Talk:Catholic (term): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 22:42, 29 May 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Catholic (term) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Christianity: Catholicism / Eastern O. / Oriental O. / Syriac / Anglicanism / Lutheranism High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy.
	This article is within the scope of the Syriac Christianity work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Lutheranism (assessed as Low-importance).

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.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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)[reply]

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: 5 June 2024).

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)[reply]

Merge from Catholicism (term)

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Proposed merge with Catholicity

NO ACTION

Withdrawn by author

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

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)[reply]

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

Defining “καθολικός”

The definition of the Greek "καθολικός (katholikos)" meaning "universal" is not entirely accurate. The Romans already had a word for "universal," and therefore no need of a Greek term, and in fact it is the root of the English word: Universalis. The Greeks likewise have the word "Οικουμενική" for "universal." "καθολικός," is, however, more accurately defined as "throughout the whole," which is how the ancient church was governed, in a conciliar manner, verging on a republic. The perpetuation of the loose translation into "universal," has been due to the influence of the Church of Rome to further their claims of "immediate, ordinary and universal control" of Christ's church on earth, and is a perversion of the original meaning. The definition in this article as is does not represent the views of the Eastern Orthodox and is therefore biased, unintentionally or otherwise. Koneill1977 (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Talk header}}
-I have tried to improve this page but it still does not read fluently --[[User:BozMo|BozMo]] 07:28, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
+{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=High|eastern-orthodoxy=yes|eastern-orthodoxy-importance=|syriac-work-group=yes|catholicism=yes|catholicism-importance=Top|anglicanism=yes|anglicanism-importance=Top|lutheranism=yes|lutheranism-importance=Low|oriental-orthodoxy=yes|oriental-orthodoxy-importance=}}
+}}
+== 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.
-I do not particularly like the "rightly or wrongly" in the last paragraph. It goes without saying the every one who believes something believes it "rightly or wrongly and inclusion for this particular case looks POV --[[User talk:BozMo|(talk to)]][[User:BozMo|BozMo]] 10:36, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
+'''re: etymology'''
-Fair article (in muddy waters). Good.
-But I find the last paragraph ("Many Protestant..." -till-
-"The Orthodox churches of course, agree. ") a little misleading:
-It seems to imply that Roman Catholics believe that the
-Pope is the head of the universal Body of Christ; they (we) don't.
-The Church (in its most profound/mystical sense) is a Body; in that
-sense, the Head is just Christ. The pope is the head of the bishops,
-and hence the head of the Church as institution (divine institution, granted).
-The paragraphs seems to echo some anti-catholic prejudices and attacks
-eg. http://jmgainor.homestead.com/files/PU/Scr/hoc.htm
-which purposedly confounds the two analogical -but different- uses
-of the term 'head'. The page above indeed links to out of context
-prases from CV 2; but if one reads the entire page
-http://www.cin.org/v2church.html
-one can find 'The Head of this Body is Christ ...He is the head of
-the Body which is the Church.'--[[User:Leonbloy|Leonbloy]] 17:40, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
+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...
-However, the quotes, taken from the documents of Vatican I and Vatican II, clearly speak for themselves on the matter:
+[[User:Natmanprime|Natmanprime]] ([[User talk:Natmanprime|talk]]) 21:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
+== merge proposal into [[Catholicism]] ==
-"&#8230; the successor of Peter, the Vicar of Christ, the visible Head of the whole Church &#8230;"
-Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter III, § 18
+See discussion at [[Talk:Catholicism#Merge Catholic into Catholicism|Talk:Catholicism]]
-"Therefore, if anyone says that blessed Peter the apostle was not appointed by Christ the lord as prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole church militant... let him be anathema."
+:I'm closing the discussion for now, leaving the former "Catholic" page (now [[Catholic (Christian terminology)]]) as a sub-page of "[[Catholicism]]" --[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]] ([[User_talk:Zfish118|talk)]] 18:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
-Vatican I, First dogmatic constitution on the church of Christ, Chapter 1, § 6
+== 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 ==
-"&#8230; the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, true vicar of Christ, head of the whole church&#8230;."
-Vatican I, First dogmatic constitution on the church of Christ, Chapter 3, § 1
+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?  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:JBGeorge77|JBGeorge77]] ([[User talk:JBGeorge77|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/JBGeorge77|contribs]]) 03:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-"The Roman pontiff is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole church and the father and teacher of all Christians&#8230;."
