Raised UPC, coverting to Catholic faith.

[newinfaith]

I have no idea if this is the best place for this post, if it is not feel free to move it. I was raised in the United Pentecostal Church, and am in the process of converting to the Catholic church.

When I say in the process, I have not gone to RCIA yet, however I do attend mass on a regular basis. To make my long story short, I was married for 2 years, and later divorce. We married in a county court house, my ex husband was Catholic and I was not at the time. I later remarried, and have been for 7 years. My husband is a cradle Catholic, but we both wanted to find the church that fit us. Like I said, I was raised in a UPC church and I did not believe all the things I was taught. We both went to a Methodist church for about a year, and were married there. In the past 2 years, I have gone to the Catholic church with my husband, and feel that it is the best place for us as a family. I went to our Priest to find out about getting our marriage blessed, and was told that I need to have my first marriage annulled. I have been told different things, but am doing what he said to do. I do not understand why it must be annulled, give we where not married in a church? That is my first question, and my other question, is will my baptism in the UPC be accepted in the Catholic church. The UPC do not baptize in the trinity, and I wondered about that. Also, how long are RCIA classes. I know two people who went to RCIA, and they both went for different lengths of time? Again, please move me if I am in the wrong place.

 

[puzzleannie]

I have no idea if this is the best place for this post, if it is not feel free to move it. I was raised in the United Pentecostal Church, and am in the process of converting to the Catholic church.

When I say in the process, I have not gone to RCIA yet, however I do attend mass on a regular basis. To make my long story short, I was married for 2 years, and later divorce. We married in a county court house, my ex husband was Catholic and I was not at the time. I later remarried, and have been for 7 years. My husband is a cradle Catholic, but we both wanted to find the church that fit us. Like I said, I was raised in a UPC church and I did not believe all the things I was taught. We both went to a Methodist church for about a year, and were married there. In the past 2 years, I have gone to the Catholic church with my husband, and feel that it is the best place for us as a family. I went to our Priest to find out about getting our marriage blessed, and was told that I need to have my first marriage annulled. I have been told different things, but am doing what he said to do. I do not understand why it must be annulled, give we where not married in a church? That is my first question, and my other question, is will my baptism in the UPC be accepted in the Catholic church. The UPC do not baptize in the trinity, and I wondered about that. Also, how long are RCIA classes. I know two people who went to RCIA, and they both went for different lengths of time? Again, please move me if I am in the wrong place.

the marriage issue is very confused, and my advice is to make an appointment with the priest, don’t just ask on the fly, and give all the details about your first and current marriages. A quick answer just will not help you. There are too many variables.

for instance if your first husband was baptized Catholic, but he did not follow Church laws in getting married, it is probably invalid due to lack of form, that would not need a full annulment proceeding, but there is a paperwork process to establish the fact that you are free to marry, or in this case, to convalidate your current marriage.

we are talking 4 people, at least, you and your ex, your current husband and his ex (if he was ever married before) plus anybody who was ever married to your ex. All of their circumstances have to be looked at: were they Catholic, were they free to marry etc.

The best place to begin is with your parish priest, but you need to make a formal appointment, and be up front with all the details. He will guide you. Yes you can do this, just follow the lead of the Holy Spirit and it will happen for you. These cases are generally much simpler than people fear.

When it comes time for your reception in the Church the priest also needs to know all the details of your baptism. In general Pentecostal baptisms are not valid because rarely are they done with water and the Trinitarian formula, but your priest needs the details of your own situation to decide.

WElcome HOme

 

[newinfaith]

Thank you for your reply. My husband has never been married prior to me. We just had a change of priest’s, this past winter. When we met with our former priest, I was told that no, I did not need the marriage annulled. Due to two facts, my ex was catholic and married out side of the church, and for the fact it was at a court house. However, my husband and I made the appointment with our current priest, and he said yes in fact it needs to be annulled. At this point, I am doing what he asks of us. However, I was not clear on why I was given two different answers.

Thank you for your help with the baptism, I thought that it may not be accepted as a valid baptism. I was baptized with water, but not in the name of the father, son, holyspirt. I have not issue with being baptized Catholic, I just wondered.

