OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion => Orthodox-Catholic Discussion => Topic started by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 12:28:11 PM

Title: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 12:28:11 PM
Firstly, they are Roman Catholics

They're neither Romans nor Catholics, Latins, Westerners, Papists, etc., etc., yes, and I will even go on to say they are Christians as well...but not Roman, the Roman Church was the Imperial Church, and not Catholic, it's a local patriarchate.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: TomS on July 04, 2007, 12:40:26 PM
They're neither Romans nor Catholics, Latins, Westerners, Papists, etc., etc., yes, and I will even go on to say they are Christians as well...but not Roman, the Roman Church was the Imperial Church, and not Catholic, it's a local patriarchate.

Right. They are Papists!  ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Anastasios on July 04, 2007, 12:51:18 PM
And the point of this thread is?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 12:59:50 PM
And the point of this thread is?
Apparently, GiC has some point to make in posting this on the forum. Trolling perhaps?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 01:35:13 PM
Apparently, GiC has some point to make in posting this on the forum. Trolling perhaps?

Ummm, yeah, the point was to respond to an accusation you made against me. This is generally a topic I avoid, but I wasn't given too much choice in the matter this time.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Tallitot on July 04, 2007, 01:44:58 PM
Catholics don't call themselves "Roman Catholic'....the term was invented by high church Anglicans who liked to refer to themselves as "Anglo-Catholic". The Catholics were the "Papists", the Anglo-Catholics were the "Apists"
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 01:47:53 PM
Ummm, yeah, the point was to respond to an accusation you made against me. This is generally a topic I avoid, but I wasn't given too much choice in the matter this time.
Well, you chose not to avoid it this time, and you decided to post it, so I thought I might expose it to a little more scrutiny.
Machiavellian? ....Perhaps... ;)

Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 01:53:30 PM
Well, you chose not to avoid it this time, and you decided to post it, so I thought I might expose it to a little more scrutiny.
Machiavellian? ....Perhaps... ;)

Well, I've made no secret of how easy it is to get me into a fight...call me out and I'll probably come out swinging. ;D

Cowardice is to be feared more than defeat. ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 04, 2007, 01:56:55 PM
Cowardice is to be feared more than defeat. ;)
There's also a fine line between being courageous and being just plain foolhardy.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 01:57:33 PM
Of course, if the term 'papist' is to be banned on this board, that's fine, just let me know and I'll find another word to use...while I may come across as one, I'm not such a dolt as to be unable to think up synonyms. And even if my knowledge of the English language does let me down, I do know how to use a thesaurus. Perhaps we could have a list of 'forbidden words' to prevent such misunderstandings in the future and I'm still not clear on the status of the term 'papist', which has been used quite extensively on this board and is even the name of one of the posters here.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 04, 2007, 02:05:44 PM
How do you post a 'forbidden' words list without using those words?

Just thought I'd ask...  :D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 04, 2007, 02:08:46 PM
My, my... agree with GiC in part here. The real question is why we abdicated the word "Catholic" to them, in reality if not officially, not the word "Roman".

Let the games begin.


Thanks, Peter
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 02:10:22 PM
There's also a fine line between being courageous and being just plain foolhardy.

Courage and Foolishness, like Cowardice and Wisdom, are not synonyms, nor are they antonyms, they are distinct. One can be a courageous fool or a wise coward, just as one can be wise and courageous or cowardly and foolish. To quote the latin proverb, 'timidi mater non flet.'

However, what I suggested was more along the lines of Herodotus: 'Far better is it to have a stout heart always and suffer one's share of evils, than to be ever fearing what may happen and never incur a mischance.'
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 04, 2007, 02:11:57 PM
My, my... agree with GiC in part here. The real question is why we abdicated the word "Catholic" to them, in reality if not officially, not the word "Roman".

Let the games begin.
I don't understand your post.  Do you mean to say something like this:  "The real question is why we abdicated the word 'Catholic' to them,..." ?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 02:12:30 PM
How do you post a 'forbidden' words list without using those words?

