quote:What I'm wondering is if I have decided that the church got something wrong (and I have), do I have to toss the whole thing? or do I still get to listen to its wisdom and worship through its sacraments, which I *do* find grace-filled?
I really need to discuss the matter with a priest but, until such time as I can, I am listening to people's thoughts on the matter, too.
As I understand it, the church is supposed to be infallible when teaching on morals. I have come to a position in my life where I genuinely believe that the practical moral teaching of the church is wrong, though I still agree with its philosophical underpinnings on the subject. Do I *have* to throw the baby out with the bathwater?
As I said in the other thread, I plan to discuss this with a priest, but, since I've thrown the question out to the world at large, there are some of you whose opinion I'd like to have.
posted
What kind of catholic are you? I'm Roman Catholic- I don't know if I feel comfortable commenting on other kinds of Catholic "walks"
Posts: 944 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jim-Me, I'm going out for a while now. I'll get back to this later. It may take a while to gather my thoughts.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always go back to the Catechism when I'm questioning "stuff"
quote: 892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a "definitive manner," they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent" which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
Which brings me to it depends what you're talking about.
Posts: 944 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
If we are talking about papal infallibility, there is a very wide spectrum of Catholic opinion. It was only really defined as a doctrine fairly recently in the First Vatican Council (1870?). And it doesn't mean that every thing the Pope says is correct. Infallibility is very rarely invoked. I can only think of one instance.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am a Catholic and have an uncle who has been a priest for over 40 years.
In my final opinion, God is the final say. However, the Church has had some very smart people thinking about these topics for 2000 years or so. Not that it makes them right, but at least give consideration to how they got to thier position. Most of the real stances of the Church are actually very nuanced and not give to sound bites, even if that is how they are sold.
I also disagree with the Church on certain subjects, both practical and religious. I think married couples should be allowed to use birh control, especially if they already have children. I also would not have a problem if it were shown that Mary and Joseph had other children other than Jesus.
posted
Jaiden, I'm Roman Catholic, sort of. I haven't been active for about 2 years, but I haven't found anything else that contains the truth and grace I find in Catholic worship.
There was a specific event that caused me to stop attending services and, since then, a whole host of stuff (most of which is admittedly emotional rather than rational) that has caused me to rethink a particular segment of Catholic moral teaching... and disagree with it.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
msquared, I'm not taking this on lightly, I promise . I will freely admit that I've taken some things the church has said a little too much at face value and that that *is* part of the problem... but I really have an irreconcilable difference on this one.
kmb, not a papal issue... my understanding is the church at large, when commenting on matters of faith or morals, is also to be held infallible.... and my issue is not a matter of controversy, as far as I know. It's a personal conflict and a personal one only. I'm sure it isn't unique, but I am certainly rare in thinking about maintaining communion from my position.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
As far as me, I've been Roman Catholic my whole life. I've received almost 20 years of Catholic education and have numerous family members who are priests/nuns/monks. I have many good friends who are priests/nuns and am on first name basis with 4 bishops (I've shaken JPII's hand too but that doesn't mean anything to the present conversation). But I'm not an expert by any means.
However I do know many seminary teachers and am on a university campus with a large seminary so I can do research and find out answers for you (you can email me if you want me to find information at all).
Posts: 944 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
While you are figuring stuff out, I would urge you to stay in communion as long as it is meaningful to you. Without knowing the issue if can only believe that you have an earnest heart and are trying faithfully to discern God's will. So I will, at least, consider myself to be in communion with you if that's okay.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:but I am certainly rare in thinking about maintaining communion from my position.
That I doubt.
Hehehe... well, I hope my position in general is pretty rare... I'd hate to think that a large percentage of people have been through what I've been through... for one, I hope they got better advice much sooner!
kmb, thank you, that's very kind and I accept
Edit, to all: it would be more a return to communion that I'm considering... I miss my spiritual home.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jim-me, do you want the email of a retired priest I know? He's a great guy and always goes the extra yard no matter what. He also is terrific at doing research and asking questions to others if he doesn't know. He's very good at acknowledgign if he doesn't know something and finding it out. (Or I guess I could try to convince him to come onto the messege board...)
