Having doubts about converting to Catholic

[utah_rose]

Thank you for all your (name removed by moderator)ut! Your answers made sense to me, and like a previous poster said, a lot of my doubts come from not understanding everything yet. I am going to attend to my RCIA class tonight and plan to keep going on this journey, even though I’ll hit some bumps along the way. Thanks again.

Good for you! On another note. if you do confess a sin like stealing no forgiveness unless restitution is made. In the act of Contrition you also promise “To amend your life” and if a child molester should confess this act, the priest would probably counsel him and also try and make sure that this person understands the seriousness of the act and resolves to commit it no more.

And yes, I believe unfortunately that a lot of these cases occur where children know the person or is a member of the family. I’d watch out for these things.

 

[rinnie]

This is just my view on the logic of the matter:

-If offenders knew that priests would turn them in, then they wouldn’t tell priests what they did in the first place, so, the question is superfluous. The priest is there to help victims and perpetrators alike, without regard to their merit other than their shared and common status as children of God I would suppose. Apprehension of offenders remains a matter for law enforcement. Helping people find God is a matter for churches.

The logical answer in my view would then be simple. If you feel drawn to the Catholic church, follow your inclinations that took you there in the first place and follow through with it. You’ll probably find other things you don’t like about it over time. There will always be this thing and that. But if your heart generally tells you that’s the place you ought to be, then that’s the place.

Just my advice.

Respectfully,
Sufjon

wow!!! The only thing I can add to that is AMEN!

 

[JonNC]

You do have to concede though Jon that your church is making a moral statement, the extent of which you may determine. The Catholic Church in it’s moral teachings and in the norms for ordination of priests clearly, and uniformly defines homosexuality as “disordered” and “intrinsically” evil.

Not being ELCA, and considering the recent ELCA position to be heterodox, I would not concede it.
From the LCMS website:

The Missouri Synod believes that the Bible teaches that homosexual behavior is contrary to God’s Word and will, and seeks to minister to those who are struggling with homosexual inclinations

lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2724

Jon

 

[brumano]

Not being ELCA, and considering the recent ELCA position to be heterodox, I would not concede it.
From the LCMS website:

lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2724

Jon

I guess I don’t understand your statements in the context of your previous post, no matter; if it’s my bad it’s my bad, best wishes in everything.

 

[brumano]

With respect, one small but very important correction: the Church defines homosexual ACTS as disordered, not the condition of homosexual attraction itself. The Church teaches that all Christians are called to charity to all of our brothers and sisters. Put another traditional way, “Hate the sin, love the sinner.”

With likewise respects, and corrections: The Catholic Church defines homosexual acts as both disordered and as being the comission of mortal sin, as in the same with the other “grave” sins such as adultery…the thoughts, speech, and deeds are interwoven… all of it is to be avoided strictly as the action itself. This has to do with the nature of sin itself, not just this sin; but all sin. We acknowledge our understanding of this at Mass when we confess to God and each other that we have sinned in:“thoughts, words, deeds, and even in what we failed to do…” The condition itself is also “disordered” just as the temptation to any sin is against…truly good order; that which God has made and given. Yes, there are conditional factors involved concerning individuals, but we’re not talking about individualism, we’re talking about the pronounced moral teaching of a Church; The Roman Catholic Church, and that teaching is the teaching that we have to observe for our good and the good of others.

 

[JonNC]

I guess I don’t understand your statements in the context of your previous post, no matter; if it’s my bad it’s my bad, best wishes in everything.

You said,

Originally Posted by brumano
You do have to concede though Jon that your church is making a moral statement,…

I’m saying that the ELCA is not my Church, and I believe their position on this matter (and some other matters) to be heterodox, and not in keeping with Lutheran orthodoxy.

