Talk:Catholic (term)

Term

By using the term "Roman" Catholic Church, then admitting that it was a term "once" used by early protestants makes the entire point ILLOGICAL. You state "Roman" was "once" used by Protestants "to disparge Catholic claims..", YET you clearly use the SAME "Roman Catholic Church" in your own discussion. Additionally, you continue to give anti-Catholic rhetoric by stating "many identify Roman Catholicism exclusively with the Latin or Western Church", proceeding to give names of numerous other non-Latin rites/Eastern churches ending with the statement "all in communion with the Pope". As if the very fact that they are in communion with the Pope makes them "Roman". Simple, sillyness brought about by uninformed bias. Its the equivalent to saying all Floridians are Marylanders or D.C.'ers since they are in "communion" with the President which resides in the US Capitol in the D.C. No, for just as Floro-Americans are American and are not D.C.-American, Byzantine Catholics ARE Catholic, but NOT Roman Catholic. Thus if you going to be CONSISTENT regarding the "Universal" Church, speak of Catholic in "In one widely used sense", then you should remove the tagged on term which you stated as used "ONCE" or used "particularly in ..." ; removing the word ROMAN from the actual Catholic Church at large from this topic. It is improper to speak of something "in the widely used sense" then use the same term ("Roman") used "once" or in some particular region.

By using the term "Roman" Catholic Church, then admitting that it was a term "once" used by early protestants makes the entire point ILLOGICAL. You state "Roman" was "once" used by Protestants "to disparge Catholic claims..", YET you clearly use the SAME "Roman Catholic Church" in your own discussion. Additionally, you continue to give anti-Catholic rhetoric by stating "many identify Roman Catholicism exclusively with the Latin or Western Church", proceeding to give names of numerous other non-Latin rites/Eastern churches ending with the statement "all in communion with the Pope". As if the very fact that they are in communion with the Pope makes them "Roman". Simple, sillyness brought about by uninformed bias. Its the equivalent to saying all Floridians are Marylanders or D.C.'ers since they are in "communion" with the President which resides in the US Capitol in the D.C. No, for just as Floro-Americans are American and are not D.C.-American, Byzantine Catholics ARE Catholic, but NOT Roman Catholic. Thus if you going to be CONSISTENT regarding the "Universal" Church, speak of Catholic in "In one widely used sense", then you should remove the tagged on term which you stated as used "ONCE" or used "particularly in ..." ; removing the word ROMAN from the actual Catholic Church at large from this topic. It is improper to speak of something "in the widely used sense" then use the same term ("Roman") used "once" or in some particular region.

re: etymology

forgive me, a bit off beat, but what is the relation between cathoulou and cthulu the h.p.lovecraft character? there must be one, i wonder if anyone knows... Natmanprime (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

merge proposal into Catholicism

See discussion at Talk:Catholicism

I'm closing the discussion for now, leaving the former "Catholic" page (now Catholic (Christian terminology)) as a sub-page of "Catholicism" --Zfish118 (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Solution to Roman/No Roman: Each Sect Gets their own h2 header and a h3 header for their view of as catholic and why and stick out of editting other's support so much

Solution: Each Sect Gets their own h2 header and a h3 header for their view of as catholic and why and stick out of editting other's support so much? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBGeorge77 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Capitalization

The third word of this article "catholic" should be capitalized.

Please edit it to reflect this correction. Thank you65.8.142.136 (talk) 05:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

No, "catholic" should not be capitalised in this context as it isn't being used as part of a proper name or proper noun. It is being used in the same way in which was originally used in the creeds. Afterwriting (talk) 13:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Adjective/noun

Can someone write in the introduction when the term "Catholic" switched from an adjective (as in the Catholic Church) to a noun (as in, "I am a Catholic.")? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.170.135.100 (talk) 01:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I think there is no answer to this. In Latin and Latin-derived languages adjectives can be freely used as nouns and in English nouns can be used as adjectives (e.g. "the gypsy crew"). Esoglou (talk) 06:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Three marks

In the "Other Western Christians", each of the terms in the three marks clause ("one holy catholic and apostolic church") in the Nicene Creed were individually wiki-linked to a topic. I am concerned that these wiki links border on original research (for instance, does "Apostolic" only refer to "Apostolic succession", even when discussing Reformed churches?); this interpretation is certainly not sourced. I have replaced it with a link to the "Three Marks" article in its stead. --Zfish118 (talk) 13:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Universalism

