NotMe.ie

pauldla

Came across this page on FB, and thought I'd run it by the good people of A&A for comment.

From the webpage www.notme.ie

Leave the church in 3 easy steps

1. enter your details
2. leave a message of defection
3. enjoy your freedom

In Ireland there was a way to formally record that you were no longer a Catholic and require the church to record that fact. Over 12,000 people started this “Declaration of Defection” process. But in April 2011 the Catholic Church changed church law and removed the option to record formal defections.

Cormac Flynn, Paul Dunbar and Grainne O’Sullivan were the pioneers of CountMeOut.ie who took on the church and we salute them. They closed CountMeOut.ie after church law was changed to frustrate people trying to record their defection. Read more details here.

NotMe.ie believes that if people tell the church they have defected then it should take a reality check and listen to them and correct their records. Young infants do not have a choice when they are baptised but adults have the right to set the record straight.

NotMe.ie lets you informally and symbolically leave the Catholic Church. It has no impact on the Catholic Church’s view of your religious standing but is a way to identify as not Catholic. This symbolic gesture supports the separation of church and state. It does not signify or support atheism or humanism as many religious people also support church and state separation.

NotMe.ie is maintained by Atheist Ireland an Irish advocacy group, that does not recognize church law or state submission to church law, promoting atheism and reason over superstition and supernaturalism, and an ethical, secular society where the State does not support or finance or give special treatment or privelege to any religion.

As it happens, I was baptized in London; I wonder what the procedure is for us Foreign Born Irish.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

probably better just stick it down on the census next time it comes around

Peregrinus

Just a few comments:

1. Has the webpage been adapted from something originally designed for another purpose? It's a bit clunky, and not quite fit for purpose. I read that "you can optionally leave details to display on our defection board", but I can't find any link to the defection board. And it's not much of a "display" if it can't be found. If the object is to allow people to witness publicly to their defection, the defection board should be front-and-centre, surely?

2. There are separate pages for defecting from the Catholic church, and defecting from other churches. But on both pages the details elicited are identical, suggesting that there is in fact no need for distinct pages. What gives? Plus, the "other churches" page kind of assumes that all churches are like the Catholic church - divided into parishes, admission into the church through baptism, etc.

3. Both pages say that defection "represents a denial of decisions about your adult beliefs that parents signed you up to as a child". This may or may not be the case - what about people who join a church as adults, but later wish to defect? What about people whose religious identity is inherited like, say, Jews? (In fact, the entire language of the site tacitly presumes Christianity; you might want to look at that.) More to the point, isn't it up to the individual defector to say what his defection represents, and not for the people running this site to assign their preferred meaning to it? It would be a bit ironic that, as a resui.t of using notme.ie to reject the Catholic church view of baptism, you have the notme.ie view of defection imposed on you.

4. Again on the "other churches" page, there's a statement that registering your defection "has no impact on religious law". This isn't necessarily true; depending on the beliefs and laws of the church or denomination concerned, it may well have an impact. Indeed, under Catholic canon law, it may well have an impact in some circumstances, so the corresponding statement on the Catholic defection page probably wants qualifying. Perhaps the bottom line is that the people behind this site shouldn't make claims about what effect defecting through the site will or will not have under the laws, rules or practices of any religion; they're not really in a position to give advice like that, are they? Maybe replace these claims with a more modest statement along the lines of "we can't promise you that this will have any effect under the rules of the denomination you are leaving".

5. Both defection pages say that "The price for membership is 0.00€ now". There are several things wrong with this. First, defecting from a church is not a "membership" of anything. Secondly, putting the euro sign after the nominal amount suggests illiteracy. Thirdly, the "now" suggests an implication that the people running this site contemplate introducing a monetary charge at some point. If they don't intend to introduce a charge, they should drop any language suggesting that they do. If they do contemplate making a charge they should probably say so directly, rather than hinting at it in this tangential fashion. It can only create the (I'm certain, false) suspicion that this is the groundwork for some money-raising rort.

6. Couple of small problems on the home page: There is a statement that "NotMe.ie believes that if people tell the church they have defected then it should take a reality check and listen to them and correct their records." That might be taken by some to imply that registering with notme.ie amounts to "telling the church" that they have defected. Is this right? Is notme.ie going to forward defection records created on its site to the parishes named by defectors? If so, say so clearly. if not, qualify this statement to make it clear that registering with notme.ie is not "telling the church". (Indeed, if others have the same difficulty that I do in finding the "defection board", it's not telling anybody except the administrators of notme.ie.) The old countmeout site was very clear about this; you could copy or print off stuff from that site, but it was up to you to forward it to anyone that you wanted to take any notice of it.