And His peace with you,
Jon

 

[Reuben_J]

SonCatcher:

Most Protestants believe they confess their sins privately, silently to God without the assistance of a priest. Why and how would God report him in that case? God’s justice is not our justice.

po18guy:

Here is another hypothetical situation for your friend: If the molester was Lutheran, did not confess, and kept their position in children’s liturgy, how is that better than in the Catholic Church, where the confession (and penance i.e. corrective action) would take place?

OTOH, this would be the Protestants premise that does not believe in Confession or faults the Seal of Confession.

 

[avemaria77]

I just wanted to encourage you to continue to learn through RCIA and this forum and trust in God and His One Church. Jesus taught us many things and one of those things was humility beyond our understanding. God became Word and then He sent His only Son to
become human and then He subjected Himself to unbearable torture. And just when we think He couldn’t humble himself any more He became bread for us to consume.

Being Catholic is very humbling. The faith is so wide and so deep. If you pray for understanding in a particular area you are struggling with, study and seek counsel you will find the answers you are looking for, however, it may all take time. Patience teaches us humility

Don’t forget that one of the biggest differences between Catholics and Lutheran’s is the way we view the Eucharist. Lutheran’s believe the body of Christ changes back to bread after service…or at some point and the bread that is not used is thrown away (I think they call it consubstantiation). This was never a Christian teaching until Luther invented it in the 1500’s. Catholics believe that the bread turns into the body of Christ during the mass called transubstantiation and stays His body. If you notice there is a reverence toward the Body of Christ outside of the mass and this was so in the early church before the 1500’s and Luther came along. If you have the opportunity going to adoration will really help you during your journey.

Praise God for our new sister in Christ’s Catholic Church!!

 

[JonNC]

Don’t forget that one of the biggest differences between Catholics and Lutheran’s is the way we view the Eucharist. Lutheran’s believe the body of Christ changes back to bread after service…or at some point and the bread that is not used is thrown away (I think they call it consubstantiation). This was never a Christian teaching until Luther invented it in the 1500’s. Catholics believe that the bread turns into the body of Christ during the mass called transubstantiation and stays His body. If you notice there is a reverence toward the Body of Christ outside of the mass and this was so in the early church before the 1500’s and Luther came along. If you have the opportunity going to adoration will really help you during your journey.

Just some clarification, avemaria. First, welcome to CAF.

Consubstantiation is an expression of the real presence from Duns Scotus, a Catholic, who lived in the 1200’s and early 1300’s. Additionally, Lutherans specifically reject the idea.

More precisely, we believe that it is Christ’s body and blood, but we put an emphasis on the sacramental action. For example, consecrated elements can be taken to the sick without be consecrated again.
There are some who do, sadly, dispose of the host at some point. This is a huge issue with me, and other Lutherans, who believe it ought to be reserved.

Praise God for our new sister in Christ’s Catholic Church!!

I too, prasie God that she will be blessed in word and sacrament in the Catholic Church.

Jon

 

[FaithG]

My dear friend.
i understand your fears but what you are doing is trying to understand everything. we cant. you came to the Church because you came to accept the Church is the One sent by God to teach all Truth to all man and in doing so, you are being obedient to Christ. i know that devil will put obstacle on the way but do not let these things trouble or discourage you. you just dont know what goes on between the priest and whoever confesses his sins. i would assume that the priest talk to the person into do the right thing. dont worry so much in finding perfection as to what God wants from you.
now that you know the Truth you must endure the suffers that comes with it. God keep you and encourage you to follow Him in Truth.

Wisdomseeker,
I know that you mean well, but you are making a mistake so many Catholics do in taking the truth of your own faith for granted. When people come to RCIA, it’s not because they have accepted the Catholic Church as God’s truth. It is because they think it is, but they’re really just deciding. So to be told, don’t fret, just believe it’s right, is aggravating and discouraging to a would-be convert.