Just thought I'd ask...  :D

Perhaps we could post them in Latin, as has been the custom when writing someting deemed 'inappropriate'.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 04, 2007, 02:18:41 PM
Perhaps we could post them in Latin, as has been the custom when writing someting deemed 'inappropriate'.
But what does that do to us who can read Latin?  If I can read every language, does it matter what language one uses to speak an insult?  It's like the classmate decades ago who thought he could get away with cussing in Spanish around a music teacher, not knowing that she also taught Spanish. :-[  WHOOPS!
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 02:23:19 PM
They're neither Romans nor Catholics, Latins, Westerners, Papists, etc., etc., yes, and I will even go on to say they are Christians as well...but not Roman, the Roman Church was the Imperial Church, and not Catholic, it's a local patriarchate.
I can't wait until lubeltri finds out he can't be called Catholic. Perhaps I'll email him a link to this post......
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 02:28:11 PM
Oh, and shouldn't this forum be renamed? It surely can't continue to be called "Orthodox-Catholic Discussion".
What would you suggest GiC? "Orthodox-Latin Discussion"? But then there's Deacon Lance. hmmmm....
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: TomS on July 04, 2007, 02:42:57 PM
Oh, and shouldn't this forum be renamed? It surely can't continue to be called "Orthodox-Catholic Discussion".
What would you suggest GiC? "Orthodox-Latin Discussion"? But then there's Deacon Lance. hmmmm....

I suggest "Orthodox vs Satan's Church of Pedophile Priests (SCOPPs)  8)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 02:45:27 PM
I suggest "Orthodox vs Satan's Church of Pedophile Priests (SCOPPs)  8)
Good to see GiC's now in the company of such intellectual giants.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 02:49:22 PM
But what does that do to us who can read Latin?  If I can read every language, does it matter what language one uses to speak an insult?  It's like the classmate decades ago who thought he could get away with cussing in Spanish around a music teacher, not knowing that she also taught Spanish. :-[  WHOOPS!

LOL...he should have used a less common language. But the theory behind such a practice is that those who were capable of reading Latin, that is to say the more educated segment of society, were not the one's that needed to be protected by censorship, only the masses needed such a protection. Of course, I oppose censorship as an absolute and diabolical evil in EVERY form, infact I would go so far as to say one of the greatest evils in the history of humanity. But if you are going to censor, don't compound your sin by eliminating due process as well, at least make it clear in some form what you are censoring.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 02:52:05 PM
Oh, and shouldn't this forum be renamed? It surely can't continue to be called "Orthodox-Catholic Discussion".
What would you suggest GiC? "Orthodox-Latin Discussion"? But then there's Deacon Lance. hmmmm....

I guess that could work...regardless of what liturgical rite they use, they're under a Latin Bishop, they're Latins.

I suggest "Orthodox vs Satan's Church of Pedophile Priests (SCOPPs)  8)

Are we going to have to add SCOPP to our list of forbidden words? LOL :D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Jakub on July 04, 2007, 03:03:07 PM
Boys will be boys...

james
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 03:07:08 PM
Boys will be boys...

james

Yep. And sometimes even grown men will be boys. I'd say "puerile", but then what do I know?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 04, 2007, 03:26:19 PM
They're neither Romans nor Catholics, Latins, Westerners, Papists, etc., etc., yes, and I will even go on to say they are Christians as well...but not Roman, the Roman Church was the Imperial Church, and not Catholic, it's a local patriarchate.

We don't call ourselves "Roman" Catholics---you guys do. We are officially the "Catholic Church," not the "Roman Catholic Church." So if you want to stop calling us Roman . . . you are more than welcome!  :)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 04, 2007, 03:27:41 PM
We are the "Catholic Church,"
Well, if GiC has his way, you're not even that.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 04, 2007, 03:31:35 PM
I can't wait until lubeltri finds out he can't be called Catholic. Perhaps I'll email him a link to this post......

Well, I had already changed my label under my name after some had intimated that I was not a Christian. I figured I wouldn't be offending anybody here with that label, even Asterikos (who has been baptized). So hopefully GiC will have nothing to complain about. . .
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Veniamin on July 04, 2007, 03:32:05 PM
Well, if GiC has his way, you're not even that.

Franko-Latin Religious Organization, maybe? :D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 04, 2007, 03:35:13 PM
Well, there's always the Whore of Babylon. How does that work, GiC?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 04, 2007, 03:39:24 PM
Well, there's always the Whore of Babylon. How does that work, GiC?

That sounds like a lot of fun...are you trying to convert me?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: John of the North on July 04, 2007, 03:52:53 PM
So hopefully GiC will have nothing to complain about. . .

