Marriage and baptism are not middle-class rites of passage. We need to make them easier

  • Thread starter Thread starter reggieM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is it the norm for Pre-Cana to take 6 months now? In the 90s when we got married it seemed like most of the pre-Cana consisted of either one weekend (our pick), or maybe an hour a week for lik 4 to 6 weeks.
My diocese requires prep to start a year before the wedding, but it can (and often is) trimmed back.

I think in the past, pre-cana could be shorter because most people agreed with what marriage is. Now adays it’s a gamble if what I mean by marriage remotely resembles what a couple in front of me thinks it is. Most of my time in teaching pre-cana was unwarping people’s misconceptions about marriage in today’s society.

The Church is in a bit of a conundrum. We could teach about marriage when kids are in high school, but since there is often 10+ years now between high school and marriage much of that teaching is lost to the intervening years. In the mean time we have society’s definition of marriage that crowds in and supplants what the Church means by marriage.

So how is the Church to know if a couple in front of the altar is actually aware of what they are, in theory, promising? My Bishop thinks it requires basically teaching them all as if marriage is a completely foreign concept. That might seem unjust or cynical, but in reality my experience is that most couples do not have a good idea of what marriage truly is beyond some romantic fantasy about love.
 
The article is full of a tad more hyperbole and stereotypes than I think is helpful.

If his point is that in some places, the process could be simplified, that’s fair enough. But he’s practically arguing that you can just say one sentence to parents to replace Baptism prep. In an ideal world, where every Catholic is an engaged Catholic, that would be fine. But that’s not sufficient preparation for a lot of Catholics out there, particularly those who are going through the motions without really stopping to think about what the sacraments are for.

It’s also sort of ironic because you have a lot of people saying the Church does not do enough to prepare couples for marriage. How many times have I seen people who have experienced the pain of divorce posting here at CAF about how they wish they had known more going into it and that the Church needs to do more.

Now, is there room for improvement? Sure. But we shouldn’t write off the whole concept.

I was particularly struck by the author’s comment on not being “community-minded.” I can sympathize with that. I’m an introvert who gravitates towards the role of “fly on the wall” in social situations. However, the Church is a community. The Catholic faith is not an individualistic faith. The communal aspect is one of the key attributes. We cannot just set it aside because it makes us uncomfortable.

The article also makes it seem like priests are basically sacramental Pez dispensers who should be ready to give out the sacraments with no regard for preparation.

Maybe the author was trying to exaggerate and be provocative simply to make the point that some places require too much. Again, that might be a fair point. I think there are better, more constructive ways to make that point, though.
 
I mostly disagree with this article. However, there is one thing I totally agree with, which is some parishes are very ridged.

In most cases, this is because a lay person runs the administrative aspects and the pastor doesn’t buck the system unless there is a extreme situation. Most people who are offended or bothered by the way the parish performs their pre-Cana or pre-Jordan do not complain to the pastor and simply move onto another parish or leave the Church after the sacrament.

It’s good to have standard ways of doing things, but each situation should be individually examined by the pastor and process customized to each situation.

And the idea of only a few kids getting baptized at once is ridiculous. There should be no limit.

God Bless.
 
