Sorry, another "marriage and reception into Church" question

[Don_Ruggero]

Looks like the OP was posting at the same time I was.

Nevertheless, unless you’re asserting that the catechemen was asking “Why (there was a seeming change in direction)”, the OP’s question still seems to be looking for information about "Why (the answer is ‘no’) " - which would require her to know all the sensitive details of the catechumen’s situation.

Yes, it would have been better if there hadn’t been a misunderstanding that persisted till last month. Still, the misunderstanding over status is resolved. Do you think that the OP is asking ‘why the misunderstanding’? C’mon, now… really?

Yet, her question wasn’t about the ‘failure’; it was about the substance of the catechumen’s situation.

It seems like the pastor thought that ‘no go’ had already been communicated.

This is really not as complex as it is being portrayed in these posts.

There is no need to theorise. The RCIA director is here before us. Theorising is purposeless since there is a concrete problem that requires an immediate and concrete solution:

1. The catechumen does not understand.
2. Having had a conversation with the pastor, the catechumen has gone to the RCIA director because she has not understood the problem/situation. The catechumen has appealed to the RCIA director for HELP.
3. The catechumen wants the RCIA director to explain the matter to her since whatever the priest did or did not say to her has failed to be understood.
4. The RCIA director cannot comply with this request because the priest will not tell him/her what is the issue.
5. The catechumen has the right to understand what is the issue. It does NOT matter if the priest told her or not – whatever he did or did not say did not provide her with understanding.

If the priest is unable, for whatever reason, to give a satisfactory answer to the catechumen, the catechumen should go to the diocese. I am confident that the priest will divulge the problem to an official of the diocese – since he must – and I am confident that someone there can help this poor lady to understand:
a) What is the exact impediment to her becoming Catholic.
b) What can be attempted to resolve the impediment.

There is no indication that the catechumen does not accept what the priest has said…everything indicates she does not understand the problem.

The situation that the catechumen presents – she does not understand why she cannot become Catholic – is simply, pastorally, intolerable.

 

[SeekingHisPlan]

Seems to me that the catechumen has two questions:

-Why may I not enter the Church AND why am I just finding this out now.

It appears to me that Fr. believes he did warn her of this way back at the beginning. Perhaps he did, and she misunderstood. But if that is the case, I am still confused as to why she was allowed to continue in the process, and why I was not apprised, at least, of the fact that there was a candidate who may have an impediment to reception, and which candidate it was.

Fr. and I see each other frequently, and communicate frequently, as I am also involved in other ministries. We communicated about RCIA, but, based on my understanding of our process, never once did it occur to me to “check back” that everyone was free to proceed. So maybe I missed something. Maybe Fr. did. Maybe both. The situation remains that the catechumen doesn’t understand what has happened here.

Gorgias, you keep asserting that I am attempting to obtain information that I have no right to be privy to. I’m not. I’m trying to obtain the information I need to answer the questions I am being asked. If there is information there that I am not allowed to have, then I don’t want it, but in that case, someone else needs to explain the situation to the catechumen so that she gets it. I imagine it’s quite unlikely that she’d contact the bishop or anyone else. I think it more likely she’ll walk away if she doesn’t get a satisfactory explanation before very much longer.

 

[otjm]

Nevertheless, unless you’re asserting that the catechemen was asking “Why (there was a seeming change in direction)”, the OP’s question still seems to be looking for information about "Why (the answer is ‘no’) " - which would require her to know all the sensitive details of the catechumen’s situation.

If you read what I wrote, instead pursuing something I am not writing about, you would not continue in this direction. I was not speaking about this.

Yes, it would have been better if there hadn’t been a misunderstanding that persisted till last month. Still, the misunderstanding over status is resolved.

Okay, apparently you have not worked in RCIA. But if you read the my comment in post #12, and instead of continuing on your topic, actually read what I wrote,perhaps you might understand what I was trying to say.

Do you think that the OP is asking ‘why the misunderstanding’? C’mon, now… really?

My comment was irrelevant to that point, something you still have not understood. There are actually two issues in ths thread; Don Ruggero very completely answered one of them. I am speaking to the other.

Yet, her question wasn’t about the ‘failure’; it was about the substance of the catechumen’s situation.

