Crossing the Tiber - The Master Thread

[Briva]

About the hand holding, yes that is something new to me. At our parish everyone does it, I didnt at first, but dh is a hand-holder/hugger/hand-shaker/hand-lifter upper. I did put my hands down when the Our Father ended when the priest continues. I have lifted my hands in prayer at the altar (protestant), but grew up with putting my hands together in front of me (also kneeling and praying silently).

[Parrothead]

Lara in Colo could use our help. She needs a good inspirational Catholic book to give as a gift. If anyone has a suggestion could you post it here

[cathmom]

Hand-holding in endemic here in NC. I don't like it. It's not supposed to be done. It can cause problems. It can spread germs. It diminishes the sign of peace. Did I mention I don't like it?

[Hunter's Moon]

So I was just informed on another board that the Catholic Church may view my civil marriage as legal, but until I am confirmed and our marriage is convalidated, we would be living in sin to have sex.

 

I have to say I am very upset with this. It makes me feel like the Church is calling my marriage fake, even though the state views it as real.

[Parrothead]

So I was just informed on another board that the Catholic Church may view my civil marriage as legal, but until I am confirmed and our marriage is convalidated, we would be living in sin to have sex.

 

I have to say I am very upset with this. It makes me feel like the Church is calling my marriage fake, even though the state views it as real.

 

 

Yeah, I had the same reaction when I was told the same thing. Then I asked my priest at the time. He said, "just don't worry about it."

 

Technically it is true. But what are you going to do? I doubt your dh would go for abstaining any more than mine would have at the time. You can't even confess it right now because you fully intend to commit the sin again. You are on the right track. Hopefully your dh is on board with the convalidation in the near future. Then you can confess it if you feel having had relations with your dh was a sin at the time.

 

As for the whole fake/real thing. No, the church doesn't see you marriage as fake. It is illicit though. (I think that is the right term.) it is a real marriage. You are just in a kind of limbo-y place since you are reverting. It will all work out in the end.

 

:grouphug:

[nono]

Your state marriage isn't fake, but it is simply that. You haven't had the Sacrament of Matrimony, so you don't have a Catholic marriage. That's it in a nutshell. As for the other stuff, well.... :001_rolleyes: , I mean don't ask me. My marriage is illcit among other things. But one thing the Catholic Church and I agree on is that it is definitely not a Catholic marriage.

[nono]

I think this is actually accurate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valid_but_illicit

 

My marriage is both illicit and invalid. I'm still bound for eternity with the one who walked out on me 16 years ago. I really know how to get back at a guy...

[milovany]

Hey, I thought Ryan Gosling was Orthodox?!? :D :D :D

[Parrothead]

Hey, I thought Ryan Gosling was Orthodox?!? :D :D :D

He is fickle that way. :coolgleamA:

[justamouse]

So I was just informed on another board that the Catholic Church may view my civil marriage as legal, but until I am confirmed and our marriage is convalidated, we would be living in sin to have sex.

 

I have to say I am very upset with this. It makes me feel like the Church is calling my marriage fake, even though the state views it as real.

 

It's really nothing to worry about. Mine was, too. With 6 kids. My priest echoed Chucki, don't worry about it. :D

 

And now it is, the wedding was small, two witnesses, my priest and us in front of that Tabernacle. It was amazing. It wasn't retaking my vows. It was more. It was utterly amazing.

[justamouse]

I think this is actually accurate: http://en.wikipedia....lid_but_illicit

 

My marriage is both illicit and invalid. I'm still bound for eternity with the one who walked out on me 16 years ago. I really know how to get back at a guy...

 

 

:lol:

[PRTGSw2K]

Hand-holding in endemic here in NC. I don't like it. It's not supposed to be done. It can cause problems. It can spread germs. It diminishes the sign of peace. Did I mention I don't like it?

 

I noticed the same thing when I moved here.

[Hunter's Moon]

Thanks for the replies.

 

The hurt on my part was a knee jerk reaction.

 

I have another question. I should probably step away from Google, but, I see some people saying the Convalidation must be done before I am Confirmed, and others saying it can only be done after I am Confirmed, and others saying it does not matter. Which one is true? Is this a diocesan decision? The parish sister told me it can happen after I am Confirmed. But then online I also see that I should stop receiving Communion until my marriage is Convalidated.

 

:confused1:

[justamouse]

Thanks for the replies.

 

The hurt on my part was a knee jerk reaction.

 

I have another question. I should probably step away from Google, but, I see some people saying the Convalidation must be done before I am Confirmed, and others saying it can only be done after I am Confirmed, and others saying it does not matter. Which one is true? Is this a diocesan decision? The parish sister told me it can happen after I am Confirmed. But then online I also see that I should stop receiving Communion until my marriage is Convalidated.

