Officially recognised Churches in Austria

[1ke]

One question: What’s a “marriage tribunal”? I don’t know this term. (Yes, sometimes it’s a curse to be a non-native speaker in a Forum! )

The Tribunal is the church body that judges cases having to do with canon law. Specifically the marriage tribunal deals with validity of marriages and freedom of Catholics to marry. There are other types of tribunals that deal with other types of canonical trials.

So “defect” is then the English word I am looking for? Does this mean than “to officially resign” from the Church?

Yes.

Concerning marriage: Nowadays hardly none cares about the Catholic requirements to marriage.

Well, the Church certainly does.

And the CC in Austria doesn’t really care.

This is not accurate.

So if a woman’d be divorced and then remarry - she would get the Eucharist anyway.

Well, it is hard for someone on the outside to know in every situation what may be going on, based solely on appearances. It is possible that such a person has reconciled with the Church and married in the Church. It is possible that a priest may not know of their history, prior marriage, etc.

The Church very much does “care” and moreover must follow canon law faithfully.

If any individual priest does not do so, they would be guilty of a serious crime under Church law.

(There are very few “traditional” priests left here who would strictly act to the Catholic law and doctrine. Most of them are really old. - the younger generation of priests are far more liberal! Too liberal, I am tempted to say!)

You seem to be speculating, but I don’t think you are completely accurate there.

(And remember: Nearly EVERYONE here in Austria is a baptised Catholic! Does that hinder them to “violate” Catholic law? No, not at all!
So in my opinion many Catholics are uprooted here. In most Catholics here I don’t see much difference to an Atheist.

That may be true. Many people are confused. You yourself claim to be Catholic but don’t seem to know a lot about the Catholic faith. Perhaps you are turning to the Baptist faith without fully understanding what it is you are leaving behind.

(And, frankly, I think in the US this isn’t any different, is it?

It is quite different.

While there are certainly many differences, and there are many people who do not respect God or His laws, on the whole the US is very religious. IUpwards of 85% of Americans attend church.

 

[1ke]

I can’t accept the idea that Baptism as an infant makes one a Catholic regardless of the choice which the person may make later.

Well, that you cannot accept it does not change it. A person baptized into the Catholic Church is Catholic forever. They are bound by canon law. Period. It is an ontological reality. It is a character imparted to your soul. It cannot be removed.

For example, one reads that as many as 30,000,000 US Catholics have fallen away from the church, some joining Protestant churches, some becoming unchurched. Now, does the Church still count those as Catholics? I have a relative who left Catholicism to become a Protestant. Does the Church still view her as a Catholic? It simply seems so unrealistic. I can understand it happening in a country with a state church, perhaps, but not in the USA.

Yes. Those people are still Catholic forever.

Was Hitler, born in Austria, always a Catholic since he was baptized Catholic - despise his paganism, bigotry and crimes?

Certainly. He was/is Catholic by virtue of his baptism.

How about Al Capone and a host of other Mafia-style criminals who openly defied Catholic ethics?

It doesn’t change the fact of their baptism or the character it imparts.

I don’t quite understand what you are trying to drive at. We are baptized into the Body of Christ and we become children of God. We can’t ever undo that. We can *reject *it-- meanign we can choose to sin mortally and separate ourselves from God-- but that doesn’t mean it erases our baptismal covenant, or incorporation into Christ.

 

[1ke]

It makes one a Christian, not necessarily a Catholic.

A person baptized into the Catholic Church is a Catholic and bound by Catholic canon law.

A person baptized into some other ecclesial community in the Trinitarian formula is also Catholic, though imperfectly united to the Church and not under the jurisdiction of Catholic canon law.

Is there evidence that these men that you cite were confirmed in the Catholic Church?

It is baptism that makes one Catholic.

 

[Esdra]

As for Austria, I'm learning as I read. Thanks. Which leads to this question: Was Hitler, born in Austria, always a Catholic since he was baptized Catholic - despise his paganism, bigotry and crimes? How about Al Capone and a host of other Mafia-style criminals who openly defied Catholic ethics?

He was always a Catholic, yes, I think he never defiled.
With the Mafia things are a bit different: I have read somewhere that they are “very Catholic” and that the Vatican supports them (The Italian Mafia is often seen as a freedom fighter, especially for the poor; similar to Robin Hood); despite they are making so many crimes. Especially in Italy where the RCC is also the national Church (just like in Austria).

 

[rick43235]

Upwards of 85% of Americans attend church.

This seems awfully high to me. Most polls I’ve read indicate the figure is more like 45%.

gallup.com/poll/117382/Church-Going-Among-Catholics-Slides-Tie-Protestants.aspx

 

[1ke]

This seems awfully high to me. Most polls I’ve read indicate the figure is more like 45%.

gallup.com/poll/117382/Church-Going-Among-Catholics-Slides-Tie-Protestants.aspx

I believe it was a Pew Research study that I saw with this number.

 

[1ke]

He was always a Catholic, yes, I think he never defiled.

The question was not about the civil law’s position. The question was regarding the Catholic Church’s position on whether or not these individuals are considered “Catholic.”

With the Mafia things are a bit different:

No, they are not different.

I have read somewhere that they are “very Catholic” and that the Vatican supports them

OMG, you are seriously mistaken. What sort of crazy propaganda have you been reading?

They are *criminals *and the Church does not “support” criminals or the Mafia. They are called to repentance, like all other sinners.

