[soc.religion.christian] The Catholic Church

norcio@afn.ifsm.umbc.edu (A. F. Norcio) (08/08/90)

In a recent posting, Yaakov Kayman strongly objected to
Cindy Smith's use of the term Jewish Christian.  I
would like to object just as strongly to her continual
use of the terms Catholic and Catholic Church.  

In the normal usage of the English language when one
hears or sees the terms Catholic and Catholic Church,
one automatically and typically thinks of those Churches
that are in union with one of the major Metropolitan
Sees and recognizes the Pope (Patriarch of the West, Bishop
of Rome) as the Supreme Pontiff of the One, Holy, Catholic,
and Apostolic Church.  Specifically, these Churches include
only the following:

	 1) The Roman Catholic Church (Latin Rite)
	 2) The Ambrosian Catholic Church (Latin Rite)
	 3) The Lyonnaise Catholic Church (Latin Rite)

	 4) The Coptic Orthodox Catholic Church (Alexandrian Rite)
	 5) The Ethiopian Catholic Church (Alexandrian Rite)

	 6) The Malankar Orthodox Catholic Church (Antiochene Rite)
	 7) The Maronite Catholic Church (Antiochene Rite)
	 8) The Syrian Orthodox Catholic Church (Antiochene Rite)
  
	 9) The Armenian Apostolic Catholic Church (Armenian Rite)

	10) The Bulgarian Orthodox Catholic Church (Byzantine Rite)
	11) The Greek Orthodox Catholic Church (Byzantine Rite)
	12) The Melchite Catholic Church (Byzantine Rite)
	13) The Romanian Orthodox Church (Byzantine Rite)
	14) The Russian Orthodox Church (Byzantine Rite)
	15) The Ruthenian Orthodox Catholic Church (Byzantine Rite)
	16) The Ukrainian Catholic Church (Byzantine Rite)

	17) The Chaldean Catholic Church (Chaldean Rite)
	18) The Malabarese Catholic Church (Chaldean Rite)

It is apparently necessary to mention specifically that this
list does not include either the Anglican Church or the
Anglican Rite.  

Cindy Smith's many postings are very misleading.  First, it
may well be appropriate for all Protestants, including
Episcopalians/Anglicans, to consider themselves as part of the 
catholic (i.e., universal) church.  But it is entirely 
inappropriate and inaccurate for any Protestant Church to
consider itself as part of the Catholic Church and likewise
to refer to themselves as Catholics.

Further, it is clearly appropriate to state opinions.  But
to state opinions in such a way so as to give the impression
that one is pronouncing the official position of the Catholic
Church is deceptive.  This is especially troublesome when the 
opinions are canonically incorrect as far as Catholic Church
Theology is concerned.  This tactic merely furthers engenders
misunderstandings, animosity and harsh feelings between Catholicism 
and Protestantism.

In addition, the Catholic Church has a long history and over
its history has developed a moderately well-defined jargon 
in which to express theological concepts and ideas.  To use
terms and phrases in an uninformed way is again merely adding to
the confusion of Protestants and Catholics as well.  I can not
imagine what the motivation is for doing this.

Finally, in my opinion game-playing with words is not at all
consistent with ecumenical spirit to which all Christians
should be committed.

[High church Anglicans use the term Catholic to refer to a somewhat
broader Catholic tradition, which includes the Roman Catholic Church
but is not limited to it.  This wing of the church is often referred
to as "Anglo-Catholic".  So it is a use of the term "Catholic" that
has some tradition behind it, although it's certainly a less common
use than the one you are used to.  Cms does identify herself as
Episcopalean on a fairly regular basis, but I agree that some postings
might be misleading to new readers of this group.  I'll leave it to
cms to decide what to do.  --clh]

mangoe@cs.umd.edu (Charley Wingate) (08/12/90)

There are those of us who object to the self-appellation "Catholic Church"
as being entirely too much of a sales pitch.  It is typical in anglican
theology (and perhaps in other protestant bodies) to understand the creedal
phrase "We believe in one holy, catholic, and apostolic church" as referring
to the body of christians in its entirety, not to a specific denomination or
hierarchy.

My normal practice is to refer to the component churches directly.  As far
as discussions here go, the uniate churches simply don't figure much except
as pretty abstract examples.  Almost exclusively, we talk about Roman
theology, Roman liturgy, and Roman polity.  (or RC, if "Roman" offends...)
I don't refer to the eastern churches solely as "Orthodox" either, for
roughly the same reason.  I refer to them as the Eastern churches (or
occaisionally, Eastern Orthodox).

