Why Catholic Church is better than the term Roman Catholic Church.

[mystified]

I am a Catholic. I happen to be a member of that part of the Church headquartered in Rome that uses the Latin Rite, but sometimes I attend parishes of Ruthenian, Maronite, or of other Eastern Catholic Rites that are in communion with the Bishop of Rome.
Not only are a majority of protestants unaware of the Eastern Rite Catholics, there are an awful lot of Latin, or Western, Rite Catholics in the dark about the “other” Catholics.
Regardless of language or liturgical customs, we are all Catholics.

 

[Jestocost]

For me to ascribe the title of Universal Church to the organization headed by the Pope is to be dishonest. It also introduces confusion in others, as there are many churches aside from your own which claim to be “Catholic”.

How then do you refer to the various denominations that call themselves “Church of God” or “Church of Christ” Or “Apostolic”? Certainly all Christians believe themselves to fall under these descriptions. Many could claim similar problems with Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Baptists, etc.

Or are these for some reason just not an issue for you?

 

[Teflon93]

If it’s good enough for the Popes, it’s good enough for me:

And since many of these same Popes referred to Protestants as heretics and schismatics, we’ll use those terms liberally too, okay?

 

[THurifer2]

There are Catholic churches not in union.

The old Catholics come to mind…

If an old catholic sees your name on the hospital census they will come and give you communion.

If you put Roman Catholic they will not.

 

[mystified]

THurifer,
Yes, and if one googles “catholic” dozens of groups using the name will be shown and some even have their own “popes”. If the patient is lucid enough to receive communion, he should be lucd enough to ask the visitor’s parish. It has been my experience that the priest will introduce himself as “Fr. Smith from St. Philomena’s” if you are not in a Catholic hospital with an assigned chaplain.

 

[Verbum]

Hi All,

I’m surprised at the amount of confusion that surrounds this question.

First of all the term Roman Catholic Church has nothing to do with the Roman Rite. It arose in the 19th Century when certain members of the Anglican community came up with the theory of a Catholic Church, enjoying apostolic succession and composed of several bodies. (Cardinal Newman, before his conversion was part of this movement called the Oxford Movement).So they spoke of a Roman Catholic Church and an Anglo-Catholic Church. The use of the term Roman Catholic gives legitimacy to this theory. So it is not the happiest choice for naming the Catholic Church in which we believe.

Most of us on this forum belong to the Latin (or Western) Church. This Church has several rites (or ways of celebrating the liturgy), of which the main one is the Roman Rite. There are however several other rites within the Latin Church : Mozarabic (used in a few parishes of Spain), Ambrosian, used in the Archdiocese of Milan, Bragan (occcasionally used in the Archdiocese of Lisbon), and Dominican, Carmelite and Carthusian (used by the religious orders of the same name.

Most of us then are Latin Catholics of the Roman Rite.

And this brings us to another reason for not calling ourselves Roman Catholics : it gives the impression that all Catholics (including Eastern Catholics) belong to the Roman rite.

Verbum

 

[Genesis315]

I don’t mind either. (Although I tend to just call myself “Catholic” and refer to the whole Church as the “Catholic Church”).

As St. Francis de Sales said:

“…for the rest of the world calls us Catholic; and if we add Roman, it is only to inform people of the See of that Bishop who is chief Pastor of the Church. And already in the time of S. Ambrose to be Roman in communion was the same thing as to be Catholic.”

 

[Manphibian]

Many protestants that I run into toss around the term “Roman” Catholic with the emphasis on the word “Roman”, as if it is a slur. Like saying “romish” or “papist”. To me, and I believe I have read somewhere that the general label is the Catholic Church, and the term “Roman” was thrown in later, as I mentioned above, as a sort of slur.

However, I like it. I even prefer it. Yes, I am a Roman Catholic and love all that “popery”; so help me God.

 

[Teflon93]

Many protestants that I run into toss around the term “Roman” Catholic with the emphasis on the word “Roman”, as if it is a slur. Like saying “romish” or “papist”. To me, and I believe I have read somewhere that the general label is the Catholic Church, and the term “Roman” was thrown in later, as I mentioned above, as a sort of slur.

However, I like it. I even prefer it. Yes, I am a Roman Catholic and love all that “popery”; so help me God.

LOL—the pre-PC slurs are certainly to be preferred. One may take pride in being a “papist”—the slur is a light burden proudly borne as the yoke of old; “Roman” Catholic is just such weak tea you can’t glory in drinking it.

Papist—and proud of it.

 

[peary]

“Roman Church” is a protestant invention. It was always the CATHOLIC CHURCH. The Orthodox chuches are still considered part of the ‘Catholic’ Church, but they are not unified.

 

[PC_Master]

How then do you refer to the various denominations that call themselves “Church of God” or “Church of Christ” Or “Apostolic”? Certainly all Christians believe themselves to fall under these descriptions. Many could claim similar problems with Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Baptists, etc.

