| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Formal defection downgraded; “the to "expressed desire” of those who wish to defect | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Thursday, 14. October 2010, 21:47 (698 Views) | |
| PJD | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 06:50 Post #16 |
|
This subject raises, for me, a few additional questions. If canon law can be changed - and in my opinion and in this instance - acting against sacramental theology (1st decree of truths); where does that leave the question of infallibility in relation to said law? PJD |
![]() |
|
| tomais | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 08:53 Post #17 |
|
Canon Law! Gosh people talk of nothing else! People just stop going. Along the lines of : I don't go now; Ive just stoped going! Formal teaching on nuances etc.,-when even clergy are in twos and threes! Many postings here carry the inference of being well informed; just like 90% of Catholics? Yes the term barrackroom laywers comes to mind and that encludes many clerical collars. Finally what % of laity read or know about bishops statments? being a Catholic was and in fewer instances was and is one of habit. Just look around and listen. Tom |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 13:45 Post #18 |
|
We are currently living in an era of transparency tom. Less preV2 thinking and less post V2 wriggling. Internet provided by Holy Spirit? PJD |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 14:42 Post #19 |
![]()
Administrator
|
No harm in that. That is often so, when the cause is lack of interest, disbelief or falling out with somebody. However 12,000 people in the area of just one Bishops Conference have made formal notifications of disaffection in less than a year. That takes a positive decision.
Some here are well informed. If 90% of Catholics are not, that is their choice. Anyway we enjoy communicating with each other. You see, Tom, unlike you we small fry do not enjoy the delectable privilege of having frequent conversations with a Cardinal, we are stuck with each other, that puts us in good company. We enjoy it! |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 14:51 Post #20 |
![]()
Administrator
|
How about a form for notifying disaffection with a parish? We could all sign them, give our reasons, send them off to the bishop, and tick three boxes, expressing our preference of which parish we would prefer to belong to? A parish priest would get ten Brownie points for every first choice box ticked, five for second choice, one for third choice, and minus one hundred for a disaffection form. The one with the best points would be rewarded with the parish of his choice, and a very posh presbytery, plus generous non contributory pension. The next stage would be disaffection with diocese form, to be submitted to a Roman pen pusher. ps Canon Law to be revised as necessary, by committee appointed by Catholic Cyberforum lawyers. Edited by Rose of York, Saturday, 16. October 2010, 14:52.
|
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 15:51 Post #21 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
Indeed. How often do we read of people complaining, "Honestly, those Catholics. They're obsessed with Canon Law! You never hear them talk about anything else!"
|
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 16:06 Post #22 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Only the gossips, and that was when Cardinal Bernard Law was Canon Law. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Deacon Robert | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 19:34 Post #23 |
|
I am following this thread with some interest and trying to understand the Bishops statement. How is the church in Ireland funded- State funding through taxes or individual Catholics? In Austria you have to declare your church allegiance. your portion of the "church tax" goes to your church. A formal declaration is required to end the funding or change which church. If it is the same in Ireland then the Bishop appears to be trying to retain funding ffrom those who no longer are members of the church. |
|
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Saturday, 16. October 2010, 19:44 Post #24 |
![]()
Administrator
|
The Irish Governments (Republic and Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK) do not fund churches. It was the Vatican that made the change, not the Irish bishops. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 17. October 2010, 15:41 Post #25 |
|
I realise that for some reason Irish bishops aren't exactly flavour of the month with you, PJD, but blaming them for the Vatican's mucking about seems a tad unfair. |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 17. October 2010, 15:42 Post #26 |
|
When did canon law become infallible? |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 17. October 2010, 15:46 Post #27 |
|
It is not an Irish Bishops issue, it's a change in canon law - or withdrawal of an earlier change to be more precise - that has caused the problems. Anyway, the Church in Ireland does not receive any funding from the government other than what she gets as an approved charity, the same entitlement as any other approved charity. |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Sunday, 17. October 2010, 16:06 Post #28 |
![]()
Administrator
|
The old procedure whereby people could defect formally from the church did not signify any acknowledgment on the part of the Church, that the defector was no longer a Catholic. The person notified, the Church received and acknowledged the notification, that is all. Unbaptising is impossible. I find it rather amusing that a diocese now maintains a register to note “the expressed desire” of those who wish to defect from the Catholic Church, whereas no diocese instructs its parishes to maintain a register of local people who ARE Catholics. A diocese receiving a letter from a person asking "am I a Catholic" would, in most cases, by unable to answer yes or no. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 17. October 2010, 16:51 Post #29 |
|
There is obviously some kind of counting that goes on to produce statistics like these, does anyone know where they get the figures? |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Sunday, 17. October 2010, 17:20 Post #30 |
|
At the beginning of this topic; we read this: "the Archdiocese of Dublin has said that because of recent changes to the code of canon law, it would no longer be possible to defect formally from the church." So regarding the Irish question Mairtin put viz: "I realise that for some reason Irish bishops aren't exactly flavour of the month with you, PJD, but blaming them for the Vatican's mucking about seems a tad unfair." I wasn't blaming the Irish really - it just that they had commented on the matter and it appeared on here. Obviously not every person baptised is baptised a Catholic. So I ask myself why deal with any paperwork at all. Or is it all to do with 'money' as has happened in Germany and Spain - or so I have read. Very confusing. I did refer the question (of baptism in this regard) to a top canon lawyer. And he already knew of the matter and was similarly confused. PJD |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |







7:53 PM Jul 11