Excommunication from the Catholic Church

MetalDog

Right, was on Countmeout.ie recently, and the RCC has suspended the defection process due to Canon Law bulls hit.

How then do you go about getting excommunicated from the RCC as has anyone done it?

I don't want to get a criminal record for, say, burning down a church (mind you its awfully tempting sometimes, almost every time you open a newpaper and see more abuse revelations), and please no smart answers of the "Kicking Bishop Brennan up the arse" variety.

Thanks

Sarky

I suspect assaulting a bishop remains the least illegal method, alas.

seamus

Desecrate the eucharist. Go to a local mass, take a host when offered, bring it home and video yourself burning it.

Then send the video to your bishop.

Worth noting that excommunication doesn't actually "kick you out" of the Catholic Church, simply prevents you from being officially permitted to get the eucharist and the sacraments. They will still count you as Catholic, just banned from doing Catholic-y things.

magicbastarder

ordain a woman as a priest. seems to be the easiest way for priests to be excommunicated.

conorod

If you are an apostate from the faith then you are already excommunicated, Latae sententiae (automatically) - same way as you would be by any of the other methods listed above. Got confirmation of this from my diocese a few months ago. So just not believing in God will do it.

Penn

conorod wrote: »

If you are an apostate from the faith then you are already excommunicated, Latae sententiae (automatically) - same way as you would be by any of the other methods listed above. Got confirmation of this from my diocese a few months ago. So just not believing in God will do it.

Not any more. Even not believing in God doesn't mean that, in their records, you don't believe in God.

The Catholic Church continues to block efforts by those who wish to formally renounce their membership of the faith. The Countmeout.ie organisation recently assisted 16 people in their effort to have an "Act of Apostasy" recognised as a formal declaration of their wish to leave the church. However, the Archdiocese of Dublin has decided it cannot accept these declarations meaning those who wish to leave the church continue to be denied this option.

The website Countmeout.ie made headlines in 2009 when it offered a simple 3-Step process for this wishing to formally leave the Catholic Church. The process involved sending a "Declaration of Defection" to one's local diocese, after which an annotation was made to the baptismal register. In 2010, however, the church made changes to Canon Law which removed the option to formally defect. Count Me Out has been exploring alternative methods of formally renouncing one's membership since the changes to Canon Law and recently trialled a new declaration known as an "Act of Apostasy".

The Act of Apostasy allows someone to declare themselves an apostate to the faith, i.e. one who rejects Christian teachings. Canon Law stipulates that an apostate to the faith automatically incurs a latae senteniae excommunication. In response to the 16 Acts of Apostasy which were sent to the Archdiocese of Dublin in June 2011, a spokesperson stated that they would not be accepted. Furthermore, it was stated that excommunication does not mean that somebody is no longer a member of the church.

Count Me Out has concerns about the latest developments. It appears that there is currently no possibility of formally ceasing one's membership of the Catholic Church. This has implications for one's freedom of religion and association. Countmeout.ie has experienced a ten-fold increase in traffic to the site in the aftermath of the Cloyne Report. This demonstrates the desire of many lapsed Catholics to leave the church and we are now calling on the church to make this a possibility.

Count Me Out, 20/07/2011

mikhail

Excommunication is more like shunning than kicking you out, so it doesn't really serve the purpose you're looking for. Don't worry about formal defection: simply live your life without them.

Dades

mikhail wrote: »

Don't worry about formal defection: simply live your life without them.

Next question: how to live your life without the catholic church interfering? :pac:

mikhail

Dades wrote: »

Next question: how to live your life without the catholic church interfering? :pac:

Move to a country where they're a minority religion.

What's next, Dades, world peace?

Dades

First things first - I have to sort out my Fantasy Football team before tomorrow! :pac:

MetalDog

Wow, the RCC are really going for the Hotel California scenario: "You can checkout any time you like/But you can never leave!"
It would be nice to formally give them the finger, mind you.

Mistress 69

Take a walk on the wild side.. get formally baptized as a prod, take the cert down to your local padre... bet that would do it! Then all you have to worry about is de proddying yourself. You know kick the can down the road a bit!

MetalDog

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Take a walk on the wild side.. get formally baptized as a prod, take the cert down to your local padre... bet that would do it! Then all you have to worry about is de proddying yourself. You know kick the can down the road a bit!

hmmm . . . interesting, and somehow I'd say de-prodding yourself is easier, although open to correction on that from any ex-CoI people on here.

gman2k

I heard Paolo Tuillio on the radio recently and he said he was excommed twice - once for buying a copy of a non authorised bible, and secondly for going to Trinity without his bishops permission!

goose2005

In Roman Catholic canon law, excommunication is a censure and thus a "medicinal penalty" intended to invite the person to change behaviour or attitude, to repent and return to full communion. It is not an "expiatory penalty", designed to make satisfaction for the wrong done, still less a merely "vindictive penalty", designed solely to punish.

Excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics and remain bound by obligations such as attending Mass, even though they are barred from receiving the Eucharist and from taking an active part in the liturgy (reading, bringing the offerings, etc.). However, their communion with the Church is considered gravely impaired. In spite of that, they are urged to retain a relationship with the Church, as the goal is to encourage them to repent and return to active participation in its life.

Excommunicated persons are barred from participating in the liturgy in a ministerial capacity (for instance, as a reader if a lay person, or as a deacon or priest if a clergyman) and from receiving the Eucharist or the other Sacraments, but are not barred from attending these (for instance, an excommunicated person may not receive the Eucharist, but is not barred from attending Mass). They are also forbidden to exercise any ecclesiastical office or the like. If the excommunication has been imposed or declared, stricter effects follow, such as the obligation on others to prevent the excommunicated person from acting in a ministerial capacity in the liturgy or, if this proves impossible, to suspend the liturgical service, and the invalidity of acts of ecclesiastical governance by the excommunicated person.

So "excommunication" is not expulsion, it means being put on probation.

Orion

goose2005 wrote: »

So "excommunication" is not expulsion, it means being put on probation.

It means you've been a naughty, naughty boy. /lifeofbrian

The problem is not the rcc counting you as a member - it's the people who don't practice ticking the rcc box in the census because "ah sure that's what I was brought up as" or "mammy said I had to". AKA Sheep.

MetalDog

Sorry to drag this one up from the depths, but I was again in touch with a diocesan secretary with regard to excommunication.
He wrote back as follows:

Dear Dog,

Thank you for your email.

There is no formal process for leaving the Catholic Church. One simply stops attending religious services. However, it would be advisable for you to speak to your family and friends about your decision as your decision excludes you from officially participating in the following; Baptisms, Confirmations, Religious weddings and funeral rights. Also your completion of future census forms would need to reflect your religious status.

Yours faithfully,
Fr [Redacted]
Diocesan Secretary

I replied:

Dear Fr [Redacted],

Thank you for your reply.
Can I please have a written acknowledgement of my Apostasy and its resulting excommunication for my own personal records. My home address is at the bottom of my previous email.

Thank you,

So, anyone ever got a written acknowledgement of apostasy? I know damn well its not the same as a Defection because the bastards moved the goalposts on that one, but still.

Brian Shanahan

MetalDog wrote: »

Right, was on Countmeout.ie recently, and the RCC has suspended the defection process due to Canon Law bulls hit.

How then do you go about getting excommunicated from the RCC as has anyone done it?

I don't want to get a criminal record for, say, burning down a church (mind you its awfully tempting sometimes, almost every time you open a newpaper and see more abuse revelations), and please no smart answers of the "Kicking Bishop Brennan up the arse" variety.

Thanks

Go into a church, and every time the priest/bishop gets up to say something disruprt him (I'd love to hear a few "whore of Babylon"'s myself). It shouldn't take that long before someone does something about you.

NS77

You could become involved in the Mafia.. seems to be a pathway to excommunication

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/22/pope-francis-excommunicates-mafia

Waitsian

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Take a walk on the wild side.. get formally baptized as a prod, take the cert down to your local padre... bet that would do it! Then all you have to worry about is de proddying yourself. You know kick the can down the road a bit!

As a 12 year old First year, I, and my classmates, were told by a Christian Brother in Newry CBS, that Catholics who joined a Protestant church were called perverts. Not converts, perverts! I kid you not.

Hotblack Desiato

The unbrotherly unchristians certainly were experts in that field, however.

magicbastarder

i still don't get the interest in 'leaving' the church, or being excommunicated. how can I leave something I am not a member of?

insisting on following their internal processes to achieve a null event only serves to grant legitimacy to those very processes, and in that sense, it's a self-defeating goal.

Draco

magicbastarder wrote: »

how can I leave something I am not a member of?

If you were baptised you are a member, just non-practising one.

Cabaal

magicbastarder wrote: »

i still don't get the interest in 'leaving' the church, or being excommunicated. how can I leave something I am not a member of?

If a person was baptised then they are considered a member of the RCC, doesn't matter if they go to mass or not.

