To the dismay of many Catholics, or those choosing to marry one, tying the knot requires attendance of Pre-Cana classes. Pre-Cana is a series of lectures on how to have a functional marriage, organized by people not allowed to have one. The irony is not lost on anyone, save the organizers. Still, one has to imagine they’re in on the joke, if not just a little.
The prospect was not at all appealing to either of us. I’m terribly impatient, scoring highly on any Attention Deficit checklist. Six hours seemed unbearable, impossible, cruel; even spread over three sessions. And I’m not very comfortable in religious settings. My visits to houses of worship are invariably as a wedding guest or tourist. Like many, I believe in something, I just don’t think it has an address I must frequent.
My wife-to-be was not excited about the Pre-Cana either. Like many Catholics I know, she’s more of a Skeptolic. The blind faithful consisting these days only of the elderly fringe, the oldest leaves of the family tree. The remainder: the trunk, branches and twigs, practice Skeptolicism. They feel the Pope is a wee bit too stubborn and outdated, like someone demanding we return to the days of pulse-dialing telephones. He gets absolutely no slack from them for being Polish.
What I’ve seen of Skeptolicism in my her rural village in Poland is familiar to the Skeptolicism practiced by friends in the States and Ireland. One appreciates the rituals and traditions of the religion, but such things as a Baptism seem more ceremonial than anti-Hell insurance. The hypocrisies and blunders the church has made aren’t swept under the carpet anymore. The fact that the previous village priest had impregnated one of the local girls was common knowledge. On a positive note, while he did seriously violate his duties as a servant of God, he at least listened to the Pope and shunned birth control.
Our opposition to the Pre-Cana indoctrination on any grounds was moot. Our hands were tied. We were to be married in a 600-year old church in her village later that summer and that required permission. That permission came with a six hour price tag. We rose to the occasion with a healthy mixture of anger, cynicism and dread and entered the first great test of our relationship.
We both drew a breath as we made our way to the first of three two-hour marriage boot camps. We arrived at the church on time and made our way to the large function room. Chairs were neatly lined up and by the looks of it they were expecting a sizable crowd. Not too shabby for $100 per couple. The room can hold a 200 unhappy souls for certain. Slowly it filled up.
Instinctively we both took seats in the back, not far from the exit. This turned out to be one of the greatest seating calls of all time.
Pre-Cana is the opposite of a concert. The back rows fill up first. As the seating options dwindle, the only seats to be found are in the front. For late arrivals there will be no escape. No choice but to stare at the speaker, deer in headlights, for two hours. The rest of the crowd was at leisure to read, knit or whisper snide remarks.
We had not fooled ourselves. We were certain we would be bored beyond recognition. As a result we had come equipped to kill time by any means necessary. Books. Magazines. PDA. New York Times Crossword. Sketch pads. We divvied up our swag as we waited for the session to start.
Ten minutes after the hour the room was full and buzzing with conversation. A middle-aged woman and man took the podium. She was short and round-faced with thick glasses. Barely visible behind the podium, like Dr. Ruth behind a tree. He was tall, thin and balding with a half-hearted comb-over.
They began to talk but neglected to turn on the microphone. Mouths were moving, but nothing was heard over the din of the audience. They had the rapt attention of the first row for certain — the only people who could hear what was being said. The remainder of the crowd gradually quieted down until finally they had the attention of the audience. Still, nothing could be heard. This went on for five minutes.
After numerous shouts of “We can’t hear you!” they realized we weren’t bluffing and switched on the microphone. The speakers popped loudly, waking any slumbering audience members. The man mumbled something about using a microphone. Then they announced they would start over. Fine for us, we hadn’t heard a thing yet, but I pitied the folks in the front row for having to undergo a double dose.
Evidently a scene began. What it was about was not understood. All turning on the microphone did was make their inaudibility more obvious. Still, no one save the front row had any idea what was really going on.