However, it was the failure to communicate which I was writing about - which is relevant not only to future RCIA sessions next year and in the future for the parish, but for anyone else who works in RCIA.

It seems like the pastor thought that ‘no go’ had already been communicated.

It appears the case, and that is what has set up the issue to come up this late in the process.

Let me try to explain it again. Some candidates are gung ho, ready to join, and little or nothing is going to get in their way.

Others struggle with the process; they are often having to overcome deeply seated beliefs many of which were taught them from childhood, and often have other family members who may be anywhere from mildly disturbed at their joining, to possibly even shunning them because they would even consider joining “the whore of Babylon” as the Church is sometimes referred to.

Not all catechumens and candidates have problems. But something of this nature could be the tripping point where someone throws up their hands and bails out. In particular, that can occur where they are confronted with something they don’t understand, and don’t additionally understand that it has to be resolved before they enter.

I have seen people walk away from RCIA. I also am involved in Catholics returning home, and too many of them left the Church not over doctrine, but over issues that were over a personal matter with a pastor or other member of the parish or parish school. I am working with one right now who has been away from the /church for 40 (as in forty) years, because of an issue over their grade school child.

If there had been good communication even 6 weeks after RCIA started, I would think this issue would have been addressed at that time - not the questions which the woman has, but the status that she, along with everyone else, is moving forward toward Easter. That alone should have triggered the priest to say either that he was concerned the woman was not proceeding with marriage resolution, or to communicate clearly that she needed to be on a different track than the rest.

An RCIA Director, whether paid or unpaid, has a whole lot of work to do, and a whole lot of responsibility. The pastor likewise has a whole lot of work and responsibility. Having a process in place is just one more task to people who generally are overburdened. but this thread shows the necessity of having clear communication not only at the beginning, but along the way so that issues like this come to the forefront much earlier - thus not allowing someone to drift along thinking everything is fine, until half way or more into the process. This is a learning opportunity for both the pastor and the RCIA director and an opportunity to set up a procedure so that issues similar to this do not just get missed, and everyone drift along.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Seems to me that the catechumen has two questions:

-Why may I not enter the Church AND why am I just finding this out now.

It appears to me that Fr. believes he did warn her of this way back at the beginning. Perhaps he did, and she misunderstood. But if that is the case, I am still confused as to why she was allowed to continue in the process, and why I was not apprised, at least, of the fact that there was a candidate who may have an impediment to reception, and which candidate it was.

Fr. and I see each other frequently, and communicate frequently, as I am also involved in other ministries. We communicated about RCIA, but, based on my understanding of our process, never once did it occur to me to “check back” that everyone was free to proceed. So maybe I missed something. Maybe Fr. did. Maybe both. The situation remains that the catechumen doesn’t understand what has happened here.

Gorgias, you keep asserting that I am attempting to obtain information that I have no right to be privy to. I’m not. I’m trying to obtain the information I need to answer the questions I am being asked. If there is information there that I am not allowed to have, then I don’t want it, but in that case, someone else needs to explain the situation to the catechumen so that she gets it. I imagine it’s quite unlikely that she’d contact the bishop or anyone else. I think it more likely she’ll walk away if she doesn’t get a satisfactory explanation before very much longer.

From my reading, what you are saying here, SeekingHisPlan, is exactly what I have understood from the beginning.

If the pastor will not meaningfully communicate to the catechumen (and at the risk of being repetitive, to say words to someone is meaningless if the person is not able to process and understand what is being said – which is evidently the case with the catechumen) and if the pastor will not engage some other party that can try to facilitate an explanation that succeeds in providing understanding to the catechumen and if the catechumen herself will not seek a remedy beyond you…I am really at a loss as to be able to offer a viable solution.

There is the pastor. There is you, the RCIA director. There is the catechumen. And there is, potentially, a diocesan official who has oversight over the pastor.

In this case, I have to attribute the failure to communicate to the pastor; as priests, we are the ones who have the superior knowledge as well as the pastoral responsibility. It is on us to do what needs be done to effectively communicate…as in: (1) There is a problem. (2) This is the scope of the problem. (3) Here are the ramifications of the problem relative to the goal at hand: you becoming Catholic. (4) Here are the things we can do to overcome the problem. (5) Do you understand? (6) Do you agree to cooperate with this remedy?