I think in the past, pre-cana could be shorter because most people agreed with what marriage is.
Yes, that’s what the author was pointing to. He’s reflecting from a traditional Catholic perspective. From my own personal experience in communities oriented around the Extraordinary Form, for example, where the approach is more traditional - there is little need or tolerance for a heavily-programmatic approach. Additionally, it is often the priest himself who works with a couple or with parents for baptism and people are already prepared and highly-motivated. That’s one reason why people migrate to such Catholic communities and it does reflect the way it was before the Vatican II. It’s among this group of people where homeschooling is the first option and independent Catholic schools are also supported.
The Church is in a bit of a conundrum. We could teach about marriage when kids are in high school, but since there is often 10+ years now between high school and marriage much of that teaching is lost to the intervening years. In the mean time we have society’s definition of marriage that crowds in and supplants what the Church means by marriage.
Yes, exactly. Schools, media and the public in general (assuming most people don’t have staunch Catholic friends also) will give a strong message about marriage. People are already formed with those ideas by the time they approach the Church seeking the sacrament.
So how is the Church to know if a couple in front of the altar is actually aware of what they are, in theory, promising? My Bishop thinks it requires basically teaching them all as if marriage is a completely foreign concept. That might seem unjust or cynical, but in reality my experience is that most couples do not have a good idea of what marriage truly is beyond some romantic fantasy about love.
It’s a great question and there are different, conflicting answers. Your bishop has one. But it’s like the permissive parents who suddenly realize that they have a monsters in the house. Now it’s a crack-down and the kids will be miserable and confused. “Why did you let us get away with this all these years and now you’re getting upset and punishing us”?

I don’'t know the answers. I’ve made my own choices and I associate with other Catholics who think like I do - but I would never point fingers at anyone, and that includes the young couples or even their parents who really don’t know much about the Faith. I don’t blame the bishops or priests either. We all just got caught in a revolution that was more powerful than anybody realized and I’m in no position to ascribe blame to anyone.

I think we all just have to try to put the pieces back together and people take different approaches. As I mentioned before I’m grateful for the educators like yourself and others who have taken on this very difficult task.
 
I mostly disagree with this article. However, there is one thing I totally agree with, which is some parishes are very ridged.

In most cases, this is because a lay person runs the administrative aspects and the pastor doesn’t buck the system unless there is a extreme situation. Most people who are offended or bothered by the way the parish performs their pre-Cana or pre-Jordan do not complain to the pastor and simply move onto another parish or leave the Church after the sacrament.

It’s good to have standard ways of doing things, but each situation should be individually examined by the pastor and process customized to each situation.

And the idea of only a few kids getting baptized at once is ridiculous. There should be no limit.

God Bless.
I think that’s a key point the author was getting at.
I believe the lay-run programs suffer from this especially. The author is contrasting the older-style Catholic life where the pastor was hands-on with all the education and it was more of a one-on-one and personal style. If a couple needed more help, they would get it. If couple was already very prepared, they would move through quickly.
I can’t blame the good laypeople today who do this work, but it’s a different dynamic.
I know of the parishes around here that had, in the old days, four priests in the rectory and 7 or 8 nuns in the convent. The school was inexpensive and full to capacity - those kids at least knew the basics. The other education was done by the priests who really had the time and interest in such things.
Just as you said today, the pastor cannot afford to get his volunteer laypeople upset so he just lets things go.
Then the lay-leaders will adhere to the program with fierce determination and there will be no exceptions for anyone, even if the program doesn’t work that well.
 
He explains the contrast here:

My older daughter was baptised when she was a week old. All I had to do to secure for Thisbe Perpetua the remission of sin and an heirdom in the Kingdom of Heaven was to call Fr H down at the rectory to let him know that my wife had had the baby (he was expecting my call: good priests know things like which of their parishioners are pregnant): “How does Saturday at eleven sound?”

That, and one piece of paper from her godfather’s parish attesting to his being a communicant, were the only requirements. He supplied the salt and the chrism and a Latin pamphlet with the Exorcízo te and all the other forgotten glories of the Roman Rite; we brought the baby. Afterwards we drank champagne.

But he’s also assuming a much smaller parish where the priest can know the parishioners that well.

We have some parishes with 2,500 families or more. And some even clustered like that with a pastor and maybe a retired priest to help out. The priest cannot possibly know everybody or simply take a phone call like that.
I wish they would do it that way but, at least around here, we have far too many Catholic-per-priest to afford it anymore.
 
I mostly disagree with this article. However, there is one thing I totally agree with, which is some parishes are very ridged.

