Accidentally Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pray4Life
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pray4Life

Guest
Please bear with me, I know this is long, but it is eating me up and if anyone can help me, I would appreciate it so much.

I married my (baptized-Protestant, and still non-Catholic) husband after a period of informal instruction in the Church (not RCIA, but approved by the priest) and after changing my mind about being received into the Church, for various reasons not relevant here (but no, it didn’t have to do with our relationship.) So I was a non-Catholic when we married and unsure if I’d ever actually become Catholic, though I shared many Catholic beliefs.

Again, for various reasons, this was probably for the best. When I finally was received into the Church, at a different parish, two years later, I was fully ready to come home. 🙂 I was already baptized Methodist as an infant (again years later as a Baptist, because Baptists don’t believe infant baptism is valid- yes I know multiple baptisms are a big no-no in the Church, but remember I wasn’t Catholic yet!) So I just made my first Communion at an ordinary weekday Mass and was confirmed on Pentecost the following year. 🙂

In any event, my marriage has never needed to be convalidated because I was still a non-Catholic when we married. But after reading something on here where a woman was questioning the validity of her marriage due to the mixed marriage issue, I began to feel a little anxious. I had never before even thought I might have been Catholic when I got married, I was dead certain that I was not for the past almost 8 years, but when I looked up being received into the Church, I saw that a profession of faith can mean you are Catholic if you are already baptized even apart from the other Sacraments, and though this is usually done at the time of first Eucharist, I got the impression it could be done separately!

I have absolutely NO memory of doing such a thing and neither does my family. If it did happen, I did not know what it meant, not at all, or that I was then Catholic by doing it (though I did fully intend to join the Church at one time and could have made such a profession honestly…apart from not knowing what it actually meant!) I have NO reason to believe such a thing ever happened, and I have no proof it ever did. Even the man who was sponsoring me into the Church the first time I was preparing to convert mentioned his surprise years after the fact that I had eventually joined the Church, clearly indicating that he did not think I was Catholic at the time, either.

I know this fear is totally groundless, but it would be such a comfort to me if anyone knows whether the profession of faith for a candidate must be public under ordinary circumstances (I am dead certain no public events ever happened during my preparation- there was no “rite of welcoming” or any acknowledgment at Mass, etc.) I do not even remember meeting with the priest privately except once, to discuss the possibility of a Catholic wedding early in my engagement. It is possible I did, when planning to make my first Communion, but I do not remember. I never even went to Confesion until over a year after I changed my mind about being received!

Could I have been Catholic all that time without me or anyone else knowing it? Can someone accidentally become Catholic? Is it very likely it would have happened this way? I am not even sure what I’d say to my priest (no longer the same one, I have moved multiple times since then)- “I fear my marriage is invalid, and I have absolutely no reason, proof, or evidence to have such a fear.” I understand the Church assumes a marriage is valid unless it can be proved otherwise, is this true?

Thanks for any help…I know this probably sounds crazy…I do have anxiety issues to start with which are being treated (but not very successfully, obviously). I am also resolving to stay away from threads like that in the future, but obviously the damage has been done. 😦 God bless you.
 
If you were baptized using the Trinitarian formula you were baptized Catholic no matter the tradition.
 
Yes, the Creed is usually done publicly after the person being received into full communion is asked if they are asking to be received of their own free will. They then join the community in reciting the Nicene Creed. Then they say “I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.”

I think it would be very difficult for you to have done all this without knowing.

What I don’t understand is why you weren’t confirmed before you received Communion.

But that has no bearing on when you became Catholic.
 
Hang on OP, are you saying you made this profession of faith and received first Holy Communion in the Catholic Church prior to your marriage?

What matters is what you were on the day of your marriage, not what happened afterwards.
 
LilyM said:
Hang on OP, are you saying you made this profession of faith and received first Holy Communion in the Catholic Church prior to your marriage?

What matters is what you were on the day of your marriage, not what happened afterwards.
Click to expand...
She’s worried that she may have made the profession of faith before she married but she doesn’t remember doing so. She knows that she received Communion AFTER they married.

I honestly don’t think she has anything to worry about.
 
Phemie said:
She’s worried that she may have made the profession of faith before she married but she doesn’t remember doing so. She knows that she received Communion AFTER they married.

I honestly don’t think she has anything to worry about.
Click to expand...
Remember, as Phemie said, the saying of the Creed that everyone does in Sunday at Mass is a somewhat separate thing from the Profession of Faith a convert would make - and it sounds like it would be difficult to do the latter without knowing or remembering, especially if you’d decided against becoming Catholic.

I agree - nothing to worry about.
 
