Universal Church in union w/Rome- The Catholic Church or The Roman Catholic Church?

[Old_Medic]

Why are you considering what other Churches call the Catholic Church?

That is the REAL question, why you are worried about what others may, or may not, choose to call the Church?

I grew up in a Church, one that my Paternal Grandfather was the Minister of, that called the Catholic Church “The Devil’s Church”. That did NOT make it so, it was simply ignorance on their part. (Of course, when I announced that i wanted to become a Catholic, hell WAS raised.)

Of course Orthodox consider all Catholics to be “Roman Catholics”. They split away form “Rome”, and that is their frame of reference. But, their calling the Church the “Roman Catholic Church” does not make it so, just as the people in my grandfathers church calling it “The Devil’s Church” also did not make that so.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Why are you considering what other Churches call the Catholic Church?

That is the REAL question, why you are worried about what others may, or may not, choose to call the Church?

I grew up in a Church, one that my Paternal Grandfather was the Minister of, that called the Catholic Church “The Devil’s Church”. That did NOT make it so, it was simply ignorance on their part. (Of course, when I announced that i wanted to become a Catholic, hell WAS raised.)

Of course Orthodox consider all Catholics to be “Roman Catholics”. They split away form “Rome”, and that is their frame of reference. But, their calling the Church the “Roman Catholic Church” does not make it so, just as the people in my grandfathers church calling it “The Devil’s Church” also did not make that so.

AGREED!

Our faith has been trivialized so much by Protestants and other anti-Catholic groups that we ourselves have adopted that mentality and approach to faith and our Church. Who cares what the name of the Church is, how does that impact our salvation? If having the right name of the Church important? What is important is He who is the head of the Church, and its the only name that is important to us. Jesus Christ. Catholic, Orthodox, whatever, the name is not important.

 

[jmj1984]

AGREED!

Our faith has been trivialized so much by Protestants and other anti-Catholic groups that we ourselves have adopted that mentality and approach to faith and our Church. Who cares what the name of the Church is, how does that impact our salvation? If having the right name of the Church important? What is important is He who is the head of the Church, and its the only name that is important to us. Jesus Christ. Catholic, Orthodox, whatever, the name is not important.

Excepting of course that the Pope is the head of the church on earth, which is a rather important distinction.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Excepting of course that the Pope is the head of the church on earth, which is a rather important distinction.

No. There is only one truth and that is Jesus Christ. If you cannot see the papacy in that light, then you have completely missed the point.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Excepting of course that the Pope is the head of the church on earth, which is a rather important distinction.

I don’t think it is necessary to critique every little detail within all of Constantine’s posts.

As a Catholic, I’m pretty sure he believes that, but just didn’t state that he did.

For instance, I like strawberry ice cream. That doesn’t imply that I don’t like any other kind of ice cream, just because I didn’t list other kinds of ice cream that I like.

 

[jmj1984]

No. There is only one truth and that is Jesus Christ. If you cannot see the papacy in that light, then you have completely missed the point.

I do indeed, just emphasising the point thats all.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I do indeed, just emphasising the point thats all.

If we see the truth in Christ, nothing else needs to be emphasized

 

[Aramis]

I disagree. The overwhelming majority of Orthodox are fully aware that Eastern Catholics do not identify themselves as Roman Catholics. You may find Greek Catholic, Melkite, etc., but you will not find “Roman”. Accordingly, those who refer to Eastern Catholics as Roman Catholics, are very likely making a choice to deny the self-identification of Eastern Catholics and to impose an alien identity upon them. IMO this usage is akin to the usage of the U word, which is acknowledged to be inherently “confrontational and uncharitable” (cf Important Forum Information).

I’ve heard Uniate used far more by Byzantine Catholics than anyone else. Most of the Orthodox locally don’t use the term, because most of them don’t realize they exist…

Also note that in several languages, the term for Greek-Catholics aka Byzantine Catholics translates to “Roman Catholic.”

 

[dvdjs]

I’ve heard Uniate used far more by Byzantine Catholics than anyone else. Most of the Orthodox locally don’t use the term, because most of them don’t realize they exist…

How interesting. My experience is the exactly the opposite.

Also note that in several languages, the term for Greek-Catholics aka Byzantine Catholics translates to “Roman Catholic.”

I understand the use of “Roman” in some other regions to refer to those descended from, or connected to those descended from the Eastern Roman Empire. But to use “Roman” in translation would be an odd choice given the other uses of “Roman” in the English language; I don’t recall seeing such a translation used. Rather:

For those unfamiliar with Turkish, Syriac or Arabic, “Rum Katolik” does NOT mean “Roman Catholic” in the common English usage of that phrase. “Rum” is the Turkish for the Greek term “Romaioi”, and Romaioi, which looks like the English word “Roman”, would normally be accurately translated as “Byzantine”, “East Roman” or “Romaioi” (to indicate the East Romans, the inhabitants of the East Roman Empire) in the context of the domains of the former Byzantine, or East Roman, Empire. The Empire in the East was the direct, organic, and only survivor of the Roman Empire of Augustus Caesar and this is reflected in part by the fact that the name Roman/Romaios continued in use from its establishment in 313 A.D. through to its political end in 1453 A.D.

rumkatkilise.org/

 

[jmj1984]

If we see the truth in Christ, nothing else needs to be emphasized

Excepting of course that weak and sinful as we are, our ‘seeing’ of the truth, our understanding can often be wrong and can lead us into error.