Posts: 944 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would be in great debt to you and him, both, Jaiden, for the opportunity to discuss this in depth over e-mail... that would be truly wonderful!
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "official" church gets things wrong often. I would point out the sex-abuse scandal as a prime example. No one can say that the way the victims were treated by the "official" church was in accordance with God's will, yet it was "official" church policy. There is often a lag between the "Church" meaning the whole body of Christ (and that includes us!) and "official" church policy.
One of the "best" Catholics I know has spent the past 20 years fighting these policies. He is also the church. Can I e-mail you one of his articles? It addresses the "what is the church" issue.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
edited to add: I wish I could get you in contact with Father Benedict. He's a great person to converse with about things like this (considering he teaches both Sexual Ethics and Christian Moral Life at my alma mater). He's a very kind, open hearted, intelligent man. *sigh*
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
kmb, this isn't a matter of "official" policy, but of clear cut moral teaching...
aw, hell, I might as well just talk through the thing, it's not like most people here don't know the parts of the story from my landmarks anyhow...
follows shortly... and thanks to everyone for the kind responses. And Dag, since I hadn't mentioned you, thanks for taking a little time to be clear, too. (I suspect he knows the whole deal).
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't mean to press you into anything. I mentioned the sex-abuse issue as one area where the "official" church got it wrong while the larger "church" didn't. Not because I thought it had a specific bearing on your question.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He is also the church --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All by himself!?
Clearly not. That is my point. No one is.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
I was sexually abused as a child by several other, older children. My parents, the same ones who raised me Catholic and gave me my earliest spiritual lessons, spanked me for it, telling me I was bad to behave like that and never to do it again. Needless to say, this screwed up my sexual perspective pretty badly. Add in, now, a couple decades of taking way too far to heart every sermon about "whoever looks at a woman lustfully" and the not-real-forgiving nature of parental lessons and after a while you get a pretty screwed up young man. Long story short, I spent the majority of my life constantly craving sexual contact (thinking it's the only way I could have any value, not uncommon with sexual abuse victims) while simultaneously contsantly hating myself and thinking myself as evil and hellbound because of it.
I was in my 20's before the idea "I was sexually abused" ever reared its head. By then, I figured, I was past it, not really anything to do about it. My self-loathing, I thought, was normal... even appropriate... humility. I recall being puzzled in psych classes because the superego is the good part of you, that keeps the bad ego and id in check. I was like "so the goal is to be all superego, right? get rid of the ego and the id?" My instructor tried to explain that, no, that wasn't right, but I never could understand why.
So, eventually, I get married and have a few kids. I think it's testament to how much we loved each other that we managed to make it 12 years, with me as completely fouled up as I was and her, honestly, not too much better. I also start teaching confirmation classes and playing in the church praise band, because we can't afford regular tithing, so we give in services rendered.
Until my fourth child came along. The church I had gone to since 1975, which had given me my first communion, my first confession, my confirmation, in which my sister, nieces, nephews, and older children were baptised, refused to set up a baptism appointment for Robby because they wanted to see our tithing records. We explained that we did not have one and why. They said "I'm sorry but without your tithing record, without a pledge, we have no way of confirming that you are a member of this parish and able to receive baptism here."
I had never been so dumbstruck in my life. We walked out of church. We never went back. I had some trusted priests whom I could have called, but, honestly, I was so shocked and horrified I began to really question my entire faith... if *anyone* could stand to see a sacrament denied over *tithing*, then the whole thing must be a scam, right? well, maybe not, of course... one secretary does not a church policy make, but to us... well it was a serious slap in the face.
Now, about this time, the chickens also began to come home to roost in my marriage. After a really ugly fight, I agreed to go into counseling. The counselor, whom my wife had picked out, said that we both had some serious issues to work and how did we want to proceed? I volunteered to take mine on first and then Monica could work on her stuff if I was able to mold myself into what might pass for a good husband. At this stage I was thinking "learn how to communicate... learn how to be less selfish... " things like that.
