Count Me Out!

The folks at "Debaptized" explain that defection is the next logical step after initially rejection your religion and its tenets.

For all the people who have been victimized, scapegoated, prejudged or generally turned-off by the Roman Catholic Church, there is a site based in Ireland that makes formally defecting easier, "Count Me Out."

According to the Catechism, one must make a formal declaration of defection in order to cut ties with the church. The person seeking to defect must sent a declaration of intent to the diocese they are currently registered (however, the Catechism does point out that your soul is permanently and eternally Catholic-whatever!). Once sent the Church will make the note of defection in their records. Basically, a formal declaration of defection is the most public act a person can do to distance themselves from the Church (other than mockingly hang on a cross in front of millions of spectators.)

There is a point in formally defecting. It truly doesn't matter if a person has proclaimed their disbelief or has not set foot in a church again, the Church still counts you as one of the 1.2 billion faithful. It is only logical to formally leave the institution if a person is truly appalled at the history, beliefs, or criminal actions of the Church, yet is still formally counted as a full member in Church records. Formally defecting also provides a final emotional sense of closure for those who want it, not to mention it makes things simpler if you have chosen a different spiritual path.

This should not be a quick decision. One thing to keep in mind that when a person formally defects, he or she is no longer welcome to take communion. It may also cause complications concerning other sacraments, such as the ability to have a Catholic Marriage, as well as end-of-life choices like the option of being buried in a Catholic cemetery. Nevertheless, these should mostly be non-issues for people who truly do not want to be formally considered Catholic.

In today's world people should look at their beliefs honestly and decide for themselves if they still line up with these ancient cultural belief systems. Given the history of these groups people owe it to others and themselves.

Here is the pdf Declaration of Defection.

The Rite of De-Baptism

What does the image of a hair dryer have to do with atheism? The creators of "Debaptized" have adopted it because they intend to dry away the waters of baptism for all.

In recent years many Atheists have become more outspoken in the Western World. Famous Atheists such as Richard Dawkins loudly proclaim their beliefs and challenge theists. Since the Pope is touring through merry England, the nation's religious landscape has been under close scrutiny. One atheist group has had considerable success reaching out to British citizens, the creators of "Debaptized."

This group intentionally mocks the Christian ritual of Baptism in creating a counter-ritual: Debaptism. Once a person chooses to be debaptized through this group, they send a Certificate of Debaptism "suitable for framing." They maintain a website that has made over 100,000 requested British debaptisms.

They are unapologetically irreverent of baptism and religion in general. They describe baptism as :

"the ritual cleansing of sins. Typically administered to infants shortly after birth (without their consent) to remove Original Sin, of which they are guilty before even breathing."

And their understanding on the Christian concept of Original Sin:

"Original Sin is an hereditary sin. It is a sin of which all are guilty by having had ancestors who committed a particular sin. Despite no have actually committed the transgression yourself, you are nonetheless still required to be punished for it. Having to pay for crimes you do not commit is a human right violation."

And finally here is what they have to say about the concept of the soul in Christianity:

"A soul is a thing that, despite being both invisible and undetectable, is considered more important than a living person's happiness, well being and very life. This morally bankrupt viewpoint leads to the devaluing of human life and the reliance on an imaginary afterlife to give meaning to people's lives."

They believe that the symbolism behind debaptism is as significant as baptism itself because "debaptism can provide a new symbolism and ritual to ease you away from this morally empty worldview."

To these atheists, the whole religious hoopla is so utterly without reason, ultimately meaningless and potentially dangerous that they feel creating a fictitious rite to wean people off the need to believe in superstition is well worth the effort.

The whole point of the group and the popular website is to get people thinking about their beliefs and offers counterpoints to those beliefs, a very noble cause. The religious will see this whole activity as anathema to all they hold dear, but don't we need counterpoints every now and then? Don't we need our beliefs challenged in order to save us from complacency or worse?

There is real value in their campaign as well as their ideas. However, like religious zealots, dedicated atheists must refrain from going too far in pushing their beliefs on others. Still, the fact that the rite of debaptism exists is an especially poignant and clever way to create much-needed pressure to traditional beliefs.

When In Rome...

