Conversion to Catholicism?

[eichenb2]

I think it is tough to convert to Catholicism. I would be asked to apply for a grant of nullity, since I was married and divorced 14 years ago. During this time, my wife and I (of 13 years & 4 children) would be asked to practice celibacy. This could take 18 months. Also, nullity may not be granted, which means that I will have to remain celibate until my ex-wife dies. The Church would not recognize my current marriage. So, in effect, the Church would be giving Satan a foothold in my marriage, due to temptation. The other option is to be hypocritical and just confess everytime that conjugal union takes place. This is completely inconsistent with my personality. Because of this personality trait, I do not think I am willing to commit to the nullity process unless I am willing to live with the result. I do not think I am; as I am a realist and realize celibaby is not something that I can maintain. It is interesting that if a Catholic man (baptized and confirmed) married a baptist women without a dispensation from a Bishop and the marriage fell apart, he can readily get a grant of nullity (defect of form). This means unjust. The problem lies, in my opinion, with the assumption of validity. Most people who get married now hope for permanance, but believe they can divorce if it “doesn’t work out”. I know this was my perspective. But how can this be proven by a “positive act of the will”?
Additionally, I believe that marriage is for 1) procreation 2) protection again sin (fornication) 3) spiritual, emotional, & physical comfort of spouses. Catholicism teaches that every sex act must be open to conception. While I agree that abortion and the pill are immoral, birth control that does not allow conception seems fine (coitus interruptus & profelactics (sp?)). I think this view of marriage effeminizes men and sees woman as baby making machines. If this is what Church calls me too do, I think I will decline; as it does not seem natural and it DOES seems overly legalistic. Orthodoxy??? :newidea:

 

[eichenb2]

Anyone have any thoughts???

 

[eichenb2]

I should mention that we met with the RCIA director. She was less than enthusiastic and told us we would need to wait until the next RCIA cycle (September I think). The whole thing was a discouraging experience.

 

[puzzleannie]

my first thought is to suggest an appointment with the pastor of your nearest Catholic parish, lay out all the facts of you current marital status, previous marriages, baptismal status of all parties and other particulars so you can get advice relevant to your individual situation, and pastoral counselling to deal with other issues as they arise. Far more helpful than any speculation on this forum. In my experience these situations are generally far easier to resolve than many people imagine.

 

[eichenb2]

my first thought is to suggest an appointment with the pastor of your nearest Catholic parish, lay out all the facts of you current marital status, previous marriages, baptismal status of all parties and other particulars so you can get advice relevant to your individual situation, and pastoral counselling to deal with other issues as they arise. Far more helpful than any speculation on this forum. In my experience these situations are generally far easier to resolve than many people imagine.

I have one for this Friday. Thanks.

 

[HappyRevert]

Additionally, I believe that marriage is for 1) procreation 2) protection again sin (fornication) 3) spiritual, emotional, & physical comfort of spouses. Catholicism teaches that every sex act must be open to conception. While I agree that abortion and the pill are immoral, birth control that does not allow conception seems fine (coitus interruptus & profelactics (sp?)). I think this view of marriage effeminizes men and sees woman as baby making machines. If this is what Church calls me too do, I think I will decline; as it does not seem natural and it DOES seems overly legalistic. Orthodoxy??? :newidea:

Becoming Catholic can be quite difficult. Definitely speak with your pastor about it. I’m unsure if you can apply for the annulment as you are going through RCIA, and exactly how that all works with respect to the validity of your marriage before you are technically Catholic…I agree it is a bit confusing. Fortunately, it is worth the trouble.

