When did the Catholic church get it's name?

Just wanted to clear up a few things stated. Jesus died in 33 AD. St. Ignatius wrote his letters in 106-107 AD.

St. Ignatius was the disciple of St. John and St. Peter and was the third bishop of Antioch with St. Peter being the first to hold the bishopric. St. Ignatius was appointed by St. Peter to hold this office. He was also friends of several of the 70 disciples of our Lord including Barnabas. His closest associate was St. Polycarp. St. Ignatius was martyred in the Roman arena by being eaten by beasts before a cheering crowd.

The first century Church has always been the Catholic Church from Pentecost onward thus the inability of anti-Catholic bigots to point to another supportable date for the formation of the Church which is 33 AD at Pentecost. The strongest proof of the Catholic Church is Jesus' own words where He stated in His promise to humanity about His Church saying that it would endure for all times. The only enduring Church from Pentecost is the Catholic Church. To argue against this fact other than bearing false witness is to call Jesus an incompetent liar and a pretender to being the Messiah prophesied in Scriptures. That is why Satan tries so hard to convince others that the Church founded by Christ is false and no longer exists because it destroys all of Jesus' veracity and the testimony of the only Church founded by Jesus which is the Catholic Church. Jesus prayed that all Christians be one within this Church. May we all pray that those separated from His will of being in His Church come to the rightful home of all those truly called by the Holy Spirit.

God bless!

In Christ

Fr. Joseph

http://uvcarmel.org/2008/06/10/archeologists-find-...

The above link states that there was a discovery of a Catholic Church that dates back to between 33 AD to 70 AD. Which I find fascinating in the light of all those that say otherwise. However, in stating this I am inclined to remind people that Catholic means universal, which it was until the Catholics and the Orthodox divided, and then again and again.

Why would people want to believe a lie? I don't think they believe it is a lie. It saddens me that when looking at the truth, or at the very least something that makes you question your current opinions, but some people have been so inundated with lies about the Catholic Church, not to mention the "christian" websites that specifically try to tear down the Church and propagate falsehoods. Some people simply buy into it.

Peace in Christ

In addition: Apostles' Creed

A formula containing in brief statements, or "articles," the fundamental tenets of Christian belief, and having for its authors, according to tradition, the Twelve Apostles. Based on the God the Holy Trinity, to baptize in the name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit.

Origin of the creed

Throughout the Middle Ages it was generally believed that the Apostles, on the day of Pentecost, while still under the direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost, composed our present Creed between them, each of the Apostles contributing one of the twelve articles. This legend dates back to the sixth century (see Pseudo-Augustine in Migne, P.L., XXXIX, 2189, and Pirminius, ibid., LXXXIX, 1034), and it is foreshadowed still earlier in a sermon attributed to St. Ambrose (Migne, P.L., XVII, 671; Kattenbusch, I, 81), which takes notice that the Creed was "pieced together by twelve separate workmen". About the same date (c. 400) Rufinus (Migne, P.L., XXI, 337) gives a detailed account of the composition of the Creed, which account he professes to have received from earlier ages. Although he does not explicitly assign each article to the authorship of a separate Apostle, he states that it was the joint work of all, and implies that the deliberation took place on the day of Pentecost. Moreover, he declares that "they for many just reasons decided that this rule of faith should be called the Symbol", which Greek word he explains to mean both indicium, i.e. a token or password by which Christians might recognize each other, and collatio, that is to say an offering made up of separate contributions. A few years before this (c. 390), the letter addressed to Pope Siricius by the Council of Milan (Migne, P.L., XVI, 1213) supplies the earliest known instance of the combination Symbolum Apostolorum ("Creed of the Apostles") in these striking words: "If you credit not the teachings of the priests . . . let credit at least be given to the Symbol of the Apostles which the Roman Church always preserves and maintains inviolate." The word Symbolum in this sense, standing alone, meets us first about the middle of the third century in the correspondence of St. Cyprian and St. Firmilia, the latter in particular speaking of the Creed as the "Symbol of the Trinity", and recognizing it as an integral part of the rite of baptism (Migne, P.L., III, 1165, 1143). It should be added, moreover, that Kattenbusch (II, p. 80, note) believes that the same use of the words can be traced as far back as Tertullian. Still, in the first two centuries after Christ, though we often find mention of the Creed under other designations (e.g. regula fidei, doctrina, traditio), the name symbolum does not occur. Rufinus was therefore wrong when he declared that the Apostles themselves had "for many just reasons" selected this very term. This fact, joined with the intrinsic improbability of the story, and the surprising silence of the New Testament and of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, leaves us no choice but to regard the circumstantial narrative of Rufinus as unhistorical. etc...

