Category — Catholicism for Sinners

Thank the Lord, the day has finally come. We finished our laughably bad pre-cana class tonight. I can’t put the joy and relief we feel into words. This calls for a celebration. Champagne for everyone!

In all fairness, there were a few useful parts of the last two lessons (two out of seven ain’t… well, no, that’s pretty bad). One was about forgiveness in relationships and how important it is in marriage, and there were a couple of good questions that actually encouraged us to talk to each other and not just regurgitate doctrine. OK, a promising start…

And then they threw these questions in: “Do you think watching pornography can hurt your relationship? Why? How can you avoid pornography becoming a problem in your life?”

Wait, what? I thought we were talking about forgiveness! Somehow our conversation about communication and compassion turned into a lecture on the evils of porn. Way to be a buzzkill, people.

Anyway, no use dwelling anymore. The bottom line is we are DONE. And they have to let us pass go and receive our certificate of participation… even after they read the very long feedback questionnaire we filled out after our last lesson. We win!

I have been Catholic long enough to realize there are just some things the Church and I will never see eye to eye on. Women’s role in the Church/the family/pretty much anything, homosexuality and contraception are at the top of the list. I sometimes like to visualize the Catholic Church as a very old, slightly senile distant relative who goes on and on about how things were back in his day and who sometimes makes inappropriate comments about “broads” and “Orientals” getting too uppity. He means well, but we can agree to disagree, and I try to let some things slide because of his age.

Apparently, this method does not fly with our pre-cana instructors. The last three lessons have strongly focused on why using contraception is a sin against God and why we must not follow our own consciences on the matter because they are only properly informed when dictated by the teachings of the Church.

You can follow along with two of the articles we had to read: “Humanae Vitae and Conscience” and “Contraception: Why Not” (not “Contraception: Why Not?” as Jules thought it was), both written by Professor Janet Smith, whose condescending writing style and lack of factual evidence make me want to go against my “WWJD” policy.

The article cover page (I can’t make this up) is the only thing that got me through these lessons. 

The gist of the first article is how ridiculous it is that Catholics think they are smarter than the Church and how no one can opt out of the Church’s teachings on contraception. The second is a rambling account of how the Pill destroys morality, increases unwanted pregnancies, abortions and divorces and is generally responsible for all evil in the world.

Sorry, guys. I’m not gonna play. I do not accept that it is wrong to plan when you are ready and willing to have children. If you choose to do that with Natural Family Planning (NFP), more power to you. If you choose to use some form of contraception, great. Having kids is a major life change, not to mention a pretty significant financial commitment, so I am all for people being responsible and not procreating until they’re good and ready.

What makes me most angry about these “lessons” on contraception is that they aren’t intended to spark debate or discussion. They are simply a lecture on why Church doctrine will always outweigh our personal beliefs. Case closed. There were very few essay questions or opportunities to ask questions or express an opinion, just a series of leading multiple choice questions. I started answering them the way I wanted to, then deleting some of my responses and writing slightly more diplomatic answers.

Then there were the questions I had to give answers I knew were “wrong.”

Yes, the Pill is the reason more couples divorce. If a couple is struggling with a difficult marriage, you know what would be a good fix? More kids.

It’s just insane to blame more unwanted pregnancies on one sole factor in the last 40 years. Plus, if the unwanted pregnancy rate has gone up since the 1960s when women started using birth control, can you imagine what it would be without the Pill?

I’m sorry, but that’s just not accurate. As one friend who used to work for an OB/GYN said, “We used to have a nickname for women who used Natural Family Planning. We called them ‘Mommy.'” NFP has a few different methods, but it involves recording different bodily factors (such as basal body temperature and cervical mucus changes) to determine when a woman is ovulating.

Most sources I found (like the one sponsored by the National Institute of Health) cite the statistic that 15 to 20 women out of 100 get pregnant each year using NFP. The Pill results in 2 to 3 pregnancies out of 100 when no pills are missed. The “withdrawl” method, by contrast, gets about 7 to 22 women out of 100 pregnant every year. I can’t get excited about a 15 to 20 percent failure rate, though measuring my cervical mucus does sound fun.

And then there’s that. I might have laughed at the Hall and Oates reference if it weren’t misspelled and if I weren’t too busy throwing up in my mouth.

So, what do y’all think, particularly those of you who are Catholic? Do you agree with the Church or do you think we should be able to follow our consciences?