Some people are unhappy about this membership and rightly so,

Previously people were able to use the loophole advertised by countmeout.ie, but since then the Vatican have closed this loophole in canon law....effectively blocking people from closing their membership.

membership is power to the church so anything to bring down those numbers is a good thing,

magicbastarder

Draco wrote: »

If you were baptised you are a member, just non-practising one.

possibly - but if so, by their rules. I couldn't give a flying **** about their rules, if I don't consider myself a member, it matters not what they think.

magicbastarder

Cabaal wrote: »

membership is power to the church so anything to bring down those numbers is a good thing,

census returns are power to the church. this is the real issue, not baptismal rolls.

Cabaal

magicbastarder wrote: »

census returns are power to the church. this is the real issue, not baptismal rolls.

true,
but bottom line is if people want to leave the rcc after being forced into it as a child then its an important issue for them.

kylith

magicbastarder wrote: »

possibly - but if so, by their rules. I couldn't give a flying **** about their rules, if I don't consider myself a member, it matters not what they think.

So, if what the church thinks doesn't bother you, why does what people who want to defect from it think bother you?

If I want to have a letter from the scouts saying that I'm not a member then what harm is it to you? What harm does someone wanting a letter from a bishop saying they're not considered a member of the RCC do to you?

magicbastarder

it's no real harm to me, but that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on it; and as I mentioned, the whole debate is a distraction.

Cabaal

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's no real harm to me, but that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on it; and as I mentioned, the whole debate is a distraction.

But thing is if people are interesting in trying to get the rcc to officially recognize that they've left the church then its a pretty good bet to say that they've not ticked catholic on the census.

So what harm does it do?

shruikan2553

If it didn't matter and was no big deal then why won't they let people leave?

nozzferrahhtoo

seamus wrote: »

Desecrate the eucharist. Go to a local mass, take a host when offered, bring it home and video yourself burning it.

I have possessed and continue to possess a large number of these which I have experimented on in a large variety of ways. I documented this in text and pictures and I have not been excommunicated yet. As part of my research involved interviews with the people who work with these products... there is no small number of people who know what I have, what I have been doing with them, and who and where I am.

None of them seem all that moved to excommunicate me. Or even all that bothered at all really. So I am afraid I can not join you in recommending "host desecration" as a viable path for the OP.

magicbastarder wrote: »

possibly - but if so, by their rules. I couldn't give a flying **** about their rules, if I don't consider myself a member, it matters not what they think.

True to a point. But I think the motivation people have for wanting to be officially removed lies elsewhere. These church leaders do petition our government all the time in attempts to affect changes in our society. And when doing so they point to the size of their members list. They do not go in saying "I am Fr. Friday and here is my opinion. They go in purporting to be Fr. Friday representing X number of people.

And people like myself simply are uncomfortable with the thought our name is being used to beef the representation power of people who presume to speak for us.... but do anything but. Quite the opposite often as the things these old men in dresses go in espousing are often positively abhorrent to me.

People like the OP simply do not want the church pretending to speak for them or represent them when they do no such thing.

As you say though we could do with working on the census figures too. But I see that as something to be done in parallel to the topic of this thread.... not in place of it. I wish to do both.

And as the post above mine points out.... if the census really was the end point of this and not their internal member list.... then why are they so keen to change canon law to stem the flood of people out of that list?

robindch

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

None of them seem all that moved to excommunicate me.

That's because you've been excommunicated Latae sententiae, ie, by virtue of the act of "desecration" alone, and not by a concrete act of the church.

BTW, you're following in the footsteps of PZ Myers and the Great Crackergate Controversy of 2008:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/24/the-great-desecration/

I Heart Internet

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I have possessed and continue to possess a large number of these which I have experimented on in a large variety of ways. I documented this in text and pictures and I have not been excommunicated yet. As part of my research involved interviews with the people who work with these products... there is no small number of people who know what I have, what I have been doing with them, and who and where I am.

What are you hoping to achieve by "experimenting" on these hosts?

Is your purpose to simple insult or provoke a response from people?

Your actions seem quite self-centred and needlessly disrespectful to me.

Cabaal

I Heart Internet wrote: »

What are you hoping to achieve by "experimenting" on these hosts?

Have you not read the thread?
he's trying to get thrown out of the rcc

I Heart Internet

Cabaal wrote: »

Have you not read the thread?
he's trying to get thrown out of the rcc

He doesn't make it clear at all that this is the purpose of his actions. He just reports that he hasn't been excommunicated for it, as if this is just incidental.

This "experimentation" is akin to burning books, places of worship, etc of people you don't agree with. It's a very disrespectful thing to do to people who hold a certain belief that you don't happen to share.

Cabaal

I Heart Internet wrote: »

He doesn't make it clear at all that this is the purpose of his actions. He just reports that he hasn't been excommunicated for it.

