I can no longer in good conscience identify as Catholic. It's been fun

[Neithan]

You’re way ahead of me. I am a dim bear when it comes to philosophy.

It’s probably my amateur explanation that makes it seem muddier than it actually is. But not everyone has a taste for those theological technicalities or personally has much use for them. Some people actually are turned away by it. Still I think it’s good they are there for those of us who need them. It’s a very “Latin” or Western way of seeing the faith, though.

For those of us who do question, at least in my own experience, it helps to appreciate the depths of the faith and its well understood limits. For others I guess it leads them away. @StudentMI stated earlier in another thread that he was “troubled” over doctrine and the Scholastic reliance on reasoning. Whereas it might look like an appreciation for the Greek emphasis on mystery, I thought it seemed more like fideism at the time. That combined with temptations to unbelief, along with whatever else is swirling around in the soul, is not conducive to a flourishing of faith.

 

[QContinuum]

Yeah that does seem strangely flippant.

This is what flummoxed me as well.

 

[phil3]

Have you read the book?

 

[Dan_Defender]

This is a forum for defending the faith, not for atheists or whoever to try to undermine or put down, however subtly, the Catholic conversions of others or the Catholic faith of others. This isn’t some kind of a nondenominational discussion forum.

I agree with this. To assume that atheists on CAF have only the purest of intentions is in my opinion, naive. Jesus said be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.

 

[hope]

The Catechism

**[1267] Baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ: "Therefore . . . we are members one of another."72 Baptism incorporates us into the Church . From the baptismal fonts is born the one People of God of the New Covenant, which transcends all the natural or human limits of nations, cultures, races, and sexes: "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body."73

1272 Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark ( character ) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation.83 Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.

1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church."81 "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."82

 

[Vouthon]

Every baptized person is a member of Christ’s Church so long as the bond of ecclesiastical union is not severed by heresy, schism or apostasy. The second places one in imperfect communion (as with our Protestant and EO brethren) while the latter means that one has no visible communion with the church and so is no longer a Christian (the permanent spiritual character of baptism notwithstanding).

 

[Montrose]

Every baptized person is a member of Christ’s Church so long as the bond of ecclesiastical union is not severed by heresy, schism or apostasy. The second places one in imperfect communion (as with our Protestant and EO brethren) while the latter means that one has no visible communion with the church and so is no longer a Christian (the permanent spiritual character of baptism notwithstanding).

Read this:

Bad Catholics Are Still Catholics | Catholic Answers Magazine

 

[Vouthon]

Read this:

St. Robert Bellarmine addresses this in my post earlier. Yes a “bad” Catholic (one lacking the theological virtues or acting against her moral teachings) remains still of the body of the church. They remain in “communion”.

This is distinct from someone who has actually gone into schism (by joining a church not in communion with the Holy See, placing them in imperfect communion) or someone who has apostasized (sundered communion altogether).

 

[Montrose]

This is distinct from someone who has actually gone into schism (by joining a church not in communion with the Holy See, placing them in imperfect communion) or someone who has apostasized (sundered communion altogether).

" By being baptized in the Church—or by being received into it after being baptized elsewhere—one becomes subject to the laws of the Church, and these obligations remain even when one betrays the Faith in fundamental ways. This even applies in cases where one has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism, which the Code defines as follows:

Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him (can. 751).

There are penalties for committing these crimes, including excommunication (can. 1364 §1). However, even excommunication does not mean that one ceases to be a member of the Church. Instead, as the Catechism explains, excommunication is “the most severe ecclesiastical penalty.” It “impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts” (CCC 1463).

This is verified by the Code ’s explanation of the effects of excommunication (can. 1331), which lists the inability to participate in the sacraments and the inability to exercise ecclesiastical offices, ministries, functions, etc. However, the canon does not list ceasing to be a Catholic or being released from the Church’s laws as a result.

A person who has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism may no longer identify himself as a Catholic, but he’s still bound by the Church’s laws—including, for example, the obligation to attend Mass every Sunday (without receiving Holy Communion, of course)."

 

[Neithan]

Of course any ecclesial obligation holds no weight in the mind of someone who has renounced the Church’s authority to bind his conscience, and the effort is moot, though it may be our obligation to inform them of such at least as we believe the duties are binding regardless.

 

[Vouthon]

A person who has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism may no longer identify himself as a Catholic,

Thank you for confirming - in bold lettering no less - in your own quotation above, that a person who has apostasized from the faith “may no longer identify” as Catholic.

This agrees with Pope Pius XII and the teaching of the church since patristic times:

"Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith , and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body…

For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy." - Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, #23, 1943.

