“Roman” Catholic began as an insult. It is used derogatorily here, as in RCC, by those who wish to demean it.
So, when I see RCC, I know that it is being used in a way that is meant as an insult.
***** Vatican.va often uses the Roman Catholic church when specifying itself.******
Yes it does, though it was begun as an insulting term, over time it has come into common usage to specify the Latin Rite church which is centered in Rome.
Catholics call themselves Catholic, but will say they are Roman Catholic if asked. I must say that is rare as most people don’t need to ask when told I am Catholic.
Oh, you do, do you? Mind reading much?
It didn't occur to you that just perhaps it's easier and quicker to type RCC than R-o-m-a-n C-a-t-h-o-l-i-c C-h-u-r-c-h-?
Catholics. Church of the Perpetually Offended.
Like PROTESTant?
I am part of the Flying Inman Rite.
We've all seen this complaint before. For many -- the issue has been put to rest, in that it is not pointed at as some sort of "attack" just for using the name "Roman Catholic" which the [ahem] Roman Catholic church, from officials on down through membership, does at times use to describe "itself"> As another pointed out, abbreviating to "RCC" is simply abbreviation.
I can't speak for all others, but when I use the letters, or include [Roman] at times in brackets, I am specifying what church I am talking about -- not to be confused with Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, etc., including Anglicans, many of who do refer to themselves as 'Catholic'. I have attended mass at a nearby "high Anglican" church, whose ceremonial proceeding are more "Catholic" than what is found in many modern Roman Catholic settings. We hear on these pages frequently enough -- from those RC'ers who decry the Novus Ordo Church".
Even the Lutherans declare they believe in the catholic church. Should I be including them when speaking of something a bit differentiated from them and others too?
I'm sorry, but that price you are seeming to require, is far too high. I will not so easily surrender the English language. It is my own native tongue.
I cannot keep from yourself choosing to take offense --- but if it makes you happy to be unhappy -- then be unhappy? whatever.
The reasons behind using the terminology was all pointed out (and explained) in a book that I can readily enough think of from nearly two hundred years ago (1825). I have posted page image discussing this issue, from that book before. Would you like to see it again?
I am not Anglo-Catholic, nor self identify as other capital "C" catholic of much any sort, but I do respect the argument of the old Anglo Catholics more than I respect the efforts (even the seeming demand) to control all language, thus by subtlety of language usage and implied connotative meanings, lead others to commit some sort ecclesiastical suicide -- by surrendering the word "Catholic" unreservedly to those who can otherwise legitimately be referred to using the identifier Roman Catholic.
I use the phrase "feelthy papist" when I'm trying to inject a bit of humor into the situation, such as making a nod toward the extremes of "anti- Roman Catholicism" that fails to differentiate between tenets of faith, and persons themselves, and all the errors (on either side of the equation) those types of attitudes have lead to in past times.
As far as not calling some "Protestant" that as much as anything derives from having some respect for a range of rather minor differences between what may be seen as those faithful to older "mainline" Protestant theology, and say some Baptist and Southern Baptist who tend towards an Arminian view, while also putting some distance between the modern, liberal Episcopalians and Presbyterians who's theology today is more like some Universal Universalist, than any sort of Lutheran or Calvinistic expression.