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

[Mannyfit75]

I encourage, PC Master to explore the Eastern Catholicism Forum so you gain some knowledge, and ask them which is more proper.

 

[PC_Master]

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

Exactly. There are at least half a dozen major organizations who claim to be the true church as founded with the apostles. They all claim to be Orthodox (as do Roman Catholics) and Catholic, not to mention Apostolic and Holy as well.

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.

You keep trying to use this as a point of contention, but I assure you, I understand it.

You have the earthly organization which you prefer to call the “Catholic Church”, which I have chosen to call the “Roman Catholic Church”. It is headquartered at the Vatican, inside of Rome, Italy (which has, thanks to the Lateran treaty become Vatican City).

Within this church are 23 individual “particular churches”, sometimes also called “rites” or “autonomous churches”. 22 of these were not originally part of the Roman Catholic Church, and follow one of several eastern liturgical forms. Mostly, these churches are break-offs from Eastern Orthodoxy, or are simply expansions of the Roman Catholic Church into areas with a heavy EO tradition.

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

I understand that, but listen to what I’m saying – my conscience requires that I do not use the term “Catholic Church” to imply that the church headquartered in Rome is the one true universal church, because such a label excludes a great many which I feel are a part of that church. Therefore, I need an adjective to describe that church, in contrast with the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Churches, the Old Catholic Churches, Protestant Churches, and various other denominations whose members can possibly be part of the universal, invisible, church formed by Christ.

You, no doubt, understand what I’m looking for by now. So, either assist me in finding an agreeable term, or continue to raise trivial arguments that only you and a select few others seem to have a problem with.

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.

The floor is open. The only things I reject are ideas like “the Catholic Church”, because I believe they are dishonest.

I encourage, PC Master to explore the Eastern Catholicism Forum so you gain some knowledge, and ask them which is more proper.

The Eastern Roman Catholics can feel free to come here, or PM me, if they have a problem with my use. I have no doubt that a few of them read my posts regularly, and yet none of them seem to complain.

 

[andy120]

The Church in Rome is Catholic. To generalize the entire Church, the Word Catholic Church makes it fully Catholic because Eastern Rite Catholic aren’t Roman Rite.

Roman Rite? I always knew it to be called the “Latin Rite.” The Roman Catholic Church is not an exclusive term to those in the Latin Rite.

I call the Church the Roman Catholic Church because it includes all rites in communion with the bishop of Rome (the Pope). No Eastern or other rite would disagree that they were in communion with Rome. Therefore, I see no reason why the term “Roman Catholic” excludes those in Eastern or other rites.

 

[peary]

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.

That’s horsepuckey! The true “CATHOLIC CHURCH” is the Church which has kept apostolic succession and the priesthood alive. It is the Church was is also guided by its 21 Ecumenical councils (the last being Vatican II). The biblical church in ACTS is the same church known as CATHOLIC today (read: ROMAN)

So what other type of revisionist history have you been taught?

 

[PC_Master]

That’s horsepuckey! The true “CATHOLIC CHURCH” is the Church which has kept apostolic succession and the priesthood alive. It is the Church was is also guided by its 21 Ecumenical councils (the last being Vatican II). The biblical church in ACTS is the same church known as CATHOLIC today (read: ROMAN)

So what other type of revisionist history have you been taught?

Claim all you like. However…

1. You haven’t demonstrated that it is in fact the same church.
2. If it is, and if apostolic succession is the means by which you trace it, there are several others which can claim to be the original church (the largest being the Eastern Orthodox).
3. The priesthood wasn’t extant in the apostolic church.

There are many other points I could make, but this discussion (whether or not the RCC is the same as the apostolic church found in scripture) should best be put into another thread.

All you’ve done here is made a bunch of claims with no substantiation. In the end, it comes down to this – you believe that the church Christ founded is the RCC of today. I do not believe that. Therefore, for me, the term Catholic Church is misleading and dishonest, and I will not use it.

I sincerely apologize if that offends you, for offense is not my intent, but that is simply where I stand on the matter.

 

[BrianH]

That’s horsepuckey! The true “CATHOLIC CHURCH” is the Church which has kept apostolic succession and the priesthood alive. It is the Church was is also guided by its 21 Ecumenical councils (the last being Vatican II). The biblical church in ACTS is the same church known as CATHOLIC today (read: ROMAN)

So what other type of revisionist history have you been taught?