I don’t want to get into this too much because it will just make me more enraged, but I feel compelled to share some of the answers we got to our first pre-cana lesson. Our instructors, a married couple who I’m sure have the best intentions… just not a firm grasp on reality, sent us a 16-page, single-spaced Word document filled with exclamation points and some of the most sexist statements I’ve read in awhile. It’s like reading “Men are from Mars, Women are from Whore Island.”

Sounds more fun…

I don’t quite understand. I know lots of Catholics who are open-minded and well-educated and who don’t blame women for original sin and the fall of man. I also know several Catholic couples who had perfectly lovely experiences in their pre-cana classes (though Nicole said her class was great, but the priest told them the man should make all the decisions… because that’s how God intended it). I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

I’ll just share a few excerpts:

• Usually, men are more down to earth, more grounded than women. They are active and they like to build things, they are a lot in the “doing!

• In the Jewish tradition it is the very important duty of the father to name his children and a very meaningful one: by giving the name, the father grants permission to live and gives the identity. This is the meaning of Paternity.

• The ribs protect the heart, and also the lungs… What was in Adam’s lungs? God’s breath of life, his Holy Spirit… Maybe that’s why women are more naturally religious than men?

• She is also given maternity; she’s the one who will bear life in her womb. Woman in Hebrew is nekeva which means hollow, receptacle, to create an inside space. Woman’s body is made to receive. Woman is consecrated to life. It is an incredible mission if we think about it and wonderful too!

• Woman’s ability to receive relates her naturally to the spiritual world. She is more inclined to the things of the heart, that is to love. These two characteristics make her closer to God, who is Love and giver of life.

• God entrusts man to the woman. Man is a lot into his doing and has a tendency to forget God! He thinks he can manage everything by his own strength! So God gives the woman to the man to remind him of the spiritual.

• She is to be the guardian of the spiritual. She can also be called the Guardian of Purity.

• She added that they were not even allowed to touch it [the forbidden fruit]!  God never said that! She grabbed the bait! It made God sound even more severe! She enters in the devil’s game! He insinuated doubt in her. She totally gave in, meaning that she entered into temptation! Note that the devil doesn’t talk to Adam. Adam had been entrusted with the authority.

• Let’s also look at this scenario closer! First, she finds the fruit attractive. She is seduced — the pleasure of her senses and the desire for glory and power! This means that she chooses to eat the fruit to please herself without considering the long term repercussions of her actions. She wants to decide for herself what is good and what is bad.

• This is original sin: we want everything, right away, not accepting to depend on God… We want to decide for ourselves what is good or bad without trusting that God will provide at the right time. We make ourselves our own gods.

• She was to be a suitable partner to Adam, yet she made a decision on her own, not even respecting their partnership. She didn’t consult Adam. How often do we see couples where we can say that the wife “wears the pants?” As the guardian of the spiritual, Eve was supposed to remind man of God, to lead man to God and instead she led him away from God…She was also consecrated to life and led all humanity to death.

• The devil was called Lucifer before his fall, and he was the chief of all the archangels. Lucifer means the light bearer, and he was probably an extraordinarily beautiful angel. It’s easier to imagine Eve talking to the most beautiful of angels and being seduced.

• They are not equal partners anymore… The communion man and woman experienced together before sin is broken. “Your urge shall be for your husband.”  Woman will become very possessive in her love for her husband.  He will take advantage of this urge the woman has to be loved and protected, and he shall be your master, meaning that the man will distort the authority that was given to him as a service into a power over the woman and he will lose his respect for her. He will use the woman for himself instead of loving her. He will lust instead of love. Their partnership is destroyed because of sin.

Jeez, woman! Way to screw everything up. I have a sudden fruit craving; maybe I’ll go eat an apple and destroy free will.

Brian and I finally sucked it up and did our first pre-cana lesson. We are accepting the harsh reality that we have less than six weeks until the wedding, and the Catholic Church probably doesn’t give extensions (that Pope is such a stickler for deadlines).

However, this didn’t stop me from whining like a spoiled brat 90 percent of the time. “I don’t waaaaana. This is booooring. These questions are stuuuuupid. I’m huuuungry.”

The format of the online class is pretty much your average reading comprehension test– read several Bible verses, answer some questions, read some more, answer some more (next time, we will insert the steps “drink some wine” and “watch some YouTube videos” in there somewhere). The first lesson’s goal was to  “explore the very beginnings to understand better who we are as man and woman, as a couple and what was meant by God in creating us so different.” Yes, do tell.