Someone in this four sided equation has to be willing to go the extra distance or this situation is doomed. What you describe would be frustrating in the extreme to the catechumen.

I can imagine the prospect of going to the diocese is beyond daunting. It really should not be, however. It could be done by phone or letter; it does not have to be in person. Believe me, judicial vicars are used to dealing with written briefs. She can delineate the marriage situations and explain that she has been left uncomprehending by how the parish has handled the matter – and the judicial vicar can sort it out.

The question, I suppose, becomes whether or not you want to relate what you know directly to the judicial vicar, explaining that the catechumen is on the verge of quitting the programme because the pastor has left her in a state of confusion and of incomprehension. If the catechumen were to agree to discuss this with him and she presents her circumstances, he should be able to definitively explain to her the situation in fairly short order and what are the potential remedies. (Perhaps meeting with her, be it in person or by letter or by phone, with you also involved so that you also can understand and, hopefully, help her to understand.) Of course, that could make things awkward between you and the pastor.

I am afraid at this point that I have to ask: does the pastor understand that the catechumen will simply abandon the effort to become Catholic because she is unable to comprehend?

I have been at this for decades. I have seen a lot. Like otjm, I have seen people make a decision not to become Catholic. But I just think it is incredibly sad for a person to walk away simply because they cannot understand and they are left to walk out the door in a state of incomprehension and enigma. That is a tragedy.

I will just add…the potential remedy may be very straight forward, at least as far as the pastor is concerned, and so the pastor may not understand the extremity of her lack of understanding or the effect this is having upon her…but if the pastor won’t divulge anything to anyone but her and she can’t comprehend it, it might as well be the riddle of the Sphinx…at least as far she is concerned.

 

[Gorgias]

It appears to me that Fr. believes he did warn her of this way back at the beginning.

Yeah, that’s how it seems.

But if that is the case, I am still confused as to why she was allowed to continue in the process, and why I was not apprised, at least, of the fact that there was a candidate who may have an impediment to reception, and which candidate it was.

Giving everyone the benefit of the doubt, perhaps Father thought he had told her that she had to wait, and she thought she was supposed to continue on in the process until told that it was time, and you thought you’d be told if there was someone who had a roadblock.

based on my understanding of our process, never once did it occur to me to “check back” that everyone was free to proceed. So maybe I missed something. Maybe Fr. did. Maybe both.

Yep, that makes sense.

Gorgias, you keep asserting that I am attempting to obtain information that I have no right to be privy to. I’m not. I’m trying to obtain the information I need to answer the questions I am being asked.

Right; but Father doesn’t want to disclose the details to you. I’m not saying you’re deliberately prying; but, it sure seems that you’re between a rock and a hard place!

I imagine it’s quite unlikely that she’d contact the bishop or anyone else.

Right. That’s what surprises me about the advice being given here: a woman who really isn’t familiar with the Church, but who knows you well and who has talked with the pastor a few times, is being advised to contact people she doesn’t know about a process she’s unfamiliar with and rules that confuse her. Good luck with that one.

I think it more likely she’ll walk away if she doesn’t get a satisfactory explanation before very much longer.

Yep. And, although I haven’t spent my time on this thread telling people how many years I’ve been involved in RCIA, that (sadly) seems to be the most likely outcome. :sad_yes:

 

[Gorgias]

Someone in this four sided equation has to be willing to go the extra distance or this situation is doomed. What you describe would be frustrating in the extreme to the catechumen.

:sad_yes:

I can imagine the prospect of going to the diocese is beyond daunting.

From the catechumen’s perspective? Absolutely…!

The question, I suppose, becomes whether or not you want to relate what you know directly to the judicial vicar, explaining that the catechumen is on the verge of quitting the programme because the pastor has left her in a state of confusion and of incomprehension.

And that seems rather harsh. If it comes down to ‘tattling’ on the pastor to the canon law office, then no one wins – and backlash very likely is the result (in addition to a catechumen walking away, since after all, unless the pastor is mistaken in his assessment, the canon law office isn’t going to be telling her “oh, you’re good to get your sacraments!”).

I am afraid at this point that I have to ask: does the pastor understand that the catechumen will simply abandon the effort to become Catholic because she is unable to comprehend?

