en.html
where the term Roman Catholic is used on the Vatican website in reference to the life of His Holiness Pope John Paul I.

 

[mtr01]

There are lots and lots of places where the term Roman Catholic Church is used on the Vatican website. See post 128.

The context was explained in posts #129 and #130.

 

[bobzills]

The context was explained in posts #129 and #130.

I don’t see how this would apply to the biography of Pope.John Paul I
vatican.va/holy_father/jo…graphy_en.html
Post #129 says that the term RC is used “largely for the purpose of clarity, when dealing with other Christians.”
Post #130 says: “the Church itself isn’t threatened by the use of the qualifier as identification in formal communication. However, it doesn’t then give license to use the Church’s use of the word for clarity purposes to use it as pejorative…”
But in the biography of the Pope, I don’t see how the term RC is used for clarification?
Or how would this be relevant in the speech of Pope John Paul II on October 25, 1997. Where was a clarification needed for the use of this term?

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The Catholic Church has the authority to call itself whatever it wants to call itself because Jesus gave it that authority.

Where’s the beef?

 

[Subrosa]

I’m pretty sure that Australians have been calling their country Oz since long before that American wrote the story about the wizard. Maybe we should sue for the royalties. No-one to my knowledge has ever said they find “Oz” offensive.

I have no problem with nicknames, for Australians or for Catholics. You can call me a “Mick” or a “Kneeler” in casual conversation. But when people use a name for Catholics which they know, or should know, is offensive, and they use it in a way to try to impose it as the correct standard name, that is very offensive.

Here’s my parish website. Please tell me if “Roman Catholic” is offensive here. Also, check out the other posts to see if “Roman Catholic” is offensive there.

sbcwickford.org/index1.html

dioceseofprovidence.com/

ctkri.org/

Here is just one document published on the vatican website. Please let me know if “Roman Catholic” is offensive here.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/ch_orthodox_docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20000719_baltimore_en.html

Might I suggest that the term “Roman Catholic” is subjectively offensive in only some places? It certainly is not here.

Subrosa

 

[bobzills]

Here’s my parish website. Please tell me if “Roman Catholic” is offensive here. Also, check out the other posts to see if “Roman Catholic” is offensive there.

sbcwickford.org/index1.html

dioceseofprovidence.com/

ctkri.org/

Here is just one document published on the vatican website. Please let me know if “Roman Catholic” is offensive here.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/ch_orthodox_docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20000719_baltimore_en.html

Might I suggest that the term “Roman Catholic” is subjectively offensive in only some places? It certainly is not here.

Subrosa

Correct. Contrary to what Petergee says, the phrase Roman Catholic is used lots and lots of times by the Catholic Church.