Priests? In ACTS? That is news to me!

 

[peary]

Claim all you like. However…

1) You haven’t demonstrated that it is in fact the same church.
You haven’t proven to me that it isn’t.

2) If it is, and if apostolic succession is the means by which you trace it, there are several others which can claim to be the original church (the largest being the Eastern Orthodox).
The Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Rite churches are known as the “eastern lung” of the Catholic Church. They are still considered the true church because of apostolic succession. They also are part of the original church.

3) The priesthood wasn’t extant in the apostolic church.
B]Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as “presbyters” or “elders.” In fact, the English term “priest” is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14–15).
Bishops (episcopoi) have the care of multiple congregations and appoint, ordain, and discipline priests and deacons. They sometimes appear to be called “evangelists” in the New Testament. Examples of first-century bishops include Timothy and Titus (1 Tim. 5:19–22; 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5).
Deacons (diakonoi) are the assistants of the bishops and are responsible for teaching and administering certain Church tasks, such as the distribution of food (Acts 6:1–6).

All you’ve done here is made a bunch of claims with no substantiation.
And all you have done is make a bunch of claims that it isn’t with no substantiation. *
In the end, it comes down to this – you believe that the church Christ founded is the RCC of today. I do not believe that. *
I don’t care what you believe, actually. That is your own thing; it isn’t mine.
Therefore, for me, the term Catholic Church is misleading and dishonest, and I will not use it.
Good for you!

 

[roanoker]

Pope Noah, what is that new-age appearing picture in your signature? I can’t for the life of me figure out what it is trying to represent…

 

[NonDenom]

Mannyfit75, I know that some of you noticed that some Catholics don’t like the term “Roman Catholic Church” to describe our Church.

I am one them. I shall tell you one of the reasons why.

I object to the term Roman Catholic Church because it does not fully describe the universal Church. To describe the Church as Roman, would neglect the Eastern Rite Catholics, whose own rite is not Latin.

The one problem you have here is the term “Catholic” which describes the church of which head or leader if you will is in Rome. The term “catholic” (small c) describes Christ’s universal church,
UNIVERSAL

1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of all or the whole: universal experience.
2. applicable everywhere or in all cases; general: a universal cure.
3. affecting, concerning, or involving all: universal military service.
4. used or understood by all: a universal language.

You may not like it but you have “Come home to Rome” or as many put in their signature “Tiber swim team” so myself and many others will consider you member of the Roman Catholic Church.

I dare not ignore the Byzantine Catholic Churches (all 22 of them) by just describing the Church as Roman Catholic Church.

I thought there was only ONE Catholic church.

I think the proper terminology is Catholic Church. It is whole, and universal. It describe one faith.

See Above.

I also like to add the Catechism is title “Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

Notice the capital “C”

Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”[5], that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.[6] “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic

Agreed, notice the small c.

This Church, constituted and organized in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him”.

Disagree

It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word “subsists” can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe… in the “one” Church); and this “one” Church subsists in the Catholic Church

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html

If you want to describe Jesus Christ’s Church (our view) or the Catholic Church called it by its proper name. It is Catholic Church period.

I’m glad it’s not the Roman Catholic church that decides who belongs to our Lord.

 

[Deconi]

I’m glad it’s not the Roman Catholic church that decides who belongs to our Lord.

Newsflash!

Since Our Lord is THE Original Catholic, AND HE appointed the Roman Bishop as the keeper of His Keys, what does that tell you?

 

[PC_Master]

You haven’t proven to me that it isn’t.

You’re the one making the claim that it is. Traditionally, the burden of proof is on you. However, claims can be reworded to make either person the affirmative claimant, that’s not necessarily binding.

Still, it would seem that if you’re making this claim, it’d be far easier for you to prove it than it would be for me to disprove it. Why not simply do that instead of playing rhetorical games? It shouldn’t be too hard. Start a new thread and link me to it. I’ll read it with interest.

The Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Rite churches are known as the “eastern lung” of the Catholic Church. They are still considered the true church because of apostolic succession. They also are part of the original church.

If the whole is the sum of its parts, and the Eastern Orthodox are a part (by the way, I’ve never heard Eastern Rite Roman Catholic Churches referred to as being part of the “eastern lung”, only the EO – care to cite a source on this one?), then the Roman Catholic Church is also only a part, not the whole. It also proves my point of disunity.

