Ex-Catholics being counted as Catholics

[Mike_from_NJ]

What misrepresentation is going on? Where is the Church or anyone else claiming that every baptised Catholic on its records is practicing or self-identifies as Catholic?

Let’s say I want to invest in a publicly-traded cell phone company. Let’s also say that for the most part each person only has phones with one cell phone company at any one time. In the United States publicly-traded companies must file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission with give detailed information about their company to potential investors, including their customer base.

So I’m interested in investing with Grandiose Cellular. I check out their latest annual statement and want to know how many customers they have.

Let’s say that unlike Massive Cellular, Immense Cellular, and all of the other cell phone companies they tally their customer base differently. Instead of counting the number of people with an active contract with them they count all living people who have ever been customers with them. This includes people who rather liked Grandiose but were happier with another provider, people who were dissatisfied with Grandiose and moved to another provider, and those people who decided they simply don’t need a cell phone.

If Grandiose Cellular in their annual statement said they had “100 million customers” but really had 80 million customers under contract, would you consider that to be a misrepresentation if they didn’t explain in their annual statement how they arrived at such a figure? I know I would. Would it be fair to the people who filed complaints or other trouble with Grandiose that they be included as though they were happy with Grandiose?

If instead Grandiose Cellular still tallied their customer base the same way but said upfront and with no chance of misleading anyone “We came to our total of 100 million by including all people who currently or previously had a contract with us, as our mission statement is to provide quality service to everyone,” then that’s a different story. It doesn’t tell me the information that I’m looking for (i.e. how many people are currently by choice with the company) but also doesn’t make it seem they have more customers than they really do.

A lack of forthrightness – like in the articles I linked to in the first post – are most certainly misleading in making those who read it (and not aware of the unique method of tallying the Catholic Church uses) think there are more by-choice members than there really are.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Reuben J, I apologize. After posting my response to LilyM I saw your post but I also saw the clock on the wall. I have to get up in six hours or so, so I’ll have to give your post a careful reading and follow-up with you tomorrow.

 

[LilyM]

Let’s say I want to invest in a publicly-traded cell phone company. Let’s also say that for the most part each person only has phones with one cell phone company at any one time. In the United States publicly-traded companies must file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission with give detailed information about their company to potential investors, including their customer base.

So I’m interested in investing with Grandiose Cellular. I check out their latest annual statement and want to know how many customers they have.

Let’s say that unlike Massive Cellular, Immense Cellular, and all of the other cell phone companies they tally their customer base differently. Instead of counting the number of people with an active contract with them they count all living people who have ever been customers with them. This includes people who rather liked Grandiose but were happier with another provider, people who were dissatisfied with Grandiose and moved to another provider, and those people who decided they simply don’t need a cell phone.

If Grandiose Cellular in their annual statement said they had “100 million customers” but really had 80 million customers under contract, would you consider that to be a misrepresentation if they didn’t explain in their annual statement how they arrived at such a figure? I know I would. Would it be fair to the people who filed complaints or other trouble with Grandiose that they be included as though they were happy with Grandiose?

If instead Grandiose Cellular still tallied their customer base the same way but said upfront and with no chance of misleading anyone “We came to our total of 100 million by including all people who currently or previously had a contract with us, as our mission statement is to provide quality service to everyone,” then that’s a different story. It doesn’t tell me the information that I’m looking for (i.e. how many people are currently by choice with the company) but also doesn’t make it seem they have more customers than they really do.

A lack of forthrightness – like in the articles I linked to in the first post – are most certainly misleading in making those who read it (and not aware of the unique method of tallying the Catholic Church uses) think there are more by-choice members than there really are.

Church membership is not, under any circumstances, something that is nearly as neatly or easily defined as customership of a telephone company.

A sensible person would realise this and would accordingky look at how a church defines membership when looking at its statistics. It is hardly some sort of state secret as to how the Church defines being Catholic or whence or how it derives its statistics. You cannot therefore claim any sort of misrepresentation. It is up to the reader, in these situations, to do their due diligence.

I regularly come across statistics as to the number of Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists on the planet. I hope you don’t expect those statistics to also be as meticulous as those of a.telephone company!

 

[pepipop]

I know just from my circle of friends alone that the assumption that having children baptized means that the parents will be practicing members of the Church is a false assumption.

Besides wouldn’t a process like one that was in place until recently that allowed for renunciation of the faith help give a more accurate and up-to-date count than one that works on generality and is essentially a generation behind?

Renunciation of the faith - would seem to be too difficult to manage and/or the numbers would be negligible. Also, people can/do change their minds and reverse their decision and return to the CC.