7. And, finally, the home page makes the claim that "this symbolic gesture [defecting through notme.ie] supports the separation of church and state." How? Is notme.ie in some way an agency of the state? How does registering with notme.ie impact on the state in any way? Either explain this, or drop it, I think. On the face of it, it has no implications at all for church/state relations.

Peregrinus

pauldla wrote: »

As it happens, I was baptized in London; I wonder what the procedure is for us Foreign Born Irish.

I don't see anything on the "register your defection" page which would prevent you filling it out on the same basis as anyone baptised in Ireland. Or anywhere else in the world - the site may have a .ie address and the administrators are likely to be physically located in Ireland, but in terms of its accessibility and operation the world wide web does exactly what is says on the tin. This isn't a site for Irish people to register their defection from Irish churches.

pauldla

Peregrinus wrote: »

I don't see anything on the "register your defection" page which would prevent you filling it out on the same basis as anyone baptised in Ireland. Or anywhere else in the world - the site may have a .ie address and the administrators are likely to be physically located in Ireland, but in terms of its accessibility and operation the world wide web does exactly what is says on the tin. This isn't a site for Irish people to register their defection from Irish churches.

Indeed; but perhaps I would be better to contact the church in London directly about the matter. TBH, I'm not sure I get the point of the NotMe.ie website, if the RCC in Ireland is no longer allowing formal defections. Still, I thought it was worth getting the opinions of fellow A&A'ers (and thank you for your reply). I note with interest that NotMe.ie is associated with Atheism Ireland; perhaps one of them might drop by to expand on the site.

Peregrinus

pauldla wrote: »

Indeed; but perhaps I would be better to contact the church in London directly about the matter.

Well, if your object is to ensure that the Catholic church actually gets to hear of your decision, that would certainly be a better strategy than dropping your announcement into what for the moment appears to be the digital equivalent of a bottomless well. But the same would be true for anyone baptised in Ireland, so far as I can see. Notme.ie - if they can sort out the problem of the invisibility of the defection board - would mainly be a vehicle for notifying your defection to the class of people who are likely to find their way to notme.ie. Which, given its links with Atheist Ireland, I'd guess is a group in which other atheists are likely to be heavily represented.

pauldla wrote: »

TBH, I'm not sure I get the point of the NotMe.ie website, if the RCC in Ireland is no longer allowing formal defections. Still, I thought it was worth getting the opinions of fellow A&A'ers (and thank you for your reply).

The RCC no longer requires formal defections. For a period ending in 2011 they wouldn't recognise a defection for certain purposes unless you went through particular formalities involving communication with the bishop, and the countmeout website guided people through those formalities. But since 2011 they have no longer required any particular formality for recognition of a defection; consequently they no longer operate the procedures that the countmeout website used to guide people through.

As for the point of the notme.ie website, I can think of two. The first is for the satisfaction of people who feel the need for some external ritual to mark their disconnection from the Catholic church, and who have felt the lack of this since the Catholic church terminated its own procedures (because practically nobody was using them, basically). The second is to create greater visibility of those who leave. (Though of course this may be a bit of a damp squib if, as was the case with countmeout, most people who leave do not avail themselves of the services of the website.)

pauldla

Peregrinus wrote: »

The RCC no longer requires formal defections. For a period ending in 2011 they wouldn't recognise a defection for certain purposes unless you went through particular formalities involving communication with the bishop, and the countmeout website guided people through those formalities. But since 2011 they have no longer required any particular formality for recognition of a defection; consequently they no longer operate the procedures that the countmeout website used to guide people through.

As for the point of the notme.ie website, I can think of two. The first is for the satisfaction of people who feel the need for some external ritual to mark their disconnection from the Catholic (or any other) church. The second is to create greater visibility of those who leave. (Though of course this may be a bit of a damp squib if, as was the case with countmeout, most people who leave do not avail themselves of the services of the website.)

Yes, I suppose so, but that still seems a bit pointless to me. Of much greater worth, I think, is to put it down on the next census, as suggested above by another poster. Of course, one could always do both, I suppose (if one were so inclined).

Peregrinus

pauldla wrote: »

Yes, I suppose so, but that still seems a bit pointless to me. Of much greater worth, I think, is to put it down on the next census, as suggested above by another poster. Of course, one could always do both, I suppose (if one were so inclined).

