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

[pianistclare]

The term “traditional Catholic” is the mostly widely misunderstood and misused term on this forum.

Which is why I try to avoid that forum like the plague.
Not always successful at avoiding it though.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The term “traditional Catholic” is the mostly widely misunderstood and misused term on this forum.

Which is why I try to avoid that forum like the plague.
Not always successful at avoiding it though.

Ha! I think the original intent was for Latin Mass topics but now traditional catholic just means you didn’t do yoga at Mass this week!

 

[ToeInTheWater]

The term “traditional Catholic” is the mostly widely misunderstood and misused term on this forum.

Which is why I try to avoid that forum like the plague.
Not always successful at avoiding it though.

Well it’s hard to avoid when some posters are (1) very particular about identifying themselves as Traditionalist, not only in their profiles but by bringing it up in pretty much every topic they post on and some also (2) complain about being “unwelcome on CAF” or “bullied for being a Traditionalist here”.

 

[gracepoole]

Ha! I think the original intent was for Latin Mass topics but now traditional catholic just means you didn’t do yoga at Mass this week!

You know what’s interesting? It’s supposed to be about Catholic traditions – at least that’s what I was told several years back.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

You know what’s interesting? It’s supposed to be about Catholic traditions – at least that’s what I was told several years back.

Sadly that pretty much ended with the retirement of Brother JR from this forum. I remember he used to actually provide a much deeper and nuanced view of “Catholic tradition” than the “it’s all about the pre-Vat II TLM” interpretation. And I did frequent this subforum much more back then, though I rarely posted.

I also realize that many Traditionalists do feel marginalized by the current Pope already and so I don’t totally blame them for the defensive “those who are not with me are against me” attitude.

That being said I’m really not sure why this particular topic has anything to do with Catholic traditions. I clicked on it when it was on the forum sidebar and was surprised to find which forum it was in.

Unless “let 13 year old girls marry after a brief meeting with a priest with no marriage prep at all” is a Catholic tradition. Indeed, I’m pretty sure there were such things as reading of the banns for 3 Sundays in a row, and such. Not sure if the Romeo and Juliet marriage was even a valid one (not to mention the whole fictional story part of it).

ETA: But I must admit it’s a personal issue for me that most references to fiction in order to make an argument about real life make me laugh. And this particular reference was not quite as absurd as the time a poster used “Game of Thrones” as a reference to claim “The Church used to give dispensations to royalty so that brothers could marry sisters!” Though at least he didn’t go as far as to claim “the Church did that because they were threatened with dragons!”

 

[gracepoole]

Sadly that pretty much ended with the retirement of Brother JR from this forum. I remember he used to actually provide a much deeper and nuanced view of “Catholic tradition” than the “it’s all about the pre-Vat II TLM” interpretation.

Yes, Brother JR might well have been the greatest treasure known to this forum.

That being said I’m really not sure why this particular topic has anything to do with Catholic traditions. I clicked on it when it was on the forum sidebar and was surprised to find which forum it was in.

Oh, agreed. No idea.

 

[Usige]

I do think there are instances where a “one size fits all” approach to catechesis, marriage prep, etc. is not the best way to go about it.

Trying to reel this back to the original topic…

I think the above is where the challenge lies. There are certainly many people who know what marriage, baptism, conversion, et cetera involves before the hit the door.

I remember when I first walked into an RCIA class and was told “Conversion is a process, not a program… Now here’s the schedule for the process.” Okay, maybe that’s not a direct quote, but it certainly expressed the overall tone.

So the real question is how to accurately determine what a person or couple needs to prepare and then set out a plan for preparation. As you rightly point out some come in fully prepared and others can barely spell out their desire. Now I can work that out with a meeting or two… if the people or couple are willing to talk, the challenge has always been when people are openly defiant or refuse to talk.

We use the FOCCUS inventory not just to identify where people might have challenges, but also to identify where they disagree with the Church or need better catechesis. When people sit and roll their eyes or show up 30+ minutes late it is difficult to do that assessment or provide catechesis. The same thing when we’ve been teaching NFP and God’s plan for sexuality in marriage. We are kinda stuck if we let the people drive it and yet it hacks off people who feel like they are just being made to jump through hoops. There is a good reason that the vast majority of people the do marriage prep leave after a few years. It is not that they are unwilling or unable to be flexible, but rather that they are tasked with preparing people who simply do not want to hear what the Church teaches. People want their sacramental ticket punched according to their requirements and think the Church really should have no requirements of them.

