No catholic anymore

[GaryTaylor]

However, I would use caution. Sometimes a person appears to ‘disappear’ from the parish when in fact they are busy people who attend Mass at other parishes. So I wouldn’t just call someone non-practicing because I don’t see them at my parish anymore.

Yes this is pretty common. The where have you been look?

God Bless, Gary

 

[nickybr38]

Yes this is pretty common. The where have you been look?

God Bless, Gary

There is a couple at our parish who just joined last year. Others have been making comments behind their back about how they’re not at Mass every Sunday but I happen to know this couple and I know they travel. They’re not at our parish every weekend but that doesn’t mean they’re not in Mass! I too have been doing some traveling (since it’s summer) so I only attend Mass once or twice a month at my current parish. I greatly suspect whispers have started behind my back too.

I blame this on small towns. When a parish is small enough you can tell who is coming there’s a great potential for people to start making judgments (which are often incorrect).

Of course this may not be the OP’s case. They might have another reason for presuming a Catholic is non-practicing.

 

[CMatt25]

And what benefit would it have been to me, CM?

Will calling myself “Catholic” do me much good down there in the mire?

If a person feels “pushed away” then it is because their soul is already perishing.

A faithful Catholic will always be stench in the nostrils of one who is not.

And such a one can call himself “catholic” while he is being spit out!

I think what Paul says about Jews can be as well said for Catholics.

Rom 2:25-3:1

It might read like this:

25 Catholic baptism is indeed is of value if you obey the law; but if you break the law, your baptism becomes “better for him had he never been born” … 28 For he is not a real Catholic who is one outwardly, nor is true Catholic Baptism something external and physical. 29 He is a Baptized Catholic who is one inwardly, and real baptism is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God.

Guan, what benefit would yet to have been determined.

No Guan if you reread what I said, I said those who proclaim to be more faithful and tell other Catholics they are not Catholics, can have the effect of FURTHER pushing them away.

Guan I have no idea why you judge a faithful Catholic as always stench to the less faithful. That you would do so Guan saddens me. :sad_yes: But it also makes me a bit that you think you know this to be the case always.

Nor how you Guanophore can determine another’s heart for Jesus and know who will be spit out.

But Guan, I’ll assume though you weren’t trying to rewrite Scripture there when you spoke of what you think it might read like. Peace.

 

[CMatt25]

I’ve been part of both kinds. Small parishes have their advantages but you do point out a disadvantage which a large one, where one can blend in more, does not have. It’s a bit harder to judge when there are many Masses held over a weekend.

 

[rick43235]

In the eyes of the Church, if they were baptized Catholic, then they are held Catholic. Out of respect, you should refer to their beliefs as whatever they proclaim them to be.

This!

 

[Hesychios]

你中人馬?

我不是中国人

我是美国人

Back on topic. If I understand correctly from another thread on CAF, one is always Catholic. Once you are baptized Catholic that’s it. Personally I would call someone who took the initiation sacraments and did not return a non-practicing Catholic.

I think the original poster was just venting.

But you are correct from the perspective of the Catholic church, I was responding from what I imagined would be the perspective of the subject.

However, I would use caution. Sometimes a person appears to ‘disappear’ from the parish when in fact they are busy people who attend Mass at other parishes. So I wouldn’t just call someone non-practicing because I don’t see them at my parish anymore.

Perhaps, but I still think the OP was venting.

There are certainly those who will say “I used to be Catholic” and were not actually raised in a way that they knew the faith or understood it, technically then they remain Catholics according to the way the Roman Catholic church views it.

If one never leaves the Catholic church, then Father Martin Luther would still be a Catholic.

 

[guanophore]

Guan, what benefit would yet to have been determined.  :shrug:

This is not true, CM. The Holy Scriptures are clear about the consequences to those who reject the Truth.

Heb 6:3-8
4 For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. 7 For land which has drunk the rain that often falls upon it, and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. 8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.

Now I know it is not your position that it is really possible for us to be enlightened by the Truth, and that you believe we cannot know the Truth till Jesus comes again, but the Church teaches differently.

No Guan if you reread what I said, I said those who proclaim to be more faithful and tell other Catholics they are not Catholics, can have the effect of FURTHER pushing them away.

