Talk:Catholic Church

Catholic Church

What was wrong with the changes? They reflect consensus over at Wikipedia? -- 98.193.26.175 20:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, "3 That part of christendom apart from the Orthodox Church " and "4 Any non-Orthodox Church "

state exactly the same thing in different words. -- 98.193.26.175 20:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

Catholic Church

The two senses describing Orthodox Churches. I thought that the Great Schism separated Catholic and Orthodox Christianity. SemperBlotto 21:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

:You must be thinking of Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox (and others?) that don't recognize the authority of the Roman Pope, as I recollect. DCDuring 22:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC) "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." Mark Twain DCDuring 01:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

You might pick up a copy of Runciman's The Eatern Schism. The Great Schism only separated Roman Catholicism from the Orthodox Church in Byzantium (also called Greek, Russian, or Eatern Orthodox). There are other "Orthodox" Churches, such as the Oriental Orthodox (also called Monophysite, Coptic, Syriac, Ethiopic, or Armenian Church). The Oriental Orthodox separated prior to the Schism, as their lands were conquered by Moslems. --EncycloPetey 00:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches, as well as the Assyrian Church of the East, each consider themselves to be the universal and true Catholic Church. For example: The Longer Catechism of The Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church, an Eastern Orthodox catechism from 1830, by Filaret, Metropolitan of Moscow. I'll cite an example for the Oriental Orthdox as well. Does this pass as verification over here? -- 98.193.26.175 01:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The ideal would be an English quote using the term "Catholic Church" (woithout other qualifiers) in a context where it plainly refers to a church other than the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox. --EncycloPetey 05:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

And catholic church, a phrase I come across fairly often wouldn't count either, right? Perhaps the contributor didn't know the difference between Catholic with a capital C and catholic with a lower case c? RobbieG 14:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

No, this issue was done to death over the last two years at wikipedia. This was the conclusion and I have heard every possible arguement, pro and con, believe me. I'll find you all an English quote for both questioned uses. -- 98.193.26.175 20:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand what out Request for Verification is for. It is not for assurances from users that the term exists. Rather, it is for supported evidence of the word or specific sense used in quotations in accordance with WT:CFI. We need a durably-archived, published quote, from a book, journal, etc. demonstratiing the particular sense. Someone saying "I believe you'll find it" doesn't help. Ideally, we need a quote provided. --EncycloPetey 13:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The Catholic Encyclopedia defines Orthodox Church like this: The technical name for the body of Christians who use the Byzantine Rite in various languages and are in union with the Patriarch of Constantinople but in schism with the Pope of Rome. The epithet Orthodox (orthodoxos), meaning "right believer", is, naturally, claimed by people of every religion...How "Orthodox" became the proper name of the Eastern Church it is difficult to say. ...Gradually, although of course, both East and West always claimed both names, "Catholic" became the most common name for the original Church in the West, "Orthodox" in the East....The Orthodox, then, are the Christians in the East of Europe, in Egypt and Asia, who accept the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon (are therefore neither Nestorians nor Monophysites), but who, as the result of the schisms of Photius (ninth cent.) and Cerularius (eleventh cent.), are not in communion with the Catholic Church. At least this writer seems to think that Catholic and Orthodox Churches are separate and at least he would say that the disputed senses are wrong. As a matter of fact I could not find any evidence (except for Wikipedia, which seems to come from same source) of the term Catholic Church being used of the current Orthodox Church, but it will be interesting to see, if somebody can actually provide it. Hekaheka 17:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Should we perhaps combine the two senses and label them as archaic? RobbieG 23:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that the problem is that the meanings are archaic. The current meanings seem quite recent and to reflect the outcome of sensitive discussions among various religious institutions. The current meanings would not necessarily correspond to the way the phrase has been used in the past. I also don't see how we could take any single institution's word for what the word means and has meant. Further, I suspect that folks not affiliated with one of the institutions involved would roll their eyes about this discussion, as would many who are affiliated.

Can we be vague about the definition or clear about the vast multiplicity of ways it can be and has been used? Further, how would we go about determining how the phrase is used by the larger population? DCDuring 00:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

As a first step, somebody defending the disputed senses could provide relevant evidence of the term "Catholic Church" being actually used in the sense "Orthodox Church" by people who know what they are talking about. If that is not brought up, the case should be clear: RFV failed. Hekaheka 15:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Why was this book title dismissed? This example of usage was first published in 1850. — This unsigned comment was added by 98.193.26.175 (talk) at 15:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC).

no evidence presented, failed - [The]DaveRoss 22:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)