The inaudible scene carried on for a few minutes more. The folks out of hearing range, rows 2-30, simply raised eyebrows and shrugged shoulders amongst one another. Finally, someone in the middle aggressively announced the fact that we could not hear anything.
This time the duo moved to rectify the situation once and for all. That involved turning the volume knob and calling out to the audience to see if they could be heard. After a few moments it was determined that all rows were within audio range.
They began the scene again. From the top.
Imagine if you will, bad actors reading a bad play in a mediocre theatre with shoddy equipment in front of a captive audience of miserable critics. If you’re able to do that well, you’ll be able to recreate the experience any time.
The scene was about a couple, married presumably, who are deciding where to go for dinner. One of the scenarios resulted in conflict. The other results in going to dinner.
I don’t have much experience getting in pre-dinner conflicts. I tend to shirk any decision-making responsibility and agree to most restaurant suggestions offered me. That could be because of non-confrontational personality traits or simply hunger. Regardless, the scene didn’t speak much to me, nor did it seem to speak much to anyone in the room. If it was speaking to them, they weren’t listening. They were busy looking around, bewildered. Hurt even.
When the scene ended there was a pause. Hopefully not for applause, because none was forthcoming. The duo, the only ones in the room who understood what was just talked about, proceeded on to the biography phase. Unfortunately, the biography phase involved more mumbling and microphone popping of P’s, T’s and B’s as well as coming in and out of audible range.
We all learned that they were both allegedly happily married, not to each other. We understood her to be a counselor, psychologist and mother of five. He was a counselor and hypnotist. Quite fitting given his monotone, lure-you-into-a-trance delivery. He was married thirty years or something with great kids as well, he told us. I made a mental note not to ever be hypnotized or analyzed by either. They both were Vicodin in human form.
The audience was underwhelmed. They had lost us at hello. And if not then, then during the mumbled scene. Or the repeats that followed. Or the biographies. When she told us she’d been leading Pre-Cana classes for over 20 years, my heart sank. I felt she should be jailed.
With the acting and biography phase over, we moved into the part about how great marriage is. They told us how glad they were that we came, stunningly oblivious to the fact that we had no choice. It was the equivalent of working the food line at the Alcatraz and thanking everyone for eating at your restaurant. One would have been hard-pressed to find an individual who wanted to be there, much less pay $100 for the privilege. We were there solely for the piece of paper that said we survived it, and which qualified us to get married in a really old church.
At this point, and to our misery, we were still about five and a half hours away from getting that piece of paper. We’d need to spend the next two Wednesday evenings here. Then and only then, precious paper in hand, would we be able to banish them from our memories.
At some point during the droning they mentioned that the reason for Pre-Cana indoctrination is to make sure everyone realized how great marriage is. That point seemed fairly obvious seeing as we were there in the first place because we thought marriage was a great idea. I am assuming that if one thought marriage was a terrible idea, they would not pay $100 and listen to a tranquilizing chat on how good it is for six hours.
They were preaching to the converted. The converted were really, really bored.
I had finished one magazine and readied a book when they announced a new plan: the formation of random groups of eight. People turned their chairs around, to the sides, left, right, everywhere. They formed semi-circles, circles, walls, clusters, knots, spirals. I slid back and closer to the exit, facing only my wife-to-be.
They wanted us to have a group of eight but someone’s fianc’ hadn’t bothered to come that night. We had a group of seven. Then six when the odd man out squeezed away from our community to read a book in the back. We then had three couples facing different directions and not each other.
Many folks now had their backs to the speakers, myself included. Some tried to mingle in their new groups. One thing was for certain: no one seemed to care what the speakers were mumbling about.
A new neighbor who faced my fianc’e’s right shoulder made an awkward attempt to introduce himself to me with her in between us. He gave up.
