{"id":3167,"date":"2025-06-21T15:37:31","date_gmt":"2025-06-21T22:37:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/?p=3167"},"modified":"2025-07-25T19:17:56","modified_gmt":"2025-07-26T02:17:56","slug":"catholic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/catholic\/","title":{"rendered":"Reclaiming the Word \u201cCatholic\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Today, Roman Catholic apologists frequently argue that since the early Church was called &#8220;Catholic,&#8221; then it must have been Roman Catholic \u2014 and therefore, Rome is the one true Church. This argument has led many sincere truth-seekers to be misled by a false equivalency. What appears to be historical exclusivity is, in fact, a <strong>retroactive rebranding<\/strong> \u2014 the use of an ancient word to validate a later Roman-centered reinterpretation of the word &#8220;Catholic&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Following the <strong>Schism of 1054<\/strong>, Rome began to <strong>appropriate \u201cCatholic\u201d as a proper noun<\/strong>, branding itself as <em>the<\/em> Catholic Church and labeling the Orthodox churches as \u201cschismatic.\u201d This redefinition did not come from apostolic tradition but from institutional ambition.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>By the 12th century, Roman theologians increasingly equated <em>Catholic<\/em> with <strong>communion with Rome<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li>\n<p data-pm-slice=\"1 1 [&quot;list&quot;,{&quot;spread&quot;:false,&quot;start&quot;:1064,&quot;end&quot;:1448},&quot;regular_list_item&quot;,{&quot;start&quot;:1167,&quot;end&quot;:1448}]\">This rebranding was retroactively imposed on earlier texts, creating the illusion that the early Church was \u201cRoman Catholic\u201d \u2014 a label that would have referred only to the Roman jurisdiction, not the universal Church, and never reflected how early Christians understood the term &#8216;Catholic.&#8217;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This article aims to <strong>reclaim the original meaning of &#8220;Catholic&#8221;<\/strong> before it was rebranded by centuries of Roman revisionism.<\/p>\n<h3>1. Catholic Never Meant Roman<\/h3>\n<p>The word <em>Catholic<\/em> (Greek: <em>katholikos<\/em>) first appeared in early Christian writings to describe the <strong>universal Church<\/strong> \u2014 the global body of believers united in apostolic faith. It was used by <strong>Ignatius of Antioch<\/strong> as early as 110 AD:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cWherever Jesus Christ is, there is the <em>Catholic Church<\/em>.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>While the &#8220;Catholic&#8221; Church included Rome, the word &#8220;Catholic&#8221; never meant Rome exclusively, or even Rome as the doctrinal authority of Christianity. Church of Rome did have fist place of honor &#8220;among equals&#8221;, because Rome was the capital of the Empire, and because of the memory of St. Peter and St. Paul who were martyred there. However, the term <em>Catholic<\/em> simply distinguished the <strong>whole<\/strong> Church from splinter groups and heresies. It was a qualitative term \u2014 not a jurisdictional label.<\/p>\n<h3>2. The Same Logic can apply to \u201cOrthodox\u201d<\/h3>\n<p>If Roman apologists argue that <em>\u201cCatholic\u201d in early writings proves Rome is the true Church<\/em>, the same logic could prove that the early Church was <strong>Orthodox<\/strong> \u2014 since \u201cOrthodox\u201d was also used widely to describe right belief. For example, <strong>Cyril of Jerusalem<\/strong> (c. 350 AD) wrote:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cAnd if ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord\u2019s House is&#8230; but where the Catholic and<strong> Orthodox Church<\/strong> is.\u201d (<em>Catechetical Lecture 18:26<\/em>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p data-pm-slice=\"1 1 [&quot;blockquote&quot;,{&quot;start&quot;:2507,&quot;end&quot;:3035}]\">Thus, the same is true of the word &#8220;<em>Orthodox&#8221;<\/em>. In early usage, it referred to right belief and true teaching, not to any single jurisdiction or denominational body. Like <em>Catholic<\/em>, it described the nature of the faith \u2014 not a centralized institution. Both terms were descriptors of <strong>doctrine and unity<\/strong>, not specific jurisdictions or denominations.<\/p>\n<h3>3. Catholicity Was Defined by Apostolic Unity, Not Roman Allegiance<\/h3>\n<p>Roman apologists sometimes concede that <em>Catholic<\/em> originally meant <em>universal<\/em>, yet still insist that the early Church&#8217;s \u201cuniversality\u201d implicitly referred to its communion with Rome \u2014 as if Rome&#8217;s authority were already assumed across the Christian world. But this claim is historically false.<\/p>\n<p data-pm-slice=\"1 1 []\">The early Church did not define Catholicity as submission to Rome. On the contrary, the <strong>First Council of Nicaea (325)<\/strong> provides explicit evidence against this notion. <strong>Canon 6<\/strong> affirms the jurisdiction of regional patriarchs, stating:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction over all these, <strong data-start=\"362\" data-end=\"422\">since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also.<\/strong> Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces, <strong>let the Churches retain their privileges.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p data-pm-slice=\"1 1 []\">Given the canon\u2019s purpose \u2014 to resolve disputes over territorial authority \u2014 it is especially telling that no mention is made of any universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome. If Rome had such authority at the time, Canon 6 would surely have articulated it, or at least qualified Alexandria\u2019s jurisdiction as being subordinate to it. Instead, it presents Alexandria\u2019s authority as analogous to Rome\u2019s \u2014 not derived from it \u2014 and gives no indication that Rome\u2019s influence extended beyond its own region. Canon 6 would have been worded very differently, or supplemented with an explicit clause affirming Rome\u2019s universal authority, if such a belief existed at the time.