Leaving the church/showing I am not a member

Durz0 Blint

Hi

I have never been religious in any sense and I recently heard that I am considered one by church records due to being baptised as a child.

Is this true? If so how can I get any documents held to show I am not a Catholic? Am I also currently considered a member of the faith, if so how do I get any documents changed to reflect I am not a member?

Thanks for your time

Durz0

eviltwin

You can't. The RCC is like the Hotel California - you can check out any time you like but you can never leave.

brian_t

Leaving the Catholic Church

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86016004&postcount=5

Durz0 Blint

eviltwin wrote: »

You can't. The RCC is like the Hotel California - you can check out any time you like but you can never leave.

Really, there's no way to officially be not considered a member (besides the obvious point I have never been to mass beyond attending weddings/funerals etc...)

Mrs OBumble

Just don't go.

If you lived in Germany, where the government collects Church tax, there would be papers to be changed. But in Ireland, there are no consequences and no papers.

eviltwin

Durz0 Blint wrote: »

Really, there's no way to officially be not considered a member (besides the obvious point I have never been to mass beyond attending weddings/funerals etc...)

No, I tried myself a few years ago and go nowhere. The only thing you can do is when the next census rolls around is to make sure you tick No Religion or your new faith so at least the CSO will have an up to date figure of how many people in the country actually consider themselves as Catholic.

MadYaker

Do they ask on the census what religion you are? Perhaps you could contact them and ask that it be changed if you are listed as catholic?

Benny_Cake

MadYaker wrote: »

Do they ask on the census what religion you are? Perhaps you could contact them and ask that it be changed if you are listed as catholic?

They do ask on the census, but you'd have to wait until the next one (due in 2016).

OP, just stop attending. Most religious bodies are pretty bad at record keeping, and despite what some would believe the census figures are the closest you'll get to an accurate number.

Durz0 Blint

Well it's not really a question of me not attending as I have only been in a church a handful of times in my life (for weddings etc...)

I'm just surprised an organisation I have never had anything to do with won't let me leave it (and a little creeped out tbh).

Birroc

Durz0 Blint wrote: »

I'm just surprised an organisation I have never had anything to do with won't let me leave it (and a little creeped out tbh).

The Roman organisation only cares about 3 things;
1. Footfall
2. Revenue
3. Self-Protection

kassie

i was just wondering about this last nite!!! I got my daughter christened 3 yrs ago (and have had another daughter since who is not christened and am unsure about it)

We, as parents and every day people, are not one bit religious, only attend like others for weddings/funerals/memorial masses out of respect for family members still alive.

With all this mass grave news it just sickens me to think that they "welcomed" her into their church knowing right well what they have done to the 1000s of babies and children years ago... and i was wondering if there is any way to get an annulment of the christening or make the record void??

Cabaal

kassie wrote: »

and i was wondering if there is any way to get an annulment of the christening or make the record void??

Nope,
The records will always exist and they will always show the children baptised into the catholic faith.

The best course of action you can do now at this stage is not bring them to mass, do communion or confirmation etc. Basically damage limitation!

newmug

MadYaker wrote: »

Do they ask on the census what religion you are? Perhaps you could contact them and ask that it be changed if you are listed as catholic?

They sure do. 84% of Irish people consider themselves Catholic.

Birroc wrote: »

The Roman organisation only cares about 3 things;
1. Footfall
2. Revenue
3. Self-Protection

Why do you have to be nasty. The Roman Catholic Church cares about adoring and glorifying God, and getting your soul into Heaven. Pretty apt for a church. God bless you.

Cabaal

newmug wrote: »

They sure do. 84% of Irish people consider themselves Catholic.

Of course I'd even take this with a pinch of salt as...

A 2010 Bishops Conference survey found that 10.1% of Irish Roman Catholics did not believe in God.

So numbers I suppose are closer to 74% based on the Bishops own survey

Why do you have to be nasty. The Roman Catholic Church cares about adoring and glorifying God, and getting your soul into Heaven. Pretty apt for a church. God bless you.

Nobody's being nasty, its merely the truth. Its always been about the money when it comes to the leaders of the RCC and the Vatican.

If they really truly cared about god and how views rather then money that they'd be happy to compensate victims of abuse which were caused by the church's previous "crimes"...or in the Vatican's language....errors of judgement.

greenpilot

Cabaal wrote: »

Of course I'd even take this with a pinch of salt as...



So numbers I suppose are closer to 74% based on the Bishops own survey



Nobody's being nasty, its merely the truth. Its always been about the money when it comes to the leaders of the RCC and the Vatican.

If they really truly cared about god and how views rather then money that they'd be happy to compensate victims of abuse which were caused by the church's previous "crimes"...or in the Vatican's language....errors of judgement.