Well, I think it's a safe bet that everyone who goes through the notme.ie procedure to leave the Catholic church will also not tick the "Catholic" on the next census. But of course nobody else knows, or can find out, what you've put on the Census form.

I think it comes down to this. If you want to make sure that you are not inflating anybody's perception of how many Catholics there are, the Census is going to be a much more useful tool than the notme.ie website. But if you want to publicise the fact that Pauldla has left the Catholic church then notme.ie, while perhaps not a very good tool, should still be a better tool than the census form.

Penn

NotMe.ie believes that if people tell the church they have defected then it should take a reality check and listen to them and correct their records.

The whole entire reason the Church removed the option to officially declare defection from the Church was because they don't want to take a reality check and listen to them and correct their records.

All the Church have are their numbers. It gives them power and justification. Regardless, it's the Census that really matters. If people made sure to mark down their non-religious status on the Census, that would have far more effect than NotMe.ie.

Peregrinus

Penn wrote: »

The whole entire reason the Church removed the option to officially declare defection from the Church was because they don't want to take a reality check and listen to them and correct their records.

Other way round. We know from countmeout's own figures that only a small number of people ever availed of the process - a tiny fraction, in all likelihood, of the numbers actually leaving the church over that period. It stands to reason that setting up a formal procedure for leaving that involves individual correspondence with a bishop is a barrier to having your departure recorded - most people who leave are indifferent; they are simply not motivated to go through a process like that.

The formal defection requirement was criticised within the church precisely because it led to large numbers of people who had in reality left the church being treated for canonical purposes as though they were still members, which was sometimes producing bizarre and absurd results. So they dropped it.

Penn wrote: »

All the Church have are their numbers. It gives them power and justification. Regardless, it's the Census that really matters. If people made sure to mark down their non-religious status on the Census, that would have far more effect than NotMe.ie.

I agree. And, as it happens, the last time I checked, the church's own membership estimates (in Ireland) aligned fairly closely with what the census was showing. They may or may not be cooking the books in their membership estimates in other countries, but I haven't seen any evidence that they are doing so in Ireland.

expectationlost

some people got a little further https://twitter.com/davegillen/status/510523275097956353 and http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057255325 and https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151362080621770&set=o.331110399343&type=1

Zamboni

An utterly absurd and pointless symbolic action from Athiest Ireland.
So, ironically, very religious.

Cabaal

Zamboni wrote: »

An utterly absurd and pointless symbolic action from Athiest Ireland.
So, ironically, very religious.

You don't seem to understand what a religion is...

expectationlost

the site actually got 1/6 of a page in the Sunday Times http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/News/article1594212.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2015_08_15 paywall

if all it does it become a vehicle for getting the AI message out it will be successful, they say its part of larger campaign (and yes AI have campaigned re the census http://atheist.ie/?s=census)

the article goes over having to baptise kids to get them into schools, school monopoly, interview/pic of john hamill, countmeout ending, the lack of divestment


it could be used as a record you can show the church when following the way john hamill defected from the church http://www.notme.ie/2014/10/170/

or simply a way to express onesself which is fine

it is a bit unclear, as is the website

Zillah

Zamboni wrote: »

An utterly absurd and pointless symbolic action from Athiest Ireland.
So, ironically, very religious.

Yes...because symbolic and supernatural are the same thing. Once you embrace atheism you're supposed to have your sense of humour, irony, and symbolism surgically removed.



Feelings are not logical.

Huntergonzo

I haven't signed up to Not me.ie and don't think I'll bother but I'm just wondering is it worth 'formally' leaving the church anyway? I mean I've been a non believer for many years now and I've decided by myself that I'm no longer a catholic (not sure how you could be anyway when you don't believe in God).

So basically I'm just wondering is there any great need for me to write to the Bishop and ask him to recognise me leaving the church? I mean I've already left, so do I really need some charlatan who believes in fairies and dresses up as a wizard to acknowledge me leaving?

Convince me.

robindch

Huntergonzo wrote: »

[...] I'm just wondering is it worth 'formally' leaving the church anyway? [...]

There are two risks I can think of with telling the church to get bent:

1. The church could deny your child an education as the notice would probably constitute evidence that you're not a real catholic, and therefore, that your child is not deserving of a place in the local school.
2. The church could deny your corpse burial in the local graveyard for much the same reason.