Buffalo, a baptized non-Catholic is not required to abide by the marriage laws of the Church. In fact, a marriage between two baptized non-Catholics is considered both valid and sacramental, even if it is outside of the Catholic Church and without the proper dispensations required of those who were baptized in the Church. The only requirement is that the union be legal and be recognized by their own religion, from what I understand. So regardless of the any-valid-baptism-is-Catholic-by-default thing, it has no practical application to my situation. Thank you very much for taking the time to read my behemoth of a post and write such a speedy reply. God bless you!
 
Phemie, what you describe as reception into the Church did not even happen at my actual first Communion. I do not think this was due to any suspicions of a prior profession of faith, though. This was never mentioned and I had not the slightest idea such a thing was possible before two nights ago. It was an ordinary weekday Mass, my name was mentioned during the prayers of the faithful as it being my first Communion then I received with everyone else. And until those two nights ago, I was 100% sure, for the past almost 8 years, that I was not Catholic for another 1 1/2-2 years after my wedding (don’t feel like doing the precise math at the moment lol).

I am sure such a ceremony did not take place prior to my marriage, either. I think I only ever met with the priest once, as I said, but it is possible I met with him another time and forgot while planning my first Communion. That is the only time such a thing could have taken place. If a profession of faith receiving me into the Church happened then, I have no memory of it at all, did not understand what it meant, and there were no witnesses. It does not seem to me that this is a very likely scenario, but I wanted to see what those more knowledgeable than me (and more detached, I might add) would think.

So Lily, I would still have intended to enter the Church when that meeting took place. That is why I’m worried he might have had me say the words, without me understanding that THAT was my reception. I would have meant them, but with the understanding that I would not be actually a Catholic until my first Communion. It seems to me at least my sponsor would have been present if that were the case?? But he was not, and did not even know about it…if that meeting ever even happened. You see the bind I’m in? It sounds very far fetched but I don’t know enough about how these things work to be able to say with confidence “that is indeed far fetched” LOL

To backtrack to Phemie re:confirmation, Confirmation is only done by a bishop, from what I understand, and there was none present at the Mass in May when I received my first Communion. I was not part of the RCIA program and did not join at the Easter Vigil. Thus my Confirmation was put off until Pentecost of the following year. I was not deemed adequately prepared to do it at the time of my first Communion anyway and took lessons the sweetest, dearest elderly lady from my parish before it happened 🙂

Eeek, sorry this was so long again, I get to rambling and can’t shut up. 😊 Thank you both for your quick answers and your patience.
 
P4L sweetie, a profession of faith (or any other form of reception into the Church) is NEVER something that happens privately in a one-on-one meeting with your priest.

It ALWAYS happens publicly - either by public baptism (with family and friends witnessing if not the entire congregation) or some other public ceremony such as your First Communion Mass. It is always done publicly and in front of at least some witnesses exactly so that uncertainty can be avoided.

Was your sponsor present at your first Communion Mass? Whatever the case, your reception into the Church certainly can’t have happened at any of the prior meetings you are talking about.
 
Pray4Life said:
Please bear with me, I know this is long, but it is eating me up and if anyone can help me, I would appreciate it so much.

I married my (baptized-Protestant, and still non-Catholic) husband after a period of informal instruction in the Church (not RCIA, but approved by the priest) and after changing my mind about being received into the Church, for various reasons not relevant here (but no, it didn’t have to do with our relationship.) So I was a non-Catholic when we married and unsure if I’d ever actually become Catholic, though I shared many Catholic beliefs.

Again, for various reasons, this was probably for the best. When I finally was received into the Church, at a different parish, two years later, I was fully ready to come home. 🙂 I was already baptized Methodist as an infant (again years later as a Baptist, because Baptists don’t believe infant baptism is valid- yes I know multiple baptisms are a big no-no in the Church, but remember I wasn’t Catholic yet!) So I just made my first Communion at an ordinary weekday Mass and was confirmed on Pentecost the following year. 🙂

In any event, my marriage has never needed to be convalidated because I was still a non-Catholic when we married. But after reading something on here where a woman was questioning the validity of her marriage due to the mixed marriage issue, I began to feel a little anxious. I had never before even thought I might have been Catholic when I got married, I was dead certain that I was not for the past almost 8 years, but when I looked up being received into the Church, I saw that a profession of faith can mean you are Catholic if you are already baptized even apart from the other Sacraments, and though this is usually done at the time of first Eucharist, I got the impression it could be done separately!