For every one couple I think were truly aware of what marriage involved I would say we had 3 or 4 that we could have worked with for 3 years and still not had them where they should be. Thats discounting the other 70% that were iffy.

I am open to hearing suggestions on how to improve things. I would be perfectly happy to not give up nights and weekends with people glaring daggers at me. At the same time, just rubber stamping things might as well include a packet on how to requests an annulment. I’ll be honest, the last year has been great because we were required to step down from marriage prep while in formation. It should tell you something when it is a relief to sit with people dying in hospice rather than to work with couples preparing for marriage.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Actually, I don’t even agree with you, that this was the theme. That’s what you got out of it, and obviously you already felt that.

The theme I got is “The modern Church is wrong to make Catholics jump through a bunch of hoops to get married or baptized. We should go back to the good old days when all we needed to do was talk to the priest for an hour, if that, and get automatic permission, and even a 12 year old girl could get married right away, with no questions asked.”

I also find it hard to believe how an essay that is criticizing the Church and suggesting current practices be changed, should NOT be judged by the standard of “did this convince anyone”?

It would be different if he was just defending, say, Church teaching on Mary, abortion, etc.

I am in agreement with you, Toe in the Water.

The other facet that has to be articulated is that the author is part of a community attached to the Vetus Ordo liturgy, which is quite clear in his article. Those communities are so small, not simply in terms of their actual numbers but in terms of the ratio of clergy to laity, that they are their own paradigm. These communities bear no resemblance to normal parish life.

It is not unlike being chaplain to a enclosed community of nuns. Their chaplain has the pastoral care of 15 souls who are all vowed Religious. The pastor of a parish can have the pastoral care of thousands. It is a situation like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I also realize that many Traditionalists do feel marginalized by the current Pope already and so I don’t totally blame them for the defensive “those who are not with me are against me” attitude.

I can attest that the traditionalists had the exact same attitudes decades ago, when the now beatified Pope Paul VI and the now canonised Pope John Paul II occupied the place that now belongs to Pope Francis. It was no more pleasant then than it is now.

 

[jeannetherese]

Trying to reel this back to the original topic…

I think the above is where the challenge lies. There are certainly many people who know what marriage, baptism, conversion, et cetera involves before the hit the door.

I remember when I first walked into an RCIA class and was told “Conversion is a process, not a program… Now here’s the schedule for the process.” Okay, maybe that’s not a direct quote, but it certainly expressed the overall tone.

So the real question is how to accurately determine what a person or couple needs to prepare and then set out a plan for preparation. As you rightly point out some come in fully prepared and others can barely spell out their desire. Now I can work that out with a meeting or two… if the people or couple are willing to talk, the challenge has always been when people are openly defiant or refuse to talk.

We use the FOCCUS inventory not just to identify where people might have challenges, but also to identify where they disagree with the Church or need better catechesis. When people sit and roll their eyes or show up 30+ minutes late it is difficult to do that assessment or provide catechesis. The same thing when we’ve been teaching NFP and God’s plan for sexuality in marriage. We are kinda stuck if we let the people drive it and yet it hacks off people who feel like they are just being made to jump through hoops. There is a good reason that the vast majority of people the do marriage prep leave after a few years. It is not that they are unwilling or unable to be flexible, but rather that they are tasked with preparing people who simply do not want to hear what the Church teaches. People want their sacramental ticket punched according to their requirements and think the Church really should have no requirements of them.

For every one couple I think were truly aware of what marriage involved I would say we had 3 or 4 that we could have worked with for 3 years and still not had them where they should be. Thats discounting the other 70% that were iffy.

I am open to hearing suggestions on how to improve things. I would be perfectly happy to not give up nights and weekends with people glaring daggers at me. At the same time, just rubber stamping things might as well include a packet on how to requests an annulment. I’ll be honest, the last year has been great because we were required to step down from marriage prep while in formation. It should tell you something when it is a relief to sit with people dying in hospice rather than to work with couples preparing for marriage.

