Am I qualified to do readings at mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholicskier
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
glendab said:
One more thing. Defending the poor children’s need for Baptism and the true faith is exactly what is happening. Those poor children were promised Baptism by both spouses before they were even conceived. The woman had to promise to not only secure their Baptism but had to also agree to raise those children in the faith and all of this had to happen to be given the permission to marry.
Glenda
Click to expand...
She didn’t have to promise anything, he did. The Church does not require the non-Catholic to promise to raise the children Catholic. She hasn’t since the new Code of Canon Law came into effect 30 years ago.

***Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism *********
150. When, for a just and reasonable cause, permission for a mixed marriage is requested, both parties are to be instructed on the essential ends and properties of marriage which are not to be excluded by either party. Furthermore, the Catholic party will be asked to affirm, in the form established by the particular law of the Eastern Catholic Churches or by the Episcopal Conference, that he or she is prepared to avoid the dangers of abandoning the faith and to promise sincerely to do all in his/her power to see that the children of the marriage be baptized and educated in the Catholic Church. The other partner is to be informed of these promises and responsibilities. At the same time, it should be recognized that the non-Catholic partner may feel a like obligation because of his/her own Christian commitment. It is to be noted that no formal written or oral promise is required of this partner in Canon Law.
Those who wish to enter into a mixed marriage should, in the course of the contacts that are made in this connection, be invited and encouraged to discuss the Catholic baptism and education of the children they will have, and where possible come to a decision on this question before the marriage.
In order to judge the existence or otherwise of a “just and reasonable cause” with regard to granting permission for this mixed marriage, the local Ordinary will take account, among other things, of an explicit refusal on the part of the non-Catholic party.
  1. In carrying out this duty of transmitting the Catholic faith to the children, the Catholic parent will do so with respect for the religious freedom and conscience of the other parent and with due regard for the unity and permanence of the marriage and for the maintenance of the communion of the family. If, notwithstanding the Catholic’s best efforts, the children are not baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church, the Catholic parent does not fall subject to the censure of Canon Law. At the same time, his/her obligation to share the Catholic faith with the children does not cease. It continues to make its demands, which could be met, for example, by playing an active part in contributing to the Christian atmosphere of the home; doing all that is possible by word and example to enable the other members of the family to appreciate the specific values of the Catholic tradition; taking whatever steps are necessary to be well informed about his/her own faith so as to be able to explain and discuss it with them; praying with the family for the grace of Christian unity as the Lord wills it.
 
Phemie said:
She didn’t have to promise anything, he did. The Church does not require the non-Catholic to promise to raise the children Catholic. She hasn’t since the new Code of Canon Law came into effect 30 years ago.

***Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism *********
150. When, for a just and reasonable cause, permission for a mixed marriage is requested, both parties are to be instructed on the essential ends and properties of marriage which are not to be excluded by either party. Furthermore, the Catholic party will be asked to affirm, in the form established by the particular law of the Eastern Catholic Churches or by the Episcopal Conference, that he or she is prepared to avoid the dangers of abandoning the faith and to promise sincerely to do all in his/her power to see that the children of the marriage be baptized and educated in the Catholic Church. The other partner is to be informed of these promises and responsibilities. At the same time, it should be recognized that the non-Catholic partner may feel a like obligation because of his/her own Christian commitment. It is to be noted that no formal written or oral promise is required of this partner in Canon Law.
Those who wish to enter into a mixed marriage should, in the course of the contacts that are made in this connection, be invited and encouraged to discuss the Catholic baptism and education of the children they will have, and where possible come to a decision on this question before the marriage.
In order to judge the existence or otherwise of a “just and reasonable cause” with regard to granting permission for this mixed marriage, the local Ordinary will take account, among other things, of an explicit refusal on the part of the non-Catholic party.
  1. In carrying out this duty of transmitting the Catholic faith to the children, the Catholic parent will do so with respect for the religious freedom and conscience of the other parent and with due regard for the unity and permanence of the marriage and for the maintenance of the communion of the family. If, notwithstanding the Catholic’s best efforts, the children are not baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church, the Catholic parent does not fall subject to the censure of Canon Law. At the same time, his/her obligation to share the Catholic faith with the children does not cease. It continues to make its demands, which could be met, for example, by playing an active part in contributing to the Christian atmosphere of the home; doing all that is possible by word and example to enable the other members of the family to appreciate the specific values of the Catholic tradition; taking whatever steps are necessary to be well informed about his/her own faith so as to be able to explain and discuss it with them; praying with the family for the grace of Christian unity as the Lord wills it.
Click to expand...
Given the husbands promise and obligations, made at the time of marriage and with the consent of the wife, the wife now seeking to frustrate performance of that promise is “troubling”.
 