Conclusion: The catholic/universal church is called One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In 1000, the orthodox church splits from the catholic. Until now, both catholic and orthodox church also called themselves the OHCAC. YES, the catholic church was biblically instituted at about 33 AD at the pentecost. How glorious it is...

http://www.newadvent.org/ Here is where the skeptics may read almost all the letters by the early Church Fathers. But you realize i'm sure that most of those who are anti Catholic do not want to admit were correct as that would mean then having to recognize how easily they were mislead. By the way i'm really disappointed no Chris on this or maybe he's recharging his ignorance batteries. Oh in case you do click on this site i gave in order to read the Church Fathers just click on Fathers in the top right of page.

Catholic means universal. I believe that we thought of oursleves in that manner from or very near to 33ad when we started. When Jesus gave St. Peter the keys to his kingdom on earth, the implication is universality and thus catholic. the "offical" name is unimportant. I dont think it ever has been important. it is importmnat to protestants becasue there are so many off shoots and they would get confused with no way yo tdistinguish themsleves. We do nothave that problem. We were univesal and founded by jesus christ we refered to our movement as the way etc., but the name as such is no improtant it is a relfection of how we think of oursleves and then thus became a lable. So, we were always the church universal, how else would you describe us, the description then became the name.

(((Mimjoy)))

<<<I believe at the time it got the name it meant universal but it is far from that now I mean its become very exclusive.>>>

Exclusive? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Church

You may join us if you wish. More than half of all Christians are Catholic. Now divide the other 30,000+ denominations into less than half of that population. We are not exclusive.

The Church by which ever name it is refereed: Katholic, Catholic, Roman Catholic...Is one in the same. The Proof is in our lineage of Popes. That is Hard Evidence and Undeniable.

The Church terminology became defined in the councils. Such as the words Trinity and Catholic.

God Bless

You have not stated links or evidence that this letter exists.

Anyway, if it actually did exist, it would be proof that the Catholic church was not the original church, because the original church began 106 years previously.

*sighs* The Catholic church began 300AD, but you say this so called letter was wrote in 106AD, so then it must have been that the Catholic church began 106 years AFTER the death of Jesus- that is IF this letter is real. You still give no links, so as far as I am concerned you may as well made this up.The burden of proof is on you since you made this claim.YOUR lies are not standing up.

I checked out your link. It seems that person existed but I doubt the comments, especially the comment about Peter being a bishop- which is not mentioned in the bible. You also mistake the comment about the original church which baptised adults just as Jesus was, which met and worshiped in peoples' homes (Acts 1:12-15,Acts 2:42-47) and which have overseers and deacons who could marry (1 Timothy 3:12, 1 Timothy 3:2).The Catholic church does none of those things,so either:

-the Catholic church was not the original church

-the Catholic was the original church, but has strayed greatly

My proof is biblical based. You might to consider this good link:http://www.zdziarski.com/papers/hijacking.htm it talks about the original church. You can also read your bible and see that worshiping in expensive buildings built of money taken from people is not biblical nor is praying to dead people nor is preventing people from reading God's word.

Also, bishops are not above authority nor are they authority. Any saint (ie-believer in Jesus) can baptise.

Hope this helps.

I believe at the time it got the name it meant universal but it is far from that now I mean its become very exclusive.

o when i would think baout the 5th centurey but not sure.

In about the 3rd century after christ.