Well if that is true than Fr. Seraphim was wrong and the Second Coming and Judgment does come with a warning, because surely the sky must be falling. I knew I should have been baptized on the Second.....
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Papist on July 05, 2007, 06:33:04 PM
Hey guys. I have to say that I agree with luberti. Since the name of our Church is not "Roman Catholic" but Catholic, so if you stop calling us Roman Catholic, that's cool with me. If you want to call us latin Catholics, that's ok too because that is the jurisdiction to which I belong. But taking out the term Catholic is just silly. That's the name of our Church. You may not believe that we are the Catholic Church refered to in the creed, and that's fine. But our name is Catholic. You can't change our name for us. Just as my name is Christopher, and which means Christ-brearer. Even if you don't believe I am a Christ-bearer, It is still my name.
Many Blessings to all of you.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Veniamin on July 05, 2007, 06:49:55 PM
Just as my name is Christopher, and which means Christ-brearer. Even if you don't believe I am a Christ-bearer, It is still my name.

No, it's not, it's Papist. :P
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 05, 2007, 07:14:05 PM
catholic church, catholic church...Rome, hmmmm, let me think...

Oh yeah, I remember it - the Formerly Orthodox Church of Rome !

Yep, Charlemagne's church...FOCOR !
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Papist on July 05, 2007, 07:35:02 PM
catholic church, catholic church...Rome, hmmmm, let me think...

Oh yeah, I remember it - the Formerly Orthodox Church of Rome !

Yep, Charlemagne's church...FOCOR !
Again... not our name.  :)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 05, 2007, 07:37:41 PM
It's just a sign of respect to call groups by the names they call themselves. That is why I try not to call Orthodox "Eastern" Orthodox (though admittedly many Orthodox see Orthodoxy=Eastern and vice versa) or "Schismatic Greeks," etc. So I certainly like to be called Catholic---no more, no less.

(http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/2059/untitled1hn3.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

(MTA: D'oh! Forgot to add the trademark.)



Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 05, 2007, 08:27:19 PM
So sad...too bad for FOCOR...name's in use already, but spelled with a "K".  ;)

And likewise I will refrain from using such terminology as "Papist Church, Graceless Heretics'' - that's only fair.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Jakub on July 05, 2007, 08:41:30 PM
I would partake of this extremely lively and pointless discussion, but instead I will drink a few cold brewski's, eat some chips and salsa and watch some baseball...late

james
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: GiC on July 05, 2007, 09:18:05 PM
I would partake of this extremely lively and pointless discussion, but instead I will drink a few cold brewski's, eat some chips and salsa and watch some baseball...late

james

I doubt anyone has yet to partake in this completely pointeless discussion until they have consumed more than a 'few' beers. ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 05, 2007, 09:20:25 PM
I doubt anyone has yet to partake in this completely pointeless discussion until they have consumed more than a 'few' beers. ;)

Still in the fast...light  headed, dizzy spells, etc.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 06, 2007, 02:42:53 AM
We don't call ourselves "Roman" Catholics---you guys do. We are officially the "Catholic Church," not the "Roman Catholic Church." So if you want to stop calling us Roman . . . you are more than welcome!  :)

Hey guys. I have to say that I agree with luberti. Since the name of our Church is not "Roman Catholic" but Catholic, so if you stop calling us Roman Catholic, that's cool with me. If you want to call us latin Catholics, that's ok too because that is the jurisdiction to which I belong. But taking out the term Catholic is just silly. That's the name of our Church. You may not believe that we are the Catholic Church refered to in the creed, and that's fine. But our name is Catholic. You can't change our name for us. Just as my name is Christopher, and which means Christ-brearer. Even if you don't believe I am a Christ-bearer, It is still my name.
Many Blessings to all of you.
"Catholic" is the name you give yourselves.  The problem we Orthodox have with calling your church the Catholic Church without any regional/local qualifier is that we also call our church the Catholic Church--some churches in our communion even use the name Catholic in their official titles (e.g., the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America, or something like that).  When I'm talking to a Roman Catholic--sorry, the context of this statement requires me to use this qualifier--I'll use the term "Catholic" without any qualifiers, knowing that in interfaith dialog we almost always refer to ourselves as Eastern Orthodox, or just Orthodox.  It just makes sense.

