Pre-cana issues (more of a vent than anything)

baystateapple · October 2009

Stats: I'm Catholic (actually work for a Catholic church as a secretary). FI is raised Catholic, went to Catholic school...now agnostic. Has no time for religion or Church, and doesn't care to actually have it be a part of his life. Has no problem raising our children Catholic or marrying in the Church.Tonight is night 3 of our four-Friday pre-cana program, and I'm burned out. Each week we've gotten in a huge argument on the way back. In the time we dated before we got engaged (over a year), we'd come to grips with our religion and we were okay with agreeing to disagree. Pre-cana opened up a huge can of worms (so it seems) and both of us are having problems with it.FI thinks it's ludicrous that we've been given pamphlets that say things like the Pill causes abortion and that any sexual position besides missionary is a sin (I don't know who came up with these, but in my entire life of being Catholic I've never read anything like this), and says that if this is my idea of faith, then he wants no part of it. At the same time, I disagree with a lot of what is going on, which makes me question my faith, especially when I was told by no less than two people that if I don't believe what they're saying at pre-cana, then I'm not really Catholic and I'm just pretending.So now I'm fighting with FI, and wondering if it's true, and I'm really just a "fake" Catholic. Having faith issues and relationship issues is making me physically sick, as is the idea of going to another pre-cana meeting and feeling like I'm a terrible person yet again.I'm sorry if this is the wrong place for this, or if I'm really just...I don't know. Shooting in the dark. I just never expected this. I thought pre-cana would bring us together. I feel like it's only made our differences more evident and caused more issues.

agapecarrie · October 2009

Well, it is true that the pill is abortive. Just because its pre-cana that is the messenger doesn't make it not true.This is pre-cana working the way its supposed to, in a way. Bring up these issues, and prepare you for marriage. If it is making him so uncomfortable now, just wait till you have kids. THese are very very serious things that can tear a marriage a part.The "only sexual position is missionary" is not true. Please read Christopher West "Good news about sex and marriage" and "holy sex" by popcak. It is amazing how beautiful the sexual relationship is when it reaches for the divine. It's ok to have questions, but I think if you look into things you may be suprised at how beautiful the faith is.

Riss91 · October 2009

pp is right 100%.In our pre-cana (which was more focused on how couples communicate and care for each other and NOT handing out pamphlets) they discussed the topic of differing belief systems. Their advices was to focus on what you do agree on and when there are topics of disagreement, try to boil them down to the root. Why does the church have this "rule"? What is its purpose? You may find that you agree on the basic belief..and then work from there...Also - when you say you disagree with a LOT - what types of things do you mean? Depending on what that list is, you may be right in questioning your faith. If you'd rather not list them out here specifically, you can email me :-)

kmt_cas · October 2009

As someone who is not the most perfect catholic in the world, I would have been mortified by your pre-cana experience. Honestly, I was terrified going to our pre-cana classes, and left feeling MUCH more inspired and welcoming to religion. It's sad that these classes are doing the exact opposite for you. I think each person interprets religion differently. The same words can be interpreted 239854732 different ways. Know what you believe. Discuss with your FI your beliefs and how they relate to the Catholic Church. I'm sorry, but they don't know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING. You have free will to make your own conclusions. I know I might get flamed for what I just said, but the point of my post is to say know your own truths from what you believe. Share those with your FI. Don't let the discrepancies escalate into a fight. Communicate with him openly why it's important for you to get married in the church. I can see why it's hard for him to understand your point of view when he disagrees with so much he is seeing from these classes, but if you can explain why you want religion to be a part of your life he will be more understanding. If any of that makes sense....