Well, it isn’t too often that you hear about Catholic priest scandals involving sex with adults. Ever since the Italian magazine “Panorama” published an expose revealing the numerous homosexual activities within the Priesthood of Rome, the Vatican and its allies have had no choice but to push back hard-yet again. One of them is Bill Donohue, the president of the so-called “Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.” He has been defending the Church during this year’s wave sex scandals and his explanation of the underlying cause is broad indeed: homosexuality. Yet his analysis is as ignorant as it is broad. The underlying problem is homophobia within Catholicism, not homosexuality itself.

He claims that there is a statistically “overwhelming” link between “homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors." He further commented, “As I have said many times, most gay priests are not molesters, but most of the molesters have been gay." His conclusion is that the root of the problem with the abuse scandals is caused by homosexuality within the priesthood.

However absurd his claim is, he backs it up with sound evidence. It is true that many studies have found that the overwhelming majority of priestly abuses involved the same sex. However, to blame the gays is an incorrect analysis of the available data. After putting aside the cases that are genuinely pedophiliac (that is a completely different issue) this situation just begs the next logical question: why are homosexuals becoming Catholic priests only to covertly act on their desires?

The answer to me is clearly homophobia, the true cause of this crisis. For a homosexual to join the Roman Catholic Priesthood and then clandestinely have affairs with men belies a deep-rooted conflict within the priest regarding his homosexuality. If a man cannot and will not accept his own sexuality, then it is probable that such actions become logical consequences of his denial. The “Panorama” expose describes the guilt and shame the priests would experience during and immediately after their encounters. Things would be different if the priests didn’t belong to an organization that forces them to consider themselves disordered and their sexual behavior loathsome. The organization and its attitude towards homosexuality is really to blame, the behavior of the gay priests are simply tragic symptoms of the larger problem.

It is not homosexuality that drives these priests to act dishonorably, but rather it is the denial, hatred and fear of their homosexuality that causes them to act in such ways.

The issue is not the status of homosexuality within the Church, but the status of homophobia in the Church. If the church was not so homophobic, perhaps its priests would act better than they do today.

Still, the Vatican did get something right for once when it urged that these people should no longer be priests.

You can read the “Panorama” expose here (If you know Italian).

Reply

Forward

"...And No Religion Too"

Religion should not be opposed, but when the religious take the rights of others, they must be opposed.

Many within the LGBT community have profound issues with religion. They look at most religions with disdain and view adherents with disgust. They voice their opposition to religions that have been traditionally active in public discourse. Not only are they opposed to religion, but they also alienate the believers through insults. They could not be more wrong in handling oppressive religions.

However, the way to do it is not by overtly hurling insults at people of faith or attacking their church head on. While this may be a temporary emotional outlet, it is overall not an effective approach in actually combating religious ignorance. Religion can’t be destroyed, only reduced and controlled.

The Catholic Church, for example, survived the Romans, the early heresies, the Great Schism, the Reformation, the Age of Reason, and communism. Modern-day progressives won’t change this historical trend.

Yet it is without question that the Catholic Church has recently lost a significant amount of influence in the Western World. People simply stopped caring as much, yet they were actively prodded to care less.

From advertisers using sex to sell products, to the diminished position of the Lord’s Day in society, traditional religious thought was challenged indirectly. The result was a mass decline of ordinary Americans’ commitment to traditional religion. Advertisers and corporate bosses achieved what warlords and revolutionaries before them had not: the destruction or severe regulation of Christianity to the private sphere of life. Of course concepts built into our society, such as secularism, laid the groundwork for change.

Ordinary gays and lesbians themselves did much more to erode religiously-fueled hatred by simply becoming familiar with religious Americans than all the overtly anti-religious ever did. After all, it is much harder to use your religion as a weapon if you know the target of your prejudice personally.

That is the key to reducing religion: bleed it dry by attempting to form relationships with its mild/moderate adherents and treating them like human beings. The die-hards within each religious group must be approached in this way because they will not change, but without receptive ears they will lose relevance. The key is to win over people, not crush them. To make tomorrow better than today, acts of hate cannot be matched by acts hate. This probably doesn’t hold true for every situation, but for this one it does.