Thank you for sharing your observations and getting the thread back on track. May God bless you in your ministry.
Amen.

 

[ConfusedLucy]

Yes, I interpreted it that way also and it was troubling to see that. But I think another theme the author was pointing out was that some tend to view baptisms and weddings as a rite of passage " like finishing secondary school or moving into one’s first apartment’ - so that might explain the difference.
I’ve seen this many times where the English weddings in church are quite lavish and expensive affairs – and baptisms are not as extravagant but the people treat them more like a social celebration than an offering of the sacrament.
I think also, at least around here, the Spanish language community has more young couples and those couples have bigger families.

This is true in my experience. My family members who never go to church still expect Catholic weddings and baptisms. They are seen as fairly formal events and family reunions.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I think part of the problem is that running a parish and the shortage of priests has changed since the “good old days”. It used to be that the priest knew the families. Stayed in one parish for a length of time and was more pastoral and less like a boss you have to schedule a meeting with.
A couple of 20 minute visits were plenty. But now? I’ve seen a wedding where the priest said a wrong name for the groom. I’ve seen others where the priest or Deacon has never even seen the couple but for that day.
The state of marriage probably means that priests need to roll up thier sleeves and get out into the messy lives of his charges. But some don’t know how, can’t because of an overworked schedule or are not given the proper stability at one parish to develop relationships.

Now baptism I’m on the fence about. But in general I agree it should be MUCH easier to access. A few years ago, pope Francis hinted at streamlining the process. And one has to think of those who were baptized in the early Church, where they were given a basic rundown of the “Good news” and then baptized by the thousands immediately. With the added obstacle of being discovered and killed. Leaving only hidden Churches behind to guide. I think we should move more to that area of the sacrament. Let the water flow I say!

 

[reggieM]

I think part of the problem is that running a parish and the shortage of priests has changed since the “good old days”. It used to be that the priest knew the families. Stayed in one parish for a length of time and was more pastoral and less like a boss you have to schedule a meeting with.
A couple of 20 minute visits were plenty. But now? I’ve seen a wedding where the priest said a wrong name for the groom. I’ve seen others where the priest or Deacon has never even seen the couple but for that day.

Agreed. Around here our priests move around quite a lot and never really get a chance to bond with more than a few families.

The state of marriage probably means that priests need to roll up thier sleeves and get out into the messy lives of his charges. But some don’t know how, can’t because of an overworked schedule or are not given the proper stability at one parish to develop relationships.

Some of the priests I know are just overwhelmed by the amount of administrative work they have to do – and that cuts down on time they could spend one-on-one with couples. Also, I think a lot of younger Catholics simply don’t go to Mass so when they arrive for marriage prep they’re new to the priest. There is also too much focus on the external parts of the wedding and I would imagine that just distracts from the sacred aspect, making it harder for the priest to break through all of that.

Now baptism I’m on the fence about. But in general I agree it should be MUCH easier to access. A few years ago, pope Francis hinted at streamlining the process. And one has to think of those who were baptized in the early Church, where they were given a basic rundown of the “Good news” and then baptized by the thousands immediately. With the added obstacle of being discovered and killed. Leaving only hidden Churches behind to guide. I think we should move more to that area of the sacrament. Let the water flow I say!

For me it’s similar to the above - it’s about relationships that should be built at the parish level. It can’t all be just with the people and the priest, but the lay-leaders can get to know the families also so parents would be already prepared for the sacrament.

 

[reggieM]

So the real question is how to accurately determine what a person or couple needs to prepare and then set out a plan for preparation. As you rightly point out some come in fully prepared and others can barely spell out their desire. Now I can work that out with a meeting or two… if the people or couple are willing to talk, the challenge has always been when people are openly defiant or refuse to talk.

It’s good to have that flexibility and personal approach. I think some parish leaders will take comfort in a more rigid or formal process, and that makes sense because it is easier that way. But for me, the ideal situation is as you described where the candidates can have a conversation about themselves and how well or not they’re prepared.

There is a good reason that the vast majority of people the do marriage prep leave after a few years. It is not that they are unwilling or unable to be flexible, but rather that they are tasked with preparing people who simply do not want to hear what the Church teaches. People want their sacramental ticket punched according to their requirements and think the Church really should have no requirements of them.