baystateapple · October 2009

I think I really expected pre-cana to be more like premarital counseling than "these are the rules about sex" (most of which, besides the pamphelts, I was already aware of). I think it is good that we're talking about these things and getting them out in the open right now. But...I feel a little thrown. I never knew there were rules to sex after marriage (I mean, besides the obvious one of monogamy). I didn't know that impotent people can't be married in the church. I didn't know that the Pill was abortive. I was told that it prevented pregnancy, not that it could terminate pregnancy. Which makes me sick to my stomach, because I was on the Pill for years (I stopped a WHILE ago, ironically when FI and I started dating) for medical, not sexual reasons, and I'm EXTREMELY against abortion, so this is making me feel sick and guilty.The tone of it all is really disconcerting too...someone told me that we should boycott FI's brother's wedding next year, because they're not getting married in the Church. He said that by going to it, we would be condoning it and be "sinning by default for condoning someone else's sin." I just...I find that wrong. And unnecessarily hurtful. Granted, I want to be married in the Church, and I feel that is the right thing to do. But making a huge deal and trying to force my beliefs on other people? I can't agree with that. Pre-cana, I have nothing against. I just have reservations about how seriously I can agree with the people that are running this one. Not on every issue (most of what they say, I absolutely agree with), but on the ones listed above. ESPECIALLY the one about FI's brother's wedding. Maybe other people agree with these statements, and if so, I'm not trying to attack. But I personally don't agree with them.

ring_pop · October 2009

Well, it is true that the pill is abortive. Just because its pre-cana that is the messenger doesn't make it not true.Um, are you thinking about the morning-after pill? BCPs which prevent ovulation aren't abortive. The church has different issues with the concept of blocking fertilization, but it's not abortive, at least not from my understanding...baystate, I can relate to what you're feeling. Yes, I'm a "cherry picker" Catholic in a lot of ways too. I don't believe that the concept that being "faithful" means that you have to blindly believe everything you're taught. God gave us free will, and the ability to think and question. You can have faith while questioning what you're being taught... just as long as you follow up on your questioning with research, reflection and prayer, rather than blindly UNbelieving. Actually, the Jewish people are ENCOURAGED to question and debate their teachings. I wish Catholics were more like that.What I don't understand is why your FI is trying to convince you that you're a "fake" Catholic - if religion has no part in his life, why would he criticize you for not believing EVERYTHING you're told? Is he trying to make you agnostic along with him? If anything, he should support you as you go through this process of discerning your faith.I don't know if this is an option for you since you say you work at a church, but could you find a different, more liberal parish which will give you a better forum for asking questions?

baystateapple · October 2009

Thanks, ring_pop. Actually, we're not going to pre-cana at the church I work at...since we're getting married in MA where FI's family is and not at my home parish at all, and also because we're in priest-transition right now (my boss/priest recently got transferred to another parish), we're doing our pre-cana at the Chancery of the Diocese in CT. We got permission from his church to do it, since we'd have to go up to MA four times on Tuesday nights, and that's not conducive at all.

kmt_cas · October 2009

The tone of it all is really disconcerting too...someone told me that we should boycott FI's brother's wedding next year, because they're not getting married in the Church. He said that by going to it, we would be condoning it and be "sinning by default for condoning someone else's sin." I just...I find that wrong. And unnecessarily hurtful.That's plain ridiculous. I probably would have gotten up and left if they said these things to me ....

baystateapple · October 2009

kmt_cas, I felt the same way...I don't like feeling that I have a choice between "sinning" and alienating my in-laws for probably ever. Wow, great choice there. FI is generally extremely accepting of my religious beliefs (I'm sure it's easier because he was raised Catholic and I don't have to explain too much to him, he knows it all already). The problem came in when these topics (the Pill, his brother "sinning", etc.) came up and he got upset. As did I.

Riss91 · October 2009

Lies: - Impotent people can't be married in the church.- All BC pills are abortive (some are, some aren't). The church recommends NFP as a method of BC.- Sexual positions besides missionary are a sin.It's upsetting to me to hear that this is what your Pre-cana class is telling you. These nonsensical messages really do the church a disservice. Just keep an open discussion with your FI about what you believe in - basic ideas of life - I'm sure you will find that you agree with many of them - generally, we don't fall in love with people that live their life in a way we are against.

baystateapple · October 2009

generally, we don't fall in love with people that live their life in a way we are against. Thanks, Riss. I love this.

