Catholic Online Forum

(If this is in the wrong section, please whisk it away to where it belongs. Upon cursory examination, it looks like this topic hasn't been brought up here yet, so I'm not sure where to put it.)

In the Diocese of Phoenix, word about the new marriage preparation guidelines hit the Catholic Sun in about October of last year. Now that it's implemented, though, it's starting to get discussed on the main Catholic blogosphere, with Father Z and Creative Minority Report (via a guest post by Erin) weighing in. If you know of anyone else, please tell me; I'd love to read it. I've been reading the comments on the aforementioned blog with interest, but several days have passed and I have a lot to say, so I'm putting it here in the hopes of getting more feedback.

I live in the Diocese of Phoenix, and started going through marriage prep a couple years ago (didn't complete it - we broke up for sundry reasons). I found out the breadth of marriage prep at the time - all the classes we had to take, and all the money we had to pay.

I definitely think that marriage prep needed a strong shot in the arm. However, I don't think that the present band-aid is anything like a solution. I see it as analogous to schools catering their education to the slowest kids in class, thus frustrating to no end the more advanced students.

Here's the breakdown of everything couples need to do under the new marriage prep guidelines:

1. Initial interview: 1 day
2. Prenuptual inquiry: 1-2 days; getting necessary paperwork (baptismal certificates, affidavits): maybe a week or so.
3. FOCCUS test: 1 day; maybe a month for processing and setting an appointment to discuss the results
4. Results discussion: 3 days generous estimate
5. Married Life Skills classes/Love for Life engaged weekend/other approved Preparation Workshop I class: 2-3 days
6. Preparation Workshop II (God's Plan for a Joy-Filled Marriage): 1-2 days (it can also be completed online in some cases)
7. Preparation Workshop III (Natural Family Planning instruction): 4 days
8. Immediate Preparation: 1-3 days (meet with the priest once, suggested confession, suggested wedding liturgy planning - but what bride would wait for the last two months of a nine month prep process to begin planning her wedding?)
This compilation comes from:
Covenant of Love (http://www.diocesephoenix.org/mfrl/docu ... Letter.pdf) (the source)
God's Plan for a Joy-Filled Marriage main site (http://www.joyfilledmarriage.com/)
Diocese of Phoenix Office of Natural Family Planning (http://www.phxnfp.org/index.php)

So by adding up the generous estimates, that's 19 day's worth of actually doing something, a week for collecting paperwork, and perhaps a month of waiting for FOCCUS results (that's how long I had to wait, ymmv). Let's be generous again and say that totals two months, leaving seven months of... twiddling thumbs. All right, for many couples it would be allowing things to sink in, finding free days, talking and praying, all that good stuff. I'm still not sure how seven months of thumb-twiddling is so much better than four months of it.

Most of the old-six-months, new-nine-months time is eaten up by the fact that these classes are not offered very often, so if a couple gets engaged just in time to miss the last one, they have to sit down and twiddle their thumbs until the next one rolls around.

I fully understand the benefits of being able to corner uncatechized, non-Mass-going Catholics and pound into their heads the Truth About Love and Marriage, and the Church While We're At It. I truly agree that the classes we had under the old process were... lacking.

But. Let's look at what's really happening. We're adding more classes, without improving them. We're adding three months of dead air. And that's supposed to herald a dramatic change? What if we made Confirmation classes three months longer, added some more fees, and kept the same terrible (occasionally nonexistent) catechesis? Would anyone be jumping up and down about how that's fixed too?
In brief, I think what we should have done is overhaul the classes themselves, which are the actual stumbling block. Maybe add one or two more if they'll be necessary, high-quality classes.

Also, referring to my initial analogy, what about the Catholics who have been faithful practicing Catholics most of their lives (including converts of course), know a thing or two about Church teachings and accept them, have a working grasp of NFP, and who just plain gosh darn want to get married? We can't be *that* tiny of a demographic! (I know we're tiny but please, we're still here.) In fact for adult converts it might even be more annoying, depending on how good of an RCIA program they went through, because they *just learned* about what marriage should be, what Church teachings are and why they should be followed, et cetera, et cetera, and now they have to go over the same thing warmed over.

I'm facing having to go through this in a few months. Right now my FH-to-be is finishing up RCIA and doesn't want to begin until after he receives his sacraments in Easter. As it stands, I'm not looking forward to it. People get engaged because they want to get married. Nine months is a darn long time to keep the brakes on, when the train really, really wants to go full steam ahead.