To my surprise, she wanted to go back to when I was six and deal with my sexual abuse. Long story short (too late) we did and I got a lot better, by leaps and bounds. I got "love" and "sex" on the same page. I got to where I wasn't constantly thinking about sex. I got, most important of all, to where I wasn't hating myself constantly either. I got to where, I suddenly realized, my marriage was going to work and we were going to be happy together for the first time since our first year together.
Then the big surprise. My wife suddenly decidied she was done. She didn't want to work on her issues. She took the kids and moved out. She offered to stay, if I would let her out of her promise to work on her issues, but I realized this meant I would have to be good enough for both of us... carry both of our neuroses on my shoulders. I said "no".
So... here I am. Catholic teaching is that divorce is unequivocally bad. Yet, in the strictest sense. I chose it. I cannot choose otherwise. I will not. Also, the church teaches, unambiguously, that in the rare case where a divorce is necessary and warranted, the divorcees are called to not remarry, but instead remain celibate.
Now, having, for the first time in my life, reached a position of sexual sanity and health, to be told not to ever have it again is just too much to stomach. This from a church in a sexual crisis. This from a church whose teachings were used, inappropriately, but still used, by my parents and, eventually, by my self and my self-hatred, to beat me into the twisted creature I had become.
I have found a wonderful woman, who loves me as I am, who has helped teach me to love and be loved, who has moved halfway across the country to be with me and help me raise my children. She doesn't want to get married and neither do I, at the moment, but she has also shown me how a healthy sexual relationship works and how beautiful it can be. I do not feel called to repent of any of this.
But, again, the church teaching is unambiguous. I just think it's wrong, in my particular case. I think it has some very good points about sexuality, but I think some bad ones, too... and disasterous ones for me.
posted
KQ, I would never think you disrespectful... if you prefer to e-mail it to me so you don't have to call me out in public, that's fine... but if you have some input I'd like to hear it.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am so sorry that the church has failed you in so many ways. It is a testament to your faith that you haven't given up long ago.
I agree that church teaching here is wrong. The Catholic Church is monstrously screwed up about sex.
Human sexuality is a gift that like any of God's gifts can be used for good or ill. Like fire or water, it is both dangerous and essential. I believe that it can and should be "sacramental" in nature - that is a sign and symbol of God's Love for us.
I am very glad that you have found some happiness and I have every reason to believe that God rejoices in your joy as well.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Until my fourth child came along. The church I had gone to since 1975, which had given me my first communion, my first confession, my confirmation, in which my sister, nieces, nephews, and older children were baptised, refused to set up a baptism appointment for Robby because they wanted to see our tithing records. We explained that we did not have one and why. They said "I'm sorry but without your tithing record, without a pledge, we have no way of confirming that you are a member of this parish and able to receive baptism here."
I have no words for this except I'm sorry you were treated this way.
quote:So... here I am. Catholic teaching is that divorce is unequivocally bad. Yet, in the strictest sense. I chose it. I cannot choose otherwise. I will not. Also, the church teaches, unambiguously, that in the rare case where a divorce is necessary and warranted, the divorcees are called to not remarry, but instead remain celibate.
I think there's a decent chance you could get an annulment, based on the theory that at the time of your marriage you were not able to fully appreciate the extent of the covenant being made - the "sex and love on the same page" thing is very similar to some grounds I've heard that have been successful. It is certainly worth looking into.
quote:I have found a wonderful woman, who loves me as I am, who has helped teach me to love and be loved, who has moved halfway across the country to be with me and help me raise my children. She doesn't want to get married and neither do I, at the moment, but she has also shown me how a healthy sexual relationship works and how beautiful it can be. I do not feel called to repent of any of this.
But, again, the church teaching is unambiguous. I just think it's wrong, in my particular case. I think it has some very good points about sexuality, but I think some bad ones, too... and disastrous ones for me.
Unfortunately, I have little to offer you here. This is something I've struggled with and never resolved successfully.
