You wrote:
“It is equally if not more offensive to me to have the Catholic Church feel it has exclusive rights to the term ‘catholic’.”
That is irrelevant. The very concept of truth dictates that you cannot have opposing organizations all truthfully claiming to be universals. That is logically impossible.
“There is only one church. That is the body of Christ in the world. It is therefore the catholic church. Exclusive or primary possession of either of those terms ‘catholic’ or ‘church’ should be recognized as the true offensive use of verbage; not the addition of qualifiers to make certain the group being spoken about is uniquely identified.”
There is only one Church, and it is not your sect. You belong to a sect invented sometime after 1500. You, therefore, cannot be Catholic and cannot hold a faith that could possibly be called “catholic” because it belongs to nothing but a particular sect founded in the last few centuries with a new gospel, no history beyond 1500, and no mandate from Christ Himself. Do my words offend you? The truth often does offend people.
You said “The very concept of truth dictates that you cannot have opposing organizations all truthfully claiming to be universals. That is logically impossible.”
No it isn’t. First, we are not opposing organizations- unless the opposition comes from you. Second, since the church belongs to Christ, only He can say with certainty who is right and who is wrong. I think we’ll find more inclusivity in the true body of Christ than any of the faulty earthly organizations demonstrate.
You said “Do my words offend you?”
No. Love’s not easily offended. That was actually part of my point with the ease at which Roman Catholics are offended; seems if you know you’re right you could just smile quietly and wait for God to turn my sect and it’s followers into a greasy spot.
I only wrote to explain that your premise that the term ‘Roman Catholic’ was a term meant to be derogatory was not in fact always true. Regardless of whether I am right or you are right or (and here’s the probability) God is Bigger than both of our understandings and theologies combined; I was simply trying to assure you that the term is not necessarily derogatory.
There are many terms for the Roman Catholic church that are; and if this were a question of whether we should use the term “Whore of Rome” or Catholic church, I too would jump in and decry such animosity masquerading as Christianity.
I don’t expect to change your mind, and you won’t likely change mine; but I think I expressed why, in some cases, the term “Roman Catholic’ does not meet your presupposition of negative motive fairly clearly.
On the bright side- we’ll probably get to spend eternity together- well after you’re out of purgatory and all. :) Look me up.
Will
“There is only one Church, and it is not your sect. You belong to a sect invented sometime after 1500. You, therefore, cannot be Catholic and cannot hold a faith that could possibly be called “catholic” because it belongs to nothing but a particular sect founded in the last few centuries with a new gospel, no history beyond 1500, and no mandate from Christ Himself. Do my words offend you? The truth often does offend people.”
It seems your words would offend the Pope. I’ve been told here frequently that Vatican 2 recognized someone can be a Christian without being ‘Roman Catholic’.
Were the folks who posted that lacking in understanding?