 

[puzzleannie]

However, my husband and I made the appointment with our current priest, and he said yes in fact it needs to be annulled. At this point, I am doing what he asks of us. However, I was not clear on why I was given two different answers.

.

the confusion is the way the answers were stated, yes the annulment needs to be done: that is the Church must investigate and issue a judgement on your first marriage. No, a full annulment proceeding should not be necessary because on the face of it the marriage is invalid due to lack of form. That does not require witnesses etc but there is still a process–you need the original marriage license, divorce decree, ex’s baptismal information etc., the priest can tell you what is involved, it’s not my area of expertise. He just meant there is a process, it is not automatic.

 

[twopekinguys]

I have no idea if this is the best place for this post, if it is not feel free to move it. I was raised in the United Pentecostal Church, and am in the process of converting to the Catholic church.

When I say in the process, I have not gone to RCIA yet, however I do attend mass on a regular basis. To make my long story short, I was married for 2 years, and later divorce. We married in a county court house, my ex husband was Catholic and I was not at the time. I later remarried, and have been for 7 years. My husband is a cradle Catholic, but we both wanted to find the church that fit us. Like I said, I was raised in a UPC church and I did not believe all the things I was taught. We both went to a Methodist church for about a year, and were married there. In the past 2 years, I have gone to the Catholic church with my husband, and feel that it is the best place for us as a family. I went to our Priest to find out about getting our marriage blessed, and was told that I need to have my first marriage annulled. I have been told different things, but am doing what he said to do. I do not understand why it must be annulled, give we where not married in a church? That is my first question, and my other question, is will my baptism in the UPC be accepted in the Catholic church. The UPC do not baptize in the trinity, and I wondered about that. Also, how long are RCIA classes. I know two people who went to RCIA, and they both went for different lengths of time? Again, please move me if I am in the wrong place.

I am the Lay Director of RCIA for our parish, so I may be able to help out a bit here.

If I understand your original post correctly, you and your first husband had a civil wedding outside of the Catholic Church. Your first husband was Catholic, and you were baptized into another faith, at the time.

If this is correct, you will not need to get a full blown annulment, but the marriage will need to be declared invalid due to lack of form. All baptized Catholics are required to be married in the Church, unless you receive a dispensation from the Bishop. (I am assuming you didn’t get one of these)

Even though you don’t need a full blown annulment, you still need to get this paperwork done.

The parish where you are should have a pastoral advocate for annulments, that can help with this. Sometimes it is the priest, sometimes, it is a specially trained lay person. The good news about a defect of form, or lack of form declaration of nulity is that they don’t take any time at all to complete.

If your pastor, or the pastoral advocate is unfamiliar with this, contact the diocese where you live, and ask to speak to someone in the Tribunal.

Now, assuming that the marriage that you are currently in is the first for your current husband, and you don’t have any others, then you are good to go for RCIA, and ultimately joining the Church, once that paperwork is done.

If your current husband is Catholic, and you were married outside of the Catholic Church, then you would need to have your current marriage blessed. If he is not Catholic, then the blessing is not required.

As far as your baptism, if they do not baptise using the trinitarian formula, then the Church will not recognize it as a valid baptism.

RCIA programs can vary in length depending on the parish. Ours goes for 9-10 months.

Keep going to Mass, but based on your current marriage situation, your husband should not be receiving communion. Also, as I’m sure you are aware, you shouldn’t be either.

If I can help out with anything else, let me know.

God Bless

 

[newinfaith]

That cleared it all up!! Thank you.

 

[twopekinguys]

That cleared it all up!! Thank you.

Great!!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

For a minute I thought it read, “I was raised UPS!” I guess that would be the “what can brown do for you?” religion! And you’d never be on time for the service!