What seems to have misled you is a failure to grasp yet another “technicality”: because the church is the universal sacrament of unity of the human race, every person is in a sense oriented to her and the baptised in particular are (from our perspective) still spiritually “subject” to her but crucially no longer “members” of her because they lack the profession of faith:

1065. Scholion. The nature of subject differs from the nature of member of the Church.

A baptized person remains always a subject of the Church, according to the edict of CIC 87, as is concluded from the doctrine of St. Thomas: “Because the baptismal character, by which one is added to the people of God, is indelible; thus the baptized always in a certain way remains of the Church; and thus the Church can always judge of him.”[[25]] Nevertheless a baptized person cannot simply be called a member of the Body of the Church who is a heretic or apostate or schismatic or excommunicate, just as has been proved in the thesis

See this too:

" Heretics, apostates, and schismatics are not members of the Church.

It is proved by a common argument. Those baptized persons who formally and manifestly have severed the social bond of faith or of government established by Christ as essential in his Church are not members in reality of the body of the visible Church. But formal and manifest heretics, apostates, or schismatics formally and manifestly have severed the social bond of faith or of government established by Christ as essential in his Church. Therefore formal and manifest heretics, apostates, and schismatics are not members in reality of the Body of the visible Church."

(Ioachim Salaverri, De Ecclesia Christi lib. III, cap. 2, a. 3. Causæ quæ baptizatum ab Ecclesiæ corpore separant. Thesis 26, nos. 1045-1067. In Sacræ Theologiæ Summa vol. I, tract. 3, pp. 872-882.)

A person who has apostasized is not a member of the church, which is why they “may no longer identify themselves as a Catholic” because they have ceased professing the faith.

 

[Vouthon]

Of course any ecclesial obligation holds no weight in the mind of someone who has renounced the Church’s authority to bind his conscience, and the effort is moot, though it may be our obligation to inform them of such at least as we believe the duties are binding regardless.

Precisely.

 

[Montrose]

Thank you for confirming - in bold lettering no less - in your own quotation above, that a person who has apostasized from the faith “ may no longer identify ” as Catholic.

You obviously just read selectively. It is clearly saying that even though a person may no longer identify themselves as Catholic they are BOUND by Church law. Church law applies only to Catholics.
It is very clear to see the Church is saying you may not think of yourself as a Catholic but we do!!

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Of course any ecclesial obligation holds no weight in the mind of someone who has renounced the Church’s authority to bind his conscience, and the effort is moot, though it may be our obligation to inform them of such at least as we believe the duties are binding regardless.

I don’t agree it’s necessarily moot. People sometimes have a tiny bit of conscience or attachment to the Church still in the back of their mind. Our reminder might have an effect. If not now, then maybe 30 years from now, or when the person is dying. It’s worth a try in any event.

 

[hope]

St. Robert Bellarmine addresses this in my post earlier. Yes a “ bad ” Catholic (one lacking the theological virtues or acting against her moral teachings) remains still of the body of the church. They remain in “communion”.

They remain a Catholic by virtue of their baptism.

 

[hope]

Every baptized person is a member of Christ’s Church

The Catholic Church

so long as the bond of ecclesiastical union is not severed by heresy, schism or apostasy.

Only means they are not in the grace of God it does not undo baptism.

The second places one in imperfect communion (as with our Protestant and EO brethren) while the latter means that one has no visible communion with the church and so is no longer a Christian (the permanent spiritual character of baptism notwithstanding).

Baptism places one the Catholic Church. You cannot undo it. You may no longer be a practicing Catholic but a Catholic you remain. You can’t undo the permanent mark of Baptism.

 

[rosejmj]

I know what the book is basically about and I’m not saying the Church is against science or hasn’t been hugely influential for the past several hundred years or even done good things. But this is only one perspective and history is largely open to interpretation and the Church has also had a lot of issues in the past several hundred years. But that’s beyond my point. I was just saying that neither philosophy or history can prove that Catholicism is true/contains the fullness of truth. Science is the closest thing one can get to proving anything is true and one can obviously not use science to prove Catholicism is true since science cannot deal with the spiritual. Therefore, one reason many will not consider themselves Christian or Catholic is because they realize there is no way to know if any religion is true/if Christianity is really from God because it is outside the realms of science.

 

[Mary888]

Maybe your grip was too tight, doing all that research about.doctrines. We aren’t all ready to learn doctrine and resist temptations so we can keep our faith.
If I were you I would enjoy my life practice my faith in what I am required to do and stay away from the deep theological questions. Since you say you no longer feel much this shouldn’t be hard. And see in a while if you still feel that strongly the need you now describe to identify as a Catholic and to understand 2000 year old tradition completely.
You don’t have to be ready to be a monk in order to be Catholic…

 

[PatienceAndHumility]

This does surprise me @StudentMI but it also doesn’t. We have had a few back and forths here on CAF.

If I can attempt to speak to your heart, I would invite you to free yourself from the shackles you might have unwittingly imposed on your faith. Discover it’s heart again. It begins with the giving of self. Peace

 

[CoffeeCatholic]

… I guess I’m just not sure why you felt the need to post this here. The flippant “it’s been fun” and “see ya” at the end being so, hmm… immature and kind of seems like you were never really serious about Catholicism in the first place. Or just vying for attention. I don’t know. But the whole post really didn’t even need to be made at all - especially if you ‘doubt’ you’ll even return to post. Why bother to post at all? LOL.