Officially recognised Churches in Austria

[Roy5]

Why do I get the feeling that some of this is game-playing? Maybe ‘word-play’?

What I mean is that iff a person is baptized Catholic as a wee baby, then when an adult chooses to become a Methodist or a Presbyterian, say, does the church really teach that that person can’t change and become a Protestant, that he (or she) will always be a Catholic regardkess? What sort of freewill is that?

And it strikes me as a contradiction. If a person denies many of the central doctrines of the Catholic Church - e. g., transubstantiation, Immaculate Conception, papal infallibility in faith and morals, etc. - how can that person logically continue to be viewed as a Catholic? Doesn’t that person automatically excommunicate himself? He (or she) had not chosen to be Catholic when he (or she) was baptized as an infant, but did make a definite choice to be a Protestant as an adult. Reason suggests that this later decision is the one that ‘reigns’.

 

[1ke]

Why do I get the feeling that some of this is game-playing? Maybe ‘word-play’?

It’s not a word-playing game. It’s an ontological reality.

What I mean is that iff a person is baptized Catholic as a wee baby, then when an adult chooses to become a Methodist or a Presbyterian, say, does the church really teach that that person can’t change and become a Protestant, that he (or she) will always be a Catholic regardkess? What sort of freewill is that?

Yes, he or she will always be a Catholic, always be subject to Canon Law, and always responsible for the choice the make to reject the sacraments an the Church.

If they defect from the Church and join another group they would be a schismatic, heretic, or apostate depending upon what doctrines they embrace. They are still a Catholic.

Certainly, such a person can choose to leave anyway. They are responsible for those choices when they reach judgment day, as we all are. So, it will depend upon their knowledge and true freedom to act as to whether or not they are culpable for these choices they’ve made.

And it strikes me as a contradiction. If a person denies many of the central doctrines of the Catholic Church - e. g., transubstantiation, Immaculate Conception, papal infallibility in faith and morals, etc. - how can that person logically continue to be viewed as a Catholic?

They are Catholic by virtue of their baptism. They are in error, and pastorally the Church’s goal is to help them reconcile and embrace the full teaching of the Church.

Doesn’t that person automatically excommunicate himself?

You misunderstand excommunication. Excommunication does not make one “not Catholic.” It does not kick someone out of the Church-- although this is a common myth. A Catholic who is excommunicated is still 100% Catholic and bound by Canon Law.

Excommunication is a canonical penalty that has to do with reception of the sacraments, holding of office, and such. The purpose is always to convict the person of the seriousness of their error and help them to repent and return to the participation in the sacraments.

He (or she) had not chosen to be Catholic when he (or she) was baptized as an infant,

Their parents made the baptismal promises on their behalf, as is their duty.

but did make a definite choice to be a Protestant as an adult. Reason suggests that this later decision is the one that ‘reigns’.

Wrong-o.

 

[PRmerger]

One is incorporated fully into the Church via baptism.

How can one be fully incorporated, yet only in imperfect communion with the Church?

 

[PRmerger]

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

This is true. Good point.

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.

Here it seems the Catechism disagrees with you.

For “by the sacrament of Confirmation, [the baptized] are **more perfectly **bound to the Church and are enriched with a special strength of the Holy Spirit. Hence they are, as true witnesses of Christ, more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith by word and deed.”–1285

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

Again, how can someone be imperfectly joined yet fully joined at the same time, as in the case with our separated Christian brethren?

 

[1ke]

How can one be fully incorporated, yet only in imperfect communion with the Church?

Because a non-Catholic is not a member of the visible Church. They can become fully incorporate by making their profession of faith in the Catholic Church.

They are Christian by virtue of their baptism. They remain outside the bonds of the visible Church as it pertains to canon law, eligiblity to receive the sacraments, etc.