This might be the best course of action, in addition to following it up with a question: “Father, what can I do – as RCIA director – to try to make sure that this doesn’t happen?”

the pastor may not understand the extremity of her lack of understanding or the effect this is having upon her…but if the pastor won’t divulge anything to anyone but her and she can’t comprehend it, it might as well be the riddle of the Sphinx…at least as far she is concerned.

Right: and perhaps, part of the solution is just ‘falling on our sword’: whether it’s the OP or the pastor, it seems that part of the way out of this is admitting to the catechumen – in the way of an apology – “I’m really sorry, but it seems that we haven’t done a really good job – we haven’t kept you in the loop, and it seems that we’ve confused you. Here’s where we stand right now, and here’s what we’re able to do. How would you like to proceed?”

 

[Gorgias]

If you read what I wrote, instead pursuing something I am not writing about, you would not continue in this direction. I was not speaking about this.

I noticed. You seem to be ignoring the OP’s questions about finding out about the situation, in favor of pointing out the (obvious) fact that there’s a whole lot of miscommunication going on.

Okay, apparently you have not worked in RCIA.

Hmm… maybe I should start repeating a mantra about the number of my years in RCIA work, so that there’s not miscommunication?

However, it was the failure to communicate which I was writing about

Which is all well and good, but that’s not the issue that the OP has brought us – she already knows that there was a communication breakdown… so she’s asking about the aspect of the problem that you’re not talking about.

I have seen people walk away from RCIA. I also am involved in Catholics returning home, and too many of them left the Church not over doctrine, but over issues that were over a personal matter with a pastor or other member of the parish or parish school.

Yep – in a certain sense, it’s the ecclesiastical version of the axiom “all politics are local”. :sad_yes:

This is a learning opportunity for both the pastor and the RCIA director and an opportunity to set up a procedure so that issues similar to this do not just get missed, and everyone drift along.

This is also true – but that’s a ‘post-mortem’ action item. Right now, the focus isn’t “how do we fix our process for next year”, but rather, “how do get the right info to our catechumen today?”…!

 

[Don_Ruggero]

And that seems rather harsh. If it comes down to ‘tattling’ on the pastor to the canon law office, then no one wins – and backlash very likely is the result (in addition to a catechumen walking away, since after all, unless the pastor is mistaken in his assessment, the canon law office isn’t going to be telling her “oh, you’re good to get your sacraments!”).

Excuse me? The “canon law office”?

If you are talking about the tribunal, and work in this field so that you actually know the terminology, you know that this matter is going to the judicial vicar sooner or later in any event…unless this diocese has an expedited administrative process that bypasses the tribunal for defect of form and her case(s) qualify for such.

When you read what I actually wrote – as opposed to what you seem to invent out of whole cloth – the recourse to the judicial vicar is so that what the problem can come out into the open, firstly. Secondly, in turn, the judicial vicar or a canon lawyer of the tribunal can then explain to the catechumen, using language and concepts that she can understand, what is the problem and what is the remedy. The pastor has failed to do this for the catechumen. The catechumen has gone to the RCIA director explicitly seeking a comprehensible explanation; this is reasonable. The pastor is not giving the RCIA director what is needed to try to help to resolve the catechumen’s enigma.

The catechumen is acting correctly to seek information from someone who will give it to her. If the pastor will not make the issue clear to her and will not cooperate with the RCIA director so that the issue can be made clear, then the next recourse is to the diocese.

A pastor receives a mandate from his bishop and with that mandate comes the care of souls of a defined parish. That care of souls is for a portion of the people of God of the diocese. Their care, ultimately, always resides with the bishop. He associates priests with him, as co-workers, in order to provide adequate pastoral care to the people of his diocese. If the pastor of a parish falls short in his mandate for whatever reason, the matter reverts to the bishop to provide pastoral care – either directly or through the officials he has delegated…viz. the vicar general, the appropriate episcopal vicar, the judicial vicar or the vicar forane.

I do not know why you say recourse to these officials is “harsh”. The pastor has failed to explain in a way that the catechumen understands. The pastor will also not explain to the RCIA director information, when the RCIA director has been asked by the catechumen to provide her with an explanation that she can comprehend. If the pastor will not cooperate, the only viable solution is to have recourse to a diocesan official to intervene. This is not harsh. This is not tattling. This is informing the shepherd of the diocese or a member of his curia that someone under the bishop’s care, as shepherd of the diocese, has been so badly served that she is walking away from the Church.

