RCIA-Confirmation Sponsor...

[Br.Rich_SFO]

in this diocese there is a specific rule about this. the reason as it was explained to us (RCIA and Confirmation directors) when enacted was two-fold. One, that if the relationship is broken off during the catechumenate or candidacy, it not only leaves the candidate w/o a sponsor, but could be detrimental to the conversion process itself. The second is the more delicate one, that as sadly so many such couples are already co-habiting, the sponsor may actually be participating with the candidate in a situation that is a barrier to true conversion and of course, to being properly disposed for the sacraments. Since the alternative is for us to be the life-style police, a pastoral function outside our realm, it is best to remove it as in issue by not allowing the bf/fiance to be a sponsor.

Obviously neither of those scenarios is true in your case, or even in most cases, but since it has come up often enough, hence the rule. In any case it is not absolute, and the pastor can allow it if he is confident the circumstances allow it.

But I can add that in the only two cases I heard of where exceptions were made based on the fact that the sponsors were very well known and were assured there was no problem–subsequent facts proved otherwise. It is rather embarassing for all involved when the sponsor, known to be the fiance, stands beside the candidate in an advanced state of pregnancy at the Vigil. so personally, I go by the rule book, and let the pastor be the one to make exceptions, so it might be worthwhile for you and your fiance to speak directly to the pastor about your situation.

there is no such requirement in the RCIA ritual book, but, as here, it may be a local rule for the parish or diocese. And if it is a rule, it should have been explained from the beginning, not so close to the sacraments, but in fairness, the catechist may have only been told about it.

But again the diocese or parish cannot makeup a “rule” that does not exist in Church Law.

 

[jmcrae]

But again the diocese or parish cannot makeup a “rule” that does not exist in Church Law.

But - but - then we’d have to be honest with fiance(e)s and boyfriends/girlfriends who are not in good standing with the Church and/or not modelling an authentic Catholic lifestyle, about the reasons that they can’t be the Sponsor!



What I don’t understand is, how does a Candidate or Catechumen who is living with his girlfriend or living with her boyfriend come to be present at the Easter Vigil to receive the Sacraments of Initiation? Never mind who the sponsor is.

Aren’t they supposed to have taken up the Catholic lifestyle, before they arrive at that point?

 

[forever_always]

But - but - then we’d have to be honest with fiance(e)s and boyfriends/girlfriends who are not in good standing with the Church and/or not modelling an authentic Catholic lifestyle, about the reasons that they can’t be the Sponsor!



What I don’t understand is, how does a Candidate or Catechumen who is living with his girlfriend or living with her boyfriend come to be present at the Easter Vigil to receive the Sacraments of Initiation? Never mind who the sponsor is.

Aren’t they supposed to have taken up the Catholic lifestyle, before they arrive at that point?

I’m not sure if you were talking about us specifically, but we do not live together, and we are “modelling and authentic Catholic lifestyle.”

But yes, it surprises me that some people (like another couple in the class) can get away with their behavior… it seems kinda hypocritical that they behave that way? We used to have this priest who refused to marry people that lived together.

 

[jmcrae]

I’m not sure if you were talking about us specifically, but we do not live together, and we are “modelling and authentic Catholic lifestyle.”

No, not at all. I’m talking about the fact that many parishes have this rule, so that they don’t have to explain to the living-together ones why the girlfriend or boyfriend can’t be the sponsor. They just make everybody (including good people like you) do the same, and then they don’t have to explain it to them - they just say, “Well, that’s the rule.”

But yes, it surprises me that some people (like another couple in the class) can get away with their behavior… it seems kinda hypocritical that they behave that way?

They also don’t seem ready to become Catholic.

We used to have this priest who refused to marry people that lived together.

He’s a smart guy. Did you know that when couples who are living together decide to marry, it’s often because they are trying to prevent a break-up, because of some kind of unhappiness in the home? They usually end up getting divorced, anyway - and in the Catholic Church, that means that neither of them can remarry.

It’s better for them to break up before they get married. Then, they can go to Confession, and then they can marry someone else.

 

[damooster]

What I don’t understand is, how does a Candidate or Catechumen who is living with his girlfriend or living with her boyfriend come to be present at the Easter Vigil to receive the Sacraments of Initiation? Never mind who the sponsor is.

Aren’t they supposed to have taken up the Catholic lifestyle, before they arrive at that point?

We have two couples in my RCIA class that are engaged but living together. They are very open about it too; I was shocked when I first heard about it.

One of the guys is also previously married and his son from that marriage now lives with him and his fiancee. He is Catholic and is his fiancee’s sponsor.

My sponsor lives with his girlfriend, and takes communion every week. It’s getting harder to ignore.

Sorry to the OP for highjacking this thread, but I had to share.

 

[forever_always]

We have two couples in my RCIA class that are engaged but living together. They are very open about it too; I was shocked when I first heard about it.

