Please Settle This Debate Between Phoneman777 And Bread of Life

[Phoneman777]

Our papist friend Bread of Life whom Phoneman777 affectionately calls "Dead Bread" (to remind him that the Eucharist wafer is as so completely and absolutely useless as ropes of sand) constantly ridicules and criticizes we Protestant members here in CB who use the phrase "Roman Catholic Church" to refer to what Dead Bread insists should be called the "catholic church" because, according to Dead Bread, the catholic church has never recognized or sanctioned the use of the phrase in reference to itself, and therefore we Protestants are unwittingly publicly humiliating ourselves by use of it.

Phoneman777 submitted for our approval the following evidence, an excerpt from a 1950 encyclical from Pope Pius XII in which he wrote:

"22. Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter of a few years ago, and based on the Sources of Revelation, which teaches that the MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST and the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH are one and the same thing."
​

It should be clear to anyone reading that with their eyes open that Pius XII just declared in no uncertain terms that the phrase "the mystical body of Christ" -- a clear, unmistakable reference to the entire global planetary fellowship of Christian believers -- and the phrase "Roman Catholic Church" are synonymous. Dead Bread denies this.

What say YOU?

 

[Enoch111]

What say YOU?

It is pretty obvious from this quotation that the Roman Catholic Church is a distinct entity (as know by the world for centuries). So there is no contest.

Here is what we find in the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

'In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic".

The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed. (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766)'

So Roman Catholic Church is both legal and official. Papists should be proud of this designation, since the pope is the bishop of Rome, and as they say "all roads lead to Rome".

 

[brakelite]

It is pretty obvious from this quotation that the Roman Catholic Church is a distinct entity (as know by the world for centuries). So there is no contest.

Here is what we find in the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

'In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic".

The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed. (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766)'

So Roman Catholic Church is both legal and official. Papists should be proud of this designation, since the pope is the bishop of Rome, and as they say "all roads lead to Rome".

Well Enoch, and @Phoneman777 , in the beloved words of our most dearest and cherished friend and erstwhile adversary, Dread of Life, that would be
"Game
Set
and Match".

 

[Phoneman777]

It is pretty obvious from this quotation that the Roman Catholic Church is a distinct entity (as know by the world for centuries). So there is no contest.

Here is what we find in the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

'In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic".

The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed. (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766)'

So Roman Catholic Church is both legal and official. Papists should be proud of this designation, since the pope is the bishop of Rome, and as they say "all roads lead to Rome".

Enoch111, thanks, though Papist Bread has well established himself as a denier of unwelcomed facts that undermine his position - even when those facts come in the form of official, Impramatur-worthy statements from his own apostate organization.

 

[Phoneman777]

Our papist friend Bread of Life whom Phoneman777 affectionately calls "Dead Bread" (to remind him that the Eucharist wafer is as so completely and absolutely useless as ropes of sand) constantly ridicules and criticizes we Protestant members here in CB who use the phrase "Roman Catholic Church" to refer to what Dead Bread insists should be called the "catholic church" because, according to Dead Bread, the catholic church has never recognized or sanctioned the use of the phrase in reference to itself, and therefore we Protestants are unwittingly publicly humiliating ourselves by use of it.

Phoneman777 submitted for our approval the following evidence, an excerpt from a 1950 encyclical from Pope Pius XII in which he wrote:

"22. Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter of a few years ago, and based on the Sources of Revelation, which teaches that the MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST and the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH are one and the same thing."
​

It should be clear to anyone reading that with their eyes open that Pius XII just declared in no uncertain terms that the phrase "the mystical body of Christ" -- a clear, unmistakable reference to the entire global planetary fellowship of Christian believers -- and the phrase "Roman Catholic Church" are synonymous. Dead Bread denies this.

What say YOU?

Didja hear that, Papist Bread???????

 

[FHII]

Calling him "Dead Bread" or "Dread of Life" certainly isn't helping your case. It helps as much as him calling others, "Einstein" or "Genius". Just saying...