I guess what I'm looking for is someone who can convince me that this was all an excellent idea, and it will not backfire or be mind-numbingly frustrating. When April comes knocking, I'd like to be able to be excited about all this preparation, not bonking my head against a brick wall because we already are against contraception, we already are against cohabitation and premarital sex, we already have learned about marriage from RCIA/Father Corapi/Gregory Popcak/our parents/the catechism/thirteen years of Catholic schooling/other orthodox Catholic sources, we already are open to NFP, we already are talking about finances, kids, education, chores, running the home, sex, et cetera... and still have to sit through expensive classes to tell us just that. I'm not saying we know everything. I'm just dreading being treated like we know nothing... for nine months.

-Leah

_________________
*~**Empress**~*
=^.^=

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
-Albert Einstein

Leah,

A canon lawyer I know told me he believes a marriage prep. program isn't effective until 50% of the couples that enter it drop out and cancel their weddings. He said this because Catholic divorce rates are as high as the larger population, and he would rather the ones who don't know what they're signing up for get weeded out before they take their vows, rather than contact lawyers after the ceremony and after they have kids. What was he implying? That most Catholics don't have the most basic clue about the commitment they are making when they enter marriage; it's one reason why there are many declarations of nullity seemingly for very little good reason. In other words, you and your husband-to-be may well be exceptions.

I can understand your impatience with the process, especially with dumbed-down retreats and classes. I recently had to go to the prep. session for parents of children who are making their first Holy Communion in the spring. Mind you, this is my fifth child making her first Holy Communion. I have three more children to get "prepped" for. At this last session, a session for adults, mind you, we were told to get markers and crayons and construction paper and make a card for someone we thought we could "be bread" to. I resolutely refused to engage in this childish, sentimental activity. On the other hand, I wonder how many of the parents got something out of the session, given the horribly abismal level of catechesis they received and the lack of further study the majority of them probably have.

It would be nice if couples could be interviewed by an experienced person who could insightfully tailor the necessary sessions to the couple's needs. The same should be done for people who are looking to enter the Catholic Church. But it takes plenty of skilled laypeople to do this, often on a volunteer basis. Without these volunteers, a cookie-cutter approach has to be taken because it takes fewer people.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

I hope that guy isn't actually responsible for any marriage prep programs, because that's an awful attitude to have.

_________________
Rob

Is it? The idea of marriage prep should be to separate those seriouslyt seaking marriage and wiling to prepare for it from those who are trying in out.

_________________
Bob C

In addition to what I said above, believe me, I have experienced close-up and in depth the cluelessness of most Catholics, especially when it comes to marriage. Part of that experience is from being a lurking member of an online wedding community for several years now, and Catholic questions always crop up. The questions themselves often display massive amounts of ignorance, matched and sometimes surpassed by the replies. I can see where the canon lawyer is coming from, but my sentiments lie with Rob.

(I keep typing things and then realizing I'm talking too much.)

From where I sit, the changes do nothing to improve marriage prep... it just gets longer. If a couple doodles during classes under the old system, there is nothing under the new system that will make them pay attention. In fact between adding more-of-the-same classes and tacking on three empty months, I wouldn't be surprised if people did drop out more often (or not even start, which undermines the ENTIRE operation) - not because they are re-evaluating their relationship or life, but because the RCC is being "unreasonable", and they're going to get married somewhere else.

Please someone tell me that the new classes are not going to be the same as the old ones; that would be significant.

I have to admit though, I am getting the general sense of how marriage prep classes go through 1. how preparation for the first four sacraments is (mis)handled, and 2. what other Catholics (both orthodox and less-than; honest reactions can be very revealing) have to say about them. I haven't been able to find actual course content online - course overviews, from my experience, always sound better than what actually goes on in a class.

I would LOVE to hear from people about their own experiences in marriage prep, whether teaching or being taught, under the old system or the new system. I would be so happy to be proven wrong on every count!

-Leah

_________________
*~**Empress**~*
=^.^=

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
-Albert Einstein

His point is that 50% of the people probably should not have gotten married in the first place. This is borne out by the divorce rate. And it is less painful to the Body of Christ when people decide perhaps they should not attempt marriage to each other than the ensuing divorce, breakup of the family with children, and the annulment applications are. It is a realistic and quite pragmatic attitude to take.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

I think I have to agree with Rob. That 50% sounds like some kind of quota, not to mention really negative. While it may be unrealistic to expect 100% success, it seems to me that the goal of marriage prep should be to strengthen the relationships of those who need more knowledge, wisdom, and resolve before entering matrimony, rather than trying to "weed them out".

