What is the name of that Church which was established in Rome by Sts. Peter & Paul which is currently headquartered at the Vatican?

[phoenix3212]

It doesn’t matter to me personally. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet sort of thing, you know?

But I do think it’s appropriate to refer to the whole church solely as the “Catholic Church” for the sake of Eastern Rite Catholics.

 

[Nine_Two]

Another example of a term that just occured to me, which shows the opposite development, is the term “uniate” which was coined by the Eastern Catholics themselves but has taken on a derisive meaning, to the point that it is against the rules on this forum to call someone “uniate” even if they are from a church which once used the term in self-reference.

Basically it doesn’t matter what a word once meant, it is what it commonly means now. I’ve heard people use the term “Roman Catholic” in an insulting way, but I’ve also heard people say “Catholic” in an insulting way. No matter what title you want to be called by, someone is going to turn it into an insult, but hopefully that will be a minority. It’s the terms which are only ever used as insulting, like earlier mentioned terms “Papist” or “Romish” (or “Semi-Catholic”, as I’ve heard the Orthodox refered to as before) which when used certainly are meant to give offense.

 

[Bill_Pick]

This hopefully will sound like a silly question to most viewers; however, it is one that hijaked another thread that I know of and someone posted on that thread that it’d hijaked several other threads.

My hopes in starting this thread is to allow the hijaker their own thread so that they will stop hijaking others to address the issues they have with the name of their own Church.

If you are a Roman Catholic Christian, are you (like the hijaker) offended when someone says you are a Roman Catholic? Do you think it’s a slur? Do you (like the hijaker) think that those of your Church who accept others refering to your Church as the Roman Catholic Church are ignorant?

I am Greek Orthodox now, but before I converted I was a Roman Catholic Christian. Most of my friends and aquaintences are all Roman Catholic. I was and they are very proud to be called Roman Catholics!

The name is the Cathloic Church after the spilt it was called the RCC as a insult to the Cathloic Church

 

[jmcrae]

hi monica.

answer - the Catholic Church

and yes, it is an offensive term even though most people (including many catholics) that use it have no intention to be so. it’s just innocent ignorance. however, we should do our best to stop calling the CC the RCC because not only is it incorrect but it’s a slap in the face to the Byzantine, Chaldean, Coptic (etc) rites.

If they are in full communion with Rome, then are they not also Roman Catholic?

I think there is a difference between being Roman Catholic (affiliated with the Pope) and Latin Rite Catholic. These are not synonyms, in my mind.

 

[wwolverine]

This hopefully will sound like a silly question to most viewers; however, it is one that hijaked another thread that I know of and someone posted on that thread that it’d hijaked several other threads.

My hopes in starting this thread is to allow the hijaker their own thread so that they will stop hijaking others to address the issues they have with the name of their own Church.

If you are a Roman Catholic Christian, are you (like the hijaker) offended when someone says you are a Roman Catholic? Do you think it’s a slur? Do you (like the hijaker) think that those of your Church who accept others refering to your Church as the Roman Catholic Church are ignorant?

I am Greek Orthodox now, but before I converted I was a Roman Catholic Christian. Most of my friends and aquaintences are all Roman Catholic. I was and they are very proud to be called Roman Catholics!

Dear Monica,

Thanks to your question, I have come to know the we are Catholic Christians and Not Roman as is being said, but than there was one answer in another forum, dont remember exactly were, but the answer was quite interesting too. it said, that Jesus was crucified on the cross by the roman soldiers, ie the roman rule?, and hence Jesus established His first Church there. I found the answer quite good, Maybe that was God’s plans and hence the RCC?

Regarding to your other slur thing, I never thought of it that way, and when it comes to my religion, I do mention RC ie roman catholic. Maybe its wrong according to some writers on this forum? But than in my place all use it.

 

[ralphinal]

If they are in full communion with Rome, then are they not also Roman Catholic?

I think there is a difference between being Roman Catholic (affiliated with the Pope) and Latin Rite Catholic. These are not synonyms, in my mind.

Most people stictly see Latin Rite as Roman Catholic. And most of them do not know about any other rites.

 

[josie_L]

This hopefully will sound like a silly question to most viewers; however, it is one that hijaked another thread that I know of and someone posted on that thread that it’d hijaked several other threads.

My hopes in starting this thread is to allow the hijaker their own thread so that they will stop hijaking others to address the issues they have with the name of their own Church.

If you are a Roman Catholic Christian, are you (like the hijaker) offended when someone says you are a Roman Catholic? Do you think it’s a slur? Do you (like the hijaker) think that those of your Church who accept others refering to your Church as the Roman Catholic Church are ignorant?