 

[porthos11]

I did not present my personal interpretation nor reference my personal opinion, I referenced facts as I did in my original post. If you have a better interpretation of '‘Mother and Mistress of all the Churches’ along with the rest of the sources I have cited I would be more than happy to hear it for my edification.

The context makes it clear: what is referred to is not the Universal Catholic Church, but one particular church, specifically, the Church of Rome (i.e. the Latin Church), as contrasted to the other Great Churches (Alexandria, Constantinople, Jerusalem and Antioch). That particular Church is correctly called the “Roman” Catholic Church. But the term does not properly apply to the communion of the 23 Catholic churches, which is properly called the Catholic Church.

 

[twf]

The context makes it clear: what is referred to is not the Universal Catholic Church, but one particular church, specifically, the Church of Rome (i.e. the Latin Church), as contrasted to the other Great Churches (Alexandria, Constantinople, Jerusalem and Antioch). That particular Church is correctly called the “Roman” Catholic Church. But the term does not properly apply to the communion of the 23 Catholic churches, which is properly called the Catholic Church.

More specifically, as I outlined in my previous post in this thread, the “mother and mistress of all the Churches” is the Diocese of Rome…the local church that has always held the primacy. In the ancient usage, the Roman Church is the Church in Rome…the larger Western Church which worships according to the Roman Rite is properly Latin Church. The Roman Church, called here the ‘mother and mistress of all churches’, is hardly the Universal Church - just one of thousands of particular churches (each diocese corresponding to a particular church in theological terms) that happens to rank first among them…

 

[jmj1984]

The context makes it clear: what is referred to is not the Universal Catholic Church, but one particular church, specifically, the Church of Rome (i.e. the Latin Church), as contrasted to the other Great Churches (Alexandria, Constantinople, Jerusalem and Antioch). That particular Church is correctly called the “Roman” Catholic Church. But the term does not properly apply to the communion of the 23 Catholic churches, which is properly called the Catholic Church.

Again I will wait for someone to come up with an authority equal to those that use the term before I change my opinion.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother jmj,

Actually the term is far older than that, the Council of Florence used it back in the 15th Century throughout the Council documents’**… They adopted an attitude of opposition and, prodigal of their good name and enemies to their own honour, they strove to their utmost with pestilential daring to rend the unity of the holy Roman and Catholic church and the seamless robe of Christ’, and with serpentlike bites to lacerate the womb of the pious and holy mother herself. **

The self-identification of “Roman” is older even than that. Certain Eastern Orthodox before, during, and after, the Council of Florence also identified themselves as “Roman,” but it is not in relation to the particular Church of Rome, but to the original Roman heritage of the Church as a whole (i.e., the marriage of Church and State during Roman times). There is no good reason to believe that Florence, which garnered the participation of Eastern Orthodox, did not understand this general understanding of the term “Roman” when referring to the Church universal.

The Council of Trent also uses the term throughout 'CANON XXIX.-If any one saith, that he, who has fallen after baptism, is not able by the grace of God to rise again; or, that he is able indeed to recover the justice which he has lost, but by faith alone without the sacrament of Penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and Catholic Church-instructed by Christ and his Apostles-has hitherto professed, observed, and taugh; let him be anathema. '

The Tridentine profession of faith also states ‘Since that time the Roman Catholic Church has added two articles which enter into the profession, one on the sinlessness of the Virgin Mary, and one on the infallibility of the pope, in the following words:’

This seems to be refer particularly to the Church of Rome, and shouldn’t automatically be perceived to say that the Church universal is “Roman.”

The First Vatican Council also uses the term in its profession of faith states '** I acknowledge the
holy,
catholic,
apostolic and
Roman**
church, the mother and mistress of all the churches [1] .
Likewise
all other things which have been transmitted, defined and declared by the sacred canons and the ecumenical councils, especially the sacred Trent, I accept unhesitatingly and profess; in the same way
whatever is to the contrary, and whatever heresies have been condemned, rejected and anathematised by the church, I too condemn, reject and anathematise.
This quote from Vatican 1 is even more obvious that the term “Roman” is referring only to the Church of Rome, not the Church universal. I’m not sure how this statement (especially) can be used to support your claim that the Church universal can be called “Roman.”

I understand that some Eastern Catholics may not like the term because they perceive it as an insult or a slight of their particular tradition but ultimately it is no more than a statement of fact. We are all Roman because we are all part of the church which accepts the Roman Pontiff as its head (on earth) and which is obedient and humbly submissive to said pontiff. Likewise the Catholic Church has a Roman Character because its head on earth is the Roman Pontiff and said church is 'the mother and mistress of the churches’

. This does not mean that all Catholics have the same liturgical or even theological traditions nor does it undermine the importance of the various rites and particular chuches.
We are not all Roman. I agree with brother dvdjs that using the term “Roman” when referring to Eastern or Oriental Catholics is pejorative. The quotes you have given don’t really support a claim that the Church universal can properly be called “Roman” simply because her head bishop is the bishop of the Church of Rome,

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

Again I will wait for someone to come up with an authority equal to those that use the term before I change my opinion.

What we’re saying is that your “authorities” don’t seem to be saying what you think they are saying.

Blessings,
Marduk