Ex-Catholics being counted as Catholics

[Mike_from_NJ]

This is a follow-up to a question I asked in the Ask An Apologist section this morning.

Hello,

How does the Catholic Church determine the number of Catholics in both the United States as well as the world? Does Omnium in mentem, which removes the process by which one can formally defect from the Church mean that the totals given in the Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae include those who are practicing a non-Catholic Christian faith, a non-Christian faith, or no faith at all?

The Annuarium gives the total number of Catholics in the world by region. Anyone baptized Catholic is considered a Catholic. They are counted as Catholic even if they are not going to Mass or are attending a non-Catholic community. This is the same as counting a blood relative as a member of your family even if they “disown” their family, once a member of the family you are always a member of the family.

Given how few people actually followed the process to formally defect prior to Omnium in mentem it wouldn’t appear that the change would have much of an impact on the overall numbers.

First I want to thank Fr. Charles Grondin for his answer, which was both thorough and concise. I do have some issues with what this answer means.

The Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae is also referred to as the Statistical Yearbook of the Church. One thing it does is give a total of how many Catholics it believes there are during that year. As most people here on CAF are likely aware the Church believes that once you are baptized that there is an indelible mark on the person’s soul making them forever a Catholic. As Father Grondin noted in his answer the Church takes that stance not only from a metaphysical standpoint but also from a membership standpoint.

The reason why I questioned whether such a stance took hold from a membership standpoint is because how someone who doesn’t necessarily believe or even know that the Church believes this way would interpret statements made about Church membership. I do not possess a copy of the Statistical Yearbook, so I don’t know if when it discusses its membership rolls if it makes clear that it is including those that have left the Catholic faith but have been baptized. I do know that going through various Catholic media reporting on the 2013 Yearbook that so far I have found no article that made that distinction.

For example:
National Catholic Register
Vatican Information Service
AsiaNews.IT

Because these articles are read by non-Catholics as well as Catholics, it is easy to see how membership claims could be read as counting actual members as opposed to members plus those who have since gone on to other churches, faiths, or no faith.

One of the main reasons I posted here in the Non-Catholic Faiths section was to see if other churches do the same thing. As far as I know they don’t.

Regarding Father Grondin’s note about the small number of people who prior to Omnium in mentem had formally defected, I have a few things on that:

1. The average Catholic at the time may not have been aware of the concept that they would be considered Catholics even if they later moved away from Catholicism.
2. Even those that were aware of that concept may have thought that when the Church announced its membership totals that it was using a rubric more in line with what other Churches (and in fact businesses and organizations use) as opposed to the metaphysical one.
3. There were groups such as countmeout.ie which provided assistance to those wishing to know how one formally defects. They asserted that tens of thousands of forms were downloaded prior to Omnium in mentem (which is not an insignificant number in Ireland).
4. Even if the amount of formal defectors is small, I feel it’s important that one should provide accurate information whenever possible. Again, I do NOT have a copy of the Statistical Yearbook so I don’t know if it specifically states how it comes to its numbers. I can only hope that it does. If it does then the fault lies with those members of the media who are passing on such information without stating its counting process.

A note to the mods: I’ve placed this thread in Non-Catholic Religions because it would be of particular interest to those who were formally Catholics. Plus as noted above I wanted to compare and contrast to see if other faith traditions also use a once-a-member-always-a-member method of tallying its members.

 

[Padres1969]

Depends on the denomination. Some will continue to count you even if you stop attending/leave unless you formally ask to be removed from their membership rolls (at which time they’ll remove you and you are no longer counted). Some don’t even continue to count you as a member if you’re not an active participant in their church/faith depending on whatever criteria they set as being the cutoff. The biggest difference between other denominations and the RCC as I see it is that the Catholic Church is one of the few denominations that doesn’t allow you to remove yourself from their membership rolls as I understand it because of the “family” view Father Grondin mentions.

 

[theropod]

I attended a non-denom church that started over from 0 every year. If you didn’t re-up and re-affirm the membership covenant and core beliefs, you went off the membership list.

I actually like that idea, to be honest.

 

[Sy_Noe]

So does all of this mean that when Catholics say there are x-number of Catholics, and the Catholic Church claims there are x-number of Catholics, that they include in the count those who no longer practice? IOW I am counted as one of the Catholics in those numbers? In that case, may I drop my “non practicing” adjective on CAF and I won’t be told I can’t ID as simply Catholic?

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I didn’t read the entire thread even though it’s short, so please excuse me if I’m repeating something - apologies.

One can’t really be an “ex-Catholic,” can one? Once a Catholic, always a Catholic even if one stops practicing or begins to attend at the place of worship of another faith denomination. If one is baptized a Catholic, he or she is always a Catholic. Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders confer an indelible mark on the soul.

 

[Peter_J]

An ex-Catholic isn’t the same as a “never-been-Catholic” (although explaining how they’re different tends to upset people at times).

Similarly, I’ve never been Orthodox, which is not really the same as saying that I left Orthodoxy (in which case I would an ex-Orthodox).