Or are these for some reason just not an issue for you?

It’s not that I believe only “Baptists” practice baptism, or only Presbyterians have presbyters, but rather that those terms don’t, as a label, seem to have association with more than one group. It’s about removing confusion. When I compare Baptists to Roman Catholics, I may use those terms. On the other hand, one might compare “Southern Baptists” here in the USA with other Baptist churches, where the Southern Baptists are the ones belonging to the Southern Baptist Convention, holding all the beliefs it holds.

If, for some reason, my use of terms like Baptists, Presbyterians, etc is at all confusing to anyone, I’m more than willing to attempt to clarify with a more descriptive label, just as I do with Roman Catholicism (not just plain “Catholicism”).

First of all the term Roman Catholic Church has nothing to do with the Roman Rite. It arose in the 19th Century when certain members of the Anglican community came up with the theory of a Catholic Church, enjoying apostolic succession and composed of several bodies. (Cardinal Newman, before his conversion was part of this movement called the Oxford Movement).So they spoke of a Roman Catholic Church and an Anglo-Catholic Church. The use of the term Roman Catholic gives legitimacy to this theory. So it is not the happiest choice for naming the Catholic Church in which we believe.

Right, the general concept is that all Christian bodies which agree with certain core beliefs are part of the universal (catholic) church described in scripture, and that earthly organizations do not determine it.

It all depends on how you define the “Catholic Church”. But, at least persons such as myself have no derogatory intent toward Roman Catholics. “Roman” is simply used as an accurate descriptor to clarify which part of the universal (Catholic) church we’re speaking of.

Most of us on this forum belong to the Latin (or Western) Church. This Church has several rites (or ways of celebrating the liturgy), of which the main one is the Roman Rite. There are however several other rites within the Latin Church…Most of us then are Latin Catholics of the Roman Rite.

If that is the way most Roman Catholics view it, I’d be willing to use the term Latin Catholic instead. However, my understanding from reading is that the rite is actually called the Latin Rite, not the Roman Rite. The church is also headquartered in Rome, former capital of the Roman Empire, for which it was the state religion. The association with Latin seems to have come much later.

If this information is in error, please let me know. (Linking me to sources would also be much desired.)

And this brings us to another reason for not calling ourselves Roman Catholics : it gives the impression that all Catholics (including Eastern Catholics) belong to the Roman rite.

This is analogous to the confusion between the Roman Catholic Church and all the other parts of the Catholic Church which don’t recognize the supreme authority of Rome.

Continued…

 

[PC_Master]

Many protestants that I run into toss around the term “Roman” Catholic with the emphasis on the word “Roman”, as if it is a slur. Like saying “romish” or “papist”. To me, and I believe I have read somewhere that the general label is the Catholic Church, and the term “Roman” was thrown in later, as I mentioned above, as a sort of slur.

To some people, it certainly is, as they choose to emphasize ideas of incorporated paganism by Roman emperors and such. It’s just like the concept of using the term Protestant to insist that one is protesting against God’s true church, rather than being simply a label. Each is essentially calling the other group heretical, and that, I think, is where the offense comes in.

However, I have no such intent, though I don’t agree with all of the theology of the Roman Catholic Church. I have also offered to substitute another term in place of Roman. Latin has been possibly suggested, but I have yet to see how others will react to this label.

However, I like it. I even prefer it. Yes, I am a Roman Catholic and love all that “popery”; so help me God.

I can’t blame you. If I could believe in such, I’m sure it would give me great peace of mind to know there’s an earthly organization accurately interpreting the will of God to the people. I have no doubt that’s why many people love the Roman Catholic Church.

“Roman Church” is a protestant invention. It was always the CATHOLIC CHURCH. The Orthodox chuches are still considered part of the ‘Catholic’ Church, but they are not unified.

As are several other large denominations which split with the Roman Church over the centuries.

The true “Catholic Church” spoken of by early writers was the post-Apostolic church, which no longer exists, having been split up into many fragments.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Latin would be good to distinguish from Eastern Rite. However, PC Master would fall to overlook at the Eastern Rite Catholics if he labelled Catholics as Latin.

I also like to add that by addressing as Roman Catholic, I think most Eastern Catholic would take offense to that. Hence, Catholic is more proper, or Catholic Church.

 

[mystified]

To the poster who described the Orthodox as not unified. That may be true, but I think what was meant was “in union with the Church headed by the Bishop of Rome.”
Of course there are Roman Catholics. They live in the capital of Italy .

 

[Mannyfit75]

To the poster who described the Orthodox as not unified. That may be true, but I think what was meant was “in union with the Church headed by the Bishop of Rome.”
Of course there are Roman Catholics. They live in the capital of Italy .

That’s us Latin Rites, but if one was to describe the Church in union with the Pope, Catholic Church is a proper term.