So long as the state lets church deny services to the state's citizens, the above will continue.

pauldla

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I haven't signed up to Not me.ie and don't think I'll bother but I'm just wondering is it worth 'formally' leaving the church anyway? I mean I've been a non believer for many years now and I've decided by myself that I'm no longer a catholic (not sure how you could be anyway when you don't believe in God).

So basically I'm just wondering is there any great need for me to write to the Bishop and ask him to recognise me leaving the church? I mean I've already left, so do I really need some charlatan who believes in fairies and dresses up as a wizard to acknowledge me leaving?

Convince me.

Looking at the notme.ie website got me thinking about it, so I looked up the church in North London I was baptised in, and the very nice lady replied that yes indeed, I was baptised on such and such a date, please send SAE etc. I began looking at what to do next and I found myself thinking much as yourself. I don't believe, don't go, and haven't raised the kids to it. What does it matter if there is a piece of paper somewhere in North London that says I was baptised into the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. It's not as if I put much weight on anything else they have written down.

Now the census, that's another matter....

Huntergonzo

robindch wrote: »

There are two risks I can think of with telling the church to get bent:

1. The church could deny your child an education as the notice would probably constitute evidence that you're not a real catholic, and therefore, that your child is not deserving of a place in the local school.
2. The church could deny your corpse burial in the local graveyard for much the same reason.

So long as the state lets church deny services to the state's citizens, the above will continue.

I don't want to sound dismissive but neither of those 2 things really bother me, I don't have children and I'm not sure I ever will (not too keen on the idea but I'm 27 so you never know) and after I'm dead I really couldn't care less what happens me. I'll be going for either cremation or donate my body to science if there's anything still left that's remotely usable after I get done with it

The state allowing the church to indoctrinate children in schools and to give preference to baptized children is a complete disgrace though. Baptism should be illegal for under 18s anyway, that'd be a fun law for a change :P plus then we'd get to see how many actual consenting adult 'catholics' there are in Ireland.

Huntergonzo

pauldla wrote: »

Looking at the notme.ie website got me thinking about it, so I looked up the church in North London I was baptised in, and the very nice lady replied that yes indeed, I was baptised on such and such a date, please send SAE etc. I began looking at what to do next and I found myself thinking much as yourself. I don't believe, don't go, and haven't raised the kids to it. What does it matter if there is a piece of paper somewhere in North London that says I was baptised into the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. It's not as if I put much weight on anything else they have written down.

Now the census, that's another matter....

I'm glad to hear you didn't raise your kids with it anyway, that's where it all starts, but people should be free to believe whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt other people. But parents shouldn't be ramming their superstitious insecurities down the throats of their children, let them come to their own conclusions.

I actually considered getting myself excommunicated a few years ago, for no other reason than I don't believe in God so I thought being labelled a catholic was amusingly stupid. I might still write to the bishop if I can build up the interest but it's not all that important to me, as far as I'm concerned I've decided and that's all that really matters.

Peregrinus

robindch wrote: »

There are two risks I can think of with telling the church to get bent:

1. The church could deny your child an education as the notice would probably constitute evidence that you're not a real catholic, and therefore, that your child is not deserving of a place in the local school.
2. The church could deny your corpse burial in the local graveyard for much the same reason.

So long as the state lets church deny services to the state's citizens, the above will continue.

But those are reasons why Huntergonzo might not notify the church of his noncatholicity. (Is that even a word?) He's asking if there are any positive reasons why he would notify them. He's a bit leery of seeking their confirmation or acknowledgment, since that might imply that he needs it, and he doesn't think he does.

So, given his reluctance to acknowledge that they have any say in this matter at all, is there any reason why anyone here would suggest to Huntergonzo that doing this is a good idea?

Absolam

Peregrinus wrote: »

But those are reasons why Huntergonzo might not notify the church of his noncatholicity. (Is that even a word?) He's asking if there are any positive reasons why he would notify them. He's a bit leery of seeking their confirmation or acknowledgment, since that might imply that he needs it, and he doesn't think he does.

So, given his reluctance to acknowledge that they have any say in this matter at all, is there any reason why anyone here would suggest to Huntergonzo that doing this is a good idea?

I can't see any reason to use it other than perhaps some sense of self acknowledgement. As pointed out, it's not a declaration to the public at large, nor does it make any difference to the Catholic Church itself.