 

:confused1:

 

 

Mine was done before. Then I was provisionally baptized (couldn't find my baptism records) and made confirmation at Easter Vigil.

 

If you can do it all so that you can get the sacraments at Easter Vigil? Is it one of THE most beautiful masses I have ever been a part of. Between being prayed over, and having the congregants sing the Litany of the Saints over you as you walk through the darkened church to the baptismal with your candle...it is transcendent.

 

My priest didn't MAKE me stop taking communion, I did it as a fast. And it hurt. It really narrowed my focus, and, it made taking it again at the Vigil so meaningful. You can't have a feast without a fast.

[Hunter's Moon]

Even though I completed my RCIA classes, I will be attending the "official" classes that my parish has. The class I did was with the parish Sister, but these are done with the Priests as well as guests.

 

Class started last Sunday, but Sister M invited me to this weeks because a Priest from a nearby Catholic college will be celebrating Mass and then explaining every part of it in class.

 

I do plan to speak with one of the Priests, but should I not receive Communion on Sunday since my marriage is not Convalidated? Sister M told me my marriage would be Convalidated the day of my Conirmation or shortly after, but she never mentioned anything else.

[Parrothead]

My marriage was done first then I was confirmed. I still received itch the blessing of my priest then we moved and the new priest knew the whole story and he never said anything. I suppose it is best to go with your conscious.

[ElizaG]

I do plan to speak with one of the Priests, but should I not receive Communion on Sunday since my marriage is not Convalidated?

I would strongly urge that you avoid seeking advice about this, and other aspects of your marital situation, on Internet forums. Especially from random laypeople, who may or may not have been given correct advice by their own pastors (*), and whose circumstances in any case might be different from yours.

 

Similarly, I would ask that others not jump in and give the sort of "hey, no problem" comments that came up in a couple of recent posts. I don't claim to understand all the issues here, but at best, this is taking a sensitive pastoral issue and making it into a black and white situation. At worst, it could be... well... much worse.

 

Praying for you, as you continue on the journey of faith. It can seem like a bit of a wild ride sometimes. But He is always there when we need a hand to help us over the turbulent bits. :)

 

(* In the 1970's, some of my older relatives were told "not to worry" about using contraception. And there are people on this board who've mentioned equally dodgy advice they've been given in our own time. Individual priests are not infallible.)

[ElizaG]

Just wanted to add some general resources on related topics. Everything in them looks to be consistent with Church teaching, but the information may or may not be applicable to the situations of specific board members.

 

Are non-Catholic marriages valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church? What if a Catholic marries a non-Catholic? -- Catholic Answers

 

What can I do about my invalid marriage? -- Catholic Answers

 

Priest said I can't receive sacraments -- EWTN Q&A

 

Effect on invalid marriage after becoming Catholic -- EWTN Q&A

 

Pastoral Letter on Widowed, Separated, and Divorced -- Bishop Joseph V. Sullivan of Baton Rouge, LA

[nono]

I would strongly urge that you avoid seeking advice about this, and other aspects of your marital situation, on Internet forums. Especially from random laypeople, who may or may not have been given correct advice by their own pastors (*), and whose circumstances in any case might be different from yours.

 

Similarly, I would ask that others not jump in and give the sort of "hey, no problem" comments that came up in a couple of recent posts. I don't claim to understand all the issues here, but at best, this is taking a sensitive pastoral issue and making it into a black and white situation. At worst, it could be... well... much worse.

 

Praying for you, as you continue on the journey of faith. It can seem like a bit of a wild ride sometimes. But He is always there when we need a hand to help us over the turbulent bits. :)

 

(* In the 1970's, some of my older relatives were told "not to worry" about using contraception. And there are people on this board who've mentioned equally dodgy advice they've been given in our own time. Individual priests are not infallible.)

 

 

 

Yes, and as I've stated on the old thread and this, I'm certain many don't consider me "Catholic enough" to participate. Hey, I'm still counted in the baptismal roles. :seeya:

 

And since I can't trust that correct advice can be given to me by my own pastor and priests, as you say, I'm waiting until the Pope is willing to speak ex cathedra on the issue of my marriage/annulment. Because otherwise, it might be wrong and it could be "much worse." Since the Pope is unlikely to do this for me, I'll wait until my life lines up neatly within the lines that the church has drawn. Then I'll execute on participating in the game with all i's dotted and t's crossed. Pity us whose lives don't have perfect timing to match all the rules all the time. We are often judged by other super-perfect Catholics who may just have been luckier with everything timing out according to the general rules.

[Parrothead]

 

I would strongly urge that you avoid seeking advice about this, and other aspects of your marital situation, on Internet forums. Especially from random laypeople, who may or may not have been given correct advice by their own pastors (*), and whose circumstances in any case might be different from yours.