 

[crazzeto]

Welcome Home

To answer your questions:

1. Your first marriage may be considered valid because beleive it or not, the priest (or minister) isn’t the one who’s marrying you. You and your ex-husband married each other, literally. You were the ones performing the ceremony, even though the pastor was leading. In reality he’s a witness. There for since you were in fact legally married, and clearly it was your intent to be married, you have to go through an anullment process to determain if you did in fact have proper intent at the time of marriage, or if some other circomstanse like infidelity (specifically identified by our Lord) exists.
2. Hard to answer on the forums here, was the proper trinitarian formula used? “I baptise you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Ghost)”. If so then it is a valid baptism, and you don’t need to be baptised now, if so then there is a very good chance that it was a valid baptism.

 

[twopekinguys]

Welcome Home

To answer your questions:

1. Your first marriage may be considered valid because beleive it or not, the priest (or minister) isn’t the one who’s marrying you. You and your ex-husband married each other, literally. You were the ones performing the ceremony, even though the pastor was leading. In reality he’s a witness. There for since you were in fact legally married, and clearly it was your intent to be married, you have to go through an anullment process to determain if you did in fact have proper intent at the time of marriage, or if some other circomstanse like infidelity (specifically identified by our Lord) exists.
2. Hard to answer on the forums here, was the proper trinitarian formula used? “I baptise you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Ghost)”. If so then it is a valid baptism, and you don’t need to be baptised now, if so then there is a very good chance that it was a valid baptism.

I hate to disagree with you here, but, with item 1. If you reread her posts, you will see that her first husband was Catholic, and married outside the Church.(I was married for 2 years, and later divorce. We married in a county court house, my ex husband was Catholic and I was not at the time) Therefore, a full annulment is not required. There was a civil marriage, but not a sacramental one. That is why they would pursue the Defect of Form/Lack of Form route.

Item 2. You will see that she mentions they did not use the trinitarian formula (I was baptized with water, but **not **in the name of the father, son, holyspirt.)so the baptism wuold not be considered valid.

bolding mine

 

[crazzeto]

I hate to disagree with you here, but, with item 1. If you reread her posts, you will see that her first husband was Catholic, and married outside the Church.(I was married for 2 years, and later divorce. We married in a county court house, my ex husband was Catholic and I was not at the time) Therefore, a full annulment is not required. There was a civil marriage, but not a sacramental one. That is why they would pursue the Defect of Form/Lack of Form route.

Item 2. You will see that she mentions they did not use the trinitarian formula *(I was baptized with water, but **not ***in the name of the father, son, holyspirt.)so the baptism wuold not be considered valid.

bolding mine

I answered based on the original post, which I didn’t see any information regarding the forumal used in Baptism. As far as the husband, I guess I got confused, I thought the second was Catholic. Thank you for your thoughts.

Edit
BTW, regardless if you read point 2, you’d see there was no need for you to object to it

 

[twopekinguys]

I answered based on the original post, which I didn’t see any information regarding the forumal used in Baptism. As far as the husband, I guess I got confused, I thought the second was Catholic. Thank you for your thoughts.

Edit
BTW, regardless if you read point 2, you’d see there was no need for you to object to it

I apologize if it came across as an objection. It was only meant as a clarification.

 

[CSJ]

Thank you for your help with the baptism, I thought that it may not be accepted as a valid baptism. I was baptized with water, but not in the name of the father, son, holyspirt. I have not issue with being baptized Catholic, I just wondered.

Firstly, in the words of our late great Pope John Paul the Great, “Do not be afraid.” Although we don’t always see it, there is always a greater good behind the obstacles that face us.

To answer your question regarding your baptism, I presume that it would not be deemed valid as you were not baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. My wife was baptized in the name of Jesus in the Pentecostal Church and she was required to be baptized validly in the Catholic Church. It would be helpful if you had your baptismal certificate. If you’ve lost it, the church at which you were baptized may be able to produce a duplicate. The priest or bishop would then be able to ascertain the validity.

I am overjoyed with your decision to enter the Catholic Church. It may seem a little daunting when considering the annulment and RCIA process, but you are in the right place. We feel that we are at home in the Catholic Church and the journey is as exciting as ever.

The previous advice to seek the counsel of your priest regarding your annulment is the best course of action. In addition, pray the Rosary for Mary’s intercession on your part. Mary’s desire is to lead us to Christ. Welcome Home.

