I don't think the court has jurisdiction

The Courts certainly do not seem to be lacking in bull by-product these days...

I agree with the ontological perspective, but even from a civil perspective, when a person gets a civil divorce, are the records of the marriage destroyed? If not, why should the record of a baptism be destroyed? Or to go even further, if a person once belonged to a political party, can such record be destroyed and erased from memory?
But then again, logic and consistency have to do with justice, not necessarily with justices.

On re-reading I notice that they talk about cancelling, not destroying records, so my analogies are somewhat weak. Well, I guess the Parish could issue a document stating that it recognizes that the person does not consider himself as a member of the Church and will be therefore be excluded from it until he goes to confession and returns to the fold.
Wait, what do we normally call that? Exco..something?

Roberto,

Actually it would be called apostasy not excommuncation.

In the course of work, I have only had to deal with an "unbaptism" request once. But Father said it wasn't all that unusual for this sort of thing to be brought to the Arch. chancery office downtown. What sort of cracked me up about this sad individual's letter was that she ranted about the evils of religion etc. but requested that we issue an official "unbaptism" certificate suitable for framing. (Like, if you think we're full of "it" why do you give our certificates any validity?)

I guess our response (written by a caring, well-educated priest with much more tact than I would be able to muster) was that she was free to consider herself "not a member" of our parish or Church but we could not expunge a record of what had taken place (with an honest but not confrontational mention of the indelible mark it makes on a soul) I decided to pray for this woman, but I don't think I could have been quite a polite. And if I had known about the bulls blood, I might have suggested it that, along with a request to not contact us if she didn't thing we were 'real.'

"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Somebody should tell Caesar this ain't his.

Makes more sense to bathe in the blood.

Jeff,

thanks for the correction. Just to clear up my mind: is apostasy what happens when a person decides to not want to be part of the Church anymore (in statement or in fact) and excommunication when the Church tells a person that he/she is outside of the Church due to major sinful behaviour?

In other words, is the difference based on who takes the initiative or is there something else involved?

I don't want to stray from the thread, so ignore me if I have.

Here's an article about the case. It's hard to tell just why the case went on so far.

Roberto,

Apostacy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith.

Excommunication is an ecclesial punishment aimed towards repentance of the individual.

Perhaps we could, then issue a certificate of Apostasy.

"By the Authority granted us by the Apostolic See, we hereby certify that -N.- has departed from the Body of Christ, the Communion of Saints, the Holy Catholic Church, through a free and deliberate act of the will."

I guess I am puzzled as to why any individual would want such a thing. IF it means nothing, then it means nothing!

On the other hand, Catholics and others have had questions about being baptized Mormons by proxy against their will!

It's hard not to come to the conclusion that the plaintiff is a hard core malcontent who doesn't care so much about his privacy rights as he does about publicly showing the Church how much he hates it. I mean, give me a break, how many people were going through his baptismal records and finding out-horror of horrors-that he was baptized a Catholic?

So is the Church supposed to staple the guy's "unbaptism certificate" to his baptismal file, or what? And what real point does this make?

How about a compromise? A large red "apostasy" stamp will be put on all such baptismal certificates. ;)

"John the Debaptizer"

I laughed out loud on that one. Bravo!

Julian did what?

Was that where the mad cow disease came from?

My apologies to bovines everywhere. No offense was intended.

As a non believer in Christian Church teachings I would think that when a child is baptised as a baby, long before he/she is capable of making any rational decision about their religious or secular beliefs, then that baptism is not worth the time of day as regards to validity.

I can quite understand therefore why such a person would like to have their name removed from church records. The baptism itself has happened and that cannot be undone or removed, but surely it is not asking too much to ask the church to isuue a piece of paper stating that the "baptismee" has indicated that they wish to disregard the baptism that their parents and the church imposed on them when an infant. That too has happened once written documentation has arrived at the church - or does this sort of thing only work one way?