We entered the discussion phase of the torture. The speakers asked the various groups to discuss “inspirational married couples” that we knew of. One of the few people to take that seriously also happened to be in our group. He asked me what couples came to mind. I shrugged my shoulders, as did my fianc’e. He then told us his fianc’e’s parents are a great example because they’re so happily married. Everyone looked away as if he were a homeless guy who had approached our caf’ table.
As time crept onward the crowd tended to grow in volume and activity. That didn’t stop the duo from speaking. They continued bantering about something. It was only audible to only the first few rows, but that seemed okay for them. The captive row members looked about sadly, planning an exit strategy. It was a certainly that they wouldn’t be late next week, lest they get front row seats again.
We detected an accent among our group and struck up a conversation with a Ukrainian couple. We discussed the merits of the Pre-Cana. It was determined there were none. Then we discussed what the chance was that we could escape. We wondered what the next session would be like and tried to discern who in the crowd looked like a doomed couple. Anything to pass the time.
We had been provided workbooks and information sheets and statistics and explanations of what makes a good marriage. That which was not goofy we wound up disagreeing with. The contention that birth control causes divorce was a fun one. We wrote silly answers to “serious” questions, mocked the duo and looked at our watches.
The crowd reminded me of a time when I was performing for an improvisational comedy troupe in a Christmas show for employees of Microsoft. We were ignored, scowled at and drowned out by the audience. After fifteen minutes of torture we packed up, took the check, and left. Sadly, tonight’s performers had more staying power; well-practiced playing to hostile crowds.
They kept on. Determined to hold us through to the end. Drowned out by bags packing, zippers zipping, chatter, cell phones activating and chairs sliding. The only thing we heard, inspiring both hope and dread, was there would be a different speaker next week.
Ten minutes from the end, a few brave souls left, as though fleeing a horrible ballgame. They had correctly surmised that the registration sheets we handed in earlier were the only form of attendance being taken.
At 9 o’clock, before the speakers could finish dismissing us, my fianc’e and I were halfway down the stairs, behind the Ukrainian couple.
“See you next week,” I said.
“Eh,” he answered in a thick accent, “Maybe not.”
Indeed, I never saw them again.
Boy aren’t you long winded. What is 6 hours out of eternity? If you are that ADD then maybe you should not get married since you will probably lose interest with your significant other pretty quickly.
I find if you do these classes what does it hurt? You may actually learn something.
Good Luck to you both, I think that you are going to need it especially with the Foccus Test.
What do you expect when you go into something absolutely certain it’s going to be horrible, and then look for any opportunity to confirm your opinion? Those speakers are not paid, and they are just facilitators, not the main event. The point is to get you and your fiance talking about “the serious questions” (which you provided “silly” answers to). A lot of people gloss over the heavier issues, only to have to work twice as hard when unpleasant surprises and differences come up after they are married. No wonder you got nothing out of it… you put nothing in.
My goodness, such angry reactions to a spot-on essay. Kudos to the banterist for bringing to life the snooze-fest called pre-cana. Like “celibate” priests and the anti-homosexual/anti-women stance that the church takes, manditory pre-cana also doesn’t have a place in modern (read: post-1850) times. The “serious” questions can’t be taken seriously in this artificial, force-fed environment. That said, if couples who took pre-cana found that it opened their eyes to the great married unknown, then a) good for them and b) too bad you don’t have the kind of closeness and self-awareness to be discussing things like family, the meaning of life and your likes and dislikes before you chose to get married. hopefully, you’ll always have the church to tell you what to see (or not see) in life, love and, especially, your other half.
Why even bother to go? You were dead set against it, so why bother? It is people like you who make me sick! If you do not agree with the Church, fine, but then stay as far away from it as possible and please do not ever again try to explain things which you do not understand (of which I am sure there are many!) Just crawl back into your hole and stay there, it will make us all very happy, your fiance’ included!
Well your story was long but funny.
