B
BVMFatima
Guest
Then again you figure they are very latinized.
- Status
F
Fra_Angelo
Guest
Is this conclusion true? We are Catholics, but I do not know how far it is true to call the Church Roman Catholic Church. It is often used by outsiders or when we contact the other Christian denominations who find it difficult to compromise the word ‘catholic’ in the Apostles Creed. Protestants use it to refer the whole Catholic Church that is all those who are in communion with the Bishop of Rome(i.e. all the Eastern Catholic Rites come under this name). It can also mean the latin rite since it has the See of Rome as its head. It can also be rightly understood as the Church/ See of Rome. I am a Catholic from Eastern Tradition (Syro Malabar Rite in Kerala, India). We ourselves recognise as RC in the first sense and that is what we are called by both the people and the Government of Kerala. And also I firmly disagree with the argument that Vat II calls the Church as Roman Catholic because majority are Latin Catholics. We all belong to one Holy Church and there is no inferiority or superiority within the Church. If the Church is called Roman Catholic, it is because of its communion with the See of Rome.
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
Father Angelo, the Syro-Malabar Church outside of Changancherry is hardly the standard for Eastern Catholicism. The people refer to themselves as RC or RCSC (Roman Catholic Syrian Christian) because they don’t know their own identity as Syro-Malabar. Let’s be honest, even the Holy Synod of the Syro-Malabar Church is having a very difficult time getting priests or even bishops to follow the true Traditions of the Church.
P
Peter_J
Guest
M
MaxMarieOFS
Guest
The intent is not to shut out the Eastern Church. Those articles are all about unification. The Anglicans did not break away from the Eastern Church. They were originally of the Western Church. So they will reunite with it. The Baptists did not break away from anyone, but I think they would find mass in the Western Church more similar to their own services than the services of the Eastern Church.
Here are a few links without the offending word
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_02051995_orientale-lumen_en.html
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/november/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20061130_dichiarazione-comune_en.html
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20101221_luce-del-mondo_en.html
F
Faustinas_frien
Guest
Where as I have read the opposite…that there are Latin rite Catholics that are NOT roman catholic, e.g. Gaelic.
latin rite is the RITE, of which Roman catholic is one. (majority not plurality)
Eastern rite is the RITE of which Ukr, Byz, Coptic, marionote are a few examples.
Guess what if the great schism had not occurred, roman Catholics would be the minority…
D
dvdjs
Guest
B
BVMFatima
Guest
How would the Roman Church be the minority without the schism?
D
datritle
Guest
i don’t like where THIS is headed! is this gonna turn into the westside story? are the latin rite folks the jets or the sharks?
B
BVMFatima
Guest
Maybe this is the Outsiders?
P
Peter_J
Guest
The problem with this statement is your use of the word “rite”. There is no “Latin Rite”. There’s the Latin Church, and there’s the Roman Rite.
(In much the same way, there is no “Melkite Rite”, etc. even though such terms can sometimes be found on the internet.)
A
Aramis
Guest
A singular “Eastern Rite” doesn’t exist. Its “Eastern Rites” - referring to the Byzantine, Alexandrian, Antiochene, Chaldean, and Armenian Rites.
All the Byzantine Rite Usages are pretty much the same. Small differences (less than can be seen across the Roman Rite in practice). The Alexandrian has 2 traditions that are quite divergent (Coptic and Ethiopian), and the Ethiopian has two fairly divergent uses (Ethiopian and Eritrean). The Antiochene and Chaldean both have several churches using distinct traditions.
F
Fone_Bone_2001
Guest
On this website, and others like it, the norm is to identify the whole church as the Catholic Church, and to refrain from applying to it the adjective Roman due to the existence and dignity of the Eastern Catholic Churches.
The rest of the world - and *sometimes *the Vatican - has no such convention. Like it or not, most people use the term Roman Catholic Church to refer to the whole Catholic Church.
That said, don’t overestimate the extent to which the modern papacy uses the term Roman Catholic Church. If I recall correctly, the documents of the Second Vatican Council, like the people of this forum, do refer only to the Catholic Church.
I don’t think that’s accurate, at least not today. The Roman Church most often means the Diocese of Rome; the Latin Church is an autonomous (sui iuris) church consisting of many dioceses.
I don’t think there’s much clarity to be had. The term Roman Catholic Church isn’t an official, canonical one, so it means whatever whoever is using it intends it to mean. Most of the world, unfortunately, and apparently even the Vatican sometimes, uses it to mean the whole Catholic Church.
As I said though, we needn’t fret too much, as this usage isn’t absolute. Vatican II, if I recall, never refers to the whole Church as the Roman Catholic Church…
Your expectations are too rational.
You can indeed find some Eastern Catholic parishes - the more latinized ones - that will label themselves “Roman Catholics” … sometimes “Byzantine Rite Roman Catholics” etc.
Fortunately, I don’t see this myself. But I have heard of it happening.
Case in point.
Indeed. Not surprising, sadly - the Syriac Maronite Church of Antioch tends to be one of the most heavily latinized Eastern Catholic Churches. At least in our western culture. I have no idea what it’s like in Lebanon.
Oooh, good call! I like that idea. Less ambiguity.
In all fairness, Faustina’s frien’s statement didn’t necessarily imply that there’s a “Latin rite.” (S)he spoke of “Latin rite Catholics” which could easily mean “Catholics who typically celebrate one of the Latin rites.” That’s what I took it to mean.
B
BVMFatima
Guest
This is how I look at it, Latin Church = Roman Rite = Roman Catholic Church (called Roman due to the rite.)
Ukranian Church = Byzantine Rite = Byzantine Catholic Church due to rite.
Ukranian Church = Byzantine Rite = Byzantine Catholic Church due to rite.
C
countertenor
Guest
Except that generally the Church that goes by the name Byzantine Catholic Church, is the Ruthenian Catholic Church not the Ukrainian Catholic Church, even though they both use the Byzantine Rite.
B
BVMFatima
Guest
Really? Because there is a Ukranian Church in my town that calls itself Byzantine Rite.
V
Vico
Guest
There is a Byzantine Catholic Metropolitan Church of Pittsburgh in the USA. In the Europe there are other eparchies of the Ruthenian Catholic Church and also of the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The Ruthenian Catholic and Ukrainian Catholic churches are both of the Byzantine tradition, and have differences in their liturgical rites.
gcatholic.com/dioceses/data/rite-Rt.htm
gcatholic.com/dioceses/data/rite-U.htm
gcatholic.com/dioceses/data/rite-Rt.htm
gcatholic.com/dioceses/data/rite-U.htm
P
Peter_J
Guest
My memory may be imperfect, but wasn’t it pointed out to you, more than a week ago, that both of those statements are wrong?
P
Peter_J
Guest
B
BVMFatima
Guest
No, I pointed out the term “Latin Rite” can be misleading in a sense, not Roman Rite.My memory may be imperfect, but wasn’t it pointed out to you, more than a week ago, that both of those statements are wrong?
- Status