 

Similarly, I would ask that others not jump in and give the sort of "hey, no problem" comments that came up in a couple of recent posts. I don't claim to understand all the issues here, but at best, this is taking a sensitive pastoral issue and making it into a black and white situation. At worst, it could be... well... much worse.

 

Praying for you, as you continue on the journey of faith. It can seem like a bit of a wild ride sometimes. But He is always there when we need a hand to help us over the turbulent bits. :)

 

(* In the 1970's, some of my older relatives were told "not to worry" about using contraception. And there are people on this board who've mentioned equally dodgy advice they've been given in our own time. Individual priests are not infallible.)

 

I don't think anyone said, no problem or that E's situation had an easy fix.

 

Stuff like this happen and it happens fairly often. There isn't an easy answer, but a person has to do things they may not agree to in order to preserve the marriage. I know in my own situation early in my marriage before dh came to the church we would have ended up divorced due to a certain church teaching if I hadn't been willing to step off the straight and narrow. Yes, that is me and mine, and I can live with it. Perhaps E feels the need to step off in order to preserve her marriage while getting ready to have it validated. Perhaps not. But she deserves to know she isn't alone if she goes that direction.

 

So lets show just a bit of compassion to people put into difficult situations while working out their way to the church instead of being rigid and lacking grace.

[Parrothead]

I really wish people would stop bringing this up with converts/reverts.

 

Without knowledge and intent marital relations for marriages outside the church are not a mortal sin.

 

People can't unlearn things.

[OrdinaryTime]

Even though I completed my RCIA classes, I will be attending the "official" classes that my parish has. The class I did was with the parish Sister, but these are done with the Priests as well as guests.

 

Class started last Sunday, but Sister M invited me to this weeks because a Priest from a nearby Catholic college will be celebrating Mass and then explaining every part of it in class.

 

I do plan to speak with one of the Priests, but should I not receive Communion on Sunday since my marriage is not Convalidated? Sister M told me my marriage would be Convalidated the day of my Conirmation or shortly after, but she never mentioned anything else.

 

Personally, I would not receive communion until my marriage was convalidated, unless my husband and I decided to abstain until then, as difficult as that is. I would also talk with your priest as soon as possible to get some counsel on the issue. Maybe they can move up the Convalidation? My prayers will be with you during this difficult time.

[Joker]

Wait a minute! This is all really new to us so I'm a bit confused about the marriage talk. Does the church not view us as married since we were not Catholic and it was not a Catholic wedding? We were married by a minister in a chapel. Is it different for those converting? I'm so lost.

[OrdinaryTime]

I really wish people would stop bringing this up with converts/reverts.

 

Without knowledge and intent marital relations for marriages outside the church are not a mortal sin.

 

People can't unlearn things.

 

 

I don't think anyone was unkind. I think folks are trying to share their own experiences AND the Church's teaching on these difficult issues. In this case, someone came and ASKED for advice; no one brought it up. I think sharing some links with further information on Church teaching is appropriate.

 

We all have difficulties - cradle Catholics, reverts, or converts - in trying to live out the Truth in a fallen world. We all fail. That is why the Church isa hospital for sinners. But sharing the Truth is never the problem.

 

I really hope, elisheba, that your situation is resolved peaceful. Lots of prayers for you!

[Parrothead]

Wait a minute! This is all really new to us so I'm a bit confused about the marriage talk. Does the church not view us as married since we were not Catholic and it was not a Catholic wedding? We were married by a minister in a chapel. Is it different for those converting? I'm so lost.

 

No, you are fine. You are married. There are some issues with baptized/confirmed Catholics marrying outside the church.

 

Once you finish RCIA and are confirmed within the church your priest will want to convalidate your marriage - making it sacramental.

[Hunter's Moon]

I was baptized in the CC as an infant, but received no other Sacraments. When I got married, I was in RCIA, but I was still unsure of whether I was going to go ahead and be Confirmed or not.

 

I know that has no bearing on the Church's teachings about marriage outside of the Church, but I do hope the priest I speak with understands that DH has no plans to convert and would *not* be willing to abstain until I am Confirmed in the Spring. It may be possible to move the Convalidation up, but at this point, I am being very quiet about the CC around DH. He is already unhappy about CC teachings on BC. I do not want to fuel a fire for resentment within him, towards myself or the Church.

 

I am continuing to pray, and asking St. Monica's intercession. I am actually considering St. Monica for my Confirmation Saint. I need both her patience and her faith that prayer would work in her situation.

[ElizaG]

Advising someone not to seek answers about these sorts of questions from a homeschooling board does not = being rigid and lacking grace.