While I am not in any relationship, I would like to add that you have given me more reason why it is best to just head to Las Vegas to get married; it’s just much easier and faster that way.
best of luck to you
Yeah I tend to aggree that its an attitude thing and you’ll get out of it what you put in. Im sure your fiance’ has had a movie to watch with you that was unenjoyable. Classes arent much longer than a bad movie. I do think that classes serve a purpose today as much as they ever have. All walks of life come to get married and i think its important that all of them recognize important issues that will come up in a marrage. go ahead be bored. dont agree with the speaker on catholic points of view. 70 some odd precent of catholics dont aggre with the birth control regulations as shown on a recent poll i saw on tv. but then keep the questions in your head and talk about them seriously with your significant other. you might be suprised what they have to say. Its best to work what you can today, rather than down the road
It sounds as if you were in our Pre-cana class. Expect we received lectures on Ecological breast feeding, and how women should stay in the home and not work. But it does make me feel a bit better to know we were not alone in our total and complete boredom
I endured this indignity more than 35 years ago. It wasn’t any better back then.
Irony or ironies: requiring marriage instruction while leaving the worst of parents on their own to abuse, neglect and indoctrinate their kids into a church that only cares for embryos.
I suffered through this in 1978, only it was a WEEKEND long “event”. I found it ironical that those of celibate lifestyles were teaching those about to embark on the opposite. The most impressive moment, at least the one I remember best, was when this speaker (newly married man) got up to tell us that he and his wife “prayed” every morning together for spiritual enlightenment during their future sexual activity. I believe they still thought it was wrong to consummate their marriage unless they were doing so in order to procreate, certainly not for recreational reasons. The other memorable event was the writing/reading of personal notebooks to each other, with canned questions. I found myself starting a game of “boxes” and/or hangman, and handing the notebook back and forth to the fiance after each move. I did become more of an aficionado of the games, and learned the necessity of knowing how to play them well when I would find myself being subjected to similar inhumanity. So I guess something positive did flow from the otherwise wasteful use of 72 hours. I seem to remember ditching the “graduation” Mass at the end where they give you your “diploma” in favor of sipping margaritas at the local pub down the street. A wise choice on my part.
My husband & I had a courthouse wedding agreeing to a church wedding at our 6 anniv. We now have a 3 yr old boy, own our home, & my husband is a stay at home daddy. He makes dinner & I comute. We are nearing the day of our catholic service & discover even with our sucessfull marriage we are still required to attend Pre-Cana. To, what? Learn how to live together. He’s not dead yet, so somethings working?
I had no idea what to expect from this class. Which is why I’m searching the internet. I was hoping for no religious questions & your artical has eased concern about my limited knowledge of my own faith. In it’s place is a deeper concern – that I may not agree with my own faith.
I must say the part that I find most humorous is the people that read this and become so angry by this one persons view of his experience. This is exactly why I am so annoyed with this ritual! I do not understand why two adults cannot just love one anther and the church trust the fact that they know what they’re doing! Instead it is pushed down your throat that it is the churches way, or no way! I’m curious how long the writer of this story has now been married? And how often you aruge about any of the nonrealistic issues that they tend to bring up in these classes! Whether you keep an open mind or not, you and only you can decide how your marriage will turn out…not some dumb classes! If this were the case, the Catholic religion would have a 0% divorce record! The day that happens, perhaps I could take these classes seriously!
I find it funny that some of the people responding here think you have to attend pre-cana in order to discuss serious issues that will come up in your marriage. Isn’t it possible to do your own research before you get married and discuss these issues on your own??
WOW!!! I am so saddened by this. Why bother getting married in the Church if you don’t agree with it? That seems to be a bigger hypocrasy than a chaste priest giving the classes. And although they take a vow a celibacy upon entering the priesthood, it’s not like they never had a “normaL” life beforehand. Some of the best advice (including intimacy issues) I have ever recieved was from out parish paster. I am really looking forward to my pre cana classes. Although, it would seem the difference here is that 1) I know my faith, 2) I know my priest, 3) my SO and I have already covered most of the stuff we need to worry about. We are just looking forward to the “objective” opinion.
