1
1ke
Guest
I don’t think you disagree with me at all.
I said “it would be nice if they could attend with you, go on a retreat or whatever”.
What you said is “encouraged” but not “mandatory”.
I think those are the same thing.
- Status
I said “it would be nice if they could attend with you, go on a retreat or whatever”.
What you said is “encouraged” but not “mandatory”.
I think those are the same thing.
1
1ke
Guest
Thanks for clarifying.
I’m not sure why people are reading into my posts things that aren’t there. I never said the Rites *should *be omitted.
I pointed out that lack of rites, or lack of a sponsor attending a rite, or even the candidate or catechumen not attending the rite, isn’t an *impediment *to baptism or confirmation.
They are “mandatory” in the sense that Vatican II mandated the restoration of the catechumenate for adults with distinct liturgical rites. And most dioceses have done so, in one form or another, certainly all of them I’ve been involved in.
It is not “mandatory” in the sense that if a person does not attend the rites they are refused baptism.
And, candidates are a different matter entirely. But, their reception into the Church and confirmation are also not dependent upon participation in the rites.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have the rites, and I don’t know where anyone is getting that in my posts.
I’m saying that the rites are what they are, but not **more **than what they are.
1
1ke
Guest
I didn’t tell her not to attend rites, not to take sponsors seriously or any such thing.
I did tell her she doesn’t have to have SEVEN.
J
jmcrae
Guest
And yet, you keep on quoting laws intended for extraordinary situations, as if they applied to her situation.
I agree that they probably don’t need seven, but telling her that they technically only need one and that technically, the person need not ever show up, can only be confusing to her.
Technicalities and the minimum of the law, even though they may be factual, are not useful if you actually want to help someone to navigate their way into a fulfilling and joyful experience of conversion.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Just curious and you don’t have to answer if you don’t want to but are a canon lawyer or a liturgist by training?
You seem to have all the answers and want to present what is right but by doing that you are rather harsh and impersonal to the people who asked for advice here. I think that is where you get those objections.
New people not only need to know the minimum requirements of the Church but also they should know why those things were done. Without saying them, people will have the impression that all that is.
Be nice. I love it very much when our smart people in the Church are nice and not just merely telling us off.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
I was my husban’s sponser when entered the Church 12 years ago.
U
Usige
Guest
The problem tends to be with people insisting on things that the Church herself does not insist on. There are preferential options and then requirements. Some hold the preferential options as if they are requirements that can only be bypassed in grave circumstances.
When people wish to understand a question, they should know what must be done and which things should be done, but are not required. It should be explained why there is a preference without making it seem like it is an absolute requirement. I tend to put it forth as “this is the normal course, but if you cannot do X, Y or Z for some reason do not worry. They are helpful, but will not prevent you from proceeding.” Conversion to Catholicism can be stressful enough without putting additional roadblocks in the way.
It seems many people forget that the National Statues are very clear about placing no greater burden than necessary. That means that we are to work with people given their individual needs and circumstances. We should not try to force them through a meat grinder and pack them into a mold that is convenient to us or how we want to do things.
U
Usige
Guest
My wife was my sponsor 9 years ago. I also went through truncated rites over a 3.5 month period. Even the rite of welcome I was asked if I wanted to participate, not required to. We talked about the rites that would be helpful to me. Despite my formation being somehow lacking, I was still welcomed into diaconal formation last year. I guess the bishop and formation committee was not that concerned that I didn’t go through the full RCIA procedure… err… process. (and yes they were aware of it since it was in my application essay)I was my husban’s sponser when entered the Church 12 years ago.
J
jmcrae
Guest
And I wish that people would not portray the RCIA process as a series of unnecessary roadblocks that you can bypass if you know the right technicalities.
The Rites and the meetings and the other elements of the process are there because they are of great value to people who are undergoing conversion. They actually speed things up, in my experience - I tried converting under my own steam for 17 years, and it wasn’t until I entered fully into the experience of the RCIA, including attending the lectures, going to the retreats, communicating with my sponsor, doing the Rites, and attending Mass and Breaking open the Word that the pieces started to fall into place and I really came to understand what I was undertaking.
U
Usige
Guest
They are of great value to some people, but not everyone. That is why candidates (the majority of adults received) are supposed to follow a course based on their individual needs. I am glad they were helpful to you and many others in their conversion.
That being said, the statues are very clear that people are to be walked with individually and undue burdens are not placed on them. Those are not technicalities, but the will of the bishops. What is undue burdens? Well that greatly depends on the individual. If a family of 7 only knows 2 Catholics is it an undue burden to require them to find 7 sponsors? If a person only knows one person who is Catholic and that person is their spouse, is it an undue burden to forbid their spouse as a sponsor? If a candidate has to correct their RCIA leaders on matters of faith, is it an undue burden to make them sit through classes? All those questions are not the purview of the RCIA leader to dictate, but rather is to be discussed with the individual based on their own circumstances. We cannot say, “this was helpful to me, so it is detrimental to you not to do the same.”