He explains he burnt the item and was not thrown out, as such they wouldn't recommend the action to others as it;ll be fruitless.

Given the topic of the thread and the manner in which they are responding I think its safer to assume the burning was intended to get a reaction to get thrown out.,...rather then burning stuff for the laugh

None of them seem all that moved to excommunicate me. Or even all that bothered at all really. So I am afraid I can not join you in recommending "host desecration" as a viable path for the OP.

I Heart Internet

Cabaal wrote: »

He explains he burnt the item and was not thrown out, as such they wouldn't recommend the action to others as it;ll be fruitless.

Given the topic of the thread and the manner in which they are responding I think its safer to assume the burning was intended to get a reaction to get thrown out.,...rather then burning stuff for the laugh

He doesn't say anything about burning the item. Where did you hear he burnt things?

I would suggest anyone in the business of destroying items which other people hold as sacred would certainly do it just for kicks alright. Very low thing to do either way.

Cabaal

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I would suggest anyone in the business of destroying items....would certainly do it just for kicks alright.

In your personal view,
If somebody wants to try and get kicked out of an organization religion and is given no choice by said religion if it works then its a viable option open to somebody.

If the rcc would rather something like this would not happen then all they have to do is allow people to formally leave the faith.....you know, the way they allowed before.

I Heart Internet

Cabaal wrote: »

In your personal view,
If somebody wants to try and get kicked out of an organization religion and is given no choice by said religion if it works then its a viable option open to somebody.

If the rcc would rather something like this would not happen then all they have to do is allow people to formally leave the faith.....you know, the way they allowed before.

So it's the RCC's fault that nozzferrahhtoo has chosen to abuse items believed sacred by people.

I see.

Cabaal

I Heart Internet wrote: »

So it's the RCC's fault that nozzferrahhtoo has chosen to abuse items believed sacred by people.

If he/she did it as a means to try and get kicked out of the RCC after the RCC closed the ability to formally leave.

Then yes, its very much the RCC fault.

You seem awful concerned about people being offended...though you seem selective when it comes to this concern, makes me wounder why you don't complain about http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057062433

Most of the posts in that thread would be considered seriously offensive to somebody who is very devout.

This "experimentation" is akin to burning books, places of worship, etc of people you don't agree with.

Its nothing of the sort,
Destruction of a building is completely different to a bit of bread, please don't make such silly comparisons
:rolleyes:

Again we're back to the thread I mentioned above, making fun of jesus in pictures is like spray painting a church I suppose?
:rolleyes:

eviltwin

I Heart Internet wrote: »

He doesn't make it clear at all that this is the purpose of his actions. He just reports that he hasn't been excommunicated for it, as if this is just incidental.

This "experimentation" is akin to burning books, places of worship, etc of people you don't agree with. It's a very disrespectful thing to do to people who hold a certain belief that you don't happen to share.

Burning a bit of bread even if it is the "host" in the comfort of one's home away from the public will never compare to burning a building.

robindch

I Heart Internet wrote: »

So it's the RCC's fault that nozzferrahhtoo has chosen to abuse items believed sacred by people.

No, it's the RCC's fault that they tell people that a biscuit is actually a deity manifesting in cracker-form.

Lots of people appear to believe this monumentally silly belief.

That's what you should be getting upset about. And not nozzie for having a good laugh at it.

shruikan2553

eviltwin wrote: »

Burning a bit of bread even if it is the "host" in the comfort of one's home away from the public will never compare to burning a building.

I would hardly compare my girlfriends baking to burning down a building. She would burn lots of bread but at least the building is in tact.

MetalDog

So, in case you were wondering, the good diocesan secretary posted me out a letter the other day; it is bascially the email response above (here it is again for those of you who can't be ar5ed scrolling back)

Dear Dog,

Thank you for your email.

There is no formal process for leaving the Catholic Church. One simply stops attending religious services. However, it would be advisable for you to speak to your family and friends about your decision as your decision excludes you from officially participating in the following; Baptisms, Confirmations, Religious weddings and funeral rights. Also your completion of future census forms would need to reflect your religious status.

Yours faithfully,
Fr [Redacted]
Diocesan Secretary

So, now I have this in written form, on very expensive headed paper, no less. I think I'll let my next of kin know, not that they don't know already.

Cabaal

MetalDog wrote: »

So, in case you were wondering, the good diocesan secretary posted me out a letter the other day; it is bascially the email response above (here it is again for those of you who can't be ar5ed scrolling back)


So, now I have this in written form, on very expensive headed paper, no less. I think I'll let my next of kin know, not that they don't know already.