That’s an important point. I don’t know what we could really do about it, but my gut reaction is to take a harder-line against the ticket-punchers. There’s a risk to that also, but at least the integrity of the sacrament is preserved and it is fairer to the couples who take it seriously.

For every one couple I think were truly aware of what marriage involved I would say we had 3 or 4 that we could have worked with for 3 years and still not had them where they should be. Thats discounting the other 70% that were iffy.

I am open to hearing suggestions on how to improve things. I would be perfectly happy to not give up nights and weekends with people glaring daggers at me. At the same time, just rubber stamping things might as well include a packet on how to requests an annulment. I’ll be honest, the last year has been great because we were required to step down from marriage prep while in formation. It should tell you something when it is a relief to sit with people dying in hospice rather than to work with couples preparing for marriage.

Thank you for sharing your experiences. That was eye-opening!
For me, I can only think of more drastic sorts of ideas to begin to fix the problem, but in all cases it comes down to commitment.
I would measure that in a big parish, and we have them with 6,000 families. And over the course of the past 30 years, they haven’t had one priestly vocation.
Marriage prep is training and guidance on that sacred vocation - but we need something for priestly vocations also.

 

[DarkLight]

Same for the conversion process. A High Church “Anglo-Catholic” is certainly not at the same place along the conversion path as a Baptist, and the Baptist is not at the same place a Muslim would be, and the Muslim is not at the same place as an atheist raised by parents who constantly disparaged the concept of religion.

I recall complaining about this when I was going through RCIA. Of course, the response here was that I should be grateful to be allowed access to the sacraments at all.

 

[detles]

I’m not sure it’s the fault of the church itself, but I do think this is an issue on a few levels.

While there were many reasons that I left the church as a teen/young adult, one thing that really impacted me was when my parents insisted that my boyfriend (now-husband) and I wait until we graduated from college before marrying. Now, obviously they would have preferred that we waited to get married and were chaste, but when the choices were 1) get married now rather than “living in sin” for a few years when marriage will be more socially acceptable and 2) “live in sin” for a few years rather than getting married at a time they would have raised eyebrows among their friends (we were both 20), they choose the latter. They saw cohabitation as the lesser of two evils, and I’m honestly not sure why they saw marrying young as such a great evil.

I certainly understand that from a practical standpoint, but the message it sent to me was that my parents, despite going to Mass every week, put middle-class American values over church values.

They are absolutely not in any way responsible for my own sin, and I was not a practicing Catholic at the time (although we were considering marrying at the time because we were young and romantic) but it did say something to me that, when push came to shove, they would rather I live in a way contrary to the teachings of the church they’d raised me in than do something against middle-class American values.

 

[gracepoole]

I’m not sure it’s the fault of the church itself, but I do think this is an issue on a few levels.

While there were many reasons that I left the church as a teen/young adult, one thing that really impacted me was when my parents insisted that my boyfriend (now-husband) and I wait until we graduated from college before marrying. Now, obviously they would have preferred that we waited to get married and were chaste, but when the choices were 1) get married now rather than “living in sin” for a few years when marriage will be more socially acceptable and 2) “live in sin” for a few years rather than getting married at a time they would have raised eyebrows among their friends (we were both 20), they choose the latter. They saw cohabitation as the lesser of two evils, and I’m honestly not sure why they saw marrying young as such a great evil.

I certainly understand that from a practical standpoint, but the message it sent to me was that my parents, despite going to Mass every week, put middle-class American values over church values.

They are absolutely not in any way responsible for my own sin, and I was not a practicing Catholic at the time (although we were considering marrying at the time because we were young and romantic) but it did say something to me that, when push came to shove, they would rather I live in a way contrary to the teachings of the church they’d raised me in than do something against middle-class American values.

Catholics do believe in a third option: wait to get married and don’t have sex before marriage. It can be done.

 

[reggieM]

I’m not sure it’s the fault of the church itself, but I do think this is an issue on a few levels.