It is not the rites that are potential roadblocks, but rather intransigence on leaders that dictate the path to conversion without regard to individuals and their circumstances. Our purpose is to walk with people to conversion, whatever path that might take. We cannot plot the course for them without realizing that each of us are called in different ways. The bishop’s understood this when they wrote the statues. That is why they do not say the rites are required beyond what helps a given person.
P
pianistclare
Guest
As jmcrae is a RCIA Director, I’m sure she knows all that.
Perhaps the point that she is trying to make and that I agree with, is that there are lots of reasons why having your spouse sponsor you is not always a great one.
We have had plenty of people who have their wives sponsor them. After Holy Saturday, it’s like “There. Are you happy now” and we never see either of them again.
Telling people the bare minimum that they can do or should do or are obligated to do does little to promote true conversion.
Of course individual situations are addressed. That’s what we do.
Best practices sometimes have to be adjusted to be able to serve.
Perhaps the point that she is trying to make and that I agree with, is that there are lots of reasons why having your spouse sponsor you is not always a great one.
We have had plenty of people who have their wives sponsor them. After Holy Saturday, it’s like “There. Are you happy now” and we never see either of them again.
Telling people the bare minimum that they can do or should do or are obligated to do does little to promote true conversion.
Of course individual situations are addressed. That’s what we do.
Best practices sometimes have to be adjusted to be able to serve.
1
1ke
Guest
I am not a canon lawyer. I have been involved in RCIA since 1992, on the RCIA team in my old parish for 10 years, and in charge of it in my current parish for 10 years. I have received training in two diocese and from ACM.
I wasn’t attempting to tell anyone off.
I am hoping that a mother of 5 is not given the run around by someone who is insisting on things they have no right to insist on. I think throwing up such ridiculous and uncalled for barriers might just be enough for such a person to throw up their hands and say “forget it, I guess I won’t be Catholic after all”.
If the mother **knows **that she need not have seven sponsors for her seven family members, she can be informed next time she talks to the person who is inexplicably insisting that she does and present facts. She came here because she was stressed about this. It was my hope to reassure her that it is NOT a requirement and she need not be troubled if someone tries to insist-- she should then take it to her pastor.
1
1ke
Guest
The OP’s **whole family **is already motivated to convert. They are there. No convincing needed. They are READY to be Catholics.
And, then, she encounters barriers put up for her by people who have no right to do so. “You must each have a different sponsor” is a flat out lie.
J
jmcrae
Guest
It’s not a “flat-out lie” and the fact that technically, one person could sponsor the entire RCIA group, for that matter, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Presumably the person who said that has sat down with the family and made a thoughtful assessment of their situation based on a checklist from that person’s Pastor or Bishop, as well as from the point of view of best helping them align their hearts with the heart of Christ, and it may be that each member of the family has different questions and different needs. The sponsor isn’t just a warm body to stand at the Rites; they also having the role of “mothering” or “fathering” them into the faith through relationship building and giving them personal attention regarding their struggles and areas of curiosity.
Perhaps the coordinator sees a need for lots of individual attention for this family. They have met the family and have begun working with them; we have not.
1
1ke
Guest
You know, this has devolved and it was not my intention to get people riled up, which I obviously have.
I did not say the whole RCIA should have one sponsor. I simply said that if the family has one, or several, people they are comfortable with they do not have to have SEVEN sponsors.
So, i’ll be moving on now. Best of luck to the OP.
U
Usige
Guest
Both these speaks to matters of prudence. For a given person, a spouse may not be a good choice. It should be pointed out the potential problems with that choice, but it is not a matter of law that it is forbidden as was stated by someone earlier in the thread.
And that likely has little to do with their sponsor and more to do with the person not being ready. It is the reason that year round RCIA without begin and end dates set in stone are a much better idea. If someone is going to bail as soon as they hit a specific milestone they were not ready regardless of who their sponsor was.
1ke is more than capable of speaking for herself, but neither of us is saying that someone should just know the minimum required. What we, or at least what I am saying is that we have to be careful in saying something is an absolute requirement when it is not. That does not mean that the liturgical rites, classes, et cetera are not valuable. I simply reject someone saying we will say this is required and only admit it is not if we are challenged on it. That is duplicitous and we do no one any favor by saying something that is good is an absolute when that is not the case. Adults should be informed of the truth so that they may freely ask questions. Letting someone know if something is optional opens the opportunity to talk about why the rite is there so they come to a fuller appreciation rather than simply thinking it is a check mark before reaching their goal.
