"Roman" Catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter R3VAN
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder how the real Anglican Catholics, those who would reunite with Rome, will call themselves?
If I recall correctly, when the Episcopalian/Anglicans in Columbia SC became Catholics about twenty years ago (eventually, after instruction, etc.) by joining St. Joseph’s Parish, they became CATHOLICS.
 
I find this a bit confusing. How many kinds of catholics (eastern, western, roman, traditional, byzantine and so on) are there?

Edit: would it be better if i said: Papal friendly Norwegian Catholic or Norwegian Catholic instead of Roman Catholic?
Traditional isn’t really a “kind” of Catholic. The different “kids” would be to identify one’s hierarchical Church. So its Roman/Latin, Ukrainian, Russian, Ruthenian, Romanian, Melkite, Coptic, Ethipian, Maronite, Chaldean, Syro-Malabar, Syro-Malankara, Belarusian, Greek, Slovak, Bulgarian, Armenian, Syriac, Albanian, Hungarian, Italo-Albanian, Macedonian and Croatian (Eparchy of Križevci).

Basically each group should have sort of a “captial” Church where the patriarch is located, or the synod of bishops is centered upon.
 
If I recall correctly, when the Episcopalian/Anglicans in Columbia SC became Catholics about twenty years ago (eventually, after instruction, etc.) by joining St. Joseph’s Parish, they became CATHOLICS.
Yes, they are Catholics. But how would they identify themselves to distinguish their identity as Anglican Catholics?
 
Maybe the answer is in your question: Anglican Catholics. Has a nice ring to it.
Yes but there are already those who are not in communion with Rome who calls themselves Anglican Catholics.

At least in Canada the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada is part of the Traditional Anglican Communion that is reuniting with Rome. So now they will be an authentic Anglican Catholic Church of Canada in the true sense of the word.
 
Yes but there are already those who are not in communion with Rome who calls themselves Anglican Catholics.
I didn’t know that. Maybe Anglican-Rite? Whatever they decide, I’m sure it will be good and fitting for them.
 
In the military you have to be specific on what religion you are. It will be on your dog tag. And I’m sure you know what is the use of a dog tag… to identify the injured and casualty.
 
In the military you have to be specific on what religion you are. It will be on your dog tag. And I’m sure you know what is the use of a dog tag… to identify the injured and casualty.
Kind of funny for me. I had a dog tag that said Roman Catholic and Catholic. I don’t remember which one I changed to. I was not as into my faith at 19 as I am now. I just remember thinking it was proper to change it. I’m thinking that I changed it to Roman Catholic.
 
I haven’t seen this mentioned, but it is worth pointing out that the (Roman) Church does often refer to itself under the title Sancta Romana Ecclesia, the “Holy Roman Church.” I was thinking about the traditional form for the announcement of a new Pope, for instance the current one: “Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum; habemus Papam: Eminentissimum ac Reverendissimum Dominum, Dominum Josephum Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Cardinalem Ratzinger, qui sibi nomen imposuit Benedictum XVI.”

Surely it is not so great a step from the traditional “Holy Roman Church” to “Roman Catholic Church” that the latter should draw criticism as “non-Catholic” for using the term “Roman.”
 
Well, i am:
  • A catholic and so happy to finally be home, after over 400 years
    (Norway is the country where you are born-baptized into the lutheran state church)
  • Norwegian
  • Loyal to the Holy Pope Benedict XVI
  • Attending mass 2-4x a week
  • Following the cathecism
  • Being obedient and go to confession monthly
  • Attending TLM masses monthly (in my parish the are also celebrated in quiet weekly).
What sort of catholic it makes me, i do not know. But it doesn`t matter.
I am home and here is where i belong.

🙂
 
Why?
They were thrilled to become Roman Catholic.
Why add an adjective that describes their former tradition?
I don’t know if you’ve been paying attention to the developments, but its not a former tradition. They will bring everything Anglican with them and continue using it. They already have the Anglican Use Mass which is simply an Anglican Mass with corrections to conform to Catholic theology and ensure valid Eucharistic prayers.
 
I don’t know if you’ve been paying attention to the developments, but its not a former tradition. They will bring everything Anglican with them and continue using it. They already have the Anglican Use Mass which is simply an Anglican Mass with corrections to conform to Catholic theology and ensure valid Eucharistic prayers.
… and that was NOT THE CASE in SC twenty yrs ago.
Are you paying attention to the posts you’re reading?

:rolleyes:
 
… and that was NOT THE CASE in SC twenty yrs ago.
Are you paying attention to the posts you’re reading?

:rolleyes:
I’m not talking about 20 years ago, I’m talking about today with the Ordinariate and everything.
 
I’m not talking about 20 years ago, I’m talking about today with the Ordinariate and everything.
YOO HOO?

My post (that you are questioning) is about a certain Church community
that converted en masse in South Carolina twenty+ years ago - as the post says.
Asking if they should “modify” the name of their Catholic faith is irrelevant.

PS - Yes OF COURSE I’m aware of current changes. Who isn’t? That has nothing to do with the folks who became parishoners at St. Joseph’s decades ago!

:eek:
 
YOO HOO?

My post (that you are questioning) is about a certain Church community
that converted en masse in South Carolina twenty+ years ago - as the post says.
Asking if they should “modify” the name of their Catholic faith is irrelevant.

PS - Yes OF COURSE I’m aware of current changes. Who isn’t? That has nothing to do with the folks who became parishoners at St. Joseph’s decades ago!

:eek:
Then it is you who is not replying to the context of my posts.
I was clearly talking about Catholics identifying themselvs through their Church heirarchy as well as traditions.
 
Then it is you who is not replying to the context of my posts.
I was clearly talking about Catholics identifying themselvs through their Church heirarchy as well as traditions.
Yes - and I am free to do so.

My point:
entire congregations have converted without special “titles.”
Such an action is not unheard-of nor is it forbidden.
 
Well, i am:
  • A catholic and so happy to finally be home, after over 400 years
    (Norway is the country where you are born-baptized into the lutheran state church)
  • Norwegian
  • Loyal to the Holy Pope Benedict XVI
  • Attending mass 2-4x a week
  • Following the cathecism
  • Being obedient and go to confession monthly
  • Attending TLM masses monthly (in my parish the are also celebrated in quiet weekly).
What sort of catholic it makes me, i do not know. But it doesn`t matter.
I am home and here is where i belong.

🙂
Welcome Home! 🙂

P.S. A little charity, folks.
 
Well, i am:
  • A catholic and so happy to finally be home, after over 400 years
    (Norway is the country where you are born-baptized into the lutheran state church)
  • Norwegian
  • Loyal to the Holy Pope Benedict XVI
  • Attending mass 2-4x a week
  • Following the cathecism
  • Being obedient and go to confession monthly
  • Attending TLM masses monthly (in my parish the are also celebrated in quiet weekly).
What sort of catholic it makes me, i do not know. But it doesn`t matter.
I am home and here is where i belong.

🙂
and your user name, Padraig?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top