While there were many reasons that I left the church as a teen/young adult, one thing that really impacted me was when my parents insisted that my boyfriend (now-husband) and I wait until we graduated from college before marrying. Now, obviously they would have preferred that we waited to get married and were chaste, but when the choices were 1) get married now rather than “living in sin” for a few years when marriage will be more socially acceptable and 2) “live in sin” for a few years rather than getting married at a time they would have raised eyebrows among their friends (we were both 20), they choose the latter. They saw cohabitation as the lesser of two evils, and I’m honestly not sure why they saw marrying young as such a great evil.

I certainly understand that from a practical standpoint, but the message it sent to me was that my parents, despite going to Mass every week, put middle-class American values over church values.

They are absolutely not in any way responsible for my own sin, and I was not a practicing Catholic at the time (although we were considering marrying at the time because we were young and romantic) but it did say something to me that, when push came to shove, they would rather I live in a way contrary to the teachings of the church they’d raised me in than do something against middle-class American values.

I’m not blaming you or your parents with this, but I think they were not alone in how they viewed the matter. Many Catholics today do the same thing. People don’t want to be embarrassed for some reason, so they will put middle-class values first and their religion second.
The pressure to fit into society is very strong and often we are not given support to stand up for our Faith. That is not an excuse, but I think just a fact. Plus, very often we think that society is judging us much more than it really is. In reality people are not judging us that severely, but we exaggerated it and then deny the Catholic Faith on that basis (speaking for myself since I have done such sinful sorts of things in the past which I am ashamed of).
So, eventually children will see that and decide that the Catholic Faith is not that important, but social standing or having a boyfriend or having a high-paying job - or many things like that, are more important.

 

[Brendan_64]

Many Catholics today do the same thing. People don’t want to be embarrassed for some reason, so they will put middle-class values first and their religion second.
The pressure to fit into society is very strong and often we are not given support to stand up for our Faith. That is not an excuse, but I think just a fact.

Yes indeed. The sort of Catholic that seems to be preferred amongst polite society today seems to be one who doesn’t take his religion too seriously. Go to Mass on Sunday, by all means, but accept the general values of society as taking precedence. Don’t take religious teachings too seriously, especially when it comes to sexual matters. Be reasonable, make an accomodation with the world around you, hold a modern outlook.

The pressure to fit in can be substantial, but are we actually meant to fit in?

 

[phil19034]

To voice a minority view… I loved this piece.

My husband and I got zero out of our lengthy pre-Cana sessions and I’ve had to do the baptismal classes many times over. Also largely a waste of time. Sadly, what’s lacking for many is actual catechism and regular participation in and attendance at Mass. If people attended and participated as our grandparents did, priests would know us better and there’d be far fewer questions about when people are truly ready for a sacramental marriage or baptism for their children. The author didn’t devote nearly enough time to this point, unfortunately.

Our pre-Cana experience was a great case-in-point. Husband and I had to take a quiz to determine compatibility. We were “dinged” on a question to which we both answered true: “If I weren’t marrying my fiance, I probably wouldn’t ever get married.” Our priest (whom I loved) said this was a questionable response because it indicated that we were viewing love naively. On the contrary, our answers indicated that we both felt called to marriage by God because we’d met one another. Had we not, we might have felt called to other vocations. A quiz doesn’t ferret out rationale in this way. In our pre-Cana classes, there were some who legitimately frightened me in terms of their lack of preparedness for marriage. That wasn’t us. And our priest knew that but we went through the course because we were supposed to. There also wasn’t any discussion of NFP and its centrality in a Catholic marriage, why going to confession before the wedding is a great idea, etc. Please know that I don’t fault those running the course. They were a committed couple who meant to be strong examples of a strong Catholic marriage. But the approach dictated to them and to us could have been grown in much more positive ways.

Regarding class, the author is correct that middle class folks often tend to have the option to attend weekend retreats or multiple classes spread out over several weeks. Often, not always. It’s certainly my experience in my current parish, which is middle to upper class.

(Now I’ll duck for cover for expressing an unpopular opinion… Only so much time left when I can do so on this version of CAF! )

While I didn’t like the piece (because it was in a Catholic Newspaper), I do appreciate your analysis of this piece. But I think his sarcasm cause many not to read between the lines.

Anyway, your post is very good and I feel filled with many solid points.