I am sure that there are people that will leave Christ because they don’t like how Judas behaved. I used to be one of them. One of the reasons I left the Catholic Church was because I objected to the way others’ behaved. But, as I said, the problem was with me as much as it was them.

Guan I have no idea why you judge a faithful Catholic as always stench to the less faithful.

I did no such thing, CM. I noted that there are two ways that people respond to Truth, one to find it a sweet fragrance of life, and the other, the odor of death.

I don’ tknow what you mean by your categories of 'faithful" and “less faithful” but they are your categories, not mine. I never used them.

 That you would do so Guan saddens me.  :sad_yes:  But it also makes me a bit :mad: that you think you know this to be the case always.

If a person is willing to walk away from Christ because they don’t like the behavior of Judas, they are in trouble. They have their priorities in the wrong place. They are more concerned by social appearances and feelings of acceptance than they are the Truth.

Nor how you Guanophore can determine another’s heart for Jesus and know who will be spit out.

I think if you go back an read the post, it will be clear to you that I was talking about my own faith experience.

That being said, I don’t think my experience is that uncommon.

But Guan, I’ll assume though you weren’t trying to rewrite Scripture there when you spoke of what you think it might read like. Peace.

No, it is just a technique my beloved Methodist Pastor taught me as away of praying and applying the Scripture.

 

[guanophore]

If one never leaves the Catholic church, then Father Martin Luther would still be a Catholic.

Hitler too.

I guess I did not think of the modifyer “anathemetized” Catholic.

 

[excubitor]

What is the correct way to call people who took the initiation sacraments and never again go to church or pray. They use to call themselves catholic but I think is a bad example and they don’t represent us.

They should be called what they are. Apostates.
Apostates and their children should not have any access to the sacraments. The only sacrament they should have access to is the Sacrament of Penance. They should also perform penance similar to what the early church had to endure. Periods of years which they had to spend in public acts of repentance and mourning before they could be readmitted to the sacraments.

In the early church catholics apostasised in order to avoid persecution and martyrdom. After the persecution ended they wanted to be readmitted into the church. This caused a storm of protest among the faithful catholics, many of whom wanted these apostates to never be readmitted again into the church. Some may say that this is too harsh until we read

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

In any event the church leaders allowed these apostates back into the chuch after years of strict, laborious and very public performances of acts of reparation, repentance, humility. This included public confessions to the confessors, who were Holy Catholics who had survived the persecutions.

Today however the modern Catholic commits apostasy like he eats breakfast. He says confession with no compunction whatsoever so that he can get his kid christened. He knows and his priest knows that he will not set foot in the door again until the next wedding/christening/funeral. These apostates are worse than the apostates of ancient times. Their sin is utterly wilfull. You can kind of understand why someone would stop going to church in order to save their physical life, but these modern apostates stop going to the church so that they can sleep in, go shopping, go to the game, go to the pub etc.

They bring the church into disrepute and scandalise the body of Christ. The world sees their hollow observance of their religion when they should see the active and enduring living out of the Catholic faith in their lives.

The church has been too soft for too long. We need tough bishops, popes and priests who are prepared to rule the church with authority for the good of all.

 

[Tyuiop411]

Assuming that they haven’t joined another church (Orthodox, Lutheran, Baptist, etc.) and haven’t renounced belief in God then I think the proper way to refer to them is lapsed Catholics. At least thats how I’ve always referred to them. Or they could possibly be called cultural Catholics if they still maintain some kind of link to the Church by having their children baptized and attending Mass on Easter and Christmas.

 

[RyanBlack]

Apostates and their children should not have any access to the sacraments. The only sacrament they should have access to is the Sacrament of Penance.

I can understand denying apostates access to the sacraments, until they have been reconciled to the Church through confession. However, I don’t understand denying access to the sacraments to their children, unless you are talking about children who have not yet been baptized, and there is no reasonable hope that they will be raised in the faith. If you’re dealing a child who has already been baptized and who has a parent who has abandoned the faith, I see no reason for withholding the sacraments from that child, assuming the child desires for himself to continue in the Catholic faith.

 

[CMatt25]

This is not true, CM. The Holy Scriptures are clear about the consequences to those who reject the Truth.