 

[callmecharles]

Hi there. I’ve nothing of substance to contribute really, other than the fact that I too was raised in the UPC. So, if it helps any, you’re not going through this process alone!

When some of my old UPC pals heard tell of my interest in Catholicism, I was immediately invited to a Bible study and given three books on the “oneness” of God.

I then realized that modalism is a tricky thing to refute, if only because it’s so convenient. Anything that indicates a ‘threeness’ in God’s nature is automatically disregarded as “the Son of Man talking”. And then the few remaining scriptures that could be used to imply otherwise are declared as the proof that “God is One” and that he apparently shapeshifts.

Anyway, I was wondering if you were willing to share how you came to believe in the Trinity. (side rant: My explanations for refuting modalism mostly consist of: “I don’t believe everyone from the years 125 to 1904 went to hell.”, Paul’s greetings in the Epistles, and of course Stephen’s last words.)

 

[CSJ]

Hi there. I’ve nothing of substance to contribute really, other than the fact that I too was raised in the UPC. So, if it helps any, you’re not going through this process alone!

When some of my old UPC pals heard tell of my interest in Catholicism, I was immediately invited to a Bible study and given three books on the “oneness” of God.

I then realized that modalism is a tricky thing to refute, if only because it’s so convenient. Anything that indicates a ‘threeness’ in God’s nature is automatically disregarded as “the Son of Man talking”. And then the few remaining scriptures that could be used to imply otherwise are declared as the proof that “God is One” and that he apparently shapeshifts.

Anyway, I was wondering if you were willing to share how you came to believe in the Trinity. (side rant: My explanations for refuting modalism mostly consist of: “I don’t believe everyone from the years 125 to 1904 went to hell.”, Paul’s greetings in the Epistles, and of course Stephen’s last words.)

I beg to differ with you - your comment has much substance as it brings up the key issue and weakness of the “oneness” argument. The Bible itself teaches against the “oneness” heresy in the very first chapter of Genesis. Firstly, it is important to note that only God can create (the rest of living creation procreates). This is an important distinction.

In Genesis 1:26 (KJV), it states,
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”

This denotes the plurality of the Godhead. If God were a singular entity, why the use of “us” and “our”. God is the perfect union of three entities (all of which are intrinsically God). The Church teaches us that the Trinity is a covenant (family)…the perfect covenant.

In light of this, Scripture itself contradicts the “oneness” heresy. The problem is that the verses that are used to support “oneness” are not being translated in context with the entire body of Scripture. This leads to serious problems.

CSJ

 

[callmecharles]

Keep in mind we’re on the same side of this debate, but God could’ve been just speaking theatrically, or perhaps speaking to the angels.

When I was reading the aforementioned books, I got this part where the writer asserts we won’t see Jesus standing at the Father’s right hand, and that in fact we’ll only see one entity there (presumably the Risen Christ). I took a moment to visualize this, imagining Christ all by himself, leaning over thoughtfully, and something in me said: “There’s something VERY wrong with this.” I don’t know how to explain it really.

Also, it does some weird things to the nature of Jesus’ humanity. If we’re writing off Jesus’ humanity as a mere fleshly “blanket” for the Father, then it what sense is the carpenter from Nazareth really worthy of worship? It gets pretty frikkin’ confusing at this point. As I’ve said elsewhere on this forum, I’m not the source of all wisdom.

 

[twopekinguys]

Keep in mind we’re on the same side of this debate, but God could’ve been just speaking theatrically, or perhaps speaking to the angels.

When I was reading the aforementioned books, I got this part where the writer asserts we won’t see Jesus standing at the Father’s right hand, and that in fact we’ll only see one entity there (presumably the Risen Christ). I took a moment to visualize this, imagining Christ all by himself, leaning over thoughtfully, and something in me said: “There’s something VERY wrong with this.” I don’t know how to explain it really.

Also, it does some weird things to the nature of Jesus’ humanity. If we’re writing off Jesus’ humanity as a mere fleshly “blanket” for the Father, then it what sense is the carpenter from Nazareth really worthy of worship? It gets pretty frikkin’ confusing at this point. As I’ve said elsewhere on this forum, I’m not the source of all wisdom.