Bread of Life has explained several times why he believes calling the entire Catholic Church the RDC is wrong. His reasons (in this case) are sound and appear by my research to be correct. There appear to be around 22 sects, divisions or as he calls the "rites", of which the RDC is only one of them.

From there, my memory or knowledge gets foggy, because it appears that all are supposed to be equal... But all others concede to what the Roman rite says if and when there is an issue to be resolved. I suppose (if it's true) it's because it is the oldest. Unless there is an Antioch rite, this is probably true. Paul certainly gave Rome it's first sense of organization and I do believe there is reasonable evidence to believe Peter arrived there later.

Now, I am by no means endorsing the Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church or any of it's other rites. And if you think I am running to Bread of Life's defense because I like him sooooo much, that certainly isn't the case either. I am simply looking at the facts and coming to a conclusion. My conclusion is that Bread of Life is correct.

But I ask....

Why is it such a big deal either way? That I don't get. If you say, "Well... The RDC says this", and BOL objects to the term "Roman", does it change your point to simply say, "Catholic" and leave Rome out of it?

Likewise, is it really that big of a deal to note the RDC in the first place when it's obviously the biggest brand (rite)? It's kind of become like the term "Kleenex" or "Coke"... You may be wanting a facial tissue or cola... And any one will do, but you ask for a Kleenex or Coke...

So yes, technically Bread of Life is correct. Out of respect, I honor his request to differentiate between the two. That is, when I do because I rarely even utter the word "Catholic". I only do so when absolutely necessary and almost all the time it's in historical conversations.

I have a feeling this entire controversy is more knit picking than anything else. Bread of Life likes to jump on the issue to chide those who use it. Folks who call everything Catholic "Roman" may be doing it out of habit at first, but appear to be doing more to tick him off.

So again, my conclusions:

1. Bread of Life is right. RDC is just one of many rites in the Catholic Church.
2. It really doesn't matter a whole lot. It is illogical to get upset by it either way. Unless you are looking at the differences between the Roman, Byzantine and Chinese rites, who cares? The only ones who really care are those who are looking to stir up trouble.

 

[CoreIssue]

 

[BreadOfLife]

It is pretty obvious from this quotation that the Roman Catholic Church is a distinct entity (as know by the world for centuries). So there is no contest.

Here is what we find in the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

'In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic".

The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed. (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766)'

So Roman Catholic Church is both legal and official. Papists should be proud of this designation, since the pope is the bishop of Rome, and as they say "all roads lead to Rome".

WRONG.

By your own admission, the Oxford English Dictionary's heading is "Roman Catholic".
This is a correct term because it refers to the Roman Catholic Rite.

There is also a Melkite Catholic Rite.
A Maronite Catholic Rite
A Byzantine Catholic Rite
A Coptic Catholic Rite
A Alexandrian Catholic Rite, etc.

It DOESN'T say "Roman Catholic Church". Besides - even if it did - the Oxford English Dictionary isn't a Catholic source.
When you want to list facts from the U.S. Constitution - you don't ask the governments of China or Ecuador what they think. You go to the SOURCE . . .

 

[Enoch111]

It DOESN'T say "Roman Catholic Church".

It does not matter. False Christianity is False Christianity.

 

[BreadOfLife]

There appear to be around 22 sects, divisions or as he calls the "rites", of which the RDC is only one of them.

Just to clarify - they aren't "divisions".
The different Liturgical Rites are largely different cultural traditions - but there are no doctrinal divisions as with Protestantism.

 

[BreadOfLife]

It does not matter. False Christianity is False Christianity.

Yup. There are MANY false sects disguised under the umbrella of "Christianity".

The Catholic Church is the Original Tree from which Protestantism splintered - and continues to splinter to the tune of tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually splintering sects that ALL teach different doctrines yet ALL claim to have the "Truth" . . .

 

[CoreIssue]

Just to clarify - they aren't "divisions".
The different Liturgical Rites are largely different cultural traditions - but there are no doctrinal divisions as with Protestantism.

Rites is a different word for denomination.

Roman Catholicism accepts the Pope but other Catholic denominations do not.