...how about this for nasty....
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/nun-admits-children-involved-in-medical-trials-30339349.html

lazybones32

Durz0 Blint wrote: »

Hi

I have never been religious in any sense and I recently heard that I am considered one by church records due to being baptised as a child.

Is this true? If so how can I get any documents held to show I am not a Catholic? Am I also currently considered a member of the faith, if so how do I get any documents changed to reflect I am not a member?

Thanks for your time

Durz0

Yes, you are considered a catholic and will be until the day you die. Baptism is a one-way street and once baptised, you cannot be unbaptised.
If you want to make a formal declaration, you could write a letter to the Parish you were baptised in but this will only be a placebo for yourself. It's not like they will send you your certificate and remove you from the records.
Aside from pointless gestures, there is nothing to be done...

Mrs OBumble

greenpilot wrote: »

...how about this for nasty....
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/nun-admits-children-involved-in-medical-trials-30339349.html

What's nasty about that - apart from the Irish government (ie the folks you elected) being too lazy / stupid to regulate medical trials until a stunningly late 1987?

Other that that, the mothers were asked for permission. What is the issue, and in particular what is the thing in it which makes the church nasty?

lazygal

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What's nasty about that - apart from the Irish government (ie the folks you elected) being too lazy / stupid to regulate medical trials until a stunningly late 1987?

Other that that, the mothers were asked for permission. What is the issue, and in particular what is the thing in it which makes the church nasty?

Do you think mothers in mother and baby homes were able to give informed consent, if they were asked? Do you think it's possible consent wasn't sought at all?

Is there anything the church has done which you concede is nasty?

dharma200

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What's nasty about that - apart from the Irish government (ie the folks you elected) being too lazy / stupid to regulate medical trials until a stunningly late 1987?

Other that that, the mothers were asked for permission. What is the issue, and in particular what is the thing in it which makes the church nasty?

if you dont think that is nasty I feel very sorry for you.
the lengths people will go to to defend the indefensible due to their 'beliefs'.... The mothers were asked for consent, my word, you really beleive that? You really beleive these women had choice? Lol lol lol... The state is to lazy and stupid then the church you seek to defend at every turn, describe that please. What is the issue???? I give up.. This attitude sickens me to the core.

nagirrac

Unethical medical trials on adults and children, mainly in institutions, secular and religious, were commonplace in the 20th century, which thankfully led to the Medicines Act (in the UK) in 1968 in an effort to control such practices. What is not as well known is that unethical clinical trials are still going on, just now in countries outside the "first" world where regulation is lax. Some drug companies have acted in an absolutely despicable manner, taking advantage of the most vulnerable in countries where there are no legal protections. The fact that this is still going on is outrageous.

Anger towards the RCC on this issue is understandable as they facilitated unethical medical treatment. However, anger and outrage towards the drug companies who pushed for this "research", in many cases without consent, and towards the medical boards in the various countries that sanctioned these trials is even more valid.

lazybones32

dharma200 wrote: »

if you dont think that is nasty I feel very sorry for you.
the lengths people will go to to defend the indefensible due to their 'beliefs'.... The mothers were asked for consent, my word, you really beleive that? You really beleive these women had choice? Lol lol lol... The state is to lazy and stupid then the church you seek to defend at every turn, describe that please. What is the issue???? I give up.. This attitude sickens me to the core.

Is there proof that the Church sanctioned these trials? No
Is it more likely that the drug Company got permission from the State to conduct these trials and the State chose whatever House/Hospital/Home?

The article states that a cattle vaccine was administered accidentally and I'm certain that counter-measures were enacted afterwards. Medical ethics is around a long time and the trials were carried out by the drug company.

It seems that some people would like this to have been a RCC medical experiment along the lines of Nazi-testing but thankfully it's not.

Don't forget that babies organs were being harvested without consent, up until a few years ago, so I don't know whether the 'outrage' I witness is genuine or if it's being used as another reason to beat the dog.

Mrs OBumble

lazygal wrote: »

Is there anything the church has done which you concede is nasty?

The church has done an enormous amount of things which are criminal and / or totally evil - not just nasty.

Example include rape and other forms of sexual abuse, concealing these behaviours, imprisoning women in Madeline laundries without it being legally sanctioned, providing inadequate food to people (adults and children) in residential care.

But they do not include providing some degree of shelter to pregnant single women whose families rejected them - and look what happened when they stopped: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Lovett

As someone said, the UK legislated to control clinical trials in 1968. The Irish, not 'til 1987. What do you think was the reason for that delay?

Yes, some Irish people (including many priests and women religious) were badly educated, and took wrong messages from the religious teaching that they received (eg that sexual misconduct justified a lack of loving behavior). But by no means all of them - there were plenty of educated bishops, doctors, lawyers, business people etc who could and should have influenced things to be quite different.