I am Greek Orthodox now, but before I converted I was a Roman Catholic Christian. Most of my friends and aquaintences are all Roman Catholic. I was and they are very proud to be called Roman Catholics!

I think Catholics get angry, and rightly so, when non-Catholics insist on calling the Catholic Church, the “Roman” Catholic Church because the Church is not “Roman” but universal.

note: It is in a subtle (or not so subtle) way a means to deny us the fact that we are the Universal Church to call us Roman.

 

[JonNC]

I think Catholics get angry, and rightly so, when non-Catholics insist on calling the Catholic Church, the “Roman” Catholic Church because the Church is not “Roman” but universal.

note: It is in a subtle (or not so subtle) way a means to deny us the fact that we are the Universal Church to call us Roman.

And I think, Josie, that noncatholics should call the Catholic Church “The Catholic Church” because that is what she prefers. It is just good manners.

Jon

 

[jen_fla]

If they are in full communion with Rome, then are they not also Roman Catholic?

I think there is a difference between being Roman Catholic (affiliated with the Pope) and Latin Rite Catholic. These are not synonyms, in my mind.

well i guess this is where it gets a bit touchy ( and maybe a venn diagram would come in handy ) … and i know i’m going to upset some people (sorry ) but we believe that in order to be part of the “Catholic Church” it is simply understood that they are in communion with Rome. i can understand how other churches accepted “catholic” as an adjective describing how their beliefs are universal or that all churches are tied together and are universal, but in terms of using it as a proper name, well i guess the only area where i could see the confusion would be with our orthodox brothers and sisters.

and even if you are using the word “roman” before the world Catholic to convey that the Church is in communion with rome it still would never be correct to use that as the proper name of the Catholic Church as a whole. i mean you don’t ever see the term “Roman Byzantine Catholic Church” to convey they are down with rome.

am i making sense? i’m only on my first cup of coffee for the day!

peace

 

[MrS]

In Scripture , it was first referred to as The Way

In Greek, it could be called Universal, or Catholic

Bu 110AD, the only Church founded by Christ (and actually the only faith community which should use the word “Church” in their names) was called Catholic.

By the eleventh century those who still possessed Apostolic succession , but now denied the primacy of the chair of Peter, retained Catholic in their name.

Henry, wishing to usurp the universality of the word Catholic deemed to insult the real Church by calling them Romanists. Hence Roman Catholic was intended to insult.

Today the original Church is still called Catholic.

Within the Catholic Church are the East and West Churches.

Within the West are different Rites, the largest being the Latin Rite.

Thus I am a Catholic, Latin Rite.

.

 

[IowaJay]

No, I am not offended by it. Ignorance, with regards to me, is always a possibility, but I do know the history of the term. The Church has also used the term to describe itself.

gsearch.vatican.va/search?q=roman+catholic

God bless

Thanks for pointing this out.

A quick review of the Vatican’s website reveals that when the Church is talking about itself in general statements primarily addressed to its own members, it refers to itself as the “Catholic Church.” When it talks about itself while in dialogue with members of other Christian communities, it refers to itself as the “Roman Catholic Church.”

 

[ricko]

And I think, Josie, that noncatholics should call the Catholic Church “The Catholic Church” because that is what she prefers. It is just good manners.

Jon

Finally, someone with good manners and common sense, Thank You. We call it the Catholic Church because that is her name!

It is noteworthy that the representative Anglican divine, Bishop Andrewes, in his “Tortura Torti” (1609) ridicules the phrase Ecclesia Catholica Romana as a contradiction in terms. “What,” he asks, “is the object of adding ‘Roman’? The only purpose that such an adjunct can serve is to distinguish your Catholic Church from another Catholic Church which is not Roman” (p. 368). It is this very common line of argument which imposes upon Catholics the necessity of making no compromise in the matter of their own name. The loyal adherents of the Holy See did not begin in the sixteenth century to call themselves “Catholics” for controversial purposes. It is the traditional name handed down to us continuously from the time of St. Augustine. We use this name ourselves and ask those outside the Church to use it, without reference to its signification simply because it is our customary name, just as we talk of the Russian Church as “the Orthodox Church”, not because we recognize its orthodoxy but because its members so style themselves

newadvent.org/cathen/13121a.htm

 

[SingleMomMonica]

I think Catholics get angry, and rightly so, when non-Catholics insist on calling the Catholic Church, the “Roman” Catholic Church because the Church is not “Roman” but universal.

note: It is in a subtle (or not so subtle) way a means to deny us the fact that we are the Universal Church to call us Roman.