I think there are two questions to ask yourself:
1.) Would you view the teachings in the same light if you did not face the possibility of not being able to marry in the Church again? That is, how much of this is related to the extra-marital sex teaching and how much to the divorce teachings which might make the extra-marital sex teaching result in a permanent ban?
2.) If the permanence is the root of most of the dissatisfaction, are your objections to the extra-marital sex teaching an attempt to justify yourself? I've asked this very bluntly, and I mean no disrespect. But, as you might imagine, I'm quite good at coming up with cogent reasons why a particular teaching doesn't apply in a particular situation, so I have to constantly ask myself this question. I usually don't like the answer much, at least in my more rebellious moods.
I cannot suggest speaking with a priest strongly enough. The right priest is very important, though. The goal of the priest will, of course, ultimately to get you to accept the teaching. But the better ones will not try to convince you, but rather try to get you to arrive at a destination through your own efforts. Some are good at this, some not.
As for whether you should leave communion (or rejoin it), I don't think you're at that point yet. I respect you greatly for taking this so seriously.
I cannot endorse the opinion that the Church's teaching is wrong here, despite some of my own misgivings on some of these topics.
I have great faith that you will arrive at the right decision, whatever that happens to be, if you continue to approach it as forthrightly and honestly as you have already. God bless you.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
I did e-mail, btw, but I add the caveat that I am not Catholic, experienced, or wise. So do with my input what you will. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What a good discussion that sprang from the onanism thread!
Dagonee, I think that church teaching sometimes necessarily lags behind. My grandmother was excommunicated when she married my grandfather - he was not catholic. The church doesn't do that now. Things do change and often change is initiated by the laity. God gave us brains, and hearts, and the Holy Spirit. Maybe your misgivings and mine and those of many, many faithful Catholics are just ahead of the curve. Maybe not. I would rather err on the side of inclusion.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: If the permanence is the root of most of the dissatisfaction, are your objections to the extra-marital sex teaching an attempt to justify yourself? I've asked this very bluntly, and I mean no disrespect. But, as you might imagine, I'm quite good at coming up with cogent reasons why a particular teaching doesn't apply in a particular situation, so I have to constantly ask myself this question.
That is the kicker to sort out, isn't it? One the curses of being intelligent is that you get very good at deceiving yourself...
The best clue I can give myself on this is that my change of mind extends to sexual issues that do not pertain to me... homosexuality, for example.
But I also don't think it's a matter of total disagreement so much as a matter of emphasis... words like "intrinsically disordered" and "grave sin" with respect to things like masturbation and usage of birth control really bother me... but at the same time I think the church is *right* to confess the link between child bearing and human sexuality. I just think they go way off the deep end about it ignoring the, IMO, very justifiable use of sex as a tool for pleasure and loving among adults.
As kmb said (and I have used the exact analogy myself) it is like fire... very important, even essential to some things, but very dangerous as well. I think the church is right to call for respect for its purpose and strict safety limitations so people don't get hurt... but I don't think that it's so dangerous that it's only safe and good (by analogy) when it's in an oven.
And not that I have to be right about this, either... I freely admit that my opinions are half-baked (sorry, I had to). But they are mine and they do represent what I think is the best I can do , for myself, right now.
It is heartening to hear from many of you that you aren't quite ready to excommunicate me, yet (I'm being light about this, but it is really very good to have your support, thank you).
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I avoided posting in this thread because, most of the time, Dagonee comes around and says exactly what I want to say, only better Thanks Dag you've done it again.
quote: Until my fourth child came along. The church I had gone to since 1975, which had given me my first communion, my first confession, my confirmation, in which my sister, nieces, nephews, and older children were baptised, refused to set up a baptism appointment for Robby because they wanted to see our tithing records. We explained that we did not have one and why. They said "I'm sorry but without your tithing record, without a pledge, we have no way of confirming that you are a member of this parish and able to receive baptism here."
I cannot begin to tell you how sorry I am you were treated this way. What an un-christian way to treat people. We're a poor family. We don't use recorded tithing but only give when we're able and have baptised our children without a problem Clearly a bad apple in the bunch.