B]Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as “presbyters” or “elders.” In fact, the English term “priest” is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14–15).

This is for another topic altogether, but suffice it to say that there’s no evidence bishops or priests did anything remotely similar to what the Roman Catholic Church says.

In fact, since history can tell us when a great many of the practices of today came about (formal “sacraments”, for instance), it’s reasonable to assume that the first century apostolic church was very different from what you claim.

I originally said “All you’ve done here is made a bunch of claims with no substantiation.” Then you reply with…

And all you have done is make a bunch of claims that it isn’t with no substantiation.

Aside from this being highly evasive of the point I made, not to mention rhetorical, there’s a practical reason that I didn’t provide all (I actually did provide a little bit) of the evidence – it would be way off-topic.

I don’t care what you believe, actually. That is your own thing; it isn’t mine.

I understand that, but this is the root of our disagreement. For you to accept the term Roman Catholic in some way demeans you because you believe your church to be the Catholic Church, thus needing no qualifier.

But for me, I cannot accept that the Roman Catholic Church is the apostolic church, and thus, not using a qualifier would be unthinkable.

The key is really what you said above. The Eastern Orthodox are a part of the apostolic church. Thus, Roman Catholicism isn’t [the whole of] the apostolic church.

 

[ontologysue]

Newsflash!

Since Our Lord is THE Original Catholic, AND HE appointed the Roman Bishop as the keeper of His Keys, what does that tell you?

Well, Our Lord knows a little bit more than the Church Militant; for example, my guess is He knew Joan of Arc “belonged” to Him before the Church did…in light of the fact that the Church saw to her execution and only years later did they decide, oh, oh, she was a saint!

 

[JimG]

It’s been called the Catholic Church nearly from the begining. The term Roman Catholic was invented some 15 centuries later.

 

[DanB]

Well as Fr. Corapi states, “Words are important, because the Word was made flesh.” However, we humans place sometimes too much on semantics. I am a Catholic in union with the Bishop of Rome, who leads the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostalic Faith. Does that make me a Roman Catholic? A rite is an adjective, Catholic is the noun. And Christ’s command to Love even your enemies…is the verb of our FAITH!

 

[PC_Master]

It’s been called the Catholic Church nearly from the begining. The term Roman Catholic was invented some 15 centuries later.

Actually, the “catholic church” of the beginning was the apostolic church which later broke into many pieces, the largest of which are Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Therefore, you can’t say that Rome has been the “Catholic Church” from the beginning, unless you’re also willing to admit that the Eastern Orthodox can make this claim as well. And since there can be only one valid church organization (assuming Roman Catholic theology is correct on the point – I disagree, obviously), you’ve now put yourself in an even deeper mess.

Well as Fr. Corapi states, “Words are important, because the Word was made flesh.” However, we humans place sometimes too much on semantics. I am a Catholic in union with the Bishop of Rome, who leads the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostalic Faith. Does that make me a Roman Catholic? A rite is an adjective, Catholic is the noun. And Christ’s command to Love even your enemies…is the verb of our FAITH!

Unfortunately, you seem to have a poor understanding of grammar.

Roman Catholic Church

…for clarity, we could write it as…

Roman, Catholic Church

Both Roman and Catholic are adjectives. Church is the noun.

And while we’re here, let’s break it down…

Roman - “of Rome”; or perhaps “of origin or centering/focus in Rome”
Catholic - “universal”; perhaps also “global, singular”
Church - from Greek having the meaning of “gathering of called out ones”

So, the Roman Catholic Church is “the universal gathering of called out ones having a focus in Rome”. This is an accurate description, even for Roman Catholics, I believe.

As for rites – yes, I recognize that there is a Western Rite, and several Eastern Rites within the Roman Catholic Church. There’s much less confusion in explaining that than in saying “the Catholic Church is the universal church of Christ, but I believe they are wrong”. Obviously, that’s an oxymoron, and is certainly confusing.

 

[JimG]

Actually, the “catholic church” of the beginning was the apostolic church which later broke into many pieces, the largest of which are Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Therefore, you can’t say that Rome has been the “Catholic Church” from the beginning, unless you’re also willing to admit that the Eastern Orthodox can make this claim as well.