It would probably help further the discussion if we knew the titles of the 3 books you were given.

There is really no way to know if what they say is correct or not, if we don’t know what books we’re dealing with.

Could you give us the names of the books please?

 

[callmecharles]

Doctrines of the Bible (edited by J.L. Hall and David Bernard). Multi-authored. It’s really the only one of consequence with respect to modalism and it’s the book I’m referencing in the above post. They said it wasn’t the official doctrine of the UPC and that the Bible was the official doctrine, but it felt like an informal catechism to me. Hehe.

In the Name of Jesus (by David Bernard) It’s just a rehashing of the previous book except this time focus is limited mostly to baptism

Holy Ghost With Tongues by ack I forget the author’s name. lol. This was to convince me that I had wrongly interpreted the events of Pentecost. I buy into the whole “they were speaking foreign languages” thing… it gets into speaking in tongues as a prerequisite for salvation.

 

[newinfaith]

I hate to disagree with you here, but, with item 1. If you reread her posts, you will see that her first husband was Catholic, and married outside the Church.(I was married for 2 years, and later divorce. We married in a county court house, my ex husband was Catholic and I was not at the time) Therefore, a full annulment is not required. There was a civil marriage, but not a sacramental one. That is why they would pursue the Defect of Form/Lack of Form route.

Item 2. You will see that she mentions they did not use the trinitarian formula *(I was baptized with water, but **not ***in the name of the father, son, holyspirt.)so the baptism wuold not be considered valid.

bolding mine

From what I understand, by reading as much as I can. Is that my fist marriage will be invalid for many reasons. One, my age and lack of maturity at the time of the marriage. Second, the lack of form, and last the fact I was expecting at the time of the marriage.

I wondered about the baptism, and thought it may be the case that my baptism would not be valid. I really just wondered what others thought.

 

[newinfaith]

Hi there. I’ve nothing of substance to contribute really, other than the fact that I too was raised in the UPC. So, if it helps any, you’re not going through this process alone!

When some of my old UPC pals heard tell of my interest in Catholicism, I was immediately invited to a Bible study and given three books on the “oneness” of God.

I then realized that modalism is a tricky thing to refute, if only because it’s so convenient. Anything that indicates a ‘threeness’ in God’s nature is automatically disregarded as “the Son of Man talking”. And then the few remaining scriptures that could be used to imply otherwise are declared as the proof that “God is One” and that he apparently shapeshifts.

Anyway, I was wondering if you were willing to share how you came to believe in the Trinity. (side rant: My explanations for refuting modalism mostly consist of: “I don’t believe everyone from the years 125 to 1904 went to hell.”, Paul’s greetings in the Epistles, and of course Stephen’s last words.)

Anyway, I was wondering if you were willing to share how you came to believe in the Trinity.

Like I said, I was raised in the Pentecostal church. My grandparents helped start the church in the town I live in, and most of my family still attends. For me, it was not so much coming to the trinity, but realizing something was missing from the Pentecostal church.

The brainwashing, as I call it, starts at a early age. When I married my first husband, who was Catholic I would have no part of going to mass with him. To be honest, I was raised that I would go to hell, for leaving the church. In the same token, I was pretty much pushed out of the church, for my unplanned pregnancy. With our divorce, that should have been expected, I was then welcomed back with open arms to the UPC.

At that point, I was so angry and did not want to go back. I did not attend church for several years, untill I met my current husband. He and I attened a Methodist church for some time, only because of my fear of the Catholic chruch. I guess, me coming home is because of my husband. We started going to mass after the birth of our first child, and the peace I felt, was something I never had. I never felt peace in the UPC, only fear. Fear of not fitting the UPC mold, fear of hell, fear of every thing I was tought.

It was a process for me, and a learning curve. I want to know more about the Catholic faith. It has been hard for me, but I KNOW I am in the right place. Most of my family is not happy with my change in faith. My own mother will not go to my children’s baptism, or first communion. She asks all the time to take my kids to church with her, and I will not let her. It is hard to get them to understand that, the “fun” that comes in her church, is not God.