However, when I talk with other Orthodox, which I do in most of my discussions on this forum, I will speak in language my fellow Orthodox Christians understand.  If when speaking to fellow Orthodox I speak of the Catholic Church, I don't give them reason to know whether I'm talking about the "one holy, catholic, apostolic Church" which we believe we are, or about the Roman Church.  When I speak to other Orthodox, therefore, I will speak of the Roman church as the Roman Catholic Church, the Roman church, or simply the RC church to make sure they know I'm talking about that church that calls the Pope of Rome her supreme pontiff.  Since most of my discussions on this Orthodox forum are with the faithful of the Orthodox Church (Eastern or Oriental), you're stuck with me attaching the qualifier "Roman" to that which you call the Catholic Church.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Keble on July 06, 2007, 12:40:48 PM
It's amusing in a snarky way to read this thread, because anyone with eyes to see can see that this is all sales-pitching. For a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA, it boils down to a choice between

"We're always right because we're all-encompassing"

and

"We're all-encompassing because we're always right"

which I would submit is not a compelling choice.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 06, 2007, 12:50:30 PM
Well, to get back to the original issue, I think the church should be called the Vatican Catholic Church as the Vatican is an independent nation and is not considered to be part of Rome. Therefore, they have no right to be called Roman unless they submit to being part of the city.  ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 06, 2007, 01:36:42 PM
Well, to get back to the original issue, I think the church should be called the Vatican Catholic Church as the Vatican is an independent nation and is not considered to be part of Rome. Therefore, they have no right to be called Roman unless they submit to being part of the city.  ;)

Better yet, just roll them back to their original 10 dioceses around Rome (later the Papal Estates) and let them go on...
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Papist on July 06, 2007, 02:10:20 PM
"Catholic" is the name you give yourselves.  The problem we Orthodox have with calling your church the Catholic Church without any regional/local qualifier is that we also call our church the Catholic Church--some churches in our communion even use the name Catholic in their official titles (e.g., the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America, or something like that).  When I'm talking to a Roman Catholic--sorry, the context of this statement requires me to use this qualifier--I'll use the term "Catholic" without any qualifiers, knowing that in interfaith dialog we almost always refer to ourselves as Eastern Orthodox, or just Orthodox.  It just makes sense.

However, when I talk with other Orthodox, which I do in most of my discussions on this forum, I will speak in language my fellow Orthodox Christians understand.  If when speaking to fellow Orthodox I speak of the Catholic Church, I don't give them reason to know whether I'm talking about the "one holy, catholic, apostolic Church" which we believe we are, or about the Roman Church.  When I speak to other Orthodox, therefore, I will speak of the Roman church as the Roman Catholic Church, the Roman church, or simply the RC church to make sure they know I'm talking about that church that calls the Pope of Rome her supreme pontiff.  Since most of my discussions on this Orthodox forum are with the faithful of the Orthodox Church (Eastern or Oriental), you're stuck with me attaching the qualifier "Roman" to that which you call the Catholic Church.
Interesting that you feel that you can change the name of our church for us.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 02:56:15 PM
Well, to get back to the original issue, I think the church should be called the Vatican Catholic Church as the Vatican is an independent nation and is not considered to be part of Rome. Therefore, they have no right to be called Roman unless they submit to being part of the city.  ;)

Well, the cathedral church of the Bishop of Rome, St. John Lateran, is still located in the city of Rome---though it has a status similar to that of an embassy. It was given to the Pope by Constantine the Great himself.

I would also add that the Italian Republic dates to 1946 and thus is just a wee bit newer than the papacy ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 06, 2007, 03:10:28 PM
^

Still, the Vatican has a flag and everything. It's got nice, shiny keys and a crown even. ;D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 03:50:07 PM
That's the papal tiara, abandoned by John Paul I and his two successors. That, and the also-abandoned movable throne, were relics of Roman imperial tradition.

The sight of a pope carried on the throne and wearing the tiara with servants fanning him with ostrich feathers is smashing, but I am very glad the popes no longer do it (though admittedly the popemobile is an aesthetic step down.).

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/GestatorialChair1.jpg) (http://www.newsday.com/media/photo/2005-04/17282984.jpg)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 06, 2007, 03:54:08 PM
That's the papal tiara, abandoned by John Paul I and his two successors. That, and the also-abandoned movable throne, were relics of Roman imperial tradition.

The sight of a pope carried on the throne and wearing the tiara with servants fanning him with ostrich feathers is smashing, but I am very glad the popes no longer do it (though admittedly the popemobile is an aesthetic step down.).