 

[Reuben_J]

 

[SAVINGRACE]

Are you concerned about reporting “accuracy”?

The Church for over a thousand years has always considered those who are baptized Catholic remain Catholic regardless of what that person chooses to do with their life. With those clear parameters the numbers the Church has are correct.

The Church cannot undo what the Holy Spirit has done in the Sacrament of Baptism. It does NOT have the authority; no-one on earth has that authority. Even excommunication does not unbind baptism.

The Books of the OT and NT. The record Books of Baptism, Weddings, Funerals kept at every parish, the Book of the CCC etc etc all these “books” contribute to the Book of OUR life which is read on Judgement Day. All are intertwined when it comes to our journey to Salvation.

Individuals may choose to call themselves “ex-Catholic” or “non-practicing Catholic” or “cafeteria Catholic” but these terms have no bearing or meaning to the Church.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

So does all of this mean that when Catholics say there are x-number of Catholics, and the Catholic Church claims there are x-number of Catholics, that they include in the count those who no longer practice? IOW I am counted as one of the Catholics in those numbers?

You, me, and many others as well.

In that case, may I drop my “non practicing” adjective on CAF and I won’t be told I can’t ID as simply Catholic?

I think the only issue there might be anytime you state a point that differs from standard Catholic teaching you’re going to get some questions each time from those seeing “Catholic” on your posts.

 

[theropod]

Are you concerned about reporting “accuracy”?

The Church for over a thousand years has always considered those who are baptized Catholic remain Catholic regardless of what that person chooses to do with their life. With those clear parameters the numbers the Church has are correct.

The Church cannot undo what the Holy Spirit has done in the Sacrament of Baptism. It does NOT have the authority, no-one on earth has that authority. Even excommunication does not unbind baptism.

The Books of the OT and NT. The record Books of Baptism, Weddings, Funerals kept at every parish, the Book of the CCC etc etc all these “books” contribute to the Book of OUR life which is read on Judgement Day. All are intertwined when it comes to our journey to Salvation.

Still, there is value in understanding how many people are active participants at a given time. That’s certainly not the same thing as having been baptized.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

Still, there is value in understanding how many people are active participants at a given time. That’s certainly not the same thing as having been baptized.

Of course. Agreed. However, how do you qualify “active participants”? The Church should set those parameters, not individuals or statisticians.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

An ex-Catholic isn’t the same as a “never-been-Catholic” (although explaining how they’re different tends to upset people at times).

Similarly, I’ve never been Orthodox, which is not really the same as saying that I left Orthodoxy (in which case I would an ex-Orthodox).

I understand from a theological standpoint why the Church states what it does. Nowadays the earthly effect of having been baptized while not practicing the faith are almost nil. The question is about the Yearbook and the reporting about it, if it’s making it abundantly clear that these counts are based on this theological understanding and not from a common understanding of what it means to be a member of something.

Are you concerned about reporting “accuracy”?

Yes, in two ways.

One, a group’s influence is in many ways tied to the number of its adherents. Often times in the news section of CAF there will be an article talking about how such-and-such non-Catholic faith tradition has gained or lost some portion of its membership. I want to be sure that all groups are considered under the same standard.

Two, I think it’s important that each person be able to disassociate itself from an organization if he or she so chooses. And again I don’t mean that from a theological/metaphysical standpoint, but from an earthly point of view – the way language is commonly construed. If John Smith leaves the Catholic faith to become a Presbyterian he is not much going to care that the Catholic Church believes there is an indelible mark on his soul making him forever Catholic. But that man very well might care if he believes that the Church is essentially telling the world John Smith is Catholic and making it seem as though he did not take steps to leave the Church.

Think of it this way. Let’s say I join a charity and then some time later something occurs where I no longer wish to be with that charity. It doesn’t even have to be a bad thing, just a difference of opinion. I leave but the charity still claims that I’m actively as of this moment associated with them and I have not left it, there’s a problem. I wouldn’t be asking the charity to never say I was a member – I clearly was. I just want to make sure they are not giving the wrong impression by using language that makes it seem like I’m something I’m not.

Again this is all about what people perceive based on what is said and written. There is an immensely important distinction between stating someone was baptized and someone is currently a person who continues to be Catholic by choice. If an article, like the ones I linked to, doesn’t provide that qualification that the Church is counting all baptized as Catholics then there is a problem. If an article purposely uses language to give an impression that no such qualification exists and the reader is led to understand being a Catholic the same way one understands what a member of any other faith is, then not only is it a problem but it’s bearing false witness. It would be using an incomplete truth to make it seem like some person are one way when they are not.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Of course. Agreed. However, how do you qualify “active participants”? The Church should set those parameters, not individuals or statisticians.

Surely a process to renounce one’s faith in writing should be more than sufficient to disqualify someone as an active participant. Unfortunately Omnium in mentem eliminated such a process.

 

[Reuben_J]

Surely a process to renounce one’s faith in writing should be more than sufficient to disqualify someone as an active participant. Unfortunately Omnium in mentem eliminated such a process.