I did no such thing, CM. I noted that there are two ways that people respond to Truth, one to find it a sweet fragrance of life, and the other, the odor of death.

I don’ tknow what you mean by your categories of 'faithful" and “less faithful” but they are your categories, not mine. I never used them.

Guan, what is true is I will not think to know to judge what would have been in your heart nor what consequences, if any, there would have been for you, had you at the time met He Whom called Himself the Truth (Jn 14:6). This is why I said what benefit for you, would have been TBA.

And Guan in your own words on this thread, “A faithful Catholic will always be stench in the nostrils of one who is not.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7971155&postcount=18

In any case, peace be with you my friend in Christ.

 

[excubitor]

I can understand denying apostates access to the sacraments, until they have been reconciled to the Church through confession. However, I don’t understand denying access to the sacraments to their children, unless you are talking about children who have not yet been baptized, and there is no reasonable hope that they will be raised in the faith. If you’re dealing a child who has already been baptized and who has a parent who has abandoned the faith, I see no reason for withholding the sacraments from that child, assuming the child desires for himself to continue in the Catholic faith.

That’s where the godparent comes in. Generally speaking The sacraments of baptism and confirmation are dependent on the faith of the parents. This is what we always argue in justifying infant baptism. What many forget is that baptism is an oath and a vow to remain steadfast and perservering in the faith, to renounce all sin and to server and obey the church, to be in communion of belief with the Pope. In the case of Infant baptism the Sacrament is also an oath by the sponsors to raise the child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. So a natural parent who is not in the position to properly teach and nurture the child in the faith must agree to grant access to the child so that the sponsor can teach and lead the child in the faith.

So of course the salvation of a child does not utterly depend on the parents but moreso upon the godparents, but the parents must have sufficient faith to continually grant access to the child by the godparents. Of course I would not deny the sacraments to a child who is baptised and has a fallen away parent and who has a suitable godparent.

However what I detest is these christenings and confirmations which are done merely as a social formality, in which they mean no sacred oath or vow, where the sponsors are just going through the motions and mumbling their responses with no conviction. This is not a Grace for the poor child, but is a recipe for mortal disaster. I also particularly detest these parades of kids put together by the local catholic school, where there are more cameras and debutante dresses than there are serious affirmations of the faith.

A priest should be able to discern the difference between a child and family which are just apostates going through the motions of society compared to those who are genuinely involved and committed with the faith. In a great too many cases the godparents are chosen by the parents and are every bit as apostate as the parents themselves and yet these ceremonies go ahead, bringing disrespect upon a holy sacrament.

Read all of Trent on this subject catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/catechism/Holy7Sacraments-Baptism.shtml

The Sponsors at Baptism
Besides the ministers who, as just explained, confer Baptism, another class of persons, according to the most ancient practice of the Church, is admitted to assist at the baptismal font. In former times these were commonly called by sacred writers receivers, sponsors or sureties, and are now called godfathers and godmothers. As this is an office pertaining almost to all the laity, pastors should explain it with care, so that the faithful may understand what is chiefly necessary for its proper performance.

Why Sponsors Are Required At Baptism
In the first instance it should be explained why at Baptism, besides those who administer the Sacrament, godparents and sponsors are also required. The propriety of the practice will at once appear to all if they recollect that Baptism is a spiritual regeneration by which we are born children of God; for of it St. Peter says: As newborn infants, desire the rational milk without guile. As, therefore, every one, after his birth, requires a nurse and instructor by whose assistance and attention he is brought up and formed to learning and useful knowledge, so those, who, by the waters of Baptism, begin to live a spiritual life should be entrusted to the fidelity and prudence of some one from whom they may imbibe the precepts of the Christian religion and may be brought up in all holiness, and thus grow gradually in Christ, until, with the Lord’s help, they at length arrive at perfect manhood.

This necessity must appear still more imperative, if we recollect that pastors, who are charged with the public care of parishes have not sufficient time to undertake the private instruction of children in the rudiments of faith.