Thanks for the information. I'm glad this thread was not a complete waste of time (though ridiculing inanity never is, in my opinion). GiC just loves to stir up controversy; I'll bet it gets his goat that there's now useful information in this thread.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 06, 2007, 07:51:13 PM
Interesting that you feel that you can change the name of our church for us.
Interesting that you feel that you can come to an Orthodox discussion board and dictate to us what we are to call your church.;)

For us Orthodox to call your church simply the "Catholic Church" is an implicit agreement with you that your church is the whole and universal Church present in eternity as much as in time, for this is what we mean by the word catholic.  We simply cannot do this yet remain faithful to our Orthodox ecclesiology.  This is why we must attach a regional qualifier to the name you give your church when we talk amongst ourselves, so that we know we're talking about that church that in our eyes has confined itself to a particular terrestrial region by her deviations from truly catholic Apostolic doctrine.  In short, many Orthodox see your unqualified assignment of the name Catholic to yourselves as a pretension to all that the word catholic means, so we need to qualify your church's title by calling her the Roman Catholic Church.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 10:49:09 PM
This is why we must attach a regional qualifier to the name you give your church when we talk amongst ourselves, so that we know we're talking about that church that in our eyes has confined itself to a particular terrestrial region

A "regional" Church?

(http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/catholic_world.gif)
That includes 100-150 million each in Africa and Asia and quickly growing.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Eastern-orthodoxy-world-by-country.png/800px-Eastern-orthodoxy-world-by-country.png)
Distribution of Eastern Orthodoxy in the world by country

[-red-]Dominant religion
[-orange-] Important minority religion (over 10%)

-

You gotta try something better than that  ;)

How about "un-Orthodox Catholics"? And we'll call ourselves here "orthodox Catholics." Then everybody's happy, except GiC, of course.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 06, 2007, 10:51:37 PM
I guess the "Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh" website is misnamed...maybe we named it?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 11:13:37 PM
I guess the "Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh" website is misnamed...maybe we named it?

The official name is "Catholic Church." The official language is Latin. How many of our ecumenist American bishops are even proficient in Latin? 'Nuff said. The only time I've seen "Roman Catholic" from the Holy See is in ecumenical statements between our Church and Orthodoxy or perhaps Anglicanism. But it is not in any way what the Church as always officially called herself. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in all of its nearly 1000 pages, does not use that phrase once.

So I'm not too fond of being called it, especially considering the political/polemical nature of its origins. I'm not a Roman. I don't live in the diocese of Rome. It is true I worship according to the Roman rite, but millions of other Catholics do not. I'm fine with "Catholic in communion with Rome," though. That's a more accurate term---and a good one for you Orthodox, who are considered in some way (being "true particular churches" with "valid Eucharist"*) "Catholic not in communion with Rome."

*
Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him. The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches. Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church (Dominus Iesus, 17).

Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 06, 2007, 11:28:13 PM
A "regional" Church?

For us Orthodox to call your church simply the "Catholic Church" is an implicit agreement with you that your church is the whole and universal Church present in eternity as much as in time, for this is what we mean by the word catholic.
A church may call the whole inhabited earth her region, but unless the faith of that church is the eternal faith of the Apostles (see my quote above), that church will never be more than just a regional church.  I'm sorry if you find these words harsh and uncharitable, but that's the attitude you put yourselves up against by asking us on an Orthodox forum to simply call you "Catholic".  Will it make you happy if we call ourselves "Eastern Orthodox", considering how the earthly institution of our church is confined for the most part to eastern Europe, northeastern Asia, the eastern half of the Mediterranean coast, and much of the northeastern corner of Africa?

Lubeltri and Papist, you can argue with us if you want, but I would counsel you to not set yourselves up for frustration, because you probably won't change the general Orthodox mindset of this Orthodox forum.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 11:34:07 PM
Peter:

I know it ain't gonna change. Not trying to. Just being a pedant and enjoying the discussion.  You'll be free of me when the coffee shop throws me and my friends out at midnight.  :)

We could always do what our forefathers did: you're the Greeks, and we're the Latins.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 06, 2007, 11:37:17 PM
We could always do what our forefathers did: you're the Greeks, and we're the Latins.
Then what are the Melkites and Maronites? ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 11:39:21 PM
Then what are the Melkites and Maronites? ;)

I was thinking the same thing. But hey, tough luck. They lost out in the power struggle of the ancient patriarchates. Latin Rome and Greek Constantinople were the big boys.  ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 06, 2007, 11:43:03 PM
I was thinking the same thing. But hey, tough luck. They lost out in the power struggle of the ancient patriarchates. Latin Rome and Greek Constantinople were the big boys.
Possibly, but the Melkites in the Middle East have long called themselves "Rum Katulcek"....I wonder if they were referring to New or Old "Rum"? ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 06, 2007, 11:45:10 PM
Possibly, but the Melkites in the Middle East have long called themselves "Rum Katulcek"....I wonder if they were referring to New or Old "Rum"? ;)