 

[Mannyfit75]

A forum post I once read said…

“If the pope said one must eat peanuts to be saved, then I’m going to the store to buy up peanuts.”

The poster wasn’t kidding. He was quite serious.

So, if the pope really did say one must eat peanuts to be saved, would you go buy peanuts?

I like to comment on this. The Pope would not be using that authority for such comment is a completely ridicule the concept of papal infallibility.

 

[peary]

Actually the vast majority of Protestants have no idea that there are more rites in Catholicism than the Latin one. In fact it normally comes as a shock that other ancient churches are in communion with Rome. .

The vast majority of Catholics in the western Latin Rite have no idea that there are more rites within their own Church beyond the Latin rite.

 

[PC_Master]

Latin would be good to distinguish from Eastern Rite. However, PC Master would fall to overlook at the Eastern Rite Catholics if he labelled Catholics as Latin.

Woah – let’s clarify. Either the rite is called Roman or Latin. Frankly, I don’t care which. I also am not married to using the label “Roman Catholic”. However, since I cannot in good conscience describe the Roman Catholic Church as simply “Catholic Church” (because it implies all others are heretical, not part of the universal church Christ established), I will continue to use Roman Catholic until such time as someone provides another label.

I’m not trying to offend anyone, but it’s too confusing to use just “Catholic Church”. It’s also dishonest, in my opinion.

That’s us Latin Rites, but if one was to describe the Church in union with the Pope, Catholic Church is a proper term.

How about Papal Catholic Church or something like that? Would you be opposed to a label such as that, so long as it’s used as an accurate descriptor, and not as a derogatory term?

I’m really trying to work things out here, but you guys sure aren’t making it easy.

I like to comment on this. The Pope would not be using that authority for such comment is a completely ridicule the concept of papal infallibility.

I agree that the idea is ridiculous, but one of your fellow Roman Catholics made the original statement. Perhaps you two should talk and get your theology in agreement?

The vast majority of Catholics in the western Latin Rite have no idea that there are more rites within their own Church beyond the Latin rite.

So calling it the Western Catholic Church would be acceptable? While that’s not totally satisfactory to me, it would at least be a step closer to agreement.

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

Latin would be good to distinguish from Eastern Rite. However, PC Master would fall to overlook at the Eastern Rite Catholics if he labelled Catholics as Latin.

I also like to add that by addressing as Roman Catholic, I think most Eastern Catholic would take offense to that. Hence, Catholic is more proper, or Catholic Church.

If you are not a member of the Church you have at least three options. The most straightforwards is mutually agreed non-membership. “I sacrifice billygoats to great Blibdoolipoop, and am not a member”. However some people claim to be the real Church and others claim to be still part of it. That creates difficulties in choosing an neutral word

 

[Mannyfit75]

Woah – let’s clarify. Either the rite is called Roman or Latin. Frankly, I don’t care which. I also am not married to using the label “Roman Catholic”. However, since I cannot in good conscience describe the Roman Catholic Church as simply “Catholic Church” (because it implies all others are heretical, not part of the universal church Christ established), I will continue to use Roman Catholic until such time as someone provides another label.

The Catholic Church is Catholic Church. The Catechism states Catechism of the Catholic Church. Not Roman Catholic Church. Latin is know as Roman Rite. It describes Western Catholicism. It is very apparent to me that you lack any knowledge of the Eastern Rite. The Eastern Rite Catholic Church Liturgy is Byzantine, Antiochean, Alexandrian, Ruthenian, Meronite, Caldean, I can go on and one. These Rites uses either one of the following, John Crystodom Liturgy, Liturgy of St. James, and several others.

These Eastern Rite Catholics are not Latin nor are they Roman. Open your eyes for once.

I’m not trying to offend anyone, but it’s too confusing to use just “Catholic Church”. It’s also dishonest, in my opinion.

I think you are being dishonest to our Eastern Catholics. They are not Latin.

How about Papal Catholic Church or something like that? Would you be opposed to a label such as that, so long as it’s used as an accurate descriptor, and not as a derogatory term?

Such title is not proper. I am oppose to that because it does not describe the Catholic Church in its full context. To make such a title would neglect the bishops.

Catholic Church is more proper in respect for the our Eastern Rite Catholics.
I’m really trying to work things out here, but you guys sure aren’t making it easy.

I agree that the idea is ridiculous, but one of your fellow Roman Catholics made the original statement. Perhaps you two should talk and get your theology in agreement?

He is entitle to his opinions. Any Catholic who insist the title Roman Catholic Church is fine but I don’t think it is proper. To me it Roman Catholic Church is Protestant invention. It is no different than Papists, Romanist.

So calling it the Western Catholic Church would be acceptable? While that’s not totally satisfactory to me, it would at least be a step closer to agreement.

It is better than Papal Catholic Church. Western Catholic Church, however, would neglect Eastern Catholic Church. Hence, Catholic Church is the only proper name.

If you want what our Church is. It’s officially know as One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.