Leaving the catholic church

Penn

Monty. wrote: »

If your not a Catholic, don't participate in Catholic ceremonies as a Catholic, and you won't be counted as one. It's fairly simple.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So to be counted as a Catholic, you just have to participate in Catholic ceremonies. So, my cousin who is an atheist, is being counted as a catholic.

If only there were some way for him to formally defect.....

Monty.

Barrington wrote: »

Because it's "the done thing"

Since when was it the done thing for an atheist to pretend they are Catholic ? Is that what you do ? Oh wait, it is. It's hardly the Churches fault if you want to continue pretending to be Catholic, personally I'd rather you all left and stopped pretending.

Monty.

Barrington wrote: »

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So to be counted as a Catholic, you just have to participate in Catholic ceremonies. So, my cousin who is an atheist, is being counted as a catholic.

So your cousin who dishonestly pretends he is Catholic, by having a Catholic wedding is counted as a Catholic ? On that day yes, on census Sunday unless he is there, no.

Barrington wrote: »

If only there were some way for him to formally defect.....

There is, stop pretending to be Catholic.

MagicMarker

Hi Monty, can you link us to world wide figures taken on the last census Sunday, or any census Sunday ever? Please and thanks.

Penn

Monty. wrote: »

Since when was it the done thing for an atheist to pretend they are Catholic ? Is that what you do ? Oh wait, it is. It's hardly the Churches fault if you want to continue pretending to be Catholic, personally I'd rather you all left and stopped pretending.

It's "the done thing" to get married in a church, and seeing as how it's what the bride wanted, he complied. My point is, about 10 years he spent having no association with religion at all, yet this was never questioned, because according to the record books, he was still counted as being a catholic. Now, if I am not currently being counted as being a catholic, what do you think the odds are of me being allowed to get married in a church, become a godparent or have my own child christened? Surely, if I am not being counted as a catholic, I would not be allowed to do these things.

Monty. wrote: »

So your cousin who dishonestly pretends he is Catholic, by having a Catholic wedding is counted as a Catholic ? On that day yes, on census Sunday unless he is there, no.

There is, stop pretending to be Catholic.

But again, he was still on their records as being a catholic, so he was still being counted as a member of the RCC.

Now, if I refused to be godparent to my new nephew (which I'm thinking about doing anyway) and never even stepped foot inside a church again, I may not be counted as being at Mass on Census Sunday, but I would still be counted as being a Catholic because there is no FORMAL way to leave the church.

I ask again, why have the RCC put a stop to formal defections? Surely, if they allowed formal defections, it would decrease the number of 'pretend' catholics. If my cousin had done it, he wouldn't have been allowed to get married in the Church, would he? So why have they stopped it?

Monty.

MagicMarker wrote: »

Hi Monty, can you link us to world wide figures taken on the last census Sunday, or any census Sunday ever? Please and thanks.

I don't have them, perhaps ISAW can assist.

Monty.

Barrington wrote: »

It's "the done thing" to get married in a church, and seeing as how it's what the bride wanted, he complied. My point is, about 10 years he spent having no association with religion at all, yet this was never questioned, because according to the record books, he was still counted as being a catholic.

Now, if I am not currently being counted as being a catholic, what do you think the odds are of me being allowed to get married in a church, become a godparent or have my own child christened? Surely, if I am not being counted as a catholic, I would not be allowed to do these things.

But again, he was still on their records as being a catholic, so he was still being counted as a member of the RCC.

Now, if I refused to be godparent to my new nephew (which I'm thinking about doing anyway) and never even stepped foot inside a church again, I may not be counted as being at Mass on Census Sunday, but I would still be counted as being a Catholic because there is no FORMAL way to leave the church.

I ask again, why have the RCC put a stop to formal defections? Surely, if they allowed formal defections, it would decrease the number of 'pretend' catholics. If my cousin had done it, he wouldn't have been allowed to get married in the Church, would he? So why have they stopped it?

