Formally Defected from the Roman Catholic Church?

Let’s sum up the questions that I ask in plain terms:

  1. Do articles on this subject tend to mislead readers?
  2. Should articles not mislead readers?
  3. In this case would it be easy to phrase things so as not to mislead readers?

It’s disappointing to hear that questions that help us strive for clarity and honesty somehow “misleading”. We should always seek the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth even in areas where it would negatively affect positions we are for.

2 Likes

What survey? The numbers given by these articles (including ones written by the Church) don’t involve surveys but an assessment of the number of living people who have been baptized Catholic. The whole point is that they are announcing a number of baptized Catholics and making it seem like it’s the number of people who said yes that they were Catholic.

So this question about one number made to look like another number somehow isn;'t about numbers.

The number of people who identify themselves as Catholic will always be less than the number of people who have been baptized Catholic. This is true of any people when you compare people who are currently something versus people who currently or formerly were something. The number of people who currently drink milk will be less than the number of people who currently or formerly drank milk. So what the Church reports is vastly over-reported specifically in terms of self-identified Catholics.

Whether intentional or not, people who are unfamiliar with the Catholic Church’s unique accounting system will see something that says there are X Catholics and will take that as meaning if you were to somehow ask those X Catholics if they were Catholic each one would say “Yes!”. No one reading it would assume that it means if some of those X people were asked they would say, “Well I was baptized Catholic, but now I consider myself something else.” I think what I asked was pretty straightforward. Again I have no problem with the Church sticking to its guns as to how they come up with those numbers so long as they are clear and upfront about it so that people don’t think each of those X people considers themselves Catholic. The obvious answer is it is wrong to give people the wrong impression.

Again, you misread the question. I’m saying – very simply – that when the Church says there are X baptized Catholics that it could be more clear rephrasing it.

For example, instead it could say:
“There are X living people who have been baptized as Catholic, including those who currently practice other faiths.”

Imagine if the Democratic Party announced there were “X registered Democrats” but it included people who were once registered Democrats but have changed their political affiliation. If that unusual method was what they used, then to be honest they would have to state there were “X people who either are or once were registered Democrats” It shows that just a few additional words can make things clear and accurate, something that should be a top priority for anyone disseminating information.

When I left one Christian faith tradition (Assembly of God) for Methodist Christianity around 5 years ago, the Methodist church I joined wanted to know the name of my AOG local congregation so that they could contact them to transfer my “letter of church membership” or something like that from my old congregation to the new one, even though they were different denominations. I didn’t have to do anything - they took care of it for me.

It sounds like there is a process in place for this sort of thing between most Christian faith traditions except Catholicism, if I understand correctly. So if a lifelong Catholic were to join (let’s say) a Presbyterian congregation, presumably the Presbyterian local congregation office would call the Catholic parish that the person used to attend. Just curious how the local Catholic parish would respond. For example, would they ignore the request altogether, explain they don’t transfer church memberships, or would the Protestant church rep not even bother in the first place because they know Catholic Church doesn’t transfer memberships.

We’re speaking here of the RCC’s take on baptisms (and Anglicans, in general {a dangerous phrase} and likely some others). In such a case, assuming all factors are valid (sacramental factors in the case of RCs and some selected Anglicans (one must speak carefully) a valid baptism makes the recipient one who has been validly baptized. This being the case, such a person cannot subsequently become not validly baptized. The soul is changed by the process. The status quo ante is gone.

The grace and other things conveyed in the sacrament are best addressed in this discussion by a RC voice.

Being baptized doesn’t mean a Christian can’t stop being a Christian (apostate). Just that such a one is not, therefore, un-baptized. Baptism is no guarantee against apostasy, or sin in general. Neither are Confirmation or Orders. Also indelible

1 Like

Here’s a scenario:

Say a person was baptized/confirmed Anglican, practices Catholicism but never was received into the Catholic Church? What are they considered?

But a person who was baptized/confirmed Catholic, practices Anglicanism, but was never received into the Anglican Church is considered a lapsed Catholic?

The number of people who identify themselves as Catholic will always be less than the number of people who have been baptized Catholic. This is true of any people when you compare people who are currently something versus people who currently or formerly were something. The number of people who currently drink milk will be less than the number of people who currently or formerly drank milk. So what the Church reports is vastly over-reported specifically in terms of self-identified Catholics.