Old Rum is always better. A finer vintage  ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 06, 2007, 11:50:20 PM
Old Rum is always better. A finer vintage  ;)
LOL  :D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 07, 2007, 12:01:55 AM
All attempts to find a photo of "Ratzinger Rum" or other such thing were unsuccessful. Caribbean Catholics need to be more enterprising. The Germans came up with this:

(http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/060908/060908_popebeer_vmed_11a.widec.jpg)

Good night. Got to go.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 07, 2007, 12:03:33 AM
Old Rum is always better. A finer vintage  ;)
But nothing beats a good Russian vodka. ;)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: minasoliman on July 07, 2007, 12:10:44 AM
Man, and to think you guys were just two happy lungs.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Salpy on July 07, 2007, 12:11:04 AM
O.K. I'm confused again.  On another thread I was told that "Roman" is the word that is supposed to be used for that empire whose capitol was in Constantinople.  Why is it supposed to be used for the people who are under the jurisdiction of Pope Benedict?  

I've also heard that Greeks use that word for themselves, even though Rome is not in Greece.  Is that true?  
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Eugenio on July 07, 2007, 12:16:22 AM
To add to the confusion, the Eastern Catholics (United with Rome ,to some) in places like Ukraine often call themselves "Greek Catholics"  even though they are not ethnically Greek.

For example: http://www.ugcc.org.ua/eng/

I guess "Greek" and "Roman" refer to a place, except when they don't, eh?  :-\



Minor edit to change proscribed word,
Aristokles
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 07, 2007, 12:18:03 AM
All attempts to find a photo of "Ratzinger Rum" or other such thing were unsuccessful. Caribbean Catholics need to be more enterprising. The Germans came up with this:

(http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/060908/060908_popebeer_vmed_11a.widec.jpg)

Good night. Got to go.
Now that you bring this up, I remember seeing a doctored photo of Pope Benedict that gave me a really good laugh, even if it was a bit sacrilegious.  I'm now looking online for that photo.  It shows Pope Benedict holding up a chalice to bless it for Communion, except that the photo is most likely altered to superimpose a huge mug of beer where the Chalice should be.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Eugenio on July 07, 2007, 12:22:33 AM
Salpy, in answer to your question, as I understand, modern Greeks may sometimes refer to their culture as "Romaios" or "Romiosyne". As for the subjects of the now-titled "Byzantine" Empire, they actually called themselves "Romaics"

Here's an interesting discussion on another list I dug up:
http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2004-October/004211.html
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 07, 2007, 12:23:39 AM
I've also heard that Greeks use that word for themselves, even though Rome is not in Greece.  Is that true? 

There are two Romes. "Old Rome" is the Rome of Italy. "New Rome" is Constantinople. This was established in the First Ecumenical Council (3rd Canon of Constantinople). The full title of the Oecumenical Patriarch is: "Archbishop of Constantinople, the New Rome and Oecumenical Patriarch". This title still appears on his official documents and letters (of which I have two).
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Salpy on July 07, 2007, 01:09:29 AM
There are two Romes. "Old Rome" is the Rome of Italy. "New Rome" is Constantinople. This was established in the First Ecumenical Council (3rd Canon of Constantinople). The full title of the Oecumenical Patriarch is: "Archbishop of Constantinople, the New Rome and Oecumenical Patriarch". This title still appears on his official documents and letters (of which I have two).

Then shouldn't we call the church associated with Pope Benedict the "Old Roman Catholic Church?"  Wouldn't using just the generic "Roman" imply he has jurisdiction over both Rome in Italy and Constantinople?  I know this sounds silly, but it is very confusing.  I'm probably missing something.    :)
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Salpy on July 07, 2007, 02:28:09 AM
Sorry, but I just read a post in another thread which reminded me of something I've heard before--that Russia, or Moscow, is sometimes called "New Rome."  So of course I have more questions:

Which is the real "New Rome"--Constantinople, or Russia, or both?  By calling Pope Benedict's church by the generic "Roman," couldn't the implication be that he has jurisdiction over Rome in Italy and Constantinople and Russia?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 07, 2007, 02:56:47 AM
Sorry, but I just read a post in another thread which reminded me of something I've heard before--that Russia, or Moscow, is sometimes called "New Rome."  So of course I have more questions:

Which is the real "New Rome"--Constantinople, or Russia, or both?  By calling Pope Benedict's church by the generic "Roman," couldn't the implication be that he has jurisdiction over Rome in Italy and Constantinople and Russia?
Rome is the "Old Rome".