You mean if you dishonestly pretend to be a Catholic and take part in a Catholic ceremony as a Catholic, why should you assumed to be a Catholic. Hmmm.

I could also walk into a Protestant Church and pretend to be a Protestant.
It doesn't mean if I show up that particular day I will forever be counted in the Protestant congregations numbers, but if I faked it all year then I probably would that year.

I suspect is what you're really asking is how can your baptism record be unrecorded ? Answer is, if it happened, it can't, no more than any other event in your life that was recorded can be unrecorded. It does not mean in any way shape or form you are still a Catholic and counted in the numbers as a Catholic, so stop pretending you are one.

Penn

Monty. wrote: »

You mean if you dishonestly pretend to be a Catholic and take part in a Catholic ceremony as a Catholic, why should you assumed to be a Catholic. Hmmm.

I could also walk into a Protestant Church and pretend to be a Protestant.
It doesn't mean if I show up that particular day I will forever be counted in the Protestant congregations numbers, but if I faked it all year then I probably would that year.

I suspect is what you're really asking is how can your baptism record be unrecorded ? Answer is, if it happened, it can't, no more than any other event in your life that was recorded can be unrecorded. It does not mean in any way shape or form you are still a Catholic and counted in the numbers as a Catholic, so stop pretending you are one.

No, I'm asking why you should be assumed to be a Catholic BEFORE you take part in a catholic ceremony. If I never participated in another Catholic ceremony, if I never even stepped foot inside a church for the rest of my life, I would still be counted as being a catholic.

I have no problem with my baptism record. I was baptised, there should be a record of that. What I want is a record saying I am no longer a member of the Catholic Church, but the church has put an end to that.

So I ask again, one more time even though I probably won't get an answer, why? Why did they stop allowing people to formally defect? Your best guess will suffice, obviously you weren't there when the decision was made. So for what possible reason would they do this?

My theory? So they could continue to claim to have more members than they have, and because the number of people leaving was increasing. If you have a better explanation, go for it.

Delirium

If you must attend Mass weekly to be considered Catholic, there were 1.3 million people Ireland that were incorrectly labelled Catholic in data collected by the Catholic Bishops Conference circa 2003.

That's 30% of the population of Catholics on the island of Ireland at that time.

Of the 3.46 million Roman Catholics in Ireland, 63 percent attend church once a week, according to the Catholic Bishops Conference.

Link

Bannasidhe

Edz87 wrote: »

How does one get excommunicated? Back in the day priests and bishops ran their mouths about people can get excommunicated for x, y, or z...

I'm just wondering now if I can get excommunicated, and how would one go about it?

Does the vatican have an unsubscribe email or text service?

I've tried 1800-HELLBOUND but didn't get the notification text.

See here: http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/articles/easy-steps-excommunication

Monty.

Barrington wrote: »

So I ask again, one more time even though I probably won't get an answer, why? Why did they stop allowing people to formally defect? Your best guess will suffice, obviously you weren't there when the decision was made. So for what possible reason would they do this?

Because there is no need, no other Church has one to my knowledge, membership is voluntary, if you say your not a Catholic, then you're not a Catholic, and as far as the Church is concerned if you don't keep the 5 precepts you cannot consider yourself a Catholic.

Barrington wrote: »

My theory? So they could continue to claim to have more members than they have, and because the number of people leaving was increasing

Yes its all a giant conspiracy theory. As far as I'm concerned it wouldn't bother me if the worldwide Catholic numbers fell from 1 billion to 1. As I said the more pseudo Catholics that feck off the better as far as I'm concerned.

Penn

Monty. wrote: »

Because there is no need, no other Church has one to my knowledge, membership is voluntary, if you say your not a Catholic, then you're not a Catholic, and as far as the Church is concerned if you don't keep the 5 precepts you cannot consider yourself a Catholic.

