Talk:Bibliography of justification (theology)

Opening heading
Why not use Roman? That is what the RCC is --- the *Roman* Catholic Church. If we were going to be specific about it, Lutherans would call themselves the *Evangelical* Catholic Church. --Rekleov 15:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * This was discussed on the main article's discussion page. The term "Roman Catholic Church," though now used by some Catholics, was a term coined by non-Catholics for the purposes of belittling the Catholic Church and insulting Catholics. Many Catholics find the term very offensive. If a person has enough respect to call other churches and communities by the names they call themselves, rather than names coined by others to belittle them, he will not use the term "Roman." Johnaugus


 * I have no problem in calling someone what they would like to be called except when it is inaccurate. To use the shorthand "Catholic" is to give up points in any discussion to the Bishop of Rome (i.e., how can you argue with us?  We're the *Catholic* church by your own admission).  Also, I have never heard it used as a term of derision, but rather one used to distringuish it from other churches which do identify themselves as *catholic*.  Nothing more and nothing less.  Rekleov 17:01, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Believing a name to be "inaccurate" is no justification for calling a group or person by a name created by others to belittle them, especially one the group or person considers offensive. I do not personally believe that the actual Church founded by Christ subsists in the Christian community that calls itself "Church of Christ," but I do not therefore call them "the sectarian Church of Christ" or "the so-called Church of Christ." I call them by the name they call themselves. I do not personally believe that the Orthodox Church is the Christian only church or community that teaches orthodox doctrine, but I still call them by the name they call themselves. It's common decency. That you were personally unaware that the term "Roman Catholic" was coined as a term of derision is neither here nor there. Johnaugus


 * Fine. I will cease placing "Roman" where it belongs in Wiki pages.  However, I would like to know how you might address someone who demanded to be called "Tommy, the Great and Powerful Lord of North America and Environs" (not that this disagreement over terminology is anything nearly the same).  Something tells me that you might not give in to such a demand.  I still cannot believe that adding the "Roman" to the name is derisive in this day and age; it is purely descriptive of the Church body which has chosen to give precedence to the Bishop of Rome over all others.  Nothing more and nothing less.  But, to keep this nonsense from continuing, I will do as I have said above.  --Rekleov 17:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Interesting. Lutheran was coined as a term of derision, yet they seem to be getting along quite well with it, having adopted it as a badge of honor. A word is not tainted by its origins; a word is tainted by its use.  The use of "Roman..." as a modifier in this day and age rather than a couple of hundred years in the past is certainly not derisive, as those who use it in our time --- including an overwhelming number of those who use that name to describe themselves --- do not mean it, and certainly do not use it, as a term of derision.  To dredge up past name-calling using a particular term when that term is no longer used for such name-calling is to dig up a dead horse for more mistreatment.  -Rekleov 02:37, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * There are innumerable Catholics today who are just as offended by it as ever, and derisive use of the term is certainly not all in the past. But I'm not here to argue. As often as anyone inserts the word, I will remove it. Johnaugus


 * Good luck on your crusade! There are many pages out there to keep you busy.  As I said above, however, I won't add to your load.  --Rekleov 14:33, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reformed/Calvinist
It might be useful to have something more recent from the Reformed context, perhaps taking account of the Justification controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary and subsequently in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Reformed Church in the U. S.

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Justification bibliography (theology) → Bibliography of Justification (theology) – This is a topical bibliography (works about Justification (theology)). As such the name change is to bring consistency to topical bibliography titles per advice in WikiProject Bibliographies and per WP:PRINCIPALNAMINGCRITERIA policy of which Consistency is one. Mike Cline (talk) 17:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.