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

What is the reality of failed marriages, David? 50%? It's reality. What this cl is saying is that the wedding prep should cause these same people to realize that they either aren't ready for the commitment or they aren't able to make this commitment with this particular person so that there isn't a divorce in the first place. The goal of marriage prep is to ensure that couples have faced the difficult questions that can come around to destroy a marriage, and they either find compatibility or they don't and move on. My goodness, what is your answer to the scandalous divorce rate among Catholics, if not a marriage prep process designed to make couples face the divisive issues and not just go starry-eyed into a lifetime entanglement?

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

But shouldn't the goal be to change that reality if possible? To make sure that they are ready for the commitment?

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

It is my opinion that some combinations of man and woman will not be ready for a lifelong, exclusive commitment of total self-giving to one another, ever, either because some people are not capable of those commitments or because they aren't capable of them with that particular other person. And the prep will hopefully help them realize that. What you seem to be advocating is a class to get them to paper over their irreconcilable differences until after the wedding.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Dean,

If you manufacture widgets and fifty percent of them are lemons, should you concentrate on weeding out the lemons and scrapping them before they leave the plant, or should you try to improve your quality? If you improve the quality you may have to scrap only 10%.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

Ah, but one of the ways to improve quality is to slow down the process and put more time and effort into it and as a result you may make 50% less to begin with.

_________________
Rose West
"May God help us not to spoil His work" (Bl. Mother Theresa)

Off the top of my head? I think that a marriage prep program should clearly lay out what marriage is and should be and what it entails (particularly as the Church teaches, natch) and test/challenge the expectations/experience/knowledge of the couple.

Yes, some couples will "fail" out of a program, and others will withdraw. But setting out to cause the results to fit some sort of preconceived bell curve is an affront to teaching and statistics (and to marriage).

_________________
Rob

Rob,

Did Jesus mean for a person to literally cut out one's eye if it caused a person to sin? No. Neither was this cl intending for a wedding prep program to attain a 50% dropout rate for the sake of the 50% dropout rate. His point was that the wedding prep programs today are clearly not working; that very many people who approach the Church for the sacrament are not really psychologically capable of marriage at the time (i.e. their background coming from broken families, single-parent-by-choice families, and a culture saturated in the acceptance of divorce and remarriage handicaps them from adequately understanding the permanence and total commitment of marriage -- a key element of a valid marriage, by the way); that the marriage prep programs neither open their eyes to this reality; nor do they present and force discussion on the questions that otherwise capable people need to explore to determine compatibility. What the cl meant was that a more effective wedding prep program is certain to result in more people deciding not to marry each other before they take their vows. The ideal would be that the 50% who divorce rate would shrink to nothing (of course that is not possible) but could it realistically shrink to the divorce rate that, for instance, NFP married couples have, which is in the single digits? Is that not a good thing? What person is glad to have married the wrong person and to have gone through a divorce? How does the Church reduce the scandal of so many Catholic couples who divorce if marriage prep remains such a process where starry-eyed couples can breeze through?

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

This would be an impossible test. The challenges of marriage do not hit you all at once. The challenges of marriage are what make the marriage stronger and you also learn to handle different challenges as you mature.

There is not a class in the world that could have prepared me for the challenges of the first few years of marriage. I was however, madly in love and was willing to make adjustments and learn how to live with my polar opposite. Maybe there should be a day spent on teaching the virtue of patience.

The things that need to be addressed are NFP, thoughts about children, your comittment to the faith, maybe some finance issues. The rest of it can be dealt with as it comes if you understand what the sacrament of marriage actually means. I think they should be told that there are some things that simply can not be compromised and they need to seriously think about it if they are at odds.

_________________
Elizabeth

"Jesus go before me and prepare the way"

Elizabeth:

Maybe I didn't make my meaning clear.

I was not suggesting that a class can address/prepare one for all (or even most) of the challenges that one might encounter in marriage.

What I was saying above was that a marriage prep program should teach about the nature/meaning/responsibilities of marriage as the Church teaches.

When I spoke of "test/challenge the expectations/experience/knowledge of the couple", I was referring to the need to get couples thinking about some of the things that can come up in Marriage. People get the idea that something is possible or impossible or assume it goes without saying, etc... - and it really needs to be said!

_________________
Rob

I, too, live within the Diocese of Phoenix. I think Bp Olmsted rocks, and deeply respect him for the mess he's cleaned up (and still is).