But the letter is all lies,
Not going to mass won't stop you getting a Catholic wedding, baptism for your kids or a Catholic funeral etc.

It's utterly baseless scaremongering to claim you won't get these things if you don't go to mass, seems to be a lame attempt to scare you into not leaving

MetalDog

Cabaal wrote: »

But the letter is all lies,
Not going to mass won't stop you getting a Catholic wedding, baptism for your kids or a Catholic funeral etc.

It's utterly baseless scaremongering to claim you won't get these things if you don't go to mass, seems to be a lame attempt to scare you into not leaving

We've established that you can't "leave" anymore. So really I'm kinda just wasting their time but at the same time I wanted to do it and sure someone had to go to the time and effort posting me a letter.

And besides, I have no interest in getting a Catholic wedding, baptism or funeral, so such scaremongering, which I agree is very lame, is meaningless to me. Maybe it'd put the shits up some Mammy's boy from the ass end of Connemara or wherever who still feels guilty for playing with himself, but not me.

nozzferrahhtoo

robindch wrote: »

That's because you've been excommunicated Latae sententiae, ie, by virtue of the act of "desecration" alone, and not by a concrete act of the church.

So basically I am only excommunicated in my own head because no one else knows or has acknowledged it. But of course my name still remains on the books as a member

robindch wrote: »

BTW, you're following in the footsteps of PZ Myers and the Great Crackergate Controversy of 2008:

Not entirely. He engaged in the act of desecration to make a point. The whole point of what he did was the act of desecration.

What I was doing was scientific inquiry which will be construed by others as desecration... and a lot of it. The act of desecration however had nothing to do with my actions, my motivations or my results.

His was a good point at the time. He did not just desecrate the cracker. He also at the same time desecrated a quaran and a copy of the God Delusion. His point, I think, was that the idea of desecration in and of itself was a nonsense. And no one group has more claim to offence at it than any other.

For me, for example, the only thing that bothered me is that I see no real utility in damaging books. Aside from that I was value neutral on his actions.

nozzferrahhtoo

Cabaal wrote: »

he's trying to get thrown out of the rcc

Nope. That was not my intention or motivation. I was merely RETROSPECTIVELY on this thread observing that having done so did not get my thrown out, so advising the OP to engage in desecration with the motivation of getting thrown out might not work.

In other words I was not trying to get thrown out but my experience suggests that following my example WITH that intention might not get your thrown out either.

nozzferrahhtoo

I Heart Internet wrote: »

What are you hoping to achieve by "experimenting" on these hosts?

I explained this in a blog post actually. It is my experience that there are three main groups of "believers" in the consecration ceremony even within the catholic community.

That is.... despite the very specific teachings in the doctrines of the church.... catholics on the ground appear to fall into three essential categories.

1) People who think the entire ceremony is nothing more than symbolic. In other words these people do not really believe anything about the crackers at all. As such there is nothing to address.

2) People who think there is a spiritual but undetectable change in the crackers. Such people are making an actual claim but an unmeasurable and unverifiable one. Much akin to a magician who pulls an entirely invisible and undetectable rabbit out of a hat and claims to have preformed magic.

3) People who think there is an actual very real physical change in the cracker. THIS was the claim I decided to bring scientific inquiry to bear on. I found no difference. I retain some of the crackers, pre and post consecration, however in the hopes someone might in the future suggest a test, measurement or comparison I did not yet think of, or new technology in the future becomes available to me to perform experiments previously unavailable to me.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Is your purpose to simple insult or provoke a response from people?

The above should have answered this question but on the off chance it did not:

No.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Your actions seem quite self-centred and needlessly disrespectful to me.

Perhaps the above clarification, previously unavailable to you while evaluating the situation, has corrected your erroneous conclusion on the matter therefore.

nozzferrahhtoo

I Heart Internet wrote: »

He doesn't make it clear at all that this is the purpose of his actions.

Because it wasnt

I Heart Internet wrote: »

This "experimentation" is akin to burning books, places of worship, etc of people you don't agree with.

It is akin to no such thing. The consecrated hosts were my property given freely to me at the time. This is in NO WAY comparable to going and burning the property of others in a wanton act of violence, destruction, arson..... against the property of others..... and likely bringing risk of injury or even death to others in the process.

To compare the two at all is.... extreme and reactionary.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

It's a very disrespectful thing to do to people who hold a certain belief that you don't happen to share.

Nope. Disrespecting IDEAS is not the same as disrespecting people. I am happy to disrespect ideas. If people choose to take offence vicariously on behalf of their ideas.... that is their choice and problem..... and not mine.