bel138 · October 2009

Yes, Riss is correct on those lies. Maybe in 1956 impotent and infertile people weren't allowed to marry, but not any more. Most hormonal BC will block ovulation, but on the off chance you do ovulate, it makes the uterus "inhospitable" to a fertilized egg. You can have sex in whichever position you please.We got some of these lies at our Pre-Cana, too. It was a weekend retreat, but as soon as we saw our priest again, we complained. We straight up told him we were offended and that the priest teaching the retreat was a bully out to make people feel bad. He appologized and said that priest was a fill in, and that other couples had complained as well. If I were you, I would say something to your priest and explain what is going on. I don't think the church would like rogue priests out there.

tnspight · October 2009

Sorry I'm so late to the post; I can't get on at work. I'm a cafeteria/cherry picker Catholic. I agree with kmt and ring's pp. We did our pre-Cana with my priest and loved it. Fi is non-practicing Cath, but is supportive. Our pre-cana convinced him to accompany me to Church once a month. I wish that you were having a better experience. In our pre cana, we discussed NFP briefly and FI asked fr about "the pill". Fr stated that when the Pope convened the bishops in the 70s, one of the topics was the pill. The majority opinion was that "the pill", in short, was okay. The minority opinion said that it was not since it prevented conception. The pope went with the minority. When people get "excited" about religion I try to remember this: Every group of people who has lived on this planet has had some form of religion. Romans/Greeks had Zeus/Jove, Egyptians had Ra, Buddha, etc. It's how we understand who we are and why we're here. We don't know if any one religion is right and therefore shouldn't persecute people who don't blindly follow as ring pop mentioned. It's what you believe. Religion doesn't deal in facts, they're stories passed down by word of mouth/written down decades after they happened. People worship how they feel comfortable. Religion shouldn't make you feel guilty for liking "doggy style" ; ) I hope you laugh at the last part. If ur offended, I apologize.

alliecarrie41 · October 2009

sexual position besides missionary is a sin hahahha i'm sorry, this is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard of, and have NEVER heard this before now. no church would say that, give me a break. i'd love some literature on this just so i could have a laugh whenever i'm having a bad day. i'm going to go do it doggy style now... at least i'm not on the pill, phew!

ootmother2 · October 2009

I'm sorry that you are hoving so many difficulties with your pre cana. Believe that this is NOT the norm and you are NOT a "fake Catholic"You have to realize that the majority of priests today were ordained pre Vatican II and some are incapable of chage.What's going on around you at these classes is not what our religion is about so please don't let it damage your relatioship with your FI. God wants you to be happy with the life partner you have found. Marriage just makes it sacred for both of you.It's a formality go get through the last class. Make a pact with FI not to argue when it's over.btw, BC pills are for the most part non abortive. I believe it is just one type and avoiding it is simple. I'm a lot older than your are and have never even heard of the restriction on sexual positions. I do doubt that they exist.Aftet your pre cana, make a point of finding a new church where both you and then husband will feel welcomed and valued. That's a very important part of practicing your faith. It can take some time. I think I remember having a discussion with you a couple of months ago, right? Page me on P&E and I can tell you the absolute "bestest" churches are in your area. That may cut down on your search time. Most of my family is in your area so I've been put in the spot of having to find a church on Sunday and no one else knows where anything is, those heathens

As a reslult, I have a found some great ones.

ootmother2 · October 2009

hey, feel free to email me at any time. ootmother@yahoo.com

baystateapple · October 2009

tnspight -- no offense taken AT ALL. I agree with you 100%e_ -- that is HORRIBLE. OMG. I just want to give you a hug right now. I don't know what the policy is of a pre-cana "do over" though...wish I did.FI and I had a long talk yesterday about pre-cana and what we're getting out of it. We are learning to compromise with each other's religious beliefs (or in his case, lack thereof), and in the end, it has been good for us, at least, to get these things out now before we get married. We're discussing having children more, and raising them Catholic, and it's great that I know that even though he's agnostic, he really wants to try to be active in raising our children as Catholics. Last night went better than usual. Unfortunately for us, the entire evening was about making you feel guilty if you've had sex with other people before your FI -- the guy across the table from us with his FI looked like he wanted to break the screen and leave. FI and I have already talked about previous relationships so this wasn't a heated issue for us. And THEN the woman running the pre-cana decided to take the last 10 minutes of the evening to become a screeching harpy about Dan Brown and explain why "The Da Vinci Code" should burn in hell along with anyone who reads it....Not too sure how this was related to pre-cana? But the good news is: one week left.

