Awkward experience at RCIA

[RosaryFan]

I’ve been going through RCIA (I know they’re not called this anymore, but it’s easy and you all know what I mean). I’m a lifelong Protestant that is very passionate about my new home. I’m also very inquisitive and I love to discuss the finer points of Church teaching. Finally, I also happen to have become pretty good friends with my priest.

Therefore, our classes can sometimes get pretty involved in terms of theology. I ask a lot of questions, and we discuss a good bit. There are only two others in the class. One is an older woman that comes with her husband. They occasionally engage in the conversation but usually just listen, although they seem to enjoy learning. Another is an older gentleman who did not participate in the Rite of Election, and told us on the first day that he has been coming to our parish for over 20 years with his wife, and that this is just a formality for him. He’s very disinterested.

Last night, we discussed marriage. My priest, myself, and the woman teaching the class spent a solid 20 minutes talking about contraception, NFP, etc. I’m only 31, and am married…so I have a few questions about these things.

The gentleman who is there just as a formality became very confrontational and asked if “all of this detail was necessary.” He was visibly angry, and my priest politely explained that these things can be important, he may be asked to explain church teachings, etc.

My question, I guess, is do I continue engaging my priest at classes as I always have, or do I now need to be sensitive to the fact that this guy just wants to “put in his time,” so to speak, and go home? I’m close enough with the priest that I could get answers to my questions outside of class, but should I have to? I’ve been viewing RCIA as an opportunity to get answers to questions and the group benefits. But if this guy is going to flip out every week, maybe I shouldn’t.

Thoughts?

First of all, I think the issue of contraception is VERY important! I think you should continue asking your questions in the class environment because the other candidates will benefit from the answers. That’s the whole idea of doing it as a group. Some ask questions that others may not think to ask, or are afraid to ask. It’s a real drag when no one asks any questions at RCIA. I always think people ask more questions when they’re buying a new car than they do when they’re coming into a new religion. You’re probably a breath of fresh air to the priest who moderates and to the team members. Keep asking your questions and if Mr. Formality doesn’t want to hear the answers, he can take a bathroom break, or something.

 

[steve_b]

No, the questions were specific to the details of Church teaching. Actually, we were discussing whether or not it was sinful to use NFP to contracept, as my understanding was that if you were intentionally trying to avoid having a child, that it was a sin. That was my question and the discussion was exclusive to that.

• only a few days in a month can a woman get pregnant. Couples who use ABC (artificial birth control) do it because they know there is still the possibility of pregnancy with NFP and they aren’t willing to take that chance. Therefore, ABC is intentionally trying to prevent pregnancy, NFP is NOT.
• don’t stop asking your questions

 

[jpjd]

I thought that I read somewhere that the name had been changed. If not, I stand corrected. Thanks.

RCIA stands for Rite of Chrisitan Initiation of Adults. That name has not been changed.

Maybe you are thinking of CCD, which means Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. But we now call it PSR, which means Parish School of Religion.

 

[Petergee]

I thought that I read somewhere that the name had been changed. If not, I stand corrected. Thanks.

I have never heard of any other name for it and I’ve been involved in it for years.

 

[losh14]

The gentleman in question made it clear that it wasn’t the content of what was being discussed. He has been visibly annoyed in the past at anything that goes beyond the bare minimum.

Oh, that changes things. My evangelical friends would say he just wants fire insurance.

The struggle for me is that it appears that this guy is just there to go through the motions. Do I just ignore him and do what I feel is right, which is to learn as much as I can, or do I not “rock the boat” with this guy and just wait to ask my questions later.

If he’s annoyed at being there in the first place, ask away. Comfort with personal issues is one matter, but if he’s taking steps that prevent you from going as deep into your faith as you’d like, he’s in the wrong.

In all churches - with the exception of probably the tiny one that has 15 people on whom the pastor personally calls once a week - there are people just going through the motions. It’s nice that they’re at least physically present, otherwise there’s no means to evangelize them. But they can get in the way sometimes. In our parish, there are a couple of families that come late and leave right after the Eucharist, but there is one in particular who insists on sitting in the cry room where my wife and I have our toddler. It’s a little obnoxious because there are signs saying “Reserved for parents with infants and toddlers” and the youngest kid in this family is like 12. It’s more obnoxious because the older kids (I’d guess 19 and 17) are texting on their cell phones, and the younger kids are trying to shine their penlights at and give the contents of their pockets to our daughter, which is very distracting and a little rude. Once I did say something to the father, and his words in return weren’t kind. Since then, we simply walk past them into the main body of the church.

 

[Debra_C]

Exactly. I assist with RCIA (we still call it that because it is the ordinary way for adults to join the church) and I see our teacher gloss over a question now and then and address the inquisitor during a break or after class.

You may ask any question. Leave the substance of the discussion to the priest and the teacher.

Welcome to the church.

At my own RCIA class difficult questions were either ignored or given some pat patronizing response that didn’t answer the question. I found it very frustrating. Someone assisted me in finding reliable outside resources, and I spent a good deal of time reading and bugging my priests outside of class. On the one hand, they didn’t seem to mind too much because I was truly interested in learning and needed to resolve those difficulties before becoming Catholic. However, your priest and the lay leader have set aside RCIA time to deal with those questions. Time is a very valuable commodity, and priests in particular tend to have many demands for their time. It is their responsibility as the group leaders to keep the conversation on target and to determine how much is too much such that the conversation should be bumped to a break period or after class. So I say you are lucky to have these two who are so willing to discuss things. Go ahead and use the time they have set aside for doing it. They will redirect the conversation if the discussion becomes too lengthy, detailed, or overly personal.