 

[1ke]

For “by the sacrament of Confirmation, [the baptized] are **more perfectly **bound to the Church and are enriched with a special strength of the Holy Spirit. Hence they are, as true witnesses of Christ, more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith by word and deed.”–1285

Not more fully, more perfectly. Perfection lies in the order of grace. Such as we are to strive to be perfectly holy, increase in grace and holiness, not Catholicness. Someone can’t get any more Catholic by receiving additional sacraments after Baptism. They can become more perfect through grace.

Again, how can someone be imperfectly joined yet fully joined at the same time, as in the case with our separated Christian brethren?

A non-Catholic has the same seal by virtue of their baptism. They are not visibly united with the Church and can become so by a profession of faith. A Catholic’s baptism does both at the same time because the parents make the profession of faith. Someone baptized outside the Catholic Church professes their desire to submit to the visible authority of the Church and therefore become subject to Canon Law.

They don’t become “more” Christian.

 

[PRmerger]

Because a non-Catholic is not a member of the visible Church. They can become fully incorporate by making their profession of faith in the Catholic Church.

They are Christian by virtue of their baptism. They remain outside the bonds of the visible Church as it pertains to canon law, eligiblity to receive the sacraments, etc.

I think that’s exactly what I stated originally.

 

[1ke]

I think that’s exactly what I stated originally.

From the Church’s perspective Catholic and Christian are interchangeable. They are one reality.

Ok, look, let me ask you this question:

John is 6 years old and was baptized in the Catholic Church. Is he Catholic or isn’t he? Or, does something additional have to happen before he is Catholic? If yes, what is that something?

 

[PRmerger]

From the Church’s perspective Catholic and Christian are interchangeable. They are one reality.

Ok, look, let me ask you this question:

John is 6 years old and was baptized in the Catholic Church. Is he Catholic or isn’t he? Or, does something additional have to happen before he is Catholic? If yes, what is that something?

Indeed, he is fully Catholic.

At his confirmation, this is, well, confirmed, and more perfectly bound to the Church.

But a 6 year old John who is baptized into the Methodist Church is united to the Catholic Church to the degree that he is Christian. But I just can’t say that he is *Catholic. *

I don’t know. I am willing to be convinced otherwise.

 

[1ke]

At his confirmation, this is, well, confirmed, and more perfectly bound to the Church.

Ok, perhaps defining terms would help. What do you mean by being “more” **bound **to the Church through confirmation?

 

[PRmerger]

Ok, perhaps defining terms would help. What do you mean by being “more” **bound **to the Church through confirmation?

I don’t know exactly. I was simply quoting the Catechism. Perhaps you are, well, more confirmed in your faith. Exhibiting a more mature faith perhaps?

 

[1ke]

I don’t know exactly. I was simply quoting the Catechism. Perhaps you are, well, more confirmed in your faith. Exhibiting a more mature faith perhaps?

I would agree that confirmation strengthens the grace received at baptism.

Well, gotta go watch the national championship now… football trumps apologetics.

 

[Roy5]

When a Catholic becomes a member of, say, the Methodist Church, he (or she) promises to support the Methodist Church by his presence, gifts, talents etc?

Now, I find it rather wild that that person somehow remains a Catholic. He never took vows of loyally to the Catholic Church. True, his parents promised to bring him up in the Catholic Church but that is quite different from taking the vows which come at confirmation.

Yes, a baptized child of 6 is a Catholic. However, it is only reasonable to assume that when he joins another church he no longer is a Catholic.

A question.  When the Catholic Church provides its membership figures - about 70,000,000 in the USA - does that figure include all those 'Catholics' who have fallen away from religion or become Protestants? If so, that figure needs to be cut drastically. But I don't believe the church uses that inflated figure. It uses figures gathered from families that register in the 28,000 or so parishes. So, even the Catholic Church doesn't claim those former Catholics who no longer are part of the fold. 