In most cases, this is because a lay person runs the administrative aspects and the pastor doesn’t buck the system unless there is a extreme situation. Most people who are offended or bothered by the way the parish performs their pre-Cana or pre-Jordan do not complain to the pastor and simply move onto another parish or leave the Church after the sacrament.

It’s good to have standard ways of doing things, but each situation should be individually examined by the pastor and process customized to each situation.

And the idea of only a few kids getting baptized at once is ridiculous. There should be no limit.

God Bless.
I can agree with that point. I have certainly see cases like that. A little flexibility can go a long way. Sometimes people get really tied to a way of doing things such that they forget why they are doing it. They lose sight of the end goal and become attached to the one route they have mapped out to get there.
 
Some bishops in the US are permitting Confirmation to be provided at the same time as Baptism for infants now and not just adult converts.
Which is going to destroy all semblance of religious ed for children and youth.
 
He explains the contrast here:

My older daughter was baptised when she was a week old. All I had to do to secure for Thisbe Perpetua the remission of sin and an heirdom in the Kingdom of Heaven was to call Fr H down at the rectory to let him know that my wife had had the baby (he was expecting my call: good priests know things like which of their parishioners are pregnant): “How does Saturday at eleven sound?”

That, and one piece of paper from her godfather’s parish attesting to his being a communicant, were the only requirements. He supplied the salt and the chrism and a Latin pamphlet with the Exorcízo te and all the other forgotten glories of the Roman Rite; we brought the baby. Afterwards we drank champagne.

But he’s also assuming a much smaller parish where the priest can know the parishioners that well.

We have some parishes with 2,500 families or more. And some even clustered like that with a pastor and maybe a retired priest to help out. The priest cannot possibly know everybody or simply take a phone call like that.
I wish they would do it that way but, at least around here, we have far too many Catholic-per-priest to afford it anymore.
Right. I have known parishes where I would call the parish for holy day Mass times at 10:00 at night expecting the machine only to have the pastor answer the phone personally. :eek: But then other parishes are way too big for that sort of one-on-one interaction to take place very often.
 
Is it the norm for Pre-Cana to take 6 months now? In the 90s when we got married it seemed like most of the pre-Cana consisted of either one weekend (our pick), or maybe an hour a week for lik 4 to 6 weeks.

And no, middle-class people don’t universally “love” all that stuff the guy listed. I wasn’t big on the one weekend of pre-Cana we had to do. The monastery we went to was very pretty and we got to take a lovely walk through the grounds during couples’ free time…the Mass at the end was okay…the rest of the program was meh.
I have some friends who had an interesting time with that. See, the U.S. government says that if you come from another country to get married, you only have 90 days to get married and get permission to stay. And USICS does check to make sure you’re not “faking” your marriage - meaning they’re looking at whether you live together, share bank accounts, that sort of thing. The church, however, said they had to do 6 months of marriage prep, which could only be started once they were both there.
 
I have to say that I am very disappointed that the Herald would run an article of such poor quality.

It reminds me of certain politically related journalistic pieces one encounters from the United States. Hardly a style to be emulated.
 
I have some friends who had an interesting time with that. See, the U.S. government says that if you come from another country to get married, you only have 90 days to get married and get permission to stay. And USICS does check to make sure you’re not “faking” your marriage - meaning they’re looking at whether you live together, share bank accounts, that sort of thing. The church, however, said they had to do 6 months of marriage prep, which could only be started once they were both there.
Joe came from Ireland in August of 2010. We did the six months prep in our Parish and got married in January 2011. Immigration didn’t care. He got his permanent residency after a couple of years.
 
I think one of the main things that comes up here is that in many parishes the clergy does not know their parishioners and vice versa. I don’t mean that as an accusation, but rather as an observation.

My last three children were baptized within 3 to 10 days of their birth. No classes; no getting in line on the schedule. This wasn’t a decade or two ago either, but in the last 1 to 5 years. One of our friends complained that they had to take 2 classes with each of their last 2 kids despite being in the same parish and having kids roughly the same age.