baystateapple · October 2009

And oot -- thank you. The hardest thing for me was the idea of the pills...it scared the hell out of me to think that I'd been screwing up all those years.We're still trying to find a church -- the good news is that my boss doesn't require me to go to church where I work. Which, although I LOVE the priest at my church, is probably a good thing. I tried to go with my former boss, and it was too hard to separate work and worship. Just didn't work.

kmt_cas · October 2009

Lol baystate - I'm glad you can laugh about this stuff now. Seriously, your experience will lead to many interesting stories down the road!Just a quick note - I talked with FI last night (who is a pharmacist) and said in no way shape or form is the birth control pill an abortive pill. Although he did say it did depend on your idea of what abortion is. For example, if you are pregnant, there is NO way you will have an abortion if you take the pill. Same thing with the morning after pill. If you are already pregnant, nothing will happen with the baby - the morning after pill is essentially a huge dose of the birth control pill so it doesn't allow the egg to be fertilized, apparently fertilization takes several days, which is why the morning after pill needs to be taken no later than 72 hours after the incident. That said, if you think the term abortion means the stopping the chance of getting pregnant, then yes it could be interpreted as an abortion pill. However, if you believe that, then a condom should be considered "the abortion glove" lol. Same thing with pulling out. He was raised in a very catholic family. Went to a private boys catholic school and was still mortified by what I relayed to him about your experience. He said he did hear along the way that the only non-sinful sex position was missionary, but then he said several Brothers/Fathers said that's total BS. I mean really, does God really care what position we're in? Lol. Just makes me laugh.

ring_pop · October 2009

It's worth asking about a "do-over" pre-Cana once you find a church you're comfortable with. The purpose of pre-Cana is to prepare you for marriage... if you explained to them that your other classes didn't leave you feeling fully prepared, I'm sure they would gladly let you do it again so that you DO.

mbcdefg · October 2009

Holy cheese. I'm sorry you're having such an awful experience. The people telling you all this stuff about sex and banning impotent people from getting married are feeding you a load of horse poop. I don't follow every Catholic law to the letter, either (I have some differing views on things like birth control and gay marriage and interpretation of the Bible), but I think the important thing is that you be a good person who lives a good life. If people worried more about this than the "My God is better than your God, my rules are better than your rules," maybe our world wouldn't be in such crummy shape. My advice after reading this ... do your best to get through the last session, take any good advice you can get, ignore the judgemental garbage they're trying to give you, and look for a more accepting church/priest for pre-marital counseling if you feel that it would be beneficial. Perhaps if your FI sees that this one parish does not speak for all of Catholicism, he will be more open to supporting your faith and possibly accepting parts of it himself.

meltoine · October 2009

Some clarifications: Impotent people cannot be married in the Church. This applies only to persistent, incurable impotence. Consummation is required for the marriage to be valid, if it is impossible for this to ever occur, the couple cannot be married. This really only applies in situations where the man is severely disabled, i.e. para or quadriplegic. Your FBILs wedding: If both people are baptised, and at least one of them is Catholic, according to your religion, a marriage cannot take place outside of the Church. It just physically cannot happen without a dispensation. The "sin" on your part comes in if you act as an official witness to this event, which is, in reality, not happening - because that would be a lie. If you are not serving as an official witness, you must make a judgement call on the merits of staying true to your faith vs. your family. This is what I was told by 3 different priests when it came to my sister being married outside the Church. The pill: Many brands are abortifacients. The pill (and any hormonal contraceptive) works in two ways: it prevents ovulation, and it prevents the lining of your uterus from developing to the point where it can be hospitable to the implantation of an embryo. Since life begins at fertilization, if you do ovulate on the pill (which is actually pretty common), but the resulting embryo cannot implant because the uterine lining is not adequate, that is an abortion.