 

Please note that I didn't express an opinion on this member's personal situation (even though she asked for one). She said she was going to talk to her pastor, and I support that. Stuff like this is why we have clergy and canon law experts.

 

I posted the links for the information of anyone who was interested. As I said, I don't know how they apply, or don't apply, to anyone's circumstances here. Not really any of my business.

 

And since I can't trust that correct advice can be given to me by my own pastor and priests, as you say, I'm waiting until the Pope is willing to speak ex cathedra on the issue of my marriage/annulment.

I think you know that's not how it works in real life. :)

 

Yes, priests can make mistakes. But if, on a doubtful question, someone follows their own pastor's or bishop's mistaken advice in good faith, then this mitigates their own responsibility to some degree. We're supposed to be able to trust them. The same can't be said for second-hand advice we got from a pseudonymous person on the Internet.

 

This was kind of my whole point in posting. It really wasn't my intent to comment on the private lives of anyone here.

 

Elisheba, I'll send up some prayers to St. Monica for you. :) These are hard teachings, no matter what way you look at it.

[Parrothead]

I don't think anyone was unkind. I think folks are trying to share their own experiences AND the Church's teaching on these difficult issues. In this case, someone came and ASKED for advice; no one brought it up. I think sharing some links with further information on Church teaching is appropriate.

 

I agree E did ask for advice. I was referring to in general, IRL, other websites.

 

A lot of grief comes from this. To continue to use E as an example, her dh is already unhappy about one teaching of the church. The more dislike that comes down the pipe could lead E's dh to give an ultimatum- the church or me. I don't know of many people with such a young marriage that would choose the church over the spouse. Or even in more mature marriages.

 

If a person or couple is not aware of sinning then by definition it can't be a sin. I often wonder if people take secret delight at throwing this (and a couple other teaching) at converts just to see what happens.

 

We should be supporting our converts (and reverts and cradle Catholics) instead of potentially derailing their coming into full communion. (Not that I think anyone here is purposely doing that.)

[MyLittleWonders]

I was baptized in the CC as an infant, but received no other Sacraments. When I got married, I was in RCIA, but I was still unsure of whether I was going to go ahead and be Confirmed or not.

 

I know that has no bearing on the Church's teachings about marriage outside of the Church, but I do hope the priest I speak with understands that DH has no plans to convert and would *not* be willing to abstain until I am Confirmed in the Spring. It may be possible to move the Convalidation up, but at this point, I am being very quiet about the CC around DH. He is already unhappy about CC teachings on BC. I do not want to fuel a fire for resentment within him, towards myself or the Church.

 

I am continuing to pray, and asking St. Monica's intercession. I am actually considering St. Monica for my Confirmation Saint. I need both her patience and her faith that prayer would work in her situation.

 

I had a very similar situation last year when preparing to enter the Church, as well as a dh that had no intention of converting (and still doesn't). I spoke with our priest, my dh spoke with our priest (and almost vetoed the entire thing - that took a lot of talking to convince him that it wasn't that our first wedding was not good enough), and we decided to have our marriage convalidated prior to the Vigil. As an aside, we both went to the ceremony (which happened to also be the day we baptized all four children) quite upset with each other because we still were a bit afraid of what the other person would do; he was afraid I'd leave him because the Church wanted me to (not rational but he was still having a hard time understanding it all) and I was afraid he'd not agree to it at the last minute. But, it worked out beautifully. The ceremony was exactly what we needed. It was small - us; our parents (well FIL wasn't able to attend), dh's aunt/uncle, the godparents of our children (two people for all four kids), our parish sister, and a couple from the RCIA team who wanted to support us (they are awesome and if we didn't have godparents already, I think I would have asked them).

 

All that rambling to say ... talk with your priest as soon as you can. Chances are, he'll be able to put your mind and heart at ease. Ask if he can convalidate your marriage in a simple ceremony soon. And I'll send some prayers up to Saint Monica for you and your dh. One thing I had to learn, sometimes the hard way (arguments) with dh is that space works wonders. He went from not wanting to have the kids baptized, to really being negative about the convalidation, to only wanted to attend Mass during the holidays, to now at least from all outward appearances, is "Catholic" even if he says he'll never convert. It's taken time, and me being quiet, and him being able to work through things on his own, and me being even more quiet at times. But, he's much more positive about it all now. I think, too, he can see the fruit of the Church in our life. I mean, it's not rainbows and unicorns and the kids aren't perfectly behaved, but we have more richness to our family now because of the Church and the liturgical year and Her traditions.

[justamouse]

I've heard that there is a lot of talk at the Vatican about pastoral care of these situations. We had very heated discussions about this at RCIA as most of us needed convaildations, and there was a lot of asking the Bishop about certain situations. Our bishop is very orthodox.