Of course, there are "Catholic" churches which are "Catholic" (i.e., they
are now separated from Rome), such as the Old Catholics and the Polish
National Catholics in this country.

I take particular exception to the following passage:

>[T]he Catholic Church has a long history and over its history has developed
>a moderately well-defined jargon in which to express theological concepts
>and ideas.  To use terms and phrases in an uninformed way is merely adding
>to the confusion of Protestants and Catholics as well.

I am afraid that the Roman church and its uniate sisters do not own these
words; it is right and proper for protestants to ignore the Roman spin put
upon them.  "Catholic" (small and capital "C") has acquired a variety of
meanings over the years.  When an anglican uses the word, it is unreasonable
to assume that he should be understood along the lines of RC dogma.
-- 
C. Wingate         + "I bind unto myself today the strong name of the Trinity
                   +  by invocation of the same
mangoe@cs.umd.edu  +  the Three in One, and One in Three."
mimsy!mangoe       +

hwt@.bnr.ca (Henry Troup) (08/12/90)

In article <Aug.8.03.40.37.1990.12894@athos.rutgers.edu> norcio@afn.ifsm.umbc.edu (A. F. Norcio) writes:
>	18) The Malabarese Catholic Church (Chaldean Rite)
 
>It is apparently necessary to mention specifically that this
>list does not include either the Anglican Church or the
>Anglican Rite.  

There is in the City of Ottawa, Canada a church which advertises in the
newpaper "The Anglican Catholic Church of Canada ... professing the faith of
the undivided Church as embodied in the Holy Scriptures and ... the Book of 
Common Prayer". I'm paraphrasing, becuase I don't have their Saturday newspaper
ad to hand.

Personally, I have trouble with that statement, because amongst other things,
I a) don't see how they can be part of the undivided church and not accept
the Pope and b) the BCP is (explicitly) not part of scripture, nor especially
devinely inspired (IMHO).

But if we accept churches as they name themselves, then

19) Then Anglican Catholic Church of Canada

--
Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions | 21 years in Canada...
uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 HWT@BNR.CA 613-765-2337    | 

jhpb@granjon.garage.att.com (09/20/90)

This is meant to be somewhat humorous, so make allowances.  I am told I
have a dry sense of humor, so you may not think it funny.

Whoever posted the remarks, I am in basic sympathy, as probably most
people here know.  I believe it's a matter of time only until the
Catholic Church shakes off its current diseases.  Unfortunately, it's
questionable how much will be destroyed before this happens, and how
many souls will be lost.  Will we see married priests?  Will the
American bishops go into schism?  Will they ordain women?  Stay tuned.

The religious orders have been pretty much wrecked, I'm afraid.  The
Jesuits have become a Marxist organization that preaches the social
gospel.

As I recently said in t.r.m, the number of seminarians has declined from
the high 40,000's shortly after Vatican II into the 4,000's at the
present time.  The orthodoxy of a number of those 4,000 is questionable
(I have a number of seminarian friends who have some horror stories.)

At one point about 5-10 years ago, the Catholic school closing rate was
averaging one per day since the close of Vatican II.

The liturgy has been pretty much destroyed.  (Comments about the people
wanting more changes will be greeted with utter derision and references
from Michael Davies' works, in that order.)  As Davies would put it, we
have been treated to the spectacle of people in our churches in near
bathing suit undress frolicking about in the isles, while we look in
vain for crucifix, altar, or tabernacle.

Mass atendance in some countries has dropped like 70%, as I recall.  In
places like Holland, forget about it, I'm not sure there are any
Catholics left.

A few dozen churches get sold in the Midwest.

As any sane person would conclude after a litany of such woes, "The
emperor's got no clothes!"

Or, as Michael Davies quoted:

	They create a wilderness and call it a renewal. (Tacitus)

I am speaking about Vatican II, of course.

As Davies put it, if the Catholic bishops had been managers of some
large corporation, they would have been fired long ago.  Heck, they
probably would have been thrown out of the nearest tall building after
mismanagement like what we've seen.

What is happening is really inexplicable.  The answer, of course, to the
whole mess, is a return to the Tradition of the Church.  That's all we
need.  We don't need married priests, or advertising agencies, or
priestesses, or any of that stuff.  All we need is conformance to the
traditional teaching of the Church.  Follow God's will, and He'll bless
every step.

Guess we have to figure this out the hard, way, though.  Wonder how many
casualties we'll take in the process.

