I understand it is the common practice among evangelical Christians to call themselves "Christians," with no other qualifier. However, I plead with this author and all those who have a greater awareness of the power of names and labeling not to appropriate this use of the term, which obviously has much greater application. As a member of a non-evangelical Christian group, Catholicism, to which evangelicals are often fairly hostile, I am all too aware of how the use of the term "Christian" to refer only to them affects how they, and other people, form their understanding of the respective groups' beliefs. Many, many evangelical Christians believe that Catholics are not in fact Christian, even by definition, and part of that is because their use of the word Christian refers specifically to evangelicals, might refer to other Protestants if they have been saved, and decidedly not Catholics, Mormons (remember the trouble Mitt Romney had), and other Christian denominations around the world. If there is any responsible meaning of the word Christian, it is more likely one that conveys the idea that Christians are those who believe in Christ and all the teachings he brought to humankind, not only those who have a very narrow and historically specific understanding of what teachings to focus on. The narrow use of the term "Christian" only encourages misunderstanding, hostility, and religious division where there should be greater understanding and ecumenism.

Excellent point. I'm Catholic, too, but growing up, I felt like I had about as much in common with the evangelicals as I did with hasidic jews.

tormanator makes an important point, to which I'd like to add a bit more. The traditional anti-Catholic attack is usually that they have too easily made their peace with worldly culture. That was kind of the point of the Renaissance. Roman Catholic literary, artistic, and philosophical production has generally begun from a point of negotiation with non-Catholic and non-Christian culture. So, if the picture you have of Christianity is somehow that Augustine or Aquinas or Suarez attempted to live in an exclusively "Christian" world, cut off from the non-Christian elements of culture that surrounded them, you are simply, patently wrong. The reading on this subject is so absurdly vast that it hardly makes any sense to recommend reading. Just pick up any book on the history of art, literature, music, philosophy, medicine, natural history, astronomy, architecture, whatever, and you will find that Christians historically have incorporated elements of preceding and surrounding cultures. This includes popular culture, folkloric traditions, and so on.

And the notion that Christians don't have a sense of humor is itself pretty comical. Have you read anything from the western tradition between the years 700 and 1800, Ms Rosin? And this was beyond the pale: "When you make loving Christ sound just like loving your boyfriend, you can do damage to both your faith and your ballad." The Church has canonized poets who made loving Christ sound a lot like loving a boyfriend (and without any damage at all to either faith or ballad); you might find Sta. Teresa of Avila illuminating reading.

As a non-Christian myself, I think that there are lots of things to criticize about Christianity. But this article was aggressively ignorant.

You are very correct about the narrow use of the term "Christian". Christians are diverse, and there are so many denominations that it is mind-boggling, even just in the USA. I appreciate anyone who really loves Jesus, no matter what their denomination. If we totally focused on Him and on living for Him, we wouldn't have time for comedians, talk show hosts, or replying to discussion forums.(!) The power of names and labeling is another thing that I agree with you about. I do, however, have a huge collection of T-shirts with the name of my church on them. Why? Because I love my church and the people in it. That is my opinion. And I am so grateful to live in a country where I can express myself freely. May God protect us if we lose this freedom.

tormanator, I see what you're saying, but I think you need to look within as well. I recommend you stop calling yourself a Catholic. Evangelicals might not consider you a "true Christian" or whatever, but if you really want to ensure that the term "Christian" is used more broadly, then abandon calling oneself a Catholic. Mormons stop calling themselves Mormons or LDS. Baptists, Methodists, etc. give up these titles. They're not helping. If you see yourself as a Christian (one who believes in Christ and all the teachings he brought to humankind, as you put it nicely), then refer to yourself as one. Whenever you refer to yourself as a Catholic you're only hurting your own cause.

I'm not saying people are justified in saying you're not a true Christian, but I think it goes both ways. Just my modest proposal.

