E
Edward_H
Guest
Many of us have one or two points that haven’t quite snapped I yet. But with sincere work,prayer, and docility…things settle out nicely.
- Status
Many of us have one or two points that haven’t quite snapped I yet. But with sincere work,prayer, and docility…things settle out nicely.
L
lllj
Guest
I personally can’t offer advice, but I’m interested in what people have to say. I’d like to mention that I believe the OP is not trying to start a discussion on these individual issues but rather looking for advice on whether it is okay for him to proceed with RCIA while having these issues. It looks like other posts are leaning more towards trying to sway his opinions.
J
JoeDoe52
Guest
Hey everyone! I’ve been very busy with work the last few days and just had an opportunity to read everyone’s comments. First of all, thank you to everyone who took time out of his or her day to address my original post. It’s good to know that when we have difficult faith questions or need moral support that there is a community out there as active as this one.
In particular, I appreciate the comments encouraging me to keep seeking truth and not become discouraged. When I wrote the first post I feared being “told off” in very strong terms. That did not occur; I was pleased to find support instead of condemnation.
However, I do believe that lllj (see post #22) is correct. While struggling with these issues undoubtedly means that I need to be presented the Church’s position on them accurately, I am more interested in knowing whether having these reservations is sufficient enough for me to quit RCIA and postpone my confirmation indefinitely.
I would like to also address the response by Usige (see post #19), who stated: “If you come to the time to be received and still cannot say the profession of faith with a clear heart then perhaps you still will need more time and might be received a couple months or couple years later.”
That was generally the opinion of the Catholics I originally mentioned who discouraged me from following through with Confirmation; that if I am not in complete agreement with every Church teaching then I need to wait until I am before being received. I’m not singling this comment out in order to criticize it, but rather because I understand where he or she (my apologies) is coming from. If the Sacrament is an acknowledgment before God that I agree wholeheartedly with every single Church teaching, than I would be a liar receiving it. On the other hand, if it is an acknowledgment of my desire to grow in Christ through the Church He established on earth, even if I don’t have it all figured out yet, I think I’m okay. Perhaps at heart it is a question of what it means to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation.
In particular, I appreciate the comments encouraging me to keep seeking truth and not become discouraged. When I wrote the first post I feared being “told off” in very strong terms. That did not occur; I was pleased to find support instead of condemnation.
However, I do believe that lllj (see post #22) is correct. While struggling with these issues undoubtedly means that I need to be presented the Church’s position on them accurately, I am more interested in knowing whether having these reservations is sufficient enough for me to quit RCIA and postpone my confirmation indefinitely.
I would like to also address the response by Usige (see post #19), who stated: “If you come to the time to be received and still cannot say the profession of faith with a clear heart then perhaps you still will need more time and might be received a couple months or couple years later.”
That was generally the opinion of the Catholics I originally mentioned who discouraged me from following through with Confirmation; that if I am not in complete agreement with every Church teaching then I need to wait until I am before being received. I’m not singling this comment out in order to criticize it, but rather because I understand where he or she (my apologies) is coming from. If the Sacrament is an acknowledgment before God that I agree wholeheartedly with every single Church teaching, than I would be a liar receiving it. On the other hand, if it is an acknowledgment of my desire to grow in Christ through the Church He established on earth, even if I don’t have it all figured out yet, I think I’m okay. Perhaps at heart it is a question of what it means to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation.
E
Edward_H
Guest
One aspect of RCIA is discernment. There is a bare minimum of formation that occurs. The OP should of course pursue the learning offered in RCIA, he should examine his beliefs of these matters against the larger understanding of them offered by the Church. If he can’t accept them outright, he should talk to a priest, face to face. Virtual conversations like these have limited value.
E
Edward_H
Guest
Confirmation is about helping others move to God and His Church. It’s not about us so much ,as it’s about being strengthened by the Holy Spirit so that we can help others in the holy struggle to unity with God.
At this point it sounds like a matter for a good discussion with a priest. Trying to work it out in this forum is probably not a good idea.