I have absolutely NO memory of doing such a thing and neither does my family. If it did happen, I did not know what it meant, not at all, or that I was then Catholic by doing it (though I did fully intend to join the Church at one time and could have made such a profession honestly…apart from not knowing what it actually meant!) I have NO reason to believe such a thing ever happened, and I have no proof it ever did. Even the man who was sponsoring me into the Church the first time I was preparing to convert mentioned his surprise years after the fact that I had eventually joined the Church, clearly indicating that he did not think I was Catholic at the time, either.

I know this fear is totally groundless, but it would be such a comfort to me if anyone knows whether the profession of faith for a candidate must be public under ordinary circumstances (I am dead certain no public events ever happened during my preparation- there was no “rite of welcoming” or any acknowledgment at Mass, etc.) I do not even remember meeting with the priest privately except once, to discuss the possibility of a Catholic wedding early in my engagement. It is possible I did, when planning to make my first Communion, but I do not remember. I never even went to Confesion until over a year after I changed my mind about being received!

Could I have been Catholic all that time without me or anyone else knowing it? Can someone accidentally become Catholic? Is it very likely it would have happened this way? I am not even sure what I’d say to my priest (no longer the same one, I have moved multiple times since then)- “I fear my marriage is invalid, and I have absolutely no reason, proof, or evidence to have such a fear.” I understand the Church assumes a marriage is valid unless it can be proved otherwise, is this true?

Thanks for any help…I know this probably sounds crazy…I do have anxiety issues to start with which are being treated (but not very successfully, obviously). I am also resolving to stay away from threads like that in the future, but obviously the damage has been done. 😦 God bless you.
Click to expand...
Your Reception into full union as a Catholic happened after you received the Sacraments of Holy Communion AND Confirmation.
 
No you cannot “accidentally” become a Catholic. The profession of faith is part of being received into the Church and you would definitely know if you had done it. It’s a deliberate act. You were received into the Church when you completed your sacraments of initiation and you made your profession at that time through reciting the Creed at Confirmation.

You married as a non-Catholic. Your marriage is valid. You became a Catholic two years later.

Be at peace. Do not dwell on this again.
 
Whoa, am I understanding this correctly…I wasn’t a Catholic until I was confirmed? I was receiving our Lord as a non-Catholic for that year between the two Sacraments? I had no idea. Though if I do have it right, that would certainly explain why Confirmation and first Eucharist are usually done together for adults!

I did not know Confirmation had such importance, to be honest. I thought it was good to have done, but optional. :o

Thank you all so much for your replies! I feel so relieved to know my worries were for nothing! I know this must sound so silly to all of you, but it was seriously upsetting to me. How would I even explain to my husband, “well honey, when you get home from Iraq, we have to live as brother and sister until we get our marriage sorted out, because I unknowingly became Catholic before we got married…” He did NOT convert with me and I don’t think he’d find it endearing.

Oh, and I found out this morning that the parish where this “accidental conversion” would have happened has no record of me, period. Zilch. Of course, I didn’t receive any Sacraments there, so I don’t know if they would have bothered writing down anything else, but it is still reassuring, too!
 
Pray4Life said:
Whoa, am I understanding this correctly…I wasn’t a Catholic until I was confirmed? I was receiving our Lord as a non-Catholic for that year between the two Sacraments? I had no idea. Though if I do have it right, that would certainly explain why Confirmation and first Eucharist are usually done together for adults!

I did not know Confirmation had such importance, to be honest. I thought it was good to have done, but optional. :o

Thank you all so much for your replies! I feel so relieved to know my worries were for nothing! I know this must sound so silly to all of you, but it was seriously upsetting to me. How would I even explain to my husband, “well honey, when you get home from Iraq, we have to live as brother and sister until we get our marriage sorted out, because I unknowingly became Catholic before we got married…” He did NOT convert with me and I don’t think he’d find it endearing.

Oh, and I found out this morning that the parish where this “accidental conversion” would have happened has no record of me, period. Zilch. Of course, I didn’t receive any Sacraments there, so I don’t know if they would have bothered writing down anything else, but it is still reassuring, too!
Click to expand...
Put it this way - there are THREE Sacraments of Initiation - Baptism, First Communion and Confirmation. You’re not considered to be fully initiated until you’ve completed all three, which as you say is the reason why for adults they’re usually done together.

For children, of course, there are issues of whether children are able to intellectually appreciate the significance of them, which is why they usually AREN’T all given at once to kids. Although from personal experience my niece and nephew both received Communion and Confirmation on the same weekend, but they were both 11 so reasonably mature.
 
If all 3 are required, then why do people who have been baptized in the Church but not received any other Sacraments still have to be married by a priest? They are not fully initiated either, right?
 
Pray4Life said:
If all 3 are required, then why do people who have been baptized in the Church but not received any other Sacraments still have to be married by a priest? They are not fully initiated either, right?
Click to expand...
They ARE supposed to be fully initiated beforehand - in other words they should, unless there is serious reason not to, receive the other sacraments first prior to being married.