I don't consider myself to be a catholic. But then tell me, where do you think they get the 1billion+ number from? Do you think there are over 1,000,000,000 people worldwide who keep the 5 precepts? And there is a need if they are counting me as one of the billion+ members without me actually being a Catholic

Monty. wrote: »

Yes its all a giant conspiracy theory. As far as I'm concerned it wouldn't bother me if the worldwide Catholic numbers fell from 1 billion to 1. As I said the more pseudo Catholics that feck off the better as far as I'm concerned.

The church needs to claim more members than it has to keep the power they have. If all the pseudo Catholics fecked off, suddenly, the church would have less money. The church would have fewer schools. The church would have less influence than they have. Believe me, I wish the church actually kept an accurate record of how many members they have who keep the 5 precepts and allowed formal defection for those who don't. I would love to see that number. Even the state census this year will have a larger number of catholics than are really in Ireland. I marked myself as No religion and my father changed it to Catholic (I changed it back afterwards). I've heard similar stories from a lot of people.

Dades

Monty. wrote: »

Because there is no need, no other Church has one to my knowledge, membership is voluntary, if you say your not a Catholic, then you're not a Catholic, and as far as the Church is concerned if you don't keep the 5 precepts you cannot consider yourself a Catholic.

Monty. you should check out this recent thread here.

The gist of it is that two openly non-religious parents felt sorry their daughter was going to miss out on the communion day all her class were having, and were told by the priest in charge if she got baptised in time there'd be no problem.

That priest clearly knew both sacraments would be a sham, given that the parents weren't going to raise their child a catholic, yet passed on the word from his superiors that it was fine to go ahead.

Another soul in the book, and not a precept in sight!

fitz0

ISAW wrote: »

Christians can claim to work night and day at being a christian. If you think all the academic Christians were worthless to society then you have a problem with reality.

Ah now. Where did I state that academic Christians were worthless? Nobody is worthless. Christian academics contributed and continue to contribute greatly to society. Academic Christians do too.

Although the academics of Christianity are as relevant to us non Christians as a ham sandwich to a vegetarian. We're not having it. So by all mean let Christians be as academic about their Bronze age beliefs. Let them eat ham sandwiches, I just won't. See, not saying they're worthless at all, their philosophical bent just doesn't cut it for me.

ISAW wrote: »

And please don't suggest academic knowledge is the only knowledge. the Dali Lama also spent years in study for his exams ~which were in Bhuddism by Priests. And I also explained the water on the head and baptism of babies isn't universal ( t christians) . what is universal is the baptism in the Spirit.

Again, I didn't state that it was. There is however a difference between baptism and earning a degree. If I had an architecture degree bestowed on my at birth with another person saying that I would reject Gehry and all his works in my stead, it would be a different story.

There is much more to the world than pure academic knowledge, things that can't be taught in schools. I would never think to deny that, I just don't like the inference that education is like religion (or vice versa) and that my degree would be comparable to my baptism.

ISAW

koth wrote: »

Citizenship is generally a result of where you were born.

As opposed to religion which isn't? I'll remember that if you ever claim "religion is a result of where you were born"

Religious membership should be a choice that everyone can excercise. The RCC doesn't allow that to happen for the majority of their members.

correct. The RCC demand that membership should be a choice for ALL it's members and not just for a majority.

They're made members before they can speak and refuse the ability to defect if they should decide they don't want to be members.

So you accept that Baptism makes one into a Christian and you accept the authority of the Church? Funny I could have sworn otherwise. So if you accept the church can decide to make someone a member then what are you arguing about?

Yes, the removed the ability to defect, which was a process where people could get their name removed as a member of the RCC.

Removed from what?

The RCC use baptisms as their basis for determining membership. They don't take a census in every mass and recalculate the membership numbers on a weekly basis.

No they take it on census Sunday once a year. The State on the other hand do it every ten years. which frequency of measurement do you think reflects a more valid figure?

I don't see why they would use anything other than baptisms to count the members, seeing as you can't leave once they baptised you as a child.