On the other side, I agree priests should keep it confidential. Look at it this way: if it weren’t confidential, the molester would probably not tell him anyway, so the police still wouldn’t find out. The man only confesses if he is seeking spiritual help. He knows it’s wrong, and is struggling with himself. Otherwise, he wouldn’t even tell the priest. The priest cannot help the man if the man feels the priest would “betray” him. Same with all of us, with our smaller sins. The same goes for abuse victims, who need desperately to pour their hearts out, but would never trust another person to tell it to. Priest confidentiality is the greatest treasure of the Catholic Church.

 

[chris_molter]

This is just my view on the logic of the matter:

-If offenders knew that priests would turn them in, then they wouldn’t tell priests what they did in the first place, so, the question is superfluous…

Respectfully,
Sufjon

This was my first thought as well. Seems pretty obvious.

 

[Light1111]

For the past several months, I have been contemplating converting to Catholic. Last week I had my first RCIA class and my kids started CCD. I was happy and verything was going well. Then one of my Lutheran friends brought up the topic of The Law of the Seal of Confession.

Both of us have children and do not understand if a child molester confessed his sins to a priest, why on earth the priest would keep this information from authorities? How is this helping the families of the child molesters victims, and how is this keeping the rest of the community safe by allowing a child molester to remain in public? This is the kind of crime where rarely does the criminal recover and he or she goes on to molest again. Why would God want this information to be kept secret when it could be hurting otherrs? A priest keeping this information from the police, in my opinion, would be a sin. Is this Law of the Seal of Confession something that is talked about in the Bible, or a made up Catholic rule?

There are many beautiful things about the Catholic faith, and I think Confession is a good thing, but I just see myself ever agreeing with priests keeping illegal information private. Can I still become a Catholic and disagree with this? I couldn’t possibly be the only one with these doubts.

One reason I decided to leave the Lutheran Church was because of the church now allowing gays in committed relationship to serve as pastors. I think being gay is sinful, and staying that way with the church’s permission goes against what the Bible teaches. But when I compare that with priests obstructing justice, being gay seems to be very minor. Being gay may be immoral, but hurting a child is both immoral and illegal and keeping that information to oneself is just sad and unthinkable to me.

I would love to hear your thoughts/opinions, and words of encouragement. I fear this is going to hold me back from wanting to continue with the RCIA process.

Dear Mom From Wisconsin,

I related to your post, as I’ve had the same thought/concern. I’m a social worker, and like a priest, all that I learn in-session with my clients is to remain confidential. I cannot share the information with anyone else, for any reason – even their parent, spouse, child.

The exception to this is if I am informed that a crime has been committed. Then I am obligated to inform the authorities. In fact, in discussing confidentiality with new clients, I’m ethically compelled to inform them of this fact. If anyone has ever seen the show “The Sopranos,” you might remember how Tony, the protagonist, dances around “what he really is” (a mobster) when in-session with his therapist, so as to avoid her phoning the authorities to report his crimes. There are several episodes where he tries to discuss with her his feelings after having had someone killed, and he applies all his creative powers to avoid coming right out and saying that this is what has happened. He isn’t even able to have real sessions sometimes, because he can’t tell her what is weighing on his mind–if he does, he’ll wind up in jail for the rest of his life.

I am not sure why this same ethical compulsion does not apply to the priesthood (apologetically I state that, for I have read the various responses to this post). Perhaps it is simply felt that one would not make a confession if he knew he could then face the law, as a result.

Peace.

 

[RhysApGruffydd]

I remember a priest telling me if someone confessed to a crime such as murder or rape, and I would assume molesting kids although it wasn’t specifically mentioned, he would ask the person if they where willing to go to the police. If not, he would say they could not have absolution. Some may question this, but I would say if a person is not willing to go to the police, you would have to question if they are genuinely repentent.

I absolutely agree.

I would only expand on this to say that, given such conditions, I wonder how often the original poster’s hypothetical situation actually arises.

If I want to hide an utterly devious act, and I am merely a nominal Catholic, then I certainly would not risk revealing myself to a priest, even if there would be a mere fragment of a chance that such a priest should in turn inform authorities of my crime(s).

