User talk:LightSpectra/Userboxes/TRC

What is a Roman Catholic?

Is this a person who lives in Rome and is a Catholic too? Could you change this user box to say, "This user is a Traditionalist Catholic." The prefix Roman is inaccurate. And for a Traditionalist to say this is just plain odd. Thanks.Tobit2 (talk) 03:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The phrase "Roman Catholic" means "Latin Rite Catholic;" as opposed to an "Eastern Rite Catholic." -- LightSpectra (talk) 17:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect. Latin Rite or, more properly, Roman Rite, refers to the liturgy, the way one celebrates the sacrament. It does not refer to the Church or to its members, which are termed Catholic Church and Catholics, respectively.Tobit2 (talk) 02:46, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

A Roman Catholic is one who adheres to the Latin liturgy, whereas an Eastern Catholic adheres to the eastern/byzantine liturgy. They are both Catholics and members of the Catholic Church. -- LightSpectra (talk) 03:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

So we agree that people who adhere to the Latin liturgy and Eastern Liturgy are both Catholics. So where does this Roman qualifier come into play? Does the Holy See ever state that people who follow the Latin Liturgy are to be called "Roman Catholics?" Certainly not. Equally certain, the term "Roman Catholic" is a designation introduced by English Protestants in attacks on the Church a few centuries ago. It is not, nor ever has been, a Catholic description (please excuse the pun, although I must say, it was quite good).Tobit2 (talk) 04:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean the phrase has never been used by the Holy See? Here's an excerpt from the article on the Latin Rite: "The Oriental Church is composed of four rites - Greek, Armenian, Syriac, and Coptic; all these rites are referred to by the single name of the Greek or Oriental Church, just as the name of the Latin or Roman Church signifies the Roman, Ambrosian, and Mozarabic rites, as well as the special rites of different Regular Orders." And the source for this statement is Encyclical Allatae sunt, 3. -- LightSpectra (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The text you quote uses the term "Roman Church," not "Roman Catholic Church." There is a significant difference. The encyclical from 1755 you bring up is trying to describe Oriental and Roman Rites at the same time, a difficult task without putting some qualifier, such as "Oriental Catholics," but it is still clear from the text that an Oriental Catholic is termed a "Catholic," differing only in a liturgical sense. That said, I grant you that, in recent years, when the Vatican talks to other groups, notably Anglicans or even the Orthodox Church, they have qualified things with Roman Catholic; this, however, is a diplomatic issue rather than a theological one: it won't get you off to a great start when talking with a group (a group which still blames you for sacking Constantinople) and say, "Hey we are the Catholic Church, and you aren't." In fact, the Vatican is solid ground here anyway because the term "Roman Church" or maybe even "Roman Catholic" would properly refer to the Roman patriarchate or the diocese of Rome (the people doing the talking). The Catholic Church refers to itself as Catholic, without qualifier. I believe there is a debate going on about this now on the "Roman Catholic Church" article and the dispute has been settled to rename the article "Catholic Church."Tobit2 (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)