It reminds me a bit of Islam. In strict Islamic countries if you convert to a different religion you can be executed. Maybe some would like to follow the urging of St. Thomas Aquinas, who said the church should not execute heretics. No, the church's duty is to turn the heretics over to the state which then had the duty to execute them.

 

[1ke]

When a Catholic becomes a member of, say, the Methodist Church, he (or she) promises to support the Methodist Church by his presence, gifts, talents etc?

Now, I find it rather wild that that person somehow remains a Catholic. He never took vows of loyally to the Catholic Church. True, his parents promised to bring him up in the Catholic Church but that is quite different from taking the vows which come at confirmation.

Yes, a baptized child of 6 is a Catholic. However, it is only reasonable to assume that when he joins another church he no longer is a Catholic.

It is an ontological reality.

If you walk away from your mother and father and stop claiming them as parents they are, in fact, still your parents. This is a biological reality no matter what you say or think. Same with baptism, it’s an ontological reality that such a person is a Catholic.

A question. When the Catholic Church provides its membership figures - about 70,000,000 in the USA - does that figure include all those ‘Catholics’ who have fallen away from religion or become Protestants? If so, that figure needs to be cut drastically. But I don’t believe the church uses that inflated figure. It uses figures gathered from families that register in the 28,000 or so parishes. So, even the Catholic Church doesn’t claim those former Catholics who no longer are part of the fold.

If you look at both Catholic teaching AND Canon Law, you will find that the Catholic Church does teach that those baptized Catholic are Catholic.

It reminds me a bit of Islam. In strict Islamic countries if you convert to a different religion you can be executed. Maybe some would like to follow the urging of St. Thomas Aquinas, who said the church should not execute heretics. No, the church’s duty is to turn the heretics over to the state which then had the duty to execute them.

Your non sequitur has nothing to do with the fact that a person is a Catholic by virtue of their baptism.

 

[PRmerger]

If you look at both Catholic teaching AND Canon Law, you will find that the Catholic Church does teach that those baptized Catholic are Catholic.

In response to Roy’s question regarding demographics, though, would you say that the 70 million quoted does NOT include every single baptized* person, but rather those who are “members” of a parish?

Edit: *baptized using water and in the Trinitarian formula.

 

[1ke]

In response to Roy’s question regarding demographics, though, would you say that the 70 million quoted does NOT include every single baptized* person, but rather those who are “members” of a parish?

Edit: *baptized using water and in the Trinitarian formula.

I don’t know the answer to this. I would suppose it depends upon how the question is phrased and the interpretation of the person answering.

In the Bishop’s report we complete annually we submit a variety of data, some of which is based on sacramental records and some on registered parishioners/envelope holders. There are questions about finances, questions about membership, and questions about sacraments. There are questions active catholics and lapsed catholics. So, again, the Church considers all the baptized as Catholics.

What those various statistics you see in newspapers or TV are based on, I couldn’t tell you. The US reports numbers based on self-identification on the Census.

 

[rick43235]

Well, gotta go watch the national championship now… football trumps apologetics.

Whoa! My respect for you just took a quantum leap.!!!

 

[Roy5]

The US Census does not inquire as to the religion self-identification of Americans. As far as I know the figures are provided by the various faith communities. A few representative surveys have been taken by national polling groups such as Gallup and Barna, etc.

Protestants generally do not include children and those who do not officially join the church, even though they may have been baptized Methodist, Presbyterian, etc. Episcopalians might include children in their figures, and perhaps Lutherans, too. I’m not sure.

That leads to some interesting figures. For example, “Jeopardy” recently had a question re the third largest denomination in America with 8,000,000 members. Correct answer: Methodist. However, roughly 20,000,000 Americans self-identify as Methodists. Why the discrepancy? (1) Because it is the United Methodist Church that has 8 million members, but there are several other equally-Methodist denominations (AME, AMEZ, CME, etc) that are not in that 8 million figures. (2) Methodists do not include in their figures children who have not officially joined the church through confirmation - and also exclude regular attendees who have not become members. .