<\/p>\n<h3 data-pm-slice=\"1 1 []\">4. Canon Law Confirms Political HONOR<\/h3>\n<p data-pm-slice=\"1 1 []\">The <strong>Council of Constantinople (381)<\/strong> and the <strong>Council of Chalcedon (451)<\/strong> both affirmed that ecclesiastical honor was based on political stature \u2014 not apostolic origin.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Canon 3 of Constantinople I (381)<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cThe Bishop of Constantinople, however, shall have the prerogative of honor after the Bishop of Rome, because it is New Rome.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><strong>Canon 28 of Chalcedon (451)<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cwe also do enact and decree the same things concerning the prerogatives of the most holy Church of Constantinople, which is New Rome\u2026 because the city is honored with the Sovereignty and the Senate and enjoys equal privileges with the old imperial Rome.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p data-pm-slice=\"1 1 []\">These canons elevated the status of the Church in Constantinople not because of apostolic origin or theological primacy, but because of <strong>Constantinople&#8217;s new role as the imperial capital<\/strong>. The shift in honor followed the transfer of imperial power, not divine mandate. This reinforces that <strong>church authority followed imperial geography<\/strong>, not Petrine succession or a papal primacy in Rome.<\/p>\n<h3 data-pm-slice=\"1 1 []\">5. The Word &#8220;Catholic&#8221;\u00a0 still doesn&#8217;t mean &#8220;Under rome&#8221;<\/h3>\n<ul data-spread=\"false\">\n<li>The <strong>Nicene Creed<\/strong> (325 AD) affirms \u201cone holy, <em>catholic<\/em> and apostolic Church\u201d \u2014 written and approved by Eastern bishops with no Roman bishop presiding. Contrary to some Roman claims, there was no recognition by the universal Church at the time that Rome held jurisdiction over all, nor that it delegated such authority. The idea that Rome presided over Nicea invisibly or by proxy has no foundation in the canons or council records.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Church Fathers across East and West<\/strong> used the term <em>Catholic<\/em> \u2014 but none meant &#8220;under Rome.&#8221; Both <strong>Eastern Orthodox<\/strong> and <strong>Oriental Orthodox<\/strong> Churches continue to profess belief in &#8220;one holy catholic and apostolic Church&#8221; in their liturgies and creeds today \u2014 and none of them has ever understood this to imply allegiance to the bishop of Rome. Even the <strong>Lutheran Church<\/strong>, and several <strong>Anglican<\/strong> and <strong>Methodist<\/strong> churches continue to recite the Nicene Creed and affirm belief in the &#8220;catholic Church,&#8221; always with the understanding that &#8220;catholic&#8221; refers to the universal body of believers. To be \u201cCatholic\u201d always meant to hold the <strong style=\"font-family: 'Droid Serif', serif; font-size: 20px;\">apostolic faith<\/strong><span style=\"font-family: 'Droid Serif', serif; font-size: 20px;\">, not to submit to Rome.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Conclusion<\/h3>\n<p>To understand the modern misuse of the word <em>Catholic<\/em>, three points should be clear:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>\u201cCatholic\u201d originally meant \u201cuniversal,\u201d not Roman.<\/strong><br \/>\nIt described the global body of faithful believers united in apostolic doctrine \u2014 not allegiance to a single bishop or jurisdiction. This is affirmed by the canons of the Church.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Rome gradually co-opted the word, especially after the schism.<\/strong><br \/>\nFollowing the Schism of 1054, Rome began rebranding itself as <em>the<\/em> Catholic Church, weaponizing the word to isolate and delegitimize other ancient communions.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Modern Roman Catholics try to project that rebranded meaning backward into early Christian texts.<\/strong><br \/>\nThe term <em>Catholic<\/em> in the writings of the Church Fathers or the Nicene Creed is read through a Roman lens \u2014 even though it never meant \u201cRoman Catholic\u201d in the early Church.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The early Church was indeed <em>catholic<\/em> \u2014 in the original sense of the word: universal, united, and apostolic. But it was not exclusively Roman. The Roman Catholic Church <strong>never<\/strong> owned the term; it <strong>rebranded<\/strong> it. To conflate early <em>Catholic<\/em> usage with later Roman identity is a semantic rebranding \u2014 historically unfounded and theologically misinformed, if not outright dishonest.<\/p>\n<p>Related:<br \/>\n<a style=\"background-color: white;\" href=\"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/canon6\/\">Canon 6 of Nicaea and Jurisdictional Authority<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/peterskeys\/\">Did Peter Keep the Keys? Reclaiming Apostolic Authority Beyond Rome<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Today, Roman Catholic apologists frequently argue that since the early Church was called &#8220;Catholic,&#8221; then it must have been Roman&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3207,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[74,73],"tags":[86,84,106,105,85],"class_list":["post-3167","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-centralized-papal-authority","category-orthodoxy-vs-roman-catholicism","tag-primacy-of-rome","tag-catholic","tag-catholic-and-apostolic-church","tag-catholic-church","tag-the-word-catholic"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3167","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3167"}],"version-history":[{"count":25,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3167\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3430,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3167\/revisions\/3430"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3207"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/myagpeya.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}