I have the feeling, that some here like to use words like Papal and Popery and Tiber in a derogative way for anything Catholic. Is that so? Is there an old feeling of aggression against anything Catholic behind it?
I have a sense that people need another word to refer to the Church of Rome, than simply as 'Catholic', because they don't believe it represents "The Catholic Church" that we recite in the Creed. We believe we are 100% Catholic (or else, what are we doing here?). So then if we are Catholic, and they at least claim to be Catholic, what are we supposed to refer to them as?
My question is: Is the word "popery" not a loaded word? Harping back to the times of religious conflicts?
I don't believe I've seen anyone use Popery here. Sure, can do that. I've used that in the past. It's just that it's a lot to write. Sometimes I say the Roman Church, or the Church of Rome also.
I know that very well - I have recited it often enough in Anglican churches. But would all Anglican persons say: "I am 100 % Catholic"?
I just say ‘Roman Catholic’ or ‘Catholic’ like everyone else. Alternatives tend to come across as either dismissive or derogatory.
They seem appropriate enough since the claimed authority of the Roman Church over the church Catholic derives primarily from the Papal office, since the See began demanding primacy over the rest of the Patriarchs and other bishoprics. I should be able to confess, and identify, as a catholic Christian without needing to clarify anything concerning Romish oversight.
Well, now. The Church of Jesus Christ is 'Catholic' meaning universal, with no 'hole in the corner enclaves of party sectarianism or schism'. One is either a member of Christ's undivided and universal church or not. If you are not then any assurance of salvation that you may think you may possess is presumptuous. If your allegience is to a denomination then your membership of it might be provable, but unless your allegience to Christ and his teaching is above your allegience to your denomination, you can't count on being truly 'Catholic'. Only Christ and you know if you are part of Christ's universal Church and The Holy Spirit is the only means by which we can gain assurance of membership of it. The Roman church, the Anglican church, the Methodist church, the Moravian, Orthodox both Greek and Russian, the Coptic church, the United Reformed church and many others lay claim to being part of the universal Church of Jesus Christ, and since Christ's disciples get everywhere their claim may be partially, even substantially, true. However none of them can actually know if they as denominations are part of Christ's truly universal Church without a signed certificate of authenticity from Him, which to my knowledge no church has yet been able to produce, even the much vaunting Roman Catholic church, which likes to think of itself as being the only truly 'Catholic one', also, like all of the others, actually isn't or at least can't prove it. It's just that some of its members are members of the Universal Church of Jesus Christ, just as some of the members of all the other Denominations have some members who are members also of Christ's Universal Church on earth. It therefore follows that it is perfectly logical and matter of fact for any individual to claim membership of Christ's Universal Church on earth but it is presumptuous for any denomination to claim itself to be Universal yet still remain distinct from other denominations, since there can logically be only ONE Universal , undivided Church of Christ on earth and in heaven, and it's definitely not the Roman Catholic one any more than any other. .
I would never claim that the RCC is the "alleinseligmachende Kirche" - and I think hardly any other Catholic would still claim that today.
I was looking for a translation of "alleinseligmachend" - but only found idiotic nonsense like "all-island".
Tiber certainly isn't derogatory. It's just fun geographically illustrative language. Like and American/Brit saying "over the pond", someone referring to me as being "down under", or someone in Continental Europe saying "across the channel". Papal, Popery, Papist, et. al. can be either perfectly innocent or derogatory. Some use it as an effective descriptor, some use it as an insult. I tend to say Roman Church or Roman Catholic Church.
Well, that's exactly the point, isn't it? If I were to speak of papalism or popery (potpourri? ), I would be speaking of the hierarchy within the RCC, and that hierarchy is headquartered in Vatican City. If I speak critically of the RCC I am referring, not to the fine lay members, but to the leadership of that denomination and especially the pope with his inner circle of cardinals. In other words, I see no reason for anyone to be upset by the use of such words as "popery." It's a reference to the system of appointing one man as "the vicar of Christ" as if he necessarily had an extraordinarily close relationship with God in a way that every other Christian lacked, and as if only he could accurately hear from God and pass the message on to the rest of the church. That system has a checkered history; during the past, some popes were accused of all sorts of debauchery and on occasion there were multiple alleged popes simultaneously. It's been a mess, quite frankly. But please don't take it personally, because criticism of the papal system and of the sometimes-corrupt leaders is not meant as criticism of the devout laypeople who attend RC parishes. As for "Tiber," I've seen some references to people "swimming the Tiber" as a colloquialism for becoming RC, but the colloquialism has never been derogatory of the RCC.