Good luck to you..I hope you are willing to put more effort in to your marriage.
[ I did it for the mother-in-law, darling. If I had my druthers I’d have been married in a secular cherry orchard. -B. ]
I feel that after 13 years of being best friends with my SO I already pretty much know about him…. we’ve talked about our future,we’ve made plans, and it’s obvious we can work together… he wants to get married in a church because he believes that his prayers and faith and what caused such a great love in our relationship so that is why we are getting married in church…. I know my faith and my priest and my fiance and I actually met in CCD and I still think Pre-Cana is senseless, pointless, and a total waste of time… studies show that people who belong to a religion divorce less.. but that’s any religion… the statistics don’t better if you are catholic and take pre-cana so then i say belonging to a religion and being an active member of it is enough in the prevention of divorce!!
While I did find this blog to be quite entertaining, I also agree with some others. Why did you get married in the church? My husband and I also faced this decision when we got engaged. We didn’t agree with Pre-canna or some of the church’s teachings, so we just had a civil ceremony. I’m sure some people were disappointed, mostly family, but it was our choice. Just to attend Pre-Canna becuase you wanted to get married in a “church” setting is a poor excuse. Why start your marriage on a false promise, in which you vow to be true to that faith?
[ To make the mother-in-law happy. Isn’t that what it’s all about? -B. ]
I believe my faith and my beliefs are in my heart. I listen to it. I don’t understand why I have to sit and listen to someone tell me differently. I have had this conversation with a Deacon, and he didn’t disagree with me. God is everywhere you need him to be. Not just church. I can speak to him anywhere, anytime, about anything. I don’t need to pay to hear someone else be the in-between. I can do this all by myself. However, I do want to be married in God’s house. I don’t agree with Pre-Cana. Why is that wrong?
LOL – I thought your post was very funny!
Now lets get the facts straight. I’m a typical cradle Catholic and I asked numerous married couples – including my parents about pre-Cana. Nearly everone I talked to said it was very boring and non relevent. Basically, the article that led to this description is accurate even if a few holy-rollers don’t like it.
Religous zelots: Jesus said seek truth and it will set you free. If it is bad then its bad – no need for personal pride (which is a sin) to get in the way.
Now the good news: I expected the worst but to my utter shock the program was actually great. Aparently, after years of critism in San Diego the Catholic church is doing the unthinkable – updating the program, getting good speakers, and providing useful information and a good format. I over heard some basically secular guy talking on his cell phone actually say it was “pretty good”. I attended spring 2006 at mission lu rey? in Oceanside, CA and I would rate it 4.5/5 stars. I took off 1/2 star for the steril rigid prolife couple that spoke at the end all the other speakers were awsome.
I think it is articles like this that finally got the Church to make badly needed improvements to the program. Too bad it wasn’t fixed decades earlier and religious zelots swept the truth under the carpet. God deserves nothing less than our very best.
I originally came to this site to see if the Pre-Cana curriculum was listed somewhere. After attending some 28 years ago, I wanted to see if it’s changed. From the sounds of this very funny post, it appears it hasn’t. I’ve always felt this pre-marriage class for engaged couples was well-intentioned but misguided. People this close to marriage aren’t going to change their minds if they discover incompatibilities during this weekend. So I think the program should enlighten people on WHY the road ahead is going to be rough, even for those highly compatible couples who are crazy in love with each other. There should be discussions about how and why men and women feel, talk, act and THINK differently. Had someone clued me in to this fact back then, it would have saved a lot of headaches. Instead, I had to search out information on my own while struggling to figure out why marriage was harder than it logically should be.
