Roman Catholic or Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter khmsct99
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

khmsct99

Guest
I have seen that Roman Catholic is different than Catholic. How are the two different? I have researched, but the answers I am getting online (reference websites) are showing me things such as a slight difference in the belief system and history.
 
A technical answer would say that the designation “Catholic” refers to the entire Catholic Church (or Catholic Communion) as a whole. The Catholic Church, after all, is a communion of 22+ particular churches comprising various Rites (Roman, Byzantine, Chaldean, Coptic, Ethiopian, Maronite, etc., etc., etc.).

The designation “Roman” is typically applied to that part of the Catholic Church that utilizes any of the various Latin Rites, but most especially the Roman Rite with which the majority of Catholics in the West are familiar.
 
The Roman Catholic Church is one of the 22+ churches united under the pope. It’s comprised of the Latin-using rites, and the Slavonic using Dalmatian Rite.

The vast majority of the Roman Church uses the Roman Rite, one of over a dozen Western Rites to survive to Vatican II. (V II didn’t abolish any - but several heads of rite opted to make the change to the Roman OF.)

The Western Rites include several western regional rites:
The Roman Rite (in 5 distinct forms/uses - OF, EF, Anglican use, African Use, and Yupic use; a Chinese use had evolved but was not approved)
Dalmatian Rite (which really is an ethnic use of the Roman - but it didn’t always keep up. Uses slavonic, not latin)
Ambrosian Rite (of Florence, Italy)
Bragan Rite (of Braga, Portugal)
Mozarabic Rite (of Toledo, Spain - two uses, one of which is in development: Latin and modernSpanish)
Sarum Rite (Of England - used as an occasional use missal only since Trent, but still in occasional use in both the Roman Church and the Anglican Communion)

And the religious
Benedictine Rite (Benedictine Orders - different breviary and calendars, uses Roman missal)
Dominican Rite (Dominican Order - different missal and Breviary)
Carmelite Rite (Carmelite Order)
Cistercian Rite (Cistercian Order)
Premonstratensian Rite (Norbertine Order)
 
There are multiple Rites in the Catholic Church, as others have explained. Except because the Roman Rite is so much larger (population-wise, and the fact I’ve only ever seen 1 non-Roman-Rite parish), a lot of America uses “Catholic” as an abbreviation for “Roman Catholic”. Sort of like how there are multiple types of Creationism (even theistic evolution is), but people are normally referring to Young-Earth Creationism.
 
It’s my understanding that some Protestant denominations describe themselves to be catholic (meaning universal) and use the term Roman Catholic to differentiate the Catholic Church that is in communion with the pope. So, they would be refering to the whole Catholic Church when they say this and there would be no difference. When Catholics say it, they usually are trying to specify the Latin Rite, as the other posters have said. The Latin Rite is what most westerners are most familiar with and so many people use the terms Catholic and Roman Catholic interchangably. In other words, there’s no difference.
 
Aramis said:
The Roman Catholic Church is one of the 22+ churches united under the pope. It’s comprised of the Latin-using rites, and the Slavonic using Dalmatian Rite.

The vast majority of the Roman Church uses the Roman Rite, one of over a dozen Western Rites to survive to Vatican II. (V II didn’t abolish any - but several heads of rite opted to make the change to the Roman OF.)

The Western Rites include several western regional rites:
The Roman Rite (in 5 distinct forms/uses - OF, EF, Anglican use, African Use, and Yupic use; a Chinese use had evolved but was not approved)
Dalmatian Rite (which really is an ethnic use of the Roman - but it didn’t always keep up. Uses slavonic, not latin)
Ambrosian Rite (of Florence, Italy)
Bragan Rite (of Braga, Portugal)
Mozarabic Rite (of Toledo, Spain - two uses, one of which is in development: Latin and modernSpanish)
Sarum Rite (Of England - used as an occasional use missal only since Trent, but still in occasional use in both the Roman Church and the Anglican Communion)

And the religious
Benedictine Rite (Benedictine Orders - different breviary and calendars, uses Roman missal)
Dominican Rite (Dominican Order - different missal and Breviary)
Carmelite Rite (Carmelite Order)
Cistercian Rite (Cistercian Order)
Premonstratensian Rite (Norbertine Order)
Click to expand...
Fascinating. What is OF and EF? I have alot to learn. :o
 
Aramis said:
The Roman Catholic Church is one of the 22+ churches united under the pope. It’s comprised of the Latin-using rites, and the Slavonic using Dalmatian Rite.

The vast majority of the Roman Church uses the Roman Rite, one of over a dozen Western Rites to survive to Vatican II. (V II didn’t abolish any - but several heads of rite opted to make the change to the Roman OF.)