Right: and perhaps, part of the solution is just ‘falling on our sword’: whether it’s the OP or the pastor, it seems that part of the way out of this is admitting to the catechumen – in the way of an apology – “I’m really sorry, but it seems that we haven’t done a really good job – we haven’t kept you in the loop, and it seems that we’ve confused you. Here’s where we stand right now, and here’s what we’re able to do. How would you like to proceed?”

I don’t even know what this is supposed to mean. It is not a matter of taking blame that is important. It is a matter of the issue being explained and resolved. “We haven’t done a really good job – we haven’t kept you in the loop and it seems we have confused you” is woefully inadequate when SeekingHisPlan has plainly told us the present situation of the catechumen:

• The catechumen does not have any understanding of what the problem is.
• The priest has not explained her situation to her in a way that tells her what the problem is or what the solution is.
• The priest will not tell the RCIA director what the problem is so that this person can explain the problem.

Having worked in a diocese, I can say this: whatever the issue is, the pastor will have no choice but to explain it to the bishop or his delegate (since we obviously know this is not and cannot be an internal forum matter and that is not the reason he cannot speak).

In conclusion, the entirety of your response to me causes me to say there is no reason for me to continue a discussion with you beyond this response to you.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

SeekingHisPlan: you write in a manner that is very clear to me. I am very sorry for this circumstance in which you find yourself and sorrier for the catechumen who is left in turmoil. I will pray for both of you and your pastor.

I have been a priest for many years. Dans0622, who responded earlier in the thread encouraging recourse to your diocese, is a canon lawyer practicing in an American diocese. The advice I have offered to the same effect is the best I can give you.

Otjm writes similarly in a way that is understandable and clearly borne of experience in this area.

If I can be of help to you, I am willing to try to help you further and I would be glad to continue a dialogue with you, if there is any benefit to you or the catechumen that might accrue. I have no wish, however, to prolong a purposeless exchange with others who do not know you, SeekingHisPlan, do not know the catechumen, do not know the pastor, but who make comments the main purpose of which seems to be to theorise about persons and circumstances that are, in fact, not hypotheticals but are actually known and concrete to you. That you are present to this discussion and participating in it means our focus is properly placed solely on you, who is confronting this rather remarkable quandary.

As the point is reaching a dire stage and potentially an undesired conclusion, I would suggest to you, since you say you work with the pastor regarding other ministries and that you communicate with him frequently, that you ask one last time:

• Do you comprehend that X [the catechumen] truly does not understand neither the nature of the problem or the nature of any solution to whatever is the reason you will not baptise her?
• Do you comprehend that she is on the verge of leaving the programme and not becoming Catholic because she does not understand whatever the problem and solution is?
• Are you willing to do something so that she can understand?

I would hope that he will say he did not realise she does not understand and will immediately work to remedy the matter. That is what is to be hoped.

If, however, he answers “yes” to the first two questions and “no” to the last (or any combination thereof), then the matter I am afraid falls to you. It is a matter of conscience as to whether or not you will try to intervene to help the catechumen to not walk away from the Church.

If truly the pastor is not willing to further intervene to help the catechumen and you determine to help the catechumen, then you will have to ask the catechumen: “Does being Catholic mean enough to you that you are willing to talk to someone who can help us discover what the block to your becoming Catholic is and what needs to happen in order for you to be baptised?” Which means, at this point, an official of the diocese. She is the only one who can answer that question.

At the end of the day, I just have to believe that the priest has failed to understand the situation he has, I have to assume unintentionally, created. Assuming he has formulated and is pursuing a solution, he should be the first one to be distressed to find that the catechumen has given up and left the programme simply because of his failure to provide her with an explanation that she could understand.

I have to say this is taking on something of an absurd quality. When I have confronted this type of situation and it is beyond a relatively easily resolved misunderstanding/miscommunication, it has been for one of four reasons.
(1) There is a language issue on the part of the priest or the lay person or both. In other words, a translator is needed.
(2) There is a cultural issue, typically involving a cleric from another country, and this normally requires assistance from the diocese.
(3) There is a cognitive issue on the part of the parishioner, who is cognitively unable to process the information – and this requires a very individualised response.
(4) Or there is some issue with the priest that, again, needs the intervention of the diocese.