Read the below. I would agree with you if someone simply referred to the Roman Catholic Church as “Roman” or “Romanist” as on some occasions people may use that for something besides brevity by eliminating the word “Catholic”, but by calling it Roman Catholic Church Catholics and Non-Catholics alike are simply echoing what that Church calls itself.

The original meaning of the word Catholic is “Whole” and “Complete”. In the 5th Century, it began to take on the meaning of “Universal”.

By calling it the Roman Catholic Church, not only are Catholics and Non-Catholics alike calling it by the same name it calls itself (just refer to any local Roman Catholic Church - they have names like St. John the Evangelist Roman Catholic Church or refer to any number of documents as shown on the Vatican’s website in which it refers to itself as the Roman Catholic Church), they are simply stating: The Roman Universal Church.

**Seriously, if there were any problem with calling the Roman Catholic Church, the Roman Catholic Church…then Vatican issued documents would not use the term & no local parishes would use the term as part of it’s name. **

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Respectfully, that’s a faulty premise. The Vatican does not ‘micro-manage.’ The actual web site refers to itself as the Catholic Church. Areas where things like “Roman” are written are usually in reference or reply to somebody who has already used the term, or are accepted as cultural variants. In some areas of the U.S., calling people ‘woodchucks’ is offensive to many, but others have taken the term as one of endearment. (Vermont, if you’re wondering). You’ll find some places where people will be extremely upset if they are called that name, and others where it’s encouraged. . .and both groups will be the same (Vermonters). Now the fact is, however ‘accepted’ the term might be for some, it’s still not the real name of people who live in the state though, and when you’re addressing somebody from that state in a formal way, you don’t call them woodchucks even if they LIKE or even PREFER the term.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yes, and I want to make it clear that I am not saying that if a church is named “St. Luke’s Roman Catholic Church” or somebody says, “I’m a Roman Catholic”, that I’m going to pull a hissy and go, "No it’s St. Luke’s CATHOLIC’ or “You’re a CATHOLIC”. There are times and places where the terminology is perfectly acceptable and appropriate to the persons and the situation. I’m not arguing that one must always and only say “Catholic Church” in every possible application/situation.

 

[dzheremi]

I understand the Orthodox objection to calling or thinking of any other church as the “Catholic Church”, but I don’t think this subject should be entertained here. It is one thing for Orthodox Christians or Protestants to refer to the Church in Rome as anything they want among themselves (and I’ve heard plenty of colorful names among people who did not know I was Catholic, and read many more), but if you know you’re in mixed company it seems fair to abide by the sensibilities of the majority, no matter how wrong you think they are. If I were at an Orthodox site right now I would certainly refer to the churches of that communion by whatever name they would want to be called.

As far as everyday life is concerned, however, I can’t say it bothers me. I understand also the Roman Catholic objection to referring to the whole communion by the name of its largest particular Church, but there is more to it than numbers. True, churches of the east as well as the west are in communion with Rome, but honestly, RCs, ask yourselves: How much does the Roman communion resemble the churches of the east? How balanced is the exchange of ideas and the sharing of power between the church in Rome and, say, Bkerke or Alqosh? From what I have read on the Eastern Catholic subforum and elsewhere here, there are good reasons to consider the Catholic Church as it exists today in union with Rome is heavily tilted towards a Latin understanding of the faith, that is to say a Latin theology, Latin practices, Latin norms, etc. I don’t mean this as any sort of insult. It absolutely makes sense that it would be this way. Rome is, after all, in the heart of southwestern Europe, and the Church’s historical inheritance is there. The Church’s leadership in Rome and everywhere else recognize the historical fact that all of its eastern particular churches are “unia” (sorry, but in this context it makes sense to use this!), with the exception of the Syriac Maronite Church. Rome presides over a vast number of cultures to which it often seems it has trouble relating.

Let the Pope give a complete Qurbono in Syriac or liturgy in Arabic, Old Church Slavonic, Ge’ez, Coptic, Romanian, Navajo etc. then we’ll talk about the universal nature of the Roman communion. Point being: Sure, the Church contains within her communion all of these beautiful cultures, but they are all under the umbrella of a thoroughly western/European Papal institution, which even as it calls them (nowadays) to embrace their traditional spirituality still remains in the position to censure any of them should it go to far (say, abandoning a point of Catholic dogma that is foreign to those same traditions). Is it even possible for a non-RC person to be elected Pope? I’m seriously curious, because I’ve never heard of one, so I’d be inclined to say no. It seems to me that the Papacy is an exclusively Roman office (not just geographically).