There were reasons for records. For one you might want to get married and they could determine if you are marrying a sister or close relation.

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

As opposed to religion which isn't? I'll remember that if you ever claim "religion is a result of where you were born"

You are more likely to be made a member of the Catholic church than of any other religion by being born into Ireland, that doesn't mean every child born in Ireland is Catholic. They are however Irish. The point, which you missed btw, was that religion is supposed to be a conscious choice.

correct. The RCC demand that membership should be a choice for ALL it's members and not just for a majority.

And yet 90%+ of the RCC members of Ireland didn't choose their religion.

So you accept that Baptism makes one into a Christian and you accept the authority of the Church? Funny I could have sworn otherwise. So if you accept the church can decide to make someone a member then what are you arguing about?

Yes to the baptism question and no to the authority question. I arguing that I can't remove my name as a member of the RCC.

Removed from what?

The list of Catholics in Ireland that the RCC keep.

No they take it on census Sunday once a year. The State on the other hand do it every ten years. which frequency of measurement do you think reflects a more valid figure?

That is a measure of mass attendance, not of Catholics. The state asks everyone in the country to answer for themselves, presuming they're adults. Do the RCC ask everyone in the church to fill out documents on census Sunday?

There were reasons for records. For one you might want to get married and they could determine if you are marrying a sister or close relation.

What has that got to do with me pointing out the RCC most likely uses baptism certs to keep a count of their membership?

Penn

ISAW wrote: »

There were reasons for records. For one you might want to get married and they could determine if you are marrying a sister or close relation.

:D:D

I think when the priest went out to perform the wedding and both the bride and groom's family were sitting on the same side, that might be a giveaway

Monty.

Barrington wrote: »

I don't consider myself to be a catholic. But then tell me, where do you think they get the 1billion+ number from? Do you think there are over 1,000,000,000 people worldwide who keep the 5 precepts? And there is a need if they are counting me as one of the billion+ members without me actually being a Catholic

I presume the easiest way is to get the numbers from each national census, or perhaps its complied from the Sunday census, but if you have more accurate figures that say there are only 10,000 Catholics in the world, I'll be happy to go with those figures. If you have more accurate and nationally / internationally accepted figures post them up.

Barrington wrote: »

The church needs to claim more members than it has to keep the power they have.

What power ? The Catholic faith was fully determined nearly 2000 years ago after the death of the last apostle. The Church is Catholics providing moral, religious, and sacramental support to other Catholics.

Barrington wrote: »

If all the pseudo Catholics fecked off, suddenly, the church would have less money. The church would have fewer schools. The church would have less influence than they have.

If there was only 100 Catholics worldwide, then all that is needed is money to provide facilities for 100 Catholics, and only 100 Catholics need to make any voluntary donations to their own organisation. No real Catholic I know is bothered about how many other Catholics there are.

Barrington wrote: »

Even the state census this year will have a larger number of catholics than are really in Ireland. I marked myself as No religion and my father changed it to Catholic (I changed it back afterwards). I've heard similar stories from a lot of people

Its hardly someone elses fault if your father refuses to fill it out correctly.
So now the census is another giant conspiracy theory, then perhaps you can suggest a more accurate method for the Government ?

Monty.

koth wrote: »

And yet 90%+ of the RCC members of Ireland didn't choose their religion

You didn't choose your place of birth either, but you can choose where to continue living.

Monty.

Dades wrote: »

Monty. you should check out this recent thread here.

The gist of it is that two openly non-religious parents felt sorry their daughter was going to miss out on the communion day all her class were having, and were told by the priest in charge if she got baptised in time there'd be no problem.

That priest clearly knew both sacraments would be a sham, given that the parents weren't going to raise their child a catholic, yet passed on the word from his superiors that it was fine to go ahead.

Another soul in the book, and not a precept in sight!

