Ineligible for RCIA; any other options?

[annad347]

Not really cause the bible says murder is wrong. We all know murder is wrong. I don’t know why they didn’t ask me for any proof… I’m sure they had their reason.

Maybe they didn’t need it. Maybe they’re one of those priest/church that does things they believe its right, though another priest /church would say its wrong. Maybe they felt it was more important to welcome someone into the church any way possible? That a piece of paper or lack of proof shouldn’t be used to keep someone from God. Bringing someone into the church is bringing them to ever lasting life. To bring someone to the church brings them to God… that’s never wrong.

Or maybe they thought I was so old that I was baptized before paper was invented, so why bother asking for something I obviously do not have. (that’s a joke)

I never said what they did was wrong, because like I don’t know why they didn’t ask, nor did I question why they didn’t ask because I didn’t know it was a requirement.

Jeffrey Dahmer, on the other hand… murder is always wrong… no, if and or buts. Murder is never right.

 

[LilyM]

Not really cause the bible says murder is wrong. We all know murder is wrong. I don’t know why they didn’t ask me for any proof… I’m sure they had their reason.

Maybe they didn’t need it. Maybe they’re one of those priest/church that does things they believe its right, though another priest /church would say its wrong. Maybe they felt it was more important to welcome someone into the church any way possible? That a piece of paper or lack of proof shouldn’t be used to keep someone from God. Bringing someone into the church is bringing them to ever lasting life. To bring someone to the church brings them to God… that’s never wrong.

Or maybe they thought I was so old that I was baptized before paper was invented, so why bother asking for something I obviously do not have. (that’s a joke)

I never said what they did was wrong, because like I don’t know why they didn’t ask, nor did I question why they didn’t ask because I didn’t know it was a requirement.

Jeffrey Dahmer, on the other hand… murder is always wrong… no, if and or buts. Murder is never right.

No one (except this one nun who everyone has told OP was wrong) is using anything to keep anyone from God.

As has repeatedly been stated, it is a matter of ascertaining whether the OP needs a baptism or not, or (if unsure) maybe a conditional baptism.

Imagine someone wants to join the military. Imagine the rules are that if you are under 16 you cannot join, if you are.between 16 and 18 you need a parent or guardian to give consent, and if you are over 18 you can enlist on your own.

The rules are there for very good reason. Being in the military involves some very adult responsibilities and decision-making skills. So they want to be sure recruits.actialy are, or are nearly, adult.

Imagine a 14-year old rocking up saying they were 18. Some recruiters may be keen enough to get folks in at all costs that they take the person’s word for it, but it isn’t the best or most responsible way to go about things, is it?

And if our 14-year-old would be recruit is asked for proof of their age, it is not feom some heartless determination to keep people from being in the military by any means.

 

[Horton]

Maybe they didn’t need it. Maybe they’re one of those priest/church that does things they believe its right, though another priest /church would say its wrong. Maybe they felt it was more important to welcome someone into the church any way possible? That a piece of paper or lack of proof shouldn’t be used to keep someone from God. Bringing someone into the church is bringing them to ever lasting life. To bring someone to the church brings them to God… that’s never wrong

What is it about this that you seem to failing to understand? No one is keeping the OP from God. There is a question if he is or isn’t baptized and if he has proof of it. All that can be worked though.

No one would ask you for any paperwork because you are already a Catholic. So no one asking you for a baptismal certificate has zero to do with an RCIA director for documentation.

 

[annad347]

What is it about this that you seem to failing to understand?

oh I totally understand, understood it when you made clear the difference from me and the OP. I was just answering comments given directly to me about what I said.

 

[Gorgias]

I don’t know why they didn’t ask me for any proof… I’m sure they had their reason.

And charity will prevent us from speculating on it…

To be fair, though, I think that we figured it out, upthread. When you entered RCIA, you already had been baptized and confirmed in the Catholic Church? So then, you weren’t really in RCIA as a catechumen or candidate; you were there as if it were a catechetics course. So, no need to check your sacramental status, since you weren’t going to receive any sacraments of initiation. Right?

Maybe they’re one of those priest/church that does things they believe its right, though another priest /church would say its wrong.

Yes, there are churches where folks flaunt the rules, in a skewed sense of ‘pastoral sensitivity’ (IMHO).

That a piece of paper or lack of proof shouldn’t be used to keep someone from God.

The thing is, the lack of “a piece of paper” doesn’t “keep someone from God”. You’re setting up strawmen here! The lack of a piece of paper only means that we find a different way to verify the sacrament or to help us discern that a conditional baptism is advisable. If you think it keeps people out, then you’re mistaken (or, as we saw from the OP, the person in charge of RCIA is mistaken)!

 

[annad347]

You’re setting up strawmen here!

What does that mean?

… If you think it keeps people out, then you’re mistaken…

Wouldn’t be the first time…and probably wont be the last time. God willing each mistake brings me closer to God.

 

[TomH1]

Phemie is correct. Conditional baptism is not something distinct. It is used when after diligent enquiries it remains uncertain as to whether baptism occurred or if it did whether it was valid. If one was already validly baptised conditional baptism has no effect. It does not re-baptise the individual. If the person was not ever baptised or not validly so the conditional baptism effects their only true and valid baptism.

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

You’re setting up strawmen here!

What does that mean?

From Wiki:

A straw man (or strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be “attacking a straw man”.

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent’s proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., “stand up a straw man”) and the subsequent refutation of that false argument (“knock down a straw man”) instead of the opponent’s proposition

I was asserting that the argument you presented (“you’re using a piece of paper to keep someone from God”) was an invalid argument, and was completely different than the situation we’ve been discussing.

 

[annad347]

… was an invalid argument, and was completely different than the situation we’ve been discussing.

I guess, but I tend to think from the mind of a lost soul. The OP said he was ineligible for RCIA because the nun said he need his baptism record, end of story. It didn’t sound like she did or said anything that could help him complete the RCIA class, she didn’t even suggest he go speak to the priest.

The OP is blessed that he didn’t giving up, he tried twice and still wants to figure out how he can enter the Catholic church. He now has a path and a plan.

But like I said put that in the mind of a lost confused soul… they’d just see her denial as a rejection, might leave and never return, because they couldn’t give the nun what she said was required (meaning, the piece of paper). Dramatic yes, but possible… that’s why I said what I said.

Yes, you all agree the nun was wrong, yes, you all helped the OP with knowledge of what to do now, but that doesn’t happen with everyone… you know what I mean, or maybe not… but its cool.

I have something to say about the military thing too, but I wont… because everything was figured out for the OP, so its all good.

 

[Gorgias]

But like I said put that in the mind of a lost confused soul… they’d just see her denial as a rejection, might leave and never return, because they couldn’t give the nun what she said was required (meaning, the piece of paper). Dramatic yes, but possible… that’s why I said what I said.

I agree; that’s possible. However, that wouldn’t be laid at the feet of the Church. Rather, it would have been due to one particular person’s mistaken assertion.

 

[annad347]

do you really think it matters who’s at fault? The damage is already done.

I wonder if the OP went back, spoke to the priest and reentered the RCIA class?

 

[Paul_Edwards]

Hello, I fear that it seems you have been around people who either do not care about your soul or do not understand the nature of salvation. I would suggest you perhaps find a local nearby Institute of Christ the King or Fraternity of St Peter parish where they will ensure you are received appropriately and take care for your soul. Barring that, there is Opus Dei. Or perhaps you have a good priest in a nearby parish? Have you spoken to another priest about it? Four years is a long time to wait, no good catechist would allow this to happen.

God will provide. Perhaps you will need a conditional baptism