One of the guys is also previously married and his son from that marriage now lives with him and his fiancee. He is Catholic and is his fiancee’s sponsor.

My sponsor lives with his girlfriend, and takes communion every week. It’s getting harder to ignore.

Sorry to the OP for highjacking this thread, but I had to share.

Oh wow… that would be very hard to ignore after a while =(

And the priest is okay with these couples joining the church?

 

[YADA]

Brother Rich is correct in that there are no restrictions in Cannon Law … however, the pastor at times must make pastoral decisions …

We discourage BF/GF, fiance and even husbands and wives from being sponsors … though we allow them to co-sponsor their significant other.

Why? For many of the reasons already listed PLUS this one … This is a journey of faith … a sponsor who has a vested interest in a specific outcome [that the person become “Catholic”] may not be an honest broker … able to handle the questions and doubts that may assail their candidate … or their candidate may be reluctant to approach them with their doubts and concerns; knowing how much their BF/GF etc wants them to become ‘catholic’ …

By requiring a co-sponsor who does not have a vested interest in a specific outcome; the candidate has someone to go to when necessary. Also, it is not a bad to have another viewpoint …

I will point out that we once had to remove a sponsor precisely because they lost objectivity … even though unrelated this sponsor [who had workd with RCIA for many years] became too wrapped up in ‘success’ … gaining new catholics … that when he had a person who had doubts they began to pressure them … it became more about the sponsor then the faith journey of the candidate … luckily, this person was able to speak with a priest and RCIA team member … it was sad. Ultimately this person has joined the church but they joined because they were called by Christ not because they had attended RCIA and 'had to go through with it" So you see it is not only souses and fiances who fall into this trap

If I was you I would welcome another to join you and your fiance on the journey and continue as ‘one’ of his sponsors …

 

[forever_always]

Why? For many of the reasons already listed PLUS this one … This is a journey of faith … a sponsor who has a vested interest in a specific outcome [that the person become “Catholic”] may not be an honest broker … able to handle the questions and doubts that may assail their candidate … or their candidate may be reluctant to approach them with their doubts and concerns; knowing how much their BF/GF etc wants them to become ‘catholic’ …

By requiring a co-sponsor who does not have a vested interest in a specific outcome; the candidate has someone to go to when necessary. Also, it is not a bad to have another viewpoint …

I will point out that we once had to remove a sponsor precisely because they lost objectivity … even though unrelated this sponsor [who had workd with RCIA for many years] became too wrapped up in ‘success’ … gaining new catholics … that when he had a person who had doubts they began to pressure them … it became more about the sponsor then the faith journey of the candidate … luckily, this person was able to speak with a priest and RCIA team member … it was sad. Ultimately this person has joined the church but they joined because they were called by Christ not because they had attended RCIA and 'had to go through with it" So you see it is not only souses and fiances who fall into this trap

If I was you I would welcome another to join you and your fiance on the journey and continue as ‘one’ of his sponsors …

I see what yo’ure saying about this… thank you for you (name removed by moderator)ut! =] We have still not be able to get a hold of the priest, but i do not think that he will bend rules just for us. I will still attend classes with him and support him, but his grandfather will probably be his “main” sponsor…

 

[damooster]

Oh wow… that would be very hard to ignore after a while =(

And the priest is okay with these couples joining the church?

I’m not really sure the priest is familiar with the situation. He is not the director of the RCIA.

 

[forever_always]

I’m not really sure the priest is familiar with the situation. He is not the director of the RCIA.

Oh i see…
We have a tiny parish and the priest will usually sit in the class with us, even though he is not the RCIA director, at the Easter Vigil mass he will still be confirming these people.

 

[YADA]

I see what yo’ure saying about this… thank you for you (name removed by moderator)ut! =] We have still not be able to get a hold of the priest, but i do not think that he will bend rules just for us. I will still attend classes with him and support him, but his grandfather will probably be his “main” sponsor…

Good Luck and may God Bless both of you on this journey!


In many ways we are all “co-sponsors” on the journey of faith [and life] … we can strengthen the faith of those we come into contact with or lead them astray and into sin … the choice is ours …

You are a sponsor in a very real sense … and your ability to see the value in a help mate is a sign of maturity. Also his grandfather may be able to provide some wonderful insights about life and the christian marriage vocation… …

 

[puzzleannie]

But
What I don’t understand is, how does a Candidate or Catechumen who is living with his girlfriend or living with her boyfriend come to be present at the Easter Vigil to receive the Sacraments of Initiation? Never mind who the sponsor is.

yes we teach Catholic morality, yes they are also receiving marriage prep which is very strong on the morality. We however cannot control what they actually do on their off hours. as I said we are not the lifestyle police. If the pastor who is working with them says they may participate, they do, and we simply assume they have received the appropriate pastoral counselling from him on anything that is matter for confession. That is manifestly NOT concern of the catechist or RCIA director. And yes, each diocese has particular law, which interprets and applies canon law according to the pastoral needs of that diocese, and there may be rules that are not in universal canon law.