sarges05girl · October 2009

First of all, I'm so sorry your Pre-Cana completely sucks azz. To me it sounds like a great big redo of the whole "tell your children" propaganda but with a Catholic spin. You poor dear.Our pre-cana was great and actually got DH & I talking/communicating about religion (I'm Cath, he's Baptist), our differences and how we will raise our children (he's fully open to raising them Catholic). This is how Pre-Cana should be, not a preachy propaganda slinging event.And in reference to the missionary only sex thing: I may be totally off my rocker here, but I've always figured it went back to the whole Catholic conspriacy stuff in the book of Genesis. How there are two different lines about how "God created them male AND female," then later about taking Adam's rib to create Eve, prompting some people to believe that there was another female before Eve. Lilith was the first female, but wouldn't be submissive to Adam (read: would not do the nasty in the missionary position), saying she was equal because God made her the same way she made him. And b/c Adam got all pissy about it, she willingly left Eden. And then the uber conservatives in whatever religion (Judaism, Christianity, whatever) said that missionary was the only acceptable position b/c it showed the submissiveness of the female. Just a load of BS, and more evidence of how interpreting the Bible as literal fact is dangerous.

sarges05girl · October 2009

Some clarifications: Impotent people cannot be married in the Church. This applies only to persistent, incurable impotence. Consummation is required for the marriage to be valid, if it is impossible for this to ever occur, the couple cannot be married. This really only applies in situations where the man is severely disabled, i.e. para or quadriplegic. This, even though it may be the official "rule" (whether it is antiquated or not is beyond me--need to research) is totally horrible. I personally think sex is a gift from God, and if you are unable (in any way) to have sex it shouldn't be a condition of being married in the church. The sacrament is performed by the bride/groom in front of God and witnesses. Once you leave the church the Sacrament is over; it shouldn't extend to the bedroom later that night...no matter how holy/divine marital sex may be. The basic vows of the Church are that your are open to children in your marriage. It doesn't say that you are open to children via sex, fertilization, implantation, and so on. What about a lady unable to conceive? What if she was in her 20's had cancer, and needed a full hysterectomy? She can't be married in the church because she has no baby maker? BS and if it isn't gone, it should be. But, that's JMO. The pill: Many brands are abortifacients. The pill (and any hormonal contraceptive) works in two ways: it prevents ovulation, and it prevents the lining of your uterus from developing to the point where it can be hospitable to the implantation of an embryo. Since life begins at fertilization, if you do ovulate on the pill (which is actually pretty common), but the resulting embryo cannot implant because the uterine lining is not adequate, that is an abortion. I have a few issues with this and I know that they clash with the Church's teachings. The body naturally (i.e. never been on the pill, not doing the NFP thing, just natural) aborts about 10% of all pregnancies for this very reason. Inhospitable environment. Maybe you didn't eat your Wheaties when you were TTC and it fertilized, but just didn't implant. Totally possible and I believe God's call. I also believe that because the Pill isn't 100% effective, it is still God's call whether you are on the Pill or not. I figure if this happens naturally, and I'm not 100% covered (as abstinence would be), I could still get PG, Pill or no Pill. God's call, not mine. Once again, JMO.

meltoine · October 2009

Sarges: Sex is a sacrament. Every time you have sex with your spouse, you are creating a sacrament. The sacrament doesn't end in the Church. In fact, the Church part wasn't even necessary at the beginning of Christianity. All that was necessary was for two people to declare their intention to be married, and then to consummate it. If you are unable to consummate it, you are physically incapable of experiencing the sacrament. Sad, but true. Fortunately, persistent incurable impotence is EXTREMELY rare. The ability to consummate a marriage has absolutely nothing to do with fertility or conceiving children. The ability of the man or woman to conceive has no bearing on the validity of their marriage, so long as they were able to have sex at least once after the church ceremony. As to the pill, if the body naturally doesn't produce an adequate uterine lining, that is no sin, as there was no intent by either of the spouses to prevent or abort a pregnancy. For sin to occur, there has to be intent. By taking the pill, one declares an intent to prevent or abort a pregnancy.