I know the post-divorce celibacy thing is very difficult to live. The church makes a point of showing compassion for people in your situation. I agree with Dag though, look at it from without and see if you believe objectively that the idea of marriage vows being unbreakable is wrong.
quote:I think there's a decent chance you could get an annulment, based on the theory that at the time of your marriage you were not able to fully appreciate the extent of the covenant being made - the "sex and love on the same page" thing is very similar to some grounds I've heard that have been successful. It is certainly worth looking into.
I'm not sure about this but on a different tack: Was your wife catholic? I believe there are some differences between sacramental marriage between catholics and mixed marriages with regard to anulment.
I think talking this out with a good priest is key. I don't think anyone is ready to excommunicate you. We're all working on the logs in our own eyes
I think the most important thing is that your are seeking to do the right thing. I will keep you in my prayers.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jim-Me, if everyone who disagreed with any aspect of Catholic doctrine or the actions of its officiates stopped describing him or herself as Catholic, the Church would wither.
I don't honestly feel any human being has the right, or even the ability, to seperate another human from God's church. If after honest introspection you're all right with yourself, I think you're all right with God.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd like to thank everyone for the detailed and thought out responses and for the warm show of support. Dag, as usual, you could simply pass for my conscience without any disguise or pretense, except that you're more precise and thorough. The rest of you have been equally helpful and thoughtful-- even those of few words have chosen them with great consideration and respect. Yay you!
In case there's some sense of urgency or crisis to this, however, don't worry. My therapist and closest friends have been aware of this struggle for over a year, now. It's not new and didn't get posted here because it came to a head.... I just off hand posed the question in another thread in response to something El JT de Spang said. Once I had it out there, I decided I might as well get some specfically Catholic opinions, which is why I started a new thread about it.
I figure God can allow me time and patience to sort this out... after all, I would for my children, and how much more an understanding father is he?
Miriya, you make a very good point with this
quote: I agree with Dag though, look at it from without and see if you believe objectively that the idea of marriage vows being unbreakable is wrong.
and that's the rub. I really *don't* think the church is wrong in expecting a higher standard. My wife was not Catholic when we were married, and she converted a couple of years later... then, the episode with Robby's baptism pretty much caused her to chuck the whole thing. There are probably grounds for an anullment based on the fact that our mutual psychological states were so poor that we almost didn't fit the description of "consenting adults", and I believe our therapist would attest to that, as well as to the nature of the "non-offer" to stay.
So yes, an annullment is on the list of things to consider, but now, even with some ways to get back into the church's good graces, my situation has opened my eyes to what appear to be flaws in the church's application of its philosophy on sex (which, again, I still somewhat agree with)... and so even with an annullment and the chance to re-marry, I really need to get these ideas well sorted and find if there's still room for me in the church once I do.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you definitely have grounds for an annulment, and I don't think it's a "back door" solution, either. I think this is a legitimate example of what the policy exists for. (And not because she was not Catholic, but because the two of you were not healthy enough at the time of your marriage to make a genuine commitment.)
I wish you luck. I'm an adrift former Catholic myself, and in some ways your story has a lot of resonance for me. I too miss the sense of religious community, and wish I could find a tradition that my beliefs aligned with.
quote:I think you definitely have grounds for an annulment, and I don't think it's a "back door" solution, either. I think this is a legitimate example of what the policy exists for. (And not because she was not Catholic, but because the two of you were not healthy enough at the time of your marriage to make a genuine commitment.)
I brought up the issue of his ex-wife being catholic because if she wasn't a believer she may not have entered into the marriage with the intent and commitment of true lifelong marriage as understood by catholics. The lack of such an intent would nullify the marriage (and reading a bit about her lack of efforts to make the marriage healthy and viable, it didn't seem like a stretch)
I certainly didn't intend it as a back door or to imply any lack of validity to mixed marriages.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't mean to say that you meant that, but that Jim-Me's reluctance seemed to indicate an attitude of, well, they might let me get away with this, but this doesn't change the root problem. And my point then was that annulment seems to actually fit this situation perfectly, without any particular stretch, and thus the Catholic Church actually does have a reasonable way to move forward from where he is.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
This was Kwea...my wife didn't log out again!