There is another marriage weekend sponsored by the Catholic Church that my married neighbors have gone to. All have described it as a marriage accelerator. If your marriage is good, it makes it exponentially better. And if it’s failing, it speeds up that process also. I think Pre-Cana should do the same thing. It should accelerate people’s knowledge so they can start their marriage on the best foundation to give it a fighting chance. It should use the weekend to educate couples about the confounding differences between males and females. There is a reason why people write plays like “Defending the Caveman” and “I Love You, You’re Perfect, Now Change” and why couples take turns laughing at each other and themselves during them. There are universal truths about how males and females act. Why make young couples learn it by the seat of their pants? I think the leaders of this weekend should talk about books like “Men are from Mars and Women From Venus” or Deborah Tannen’s great series with titles like “That’s not what I meant” and “You just don’t understand.” If they did, maybe the Church could use Pre-Cana to skew the divorce numbers closer to that 0% goal.
My husband and I went to pre-Cana in 1992, and we still joke about the presenters. We also still use the lessons we learned in the class.
After being asked to help out with the program in our parish, I can tell you we swore we would be different than them. But perhaps we had something in common with those geeks, in that we’re still in love with each other after 14 years, and that we were willing to give up a weekend to help young couples have the same happiness.
I’ll follow your writing over the next few years to see if you skewer the kindergarten teacher, the scout leader, or anyone else who willingly gives of themselves to help your family.
I just completed my pre-cana tonight. I actually went in expecting the worst too, but some of the aspects weren’t bad.
The most enjoyable part was where we each wrote a letter to eachother (the presenter mentioned that she and her husband write eachother letters at the beginning of every year and then read them together…something she mentioned that would be very special for them to have when the other one wasn’t around anymore) I thought that was really sweet and will probably start that tradition myself.
What I didn’t like:
1) 95% of the 7 hour course was lecture
2) The battery of information on natural family planning. We also learned that birth control causes divorce–ha! That was fun. You could just sense the discomfort in the faces of the presenters as they described their “sexuality”
3) They made the mass a part of the pre-cana (an extra hour) without informing the crowd, putting our certificates on the alter. My fiance and I could not stay the extra hour and were told that was unacceptable. It took 20 minutes of arguing to be able to get our certificate, which will have to be mailed to us since we did not stay for the mass.
Craziness.
I completely understand the lack of appeal in attending pre-cana. The Catholic church has good intentions but always finds a way to make rituals agonizingly painful. Probably most people marrying in the Church are doing it for their family members. I don’t believe that all this counselling is necessary for couples to have successful marriages. This can be attested by the myriad of successful marriages of Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc., who never attended any of these services. This counselling doesn’t gaurantee successful marriages anyway. The Church, ruled by unmarried men who in my opinion are out of touch with the rest of the world, decide the policies for the masses behind closed doors. The term “Catholic” I learned to mean “universal.” Yet they persist in an elitist fashion by manipulating engaged couples into attending these classes just for the privilege of having the ceremony at the local church.It angers me that the Church can bend the rules to protect the criminal priests that are serving, but heaven forbid that they marry us without all their proper requirements in place.
Hi there. I realize that your pre-cana blog was YEARS ago and you now have at least one child, but I have a question for you. Why go through the pre-cana at all? Catholicism doesn’t mean much to you or to your wife, so why do the charade? I guess that’s 2 questions.
I happen to be one of the “young” (well, 37, so maybe “youngish”) Catholics who does believe in pre-cana, marriage, the body of Christ, the Pope, all of it. There actually are more of us out here than you think.
And I am sorry the class was awful. That stinks. Pre-Cana should be something worth attending instead of a box to check off. There are some good ones out there, taught by married couples (not priests) who can speak from experience. Thanks for the interesting, although somewhat disenheartening read.
[ Well, my wife wanted to get married in her 400-year old village church for sentimental, not religious, reasons and to do that meant playing their game. -B.
