De-Baptism and leaving the Church

[thistle]

There is still formal defection. Here is a reference to the Vatican issued Prot. N. 10279/2006 on formal defection:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html

What in now in effect is a change of canon law that struck formal defection from the marriage canons.

1086 §1 “A marriage is invalid when one of the two persons was baptised in the catholic Church or received into it -]and has not by a formal act defected from it/-], and the other was not baptised.”

1117 “The form prescribed above is to be observed if at least one of the parties contracting marriage was baptised in the catholic Church or received into it -]and has not by a formal act defected from it/-], without prejudice to the provisions of can. 1127 §2.”

1124 “Without the express permission of the competent authority, marriage is prohibited between two baptised persons, one of whom was baptised in the catholic Church or received into it after baptism -]and has not defected from it by a formal act/-], the other of whom belongs to a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the catholic Church.”

The formal act is not on the part of the Church. It is on the part of the person. Even if the person goes through a formal act the Church will simply acknowledge that the person does not consider his/herself to be a Catholic but the Church still considers that person to be Catholic. The Church never documents that the person is no longer a Catholic.

 

[Vico]

The formal act is not on the part of the Church. It is on the part of the person. Even if the person goes through a formal act the Church will simply acknowledge that the person does not consider his/herself to be a Catholic but the Church still considers that person to be Catholic. The Church never documents that the person is no longer a Catholic.

That is an important clarification.

And it is no longer necessary to enter formal defection into the sacramental records since it no longer has any effect. It was only necessary for the period from Nov 27, 1983 to Dec 21, 2010.

 

[OraLabora]

What possible harm can a person suffer by accidentally receiving the Catholic sacrament of anointing of the sick, especially if unconscious or unaware

 

[jmcrae]

What possible harm can a person suffer by accidentally receiving the Catholic sacrament of anointing of the sick, especially if unconscious or unaware

I’m wondering the same thing. However, it is his wish, and needs to be respected.

 

[Vico]

OraLabora, jmcrae, ByzCath,

I guess all are assuming that the unconscious sick person is known to have not have obstinately persisted in grave sin up to the point of losing consciousness with no sign of repentance.

 

[dans0622]

There is still formal defection. Here is a reference to the Vatican issued Prot. N. 10279/2006 on formal defection:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html

What in now in effect is a change of canon law that struck formal defection from the marriage canons. …

Hello Vico,

Right. Since the canons were changed after that notification from the pontifical council for legislative texts, that notification has no force now and in the future (compare c. 34.3 on an “instruction”). What I mean is that, in the current law, there is no such thing as formal defection. So, if someone now tries to do it and submits such a request to a Pastor, it is meaningless because it has no effects whatsoever. An act that produces no effects is really not an act at all. In other words, it doesn’t exist. … If that makes any sense.

Dan

 

[Vico]

Hello Vico,

Right. Since the canons were changed after that notification from the pontifical council for legislative texts, that notification has no force now and in the future (compare c. 34.3 on an “instruction”). What I mean is that, in the current law, there is no such thing as formal defection. So, if someone now tries to do it and submits such a request to a Pastor, it is meaningless because it has no effects whatsoever. An act that produces no effects is really not an act at all. In other words, it doesn’t exist. … If that makes any sense.

Dan

“If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”

I was wrong, there is no formal defection but there is de facto defection, which results in latae sententiae excommunication.

CIC Can. 1364

§1. Without prejudice to the prescript of can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

§2. If contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state.

Interesting, the Archdiocese of Dublin is keeping track of those de facto defections:

dublindiocese.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2103&Itemid=373

 

[Paul_theApostle]

Hello

This may be a touchy subject so I’ll make this post as brief as possible.

I’ve recently left Catholicism but I’ve learned that I may still be listed as Catholic on a register somewhere.

Is there any way I can terminate my involvement in the Church formally? I don’t want to be associated with this organisation anymore.

BTW. I’ve been Baptized (infant baptism) and confirmed (parents)

Cheers

Wherever you go or whoever you give up on, salvation and the Kingdom of Heaven is for all of us ,including yourself

Jesus loves you and was crucified for you and overcame the power of Satan for us to recieve life and eternity in his Kingdom

take a breather and take time to talk to and pray to your Lord letting him know your troubles and concerns

May God keep you. Remain with him in faith hope ,love and prayer and pray for answers to your troubles

 

[thistle]

I’m wondering the same thing. However, it is his wish, and needs to be respected.