Having said all of this, I have to add that I presume that this is a situation in which there is

• Some problem that is defined and evident, even if unknown to the catechumen and the RCIA director.
• That the priest understands the problem.
• That the priest has formulated a path to a solution.
• That the priest has either not explained this to the catechumen at all or has done so in such a way that she has no idea and no understanding – and therefore sees only that it “cannot” happen and therefore is on the verge of giving up.

This last sort of scenario I have seen and I can quite understand. It usually happens where the priest has become so accustomed to these procedures that he loses sight of the fact that a non-Catholic non-Christian may have absolutely no knowledge and no point of reference and truly does not comprehend what is being explained, even when non-technical language is being used. The priest can think what he has said should be crystal clear when it is, in fact, still incomprehensible. It is made worse when the lay person is shy or bashful around clergy and hesitates to articulate her incomprehension.

In the best circumstances, it can at times require a great effort for priests and others to make certain concepts understandable.

If this catechumen does not know what the problem is; Does not know therefore what the remedy is; And only knows she cannot be received without knowing why, when or if there is a remedy…then she is set up for despair.

 

[Gorgias]

Excuse me? The “canon law office”?

Yeah, since on one hand, you’re talking about the judicial vicar, and on the other, the OP is talking about reaching out to a canon lawyer in that office.

If you are talking about the tribunal, and work in this field so that you actually know the terminology

No, I’m not, since there’s no indication that the case has reached them yet.

unless this diocese has an expedited administrative process that bypasses the tribunal for defect of form and her case(s) qualify for such.

Actually, no one has made the suggestion that it’s a defect of form case – it seems that the OP was talking about two ‘lack of form’ marriages.

I do not know why you say recourse to these officials is “harsh”. The pastor has failed to explain in a way that the catechumen understands.

Because it’s not entirely clear that the pastor knows he’s failed to explain it sufficiently to the catechumen. The OP certainly knows that this is the case, but her attempts to communicate with the pastor seem to have led to him thinking that she’s asking for details of the situation.

The pastor will also not explain to the RCIA director information, when the RCIA director has been asked by the catechumen to provide her with an explanation that she can comprehend.

He seems to think that she’s asking for details of the case, not asking that he (or even someone else) explain it to the catechumen again.

I don’t even know what this is supposed to mean. It is not a matter of taking blame that is important.

In a way, in 21st century America, this is relevant. If the only thing that the catechumen hears is “this is the situation; this is why you can’t receive the sacraments; here’s what you can do (or “there’s nothing you can do at this moment”)”, then her perception of the Church will suffer – after all, to her perspective, the Church is a monolithic, uncaring, legalistic behemoth. On the other hand, if one were to come to her and admit that things should have been done differently, then perhaps she’d be more able to hear what the explanation is.

It is a matter of the issue being explained and resolved. “We haven’t done a really good job – we haven’t kept you in the loop and it seems we have confused you” is woefully inadequate

If that were all that were said? Sure. But that’s not what I suggested – read on, Don R! Following that intro, I suggested that they do attempt to explain again what the current situation is, and further, ask the catechumen what her reaction is (that is, how she wishes to proceed). In other words, engage her in the process, rather than just telling her that she’s a passive piece of the puzzle.

In conclusion, the entirety of your response to me causes me to say there is no reason for me to continue a discussion with you beyond this response to you.

Perhaps. Have a wonderful day.

 

[Reuben_J]

Seems to me that the catechumen has two questions:

-Why may I not enter the Church AND why am I just finding this out now.

It appears to me that Fr. believes he did warn her of this way back at the beginning. Perhaps he did, and she misunderstood. But if that is the case, I am still confused as to why she was allowed to continue in the process, and why I was not apprised, at least, of the fact that there was a candidate who may have an impediment to reception, and which candidate it was.

Fr. and I see each other frequently, and communicate frequently, as I am also involved in other ministries. We communicated about RCIA, but, based on my understanding of our process, never once did it occur to me to “check back” that everyone was free to proceed. So maybe I missed something. Maybe Fr. did. Maybe both. The situation remains that the catechumen doesn’t understand what has happened here.