I think she said that is not the Church’s definition. …

 

[Padres1969]

**So does all of this mean that when Catholics say there are x-number of Catholics, and the Catholic Church claims there are x-number of Catholics, that they include in the count those who no longer practice? ** IOW I am counted as one of the Catholics in those numbers? In that case, may I drop my “non practicing” adjective on CAF and I won’t be told I can’t ID as simply Catholic?

Correct. People like you and I are counted by the Catholic Church as part of their overall numbers and membership as if we were still active adherent in their faith since no differentiation is made between current and former Catholics by the church. Despite it being at best inaccurate.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Being counted as a Catholic by the Yearbook is not the same as bring counted as a Catholic by any other statistic or organization. It’s rare that anyone thinks the total number of Catholics as defined by the Yearbook equals active participants (whatever that means).
The Catholic Church sees your claim to be not Catholic similar to the US government sees your claim to be a Sovereign Citizen. Try not paying taxes with that argument. Even if you move to the ends of the earth - without a special court or state dept procedure (one that doesn’t exist in the Church) you are liable to pay US tax

 

[Padres1969]

Being counted as a Catholic by the Yearbook is not the same as bring counted as a Catholic by any other statistic or organization. It’s rare that anyone thinks the total number of Catholics as defined by the Yearbook equals active participants (whatever that means).
The Catholic Church sees your claim to be not Catholic similar to the US government sees your claim to be a Sovereign Citizen. Try not paying taxes with that argument. Even if you move to the ends of the earth - without a special court or state dept procedure (one that doesn’t exist in the Church) you are liable to pay US tax

That’s the difference however. Most churches, and the US government, have a way through which you can renounce your membership/citizenship.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I think she said that is not the Church’s definition. …

If I trace this portion of the conversation back for a minute, theropod noted that it would be good to keep a tally of active members of the Catholic Church in a way most people understand it (meaning not counting every single person who was baptized). SAVINGRACE agreed but noted that the method by which one counts active member should be determined by the Church. I followed up by noting that at the very least if a person states in writing that they no longer wish to be considered an active member then they should not be considered an active member.

Again this is all to try to determine who should and shouldn’t be considered an active member apart from one’s baptism. So I apologize, Reuben J. I’m not sure what you mean.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Being counted as a Catholic by the Yearbook is not the same as bring counted as a Catholic by any other statistic or organization. It’s rare that anyone thinks the total number of Catholics as defined by the Yearbook equals active participants (whatever that means).

I disagree. If one reads an article which states that the Catholic Church says there are X Catholics, they are going to assume that means the definition by which the Church counted its membership was similar to what other organizations (including other churches) do. Any article that doesn’t state that the Church does its tally based solely off of baptisms could possibly be considered guilty of deception by omission.

The Catholic Church sees your claim to be not Catholic similar to the US government sees your claim to be a Sovereign Citizen. Try not paying taxes with that argument. Even if you move to the ends of the earth - without a special court or state dept procedure (one that doesn’t exist in the Church) you are liable to pay US tax

Beyond the truth of what Padres1969 noted, your analogy doesn’t match since the Church seems to consider such movements from one faith to another only a one-way street. The United States (in the example you used) allows people to either gain or renounce their citizenship.

 

[Reuben_J]

If I trace this portion of the conversation back for a minute, theropod noted that it would be good to keep a tally of active members of the Catholic Church in a way most people understand it (meaning not counting every single person who was baptized). SAVINGRACE agreed but noted that the method by which one counts active member should be determined by the Church. I followed up by noting that at the very least if a person states in writing that they no longer wish to be considered an active member then they should not be considered an active member.

Again this is all to try to determine who should and shouldn’t be considered an active member apart from one’s baptism. So I apologize, Reuben J. I’m not sure what you mean.

The Catholic Church may operate differently than other churches in this. The suggestion to keep a tally of active members is probably good, probably there is a reason why you people want to do that, but that does not arise in the Catholic Church. If you are familiar with the Church you would be able to see it but if not, yes, I agree the suggestion made some sense.

In order to understand this, one has to understand the Church’s definition and then set that as a premise.

The definition as been mentioned earlier, that one is a Catholic by Baptism which nobody can undo. The word is Baptism (or the Sacraments as it may be). You can only be bad Catholic or non-practicing Catholic, etc.

The record of Baptism in the Church is important because it is her duty to bring the straying flock back, not by force of course but that should not rule out the Church from making an outreach to them. So from the Church point of view, the tie is never completely cut off. Of course the person concerned can always refuse any visit, contact or outreach from the Church, like what many of you here do.

No need to apologize. So far the discussion is good.

edit: Baptismal or Confirmation record, sometimes required for marriage or becoming Godfather/Godmother purposes to ascertain one is truly a Catholic, the bureaucracy can be quite exasperating sometimes, can be retrieved from the Church even if the baptism was done 70 - 80 years ago. So that kind of record is often useful. And there are many lapsed Catholics who come back, become active in the Church and participate in it.