Well, you are certainly free to call anything whatever you like. We at least have freedom of speech and thought, for the time being, in this country. I support your right to do so! It is not possible to give an exact year when the Catholic Church began to be called the “Roman Catholic Church,” but it is possible to approximate it. The term originates as an insult created by Anglicans who wished to refer to themselves as Catholic. They thus coined the term “
RomanCatholic” to distinguish those in union with Rome from themselves and to create a sense in which they could refer to themselves as Catholics (by attempting to deprive actual Catholics to the right to the term).
Different variants of the “Roman” insult appeared at different times. The earliest form was the noun “Romanist” (one belonging to the Catholic Church), which appeared in England about 1515-1525. The next to develop was the adjective “Romish” (similar to something done or believed in the Catholic Church), which appeared around 1525-1535. Next came the noun “Roman Catholic” (one belonging to the Catholic Church), which was coined around 1595-1605. Shortly thereafter came the verb “to Romanize” (to make someone a Catholic or to become a Catholic), which appeared around 1600-10. Between 1665 and 1675 we got the noun “Romanism” (the system of Catholic beliefs and practices), and finally we got a latecomer term about 1815-1825, the noun “Roman Catholicism,” a synonym for the earlier “Romanism.”
A similar complex of insults arose around “pope.” About 1515-25 the Anglicans coined the term “papist” and later its derivative “papism.” A quick follow-up, in 1520-1530, was the adjective “popish.” Next came “popery” (1525-1535), then “papistry” (1540-1550), with its later derivatives, “papistical” and “papistic.” (Source:
Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 1995 ed.)
This complex of insults is revealing as it shows the depths of animosity English Protestants had toward the Church. No other religious body (perhaps no other group at all, even national or racial) has such a complex of insults against it woven into the English language as does the Catholic Church. Even today many Protestants who have no idea what the origin of the term is cannot bring themselves to say “Catholic” without qualifying it or replacing it with an insult.
Modern Eastern ecclesiologists agree with Catholics that the apostles chose successors. But
what authority did Jesus give to Peter himself? Catholics and
Orthodox Christians are divided over the issue.
Matthew 16:19 tells us that Christ gave Peter both the power of the keys and the power of binding and loosing. The first was given to Peter alone (Matt. 16:19), the second also to the other apostles (Matt. 18:18). Orthodox apologists claim that these two commissions to Peter are in fact identical. Whatever authority Christ gave to Peter, he gave to all the apostles.
If the Orthodox belief is correct, then our study of early Church history should reveal that every bishop, wherever located, exercised the same authority as did the bishop of Rome. Instead, from the first century onward, the successors of Peter exercised authority unlike that of any other bishop.
In many instances bishops of churches in the Eastern part of the Empire requested—even begged—the bishop of Rome (the Pope) to banish heresies and settle theological disputes which the bishops themselves could not resolve. These facts constitute the early Church’s tradition about the universal jurisdiction of the successor of Peter.
They "keys" referred to in Matt. 16:19 are telling. They refer to a symbol of an office commonly used by kings (Jesus is our King!), who was second-in-command of the kingdom when the king was unavailable (off to war, visiting other kingdoms, ill, etc.). Whatever this second-in-command ruled in the king's place, was upheld by the king upon his return. And the symbol of this office was a large key or two (2-3 ft. long) carried by the second-in-command over his shoulder, so people would know he had authority. And this office was dynastic. If the second-in-command died, another was chosen to take his place. This is the type office Jesus established in Matt. 16:19 when He gave Peter the "keys" to the kingdom of heaven. And when Peter died, another took his place, and so forth until we get to today's Pope.
but I'm sure it's good