[mommaduck]

Had a very lively discussion with a German lady the other night. We were in the van and the kids thought we were arguing (mad type arguing). Really, we parted on good terms, but it's a cultural thing on the "lively discussion" part (ftr, my mother is half German). Oh boy. Chucki, you remember me 6+ years ago? Take that and multiply it and you have this lady. She made a comment on about Catholics...and you know me...I decided to turn off my filters and go for it. She based everything off of her little village from when she was a child...I informed her about the RC ladies and gents I knew. Oh, and she agrees that Catholics (but only a few) can be Christians, but once they are they really aren't "Catholic in their hearts" anymore. I asked her what they had to give up or what is it that makes them "not Catholic in their hearts". She told me she would have to think on it. She could not remember. Further conversation had to do with the Pope (even though she was raised Catholic, she beleives that all Catholics believe the Pope is infalliable ALL the time and in ALL his words and writings...yes, I stepped in about that), Mary (whoo boy!), the Early Church Fathers, the Councils, and Sola Scriptura vs history of the Bible, and personal interpretaion.

 

I'm currently reading, and will be reading it with my children, Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy...did not realise just how much certain groups are really nothing more than new sects of Gnosticism. (recommending the book for Catholics and Orthodox alike) Hey, does anyone here have a book I could borrow on specific beliefs of the RCC, scripture verses as well as ECF's being used, etc? (would that be the CCC?) Even in areas that we may disagree on or view differently, I'm still not going to put up with the "Christian or Catholic" garbage out of other people. Ya'll are my sisters in Christ. ;)

[Parrothead]

Had a very lively discussion with a German lady the other night. We were in the van and the kids thought we were arguing (mad type arguing). Really, we parted on good terms, but it's a cultural thing on the "lively discussion" part (ftr, my mother is half German). Oh boy. Chucki, you remember me 6+ years ago? Take that and multiply it and you have this lady. She made a comment on about Catholics...and you know me...I decided to turn off my filters and go for it. She based everything off of her little village from when she was a child...I informed her about the RC ladies and gents I knew. Oh, and she agrees that Catholics (but only a few) can be Christians, but once they are they really aren't "Catholic in their hearts" anymore. I asked her what they had to give up or what is it that makes them "not Catholic in their hearts". She told me she would have to think on it. She could not remember. Further conversation had to do with the Pope (even though she was raised Catholic, she beleives that all Catholics believe the Pope is infalliable ALL the time and in ALL his words and writings...yes, I stepped in about that), Mary (whoo boy!), the Early Church Fathers, the Councils, and Sola Scriptura vs history of the Bible, and personal interpretaion.

 

I'm currently reading, and will be reading it with my children, Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy...did not realise just how much certain groups are really nothing more than new sects of Gnosticism. (recommending the book for Catholics and Orthodox alike) Hey, does anyone here have a book I could borrow on specific beliefs of the RCC, scripture verses as well as ECF's being used, etc? (would that be the CCC?) Even in areas that we may disagree on or view differently, I'm still not going to put up with the "Christian or Catholic" garbage out of other people. Ya'll are my sisters in Christ. ;)

 

 

I giggled reading your first paragraph. Yes, I remember, but you were always polite about it. At least to me. :lol:

 

I may have just the book for you. I'm currently taking a quick break in my scheduled activities, and the mail has run already today. So let me look this evening and I'll PM you. :coolgleamA:

 

 

*giggles again*

[ElizaG]

I've heard that there is a lot of talk at the Vatican about pastoral care of these situations. We had very heated discussions about this at RCIA as most of us needed convaildations, and there was a lot of asking the Bishop about certain situations. Our bishop is very orthodox.

 

The idea of confessors "leaving people in their ignorance" temporarily, to avoid a greater evil, is a very old one. I'm not questioning that this is sometimes appropriate. But the point is that the "situations" you're referring to, even if they look the same on paper, are all different. The people are in different spiritual states; there are different risks of harm to others around them; there are different future considerations (e.g., is this potentially setting the couple up for more serious problems down the road?). And our priests, as confessors, are given the theological training -- and much more importantly, the sacramental graces and authority given by Christ Himself -- to decide where to meet each couple on the road.

 

The Church uses great discretion in mentioning this approach, because it's so easily misunderstood -- both by lax people who would point to it to justify their misbehavior, and by the faithful who might be scandalized to think that others get "off the hook" while they're struggling to live out the same difficult teaching. As laypeople who happen to know about it, we should use even greater discretion ourselves.

 

Perhaps E feels the need to step off in order to preserve her marriage while getting ready to have it validated. Perhaps not. But she deserves to know she isn't alone if she goes that direction.

 

If the course of action you're talking about is supported by a pastor or confessor, then what I've said above would apply. Discretion is necessary, both because we don't know that the other person's pastor will come to the same conclusion, and because this aspect of Church teaching isn't meant for armchair quarterbacks.