Constantinople dubbed itself "New Rome".

Moscow named itself the "Third Rome" (not another "New Rome").

According to Russian ecclesiopolitical theory, "a Fourth Rome there shall never be."
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ozgeorge on July 07, 2007, 06:00:10 AM
Constantinople dubbed itself "New Rome".
No it didn't. The First Oecumenical Council did:
Quote
"The Bishop of Constantinople, however, shall have the prerogative of honour after the Bishop of Rome; because Constantinople is New Rome." (Canon III of the 150 Fathers (http://www.haywardfamily.org/ccel/fathers2/npnf214/npnf2170.htm#P3914_689786))
It wasn't just something claimed by Constantinople. It was agreed by the Church.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Αριστοκλής on July 07, 2007, 06:06:43 AM
To add to the confusion, the Eastern Catholics (***** to some) in places like Ukraine often call themselves "Greek Catholics"  even though they are not ethnically Greek.

For example: http://www.ugcc.org.ua/eng/

I guess "Greek" and "Roman" refer to a place, except when they don't, eh?  :-\


Now you get it! Roman Catholics aren't Roman (nor are they 'Catholic'). All Greek Orthodox aren't Greeks, and the RCs stole 'Greek Catholic', too - who has a better claim on that name as well, but US.

(This is fun.)  ;D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 07, 2007, 09:43:12 AM
Sorry, but I just read a post in another thread which reminded me of something I've heard before--that Russia, or Moscow, is sometimes called "New Rome."  So of course I have more questions:

Which is the real "New Rome"--Constantinople, or Russia, or both?  By calling Pope Benedict's church by the generic "Roman," couldn't the implication be that he has jurisdiction over Rome in Italy and Constantinople and Russia?

Rome=Rome

Constantinople=New Rome

Moscow=New New Rome

London=New New New Rome
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 07, 2007, 10:01:56 AM
^

London has never had nearly the ecumenical authority that any of those other three had, not even at the height of its power.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: lubeltri on July 07, 2007, 10:10:08 AM
I know---but I have studied much of Elizabethan England, and in its mythology it called itself the new Rome. Quite frankly, I do not see how Moscow has any claim to the title either. Constantinople remains the "New" Rome, even if it is almost completely devoid of Christians.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 07, 2007, 10:26:23 AM
^

I agree completely.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: minasoliman on July 07, 2007, 11:42:26 AM
Rome=Rome

Constantinople=New Rome

Moscow=New New Rome

London=New New New Rome

Whatever happened to NYC (I would say DC, but I like NY better  ;D)?
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 07, 2007, 01:37:38 PM
No it didn't. The First Oecumenical Council did:It wasn't just something claimed by Constantinople. It was agreed by the Church.
I stand corrected. :-[  Thank you for setting me straight, George.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: PeterTheAleut on July 07, 2007, 01:39:01 PM
Whatever happened to NYC (I would say DC, but I like NY better  ;D)?
I would say that NYC has become the UNRome. :D
Title: Re: Catholics have every right to be called Roman
Post by: Aristibule on July 07, 2007, 01:39:25 PM
NYC would be New New New Babylon or Fourth Babylon (after Old Babylon was moved to New Babylon; Seleucia-Ctesiphon, and then Rome became the Third Babylon by the decree of Martin Luther.)

Really - Roman continuity existed (and exists) in the West. Even in England, to be sure. The Founding Fathers of America were conscious of being in that continuity. (And I like DC better than NYC. Still better, Richmond or Montgomery. :D )
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 07, 2007, 01:40:49 PM
^

Ah, the ancient capital of my fair conquered land. Davis lives!
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Jakub on July 07, 2007, 02:04:59 PM
Who is in charge of enforcing the minimal rule of alcoholic beverages to be consumed to partake of this discussion ?

james
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on July 07, 2007, 02:08:03 PM
^

Anyone who was is too wasted now to continue.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Aristibule on July 07, 2007, 03:14:58 PM
I think all of that had something to do with the idea of Christendom, specifically the Christian monarch. With the Fall of Constantinople, the only reigning 'Eastern Roman' monarch became the Russian czars (note, not Moscow, but Russian.) This goes along with the fact that 'Russian Orthodox' does not refer to 'Russki', ie Russian ethnicity, but Russiye - under the Russian Imperial crown. Now, that's been over about 90 years.