As far the way your church treated you, I think that is completely un-Christian, and I would file a complaint against your church about it.
I know from my own experience that what they told you is NOT true, that a lot of people make payment in services rendered because of their financial situations. There is no way possible that they could have had you teaching CCD there and NOT know/proved you were a parishioner.
Posts: 325 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jim, I have no advice to give being as I'm not at all religious. We have a lot in common though, and I wanted to tell you you have my respect and sympathy for what you're going through.
posted
What msquared said about the issues in general.
Specifically,
About them not letting you baptize your child: that was extremely anti-Catholic, what they did. All that's needed for a baptism is a pulse. If that were your final issue, I'd say, go to another parish for baptism; and tell the bishop what happened, so he can jerk a knot in someone who effectively wanted to deny salvation to a baby, for money.
About the divorce: although I am Catholic, I don't quite go with what's up with Catholicism these days on this. I agree that divorce should be considered major. It sounds like you have reasonable grounds for annulment, in the way it's currently done. If not, well, if it were me, I'd change denominations. It's a cost, but it might be worth it.
But it also sounds like you don't have any interest in being chaste: you have no intention to marry this woman, but you do want to do It with her. This isn't some minor point of church teaching. It's basic to Christianity (in every denomination), because it came directly from the words of Christ, before the Church of Rome even existed. I invite you to consider whether He's worth listening to; a decision that I think is way more important than any particular action! This is between you and Him, not between you and one particular church.
Please let us know what you decide. I'm rooting for you!
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know several people who have obtained annulments from the Catholic Church for situations far more ambiguous than yours. One way to view this that cynical "it's a back door divorce, for which they collect a bunch of money too." Another way to look at it is that they have a mechanism which both treats the situation SERIOUSLY, but also has some humanity and balance to it.
If you intend to stay in the Church, I suggest that the latter view of things is probably the one to adopt.
As for the treatment by the secretary, I think you owe it to yourself to find out if that IS the policy of the church. For all you know, the secretary might've been told that day that if tithes don't increase, she'd be out of a job. Some people are just plain power mad and/or over-zealous in the interpretation of any minor lament from the pastor. It happens.
As a complete outsider, I just want to add one thing about your wife's attitude. There simply is no way to force someone to "work on their issues" if they don't want to. With the attitude she expressed, I'm sorry to say that even if she'd gone into therapy, she probably would've gotten little or nothing out of it. At least she was honest enough with herself and you to not just waste the money. The good side of it is you went first and DID get something out of it.
I hope you believe that there are healthy relationships awaiting you. And that you do not need to saddle yourself with the failure of your marriage, but to learn from it and be a better you, and a better person, husband, father, etc. as a result.
Give it time, though.
I too am rooting for you!
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"All that's needed for a baptism is a pulse"
I do have to say that I think priests are supposed to ensure that the baby is going to be in a Catholic family, or at least going be taught the Catholic faith. I mean, you can't just walk in with a baby and and ask a priest to baptize her. And the best way to know if a family is going to church regularly is to see if they have indeed been putting in any money in weekly or monthly. So I think it is common to for parishes want to look at monetary contributions for that reason. Not at the AMOUNT, but at the frequency of donation. If there aren't any, well, then if the secretary is too dumb to accept other suggestions of places to look for your name in other places, the priest should have been more than able to do that. She was looking at the money as important, rather than the proof of your activity in the church as important.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I do have to say that I think priests are supposed to ensure that the baby is going to be in a Catholic family, or at least going be taught the Catholic faith. I mean, you can't just walk in with a baby and and ask a priest to baptize her.
This is true. When you ask for your child to be baptized as catholic, at least one parent makes a commitment to raise that child in the faith and is expected to be a practicing (as are the god parents) member of that parish. There is also usually a "preparation for baptism" workshop that parents must attend.