 

If it was a conscious, "do it yourself" decision to bend or break the rules, then I don't see how a newcomer "deserves" to know about that. This thread exists (or at least, the old social group existed) to answer people's questions about orthodox Catholic teaching. I'm sure we all know that not all Catholics follow all those teachings at all times. All of us here have slipped in various ways, some more frequent or more serious than others. But the specifics don't seem like something we need to advertise.

[mommaduck]

I giggled reading your first paragraph. Yes, I remember, but you were always polite about it. At least to me. :lol:

 

I may have just the book for you. I'm currently taking a quick break in my scheduled activities, and the mail has run already today. So let me look this evening and I'll PM you. :coolgleamA:

 

 

*giggles again*

 

Well, I'm referring to the Grinch/Anti-Christmas-ME ;) :lol:

 

Uhm, I just remember...she about had a cow (thank heavens she wasn't drinking anything at the time) when I referred to Mary as the Mother of the Church. You know, since Mary isn't mentioned often in the Bible, she apparently just dissolved into the background, never to be seen nor heard from again and all. She did her job, popped out a baby, and thus is disposable by the rest of us. Blessed is she amoungst women apparently means she is just as blessed as Deborah of the OT and nothing more. You know, it's not like she gave birth to the Son of God, a member of the Trinity, or anything, right? :p

 

And thank you :) I knew you or one of the others would know how to help me (she admits that she doesn't know enough about Orthodoxy to comment much...but when she attacks Catholics, she is attacking me on many of the same issues...even the pope as we hold our bishops in high regard).

[ElizaG]

I'm currently reading, and will be reading it with my children, Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy...did not realise just how much certain groups are really nothing more than new sects of Gnosticism. (recommending the book for Catholics and Orthodox alike)

You mean, so we'll stop being Catholic and become Orthodox?

 

Seriously, I would never go on the "Exploring Orthodoxy" thread and recommend any Catholic book that argues against Orthodoxy -- let alone a book that's as polemical as the one you've mentioned.

 

You folks have chutzpah. Or something. ;)

 

ETA; FYI, many of us have looked into the claims of Orthodoxy, and did not find them convincing. But I think that debate/discussion belongs on a different thread. Unless people want to get into it here. (But if we go down that road, my house is never going to get clean.)

[mommaduck]

You mean, so we'll stop being Catholic and become Orthodox?

 

Seriously, I would never go on the "Exploring Orthodoxy" thread and recommend any Catholic book that argues against Orthodoxy -- let alone a book that's as polemical as the one you've mentioned.

 

You folks have chutzpah. Or something. ;)

 

Uhm, no, not at all. And actually, yes, I have had Catholic friends recommend some books and I have read them. I own quite a few Catholic books. In fact, if you read my full post, you will see that I also REQUESTED a Catholic book as I was defending Catholics at the time. No, chutzpah about it. There might be one small part of the book that you would disagree with. Much of the book has to do with other Heterodox, Heretical, and even Non-Christian faiths. Most of the references and comparisons with those groups use pre-Schism writings that we (Catholic and Orthodox) would hold in common. My suggestion had absolutely NOTHING to do with comparing Catholicism with Orthodoxy (I actually would have recommended another book for that if that was my intent...and I'm sure the RCC has a book on it as well).

 

Wow, I'm just stunned that you read ill intent into my post. Just stunned. Apparently you haven't taken the time to get to know me. Several on here have known me for years and some have even had communications with me outside of this board.

[justamouse]

The idea of confessors "leaving people in their ignorance" temporarily, to avoid a greater evil, is a very old one. I'm not questioning that this is sometimes appropriate. But the point is that the "situations" you're referring to, even if they look the same on paper, are all different. The people are in different spiritual states; there are different risks of harm to others around them; there are different future considerations (e.g., is this potentially setting the couple up for more serious problems down the road?). And our priests, as confessors, are given the theological training -- and much more importantly, the sacramental graces and authority given by Christ Himself -- to decide where to meet each couple on the road.

 

The Church uses great discretion in mentioning this approach, because it's so easily misunderstood -- both by lax people who would point to it to justify their misbehavior, and by the faithful who might be scandalized to think that others get "off the hook" while they're struggling to live out the same difficult teaching. As laypeople who happen to know about it, we should use even greater discretion ourselves.

 

 

This is very true, which is why I told her to go to her priest, but then, when we devalue the role of that priest by wondering if he's orthodox...and then we make the person worry unnecessarily...and question everything in their parish and their teaching

 

We all can't have Father Z, you know?

[ElizaG]

There might be one small part of the book that you would disagree with.

Are we talking about the same book? Fr. Damick's? It's far from a small part.