-Vatican I, First dogmatic constitution on the church of Christ, Chapter 4, § 2
+== Capitalization ==
+The third word of this article "catholic" should be capitalized.
-==Merge==
+Please edit it to reflect this correction. Thank you[[Special:Contributions/65.8.142.136|65.8.142.136]] ([[User talk:65.8.142.136|talk]]) 05:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
-This should be merged w [[Catholicism]]. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit&section=new '''Spade''']] 06:50, 21 May 2004 (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. [[User:Afterwriting|Afterwriting]] ([[User talk:Afterwriting|talk]]) 13:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
-For future reference, if/when this is ever discussed, note incipient comment on [[Talk:Catholicism#Organization]]. I would say that it is basically the case that since "c/Catholic" and "Catholicism" are words with separate entries in dictionaries, and do not entirely overlap in scope, it is worthwhile to have separate entries here as well. In particular, Catholic''ism'' is the term for the beliefs and practices of the Catholic Church, whereas "catholic" has a couple of other uses. Also, as a matter of etymology and history, the reasons for particular uses of the word "c/Catholic" as a word merit separate coverage to the extent that they are not covered elsewhere. [[User:Trc|Trc]] | [[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Trc&action=edit&section=new msg]] 11:24, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
+== Adjective/noun ==
-'''Catholic''', '''Catholicism''' and '''Roman Catholic Church''' are separate ideas that can stand alone as separate articles.  The problem we find is that these articles have overlapping information.  The solution is not to merge them but to rewrite the articles correctly so that pertinent information is found in the article it belongs to.  --[[User:Gerald Farinas|Gerald Farinas]] 04:10, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
+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.")?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.170.135.100|71.170.135.100]] ([[User talk:71.170.135.100|talk]]) 01:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-I think we're agreed that the articles might need work but a merge is wrong... removing tag... any huge obhection and you can re-add it I'm sure [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] 12:44, 25 Apr 2005 (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").  [[User:Esoglou|Esoglou]] ([[User talk:Esoglou|talk]]) 06:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
+== Three marks ==
-I think this is a weak and flawed article. It should IMHO be deleted another and whatever accurate information there is here (and I don't think it is much) transferred to the far superior [[Catholicism]] article. [[User:Jtdirl|<font color="green">'''Fear'''<font color="orange">'''''ÉIREANN'''''<font color="black">]] 21:41, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
+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. --[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]] ([[User_talk:Zfish118|talk)]] 13:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
-This article is worth keeping. "Catholic" and "Catholicism" are two different concepts with some overlap but not enough to justify merging them into one article. --[[User:Colenso|Colenso]] 18:51, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
+== Universalism ==
-I think the article is definitely worth keeping, but there are problems with it the way it is.
-It keeps rehashing what denominations call themselves so that it is confusing and thus seems somewhat circular or redundant in structure.  Perhaps some references are needed and it could be more factual and less contentious?  JMK
+{{universalism}}
-== Protestants who do not consider themselves catholic? ==
+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]]". --[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]]<sup>⋉[[User_talk:Zfish118|talk]]</sup> 05:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
+== Focus ==
-"Some Protestant Christian Churches, avoid using the term completely."
-I can't think of one Protestant denomination that would disavow this label. Does anyone know of one? --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc Glasgow]] 00:29, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
-:Yes. [[Afrikaner Calvinism]] is one example. --[[User:Colenso|Colenso]] 19:08, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
-:And the ''[[Free Presbyterian Church]]''. And most small evangelical groups, etc. Many ''born again'' Christian groups believe that ''they'' and ''they alone'' are the real church of Christ and everyone else isn't. In no way can that view be interpreted as ''catholic'' (ie, universal). It is mainstream christian groups, specifically those who believe in the [[apostolic succession]] of bishops, who believe that there is a broad catholic/universal church of Christians, subdivided into denominations. Fundamentalist protestantism holds different views. Some accept the 'broad church with divisions' idea. Others believe that they alone are the successors to the original church and that no-one else is ''really'' christian at all. Some believe that there were moments before them when isolated others (Luther, Calvin, etc) appeared with ''true'' christian beliefs, only for their 'churches' to lose touch with true christianity, with christianity eventually disappearing until ''they'' appeared in modern times. <font color="#006666">'''Fear'''<font color="#FF6600">'''''ÉIREANN'''''[[Image:Ireland flag large.png|25px]]\<font color=blue><sup>[[user_talk:Jtdirl|(talk)]]</sup><font color=black> 16:35, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