Similar re Baptists. Estimates are that there may be about 50 million Baptists in the USA. Of these 14,000,000 are members of churches belonging to the Southern Baptist Convention. But that doesn't begin to include as many as 15 million Black Baptists plus all sorts of other Baptist groups and independent churches that are Baptist.

If 30 million US Catholics have left the US church, and the church includes these in its figures - a major misrepesentation. But I'm quite sure that the figure of 70 million is about right, that parishes report numbers on their rolls and not include those who are now unchurched or attend other churches.

My guess is that God isn't concerned one whit about all this petty tribal bickering. He looks at our heart and not at our church affiliation. As with Peter, he asks: "Do you love me?" Then, if we do love him we try our best to serve him though serving one another. The rest, the doctrinal details, are of minor importance. "Now there abide, faith, hope and love, and the greatest of these is love." There you have it. 

 Let us strive to make religion a bridge rather than a barrier. God bless people of every creed, color, culture and country.

 

[Esdra]

The US Census does not inquire as to the religion self-identification of Americans. As far as I know the figures are provided by the various faith communities. A few representative surveys have been taken by national polling groups such as Gallup and Barna, etc.

Protestants generally do not include children and those who do not officially join the church, even though they may have been baptized Methodist, Presbyterian, etc. Episcopalians might include children in their figures, and perhaps Lutherans, too. I’m not sure.

That leads to some interesting figures. For example, “Jeopardy” recently had a question re the third largest denomination in America with 8,000,000 members. Correct answer: Methodist. However, roughly 20,000,000 Americans self-identify as Methodists. Why the discrepancy? (1) Because it is the United Methodist Church that has 8 million members, but there are several other equally-Methodist denominations (AME, AMEZ, CME, etc) that are not in that 8 million figures. (2) Methodists do not include in their figures children who have not officially joined the church through confirmation - and also exclude regular attendees who have not become members. .

Similar re Baptists. Estimates are that there may be about 50 million Baptists in the USA. Of these 14,000,000 are members of churches belonging to the Southern Baptist Convention. But that doesn't begin to include as many as 15 million Black Baptists plus all sorts of other Baptist groups and independent churches that are Baptist.

If 30 million US Catholics have left the US church, and the church includes these in its figures - a major misrepesentation. But I'm quite sure that the figure of 70 million is about right, that parishes report numbers on their rolls and not include those who are now unchurched or attend other churches.

** My guess is that God isn’t concerned one whit about all this petty tribal bickering. He looks at our heart and not at our church affiliation. As with Peter, he asks: “Do you love me?” Then, if we do love him we try our best to serve him though serving one another. The rest, the doctrinal details, are of minor importance. “Now there abide, faith, hope and love, and the greatest of these is love.” There you have it.

 Let us strive to make religion a bridge rather than a barrier.** God bless people of every creed, color, culture and country.

Hi,

thank you. That’s pretty interesting!
Actually, I was also extremely astonished when I first heard that the biggest denomination in the US would be the Catholics.
Man, you are so speaking out of my heart in your text marked bold by me!
Thank you, you made my day!

 

[1ke]

The US Census does not inquire as to the religion self-identification of Americans. As far as I know the figures are provided by the various faith communities. A few representative surveys have been taken by national polling groups such as Gallup and Barna, etc.

The census bureau gets data in a number of ways, this one from a self-identification survey:

census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0075.pdf

However, that is not really relevant to the ontological reality of baptism.

My guess is that God isn’t concerned one whit about all this petty tribal bickering. He looks at our heart and not at our church affiliation. As with Peter, he asks: “Do you love me?” Then, if we do love him we try our best to serve him though serving one another. The rest, the doctrinal details, are of minor importance. “Now there abide, faith, hope and love, and the greatest of these is love.” There you have it.

Actually, I think many people are going to find-- on judgment day-- that God is concerned with a good number of things that people tend to rationalize as unimportant.