Rau said:
Given the husbands promise and obligations, made at the time of marriage and with the consent of the wife, the wife now seeking to frustrate performance of that promise is “troubling”.
Click to expand...
Is it so difficult to understand that to a Baptist everything about infant Baptism screams “WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!”?

It’s easy to say ‘no problem’ when you’ve got stars in your eyes and children are something that may happen at some point in the future. When the children are there and everything about the idea makes you sick because in your eyes it’s wrong, it’s not so easy to go along.
 
Hello Phemie.
Phemie said:
She didn’t have to promise anything, he did. The Church does not require the non-Catholic to promise to raise the children Catholic. She hasn’t since the new Code of Canon Law came into effect 30 years ago.

***Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism *********
150. When, for a just and reasonable cause, permission for a mixed marriage is requested, both parties are to be instructed on the essential ends and properties of marriage which are not to be excluded by either party. Furthermore, the Catholic party will be asked to affirm, in the form established by the particular law of the Eastern Catholic Churches or by the Episcopal Conference, that he or she is prepared to avoid the dangers of abandoning the faith and to promise sincerely to do all in his/her power to see that the children of the marriage be baptized and educated in the Catholic Church. The other partner is to be informed of these promises and responsibilities. At the same time, it should be recognized that the non-Catholic partner may feel a like obligation because of his/her own Christian commitment. It is to be noted that no formal written or oral promise is required of this partner in Canon Law.
Those who wish to enter into a mixed marriage should, in the course of the contacts that are made in this connection, be invited and encouraged to discuss the Catholic baptism and education of the children they will have, and where possible come to a decision on this question before the marriage.
In order to judge the existence or otherwise of a “just and reasonable cause” with regard to granting permission for this mixed marriage, the local Ordinary will take account, among other things, of an explicit refusal on the part of the non-Catholic party.
  1. In carrying out this duty of transmitting the Catholic faith to the children, the Catholic parent will do so with respect for the religious freedom and conscience of the other parent and with due regard for the unity and permanence of the marriage and for the maintenance of the communion of the family. If, notwithstanding the Catholic’s best efforts, the children are not baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church, the Catholic parent does not fall subject to the censure of Canon Law. At the same time, his/her obligation to share the Catholic faith with the children does not cease. It continues to make its demands, which could be met, for example, by playing an active part in contributing to the Christian atmosphere of the home; doing all that is possible by word and example to enable the other members of the family to appreciate the specific values of the Catholic tradition; taking whatever steps are necessary to be well informed about his/her own faith so as to be able to explain and discuss it with them; praying with the family for the grace of Christian unity as the Lord wills it.
Click to expand...
Hubby would be within these bounds if he said this: “Honey, I respect your religious difference in not baptizing children but my religion says they can be and should be. I as head of this household will decide for them and I decided they will be Baptized and taken to Church on Sunday and enrolled in CCD and taught at home to prayer a Catholic way and that they will be instructed in the faith. As my wife, you will submit to my decision because this is supported not only by Scripture but is also supported by your Baptist faith. However, out of respect for your preference I will also note points of divergence in which you will have the opportunity to says what it is you believe. I love you honey, but I also love my children and I as head of the household will use my prerogative as head of household in the sight of God to do what I think is best for all concerned.”

Glenda
 
Phemie said:
Is it so difficult to understand that to a Baptist everything about infant Baptism screams “WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!”?

It’s easy to say ‘no problem’ when you’ve got stars in your eyes and children are something that may happen at some point in the future. When the children are there and everything about the idea makes you sick because in your eyes it’s wrong, it’s not so easy to go along.
Click to expand...
Yes, fairly difficult, given it wasn’t screaming so loud at the time commitments were made. You would think a Baptist might have stood up for her convictions at the appropriate time. I assume you will be just as understanding if the OP informs us shortly that he has baptized his children.
 
OraLabora said:
Correct, God does not punish innocent children. She did away with the concept of “limbo”.
Click to expand...
I assume by “She” you meant either “He” or the Church.😉

NO one "did away: with limbo. It is not a teaching of the faith. One however could still hold to the belief and be in line with the Church.

What are your thoughts on The Ban. God ordered “The Ban” many times.
 