The part I really would like to answer is about the birth control. Just a few years ago I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately for me, after reading the actual reasoning behind why the church holds this position, I have to admit I was completely wrong.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

The prophetic information held in a document created over 40 years ago is amazing. Women and men aren’t baby making machines, but rather created in the image of God. In marriage we give ourselves to each other completely, including our fertility. If we need to hold off having children, we may use Natural Family Planning, but otherwise we need to exercise control. If you hold any position other than that, ultimately it does lead to abortion. I know that sounds crazy but it does - it has been used as an argument for abortion because of birth control failure. The church takes a moral position based on where certain ideas will lead, and not just an individual’s difficulty in following that moral position. Part of being Catholic is investigating why the church holds a given position and then submitting to it to the best of our ability. I can’t say I’ve always followed the church’s teaching as I should, but without fail every single time I’ve disagreed with them, once I investigated why they hold that position I’ve found out I’m wrong and then complied.

I highly recommend Christopher West’s Naked without Shame lectures (Please those of you who revile him, keep your bashing to a minimum). It lays out the Catholic position on sex extremely well and our belief that we learn through our bodies as well as our souls.

 

[eichenb2]

Becoming Catholic can be quite difficult. Definitely speak with your pastor about it. I’m unsure if you can apply for the annulment as you are going through RCIA, and exactly how that all works with respect to the validity of your marriage before you are technically Catholic…I agree it is a bit confusing. Fortunately, it is worth the trouble.

The part I really would like to answer is about the birth control. Just a few years ago I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately for me, after reading the actual reasoning behind why the church holds this position, I have to admit I was completely wrong.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

The prophetic information held in a document created over 40 years ago is amazing. Women and men aren’t baby making machines, but rather created in the image of God. In marriage we give ourselves to each other completely, including our fertility. If we need to hold off having children, we may use Natural Family Planning, but otherwise we need to exercise control. If you hold any position other than that, ultimately it does lead to abortion. I know that sounds crazy but it does - it has been used as an argument for abortion because of birth control failure. The church takes a moral position based on where certain ideas will lead, and not just an individual’s difficulty in following that moral position. Part of being Catholic is investigating why the church holds a given position and then submitting to it to the best of our ability. I can’t say I’ve always followed the church’s teaching as I should, but without fail every single time I’ve disagreed with them, once I investigated why they hold that position I’ve found out I’m wrong and then complied.

I highly recommend Christopher West’s Naked without Shame lectures (Please those of you who revile him, keep your bashing to a minimum). It lays out the Catholic position on sex extremely well and our belief that we learn through our bodies as well as our souls.

I think that your statement should be as follows. The church takes a moral position based on where certain ideas COULD LEAD…" This is not sound reasoning. To show you this, it is the same reasoning that is used in Islam to kill an apostate. They say that he will corrupt others beliefs and therefore he must be killed. I do NOT believe that Coitus Interruptus is the same as abortion. One is killing a living being and the never becomes a being. My wife has been VERY ILL every time she has been pregnant and almost died. “taking what god gives us” is fatalistic and foolish, in my opinion. How about this. The Church is wrong. Did you ever seriously consider that???

 

[HappyRevert]

I think that your statement should be as follows. The church takes a moral position based on where certain ideas COULD LEAD…" This is not sound reasoning. To show you this, it is the same reasoning that is used in Islam to kill an apostate. They say that he will corrupt others beliefs and therefore he must be killed. I do NOT believe that Coitus Interruptus is the same as abortion. One is killing a living being and the never becomes a being. My wife has been VERY ILL every time she has been pregnant and almost died. “taking what god gives us” is fatalistic and foolish, in my opinion. How about this. The Church is wrong. Did you ever seriously consider that???

Actually, what I meant to say is that is takes the position because of where it DID LEAD (hence why I said Humanae Vitae was prophetic). I have seriously considered where the church is wrong - in fact I proclaimed that the church was wrong. Here’s the really embarrassing part I was totally, utterly, completely wrong. I’m sorry that your wife has been very ill. The church is not saying she must have more children - simply that the only morally correct way to hold off having children is to use NFP. I was not accusing you of the moral equivalent of abortion when you use coitus interruptus which is what I interpret you perceived I was implying by your highly emotional reaction. The scientific facts are as follows:

1. NFP is as effective as the pill in preventing pregnancy medicalnewstoday.com/articles/63567.php
2. Coitus interruptus is an incredibly bad way to try to prevent pregnancy with as high as 15-28% failure rate.
   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus

The church 41 years ago, took a moral position, said why they took it, and EVERY SINGLE THING THEY SAID WOULD HAPPEN HAS HAPPENED. Please read the document.