Gorgias, you keep asserting that I am attempting to obtain information that I have no right to be privy to. I’m not. I’m trying to obtain the information I need to answer the questions I am being asked. If there is information there that I am not allowed to have, then I don’t want it, but in that case, someone else needs to explain the situation to the catechumen so that she gets it. I imagine it’s quite unlikely that she’d contact the bishop or anyone else. I think it more likely she’ll walk away if she doesn’t get a satisfactory explanation before very much longer.

SeekingHisPlan, is it possible for you to bring the candidate to talk with the pastor and sort it out? You would then be present during the talk.

I do not have any RCIA experience so I am not sure about the relationship between the RCIA director and the catechumen. We do marriage seminars and counselling. Marriage and relationship problem is deep and emotional. It is not so much about the solution but rather about God showing the way and healing the trauma and pain that arise from the situation. But that would need openness and surrendering on the part of the person concerned, in which case a third party is needed who perhaps has the expertise in addressing this. Do you have someone/group like that in your parish? You may want to refer to them.

If this is the case, I can see the difficulty that your pastor faces in dealing with this. Thus the miscommunication because there is no solution given, in other word, as been mentioned by one poster here, an impasse. The pastor might not want to move farther than the advice that he had given to the catechumen.

Often times the problem involves another party, the spouse for example, which is beyond the control of the candidate but a requirement by the Church.

That can be a long term plan but in the meantime, in order to resolve the difficulty, a greater degree of openness is required from the catechumen. Do you think you can handle that? Would she be open to you? Sure, that would involve some personal information but without them you may not know what to do next.

If you are prevented to do that due to legal reason in your place, then it is unavoidable to send the candidate back to the pastor and clarify it to her. From what he has done, it is not likely that he can or want to resolve this but there is no harm in trying.

I agree it is a tragedy if this person would not become Catholic because we do not want to help her. There were indeed comments by potential converts that becoming Catholics was too difficult for them.

 

[dans0622]

Seems to me that the catechumen has two questions:

-Why may I not enter the Church AND why am I just finding this out now.

…

Hello,

Are you saying that it “seems to me” that these are the questions because the catechumen hasn’t actually told you what her questions are? In any case, the pastor is the one who can answer the first one but I think you can answer the second one.

Ultimately, since you are not really involved in the particulars, the person involved will have to talk to the pastor and get specific instructions as to what she is expected to do.

Nothing in her situations seems that complicated to me…but…I don’t know why things have proceeded as they have up to this point and have no authority whatsoever. So, that impression is not too important.

Dan

 

[SeekingHisPlan]

Thank you everyone for your replies. Thank you especially, Father (Don Ruggero) for your concern and offer of help. At the end of the day, I think that what we have here is this, exactly:

. It usually happens where the priest has become so accustomed to these procedures that he loses sight of the fact that a non-Catholic non-Christian may have absolutely no knowledge and no point of reference and truly does not comprehend what is being explained, even when non-technical language is being used. The priest can think what he has said should be crystal clear when it is, in fact, still incomprehensible. It is made worse when the lay person is shy or bashful around clergy and hesitates to articulate her incomprehension.

In the best circumstances, it can at times require a great effort for priests and others to make certain concepts understandable.

.

…and it is a big parish, and Father is overworked, and he might have felt that he already explained the situation, so what is the problem here.

In any case, very encouragingly, I saw the catechumen in question last night. She was with friends from the parish. She approached me in a very friendly manner. I briefly told her, “I’m sorry about how all this has fallen out.” and she said, “It’s OK, I really trust that this will work out, and I’ll see you Tuesday.” (RCIA meeting night)

So, SOMETHING has happened…whether she was given another explanation, or came to understand something she was told previously, or was simply blessed with a supernatural peace about the entire situation.

In any case, I intend to speak with her in private on Tuesday, to find out if she does understand, or if she is still wanting an explanation. If she is, I think I will simply assist her in approaching Fr. again, making sure he understands that she really does need further explanation of the circumstance.

 

[Gorgias]

In any case, very encouragingly, I saw the catechumen in question last night. She was with friends from the parish. She approached me in a very friendly manner. I briefly told her, “I’m sorry about how all this has fallen out.”

Great approach…!

In any case, I intend to speak with her in private on Tuesday, to find out if she does understand, or if she is still wanting an explanation. If she is, I think I will simply assist her in approaching Fr. again, making sure he understands that she really does need further explanation of the circumstance.