Does anyone know how and when the practice of infant baptism came about? I assume it is tied to the teaching that Baptism is a prerequisite for Salvation - naturally encouraging the earliest practicable baptism - so the question may convert to what is the origin of that.
 
Rau said:
Does anyone know how and when the practice of infant baptism came about? I assume it is tied to the teaching that Baptism is a prerequisite for Salvation - naturally encouraging the earliest practicable baptism - so the question may convert to what is the origin of that.
Click to expand...
Here is how it came about. In the book of acts. The apostles baptized “whole households”
 
Rau said:
Thanks I’ll try and find it. Surprised you can’t quote me a verse! 🙂
Click to expand...
Acts 16:33;)

Here is a piece I found. I don’t believe it to be explicitly Catholic but it makes the argument for infant baptism to baptists.
opc.org/new_horizons/NH00/0007c.html

From it:
When Jesus instituted Christian baptism, he instructed his disciples to “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them … [and] teaching them to observe all that I commanded you” (Matt. 28:19–20). Baptism, then, begins the discipling process, which continues throughout one’s life. Everyone recognizes that the children of believers should be taught to observe the commandments of Jesus (see Eph. 6:1–3, 4). But this passage indicates that they should be baptized first.
Click to expand...
It also makes a good point about baptism and it’s relation to circumcision which was practiced on both infant and adult converts to Judaism. Baptism is the sign of the New Covenant.

But my favorite is when Jesus himself speaks of the Children coming to Him and that we must have faith like Children.

There are others and of course I disagree with the premise in the article that there is no direct proof of infant baptism.
 
My priest said to be patient because my wife has moved from not wanting to be baptized to wanting them to be baptized in a non Catholic Church. My children are 3 and 5, I have been married for 7 years and in that time.
1- I have went from a non practicing catholic to a passionate one
2-my wife has gone from a minimally practicing fundamentalist baptist to a passionate low church Presbyterian
 
Catholicskier said:
My priest said to be patient because my wife has moved from not wanting to be baptized to wanting them to be baptized in a non Catholic Church. My children are 3 and 5, I have been married for 7 years and in that time.
1- I have went from a non practicing catholic to a passionate one
2-my wife has gone from a minimally practicing fundamentalist baptist to a passionate low church Presbyterian
Click to expand...
Your priest is wise.
  1. These types of problems are common with a Catholic who reverts and does so with gusto. It can be hard for a spouse.
  2. Sounds like she is open to changing her beliefs as well.
Did you know that most Presbyterians practice infant baptisms?

You are aware of her next move right? She may conceded the baptism, but in her place of choice.

I hesitate even mentioning it but I would kick myself if I didn’t

You have read “Rome Sweet Home” By Dr. Scott and Kimberly Hahn right?

It is the story of conversion to the faith where one spouse fights it. I think Kimberly’s dad was a baptist preacher, though I could be wrong about that…

You should read it if you haven’t. I think you will see a lot of your own family there.

Also, I think your wife’s move to Presbyterian may indeed be a good sign in your favor of a resolution and eventual entire Catholic family.
Remember, learn your faith and lovingly be able to defend and explain it. But don’t let your zeal be a turn off for your wife. This is very much like fishing, Just as Jesus said. And you may wish to reel her in calmly and slowly lest the line break…😉
 
Catholicskier said:
My priest said to be patient because my wife has moved from not wanting to be baptized to wanting them to be baptized in a non Catholic Church. My children are 3 and 5, I have been married for 7 years and in that time.
1- I have went from a non practicing catholic to a passionate one
2-my wife has gone from a minimally practicing fundamentalist baptist to a passionate low church Presbyterian
Click to expand...
I agree your priest is wise. I was in a similar situation. I reverted to the faith in 1997 after not practicing for many years. My wife had already started to attend an Anglican church when I reverted, with our kids. About two years after I reverted, she had herself and our children, then aged 9, 7 and 4, baptized in the Anglican church. I was not going to put a monkey wrench into the gears of a process she’d already started and in any event, the Anglican baptism is a valid one.

The priest that received me back into the Church, and the one who later convalidated our marriage, both said that we should never ever argue about doctrine in our marriage but instead build up the common ground between us, a love of Christ and a desire to serve God. That was a bit tough to do at first as we both had the zeal of the newly converted. With time though, we both mellowed. She even came to Rome with me last year for the World Oblates’ Congress, and loved every minute of the congress, and has gone from being a very “Low Church” Anglican to becoming a fan of Western Monasticism.

Let God work on your wife on His own timetable; just stand as a living, breathing example of your faith to her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top