The term Christian has been grossly misused over and over again -especially by the Christian propanda gurus. Christian means-Little Christ-a smaller version without all the greatness of God Himself but becoming like Him in heaven eventually.

Mans chief end according to the Westminster Shorter Catechsim is," To glorify God and enjoy Him forever." That is mans purpose or reason for being on this earth but is that the Christian Madison Ave.media exec's purpose? They don't even adhere to any Biblical Theology or have any statement of belief or Christian Worldview and to often neither does the music because of this. Is there any discernment, is there any pastor or any discussion of the message behind the music when its being written or manufactured. I have gone to Christian Festivals all my life and the last one I attended was in 2004-I moved and was no longer near by to attend and I was repulsed by the lack of Christian attitude and don't ever plan on going again. A.W.Tozer once said,"If the church thinks they have to entertain people they will loose out everytime because the world will do it better." Christians are not chasing truth and Gods glory anymore but are rapped up in the Sentimentalism of Christian pop culture which makes them weak and insipid. Music has always been a part of Christendom but the times don't dictate words or melody. We have all that we need to sing about and its in the Bible-Its the Evangel, the Gospel, the Good News!!! Those are my words and His name is Jesus which is largely left out in Christian music(Media) because its a name that offends people or doesn't and they use it flippantly or profanely. NonChristian Madison Ave doesn't like that name and thats why Christian culture doesn't have any semblance(a mere show without any reality) because they let nonChristian ideas run Christian culture and thats why it doesn't look like truth or Gospel or most of all Christian.

Truth is relevant these days and it has caused everyone to go off misdirected and culture is not sure were to lay its head in comfort and Christian pop culture is causing that with their people also. Many Christians I know don't even listen to Christian music because it all comes out of the same crapper they pass over it and because nonChristian music sounds better sometimes-Christians either want to sound like the world or sound like there Christ. Christian music companies are whoring themselves by allowing there music to be marketed by nonChristian cos. They are no different than Samson with Delilah or Jacob and Esau(He sold his birthright). Samson was seduced(lead away) by Delilah and Christian subculture is lead away by propaganda instead of truth. They sold their birthright along time ago and its sad. Money is more important than truth and Gospel and the name that is supposed to be credited gets pushed aside left on the shelf all in the name of the almighty dollar. Money is the root of all evil when it comes to Christian Pop Culture and the time is coming when all that is done in the name of Benjamin Franklin instead of Christ Jesus because they don't think that God is not watching from His throne because he is "Coramdeo"-latin for "before the face of God." Mankind is before the face of God and held to account they will be and are-BRIAN D. BECK +

There are dozenz of Evangeligal groups, ministries, and churches. All consider each other Christian for one basic reason. They are the ones that do not believe in a single truth. To them there is a truth for each church. They give a list of seven or eight core beliefs, but anything else is up to each individual group. I have heard it said that the great thing about Christianity is that the a belief in the Bible and Jesus allows for these verying beliefs.

On the other side, it is generally held that any church who holds to the doctrine of absolute truth, and that they have it, is not christian. The reason is that this does not allow the differences that Evangelicals allow. If these differences were not allowed they would have to question which church really had teh truth, which most people find to difficult to research.

Me personally, I am LDS and have asked several times for people to use the name of my church correctly and with respect. I have also posted on the deffinition of the term Christian. It was first used in Antioch by the saints wishing to distinguish themselves from the surrounding pagans. It is, therefore, simply a term that means "a Follower of Christ." I enjoyed C. S. Lewis's book Mere Christianity where he devoted an entire chapter to this topic.

Also, I would not suggest substituting the term Chatholic with the term Christian, just as I will never substitute the term Latter-Day Saint with Christian. We are all christians, but I am of a particular denomination that I believe to be the true church of Christ. When we start substituting our church's name for the general category of Christian, we show an acceptance of the view that our church is not Christian, so we must change. I am unwilling to do this, and would not advise anyone else to do it either.