You cannot have a Catholic commuinion unless you are baptised.
So the child wanted a Catholic communion, the parents, did not object and facilitated same, and asked to Priest to facilitate same, and he obliged. And because he did, the Parents now think he is a problem. Get a life the lot of ye. So if the Child chooses later in life to remain Catholic, or be a non Catholic, what's the problem ? The state will go by her census form, the church will determine numbers from census Sunday.

robindch

Monty. wrote: »

You didn't choose your place of birth either, but you can choose where to continue living.

The Russian Government -- in so many ways, like the Vatican -- believes its own house rules outweigh reality too.

For most of the last ten years, they've refused to accept that my gf is no longer living in Siberia, since they don't have a bureaucratic procedure which allows somebody to leave the country entirely.

This would be quite funny, save that the local electricity company charges per-bureaucratic-occupant, rather than for what's actually consumed (there are no meters) and you've to go to court to acquire a piece of paper which declares in the correct bureaucratic manner, a non-occupant's non-local existence.

Delirium

Monty. wrote: »

You didn't choose your place of birth either, but you can choose where to continue living.

Where I was born is a fact, me being a Catholic is incorrect as I never chose to join and yet the RCC won't let me correct this error.

Penn

Monty. wrote: »

I presume the easiest way is to get the numbers from each national census, or perhaps its complied from the Sunday census, but if you have more accurate figures that say there are only 10,000 Catholics in the world, I'll be happy to go with those figures. If you have more accurate and nationally / internationally accepted figures post them up.

I don't have more accurate numbers. I'm just questioning the accuracy of the numbers the RCC claim.

Monty. wrote: »

What power ? The Catholic faith was fully determined nearly 2000 years ago after the death of the last apostle. The Church is Catholics providing moral, religious, and sacramental support to other Catholics.

Schools. Contraceptives in Africa. Political influence. Influence over society. Their wealth.

Monty. wrote: »

If there was only 100 Catholics worldwide, then all that is needed is money to provide facilities for 100 Catholics, and only 100 Catholics need to make any voluntary donations to their own organisation. No real Catholic I know is bothered about how many other Catholics there are.

But when a majority belongs to one religion, that one religion becomes more influential throughout that society.

Monty. wrote: »

Its hardly someone elses fault if your father refuses to fill it out correctly.
So now the census is another giant conspiracy theory, then perhaps you can suggest a more accurate method for the Government ?

If each person individually had to fill out their own census, rather than the head of whatever house you were in that night, that would be more accurate. Would be more expensive though, so I have no problem with how it is currently done. All I'm saying is that if 3.5million people put down catholic on the census form, how many do you think really are catholic, given the rules and requirements you have already mentioned? Taking out the pseudo-catholics and pretend catholics, how many do you think would really be catholic?

Monty.

koth wrote: »

Where I was born is a fact, me being a Catholic is incorrect as I never chose to join and yet the RCC won't let me correct this error.

Just because your parents chose to baptise you, does not make you a Catholic today.

Delirium

Monty. wrote: »

Just because your parents chose to baptise you, does not make you a Catholic today.

could you be a pal and tell the Pope that too?

Monty.

koth wrote: »

could you be a pal and tell the Pope that too?

Write him a letter and tell him yourself.

Delirium

Monty. wrote: »

Write him a letter and tell him yourself.

I didn't have any joy with the bishop so I doubt the pope will be any more receptive to a reduction in membership numbers.

Monty.

koth wrote: »

I didn't have any joy with the bishop so I doubt the pope will be any more receptive to a reduction in membership numbers.

Have you anything in writing from him saying you are still a Catholic ?

Doctor DooM

Monty. wrote: »

Have you anything in writing from him saying you are still a Catholic ?

Lol... poor Monty, "I'm not listening, IM NOT LISTENING!"

robindch

Monty. wrote: »

Write him a letter and tell him yourself.

Herr Ratzinger has other post he might want to look at ahead of that:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/world/europe/14vatican.html