C
Contarini
Guest
The problem with this view is that if you’re starting from prolife principles, then you are saying that having been conceived through rape or incest is a crime deserving of death. You are also implying that banning abortion is a kind of punishment for sexual misbehavior, by saying that women who have chosen to have sex shouldn’t be allowed to have abortions but women who haven’t should be. If opposition to abortion is about protecting the life of the unborn child, then how the child was conceived makes no difference.
That being said, I think there’s room for more diversity on the question of enforcement than conservative American Catholic opinion implies. Catholic theologians have long held that if the social evils resulting from banning a sinful action are greater than those resulting from allowing it, then it may be justified to allow it. It’s pretty hard to see how this could be the case with regard to abortion, since abortion takes an innocent human life. But it is a consideration to bear in mind, particularly with regard to the “borderline cases.” Clearly one cannot be “pro-choice” and be an orthodox Catholic–that is, one cannot think that there is a right to abortion which ought to be protected. But I think there’s room for different views on just how one should go about opposing abortion and regarding the proper role of government coercion in preventing abortion. I recognize that what I’m saying is controversial, and I want to be tentative about it–but I would point to the opposition of many Catholic bishops to “personhood” laws as supporting my position (in other words, the Catholic hierarchy generally recognizes that such laws have serious complications that outweigh the obvious merits of clearly protecting human personhood from conception on).
But on this point you are not going against official Catholic teaching, which holds that it may be legitimate to vote for a prochoice politician if there are “proportionate reasons.” Conservative Catholics believe that there are no such reasons under present circumstances, and so they try to explain away this part of Catholic teaching. But in fact the teaching is clear–whether are not there are “proportionate reasons” is something that you have to determine based on your own conscience. Individual bishops may make rulings on the matter, and if I were Catholic I would respect such rulings coming from my own bishop.
You’re right that there are official statements opposing not just gay “marriages” but civil unions. However, the reason behind such a position seems to be the belief that civil unions are marriages by another name. I tend to agree with you on this, but I respect the Catholic Church’s teaching and if I were Catholic and American (I’m neither, though closer to the former than the latter) I’d shape my political choices by it. I think the bottom line is that there are ways to protect the legitimate needs of same-sex couples without either explicitly or implicitly redefining marriage.
I don’t think you should base your decision on what Catholics on this forum tell you. Talk to a priest and share your concerns with him. Conservative lay Catholics have essentially set themselves up as an “alternative Magisterium” and this trend needs to be resisted (it’s really American Protestant “sola scriptura” commonsense realism applied to a broader set of foundational documents than Protestants have).
Edwin
J
JRKH
Guest
Glad our comments have been helpful. I still am of the opinion that you should continue with RCIA…It’s always best to complete a course you start because information presented later in the course might shed light on questions raised earlier in the course.
I must take issue with the bolded section…
Specifically to the idea that one must be in “complete agreement with”.
In order to agree or disagree with a given thing, one must fully investigate and come to a positive, personal conclusion on the matter…yea or nay…Yes or no…This is a binary view that does not accurately reflect the available options to the Catholic…There is a third option and one that we ALL employ on one or more teaching that we have either not studied or that we do not fully understand. That third option is acceptance on a teaching on the firm belief in the Christ given authority of the Church to teach…
So - in order for you, for anyone, to confidently move forward to confirmation the only thing that you really must “be in complete agreement” on is the Church’s divine right and authority to teach and that such teaching is protected by the Holy Spirit.
Does this make sense?
I was born and raised Catholic…Baptized when I was 15 days old. Did I fully understand? Of course not…But I was Catholic. how about at 2 or 6 or even 12 years old…Did I fully understand? Nope…In fact, I’m 57 and I STILL don’t fully understand.
If you feel confident that this is the Church that Christ founded and that it has teh authority to teach - then acknowledge that fact, and commit yourself to growing in knowledge and in holiness. Mostly in Holiness…
Peace
James
E
Edward_H
Guest
I think such a statement is both a gross oversimplification and a dangerous overstatement; spring-loaded people looking for wiggle room run through the open ground offered by such blanket statements, applying them to all manner of points.