PS I have no plans to kill apostates in the near future

 

[eichenb2]

Actually, what I meant to say is that is takes the position because of where it DID LEAD (hence why I said Humanae Vitae was prophetic). I have seriously considered where the church is wrong - in fact I proclaimed that the church was wrong. Here’s the really embarrassing part I was totally, utterly, completely wrong. I’m sorry that your wife has been very ill. The church is not saying she must have more children - simply that the only morally correct way to hold off having children is to use NFP. I was not accusing you of the moral equivalent of abortion when you use coitus interruptus which is what I interpret you perceived I was implying by your highly emotional reaction. The scientific facts are as follows:

1. NFP is as effective as the pill in preventing pregnancy medicalnewstoday.com/articles/63567.php
2. Coitus interruptus is an incredibly bad way to try to prevent pregnancy with as high as 15-28% failure rate.
   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus

The church 41 years ago, took a moral position, said why they took it, and EVERY SINGLE THING THEY SAID WOULD HAPPEN HAS HAPPENED. Please read the document.

PS I have no plans to kill apostates in the near future

“WILL LEAD” means that a future time one action (past or present) will by consequence allow another action (in the future). It that what you mean to say? So…Coitus Interruptus leads to abortion??? Are you sure??? Were there rules that forbade Coitus Interruptus??? Or are you saying that because I practice Coitus Interruptus with my wife that the next logical step is abortion? I think this reasoning is good wholesome example of NON-SENSICAL argumentation. BTW, Coitus Interruptus has works 100% for us. If it wasn’t 100% then that was God acting. Why would you be upset about that?

 

[BlestOne]

“WILL LEAD” means that a future time one action (past or present) will by consequence allow another action (in the future). It that what you mean to say? So…Coitus Interruptus leads to abortion??? Are you sure??? Were there rules that forbade Coitus Interruptus??? Or are you saying that because I practice Coitus Interruptus with my wife that the next logical step is abortion? I think this reasoning is good wholesome example of NON-SENSICAL argumentation. BTW, Coitus Interruptus has works 100% for us. If it wasn’t 100% then that was God acting. Why would you be upset about that?

Did you ever read the story of Onan in your Bible… I think that is pretty strong evidence that it is wrong…

No offense but it looks to me that you are placing your physical comfort above your salvation by saying that it is too hard to follow Church teachings… Your salvation and the salvation of your family HAS to be your greatest concern. If the teachings on this were easy, everyone could do it… you are called to be HOLY… and that takes sacrifice. NFP is way more effective than artificial birth control… and much more healthy for your wife.

 

[HappyRevert]

I think we are communicating at cross purposes here. I have never stated, implied or otherwise suggested that your coitus interruptus is equivalent to abortion. Nor do I care about your family planning choices. You complained about the teachings of the church being too hard particularly on birth control and I was attempting (apparently insufficiently) to address that.

I replied that they have those teachings because there are moral implications that follow from the church not taking the position they hold. For example, the church is against birth control for a variety of reasons, I will set aside abortion this time and use the disintegration of the family.
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html paragraph 17 in particular.

The document was written 41 years ago. What they said would happen has happened exactly as described. That is why I am repeatedly asking you to read the document. It explains why the church holds the position that it does. If you read the document and still don’t agree with it, that is your choice, but please don’t attack the church’s teaching without reading it.