Large numbers of non-practicing Catholics still strongly identify as being Catholic, and would wish to be buried as such. There are many that return, as practicing members, at some point in their lives - so the door is always open.

Why would non-practicing Catholics bother baptising their children into the Catholic faith, if they were completely removed from it, had renounced it, or were against the faith. So baptism is a strong indicator of numbers of Catholics, at any point in time.

 

[Peebo]

I’m not sure if this has been asked…what of Protestants who have converted and confirmed into the Catholic Church…as they were baptized in the Protestant Church wouldn’t that mean that they would still be considered Protestant as is the case with Catholics who convert to the Protestant faith…

 

[Peter_J]

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?

I see it more as an issue of whether someone who is ex-Catholic could omit the “ex” when filling out their profile so that it just said “Catholic”. Personally, I would see that as misleading.

 

[Peter_J]

I’m not sure if this has been asked…what of Protestants who have converted and confirmed into the Catholic Church…as they were baptized in the Protestant Church wouldn’t that mean that they would still be considered Protestant as is the case with Catholics who convert to the Protestant faith…

They would be ex-Protestants.

 

[commenter]

• The Church teaches that not just Catholic Baptism, but any valid Baptism, leaves an indelible mark on the soul. We recognize your Lutheran Christian Baptism as indelible, regardless of what happens afterwards.
• Ex Catholics can, and often do, come in and seek some kind of ministry from the Church, for themselves or family members. Sometimes their background is relevant, without minimizing their current beliefs or disbeliefs. (Do you think the average cradle-Atheist spends as much time on CAF as those who say they converted to Atheisim?)
• There really is no way to accurately measure when someone ceases to be Catholic. When they miss Mass 14 times? If they go to a Humanist service 2 or more times? If they change their FB profile to “agnostic”? I know people who shop around to various non denominational churches many times, but drop in at their RC parish some times, too. There is no clear boundary line - (“ok, she is out, subtract one”) but some people pass various boundaries, in both directions, many times, towards greater, or lesser, participation as Catholics.
• Most Protestant movements define membership as belonging to a congregation. Catholicism is a different kind of thing. So it’s going to have different kinds of statistics.
  But we also have statistics that are more meaningful for you. Use them instead of the Yearbook.
• A better understanding would focus on “Practicing Catholics”. This would omit those who switch to other, or no religions, as well as those who claim to still be Catholic but don’t practice it. For some purposes, this figure would provide better numbers you are looking for. But parishes are still responsible for all those others in their boundaries. So that statistic is relevant too.

 

[Horton]

I’m not sure if this has been asked…what of Protestants who have converted and confirmed into the Catholic Church…as they were baptized in the Protestant Church wouldn’t that mean that they would still be considered Protestant as is the case with Catholics who convert to the Protestant faith…

Baptism in the trinitarian forum is baptism regardless of which church in which it was done. I was baptized as an infant in my parent’s Protestant church. When I converted to the Catholic Church my baptism was valid, no need to be baptized again. I’m sure in some church in California there is a record of my baptism (I had the certificate to prove valid baptism for RCIA) but I haven’t been considered a member of that denomination for more than 30 years.

 

[Thorolfr]

They would be ex-Protestants.

Apparently according to the Catholic Church, someone can be an “ex-Protestant” but it’s impossible to become an “ex-Catholic”. Once you’re Catholic, you’re one forever no matter what other denomination you attend or non-Christian religion you practice.

 

[commenter]

Apparently according to the Catholic Church, someone can be an “ex-Protestant” but it’s impossible to become an “ex-Catholic”. Once you’re Catholic, you’re one forever no matter what other denomination you attend or non-Christian religion you practice.

My experience is that a lot of Protestants are very interested - for and against - how the Catholic Church defines things or identifies people, sometimes with lots of emotion; but I have known or heard of very few Catholics or nonCatholics with any interest in how Protestant Churches define things. In attending college or in the Media, I have encountered countless secularists who try to refute Catholic definitions of things or people. Has anyone met any secularist who focuses on trying to refute Methodist or Presbyterian categorization of people?

 

[ComplineSanFran]

My experience is that a lot of Protestants are very interested - for and against - how the Catholic Church defines things or identifies people, sometimes with lots of emotion; but I have known or heard of very few Catholics or nonCatholics with any interest in how Protestant Churches define things. In attending college or in the Media, I have encountered countless secularists who try to refute Catholic definitions of things or people. Has anyone met any secularist who focuses on trying to refute Methodist or Presbyterian categorization of people?