Whether intentional or not, people who are unfamiliar with the Catholic Church’s unique accounting system will see something that says there are X Catholics and will take that as meaning if you were to somehow ask those X Catholics if they were Catholic each one would say “Yes!”. No one reading it would assume that it means if some of those X people were asked they would say, “Well I was baptized Catholic, but now I consider myself something else.” I think what I asked was pretty straightforward. Again I have no problem with the Church sticking to its guns as to how they come up with those numbers so long as they are clear and upfront about it so that people don’t think each of those X people considers themselves Catholic. The obvious answer is it is wrong to give people the wrong impression.
[/quote]

So why does saying “there are x million Catholics” equate to “there are x million self-identifying/practicing Catholics”?? It is common knowledge that even atheists will often describe themselves as “raised Catholic” or “baptised Catholic” or whatever, so the word “Catholic” is not equivalent to “practicing or currently self-identifying”

If you told me “there are x million Americans” meaning simply citizens of the US, and I wrongly assume that you are including only those citizens actually living in the United States, which I know is only a subset, the bad is really on me for not bothering to actually find out how you come up with those statistics, not you.

I may be “unfamiliar with your unique accounting system”, which I’m sure is hardly unique at least among Christian denominations. But as far as I am concerned if I am going to use or rely on your figures it is my job to become familiar (or familiar enough) with your system!

If I want strictly to know only about self-identifying Catholics then of course I go to a source that I know will give only those precise stats - eg local or national censuses. That way I know I am getting the exact information I want.

1 Like

From the RCC standpoint, first para is validly baptized, if all sacramental factors are valid, not confirmed.

Para 2, Yep. (Corrections may be offered).

1 Like

When you say Jesus will see the indelible mark and recognize you as His own…are you referring to the moment of death?

[quote=“Dan_Defender, post:10, topic:561852”]
Once a Catholic, always a Catholic.

/quote]
Does that go for those of us who became Catholic later in life, having been baptized somewhere else?

No that’s different than being baptized Catholic. But yes, if you become Catholic then leave, you don’t stop being Catholic.

So, doesn’t the Catholic Church recognize as valid any baptism performed in the proper Trinitarian manner? I assume that the Catholic Church would say that those individuals properly baptized outside of the Catholic Church would also have the indelible character on their soul. Wouldn’t then the Catholic Church want those names also?

I think if you’re a Christian, baptized is baptized. The Catholic Church accepted my baptism as being as good as theirs, therefore I didn’t have to go through it again. (In fact, you’re not supposed to get baptized again.)

I have a piece of paper that says I was [you would say] baptized Presbyterian. I was two months old, and that was the last time I was in a Presbyterian church. I grew up as a Lutheran, and now I’m a Catholic. Pretty sure that the Catholic church recognizes all baptisms by legitimate Christian churches as equally valid. Otherwise, they would make us newbies go through it again, right? Having joined the Catholic church, I think I am as Catholic as the next person. My priest says I am.

I agree with this. Anyway I wouldn’'t worry about whether you were Catholic or not back then, the important thing is you are Catholic now. No time like the present.

1 Like

I suppose it depends, and Protestants might better know what their own pastors might do.

The Catholic priest could certainly confirm that the person has been registered as a member of his parish, how long they have been registered, what sacraments they have received, and confirm that the parishioner will be taken off their parish register. Up to the Protestant pastor whether that is sufficient.

Trinitarian formula (valid form), water (valid matter), valid minister (normally priest/ bishop/deacon, but any person having valid intent in the sacramental action (to do what the Church does in the action), valid recipient (if adult, with valid intent, if not, valid intent on part of the sponsors.

Jesus knows everything already so nothing new to Him. I trust in His mercy.

Whoops! Got this thread and the thread on the Pew Survey on Transubstantiation conflated!

In any case, when the Church talks about numbers of Catholics, they talk about baptisms, funerals, and Mass attendance. That doesn’t count everyone who the Church considers Catholic, but it does cover those who are active.

Nah… “Pew Survey” confusion, again. :wink:

Except that what the Church reports is “number of folks who bought milk” and “number of folks who drank milk this year”. No “over-reporting” there…

And I’m saying – very simply – that the Church reports the current year’s baptisms. Not “X people have been baptized since 1950”, but “Y baptisms this year.” It’s not the over-representation scheme that I think you’re envisioning…

On the other hand, if the Dems announced “Y people registered as Democrat in this election cycle” and “Z people registered Democrat voted this year”, then that would be a pretty good measure, wouldn’t it? That’s what the Church does… :wink:

1 Like

That was my thought when I asked, for if we are with Him every day He knows who we are without having brand or mark to see and identify.

Just as Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

God recognizes Jesus publicly, immediately after He is baptized. I believe we are recognized in the same way, after Baptism. In any case the disciples were sent to baptize, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That leads me to conclude Baptism is important, accomplishes something of substance, leaves an identifiable “mark?” That’s one way of describing it.

As a result of my Baptism, I hope one day to hear those words of recognition.

2 Likes
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.