Joe Buehler

dhosek@sif.claremont.edu (Hosek, Donald A.) (09/25/90)

In article <Sep.20.03.50.03.1990.19554@athos.rutgers.edu>, jhpb@granjon.garage.att.com writes...
>Mass atendance in some countries has dropped like 70%, as I recall.  In
>places like Holland, forget about it, I'm not sure there are any
>Catholics left.

An interesting point on this, in some comments that I deleted
since I'm fairly ruthless about cutting down originals, you
implied the decline in church attendence was a result of Vatican
II. In fact, looking at the data the decline in church attendence
began in 1968 continued until the mid-70s and stopped (This is
drawn from GSS data as reported in Greeley's the Catholic myth. I
have not verified this, but I plan to write to Fr. Greeley to try
and get the exact SPSSX programs he used in reaching his
conclusions).

The L.A. Times this month reported that the Catholic church
posted a 2% increase in membership in the last count (I believe
this represents two-year-old data, though). For comparison, most
mainline Protestant denominations showed a decline on the order
of 1-2%.

>As Davies put it, if the Catholic bishops had been managers of some
>large corporation, they would have been fired long ago.  Heck, they
>probably would have been thrown out of the nearest tall building after
>mismanagement like what we've seen.

That the church is being mismanaged, I won't argue, but that it's
the direct cause of the problems you're citing, I would. What it
comes down to in the end is the parish. I'm exceptionally lucky
to be living in an exceptional parish, the quality of the
preaching is excellant, the activities outside of mass are
well-done (although the Bible study group is running into
attendence problems now that the school year has begun). I have
yet to see a poorly-attended Sunday mass (weekday masses are
another question altogether, I must admit).

I do hope this thread continues, though. It has far more
potential than the "my sect is better than your sect because your
sect is wrong" discussions.

-dh

---
Don Hosek                       TeX, LaTeX, and Metafont support, consulting 
dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu       installation and production work. 
dhosek@ymir.bitnet              Free Estimates.
uunet!jarthur!ymir              Phone: 714-625-0147
                                finger dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu for more info

mike@turing.cs.unm.edu (Michael I. Bushnell) (09/26/90)

How interesting that Joe Buehler calls Catholics to a return to the
"traditions of the church."  How even more interesting that increased
obedience is one of those traditions he so reveres.  How more
interestng still that he says "if the Catholic bishops had been
managers of some large coroporation, they would have been fired long
ago."  Apparently his respect for the apostolic authority of the
Catholic church's magisterium is somewhat less that one might expect.

And people wonder why Reformed theology affirms that the church is
"reformed and ever reforming".  Joe wants a change in the Catholic
church, against the authority of the Bishops and the Pope and calls it
a "return to tradition".  What about the apostolic authority, Joe?
Isn't it an essential point of Catholic doctrine that the church has
an irreplaceable authority to decide just these things Joe want to
return to the pre-Vatican II state of affairs?

What is going on here, Joe?  Does the church have the authority you
claim or not???

--
    Michael I. Bushnell      \     This above all; to thine own self be true
LIBERTE, EGALITE, FRATERNITE  \    And it must follow, as the night the day,
   mike@unmvax.cs.unm.edu     /\   Thou canst not be false to any man.
        CARPE DIEM           /  \  Farewell:  my blessing season this in thee!

jhpb@granjon.garage.att.com (10/01/90)

    And people wonder why Reformed theology affirms that the church is
    "reformed and ever reforming".  Joe wants a change in the Catholic
    church, against the authority of the Bishops and the Pope and calls it
    a "return to tradition".  What about the apostolic authority, Joe?
    Isn't it an essential point of Catholic doctrine that the church has
    an irreplaceable authority to decide just these things Joe want to
    return to the pre-Vatican II state of affairs?
    
    What is going on here, Joe?  Does the church have the authority you
    claim or not???

The Church certainly has the authority, but don't forget Church history.
The bulk of the bishops either did nothing during the Arian heresy, or
were outright Arians themselves.

We owe absolute obedience to God alone.  Not only are there times when
one is not obliged to obey human superiors, there are times when one is
obliged to disobey them.

As a whole, neither the Church nor the Papacy can fail.  In the long
run, things will straighten out.  In the short term, however, the clergy
is being very lax.

A genuine reform is needed, and that means nothing more than a return to
greater adherence to the traditional norms of faiths and morals.  The
preservation of these norms is what the Church is all about.

Joe Buehler