It was called either the Catholic Church or simply “the Church” because there was no other, and it was and is continuous with the apostolic Church. The Eastern Orthodox didn’t break from unity until 1054, and all those other "pieces’ started flaking off in the 15th century. Breakage is not good.

 

[Mannyfit75]

The one problem you have here is the term “Catholic” which describes the church of which head or leader if you will is in Rome. The term “catholic” (small c) describes Christ’s universal church,
UNIVERSAL

1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of all or the whole: universal experience.
2. applicable everywhere or in all cases; general: a universal cure.
3. affecting, concerning, or involving all: universal military service.
4. used or understood by all: a universal language.

You may not like it but you have “Come home to Rome” or as many put in their signature “Tiber swim team” so myself and many others will consider you member of the Roman Catholic Church.

Consider that to be so unless I change my rite from Roman to Meronite which is Eastern, when that happens I am no longer Roman Rite. My friend. I would follow the Liturgical traditions which are more Eastern.

I thought there was only ONE Catholic church.

There is Only One Catholic Church.

I’m glad it’s not the Roman Catholic church that decides who belongs to our Lord.

The Catholic Church is the Only Church of Christ. The Bride of Christ.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Actually, the “catholic church” of the beginning was the apostolic church which later broke into many pieces, the largest of which are Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Therefore, you can’t say that Rome has been the “Catholic Church” from the beginning, unless you’re also willing to admit that the Eastern Orthodox can make this claim as well. And since there can be only one valid church organization (assuming Roman Catholic theology is correct on the point – I disagree, obviously), you’ve now put yourself in an even deeper mess.

My Anti-Catholic friend,

It didn’t broke into pieces. Consider that your Protestant churches is 33,000 pieces. The Catholic Church is rather a large church which consist of over 1.15 billion believers. These include those of the 23 Eastern Rite Churches, some of which have been united with Rome for 2,000 yrs.

I believe the Eastern Orthodox Church is also Apostolic. She is 90% truth, while Catholicism is 100% true. Protestantism is less than 1% truth… and it still breaking and breaking…

Roman - “of Rome”; or perhaps “of origin or centering/focus in Rome”
Catholic - “universal”; perhaps also “global, singular”
Church - from Greek having the meaning of “gathering of called out ones”

So, the Roman Catholic Church is “the universal gathering of called out ones having a focus in Rome”. This is an accurate description, even for Roman Catholics, I believe.

As for rites – yes, I recognize that there is a Western Rite, and several Eastern Rites within the Roman Catholic Church. There’s much less confusion in explaining that than in saying “the Catholic Church is the universal church of Christ, but I believe they are wrong”. Obviously, that’s an oxymoron, and is certainly confusing.

Our Creed says at Mass, I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It doesn’t say Roman Catholic Church. Our Catechism says, “Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

Catholic Church is the only proper way to describe it. Not Roman Catholic Church. If you want to be more specific which rite I belong to call me Roman Catholic. However, if I you wish to address me as which Church I belong. It is Catholic Church.

 

[PC_Master]

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree on this. Just as you feel it’s appropriate to call me Protestant, I feel it’s appropriate to call you Roman Catholic (referring to your church as a whole, not the rite you’re in – that would probably be Latin-rite Roman Catholic). You’ve said nothing of substance, except to claim over and over “We’re the [only] Catholic Church”, and slamming Protestantism when you have the chance.

At least I have no derogatory intent by using the term Roman. That’s more than I can say for most of those who use the term Protestant.

 

[Mannyfit75]

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree on this. Just as you feel it’s appropriate to call me Protestant, I feel it’s appropriate to call you Roman Catholic (referring to your church as a whole, not the rite you’re in – that would probably be Latin-rite Roman Catholic). You’ve said nothing of substance, except to claim over and over “We’re the [only] Catholic Church”, and slamming Protestantism when you have the chance.

At least I have no derogatory intent by using the term Roman. That’s more than I can say for most of those who use the term Protestant.

Being called a Protestant you should take with pride. That is your heritage. You do adhere to faith alone and sola Scriptura. You are Protestant then.

Calling me Catholic politically correct because I do not negate my Eastern Rite Catholics, the Antiochean, the Alexandrians, the Ruthenians, the Caldeaneans,…