-::The [[United Methodist Church]] and the [[Presbyterian Church (USA)]] are two denominations which do not generally uphold apostolic succession (although some UMs do), but without question consider themselves catholic.  Probably, most [[mainline]] denominations do.  [[User:KHM03|KHM03]] 16:40, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
+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. --[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]]<sup>⋉[[User_talk:Zfish118|talk]]</sup> 17:52, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-The general rule is that all denominations that profess the [[Apostle's Creed]], [[Nicene Creed]] and its variants in their worship services consider themselves catholic.  --[[User:Gerald Farinas|Gerald Farinas]] 16:56, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
+== External links modified ==
-I think we need to keep this article - revised a bit - since, as others have already stated, most Christians ''do'' consider themselves ''catholic'' in the purest sense of the term (i.e., part of the universal Christian Church; part of Christendom).  That's not very surprising, is it?  [[User:KHM03|KHM03]] 15:49, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
+Hello fellow Wikipedians,
+I have just modified {{plural:3|one external link|3 external links}} on [[Catholic (term)]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=750008613 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|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 {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
+{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
+Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 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 [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=783775018 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|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.
+{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
+Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 15:42, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
+== Merge from [[Catholicism (term)]] ==
+{{hatnote|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. –[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]]<sup>⋉[[User_talk:Zfish118|talk]]</sup> 06:40, 2 September 2017 (UTC)}}
+{{collapse top|title=Original discussion text (to be continued at [[talk:Catholicism (term)#Merge proposal with Catholic (term)]])}}
+{{discussion top|reason=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)]].
+[[User:Chicbyaccident|Chicbyaccident]] ([[User talk: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. [[User:Sorabino|Sorabino]] ([[User talk: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. –[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]]<sup>⋉[[User_talk:Zfish118|talk]]</sup> 12:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
+{{discussion bottom}}
+{{collapse bottom}}
+== 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. [[User:Gaia Octavia Agrippa|Gaia Octavia Agrippa]] <sup>[[User talk:Gaia Octavia Agrippa|Talk]]</sup>  23:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
+== Request for comments - "Catholic (term)" to "History of Catholicity" ==
+The article of this title is being discussed [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Catholicism#Request_for_comments_-_"Catholic_(term)"_to_"History_of_Catholicity"|here]]. All are invited to participate. –[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]]<sup>⋉[[User_talk:Zfish118|talk]]</sup> 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. [[User:Anastrophe|Anastrophe]] ([[User talk:Anastrophe|talk]]) 02:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
+== Proposed merge with [[Catholicity]] ==
+{{Template:Archive top|result=Withdrawn by author|status=none}}
+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 [[WP:UNDUE|weighting]] problems in [[Catholicity]].[[User:FatalSubjectivities|FatalSubjectivities]] [[User:FatalSubjectivities|FatalSubjectivities]] ([[User talk: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. –[[User:Zfish118|Zfish118]]<sup>⋉[[User_talk:Zfish118|talk]]</sup> 14:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
+{{Template:Archive bottom}}
+== Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2023 ==
+{{Edit semi-protected|Catholic (term)|answered=yes}}
+In the first paragraph just before ref 5 and 6, change the English transliteration from okos to olos [[Special:Contributions/2A02:C7F:5C94:D400:C9E7:9FCE:3D6B:2BD4|2A02:C7F:5C94:D400:C9E7:9FCE:3D6B:2BD4]] ([[User talk:2A02:C7F:5C94:D400:C9E7:9FCE:3D6B:2BD4|talk]]) 06:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
+:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 15:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
+== Defining “καθολικός” ==
+The definition of the Greek "καθολικός (katholikos)" meaning "universal" is not entirely accurate. The Romans already had a word for "universal," and therefore no need of a Greek term, and in fact it is the root of the English word: Universalis. The Greeks likewise have the word "Οικουμενική" for "universal." "καθολικός," is, however, more accurately defined as "throughout the whole," which is how the ancient church was governed, in a conciliar manner, verging on a republic.
+The perpetuation of the loose translation into "universal," has been due to the influence of the Church of Rome to further their claims of "immediate, ordinary and universal control" of Christ's church on earth, and is a perversion of the original meaning.
+The definition in this article as is does not represent the views of the Eastern Orthodox and is therefore biased, unintentionally or otherwise.  [[User:Koneill1977|Koneill1977]] ([[User talk:Koneill1977|talk]]) 22:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)