 

Wow, I'm just stunned that you read ill intent into my post. Just stunned. Apparently you haven't taken the time to get to know me. Several on here have known me for years and some have even had communications with me outside of this board.

Truly, I don't read "ill intent." :) I'm sure that many of our Orthodox board members genuinely believe it would be very good for us to "find out" that our Church is "heretical," that our spiritual lives are "characterized by legalism," that devotion to the Five Wounds is "highly fleshly and sensualistic," and so on.

 

The thing is, although we do have answers to all these allegations, there is no comparable Catholic book, because we would never write such a book about Orthodoxy -- certainly not since Vatican II. It's expressly against the teaching of our Church to do so. I used to think it was against Orthodox teaching, too, but I think there must be different interpretations of that.

[mommaduck]

FTR, I'm not, nor have I ever been since converting to Orthodoxy, been out to convert, or even attempt to convert, any Catholic to leave the RCC. That would be very presumptuous of me. In fact, my husband's best friend from childhood is RC and made it very clear that he would have requested to be our sponsor if the EO allowed it. He considers himself an unofficial godfather to our children. To make such an accusation against me is beyond insulting. When I was a young Baptist teen, yes (and that dear friend just smiled at me and gave me a hug)...but that was a LOOOOONG time ago.

[Parrothead]

 

You mean, so we'll stop being Catholic and become Orthodox?

 

Seriously, I would never go on the "Exploring Orthodoxy" thread and recommend any Catholic book that argues against Orthodoxy -- let alone a book that's as polemical as the one you've mentioned.

 

You folks have chutzpah. Or something. ;)

 

ETA; FYI, many of us have looked into the claims of Orthodoxy, and did not find them convincing. But I think that debate/discussion belongs on a different thread. Unless people want to get into it here. (But if we go down that road, my house is never going to get clean.)

 

No that is not what she meant at all. She Sid she was reading that book to her children and commented on what she read. There was no recommendation for Catholics to read it.

 

Since you don't read the EO thread or social group posts let alone interact with them I don't suppose you know that a number of us read and post over there. Many many of us RC and EO mommas see each other as sisters in Christ . We don't feel threatened by each other and we actually learn things from each other.

 

There is no need for such hostility. On a personal note momma duct and I have been friends for the better part of a decade. I knew her when she was a foaming at the mouth evangelical who thought... Well, not so nice things about the church. (No offence, JC) she is one of the kindest people I've had the privilege to know. The same can be said for the other EO ladies.

 

And I, the CTT social group was not started to answer questions about orthodox Catholicism. It started to help people wade through the sometimes difficult turbulent waters of conversion and to answer general questions anyone might have about the faith or the church. We are not a group of traditionalist Catholics poo- pooing the rest.

[nono]

Wow, I'm just stunned that you read ill intent into my post. Just stunned. Apparently you haven't taken the time to get to know me. Several on here have known me for years and some have even had communications with me outside of this board.

 

Come sit next to me. Apparently somebody died and someone else thinks she was left in charge of this thread.

[mommaduck]

Are we talking about the same book? Fr. Damick's? It's far from a small part.

 

 

Truly, I don't read "ill intent." :) I'm sure that many of our Orthodox board members genuinely believe it would be very good for us to "find out" that our Church is "heretical," that our spiritual lives are "characterized by legalism," that devotion to the Five Wounds is "highly fleshly and sensualistic," and so on.

 

The thing is, although we do have answers to all these allegations, there is no comparable Catholic book, because we would never write such a book about Orthodoxy -- certainly not since Vatican II. It's expressly against the teaching of our Church to do so. I used to think it was against Orthodox teaching, too, but I think there must be different interpretations of that.

Same book, yes. I have jumped around in it and the part on Catholicism has not come up. In context of the conversation I mentioned in my post and whom I was dealing with, those parts of the book would apply and I believe would be agreeable. Apparently you have read the book. You find it offensive enough that I should not mention it, but not offensive enough that you had no problem reading it? The other book, I was referring to is more of a chart that compares particular doctrines...where we agree, where we disagree, and where we slightly differ...purely academic and doesn't bash either party.

[mommaduck]

Come sit next to me. Apparently somebody died and someone else thinks she was left in charge of this thread.

Thanks. I would never have come on this thread to offend anyone. If nothing else, I have only participated in the form of support, to ask questions, and to keep up with you all.

[Parrothead]

,

[mommaduck]

No that is not what she meant at all. She Sid she was reading that book to her children and commented on what she read. There was no recommendation for Catholics to read it.

 

Since you don't read the EO thread or social group posts let alone interact with them I don't suppose you know that a number of us read and post over there. Many many of us RC and EO mommas see each other as sisters in Christ . We don't feel threatened by each other and we actually learn things from each other.