C
Contarini
Guest
You need to show what is wrong with my statement. This is a typical reaction–you want to close off “wiggle room” even when that wiggle room is provided by Catholic teaching.
I said explicitly that one should be very slow to apply this principle to abortion–I think it works much better, for instance, with regard to civil unions.
The answer to people using orthodox principles for “wiggle room” is to clarify, not to make false statements about what the Church teaches and justify this because it has supposedly good effects.
(I find this to be the case particularly with regard to the question of remote material cooperation. Essentially, conservative Catholics judge that remote material cooperation in abortion is never justified under present circumstances, and then go around telling people that it’s never justified at all. But you don’t have the right to make that decision, unless perhaps you are a bishop making it for your own flock.)
If I’ve oversimplified, how have I oversimplified? If I’ve overstated, how have I overstated?
Edwin
E
Edward_H
Guest
The long lost and much maligned word “docility” offers much as regards the point about “acceptance”. Some Catholics, especially American Catholics, have a real hard time being docile to the teaching of the Church.
God above all desires unity with us. He wants us, our will, our mind, our love. Whatever keeps us from Him…our intellectual pride, our vanity, our preferences, our temporal desires, our opinions…our sins, our worries, our pursuit of pleasure for its own benefit…you name it…God desires.
Being docile takes practice, takes humility, takes sacrifice. Some matters of Church teaching I didn’t agree with when I reverted years ago. But by being docile and open, I was taught more deeply about this or that point.
I found a great unity and coherence in the moral issues developing…and more, I found that the moral issues connected with the spiritual matters as well. A great unity and coherence reveals itself when docility is practiced.
God above all desires unity with us. He wants us, our will, our mind, our love. Whatever keeps us from Him…our intellectual pride, our vanity, our preferences, our temporal desires, our opinions…our sins, our worries, our pursuit of pleasure for its own benefit…you name it…God desires.
Being docile takes practice, takes humility, takes sacrifice. Some matters of Church teaching I didn’t agree with when I reverted years ago. But by being docile and open, I was taught more deeply about this or that point.
I found a great unity and coherence in the moral issues developing…and more, I found that the moral issues connected with the spiritual matters as well. A great unity and coherence reveals itself when docility is practiced.
E
Edward_H
Guest
Well, you made the blanket statement. So kindly provide examples and boundary conditions.
Does this apply to the evils of abortion? Stealing? Alcohol? Lying? Premarital sex, adultery, over-work, pornography? Masturbation? Vanity?
M
mountee
Guest
Dear JoeDoe52, I just love the way you went at presenting your questions and feelings, if everyone could post like you this would elevate this site for me. You have received some great responses and I hope that this is helping you as you decide what to do next. I think you really have to spend some time in contemplation about your decision. Honestly, if you can’t commit competey I would urge you to postpone going forward until you can. The Church’s stance on your 3 issues is non-negotiable so if you can not reconcile your position to come in line with the Church then you will constantly be feeling as if you are sinning. This is not a good position to live in and since you know what you know, why put yourself there? It is possible that you might change your mind if you spent time with each issue separately with people who are experts who can perhaps help you move to the place where the Church’s stance makes so much sense you can accept it. If not pease consider postponing your choice. Many other churches agree with your stance on those three issues, perhaps you should reconsider. God bless you.
C
Contarini
Guest
It is a blanket statement–hence words like “may.” Hence your criticism that it’s “oversimplified” and “overstated” doesn’t make sense to me.
The classic case is prostitution–Augustine and Aquinas favored legalized prostitution because they thought trying to ban it by law would cause worse evils. I think I disagree with them on the specific case.
I was specifically suggesting, very tentatively, that it might apply to the “difficult cases” of abortion. In other words, it might be better to work to ban late-term abortions and end abortion on demand rather than insisting on a legal ban on all abortions from conception on.
Actually, I’m increasingly unsure that Christians ought to seek to use coercive state power to do anything at all. . . . but most liberal Christians who oppose using state coercion against abortion are happy to use it in other cases, which I find makes no sense.
That seems like a good example of a sin that generally can and should be legally prevented.