As far as the tithing records: in every church I've ever attended they have census cards that you fill out when you move to the parish. I did this and am a registered member of the parish. I do not use envelopes (the method of recording donations). I have never had a problem baptising my children. They check the register and there is my family's listing. Incidentally I attend a huge parish where it is virtually impossible for the priest to know all the parishioners on sight (~4500 families), so there is a need to check.
I think it's outrageous to use tithing records as proof of anything. The only reason the church records this stuff is so people can write off their contributions on their taxes. Many people do not wish to do this and there are biblical supports for doing one's "good deeds" in private or anonymously. Many parishioners tithe in unrecorded cash. If I had encountered that particular secretary's attitude, I would have totally lost it.
People like that do a huge disservice to the church.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A couple of clarifications... apologies this is really long.
The denial of baptism we experienced is *NOT* church policy. One of the many issues here is what the church actually teaches versus what I have experienced. I'm aware of the difference, but personal experience and a general sense of distrust instilled by it is a very difficult prejudice to overcome. The same applies to my experiences with "Catholic guilt" over my own sexual issues-- the things I was beaten down with were, at best, distortions of church teaching. It's hard to describe how deeply I'm affected by it and why. It's a serious issue just sorting it out for myself.
Also the church itself is not as harsh as it might seem... from the catechism on masturbation:
quote:To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that lessen or even extenuate moral culpability
It's not as if the church's position is actually a one-size fits all approach-- they do, in their official statements make allowances for individual situations. Like mine.
But this is almost never borne out in practice or policy. And some of this (maybe all of it) is just the result of it being a huge organization. Maybe it's impossible for something that large to really get an individual message across while maintaining strong standards.
But all this, I suppose, to say that it really isn't about finding a way for my situation to fit into church canon. My situation, and my therapy, have revised my thinking on the nature of sin, redemption, fallen man, and the state of grace... all of which have deepened my understanding of and appreciation for the Catholic position on these...
But it has also caused me to re-evaluate my thoughts on human sexuality and the appropriate spaces and uses for it and I have decided I don't endorse the Catholic (or any orthodox Christian) position on it. Icarus was kinda right when he sensed the desire to not "take a back door" in my comments... it's a little deeper than that, though. The question isn't so much about my personal history and how to fit that into the church-- I provided that to explain why I had started this questioning which led to a re-evaluation of my beliefs. If I really just wanted to rejoin, and nothing else, I could fit my current life into the church through the process of annullment, the sacrament of reconciliation, and the sacrament of marriage.
The problem is, I can't go through those sincerely. I am not sorry for my current relationship. I do not repent of it. I do not repudiate it. And I have also come to the conclusion that the church is inocrrect on an unambiguous moral teaching. Does this mean I can't be a sincere catholic? I'm not sure of the answer. Most of you all seem to think the answer is "no" but also I get the sense that these answers are colored by the extreme circumstances of my situation. And perhaps they should be... that is among the many things I am trying to sort. Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I enjoy having my own ideas about god. I just took all the things I think are the best out of different religions, books and my own ideas and made a hodgepodge religion that's all my own. I didn't agree with any organized religion so this way works out best for me. I really do think with any religion it's an "all or nothing" thing. Maybe this way would work for you as well. Good luck, Jim.
Posts: 870 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But this is almost never borne out in practice or policy.
I'm sorry this has been your experience, Jim. (((hugs))) I've known many priests who really did seem to take this approach to heart, and who worked hard to make EVERYONE feel loved, welcomed, and included in their churches.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
I know many good priests... I meant my comments to be directed towards the organization as a whole... the teaching authority, the magisterium, if you will. It's an enormous organization trying to deal with around 1 billion people... it maybe expecting the impossible to look for real compassion and individual situational judgment from something that unwieldy.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
. I will freely admit that I've taken some things the church has said a little too much at face value and that that *is* part of the problem... but I really have an irreconcilable difference on this one. ![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
I have no words for this except I'm sorry you were treated this way.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Thanks Dag you've done it again. ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