There are no pictures in the Creative Commons “Adam and Eve” search that are not creepy

Here’s what I learned:

• God created man, but he was ronery
• God created woman out of man’s rib to keep him company
• God tells man and woman not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil
• Serpent convinces woman it’s cool to eat from the tree, God is just being stingy (man is there, too, but he’s just in the wrong place at the wrong time)
• God is not a happy camper
• God boots man and woman out of the Garden of Eden but gives them fashionable leather garments to wear
• God punishes woman by cursing her with painful childbirth and man as her “master”
• God punishes man (“because you listened to your wife”) by cursing him to toil the earth the rest of his days

Trixy woman! Always leading man astray. That’s why man should be the master.

Brian and I decided this class would be much better if it were taught by Dr. Gnuse, our “Old Testament as Biblical Lit” professor at Loyola. I think he’d put these readings into context better than the good people of Catholic Marriage Prep, Inc. I remember Gnuse discussing how woman gets too much of the blame in this story– some people like to forget her husband was there, and at the time the story was written, women rarely made decisions without the consent of their husbands. Even when faced with clever talking serpents.

I did enjoy some of the reading comprehension questions, though. Feel free to learn along and answer any of them in the comments section:

• What does this reveal about her personality? Would you say that it makes woman:
  • Hyperactive and rational
  • Spiritual and sensitive
• Why can we say that woman sinned in the very missions God gave her? Why can we say that man sinned in the very missions God entrusted him?
• So the first consequence of sin is…
• How will sin distort the relationship of man and woman?

I look forward to reading your answers and comparing them to the answer key we just received. I have a feeling some of you will not be getting a gold star.

For someone who grew up Catholic, I’ve been to surprisingly few Catholic weddings. And by few, I mean two. One was my uncle’s wedding when I was a senior in high school, and one was Nicole’s wedding in August. I don’t remember a ton about the first ceremony, so I was surprised this summer when I saw the order of the wedding Mass.

Apparently, this is the traditional order for a nuptial Mass:

ENTRANCE RITE

Processional
Gathering Song
Opening Prayer

LITURGY OF THE WORD

First Reading
Responsorial Psalm
Second Reading
Gospel Acclamation
Gospel Reading
Homily

RITE OF MARRIAGE

Exchange of Vows
Blessing and Exchange of Rings
Prayer of the Faithful
The Lord’s Prayer
Sign of Peace

LITURGY OF THE EUCHARIST

Preparation of Gifts
Offertory Song
Eucharistic Prayer
Nuptial Blessing and Dismissal
Closing Song/Recessional

Besides the fact that it looks really long when it’s spelled out like that, what seems odd about this arrangement? The actual marriage part, with the exchange of vows and all that good stuff, is right smack in the middle of the Mass before Communion. I’m not a fan of this plan. It seems awkward and disjointed, like we’re just randomly sticking a wedding where it doesn’t belong. I’m used to the flow of Mass, and messing with it will make me go all Rainman on you.

I also think it’s kind of anti-climactic to say “I do” and exchange rings… then have the “Our Father,” the sign of peace, the preparation of gifts, Communion… It just takes all the fun and excitement out of “I now pronounce you husband and wife”! Haven’t you seen the movies? When the priest says that, we’re supposed to kiss and process triumphantly out of the church to trumpet fanfare and swelling violins. And perhaps there would be some sort of dove release. Fireworks would work as well. I like a good plot line, and this doesn’t cut it!

Has anyone ever changed this order, or is it set in stone? And am I just being overly picky?

Getting married in the Catholic Church isn’t quite as simple as impulsively buying a marriage license in Vegas and saying your vows in front of a white-jumpsuited Elvis (so I’m pretty sure Britney is not Catholic). Like all good things in the Church, a Catholic marriage requires a little work and suffering… so you know it’s good.

I wrote about the FOCCUS and some other Catholic shenanigans back in May, and that’s the last time I did anything to prepare for our rapidly approaching church wedding. When I talked to Brian today, he said, “Hey, you know that pre-cana thing? Yeah, we should probably do that…” This is why I keep him around. Registering for a pre-cana class has been on my to-do list for a few months, along with seeing a dentist, finishing “Eat, Pray, Love” and cleaning out my Gmail inbox.

For you non-Catholics, pre-cana is a course couples have to complete before getting hitched in the Church. Usually couples do it through six weeks of going to evening classes or a hardcore weekend retreat, but since Brian is in Iraq, our options are a little more limited. Luckily, in this beautiful world of the Interweb, there is actually an online pre-cana class! We’ll do the worksheets for each class topic “together” (via e-mail and Skype…how modern), submit them to our online instructor and get a certificate of completion when we’re all finished.