When we were married eight years ago, we had already scheduled our wedding over a year after we were engaged, mostly to break up the costs and not get married in a pile of debt. We took the courses - our FOCCUS results amazed our pastor, in that regarding finances, we'd scored among the highest of the thousands of couples he'd advised in all his years of doing it. I didn't mind the consults, I didn't mind the meetings, and I didn't mind the tests. I did mind the brain-numbing way the NFP classes were done. They need some serious revamping.

The bigger problem is this: all the classes and waiting periods in the world cannot fix the problem of the amazing plague of ignorance that abounds among Catholics, generally. Attending a "class" for my son's baptism (which constituted a horrible 26 minute video, discussing one thing that was new to us afterward, and doing a walkthrough in the church - Lord, don't get me started ), not only were the parents that attended shockingly ignorant of the basic history of the Church, they didn't know that at least one godparent had to be Catholic. I about died.

I imagine it's the same with marriage prep. Forty years of Kumbaya, foofy-cloud-God catechism has left us with a population of folks completely ignorant of what the Church stands for and asks of us each and every day of the sacrament of marriage. They just don't realize that Catholicism is not a passive religion, and just don't get that the encroachment of secular attitudes regarding marriage and Christian life are extremely damaging.

I understand what the Bishop is doing. It's sad that it's even necessary.

(steps off soapbox)

Peace.
--C

_________________
Carrie

~~~

There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. - The Most Reverend Fulton Sheen (1895-1979)

Carrie,

I am also a big fan of our bishop, and as I mentioned earlier I understand very well the enormity and depth of the problem of under- and mis-catechized Catholics. I am hardly going to preach to the bishop what I think he should have done.

That said, I am all for beefed-up classes. I worry that the classes are not beefed-up. From the information I have at my disposal, it seems to be that there are just a couple more of them and the content is relatively the same - from virtually all accounts I have run across, lackluster.

My stickiest sticking point, though, is the three-month-longer business. The only thing I see it accomplishing is getting the couple to think about things longer. That's good, in and of itself, but under the old system there already was approximately four months' worth of it. Now we have seven months. If it's so much better, why stop there? What's to say that marriage prep shouldn't be a year in advance? That's only three months longer than we have now. Why shouldn't we have a full season-cycle for people to mull things over, in case it's just spring fever, or the summer bridal bandwagon, or cozy winter snugglies? Or heck, why not make it even longer? I see lots of negatives when it comes to lengthening the marriage process just to make it longer. Since those additional three months are not being spent actively doing something extra - like, say, three more months of school might since at school you go to class every day. Heck, some people study marriage for decades and still aren't done - does that mean we should make people wait decades to get married so they're Absolutely Sure?

I know patience is a virtue. I know the benefits of sitting down and thinking about something before leaping into it. But honestly there comes a point when it feels like "Let's do this thing already!!!" It is impossible to be completely prepared for marriage. Yes, we should get the best preparation we can. Of course. But where should we draw the line? Traditionally the Church frowns on long engagements. I've read older, orthodox books that stop just short of saying that six months is the LONGEST an engagement should be. Past that, the negatives outweigh the positives. Especially since there are no exceptions (I would like to see a type of "tracking" in marriage prep but that's a problematic pipe dream and I know it, and really fodder for another thread).

I was discussing this with my mom and she compared it to being pregnant. Of course you should learn everything you can about labor, birth, child care, childrearing, how the parents' lives and routines are going to change, all that and more. But after awhile you find out that you've learned just about all you can before you actually *have* the baby, after which you'll learn more that you can't really learn before hand. My mom had five kids, and she said that in the beginning it seems like you can't get your hands on enough information. Then at about six months in or so, she felt like she would be ok with having the baby; there's always more to learn but she had the foundation down. Then for the last three months she said that sometimes she just wanted to yell, "Why doesn't this baby just come already!"

I don't consider my balking at nine months to be mere youthful impetuosity and impatience. I would be fine with six; it might rankle a bit because that's the kind of person I am, but I really think that nine months is a little past pushing it.

-Leah

_________________
*~**Empress**~*
=^.^=

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
-Albert Einstein

Leah,

(pardon my tardiness to your last reply)

While that reply was general (read: brain blather) and not specifically directed at your original post, I do get your frustration. I would be frustrated too, and trying to see why this is a good idea. You seem to know it is a good thing, done for good reasons, but are wary that it's just a longer wait with longer classes… in short, a wasteful pain in the butt. I agree that the extension of the time period without a serious revamp of the courses is just a waste. Dry lecturing and fluff-filled videos just don’t cut it.

Personally, I don’t know how people plan and pay for a wedding in six months, let alone nine, without having a nervous breakdown, outside the marriage prep; I feel this especially if it’s a full-blown church wedding with the inevitable conflicts, scheduling, travel coordination, and so on. Trust me, the time flies. We had sixteen months, voluntarily, between our engagement and wedding, and every month, every week, was filled with something, including the marriage prep, and all of that on top of full-time work and family obligations, and cramming in us-time. It was still overwhelming sometimes, even with that generous time frame.

We live in a society that considers marriage disposable, family life to be shunted aside, and children to be optional. The Church herself struggles to combat decades of disastrous tinkering with the catechism and the Mass. Marriage in the Church is a vocation in itself, threatened by personal ignorance and societal nonchalance in these so-called modern times… the problem is, these days, how many couples wanting to marry in the Church know it’s a vocation? How many know that “in sickness and in health” and that whole list in the vows are not just casual suggestions? Many of them flee at the first sign of trouble because they had no idea what marriage entailed at the most basic of levels to start with, both personally and in terms of the Church’s views. So, something has to be done.

Marriage prep isn’t intended to, and cannot possibly, cover every single base, just as adult catechism can’t possibly cover every single topic or answer all the questions, as both a successful marriage and spiritual maturity simply come with time and experience. This you know.

But think of it this way: when the Church has to (re?)catechize the couple in the prep process (remember our agreed astonishment re ignorance of our fellow Catholics) plus ensure the couple is doing it for the right reasons and are compatible, six months of weekends and the odd weeknight just doesn’t cut it. Geez, the year – give or take – that catechumens have before Easter Vigil is hardly enough time. So, I wonder, how can the nine months for marriage prep be really considered excessive?

That’s just my take, although I think we’re generally on the same page.

Peace,
--C

_________________
Carrie