 

There is no need for such hostility. On a personal note momma duct and I have been friends for the better part of a decade. I knew her when she was a foaming at the mouth evangelical who thought... Well, not so nice things about the church. (No offence, JC) she is one of the kindest people I've had the privilege to know. The same can be said for the other EO ladies.

 

And I, the CTT social group was not started to answer questions about orthodox Catholicism. It started to help people wade through the sometimes difficult turbulent waters of conversion and to answer general questions anyone might have about the faith or the church. We are not a group of traditionalist Catholics poo- pooing the rest.

:lol: no offence. Truth can be harch, but is truth. I was a hardcore Puritan and missing "filters and maturity", I believe was how it was phrased. Certain people took me under their wings and bore with me while I grew up. I have no desire to be the person I once was (it was exhausting anyhow LOL!).

[ElizaG]

new sects of Gnosticism. (recommending the book for Catholics and Orthodox alike)

 

No that is not what she meant at all. She Sid she was reading that book to her children and commented on what she read. There was no recommendation for Catholics to read it.

Yes, there was -- see above.

 

Since you don't read the EO thread or social group posts let alone interact with them

Yes, I do/did read those groups. Not sure why you'd feel qualified to claim that I didn't. (This is getting weirder and weirder...) And I have Eastern Christian friends, including Orthodox, Eastern Catholics, and even some non-Chalcedonians, LOL.

 

And I, the CTT social group was not started to answer questions about orthodox Catholicism.

You think? As I recall, that was exactly why the group was started. I have some memories of being told, way back when (by you and Asenik), that we were only supposed to quote the CCC and other reliable sources, not personal opinions, etc. -- because people were there to find out about the Church's teachings, and the reasons for them.

[Parrothead]

 

 

 

Yes, there was -- see above.

 

 

Yes, I do/did read those groups. Not sure why you'd feel qualified to claim that I didn't. (This is getting weirder and weirder...) And I have Eastern Christian friends, including Orthodox, Eastern Catholics, and even some non-Chalcedonians, LOL.

 

 

You think? As I recall, that was exactly why the group was started. I have some memories of being told, way back when (by you and Asenik), that we were only supposed to quote the CCC and other reliable sources, not personal opinions, etc. -- because people were there to find out about the Church's teachings, and the reasons for them.

 

Do you not think I would not know why I started the group that I started? How can you possibly know my intent above what I put on the group description when I made the group?

 

On more than one occasion I've had to explain why I started the group. If I remember correctly, you left the group because you disagreed with my intent. I invite you to do so again.

 

ETA: disregard the above request to leave. But please I urge you to have care with what you are saying. I don't want all these hard feelings within the group. Please.

[ElizaG]

Apparently you have read the book.

Parts of it. There's only so much "your mother wears Army boots" that I can take at one time. ;)

 

You find it offensive enough that I should not mention it, but not offensive enough that you had no problem reading it?

I read books from many different faith traditions and philosophies, both so that I can understand where other people are coming from, and to get insights into my own. I'm sure I'm not the only one who does this, especially on a classical education board.

 

Maybe I should change my avatar to Daffy Duck or something? I'm not here foaming at the mouth, thumping Bibles, or falling over in a swoon. Actually, I think this whole discussion is kind of funny. :) I know the book is widely read and discussed by members of Orthodox message boards and blogs, and the world hasn't come to a screeching halt over it yet. I'm just kind of astonished that you don't see how a Catholic would find it inappropriate to recommend it on a Catholic thread.

[mommaduck]

Yes, I did recommend it. I confess to that. I also have not finished the book and am jumping around in it...so my recommendation may have been premature. I was excited about certain things in it that I believe we would hold in common. The "New Gnosticism" had to do with certain other groups, NOT in reference to Catholics (and if you have read the book, then you would know that and which part of the book I must be currently reading).

 

I prefer to focus on our commonality, not otherwise. In my conversation with the lady that I was speaking of in my post, she was raised Catholic in a German village and became Baptist through some missionaries that targeted her village. SHE brought up the subject. SHE made a comment about Catholics. I asked her to expound upon that and then started tearing into her arguments and judgements in defence of my Catholic sisters. Some of her issues, if she knew enough about Orthodoxy, are the same issues she would have with Orthodoxy...this makes it personal to me as well.

[ElizaG]

Yes, I did recommend it. I confess to that. I also have not finished the book and am jumping around in it...so my recommendation may have been premature. I was excited about certain things in it that I believe we would hold in common.

Understood. :grouphug:

 

I always look forward to reading your posts, and do appreciate your intentions. And I really do find this whole misunderstanding more amusing than anything, and not something that would affect my personal feelings about you. (Perhaps this is due to my "excessive Western intellectualism." It can come in handy at times. :laugh: )