[quesera]

I'm pretty sure you cease to be a Catholic when you call the Pope the anti-Christ. Infallible, God's representative on Earth, etc.

Though in USAmerica, we're pretty flexible on the meaning of "Christian" anyway. Certainly the loudest proclaimers have no resemblance whatsoever to the expected meaning.

Those troublesome CINOs.. Gosh Darn them to Heck.

[graemep]

> I'm pretty sure you cease to be a Catholic when you call the Pope the anti-Christ. Infallible, God's representative on Earth, etc.

Infallible (i.e. with the authority of a church council) only when speaking ex-cathedra on matters of church doctrine. Its never clear what it applies to and its very rarely generally accepted (maybe once every 200 years or so) that it applies to a particular teaching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Frequency_...

[bombcar]

The popes have long ruled that once a Catholic, you're stuck as a Catholic, though they may dispense from some requirements, sometimes.

So even the Pope would say that you don't cease to be a Catholic if you call him an anti-Christ. Maybe excommunicated, but to be excommunicated you have to be Catholic.

[quesera]

It strikes me as fairly irrelevant what Catholics call ex-Catholics.

I don't think you can (edit: reasonably) call yourself a Catholic if you do not adhere to certain tenets of the Catholic Church.

(This is where I was going with the calls-themselves-Christian-but-aintnosuchthing comment, but it's less clear on re-read...)

[dragonwriter]

> It strikes me as fairly irrelevant what Catholics call ex-Catholics.

> I don't think you can call yourself a Catholic if you do not adhere to certain tenets of the Catholic Church.

If John calls himself a Catholic, and the Catholic Church up to the Pope calls him a Catholic, you are pretty silly saying he is not a Catholic because he doesn't agree with the heirarchy on things on your personal priority list for what makes someone a Catholic.

[graemep]

I think the problem is a matter of definition, and a conflict in common uses of the word:

1. Formally a Catholic in the eyes of the church. 2. Calls themselves a Catholic 3. Is Catholic in their beliefs.

The last has a lot of grey areas as its not clear what you need to believe. There is no formal definition. its clear you do not have to agree with the Church on every single thing. On the other hand at some point (e.g. not accepting the trinity) you are seriously at odds with Catholic beliefs.

The first two definitions might sometimes include atheists.

[quesera]

Do you call yourself a Googler after you quit?

You, and they, can use whatever labels serve your, or their, purpose.

But at some point it doesn't make much sense, or have much meaning, to do so.

I'm a Catholic.

[dragonwriter]

> I'm a Catholic

Does it make sense to call yourself that if you fail to hold to beliefs of the Catholic Church on central issues like “Who is a Catholic”?

I mean, if we are accepting your argument that neither your belief that you are Catholic nor the Church’s beloef that you are Catholic matters and you are not Catholic despite both of those if you disagree on important matters with the teachings of the Church, what is the natural conclusion?

[quesera]

You are making my point.

[jowea]

I think Sedevacantists and similar do consider themselves Catholic, although I don't think they usually believe the main Pope is the anti-Christ