St. Augustine also says: I most especially admonish you, men and women, who have acquired godchildren through Baptism, to consider that you stood as sureties before God, for those whom you received at the sacred font. Indeed it preeminently becomes every man, who undertakes any office, to be indefatigable in the discharge of its duties; and he who promised to be the teacher and guardian of another should never allow to be deserted him whom he once received under his care and protection as long as he knows the latter to stand in need of either.

It’s just a joke how poorly this injunction and requirement of baptism is implemented in the modern church. Nobody takes being godparent seriously and yet it is a commanded requirement of baptism.

Duties of Sponsors
Speaking of this same duty of sponsors, St. Augustine sums up in a few words the lessons of instruction which they are bound to impart to their spiritual children. They ought, he says, to admonish them to observe chastity, love justice, cling to charity; and above all they should teach them the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the rudiments of the Christian religion.

Who May Not Be Sponsors
It is easy, therefore, to decide who are inadmissible to this holy guardianship, that is, those who are unwilling to discharge its duties with fidelity, or who cannot do so with care and accuracy.

 

[guanophore]

And Guan in your own words on this thread, “A faithful Catholic will always be stench in the nostrils of one who is not.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7971155&postcount=18

In that case, please forgive my inadequate expressions. The Apostlesis much more comprehensive, and his words should be used:

2 Cor 2:14-17

15 For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things? 17 For we are not, like so many, peddlers of God’s word; but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ.

The Catholic Church (“we”) produces the aroma, and clearly, the Apostle does not restrict the effects of this aroma to those who claim they are Catholic, yet reject the Teachings if the Church. He applies it to “those who are perishing”, which I think applies to those who are unchurched, as well as those who reject the Teachings of the Church.

 

[Carlan]

You know many of us have children who were raised to love and serve God. They have put Him, and all they believe up on a shelf for whatever reason so to speak.
They have not stopped believing in the Apostolic Truth , not joined the Protestants or a cult.God still loves them as we do. We pray and trust God for them!
Peace, Carlan

 

[CMatt25]

You know many of us have children who were raised to love and serve God. They have put Him, and all they believe up on a shelf for whatever reason so to speak.
They have not stopped believing in the Apostolic Truth , not joined the Protestants or a cult.God still loves them as we do. We pray and trust God for them!
Peace, Carlan

Carlan, due to another discussion I was feeling a bit turned off and further away and reading this wanted me to give you a hug. So here :hug1: God bless you and peace.

 

[guanophore]

You know many of us have children who were raised to love and serve God. They have put Him, and all they believe up on a shelf for whatever reason so to speak.
They have not stopped believing in the Apostolic Truth , not joined the Protestants or a cult.God still loves them as we do. We pray and trust God for them!
Peace, Carlan

This is a good point. A lapsed (non-practicing) Catholic is not necessarily a lost Catholic.

And in all of these cases, prayer is the best response.

 

[CMatt25]

This is a good point. A lapsed (non-practicing) Catholic is not necessarily a lost Catholic.

And just to add to that point, not a one of us, except The One knows what another’s heart will be as they draw their last breath.

 

[guanophore]

And just to add to that point, not a one of us, except The One knows what another’s heart will be as they draw their last breath.

No one is talking about judging hearts, CM. The OP was asking how to “call” them.

What is the correct way to call people who took the initiation sacraments and never again go to church or pray. They use to call themselves catholic but I think is a bad example and they don’t represent us.

They don’t appear to be practicing their faith as he expects they would.

As was pointed out in the thread, not coming to church may only be because they are at another parish. Or it may be that they pray, but not when the OP is in observance. Or, maybe they no longer identify themselves as Catholics.

People who claim to be Catholic, and reject the teachings of the Church absolutely bring scandal to the Church. They do not rightly represent the faith of Christ, and in misrepresenting it, give a bad example. These are actions, behaviors. Only God knows their hearts. We judge them by their fruits, as you yourself are fond of saying.

 

[CMatt25]

No one is talking about judging hearts, CM. The OP was asking how to “call” them.

Guan, there is no question to ask as to what to call them, if as others have explained, someone follows all the teachings of the Church. The Church gives an easy answer to the question. As others have attested to, “In the eyes of the Church, if they were baptized Catholic, then they are held Catholic”. It just still amazes me that this is discussed as much as it is here by Catholics faithfully following the teachings. Peace.