Our conversation went a little like this:
“Did you talk with Father or the Deacon”
… “err… no”
“Do you know if Father knows who you are?”
… “well we say hi on the way out of Mass on Sundays”
“But does he know you and know you are practicing?”
… “maybe, but I don’t know since we never really talk to him”
I don’t mean that to say that they are at fault for being two of 6,000 people in the parish, but rather that my wife and my involvement in the parish has let us get to know the clergy. As such they know we practice our faith and are willing to “wave” the requirements. On the other hand there are thousands of people who simply are names on a check but never bother to get to know the clergy.

Combine that with people that show up to a class with a chip on their shoulder, muttering about how stupid it is, and they have to make a judgement call. If you were to say “why can’t we skip this; it’s a waste of time” I would be a lot less likely to say okay then if you said “I understand how important it is to know about the sacraments; would you give me a waver if I can show I understand them”.

Most priest and deacons I know are very willing to accommodate people if they can show they understand what the sacraments are, but most reasons I’ve seen for shortening prep sound like “We’ve been planning this for months and already have everything setup, we just need a priest there on Saturday in six weeks.” Or “we’ve already booked out honeymoon and if we wait another two months it will be the rainy season”.

Now that doesn’t mean that the couple automatically doesn’t know anything about marriage, but if you ask how long they’ve planned their wedding most can tell you within a couple weeks. If you then ask how long they’ve planned their marriage, many give you a blank look. In other words many have talked about the wedding, but don’t necessarily consider it as distinct from their marriage and see the wedding as the most important aspect.

One of the questions I like to ask is “You’ve planned your wedding, but have you given thought to each other’s funeral?” That generally gets them to stop and ask why. I then say “Well, the wedding marks the beginning of your marriage, but the funeral marks it’s end. What I need to make sure of is you are willing to take on everything in between”. My purpose is to get them to think beyond the next couple weeks, months or even years.

I don’t think there’s a silver bullet, but I do think the Church has an obligation to ensure that people understand what they are asking for in baptism or marriage. I have no problem if people plan for a year of prep but can show that they only need a couple months, but with the state of society now I think it is nearly impossible to assume the best unless you have a very small parish where people know each other.
 
I think one of the main things that comes up here is that in many parishes the clergy does not know their parishioners and vice versa. I don’t mean that as an accusation, but rather as an observation.

My last three children were baptized within 3 to 10 days of their birth. No classes; no getting in line on the schedule. This wasn’t a decade or two ago either, but in the last 1 to 5 years. One of our friends complained that they had to take 2 classes with each of their last 2 kids despite being in the same parish and having kids roughly the same age.

Our conversation went a little like this:
“Did you talk with Father or the Deacon”
… “err… no”
“Do you know if Father knows who you are?”
… “well we say hi on the way out of Mass on Sundays”
“But does he know you and know you are practicing?”
… “maybe, but I don’t know since we never really talk to him”
I don’t mean that to say that they are at fault for being two of 6,000 people in the parish, but rather that my wife and my involvement in the parish has let us get to know the clergy. As such they know we practice our faith and are willing to “wave” the requirements. On the other hand there are thousands of people who simply are names on a check but never bother to get to know the clergy.

Combine that with people that show up to a class with a chip on their shoulder, muttering about how stupid it is, and they have to make a judgement call. If you were to say “why can’t we skip this; it’s a waste of time” I would be a lot less likely to say okay then if you said “I understand how important it is to know about the sacraments; would you give me a waver if I can show I understand them”.

Most priest and deacons I know are very willing to accommodate people if they can show they understand what the sacraments are, but most reasons I’ve seen for shortening prep sound like “We’ve been planning this for months and already have everything setup, we just need a priest there on Saturday in six weeks.” Or “we’ve already booked out honeymoon and if we wait another two months it will be the rainy season”.