~~~

There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. - The Most Reverend Fulton Sheen (1895-1979)

I wouldn't have a problem with a marriage preparation process that actually weeded couples out. Not everybody is actually called to marriage, just as not everybody is called to the priesthood or religious life. In the same way that you'd want to weed out seminarians who aren't really called to be priests and don't have what it takes, we should not hesitate to weed out people who do not have the calling to be good husbands and wives. The sacrament of Marriage is just as important and sacred as that of Holy Orders. Why should we be really picky about who receives one and not the other?

_________________
Bridget F.

Well, marriage is kind of the default isn't it? Maybe two or three percent of Catholics discern a call to priesthood or religious life. Maybe another 7% or 8% are called to single life (if that is really a calling), and the rest are "called" to be married.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

Even if that were true, and I don't know that it is, those who are called to be married aren't compatible with that particular man or that particular woman. And a marriage prepartion process would ideally open those eyes to that reality.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Everyone,

A marriage prep program is as good as those presenting it. And as effective as those receiving the information (the couples) want it to be. That being said, for those of you who have the time and who are in a good marriage, please consider being part of marriage of a pre-cana or other marriage prep program. They always need more couples, especially younger couples.

I like what the canon lawyer said to Dean. The purpose of a marriage prep is to make you think and encourage you to communicate. He wasn't giving a "quota' he was simply saying that if the couples are really learning then you should expect to see more than a few couples change their mind about getting married to that particular person. It's far better for that to happen before rather than after the wedding.

My own diocese recommends one year for marriage preparation. (the priest can make that less) That year includes precana and a minimum of three meetings with the priest/deacon. It also gives the priest time to address any unforseen issues that might come up.

Unfortunately for far some couples the year is more about choosing the right table linins and music for the reception. Ideally the pre-cana program and meetings with the priest will help them realize that the preparation not about the day, it's about the life time.

One last thing. A priest once told me that priests often talk about how diffiult it is to know whether or not a marriage will make it. He said that sometimes couples that you are sure will make it end up divorced while the couple you thought didn't have a chance just celebrated their 40 wedding anniversary. Like Elizabeth said, the challanges of marriage do not hit you all at once.


Effie

_________________
“The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.” –G.K Chesterton

Effie,



Although our kids are far from marriage (although our oldest is approaching that age with accelerating speed), we are establishing the mindset with them that we aren't springing for their weddings, just as we aren't paying for their higher education (sure, we will assist where we believe it is prudent, but we aren't going to come even close to funding their post-high school decisions). It is our hope that, with this in mind, our kids will be less worried about the trappings of a wedding celebration that really no one can afford and more attuned to whom they are marrying.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Effie,



I don't think anyone was even giving us a year............now almost 44

_________________
Bob C