I like the idea of talking about important topics– religion, family, future offspring, history of mental illness– but I am wary of some random person “grading” our assignments. “Um, Gill, you got number 12 wrong. You said you don’t believe the man should make the final decisions in the household. The correct answer was actually, ‘Yes, Brian. I will always defer to your opinion. And go make you a sammich. Submissively.'” I could see this turning ugly. No, I’m really trying to stay positive and focus on how we can use this class to stay close while we’re apart (though I make no promises to curb my sass).

If anything, I did enjoy the images that went along with the registration page. So much that I took a few screen shots:

I wasn’t expecting so much nudity right off the bat, but hey, I’m not judging. I have a renewed resolve to work out before the wedding.

Our first lesson is titled “In the Beginning” and has the synopsis, “God’s Plan for man and woman, the origin of marriage and how sin distorted everything.” Sounds like a party– I’ll bring the cocktails!

I’ve found myself going “church shopping” lately, which is pretty much the equivalent of me going “gun rack shopping.” It’s not that there’s anything wrong with that; I just don’t usually have the need for one. But since I am technically Catholic and marrying into an actually Catholic family, I have rediscovered religion. The prodigal daughter has returned.

I was kind of hoping getting married in the Catholic church would be something like getting my First Communion. I wear a beautiful white dress, everyone tells me how pretty I look, we sing fun songs at church, then we get to have a big party, yay! Apparently, there’s a little more preparation that goes into this sacrament. We’re only starting this whole process, but I’d like to start sharing the enlightenment I gain along the way. Oh, enlightenment is the wrong religion, isn’t it? What are Catholics supposed to acquire (besides guilt)?

What I’ve Learned So Far:

1. Marriage Ain’t Cheap. I figured the ceremony would be one of the cheapest things we’d invest in for our wedding. Come on, how much would a church charge us to receive a sacrament? Ha. Ha. Perhaps I should have laid off the baby Jesus jokes before I started looking. Old St. Patrick’s Church on Camp Street, a beautiful church less than a mile from our reception location, charges $2,000 for non-parishioners! For an hour-long ceremony (45 minutes, if we’re lucky). It also has an incredibly scary downloadable Web form outlining everything you can’t do. Some highlights:

• Under no conditions is a flower arrangement to be placed directly on the altar or credence tables. Please place the arrangement on a clear plastic saucer.
• Unity candle is not allowed.
• Popular music is not to be performed or sung in church, either before or during the wedding.
• Keyboards and guitars are not permitted at St. Patrick’s Church.
• The photographer must not be conspicuous nor obstruct the proceedings in any way. During the ceremony, all photographs must be taken from the choir loft.
• Strapless attire is not permitted for the bride and/or the other ladies in the bridal party.
• NO ALCOHOL IS ALLOWED INSIDE OR AROUND THE CHURCH AND SACRISTY.
• Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

I sure am excited about my special day after reading all that.

Thank goodness for a little church called St. Theresa of Avila. It’s on Erato Street, about a mile from Mulate’s, and just gorgeous– small but big enough, newly renovated, high ceilings, stained-glass windows and a working organ. It’s also run by the cutest priest ever, Father Agudo, who has a thick Spanish accent and who told me there weren’t really any rules for the church, just “common sense.” I just want to put him in my pocket. And it’s only $300 to have the ceremony there. Done.

2. The FOCCUS is a More Amusing Version of the SAT. The Facilitating Open Couple Communication, Understanding & Study is a multiple-choice Scantron exam, much like the standardized tests we had to take in high school. Except instead of reading comprehension questions, we get to agree or disagree with statements like, “I sometimes fear for my safety when with my future spouse,” “I think my future spouse drinks too much” and “I will be uncomfortable with my future spouse seeing me naked.” I completely understand why they have couples take the test– I’m sure it weeds out some of the unwashed masses who shouldn’t be getting married in the first place. That said, it makes me giggle. Especially when it switches from “I do feel” to “I don’t feel” statements arbitrarily, causing me to answer an important question very inaccurately because I was going too fast. The overachiever in me wanted to go back and get a do-over, but Brian said I can’t. But I deserve 100 percent!

That’s all I’ve got for the moment, but I’m sure the pre-cana classes, the liturgical readings and the music will give me plenty of material for this ongoing series of “Catholicism for Sinners.”