(The Italian Mafia is often seen as a freedom fighter, especially for the poor; similar to Robin Hood); despite they are making so many crimes.

Um, no, they are not seen as freedom fighters for the poor. They are seen as CRIMINALS, which is what they are. The Vatican condemns the Mafia and their activities, and most recently Pope Benedict XVI spoke out forcefully against the Mafia in his visit to Sicily in Oct, 2010. See here for the Pope’s comments:

catholicherald.co.uk/multimedia/2010/10/05/pope-benedict-xvi-condemns-the-mafia/#

(Especially in Italy where the RCC is also the national Church (just like in Austria).

This is not correct. Revisions to the Concordat in 1984 eliminated a state church in Italy.

 

[kentuckyliz]

I live in a state where the most popular sect is the Southern Baptists. I could never be a Southern Baptist! That sect was formed explicitly because of embracing a pro-slavery platform! They only renounced their position on slavery in - get this - 1995!

I mean, seriously?!?!?!

One thing that impresses me in Austria–you have choices where to designate that 1.1%. In England, everyone paid forced tithes to the Church of England in the tax system, even if they were of another religion or no religion, until the Finance Act of 1977. Now the C of E is struggling to support itself now it’s off the government teat.

In America, you can shop around for whatever church you like. And the customer is always right.

“They did what was right in their own eyes”–in the Bible, is this a good thing or a bad thing?

 

[PRmerger]

No, this is no longer the case as of December 2009. Pope Benedict XVI issued an update to canon law.

Can you please cite your source?

 

[PRmerger]

A person baptized into some other ecclesial community in the Trinitarian formula is also Catholic, though imperfectly united to the Church and not under the jurisdiction of Catholic canon law.

Can you cite a source for this, too, please?

It is baptism that makes one Catholic.

Indeed.

And confirmation, well, confirms it, yes? It is one of the sacraments of initiation, and without it one is not fully incorporated into the Church.

 

[PRmerger]

I have read somewhere that they <the Mafia> are “very Catholic” and that the Vatican supports them

That is just ga-ga la-la nonsense.

 

[kentuckyliz]

And everything Dan Brown and Jack Chick and Lorraine Boettner ever wrote about Christ and his Church are true, too!

 

[JohnnyReb]

That is just ga-ga la-la nonsense.

Appearently you never watched the Supranos or the Godfather movies

I kid you not that was the first impression some people I know had of Catholicism. Really.

 

[1ke]

Can you please cite your source?

Oops, sorry, October 2009 not December 2009.

Here is the Motu Proprio:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_letters/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apl_20091026_codex-iuris-canonici_en.html

*Therefore I decree that in the same Code the following words are to be eliminated: “and has not left it by a formal act” (can. 1117); “and has not left it by means of a formal act” (can. 1086 § 1); “and has not left it by a formal act” (can. 1124). *

 

[1ke]

Can you cite a source for this, too, please?

The Catechism.

And confirmation, well, confirms it, yes? It is one of the sacraments of initiation, and without it one is not fully incorporated into the Church.

Confirmation strengthens our baptismal grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. One is incorporated fully into the Church via baptism.

Source: Also the Catechism.

 

[PRmerger]

Appearently you never watched the Supranos or the Godfather movies

Heh.

I kid you not that was the first impression some people I know had of Catholicism. Really.

So sad.

 

[PRmerger]

Oops, sorry, October 2009 not December 2009.

Here is the Motu Proprio:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_letters/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apl_20091026_codex-iuris-canonici_en.html

*Therefore I decree that in the same Code the following words are to be eliminated: “and has not left it by a formal act” (can. 1117); “and has not left it by means of a formal act” (can. 1086 § 1); “and has not left it by a formal act” (can. 1124). *

Thanks.

But I don’t understand. The Moto Propio from the Holy Father states that the words are to be eliminated, but when I click on can 1117, it still states,

“Can. 1117 The form established above must be observed if at least one of the parties contracting marriage was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it and has not defected** from it by a formal act**, without prejudice to the prescripts of ⇒ can. 1127, §2.”

 

[1ke]

Thanks.

But I don’t understand. The Moto Propio from the Holy Father states that the words are to be eliminated, but when I click on can 1117, it still states,

They haven’t redone the online code, and obviously it is in all the books already printed. The Motu Proprio creates an addendum.

I don’t know if they will actually remove the words in any future printings.

 

[PRmerger]

The Catechism.

Do you mean this: Those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church”?–838

Do you interpret this to mean that they are Catholic? I interpret it to mean that they are Christian, and are in imperfect communion with the CC.

Confirmation strengthens our baptismal grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. One is incorporated fully into the Church via baptism.

Source: Also the Catechism.

What I saw in the Catechism is this:

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. Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.-1272

I didn’t see the word “fully”.

In confirmation we are more* perfectly* united to His Body, the Church, yes?

 

[1ke]

Do you mean this: Those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church”?–838

Do you interpret this to mean that they are Catholic? I interpret it to mean that they are Christian, and are in imperfect communion with the CC.

There is only one Church into which you can be incorporate. N’est pas?

What I saw in the Catechism is this:

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. Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.-1272

I didn’t see the word “fully”.

You cannot be partially sealed or partially incorporated into the Body of Christ. There is before baptism and there is after baptism. That is it.

In confirmation we are more* perfectly* united to His Body, the Church, yes?

We are strengthened in the Holy Spirit. We are not made “fully” Catholic. We are already fully Catholic.