RCIA is still called RCIA–where the confusion comes in is that many parishes end up combining into RCIA candidates (who are already baptized and coming in from another Christian faith), those that simply wish to learn their faith better, or adults who were baptized Catholic and are seeking late initiation sacraments (first confession/first communion, and/or confirmation) due to logistics issues. Technically RCIA is specifically for the unbaptized.

 

[RazzsMom]

RCIA is still called that. Perhaps you have heard that RCIA is not called “classes” anymore. Rather, the RCIA “process” holds “sessions”. Class denotes a teacher who has all the knowledge and students who have none and are there to learn. Process and sessions denotes a sense of growth and interactions between all attendees - sponsors, catechists and potential members/converts alike. We all have new things to learn about the Church and faith - no one has all the answers. And we all have a faith life already - even a tiny one - or you would not be there.

That is what bothers me about your “older gentleman” who is there as a formality. I advise you to keep asking questions and clarifications, because Old Fart needs to hear this as well as you do, and he may end up being surprised at some point at hearing something that is actually NEW to him! And interesting!

You are there to learn and grow in faith. You are doing the right thing. He can grow at his own speed and that may be what is happening. Welcome to the True Church - Welcome Home to Rome!

 

[RazzsMom]

RCIA is still called RCIA–where the confusion comes in is that many parishes end up combining into RCIA candidates (who are already baptized and coming in from another Christian faith), those that simply wish to learn their faith better, or adults who were baptized Catholic and are seeking late initiation sacraments (first confession/first communion, and/or confirmation) due to logistics issues. Technically RCIA is specifically for the unbaptized.

This is correct. Most parishes do not have the volunteer staffing to tackle separate sessions for the different needs and are forced to combine them into one experience.

 

[m134e5]

Please continue to ask questions (and pray for the guy). If your questions are off-topic and time is short, the priest should let you know, but discussion helps people learn (especially when learning about something so profound as the Catholic Faith). If someone in the group doesn’t care, I’m sad for them- because making the Catholic Faith something personal (a relationship) has been very rewarding to me. It gave meaning to my life.

I’ve found most people don’t like to think very deeply about anything. Most discussions people have are little more than small talk. In order to grow intellectually and spiritually, however, we must go beyond small talk and ask the tough questions. We can learn what others have thought (when they share them with others), but we must discuss our own thoughts in order to develop our understanding of ourselves.

 

[Petergee]

• only a few days in a month can a woman get pregnant. Couples who use ABC (artificial birth control) do it because they know there is still the possibility of pregnancy with NFP and they aren’t willing to take that chance. Therefore, ABC is intentionally trying to prevent pregnancy, NFP is NOT.

That’s not quite the reason why contraception is immoral and NFP is morally acceptable. It’s not because NFP is less effective or reliable as regards reducing the possibility of pregnancy. In fact NFP if used correctly is MORE effective than most if not all conraceptive methods. The essential moral difference is that contraception is PREVENTING conception, NFP is merely AVOIDING conception.

Similar to the reason why tax EVASION is illegal and the government prosecutes people for it, but tax AVOIDANCE is quite legal and in fact governments design taxes so as to encourage people to avoid them and so as to discourage or make it harder for people to evade them.

 

[inkaneer]

What do you mean the other man was just there “as a formality”? Sounds like he doesn’t want to be there and is only there because someone [maybe his wife?] is forcing him to go. If that is the case then he is there for all of the wrong reasons. I say ask all of the questions you want and don’t worry about him. Who knows maybe one day you will ask a question that will light a spark in him. You never know. Sometimes the Holy Spirit works in ways unknown by us mere mortals.

 

[steve_b]

That’s not quite the reason why contraception is immoral and NFP is morally acceptable. It’s not because NFP is less effective or reliable as regards reducing the possibility of pregnancy. In fact NFP if used correctly is MORE effective than most if not all conraceptive methods.

“if used correctly” is a term that can be applied to both

NFP = abstinance for a time,
ABC = chemical/mechanical introduction, with myriad of side effects including abortifacient, but no restrictions to sexual activity.

NFP is natural ABC is not ony unnatural but deadly
P:

The essential moral difference is that contraception is PREVENTING conception, NFP is merely AVOIDING conception.

That’s what I said. " ABC is intentionally trying to prevent pregnancy, NFP is NOT"
P:

Similar to the reason why tax EVASION is illegal and the government prosecutes people for it, but tax AVOIDANCE is quite legal and in fact governments design taxes so as to encourage people to avoid them and so as to discourage or make it harder for people to evade them.

I don’t find that a usefuil example.

 

[Petergee]

“if used correctly” is a term that can be applied to both

NFP = abstinance for a time,
ABC = chemical/mechanical introduction, with myriad of side effects including abortifacient, but no restrictions to sexual activity.

NFP is natural ABC is not ony unnatural but deadly

True, but I think it’s better not to portray the difference between NFP and contraception as a difference between “natural” and “artificial”. “Natural” is a word easily abused and given a slippery meaning, as you see in ads for foods, medicines etc all the time.
Using condoms made of pure natural latex rubber is wrong. Taking natural herbs or natural hormones to try to prevent conception is wrong. Morally speaking, the important thing is not how well they work, but does the user intend them to work as a contraceptive. If yes, it is a sin, even if it doesn’t work at all.

That’s what I said. " ABC is intentionally trying to prevent pregnancy, NFP is NOT"

You also said “Couples who use ABC (artificial birth control) do it because they know there is still the possibility of pregnancy with NFP and they aren’t willing to take that chance.” That’s what I was correcting.

I don’t find that a usefuil example.

Thank you for sharing. I do find it the most useful analogy (it’s not an “example”) I know.