Thank you for making me laugh about the one wedding thing I am dreading the most! But alas, the future Mr. just can’t picture a wedding anywhere but the church. I’m trying desperately to have an open mind…
Talk about boring!? This rant against his Pre cana class was almost as boring as the class he discribes. Look, if you don’t want to do what your church asks you to do for marriage prep… then leave. You are not required to be catholic nor to attend their classes. But if you choose to be one then stop your complaining. You are a perfect example of the problem with christians today… there is no zeal for the faith. Many have gimmie attitude. What can I get out of it approach to everything. Only self centered interests are not christian.
You should be grateful the couple leading the class was willing to take the time to care if you have a christian marriage or not. Las Vegas was made for you and your kind. Go and enjoy your “marriage” in the Elvis wedding chaple. I couldn’t care less. Nor should your teachers at pre cana. Some seed will fall on rocky soil we were told. Appearently it has. The couple that waisted your valuble time should just stomp the dust from their feel after dealing with you. And move on to the next town.
You are an idiot!!!!! You and your fiancee obviously don’t understand anything about the Catholic religion.
My fiance & I are just starting to plan our pre-cana. I am catholic, he is Hindu. I, personaly am not thrilled with these classes…only because I cant stand crowds of people I don’t know…not comfortable and I freak out. He, on the other hand, even after I explained what pre-cana is, he is happy about it and is looking forward to it. Something is strange that you and your wife (I am presuming that you two ended up married and still are) both Catholics are talking about Pre-Cana as if it were meant to be torture.. no one WANTS to go to marriage counseling..before being married, but it is insightful, you will learn more in some forced conversations than if you were to just ‘play it by ear’. Pre-Cana forces you to discuss the major things in marriage. You cant deal with that…don’t get married.
PS-
Oh, and PLEASE don’t have children if you cant be forced into disscussing anything.
I find it interesting that the author (Banterist) is afraid to address posted counter-points that expose this coward…
[ It’s a boring topic. Terribly, terribly boring. Let’s move on! -B. ]
OMG – We actually host Pre-Cana in our home. You’ve taken the wind from my sails but I guess that’s the eye opener I needed. Funny account and certainly true. We do serve good snacks and wine on the last night. Maybe we’ll print out your blog to discuss. I’m already committed to a session Friday.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I’m surprised that if you were going to post it for the world to read, you might have done a little research instead of sounding so ignorant!
this is what you get when you don’t have the guts to say out loud you are NOT a Catholic and you will NOT marry in a Catholic ceremony.
Dignity, anyone?
Adulthood, anyone?
ADD? No surprise there. Your ADD nor your heart can handle the discipline. I’m not surprised at all with your negativity. It’s people like you who also feel its appropriate to allow your children to eat snacks during Mass. Do us good Catholics a favor and stay on THAT side of the fence.20 years ago I participated in Pre Cana,didn’t expect a thing,but at least had an open mind.Still married,4 confirmed sons later. You are a joke and the church really doesn’t need anymore “Pretenders to the Throne”..Please do not procreate!!!
GudCathGirl I have a very simple solution. If you don’t like the humor, don’t visit this site.
Whoa……….. I’m a genius! I just solved a problem that has cropped up here on this site many hundreds of times, all with one simple tactic. Man, I wonder why nobody else has ever thought of this………
By the way…….
“stay on THAT side of the fence”
“Please do not procreate!!!”
“You are a joke”
How many times does one have to reiterate “I despise you” in new and innovative ways? Even an imbecile would get that point in the first three sentences. Why did you have to waste so many words (and so much of my time reading them in the hope that perchance there was another thought lurking in all the words, a hope that was unfortunately dashed) saying “I despise you” over and over again?
I’m not Catholic. My denomination does require pre-marriage counselling. But… it is between the couple and the pastor. I think I can retrospectively appreciate that instead of the mass-production approach your article on pre-cana seems to describe (“mass-production”… get it?)
Most of the pastors I have known have been married. That probably helps a bit, too.