Now that doesn’t mean that the couple automatically doesn’t know anything about marriage, but if you ask how long they’ve planned their wedding most can tell you within a couple weeks. If you then ask how long they’ve planned their marriage, many give you a blank look. In other words many have talked about the wedding, but don’t necessarily consider it as distinct from their marriage and see the wedding as the most important aspect.

One of the questions I like to ask is “You’ve planned your wedding, but have you given thought to each other’s funeral?” That generally gets them to stop and ask why. I then say “Well, the wedding marks the beginning of your marriage, but the funeral marks it’s end. What I need to make sure of is you are willing to take on everything in between”. My purpose is to get them to think beyond the next couple weeks, months or even years.

I don’t think there’s a silver bullet, but I do think the Church has an obligation to ensure that people understand what they are asking for in baptism or marriage. I have no problem if people plan for a year of prep but can show that they only need a couple months, but with the state of society now I think it is nearly impossible to assume the best unless you have a very small parish where people know each other.
So true, and an excellent answer.
👍
 
II don’t mean that to say that they are at fault for being two of 6,000 people in the parish, but rather that my wife and my involvement in the parish has let us get to know the clergy. As such they know we practice our faith and are willing to “wave” the requirements.
That’s a great point. Taking the time to make friends not only with the priest and deacons but with other parish members would save a lot of the difficulties and time-consuming efforts for everyone. Too many people show up for important events and they have to start at the very beginning. Usually we will say “at least they showed up”, and that’s true, but it just seems that there are far too many who only want to “show up” for the important events, even their own marriage.
 
Joe came from Ireland in August of 2010. We did the six months prep in our Parish and got married in January 2011. Immigration didn’t care. He got his permanent residency after a couple of years.
It’s easier from Ireland. My friend is from what’s considered a high-risk country in terms of fraud. How closely they look depends on what country you’re from, and what kind of visa you have. He had the fiance visa, which requires getting married within 90 days.
 
In our case, marriage counselling meant two 20-minute conversations with our pastor. This is as it should be …

Working-class people and bohemian misfits like me are not community-minded. We loathe the notion of therapy, especially if it involves making small talk with people we don’t know about things that are very dear to our hearts. People with real jobs often work on Saturdays; they haven’t got time or money for couples’ weekend retreats to horse farms with Fr Dialogue.

Meanwhile, middle-class people enjoy being treated like (rather stupid) children. They like play-time and share-time and snack-time and loathe the idea of privacy; they enjoy shaking hands and holding hands, which is why their favourite parts of the new Mass are the Sign of Peace and the standing-up Paternoster. They take positive delight in these things for the same mysterious reasons that they enjoy working for those companies that require semi-annual “team-building exercises” – scavenger hunts and other pre-teen activities between mandatory presentations on LGBTQ sensitivity.

cnn.com/2017/08/04/health/exorcism-doctor/index.html
I couldn’t disagree more. We’ve lost a sense of sacred, we’ve lost our own formation, heck, we’ve even lost the definition of male or female and marriage. The answer is not less, and “easier” access requiring less of those seeking it. But rather more. More sacrament prep, more teaching and counseling about marriage, parenthood and your responsibility to get your spouse and kids to heaven.
 
US Statistics from CARA Georgetown, cara.georgetown.edu/frequently-requested-church-statistics/ reflect what has happened over the past 5 decades:

US Catholic Church Marriages
1970 - 426,309
2016 – 145.916

US Catholic Church Infant Baptisms
1970 – 1.089 million
2016 - 670,481

While at the same time, the US Catholic population has increased from 47.9 million (1970) to 67.7 million in 2016.

My own personal experience back in the late 60’s and early 70’s was that before marriage, we met with the priest on two occasions for 15 – 20 minutes. My children were baptized without any instruction at two different dioceses located in Michigan and Maine. Some may consider this disheartening, while others may consider that the Church hierarchy is currently on the right track.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top