baystateapple · November 2009

For sin to occur, there has to be intent. By taking the pill, one declares an intent to prevent or abort a pregnancy.So a girl who takes the Pill to prevent ovarian cysts is sinning, even if she's not sexually active and isn't taking the Pill to prevent pregnancy?

masked_rose86 · November 2009

You answered your own question.....the intent of the girl with ovarian cysts is not contraceptive/abortive (she isn't even having sex). When the intent is health related (aka: cysts, heavy periods, etc) that is what the intent for taking the pill is. The church does allow taking the pill for health related reasons (is my understanding). When it is taken to prevent a pregnancy (aka as birth control alone), that is the "contraceptive" intent.

meltoine · November 2009

ditto masked.

e_jakiela · November 2009

Reading all this, I really wish that Church, no any other institution ever had a sense or feeling that they are in any position to decide on any rules of what is happening between the two people who are in love.Doesn't sex become more and more an object of law, and not a wonderful means of sharing your emotions with your partner? Why are there any rules? Who decided that Church was in any way the organization capable of writing these rules? Let's be clear here - God did not tell anyone to lay any of these rules. As long as two people are faithful to each other, and not intently harming each other, there should be no rules as to how, when and why sex should happen. And definitely, Catholic priests, who should be living in celibate, are the very LAST of the people on earth to tell us if missionary is the only un-sinful position. As for abortive qualities of the pill:Fertilisation is the fusion of gamets (egg and sperm) to produce a new organizm.Abortion is the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus (or embryo).A contraceptive pill PREVENTS the fertilisation. No fertilization = no embryo = nothing to remove or expel = no abortion.The reason why the pill, or any other non-natural contraceptive method are "sinful" by the church's law is easy - the less people are born, and the more independent of the faith the people become in sustaining the one, or two, versus 10 children that they have, the less people will come to church, support church, donate... Note that the really big families are usually the most faithful.Please do not forget that any church, Catholic or not, is an organization, with its own bureaucracy, its rules, and bottom line - whatever that bottom line is.

sarges05girl · November 2009

meltoine--I had a great big response typed up last night, but the knot ate it and I didn't feel like retyping it at 1am.

But, in no way was my quoting of you anything more than mere debate and expression of my opinion (hope you didn't take it any other way). The only thing I have a problem with about the sex as a sacrament (although I can see how it could be considered as such), is that it isn't a true sacrament. All sacraments are required to have proper matter, form, and intention. Matter being: the part to which something is done (the baptismal waters being poured); form being: the verbal/physical liturgical action; intention being: the willful intention to do what the Church does.As far as I know, sex doesn't have a liturgical rite. When it gets one, let me know.

It should make for an interesting Mass.

(Hope not to offend).And to the pp about the abortive aspect of the pill--I never thought that the pill was a Catholic no-no because of any abortive properties (whether present or not), but because it inhibits conception. As Catholics, we believe in life from conception to natural death. So therefore inhibiting conception is likened to playing God and a no-no; not because of any type of abortion. Which is why I'm not sold on the Pill being so bad. Because there is still the 1% chance of conception. And if inhibiting conception is the issue NFP isn't really great either b/c you're still abstaining during the most fertile periods, therefore inhibiting conception. Granted most people say NFP is more acceptable because you're abstaining rather than just doing it and stopping it, but still. To me BC, condoms, NFP is a system to help aid TTC or TTA. It doesn't come down to one act of sex, but a pattern of sexual behaviors. You can't use NFP one time, then BC the next, then condoms, etc. You need to establish a pattern. But once again, my opinion, and my opinon only. Sorry about the threadjack! And nice debating with you meltoine.

tnspight · November 2009

Well said e-jakiela

Pre-cana issues (more of a vent than anything)

Re: Pre-cana issues (more of a vent than anything)

Choose Another Board

Search Boards