Difference Between Orthodox and Catholic

So there are most assuredly doctrinal differences.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Rites is a different word for denomination.
Roman Catholicism accepts the Pope but other Catholic denominations do not.
Difference Between Orthodox and Catholic
So there are most assuredly doctrinal differences.

WRONG.

The Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Eastern CATHOLIC Churches are NOT the same entity.
The various Liturgical Rites within the Catholic church are in FULL Communion with the Bishop of Rome.

"FULL Communion" means that there are no doctrinal differences - just differences of Liturgical practice.
"PARTIAL Communion" would infer a difference of doctrine.

 

[Phoneman777]

Calling him "Dead Bread" or "Dread of Life" certainly isn't helping your case. It helps as much as him calling others, "Einstein" or "Genius". Just saying...

Facts don't care about feelings

Bread of Life has explained several times why he believes calling the entire Catholic Church the RDC is wrong. His reasons (in this case) are sound and appear by my research to be correct.

Logic, reason, common sense, efforts to evade the illegitimate establishment of Cognitive Dissonance ALL demand that when Piux XII says "the mystical body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing", these two cannot possibly be "one in the same thing" if we acknowledge the former refers to the worldwide institution but make the latter an obscure little cog in the machinery of that institution.

Why is it such a big deal either way? That I don't get. If you say, "Well... The RDC says this", and BOL objects to the term "Roman", does it change your point to simply say, "Catholic" and leave Rome out of it?

You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble simply by reading the OP.

So yes, technically Bread of Life is correct.

He's dead wrong as are you.

I have a feeling this entire controversy is more knit picking than anything else.

Thanks for sharing your feelings. I hope this thread didn't trigger any negative ones :)

 

[Phoneman777]

View attachment 5885

Totally irrelevant to the discussion, seeing that Pius XII's equation of "mystic body of Christ" and the "Roman Catholic Church" as equals demand that they be such...and not the one be a worldwide institution while the other be a small component within the institution.

 

[Phoneman777]

WRONG.

By your own admission, the Oxford English Dictionary's heading is "Roman Catholic".
This is a correct term because it refers to the Roman Catholic Rite.

There is also a Melkite Catholic Rite.
A Maronite Catholic Rite
A Byzantine Catholic Rite
A Coptic Catholic Rite
A Alexandrian Catholic Rite, etc.

It DOESN'T say "Roman Catholic Church". Besides - even if it did - the Oxford English Dictionary isn't a Catholic source.
When you want to list facts from the U.S. Constitution - you don't ask the governments of China or Ecuador what they think. You go to the SOURCE . . .

Papist Bread, did you not see that Enoch111's citation came from the NEW ADVENT CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA?

If you keep on denying IMPRAMATUR STAMPED DOCUMENTS of the papacy, I'll have no choice but to report this heretical activity to your superiors :)

 

[Phoneman777]

It does not matter. False Christianity is False Christianity.

Amen. The only "Holy Father" in the Vatican is the presence of God trying to convince those for which He died to "come out of Babylon, My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and recieve not of her plagues".

 

[Phoneman777]

Just to clarify - they aren't "divisions".
The different Liturgical Rites are largely different cultural traditions - but there are no doctrinal divisions as with Protestantism.

So when multiple popes both claiming the right to Peter's chair and each claiming the other as an agent of Satan, that's an example of doctrinal harmony, right? LOL

 

[Phoneman777]

The Catholic Church is the Original Tree from which Protestantism splintered - and continues to splinter to the tune of tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually splintering sects that ALL teach different doctrines yet ALL claim to have the "Truth" . . .

The Roman catholic church is a deadly pagan tree fungus which began attacking that which Jesus Christ planted, watered, and prospered...which eventually resulted in the transplant of His tree in a new orchard - Protestantism.

 

[Episkopos]

The Roman catholic church is a deadly pagan tree fungus which began attacking that which Jesus Christ planted, watered, and prospered...which eventually resulted in the transplant of His tree in a new orchard - Protestantism.

Actually protestantism adds new errors into the mix while seeking to correct the errors of the RCC. And it splinters from there into thousands of denominations...as in...no that's not it...no, that's not it ...etc etc...