Nor do I think the Church could deny someones child an education on the basis of the notice, or deny them burial. I think the Church as a body (notwithstanding the odd overly judgmental functionary) is less likely to think in terms of 'real' Catholics per the notions offered on A&A, and more in terms of defectors as set out by the Pontifical Council:
"the sacramental bond of belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church, conferred by the baptismal character, is an ontological and permanent bond which is not lost by reason of any act or fact of defection."

In those terms, regardless of his acts of defection, apostasy, heresy or any other declarations, Huntergonzo once baptised continues to belong to the Church, and (so long as he repents, or gives some signs of repentance) can have a Catholic burial, and is certainly in a good position to argue for his still being a Catholic before a school admissions board. Who, to be fair, are probably more likely to care that the child is being brought up as a Catholic; and that might be difficult to assert given Huntergonzos other statements

Peregrinus

Absolam wrote: »

. . . I think the Church as a body (notwithstanding the odd overly judgmental functionary) is less likely to think in terms of 'real' Catholics per the notions offered on A&A, and more in terms of defectors as set out by the Pontifical Council:
"the sacramental bond of belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church, conferred by the baptismal character, is an ontological and permanent bond which is not lost by reason of any act or fact of defection."

In those terms, regardless of his acts of defection, apostasy, heresy or any other declarations, Huntergonzo once baptised continues to belong to the Church, and (so long as he repents, or gives some signs of repentance) can have a Catholic burial, and is certainly in a good position to argue for his still being a Catholic before a school admissions board. Who, to be fair, are probably more likely to care that the child is being brought up as a Catholic; and that might be difficult to assert given Huntergonzos other statements

Well, no. Remember, the "ontological and permanent bond" that Huntergonzo is considered to have by virtue of his baptism is one he shares with, e.g., Ian Paisley and Jack Chick and all baptised Christians of every denomination, but the Catholic Church doesn't consider them to be Catholics. "Belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church" is not at all the same thing as being a member of the Catholic church for canonical purposes. An act of defection or apostasy can't reverse the sacramental effects of baptism, but it can certainly terminate your canonical status as a member of the Catholic church for such matters as marriage, burial, etc.

As regards Huntergonzo trying to get his hypothetical child into a Catholic school, I think you're right. The salient question is not going to be whether Huntergonzo is himself a Catholic, but whether his child is being brought up in the Catholic faith. Huntergonzo's noncatholicity is not necessarily inconsistent with his children being raised as Catholics; it's going to depend on more facts than just that one.

pauldla

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I'm glad to hear you didn't raise your kids with it anyway, that's where it all starts, but people should be free to believe whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt other people. But parents shouldn't be ramming their superstitious insecurities down the throats of their children, let them come to their own conclusions.

Indeed, and the young pauldlas are free to believe any old guff they want to once they turn 18. So long as they realise they'll have their old man, in his dotage, mocking whatever beliefs they hold (especially if their belief is 'it's the rest home for you, old boy').

I actually considered getting myself excommunicated a few years ago, for no other reason than I don't believe in God so I thought being labelled a catholic was amusingly stupid. I might still write to the bishop if I can build up the interest but it's not all that important to me, as far as I'm concerned I've decided and that's all that really matters.

Would excommunication signify, though? Is excommunication not the Church saying 'You're such a bad Catholic that we're not going to let you do X,Y or Z...but you're still a Catholic'.

Peregrinus

pauldla wrote: »

Would excommunication signify, though? Is excommunication not the Church saying 'You're such a bad Catholic that we're not going to let you do X,Y or Z...but you're still a Catholic'.

This. Being excommunicated doesn't make you "not a Catholic", as far as the Catholic Church is concerned; it just makes you a Catholic who is for the time being subject to the canonical penalty of excommunication.

Huntergonzo

pauldla wrote: »

Indeed, and the young pauldlas are free to believe any old guff they want to once they turn 18. So long as they realise they'll have their old man, in his dotage, mocking whatever beliefs they hold (especially if their belief is 'it's the rest home for you, old boy').

Haha, ah well mocking younger people in your dotage is surely one of the main benefits of being old regardless of what they believe , I'm certainly looking forward to it anyway :-)

pauldla wrote: »

Would excommunication signify, though? Is excommunication not the Church saying 'You're such a bad Catholic that we're not going to let you do X,Y or Z...but you're still a Catholic'

Not even sure, I never done any research into it, excommunication was just the first word that came into my head when I considered formally seeking to leave the church. Anyway I probably won't be pursuing excommunication, if I ever write to a Bishop at all it will just be seeking formal recognition that I'm no longer a member of the church, or something to that effect.