The universalism template does not seem to fit here. "Catholic" literally means universal, but the context discussed throughout the article has little to do with "Universalism". --Zfish118^⋉talk 05:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Focus

This article would seem to be more focussed on use of the term "Catholic", rather than a detailed description of beliefs (the Latter being the focus of the "Catholicism"/"Catholic" article). There was some long commented-out material that I removed, that another restored. I re-removed it because I had summarized some of that content into the remaining sections, and the restored seemed clunking and redundant. The article now discusses the history of the term, with a summary contemporary uses, with links to each main topic. --Zfish118^⋉talk 17:52, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Catholic (term). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130306113628/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100923233927/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri_en.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120419021937/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catholic (term). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080527013838/http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3356 to http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3356

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:42, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Merge from Catholicism (term)

Due to several related discussions at Catholicism (term), I have copied this conversion to be continued at talk:Catholicism (term)#Merge proposal with Catholic (term). I have preserved the original discussion below for reference. –Zfish118^⋉talk 06:40, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Original discussion text (to be continued at talk:Catholicism (term)#Merge proposal with Catholic (term))

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows. Procedural close: Moved discussion to talkpage of article proposed for merger Obviously heavily overlapping content. In regression, the article Catholicism (term) strictly refers to the Nicene Creed i.e. the term "Catholic (term)", as clearly indicated in its lead section. Neither original nor later included source(es) in that article deal with anything but the adjective term of said Nicene Creed and its percussions. Thus, nothing motivates two mirroring locations for essentially identical content/reflection of discussion. Compare also Roman Catholic (term) which lacks equivalent Roman Catholicism (term) for analoguous reasons. Furthermore, Catholicism (disambiguation) redirects to Catholic (disambiguation). Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC) Comment. Yes, that is true - significant sections of the article Catholicism (term) are indeed overlapping with the main content of the article Catholic (term), and those sections should be definitively merged with the main article, but the question remains - what to do with sections that are distinctively dedicated to the very relevant theological terms "catholicism" and "catholicity"? Those sections can not be simply merged with the article Catholic (term), since that would create quite a confusion. Major theological dictionaries and encyclopedias have separate articles on terms "catholic" and "catholicism" (catholicity), not to mention the common practice in scholarly literature, where clear distinction between those terms is always maintained. Are there any scholars who would argue that term "catholic" and "catholicism" (catholicity) are identical? That is a non-existing question among experts. And it is not even a denominational issue, since some of the most prominent Roman-Catholic scholars (including cardinals) have recently published several major works dedicated to the complex theological questions of "catholicism" and "catholicity". One of the key problems with the articles discussed here is that most of the main scholarly works on the subject are not even listed in our articles :) not to mention the fact that frequent editorial feuds and hasty structural changes are actually quite discouraging for editors with expert knowledge on the subject. Sorabino (talk) 16:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC) Comment When was the article "Catholicism (term)" written? I have never stumbled on it before. It appears to overlap considerably with Catholicism, and should probably be merged there. –Zfish118⋉talk 12:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Catholic Church naming conventions RfC

There is currently an RfC at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Catholic_Church)#RfC:_should_this_page_be_made_a_naming_convention that may be of interest. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 23:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Request for comments - "Catholic (term)" to "History of Catholicity"

The article of this title is being discussed here. All are invited to participate. –Zfish118^⋉talk 01:45, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Communion

I think 'communion' in the lede should be linked. Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the nuances to know precisely which wiki page would be the appropriate destination, since 'communion' itself is a disambig page. I think it would be Koinonia but someone better familiar should do it. cheers. Anastrophe (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Catholicity

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I propose merging Catholic (term) into Catholicity. I think the Nicene content here overlaps with that there, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Catholicity.FatalSubjectivities FatalSubjectivities (talk) 13:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Please look into the archives. This has been discussed and rejected several times over the past decade. If you can provide a compelling reason not previously discussed, please do so. Otherwise I would encourage you to withdraw this name change proposal to avoid needless rehashing. –Zfish118^⋉talk 14:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2023

In the first paragraph just before ref 5 and 6, change the English transliteration from okos to olos 2A02:C7F:5C94:D400:C9E7:9FCE:3D6B:2BD4 (talk) 06:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)