With Rome (Old Rome) the last Roman Emperor abdicated back in the 19th c. (last of the Holy Roman Emperors.)

So - there are no Christian monarchs ruling over vast areas today than Queen Elizabeth I of Scotland (known in England as Queen Elizabeth II.) She is, of course, officially Anglican (of a respectable High Church English Use variety), though Presbyterian when in Scotland.

I think that only leaves:

Catholic kings: Albert II of Belgium, Furst Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein, Grand Duke Henri of Luxembourg, Prince Albert II of Monaco, King Juan Carlos I of Spain.

Protestant kings and queens: Margrethe II of Denmark, Koningen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Norges Konge Harald V, Konung Carl XVI Gustaf, King George Tupou V of Tonga (ie, Lutherans and Methodists.)

Of those, only Spain and Denmark have lands beyond their home countries (Juan Carlos is also the titular crusader 'King of Jerusalem'.) Only the British monarchy has any sense of being Christian with rule over large areas of the world. And, so far, restoration of Orthodox monarchs has been - well, 'duds'.

All the rest  of the world monarchs are Muslim, Animists or some Eastern religion.

I suppose Russia has the best chance of restoring a monarchy. The Greeks - little to no chance (their last King was no Emperor, and most surviving claimants to descend from the Emperors have competing claims - and are usually either Roman Catholics or Muslims.)

That's a fun little are of interest to obsess over...
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: skippy on August 28, 2007, 10:47:12 PM
They're neither Romans nor Catholics, Latins, Westerners, Papists, etc., etc., yes, and I will even go on to say they are Christians as well...but not Roman, the Roman Church was the Imperial Church, and not Catholic, it's a local patriarchate.
FYI
The ancient name is the Catholic church.
Actually all cardinals are given the title priest of titular church in Rome continuing the practice that the clergy of Rome elect their Bishop. So they become part of the clergy of the Roman church. (the diocese of Rome)

Roman Catholic was originally a pejorative term to distinguish them from the new Anglican church.

Papist, as well as papalism)  is also generally considered an insult. Very brave of Papist to take that as his moniker!

The papacy is the office of the pope. Believe it or not there is more to Catholicism than the pope.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ChristusDominus on May 13, 2009, 04:04:48 AM
Oh, and shouldn't this forum be renamed? It surely can't continue to be called "Orthodox-Catholic Discussion".
What would you suggest GiC? "Orthodox-Latin Discussion"? But then there's Deacon Lance. hmmmm....

I suggest "Orthodox vs Satan's Church of Pedophile Priests (SCOPPs)  8)
This has to be the reason for this guy being banned, I hope.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Papist on May 14, 2009, 12:42:00 PM
Sorry, but I just read a post in another thread which reminded me of something I've heard before--that Russia, or Moscow, is sometimes called "New Rome."  So of course I have more questions:

Which is the real "New Rome"--Constantinople, or Russia, or both?  By calling Pope Benedict's church by the generic "Roman," couldn't the implication be that he has jurisdiction over Rome in Italy and Constantinople and Russia?
And so he does.  ;D
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Fr. George on May 14, 2009, 12:49:10 PM
Oh, and shouldn't this forum be renamed? It surely can't continue to be called "Orthodox-Catholic Discussion".
What would you suggest GiC? "Orthodox-Latin Discussion"? But then there's Deacon Lance. hmmmm....

I suggest "Orthodox vs Satan's Church of Pedophile Priests (SCOPPs)  8)

This has to be the reason for this guy being banned, I hope.

Why resurrect this old thread?

Anyway, yes, anti-RC vitriol was involved in the decision.
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: ialmisry on May 14, 2009, 12:49:45 PM
Sorry, but I just read a post in another thread which reminded me of something I've heard before--that Russia, or Moscow, is sometimes called "New Rome."  So of course I have more questions:

Which is the real "New Rome"--Constantinople, or Russia, or both?  By calling Pope Benedict's church by the generic "Roman," couldn't the implication be that he has jurisdiction over Rome in Italy and Constantinople and Russia?
And so he does.  ;D

Actually, the one way he is Roman in the old sense of the word is that he has the pagan title "Pontifex Maximus" the office of the head of the state religion of Rome (given up by the emperor Gratian to Pope Damasus).
Title: Re: Catholics have no right to be called Roman
Post by: Entscheidungsproblem on May 14, 2009, 01:36:17 PM
Since this thread is rather old and there is already a thread discussing the whole Roman thing, I am locking this one.

-- Nebelpfade