Absolam

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, no. Remember, the "ontological and permanent bond" that Huntergonzo is considered to have by virtue of his baptism is one he shares with, e.g., Ian Paisley and Jack Chick and all baptised Christians of every denomination, but the Catholic Church doesn't consider them to be Catholics. "Belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church" is not at all the same thing as being a member of the Catholic church for canonical purposes. An act of defection or apostasy can't reverse the sacramental effects of baptism, but it can certainly terminate your canonical status as a member of the Catholic church for such matters as marriage, burial, etc.

Well, yes and no
To be a part of the Catholic Church, one need only be baptised in the Catholic Church, or be baptised a Christian and enter the Catholic Church by profession of faith and formal reception. So as long as Huntergonzo was baptised in the Catholic Church (and that's the impression I get) his ontological bond has a distinct advantage in Catholic terms over those dreadful heretics The Rev Ian and Mr Chick; and as we know, the Catholic Church doesn't consider itself to have a membership as such. An act of apostasy or heresy doesn't terminate membership of the Church for such matters as marriage or burial; it renders a Catholic unable to receive sacraments such as matrimony or extreme unction without first repenting. And whilst Canon Law prohibits apostates or heretics from receiving an ecclesiastical funeral (unless they show signs of repentance), it doesn't say it terminates canonical status as a member, nor does it (absolutely) deny burial in a Catholic cemetery; the relevant Bishop may still choose to allow their burial.

Peregrinus

Absolam wrote: »

Well, yes and no
To be a part of the Catholic Church, one need only be baptised in the Catholic Church, or be baptised a Christian and enter the Catholic Church by profession of faith and formal reception. So as long as Huntergonzo was baptised in the Catholic Church (and that's the impression I get) his ontological bond has a distinct advantage in Catholic terms over those dreadful heretics The Rev Ian and Mr Chick; and as we know, the Catholic Church doesn't consider itself to have a membership as such. An act of apostasy or heresy doesn't terminate membership of the Church for such matters as marriage or burial; it renders a Catholic unable to receive sacraments such as matrimony or extreme unction without first repenting. And whilst Canon Law prohibits apostates or heretics from receiving an ecclesiastical funeral (unless they show signs of repentance), it doesn't say it terminates canonical status as a member, nor does it (absolutely) deny burial in a Catholic cemetery; the relevant Bishop may still choose to allow their burial.

A&A is perhaps not the forum for a theological or canonical dispute, but since the notme.ie does make some canonical claims perhaps we can be excused.

Huntergonzo's baptism in the Catholic church give him exactly the same "ontological bond" as anybody's baptism in any church. What would make Huntergonzo a Catholic as opposed to (say) a Free Presbyterian would not be his baptism but his relationship of communion. Is the Catholic community his primary eucharistic community? Then he's a Catholic.

That's a situation that can change from time to time, obviously. Huntergonzo's baptism does have enduring and irreversible sacramental effects, but a permanent communion in the Catholic church is not one of them. Canonically - not theologically, but canonically - his having been baptised in a Catholic ritual does point towards his being in that communion, which is why the opening presumption will be that he is a Catholic when Dr Paisley is not.

But if they ever have to actually take a position on whether he is a Catholic or not (e.g. some question about the validity of his marriage comes up) then the fact that he was baptised as an infant in a Catholic ceremony is not conclusive; it's just a starting point. They'll look at his situation when his marriage was celebrated. Was he a Catholic at that time? And if he has defected or apostatized since his baptism (and not been reconciled afterwards) the answer will be no, he wasn't. But they won't actually take a position on that until they need to.

Which is why I think notme.ie may be going a bit far in saying that defection through notme.ie "has no impact on canon law". It could do, if the canonical question ever comes up for decision. To illustrate, if somebody - lets call him "X", to spare poor Huntergonzo, since it's unlikely that this scenario will ever apply to him - defects, and records the defection publicly through notme.ie, and later marries in a civil ceremony, and still later wishes to marry someone else in a Catholic ceremony while the first spouse is still living, they can't marry in a Catholic ceremony if their first marriage was valid. If X was a Catholic at the time of the first marriage then it was invalid, since Catholics are required either to marry in a Catholic ceremony or obtain a dispensation, and X did neither. But if X was not a Catholic, then his first marriage is perfectly valid, as far as the Catholic church is concerned. So the question of whether he defected has great canonical signficance, and the public declaration of defection which he made at some time prior to his first marriage is very relevant.