There is some concern on how the LDS church counts members, in the same way that there are concerns in how the RCC counts people. You both use the same methods. For Mormons, once you are baptized, you are considered Mormon for the records. Now worthiness is another issue for them.

 

[commenter]

There is some concern on how the LDS church counts members, in the same way that there are concerns in how the RCC counts people. You both use the same methods. For Mormons, once you are baptized, you are considered Mormon for the records. Now worthiness is another issue for them.

Lots of Protestants, and non Christians, have concerns, strong interest, sometimes strong emotions, in how Catholics define lots of things.

 

[Thorolfr]

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.

It cannot be the sacrament of baptism that makes someone Catholic. The Catholic Church recognizes all Trinitarian baptisms, even those performed by Protestant churches and someone who converts to Catholicism from another Christian denomination who has had a Trinitarian baptism does not have to be re-baptized with a Catholic baptism. And yet all these other baptized people in other Christian denominations are not considered to be Catholics unless they formally go through the conversion process to Catholicism.

 

[Sy_Noe]

It cannot be the sacrament of baptism that makes someone Catholic. The Catholic Church recognizes all Trinitarian baptisms, even those performed by Protestant churches and someone who converts to Catholicism from another Christian denomination who has had a Trinitarian baptism does not have to be re-baptized with a Catholic baptism. And yet all these other baptized people in other Christian denominations are not considered to be Catholics unless they formally go through the conversion process to Catholicism.

Maybe the definition is if you were baptized in a Catholic church.

 

[Sy_Noe]

A very interesting thread with lots of interesting comments and posts. Just a few of my thoughts…

Before this thread, I hadn’t realized some of you are Catholics according to the Catholic Church.

One of my concerns about all of this is when Catholics here are quick to say such and such a church (ecclesial community to use the correct Catholic terminology I suppose) is declining in membership. I see that said frequently about TEC and other mainline churches. But they say Catholicism is growing. Of course it can be said it is “growing” under the counting system the CC uses.

And I understand CAF is concerned about confusion when it comes to posts and profile ID. It’s one of the reasons I personally use an adjective. But I find it just as confusing if there is no such thing as an ex-Catholic according to CC teaching, but still there are Catholics here identifying as Catholic who use the term ex-Catholic to describe others. I’ve seen it said on CAF that a baptized/confirmed Catholic can’t be Catholic for this reason or that reason. It might even be because of a political view or something else. I’ve even seen a CAF apologist say as much.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8674827&postcount=2

Now I know what he means of course. That you can’t be a faithful Catholic or a practicing Catholic or I suppose whatever term one wishes to apply. But I find his emphatic No, No NO! could be confusing and misleading since the Catholic Church teaches OCAC. Someone trying to learn about Catholic teaching might get the wrong idea about who the CC teaches is a Catholic.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Maybe the definition is if you were baptized in a Catholic church.

What about the Catholics like me who were born prematurely and baptized in a hospital. My twin brother, too. I guess the hospital chaplain who baptized us took our baptismal certificates to his parish. I don’t really know, but my baptism is listed on my confirmation certificate, which did take place in a church, of course.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Here’s something kind of interesting from a Wikipedia article:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_the_United_States

I’m not sure if “ex-Catholics” or non-practicing Catholics would continue to be registered in a parish and be counted in the 69 million number even if they no longer attend that parish?

The parish I was baptized in at 6 wks old, received First Communion in at age 7, and confirmed in as a 5th grader at age 10 still has my record but at some point did remove me from their parish registration roll. I saw the roll many yrs later and was not on it. But from the posts here it sounds like I still remain in the worldwide count and US count because of my record and having had already been counted among the number of Catholics. It doesn’t appear to me the number can ever drop.

 

[Sy_Noe]

What about the Catholics like me who were born prematurely and baptized in a hospital. My twin brother, too. I guess the hospital chaplain who baptized us took our baptismal certificates to his parish. I don’t really know, but my baptism is listed on my confirmation certificate, which did take place in a church, of course.

Hi Lily, was the chaplain a Catholic priest since yours and your twin brother’s certificates were taken to the chaplain’s parish? Or do you mean the chaplain took the certificates to the hospital’s territorial Catholic parish and he was non Catholic? Am I correct to assume at least one of your parents are Catholic? I’m wondering if they requested the certificates be taken to the parish? I don’t know. Or could it be then someone is OCAC if their original baptismal certificate was put on file at a Catholic parish?

 

[Sy_Noe]

I know just from my circle of friends alone that the assumption that having children baptized means that the parents will be practicing members of the Church is a false assumption.

Exactly. I know from family as well.