The Western Rites include several western regional rites:
The Roman Rite (in 5 distinct forms/uses - OF, EF, Anglican use, African Use, and Yupic use; a Chinese use had evolved but was not approved)
Dalmatian Rite (which really is an ethnic use of the Roman - but it didn’t always keep up. Uses slavonic, not latin)
Ambrosian Rite (of Florence, Italy)
Bragan Rite (of Braga, Portugal)
Mozarabic Rite (of Toledo, Spain - two uses, one of which is in development: Latin and modernSpanish)
Sarum Rite (Of England - used as an occasional use missal only since Trent, but still in occasional use in both the Roman Church and the Anglican Communion)

And the religious
Benedictine Rite (Benedictine Orders - different breviary and calendars, uses Roman missal)
Dominican Rite (Dominican Order - different missal and Breviary)
Carmelite Rite (Carmelite Order)
Cistercian Rite (Cistercian Order)
Premonstratensian Rite (Norbertine Order)
Click to expand...
And I’m probably sure you meant Franciscans too. But what about the Eastern rite? Are they united under our pontiff? Or are they the ones that separated under “the great schism”? And the Copts have their own pope don’t they?

Bill
 
khmsct99 said:
I have seen that Roman Catholic is different than Catholic. How are the two different? I have researched, but the answers I am getting online (reference websites) are showing me things such as a slight difference in the belief system and history.
Click to expand...
Aramis said:
The Roman Catholic Church is one of the 22+ churches united under the pope. It’s comprised of the Latin-using rites, and the Slavonic using Dalmatian Rite.
Click to expand...
Guys, it’s worth pointing out that for most of the world, the term “Roman Catholic Church” refers to the entire Catholic Church, the entire Catholic Communion.

I don’t like it either. But we’d be misleading and confusing people if we led them to always expect “Roman Catholic” to refer only to members of the Latin Church.
oldburkes said:
Fascinating. What is OF and EF? I have alot to learn. :o
Click to expand...
The “Ordinary Form” of the Roman Rite is the Roman Mass celebrated according to the Missal of Paul VI. It’s the form of Mass you’re most likely to see whenever you attend Mass at a Catholic parish these days.

The “Extraordinary Form” of the Roman Rite is the Roman Mass celebrated according to the Missal of John XXIII in its latest edition (1963, I think). This version of the Mass predates all of the post-conciliar changes and is celebrated much more rarely than the Ordinary Form. It is a beautiful form of the Mass, however, and many Catholics who appreciate our little-t traditions find that they prefer this version.
 
So, Catholic is like a general thing and then there is sort of like a subcategory, like Roman Catholic… or the other types of it as well.

There is not much of difference.

Am I correct? Please Correct Me If I Am Wrong
 
khmsct99 said:
So, Catholic is like a general thing and then there is sort of like a subcategory, like Roman Catholic… or the other types of it as well.

There is not much of difference.

Am I correct? Please Correct Me If I Am Wrong
Click to expand...
There is really no significant difference
 
Jon_S said:
There is really no significant difference
Click to expand...
It would appear that you may not have had the privilege of direct contact with any of our Eastern Rite brothers and sisters. It definitely makes a difference to them.
 
otjm said:
It would appear that you may not have had the privilege of direct contact with any of our Eastern Rite brothers and sisters. It definitely makes a difference to them.
Click to expand...
By significant I mean significant theologically.

Of course there are different traditions and disciplines.
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
A technical answer would say that the designation “Catholic” refers to the entire Catholic Church (or Catholic Communion) as a whole. The Catholic Church, after all, is a communion of 22+ particular churches comprising various Rites (Roman, Byzantine, Chaldean, Coptic, Ethiopian, Maronite, etc., etc., etc.).

The designation “Roman” is typically applied to that part of the Catholic Church that utilizes any of the various Latin Rites, but most especially the Roman Rite with which the majority of Catholics in the West are familiar.
Click to expand...
👍🙂
 
Jon_S said:
By significant I mean significant theologically.

Of course there are different traditions and disciplines.
Click to expand...
I believe that you may find some theological differences;whether they are significant or not, I will leave to others. It wasn’t until John Paul 2 that one of them was finally resolved.
 
khmsct99 said:
I have seen that Roman Catholic is different than Catholic. How are the two different?
Click to expand...
The two are not different but the same .

Magisterial documents use both the term Catholic Church and the term Roman Catholic Church for the Universal Church .
 
billcu1 said:
And I’m probably sure you meant Franciscans too. But what about the Eastern rite? Are they united under our pontiff? Or are they the ones that separated under “the great schism”? And the Copts have their own pope don’t they?

Bill
Click to expand...
No. The Franciscans, in accord with their founder’s rule, use the current missal of Rome. They have no separate rite; never have, never will, because it would violate their rule of life and their charter.