There may be reasons not to - if their relationship is an irregular one, for example, then it actually needs to be regularised first before they can move on with the other sacraments.

So it’s an exception, made out of necessity, to the rule, since regularising the marriage is the first priority.

In your case you’re talking about a marriage that happened well before you began your initiation into the Church, no? Your baptism, not being done in a Catholic church, makes yours an entirely different case to someone who had been baptised within the Church, and your initiation is NOT regarded as having been begun by your baptism.
 
Ok, between your explanation and what I have read & been thinking, please let me know if I have this straight (and anyone else, please also feel free to jump in and tell me I’m a moron LOL):

Catholic baptism (and you know what I mean by this term, those baptisms specifically in the Catholic Church): in full communion with the Church from the start, and begun to be initiated into full membership (I am not sure if “membership” is the right word, it makes the Church sound like Costco :rolleyes:, but I can’t think of a better one at the moment) but fully initiated with reception of Eucharist and Confirmation.

Non-Catholic, but valid, baptism: incomplete/imperfect communion with Church, not yet initiated into Church membership.Initiated with Eucharist and Confirmation, fully so with both; full communion with Church achieved with Confirmation.

My mistake, I think, is that I have been assuming the Eucharist is what grants full communion with the Church (thus binding one to Church laws) when, if I understand you and the other posters right, it is actually Confirmation which solves the “imperfect communion” issue, and both Eucharist and Confirmation are necessary for full initiation, as it were. I am starting to that there might be a distinction between being a full, mature member of the Church, and being actually “in” the Church, i.e. fully Catholic. It is possible to be fully Catholic (such as one baptized that way) without attaining full membership, as those who complete the other Sacraments of Initiation. It is possible to be initiated into the membership process, as was the case with me (with my first Eucharist), without being in full communion with the Church yet (as I had not been Confirmed).

Which is why already-baptized adult converts are usually confirmed THEN receive Holy Communion on the same occasion. It makes more sense to make sure the person is in full communion with the Church and THEN complete the initiation than to do the reverse, as was done with me.

Whew. Please let me know if I got this right. It is very interesting even apart from my own issue and it has distracted me quite a bit trying to puzzle it out! I am sorry it is taking me so long to catch onto this, but thanks for bearing with me! Now I just hope I didn’t get it all wrong and look like a twit :o
 
Pray4Life said:
Whew. Please let me know if I got this right. It is very interesting even apart from my own issue and it has distracted me quite a bit trying to puzzle it out! I am sorry it is taking me so long to catch onto this, but thanks for bearing with me! Now I just hope I didn’t get it all wrong and look like a twit :o
Click to expand...
Now I’m going to confuse you even more. 😃

Communion was always the culmination of initiation up until 98 years ago. People were baptized and, in the beginning, immediately anointed (confirmed) and then received Communion.

When communities grew and people became more spread out, the sacraments were separated. Baptism occurred first, of course, and Confirmation and Communion would follow when the bishop (who had retained Confirmation as his to administer) came to the community. That could be as late as adulthood.

In 1910, after centuries of this tradition, Pope Pius X decreed that children could receive Communion at the age of reason, around the age of 7. All of a sudden children were receiving Communion without being confirmed first.

For decades afterwards Confirmation was usually administered whenever the bishop next came to town: for me that was the year after I made my first Communion – so I made my First Communion at the end of grade 1, at the age of 6, and was confirmed at the end of grade 2, when I was 7. My dad, who was born in 1913, received those sacraments at about the same age.

In the late 60s & 70s, the age for confirmation started being pushed further and further back, first to 10 or 11, then to high school age. Unfortunately, that was done in an attempt to keep kids in Religious Education programs and not for any theological reason since the Church says that Confirmation may be administered to anyone who has reached the age of reason (7) and has been adequately prepared but that anyone in danger of death should be confirmed (and that includes infants). There is really no justification to push it back to high school and make it a sacrament of maturity. For this reason, in recent years, some dioceses have been returning the sacraments to their original order and the children who’ve reached catechetical age are being prepared for both Confirmation & First Communion and receiving both in the same celebration.

That’s why I was surprised that you were made to wait for Confirmation but received Communion first. Any time someone is brought into full Communion or baptized into the Catholic Church as an adult the priest has the capacity to administer Confirmation and it’s usually done before they receive Communion.

In any case, you’ve completed your initiation, regardless of the order in which you received the three sacraments.
 
Wow, thank you, Phemie! How do you know all this stuff? I’m beginning to suspect you’re an undercover religious ed teacher :cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top