J
jmcrae
Guest
People naturally gravitate to the path of least resistance. If you tell people that nothing is required, then they will do nothing - and then afterward they will complain that they didn’t get anything out of it.
It’s like setting forth a banquet, and then telling people, well, the cocktails and hors d’ouvres are optional, so they skip the cocktails and hors d’ouvres. Then telling them, well, the meat is optional, so they skip the meat. Then telling them, the salad and potato are optional, so they skip the salad and the potato. And then telling them, well, dessert is optional, so they skip dessert, and then telling them, the coffee is optional, so they skip the coffee. And then at the end of the meal, they say, “I don’t know why I bothered to come to this dinner - I’m starving!”
The more you put into something, the more you will get out of it.
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
As a priest, I am shocked to read this assertion from someone who is actually in the employ of a parish. This has not been the law in over THIRTY YEARS…since the promulgation of the 1983 Code.
How is this possible, that one would not know this if one serve as an RCIA Director in a Latin Rite parish? This is so fundamental and so long standing in present law that this should be reported to the diocese.
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
First, congratulations again. I remember interacting with you in previous threads. I’m happy to read things are proceeding apace
Could you please clarify for me who has given you this advice as it would guide the answer that I give in return? I dare hope it is not the parish priest
It is important to stress that, in a parish, we may have various people fulfilling ancillary or support task, either as paid staff or volunteer…but there is one person alone with the actual decision-making under the bishop: the parish priest, which in the United States is often referred to as the pastor
Even a priest who is assigned as a parochial vicar (or as we used to say, assistant pastor) is to yield to the pastor’s decision, for the pastor is the one to whom the bishop of the diocese has confided the governance of the parish
People such as Directors of Religious Education have no authority beyond what they are allowed by the parish priest. They have no independent authority whatsoever
Which is why my counsel is to speak about this matter directly with the parish priest and seek clarification from him
As a priest, I have certainly received entire families into the Church without such a bizarre request, that each individual have unique sponsors, as has been represented to you. It is difficult for me to even comprehend, frankly
It is important to clarify that the rites themselves afford a breadth of discretion to the priest celebrant with regard to discretion of what to include and omit at will…which I always apply as I judge necessary or useful, even to setting aside entire segments, if I deem that necessary
If this were a situation in which you and your husband were already Catholic and you were presenting your children for baptism, each in succession at their respective births, some parents will choose distinct godparents for each child while others will use the same godparents. Their choice should be respected, assuming the candidates presented otherwise fulfill the norm of the law
There is no rational reason to require a different practice in presenting your children all at one time. And this decision should properly be yours and not one imposed upon you. This is a case of a person (or persons) who will have and should have some enduring relationship with your children in their spiritual journey. If there is one or two who could fulfill that role, as a pastor I would have readily assented to that option over the employ of, in this case, five people for five children with whom there may in fact be a far less and indeed even non existent relationship, even in the short term let alone the long term
In the case of you and your husband, I again can see reason why it might be preferable to have distinct sponsors…but, again, the rites presume the decision is yours. If the persons you select, again, fulfill the norms of the law, they should be accepted. Because, again, these are people with whom you will have an enduring spiritual relationship. It is one thing to help a person who has no possibility to have a sponsor. It is an entirely different matter to overrule their legitimate autonomy to choose whom they will, again assuming they comply with the norm of the law
As far as an explanation on the role of the godparents relative to your children, this article provides a nice summation in its entirety…I excerpt the following segment
*Parents need to find good practicing Catholics for godparents. Sadly, this task can be very difficult in today’s world. The best place is to look for relatives, even grandparents, who have a blood relationship with the godchild and have kept the faith over the years. Good friends are also appropriate, but sometimes friendships wane, leaving the godchild without an active godparent. Godparents should be faithful individuals who are ready to accept the responsibility of being a part of a godchild’s life for the rest of his life
What if someone would like to have a faithful Protestant friend as a sponsor? Technically, only Catholics can be godparents or sponsors. A Christian of another denomination, whether Orthodox or Protestant, however, may be a “Christian witness” to the baptism along with the Catholic godparent. The reason for this distinction and restriction is that the godparent not only is taking responsibility for the religious education and spiritual formation of the baptized person, but also is representing the Church, the community of faith, into which the person is being baptized. A Christian who is not Catholic, although perhaps a very holy, Christian, cannot fully attest to the beliefs of the Catholic Church. Likewise, a Catholic can only be a Christian witness for someone who is baptized into another Christian denomination (Cf. Vatican II, Decree on Ecumenism, No 57)
In all, godparents serve a special role in the life of the baptized person. Therefore, each parent should choose a godparent not just because of a blood relationship or friendship; rather, a godparent should be a trustworthy witness of the faith who will help the godchild attain salvation*
catholicherald.com/stories/The-Role-of-Godparents,6199
- Status