The only one of these that I think should be banned by law is pornography (well, perhaps over-work as well–at least, it makes sense to have laws that try to protect people from being coerced into overwork whether directly or indirectly, which is one of the purposes of a minimum-wage law for instance). And even then, that would apply primarily to certain forms of pornography, not necessarily to everything that the Church might define as pornography.
Alcohol should be regulated, but probably its abuse can’t be banned entirely. Adultery and lying probably can’t be banned across the board, but certainly perjury and breach of contract can be punished by law, and I would be in favor of stricter divorce laws in which adultery was a more significant factor. Certainly there are evils that come with such an approach, but less than those of no-fault divorce, I think–but I’m not sure about that.
Edwin
E
edwest2
Guest
Hi,
I think the first reason anybody wants to be Catholic is because God the Father is drawing you to the Church and His Son, Jesus Christ.
bible.cc/john/6-44.htm
I think the greatest confusion of our current age is over sex. To be blunt, you turn on the TV or watch a movie, and they are promoting sex outside of marriage all the time. Ask yourself - who decides when I have sex? It’s you. Not the State or the Church. But if you want to follow Church teaching, and be converted, it calls for a conversion of the heart as well.
To be blunt and specific, We - all of us - are being told that we cannot control our own sexuality. Pretty amazing. But there’s no money in abstaining from sex until marriage. You - we - are taught that since you can’t, according to total strangers, control yourself, then you have to buy pills, condoms and other stuff. That’s where the money is. And everything else revolves around this simple idea: Lots of orgasms good. Babies bad.
Why was same-sex marriage put on the ballot? Why does anybody need my permission to do what they want?
nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html
And according to the article in the link, many gay marriages aren’t monogamous. It’s about the orgasms.
At one time, divorce was rare, abortion was illegal and the media reflected and respected Christian values. Gradually, over a 40 year period, the “we don’t care about love, we just want lots of orgasms” crowd gradually brought their message to the media. When I was growing up, all I heard were songs about love, romance and devotion. People had relationships before they got married - to get to know each other. Today, it’s “just sex” like going to the bathroom. You don’t have to care for the other person. You just agreed to use each other, and it didn’t matter after.
Now the Man Boy Love Association is demanding their rights.
Homosexuals just want the government to give them benefits for how they’re already living. That’s it.
Abortion kills a child, but it’s legal.
Contraception because babies are bad or maybe we’ll have one, but in other countries, people aren’t having any. Babies are expensive, you’re stuck for 18 years, better to spend your money on nice things and have sex with whoever.
If you want to join the Church, please understand that a picture has been painted in your mind by the media regarding what is right, good, normal or OK. Whether you realize it or not, we - all of us - hear the same messages over and over, but how do we decide if these messages are true? Whatever you decide, realize that most of the issues today revolve around sex outside of marriage, or three people getting married or gays wanting benefits and embracing death instead of life.
None of us are perfect - not one. Jesus said, “If you love me keep my commandments.” And He identified Himself with the poor and told us of our responsibility to help them.
Yes, there are Catholics who go to Church, go on Holy Days of Obligation, and even Confession, but after their one hour in the Church building, they get in their cars and get hit with all kinds of wrong messages. I recommend you find a good Catholic publication and read it. In most of our heads, right now, we’ve got all kinds of ideas floating around. Most of the time, these ideas do not align with what is best for us as human beings.
ncregister.com/
Whatever you decide to do, I urge you to get answers to your questions. God will not force you to love Him and neither will the Church, but if you want to be in a relationship with a real person, Jesus Christ, who, if you convert, is going to be your Lord, then certain things will be required, as they are required of all Catholics.
Yes, there are times when we fall short or get distracted by others. Talk to a priest. Just honestly ask him for some advice.
Hope this helps,
Ed
E
Edward_H
Guest
My fault. I wasn’t thinking of civil law, only what the Church had declared as immoral. The Church won’t follow the lead of civil law in these matters. Still, we are called to change immoral laws, wholesale or inch by inch. We are called to use all lecit means to have these laws set right: prayer, writing letters, educational outreach, marching, economic boycotts, votes, cheerful example, family discussions, etc.
- Status