If I am a very serious Catholic, of weak character, who for some reason committed horrid acts which I was completely ashamed of, then I still would find it more likely that I would confess such sin to God in the privacy of my own home, rather than in confession. I think I would rather wait until nearing death before dealing with something like this in a sacramental way.

Lastly, I could be a very serious Catholic of very strong character, who might choose to reveal my crime(s) both to a priest and to earthly authorities of the law.

In summary, I find it very unlikely that the average priest has heard serious crimes confessed which they then were unable to report. Likewise, even if it does happen, I fail to see how this might negate the perception that all universal truth resides in the Catholic Church. I find it hard to believe that a person’s acceptance of such a proposition should rest on such little a thing as the small chance that a priest might not report a serious crime heard in confession.

 

[jmcrae]

Dear Mom From Wisconsin,

I related to your post, as I’ve had the same thought/concern. I’m a social worker, and like a priest, all that I learn in-session with my clients is to remain confidential. I cannot share the information with anyone else, for any reason – even their parent, spouse, child.

The exception to this is if I am informed that a crime has been committed. Then I am obligated to inform the authorities. In fact, in discussing confidentiality with new clients, I’m ethically compelled to inform them of this fact. If anyone has ever seen the show “The Sopranos,” you might remember how Tony, the protagonist, dances around “what he really is” (a mobster) when in-session with his therapist, so as to avoid her phoning the authorities to report his crimes. There are several episodes where he tries to discuss with her his feelings after having had someone killed, and he applies all his creative powers to avoid coming right out and saying that this is what has happened. He isn’t even able to have real sessions sometimes, because he can’t tell her what is weighing on his mind–if he does, he’ll wind up in jail for the rest of his life.

It seems to me that Tony Soprano would have done better, if he had gone to Confession instead of to a therapist.

I am not sure why this same ethical compulsion does not apply to the priesthood (apologetically I state that, for I have read the various responses to this post). Perhaps it is simply felt that one would not make a confession if he knew he could then face the law, as a result.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Priests are not, and can never be, agents of the government. It will never be their role to report to the government (including its branches of law enforcement) anything that they hear in the Confessional.

 

[Light1111]

Thank you!

 

[minkymurph]

I absolutely agree.

I would only expand on this to say that, given such conditions, I wonder how often the original poster’s hypothetical situation actually arises.

If I want to hide an utterly devious act, and I am merely a nominal Catholic, then I certainly would not risk revealing myself to a priest, even if there would be a mere fragment of a chance that such a priest should in turn inform authorities of my crime(s).

If I am a very serious Catholic, of weak character, who for some reason committed horrid acts which I was completely ashamed of, then I still would find it more likely that I would confess such sin to God in the privacy of my own home, rather than in confession. I think I would rather wait until nearing death before dealing with something like this in a sacramental way.

Lastly, I could be a very serious Catholic of very strong character, who might choose to reveal my crime(s) both to a priest and to earthly authorities of the law.

In summary, I find it very unlikely that the average priest has heard serious crimes confessed which they then were unable to report. Likewise, even if it does happen, I fail to see how this might negate the perception that all universal truth resides in the Catholic Church. I find it hard to believe that a person’s acceptance of such a proposition should rest on such little a thing as the small chance that a priest might not report a serious crime heard in confession.

I would say priests would not hear confessions of serious crime very often. They hear confessions from criminals when they minister to those in prison, but they have been convicted and therefore not attempting to avoid punishment.

During the Irish Civil War, priests were instructed not to hear confessions from those involved in acts of violence, unless they were prepared to renounce violence. Priests who had personal sympathies with the IRA did hear their confessions, and sometimes offered absolution in advance of acts of violence being committed. However, they were going against the Church in doing this because of their own personal political sympathies. This is the only time I’ve known a priest to offer absolution to someone who has committed a serious crime.

I also believe there was a priest who gave absolution to someone who had been involved in a plot could kill Hitler. Now if I had been that priest, I reckon I would have given absolution and said nothing!