The advice was pretty good. More so in retrospect. I espescially liked how Matt (my pastor) opened the first session:
“You want to get married. That’s great. Have you had a fight yet? I mean a real fight, not just a small arguement.”
We answered no.
“Come back to me when you’ve fought. You need to know how each other behave when you get angry. You’re not gonna last unless you know how to handle that. Also, you need to learn how to make up”.
Great advice. We’re still married. Maybe we would have been anyway. But, I think the counselling really helped me learn to appreciate the fight itself. :)
Still, I mildly resented the REQUIREMENT of the counselling… at the time. But, Matt was a good guy. I understood that he (as a representative of the church) should believe that a couple was properly prepared before he put his official stamp on it.
Annnnnyyyyywayyyyy. Best wishes to you and your family, Brian. I hope that six hours wasn’t as torturous as watching 12 sitcoms in a week, and hopefully more productive.
P.S. You don’t know me from a hole in a snowdrift.
If this idiot’s supposed Polish wife is “skeptical” of the church she must have moved to the U.S. very early in life. Anyone who is brought up in a rural area of Poland, and I personally know many, are VERY Catholic and are not skeptical of he church at all. Not to say they don’t have questions, but not like us Americans do. I’ve had some serious debates with my wife who lived in Poland until she came here at the age of 23 and she will not budge no matter how logical or rational your point is. Anyway, I didn’t think Pre-cana was a big deal at all. I thought it was very helpful. Guess it depends on your expectations and probably presenters too. Thanks for the good laugh man . . .
Heheh, this was so funny.
It sure ticked off a lot of readers, didn’t it?
I don’t know why these people are so angry…it seems that if the Church had provided a decent, well-presented, enjoyable, thought provoking class that you might have gotten something out of it-no matter how you went into it.
So, I guess all these pious people follow all the tenets of the church, huh? All virgins at their weddings and all that.
I’m so sure…
I deliberately never file the bookmark to this page. Whenever I get around to organizing bookmarks, I come across this blogpage on Precana and laugh and laugh. It is SO funny! The reality is that pre-cana doesn’t address real problems in real marriages. Things such as addiction, death of a child, stress from other family members, mental illness, abuse, serious & long term illness. Nobody is taught actual communications skills.
I just came across this blog while searching for information on my up-coming Pre Cana sessions (day one of two starts tomorrow). I laughed so hard. Thanks for the entertainment. I’m excited to see what Pre Cana is all about… we have to stay for six hours the first day and five the second.
This experience couldn’t be more different from the one my husband and I had. We were engaged in the first minute and stayed dedicated and open minded and invigorated for the rest of the retreat weekend that followed. I’m sorry you had a bad experience, but it doesn’t really sound like you were looking for a good one… just one to make fun of. In our seven year marriage, my husband and I continue to use catch phrases and philosophies we learned from that weekend to focus our communication. I hope your marriage lasted!
Well, I don’t know if that’s going to work for me, but definitely worked for you! :) Lovely post!
Our question for you-Are you still married after 7 years? We went to precana 30 years ago and enjoyed it – We are still married!!!!
Yes, 9 years, but why do you presume Pre-Cana would have anything at all to do with the longevity of a marriage?
-B.
Pre cana… ha ha ha!!!
Like a priest can understand the marriage to anything but an alter boy’s bare butt. You all place your faith is some silly believe that is 2,000 years old and has about as much physical evidence to anything factual as the existence of the tooth fairy. You know, I wouldn’t bother harping on you morons about this and other stupid religious rituals if it wasn’t for the fact that I didn’t constantly get junk mail and in-person solicitations from churches and other religious freak organizations. I would leave you all alone if you stupid religious Nazi’s would leave me the hell alone, but that seems to be to hard for people. Oh and by the way, faith is nothing more that a piss poor attempt at brainwashing into disbelieving the fact that when you die, everything turns black and you in effect become fertilizer. Place you faith in your children, that’s the only immortality that you are ever going to have. Dummies…
At least science works.