 

[FrDavid96]

Let’s make an important distinction here between bishops and pastors imposing their own rules for the choice of sponsor on the one hand, and on the other, implementing policies for interpreting and applying the requirements of the Church.

It is the pastor’s responsibility to make the final decision (not “absolutely” final, but practically so), as to who may be admitted as a sponsor. Pastors can make policy for the sake of uniformity (read “fairness”) and the sake of clarity. Whether or not a person is ready and qualified to fulfill the role of sponsor is the pastor’s responsibility–this goes beyond the bare minimum of meeting the objective requirements of age, previously confirmed, etc. and also involves the subjective decision as to whether or not the person is actually comitted to fulfilling the role of sponsor. Occasionally, parish “policies” might be necessary to explain beforehand the criteria which the pastor will use in deciding whether or not someone is indeed properly qualified to be a sponsor. As long as these are within the laws of the Church, and do not specifically add requirements which are not there, there is no problem with this.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

But - but - then we’d have to be honest with fiance(e)s and boyfriends/girlfriends who are not in good standing with the Church and/or not modelling an authentic Catholic lifestyle, about the reasons that they can’t be the Sponsor!



What I don’t understand is, how does a Candidate or Catechumen who is living with his girlfriend or living with her boyfriend come to be present at the Easter Vigil to receive the Sacraments of Initiation? Never mind who the sponsor is.

Aren’t they supposed to have taken up the Catholic lifestyle, before they arrive at that point?

Yes,but how often do the team members visit them at their address or ask about why their address is the same?

 

[OLHope]

I have a question to Fr. Dave or Br. Rich, what are the specific designations of sin in our church? They have been mentioned as moral sin, grave sin, veniel, cardinal, etc…I think that some stages have multiple names… so my question is which stage does cohabitation fall under?

-Hope

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I have a question to Fr. Dave or Br. Rich, what are the specific designations of sin in our church? They have been mentioned as moral sin, grave sin, veniel, cardinal, etc…I think that some stages have multiple names… so my question is which stage does cohabitation fall under?

-Hope

We of course can never make any judgment of personal sin in another. There are two Mortal and Venial sin. Such terms as Grave sin and Serious sin I feel confuse the issue. Maybe it would be better to apply them to the acts themselves a “Serious act” or “Grave act” that could contribute to Mortal sin.

There is nothing wrong with sitting down and explaining to a couple who is not married that living together is not acceptable practice because it can lead to Serious temptation and can cause others to think living together without marriage is OK. Maybe discussion on ***Familiaris Consortio ***and Family, Marriage and 'De Facto" Unions which address the issue of “trial Marriage”.

 

[FrDavid96]

I have a question to Fr. Dave or Br. Rich, what are the specific designations of sin in our church? They have been mentioned as moral sin, grave sin, veniel, cardinal, etc…I think that some stages have multiple names… so my question is which stage does cohabitation fall under?

-Hope

Hope,
It’s realy not possible to answer that question because co-habitation is such a broad term. It depends on the couple themselves (if one is married to someone else, then it’s a more serious situation indeed, for example). It depends upon exactly what they’re doing. It’s not the “cohabitation” (living under the same roof) which is sinful, but what the couple is doing under that roof. It’s also the very real scandal caused by giving the impression that such a situation is “no big deal”–as our society erreneously teaches. This is itself a sin.

 

[LEAR]

I know a case wherein the boyfriend was the sponsor, both of them went through the process, the girlfriend succesfully received the sacrament. (Before the boyfriend decided to sponsor the girlfriend, he already consulted a priest and was advised, it’s okay. There’s nothing wrong with it.)Just recently, the boyfriend went for a confession, at a different church, and was told by the priest there, that they cannot get married in a Catholic Church because of the candidate/sponsor issue. Is this true? I’m surprised and confused!

 

[FrDavid96]

I know a case wherein the boyfriend was the sponsor, both of them went through the process, the girlfriend succesfully received the sacrament. (Before the boyfriend decided to sponsor the girlfriend, he already consulted a priest and was advised, it’s okay. There’s nothing wrong with it.)Just recently, the boyfriend went for a confession, at a different church, and was told by the priest there, that they cannot get married in a Catholic Church because of the candidate/sponsor issue. Is this true? I’m surprised and confused!

Some explanation here: when someone sponsors someone else for Baptism, the sponsor is also called the Godparent (which you know already, but I had to write that to explain the rest). They are said to be related by affinity–which means that they are related, but not by blood (consanguinity). To marry one’s own Godparent used to be considered a kind of incest. This changed with the 1983 code of canon law. The Godparent affinity is no longer considered a barrier (impediment) to marriage. Some priests haven’t quite caught up with this (yes, I know, it was 1983), so sometimes a priest will answer that question the way he was trained and say that the couple can’t get married. That used to be the law, but it is not the law anymore.