The Eastern Churches fall under 5 other rites, and all have some in communion with rome, some not.
The Syriac rites (Western and Eastern are considered separate rites) comprise a total of 5 churches in communion, and 7 or so not in communion with Rome. In communion are the Chaldean Church, Maronite Church, Syrian Catholic Church, Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, Syro-Malankar Catholic Church. Not in communion are the Syrian Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Ancient Church of the East, Malankara Orthodox, Malabar Orthodox, and a couple smaller ones I can’t remember the names of.

The Armenian Catholics are in Union; the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox are not, but in practical terms, generally don’t make an issue of the Armenian Catholics being in communion with Rome.

The Alexandrians (Copts, Ethiopians, and Eritreans) have both Catholic and Orthodox - the Eritrean Catholics are separate dioceses within the Ethiopian Catholic Church, but on the orthodox side, the Eritreans are a separate church.

The Byzantines, well, there are a dozen plus Byzantine Rite Churches in communion with Rome - but twice as many not in communion with rome. The Italo-Greeks aka Italo-Albanians don’t have a parallel in the Eastern Orthodox communion, but all the others do. The ones you’ll encounter in the US are the Ruthenians, Ukrainians, Melkites, Romanians, and Italo-Greeks. The Italo-greeks in the US are not enrolled in the Ruthenian Church, but are served by clergy from the Ruthenian Church. The Italo-greeks never broke from Rome during the “great schism”.

A special aside about a particular weirdness: The Knanaya - They have a diocese in Communion with Rome via one of the indian churches (Syro-Malabar), and some of them are in a non-catholic diocese (of the Syrian Malankara Orthodox Church). I’ve read that there is a third chunk in one of the other indian non-Catholic churches. They have some parishes in the US, too. So if you see “Knanaya Catholic” - it’s a subset of Syro-Malabar.

Oh, and Chaldeans are allowed to commune in the Assyrian Church of the East, and vice versa. The Syrian Catholics and Syrian Orthodox also allow communion across the divide. In both cases, it’s by treaty, and provides for pastoral care. And in both cases, the two churches share the same rite, and are pretty darned close in praxis still.
 
khmsct99 said:
So, Catholic is like a general thing and then there is sort of like a subcategory, like Roman Catholic… or the other types of it as well.

There is not much of difference.

Am I correct? Please Correct Me If I Am Wrong
Click to expand...
You are wrong.

Speaking as a Ruthenian…

Liturgically, theologically, and in praxis, a Byzantine Rite parish is closer to the Eastern Orthodox than to the Romans. Well, excepting the Western Rite Orthodox.‡

Our Byzantine liturgies are essentially stable since about 600 AD. Rome’s hasn’t been. In fact, the Roman Liturgy had some major changes between 1250 and 1550. As in, moving chunks of the liturgy around.

We are in communion with rome, accept the dogmas (but in several cases, not the Roman Doctrines arising from/around those dogmas, including The Dormition/Assumption).

We have separate calendars and different days of obligation.(You go on 1 Jan, we go on 6 Jan). We have 4 fasts per year, you have 2; lent for us is 2 days longer; St. Phillips fast is a week longer than Advent; you no longer keep Dormition nor Apostle’s Fasts.

You have a right to a screen in the confessional; we don’t even have a right to a confessional.

We commune children from baptism on, and baptize within 30 days of birth, and chrismate (confirm) them at the same time. You baptize, then 5-10 years later, commune them; in a few dioceses confirmation is ages 8-10, in others as late as 16-17.

We have a requirement to keep the friday abstinence year round, and may not substitute for it without specific permission. Romans may substitute any pious practice for the abstinence from meat. We consider fish to be meat; romans don’t, but our bishops dispense to allow fish on fridays outside of the 4 major fasts.

My priest is a cradle Catholic, and is married, has three daughters. Yours is either a former protestant, or is celibate.

If you’ve never been, go to an Eastern Catholic Divine Worship service (Divine Liturgy) - it fulfills obligation the same as the mass, and it’s a world of difference.

-=-=-=-
‡ The WRO use the Roman Rite, but are part of the Antiochian Orthodox or ROCOR churches, part of the Eastern Orthodox Communion.
 
Catholicism (Catholic) = this describes a certain type of beliefs and the liturgy we use, etc.
Roman Catholicism (Roman Catholic) = those Catholics which are in full communion with the Pope (e.g. the 23 sui iuris churches including the biggest one, which Francis, PP, heads)

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), for example, are a Traditionalist Catholic organisation that fell out with the Church over the reforms during Vatican II so are not in full communion with the Church (the sacraments performed in SSPX churches are not recognised by Roman Catholics)

Whereas, if you took an organisation like the Confraternity of St. Peter (CSP), for example, you would find that we are still traditionalist but we have seeked permission from the Pontiff to continue our traditional ways, as opposed to creating a schism about it. Therefore members of Confraternitas Sancti Petri (and the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter) are Roman Catholic.

Nowadays, Catholic is more or less interchangeable with Roman Catholic, however you will never see an official document treating them as such.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top