When christian missionaries brought the faith to the British island in the first century. It came under papal jurisdcition under St Augustine of Canterbury in the sixth century. It seperated from papal jurisdiction in the sixteenth century.
Perhaps some Roman Catholics should be a little less sensitive to the term.Was Henry the VIII aware of this?
Perhaps.
Yes he was. He had no intention of creating a new church. He just seperated the church in England from papal rule.
When you say christian missionaries, what church were they part of and what were they called?
They were the missionaries that were spread throughout the Roman empire. They went from Jerusalem to the whole world. Rome didn’t send missionaries to Britain until Augustine in the sixth century. What he found was an already established christian presence. A Notable British christian missionary before the Roman mission is St Alban
I use the term Roman Catholic. I find it almost universally accepted among my RC friends. And I know the history of the other terms as presented here. I spent weeks, on another board, years ago, arguing with a 5 point Calvinist, until I had stopped him using them for just the reason listed.Spiritmeadow;
As you know, the Catholic Church is open to all who seek to be a part of her. So, we as Catholics hope that you will choose to be included, welcome!.
What do you think of the following? Which I sourced from another Catholic website. This pretty much sums up the way many Catholics feel about the qualifier of “Roman” being added to Catholic.
Q: When did the term “Roman Catholic Church” come into being?
A: It is not possible to give an exact year when the Catholic Church began to be called the “Roman Catholic Church,” it is possible to approximate it. The term originates as an insult created by Anglicans who wished to refer to themselves as Catholic. They thus coined the term “Roman Catholic” to distinguish those “other” Catholics and create a sense in which they could refer to themselves as Catholics (by attempting to deprive actual Catholics to the right to the term).
Different variants of the “Roman” insult appeared at different times. The earliest form of the insult was the noun “Romanist” (one belonging to the Catholic Church), which appeared in England about 1515-1525. The next to develop was the adjective “Romish” (similar to something done or believed in the Catholic Church), which appeared around 1525-1535. Next came the noun “Roman Catholic” (one belonging to the Catholic Church), which was coined approximately 1595-1605. Shortly thereafter came the verb “to Romanize” (to make someone a Catholic or to become a Catholic), which appeared around 1600-10. Then between 1665 and 1675 we got the noun “Romanism” (the system of Catholic beliefs and practices), and finally we got a late-comer term about 1815-1825-the noun “Roman Catholicism,” which is a synonym for the earlier “Romanism.”
A similar complex of insults arose around the term “pope.” About 1515-25 the Anglicans coined the term “papist” and later its derivative “papism.” A quick follow-up, in 1520-1530, was the adjective “popish.” Next came “popery” (1525-1535), and then “papistry” (1540-1550), with its later derivatives, “papistical” and “papistic.” (Source: Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 1995 ed.)
This complex of insults is revealing as it shows the depths of animosity English Protestants had toward the Church. No other religious body (perhaps no other group at all-even national or racial ones) has such a complex of insults woven into the English language as does the Catholic Church. Even today many Protestants who have no idea what the origin of the term is cannot bring themselves to say “Catholic” without qualifying it or replacing it with a Roman insult.
Source: Nazareth Resource Library
Your objection to the use of the word “Priestess” as offfensive is understandable. Will you stop using words that are bound to offend many Catholics on CAF??
God Bless.
Curiously, in the entire Apostolicae Curae episode, politics was an important factor. Not the sole consideration, but present.
Doesn’t bother me.Perhaps.
(And vice versa.)
P.S. I realize that’s a misuse of the phrase “vice versa”. I was being a little lazy.
What I meant is that a lot of Christians (including a lot of Lutherans and Anglicans) take offense when we say that the Roman Catholic Church is “the Catholic Church”, thus implying that no other Christians are “Catholic”. I see this as a form of over-sensitivity also.
Not to mention the “Orthodox Church” implying no other christians are orthodoxPerhaps.
(And vice versa.)
P.S. I realize that’s a misuse of the phrase “vice versa”. I was being a little lazy.
What I meant is that a lot of Christians (including a lot of Lutherans and Anglicans) take offense when we say that the Roman Catholic Church is “the Catholic Church”, thus implying that no other Christians are “Catholic”. I see this as a form of over-sensitivity also.
St. Alban was a Christian convert in Britain, not a missionary. Martyred for hiding a priest, as the story generally goes, but not doing missionary work.
Would you label St Alban a Catholic of the Catholic church?
Edward (Somerset, really, Edward being a child), slammed the Church hard over reformed, Mary slammed it the opposite direction, and Elizabeth, the great centrist, hammered out the Elizabethan Compromise, which kept the whole affair going in some sense of balance, until the Oxford movement and the Tractarians/Ritualists started making things interesting.