Interesting, tangentially-related content: Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions history

 

[josie_L]

I understand the Orthodox objection to calling or thinking of any other church as the “Catholic Church”, but I don’t think this subject should be entertained here. It is one thing for Orthodox Christians or Protestants to refer to the Church in Rome as anything they want among themselves (and I’ve heard plenty of colorful names among people who did not know I was Catholic, and read many more), but if you know you’re in mixed company it seems fair to abide by the sensibilities of the majority, no matter how wrong you think they are. If I were at an Orthodox site right now I would certainly refer to the churches of that communion by whatever name they would want to be called.

As far as everyday life is concerned, however, I can’t say it bothers me. I understand also the Roman Catholic objection to referring to the whole communion by the name of its largest particular Church, but there is more to it than numbers. True, churches of the east as well as the west are in communion with Rome, but honestly, RCs, ask yourselves: How much does the Roman communion resemble the churches of the east? How balanced is the exchange of ideas and the sharing of power between the church in Rome and, say, Bkerke or Alqosh? From what I have read on the Eastern Catholic subforum and elsewhere here, there are good reasons to consider the Catholic Church as it exists today in union with Rome is heavily tilted towards a Latin understanding of the faith, that is to say a Latin theology, Latin practices, Latin norms, etc. I don’t mean this as any sort of insult. It absolutely makes sense that it would be this way. Rome is, after all, in the heart of southwestern Europe, and the Church’s historical inheritance is there. The Church’s leadership in Rome and everywhere else recognize the historical fact that all of its eastern particular churches are “unia” (sorry, but in this context it makes sense to use this!), with the exception of the Syriac Maronite Church. Rome presides over a vast number of cultures to which it often seems it has trouble relating.

Let the Pope give a complete Qurbono in Syriac or liturgy in Arabic, Old Church Slavonic, Ge’ez, Coptic, Romanian, Navajo etc. then we’ll talk about the universal nature of the Roman communion. Point being: Sure, the Church contains within her communion all of these beautiful cultures, but they are all under the umbrella of a thoroughly western/European Papal institution, which even as it calls them (nowadays) to embrace their traditional spirituality still remains in the position to censure any of them should it go to far (say, abandoning a point of Catholic dogma that is foreign to those same traditions). Is it even possible for a non-RC person to be elected Pope? I’m seriously curious, because I’ve never heard of one, so I’d be inclined to say no. It seems to me that the Papacy is an exclusively Roman office (not just geographically).

Interesting, tangentially-related content: Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions history

The Catholic Church has done much to allow for cultural practices/expressions of faith (it does not try to europeanize it’s members), more so than any other church. There are always more ways in which this can be improved but suffice it to say it is universal.

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

Christian Science?

 

[ricko]

No it does not. I’ll repost my statement to that fact.

We use this name (Catholic) ourselves and ask those outside the Church to use it, without reference to its signification simply because it is our customary name, just as we talk of the Russian Church as “the Orthodox Church”, not because we recognize its orthodoxy but because its members so style themselves

In other words to make it as simple as possible, we do not change the name of the Church to accommodate EVERYONES idea of what they think our name should be nor do we expect any other church to modify their name to accommodate our beliefs and we do not have the right to change their name for them. For instance we have two churches, both Pentecostal, that have Apostolic in their name. Calvary Apostolic Church for one. Now by some peoples “reasoning” we can call this church the Calvary Church simply because we don’t believe they are Apostolic. But knowledgeable Catholics do not do this. It is the name of their church and we RESPECT that.

 

[peary]

This hopefully will sound like a silly question to most viewers; however, it is one that hijaked another thread that I know of and someone posted on that thread that it’d hijaked several other threads.

My hopes in starting this thread is to allow the hijaker their own thread so that they will stop hijaking others to address the issues they have with the name of their own Church.

If you are a Roman Catholic Christian, are you (like the hijaker) offended when someone says you are a Roman Catholic? Do you think it’s a slur? Do you (like the hijaker) think that those of your Church who accept others refering to your Church as the Roman Catholic Church are ignorant?

No. I AM Catholic, but I am also ROMAN CATHOLIC because I worship God through the Latin, or Roman Liturgy.

I am Greek Orthodox now, but before I converted I was a Roman Catholic Christian. Most of my friends and aquaintences are all Roman Catholic. I was and they are very proud to be called Roman Catholics!

You didn’t have to leave the Catholic Church. You could have joined the Byzantine Catholic Church which worships according to the Byzantine rite. Think about it.