 

[eichenb2]

Did you ever read the story of Onan in your Bible… I think that is pretty strong evidence that it is wrong…

No offense but it looks to me that you are placing your physical comfort above your salvation by saying that it is too hard to follow Church teachings… Your salvation and the salvation of your family HAS to be your greatest concern. If the teachings on this were easy, everyone could do it… you are called to be HOLY… and that takes sacrifice. NFP is way more effective than artificial birth control… and much more healthy for your wife.

Ah yes. I hear you. Still it seems interesting that a Catholic guy who wants to marry a baptist girl (in a baptist church without a dispensation) can easily acquire an annullment for defect of form. I on the other hand may have to live my life shacking up with my wife (er…sister). The Catholic guy should have known, but me, with no idea that I would convert to Catholicism later, an the Monk. Gee…that seems just. :bowdown:

 

[eichenb2]

I think we are communicating at cross purposes here. I have never stated, implied or otherwise suggested that your coitus interruptus is equivalent to abortion. Nor do I care about your family planning choices. You complained about the teachings of the church being too hard particularly on birth control and I was attempting (apparently insufficiently) to address that.

I replied that they have those teachings because there are moral implications that follow from the church not taking the position they hold. For example, the church is against birth control for a variety of reasons, I will set aside abortion this time and use the disintegration of the family.
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html paragraph 17 in particular.

The document was written 41 years ago. What they said would happen has happened exactly as described. That is why I am repeatedly asking you to read the document. It explains why the church holds the position that it does. If you read the document and still don’t agree with it, that is your choice, but please don’t attack the church’s teaching without reading it.

I didn’t complain about them being hard. I complained that were non-sensical and wrong.

 

[BlestOne]

Ah yes. I hear you. Still it seems interesting that a Catholic guy who wants to marry a baptist girl (in a baptist church without a dispensation) can easily acquire an annullment for defect of form. I on the other hand may have to live my life shacking up with my wife (er…sister). The Catholic guy should have known, but me, with no idea that I would convert to Catholicism later, an the Monk. Gee…that seems just. :bowdown:

The Catholic guy would have/should have known better than to marry without a dispensation… he is more culpable for his actions. You however, having lived a protestant life until now, complain about the rules of Catholicism because you want to join the club right? I got news for you… it is not all that difficult to get a decree of nullity for a previous marriage when it is assumed that you didn’t know what a sacramental marriage is/was. My dh was Lutheran and was married at 18 and divorced at 23… the tribunal said he was too young to understand what he was doing and granted him a decree of nullity. Before he could marry me however he had to go to counselling to make sure he was now mature enough even though he was 35 at the time… it wasn’t difficult, just time consuming and might I add… well worth the wait. So all in all, it took 4-5 mos for the ruling and 4 weeks of counseling… so 6 months… not a bad investment for what you get out of it.

 

[marthagreys]

Just a word of encouragement on the annulment process - it may not take as long as you think. If you and your ex-wife were neither one baptized Catholic, you don’t have to go through the long, drawn-out process. The annulment can usually be done in the local parish office on a simple one -page form, and only takes days or a couple of weeks to be official - I know, that was my situation. The annulment is based on “lack of proper form” (technical term), not based on a valid church-recognized marriage that has to be investigated.
Second, your statement that the Church would be giving Satan a foothold in your marriage due to temptation really isn’t fair. The Church is in no way responsible for your behavior, past or present. No matter who we are, or where we go, there will always be temptation surrounding us - that’s part of life. It’s not the Church’s fault, and the Church is absolutely NOT giving Satan a foothold in your marriage - quite the opposite. The Church is trying to protect you and your wife from continuing immoral practices. And planning to sin repeatedly with the intent of confessing it doesn’t fly. Confession is a safety net to fall into when a person does sin; it’s not a license to sin freely.
With all of that said, your opening sentence struck a chord with me. Yes, becoming Catholic is hard. It means forsaking things that aren’t consistent with God’s law (including sexual relations at times) and it is a major commitment. We’ve never been promised that the journey would be easy - only that it would be worth it. Hard, yes. So was being crucified on the cross for all sin. Think about it.