As a father I would not respect that wish. I would ensure my son or daughter was given the last rites. Nobody but God has anyway of knowing if the person actually repented or not before going into a coma!

 

[Vico]

As a father I would not respect that wish. I would ensure my son or daughter was given the last rites. Nobody but God has anyway of knowing if the person actually repented or not before going into a coma!

The annointer may not always give the Holy Anointing however:

CIC Canon 1007
The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in manifest serious sin.

 

[EasterJoy]

I was wrong, there is no formal defection but there is de facto defection, which results in latae sententiae excommunication.

It is important to clarify, however, that even excommunication does not remove a member of the faithful from the roll of the baptised. It merely marks the condition of the person, which is that they are in need of a specific kind of repentance before they may legitimately approach the Sacraments.

When it comes to baptism, we are the ultimate Hotel California: You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

If a person is adamantly and notoriously opposed to the Church, however, the Church will not allow the family of the deceased to give the person a Catholic funeral after they die. If you are intent upon leaving the assembly or persisting in behaviors contrary to the faith, the Church will honor your exercise of free will. Your choices do matter and they are your choices to make, even after you are baptised.

There is no hypocrisy in remaining on the roll of the baptised when a person has repudiated the faith. Rather, baptism is a permanent fact of a person’s past that he cannot change, as is Confirmation.

This is true of Holy Orders, as well. A priest can be relieved of his faculties, allowed to live in the lay state, and even allowed to marry, but he’s still a priest forever. He can renounce the faith and live only to attack the Church, and he’s still a priest forever. When a sacrament imparts an unchangeable character to the soul, that mark truly is permanent.

 

[thistle]

The annointer may not always give the Holy Anointing however:

CIC Canon 1007
The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in manifest serious sin.

Lets say you have not seen your son for a while. How would you know if he obstinately persists in manifest serious sin.
I would get a priest to give him the last rites. I do not see any priest refusing that.

 

[Vico]

Lets say you have not seen your son for a while. How would you know if he obstinately persists in manifest serious sin.
I would get a priest to give him the last rites. I do not see any priest refusing that.

I’m not arguing with you. Only saying that the annointer will make the determination, and must, according to the canons.

 

[jmcrae]

Lets say you have not seen your son for a while. How would you know if he obstinately persists in manifest serious sin.
I would get a priest to give him the last rites. I do not see any priest refusing that.

You would know. “Manifest serious sin” makes front page news, and affects marriages and bank accounts; that’s why the Church can’t be seen to seem to tolerate it.

“Notorious Bank Robber Given Last Rites: Has the Church Stopped Believing That Theft is a Sin?” isn’t a headline any Bishop wants to see in his morning newspaper.

 

[EasterJoy]

You would know. “Manifest serious sin” makes front page news, and affects marriages and bank accounts; that’s why the Church can’t be seen to seem to tolerate it.

“Notorious Bank Robber Given Last Rites: Has the Church Stopped Believing That Theft is a Sin?” isn’t a headline any Bishop wants to see in his morning newspaper.

If the notorious bank robber asked for Last Rites and a chance to repent, however, he would not be denied the chance to repent and receive Last Rites. Besides, the Church has to respect his choices, and will not overrule his free will the minute he gets conked on the head.

 

[jmcrae]

If the notorious bank robber asked for Last Rites and a chance to repent, however, he would not be denied the chance to repent and receive Last Rites.

Of course not. “Bank Robber Repents” is, in fact, a headline Bishops like to see - they like it when souls are saved.

Besides, the Church has to respect his choices, and will not overrule his free will the minute he gets conked on the head.

This is very true. No one will ever receive Last Rites by accident.

 

[CopticChristian]

I’m wondering the same thing. However, it is his wish, and needs to be respected.

I agree. If there is nothing to be gained by the Last rites then withholding the annointing will cause no untoward effects.

If there is something to be gained and it is his wish not to have them then he will have an eternity of Respect and an eternity to weigh that wish.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I’m not arguing with you. Only saying that the annointer will make the determination, and must, according to the canons.

I will say this that my brother whom was a baptized Catholic. At 44 years of age that is the only scarament he had recieved. He got very sick and was placed in the Hospital. I, thank God, had spoke to him about coming fully into communion just a couple days prior aobut being confirmed and so forth and he had agreed then he slipped into a coma. I contacted me priest for him to come to the hospital for the annointing. The first thing he asked me was if my brother would want this. Because of my conversation I was able to answer yes. Other wise he would not have given him the scarament.