 

[eichenb2]

The Catholic guy would have/should have known better than to marry without a dispensation… he is more culpable for his actions. You however, having lived a protestant life until now, complain about the rules of Catholicism because you want to join the club right? I got news for you… it is not all that difficult to get a decree of nullity for a previous marriage when it is assumed that you didn’t know what a sacramental marriage is/was. My dh was Lutheran and was married at 18 and divorced at 23… the tribunal said he was too young to understand what he was doing and granted him a decree of nullity. Before he could marry me however he had to go to counselling to make sure he was now mature enough even though he was 35 at the time… it wasn’t difficult, just time consuming and might I add… well worth the wait. So all in all, it took 4-5 mos for the ruling and 4 weeks of counseling… so 6 months… not a bad investment for what you get out of it.

Hmm…6+ months of shacking up with my wife (er…sister) and then told that I should not not have lust for my wife (see theology of the body). That is obsurd. My wife and I are married and I don’t believe that intercourse must “always be open to procreation”, within the bonds of marriage. Also, I would not go into it expecting an annullment. Isn’t that first thing they tell you?

 

[eichenb2]

Just a word of encouragement on the annulment process - it may not take as long as you think. If you and your ex-wife were neither one baptized Catholic, you don’t have to go through the long, drawn-out process. The annulment can usually be done in the local parish office on a simple one -page form, and only takes days or a couple of weeks to be official - I know, that was my situation. The annulment is based on “lack of proper form” (technical term), not based on a valid church-recognized marriage that has to be investigated.
Second, your statement that the Church would be giving Satan a foothold in your marriage due to temptation really isn’t fair. The Church is in no way responsible for your behavior, past or present. No matter who we are, or where we go, there will always be temptation surrounding us - that’s part of life. It’s not the Church’s fault, and the Church is absolutely NOT giving Satan a foothold in your marriage - quite the opposite. The Church is trying to protect you and your wife from continuing immoral practices. And planning to sin repeatedly with the intent of confessing it doesn’t fly. Confession is a safety net to fall into when a person does sin; it’s not a license to sin freely.
With all of that said, your opening sentence struck a chord with me. Yes, becoming Catholic is hard. It means forsaking things that aren’t consistent with God’s law (including sexual relations at times) and it is a major commitment. We’ve never been promised that the journey would be easy - only that it would be worth it. Hard, yes. So was being crucified on the cross for all sin. Think about it.

Sexual relations within the bonds of marriage is consistent with God’s law. It is normal and healthy…even without being open to procreation. No offense intended, but, it is no wonder Catholic men seem like such pansies.

 

[BlestOne]

Hmm…6+ months of shacking up with my wife (er…sister) and then told that I should not not have lust for my wife (see theology of the body). That is absurd.** My wife and I are married and I don’t believe that intercourse must “always be open to procreation”, within the bonds of marriage. **Also, I would not go into it expecting an annulment. Isn’t that first thing they tell you?

See right here is the problem… your biggest impediment is that you are not even open to learning the why’s of this faith… you want it to be ok for you to carry on with business as usual rather than explore why the Catholic Church has the position it does… education is the key to understanding.

 

[BlestOne]

Sexual relations within the bonds of marriage is consistent with God’s law. It is normal and healthy…even without being open to procreation. No offense intended, but, it is no wonder Catholic men seem like such pansies.

Pansies? For being faithful to God? For following Gods commands… you need to examine your motives a little better and the men of the Catholic Church too…

 

[eichenb2]

Pansies? For being faithful to God? For following Gods commands… you need to examine your motives a little better and the men of the Catholic Church too…

Your version of being faithful to God appears to make a man who appears to lack masculinity, as regards there sexuality. Telling a man that he has to examine his thoughts before making love to determine if it is lust or love, seems to me to be splitting hairs. I didn’t mean to offend you. That is just the way I see it.