RCIA/OCIA (I'm gonna be Catholic soon)

[Christ_empowered]

I never could quite understand Catholicism. Saints…purgatory…annulments…???

The rcc does a great deal of good work in this world . Something of a Dorothy day fan, here…

 

[JLB]

I spent two or three years doing some searching and prayer before last year, when I decided to join the RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults) class. RCIA (now called OCIA for Order of Christian Initiation for Adults) is how you join the Catholic Church as an adult.

I've gone through classes since last September every week (also to Mass every week) and I've been loving it, soaking up the knowledge gained therein. To me, the Catholic Church feels like the ultimate fulfillment of the faith that I've always practiced. Even if I wasn't practicing the Catholic faith, this is the same God I've always known and loved and the foundations laid for me in my youth at the baptist church are present here as well.

Last Sunday was the Rite of Election for me where catechumins (non-baptised) and candidates (baptisted but not yet confirmed such as myself) take another step closer to receiving the Sacraments at Easter Vigil in April.

We are all so proud of you and your commitment to the Lord.

He loves you dearly.

 

[GodsGrace]

I focus on where in this interchange we do or might disagree. I appreciate our agreements.

Hi Vinny,,,I almost missed this post!
Very happy that I didn't.

I maintain that of course Roman Catholicism (likewise Methodism, Elimism, Orthodoxism, etc) is neither the church, nor a church, but at best of the church (Mt.16:18) and has local churches. My nose is not me, but is a part of me: me is the sum of all my parts. If my nose says it’s me, besides becoming a mouth, it has sinned.

You quote Matthew 16:18 and then go on to state a nuance I don't quite understand.
My understanding of Matthew is that there is only one church. I suppose you mean that any denomination is a PART of this one church.
A PART of a big institution.

But I certainly don't believe Jesus meant there to be many denominations.
I believe He meant to have only one church....HIS church.

The reformation was necessary, in my opinion, however, it has created many problems and one is having different denominations.

The early church worked so hard to reject heresies and yet we have heresies in our denominations today.
I see the word CHRISTIAN under a person's avatar and then find out they don't believe Jesus is God or they don't believe in the Trinity and other such belief systems.

To some extent all Christian denominations, and inside or outside such, Christians, tap into the original church root. But many ideas, such as Apostolic Succession, have departed from the core NT basis, as did the slow move from local plural episkopoi (later called bishops), to key-city-area episkopoi (eg Alexandria, Jerusalem, Rome), and a primus inter pares pope (Rome), popes being first mooted generations after Peter. As early as Ignatius you can see change from the NT core position, with a church transfer of authority from individual priests—all Christians are priests—to local bishops.

Agreed. I believe this was due to the fact that it was necessary to have authority in the church in order to keep it consolidated. Of course the CC went much too far in this respect since persons cannot be forced to be a believer...
Re the Pope...you probably know that there were 5 popes in the important areas...3 of which you state...they were:
Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople. It was decided, at some point, to have only 1 Pope and it ended up being the one in Rome since by then the power of the church was in Rome. Can't remember when,,,but within the first few hundred years. Thus the CC declares that Peter was the first Pope...in a way they're correct...but not totally. He was ONE of the first popes and since he was in Rome, the lineage goes back to him.

I DO believe even Protestantism needs some kind of authority.
I read too many strange ideas on these forums...I had started a thread once about needing
a Protestant Pope. I didn't do too well !

OUR belief must be personal....
but the church should be one.

At best, Catholicism is of the original church, but it is not the original church. C S Lewis spoke of Mere Christianity, the mutual corridor leading to many denominational rooms, of which Rome is one.

Don't agree.
I believe the Catholic church is the original church.
What other denomination was around back then?
None.
The Apostles taught others and so on---the succession you mentioned...
the church then was universal,,,,catholic,,,and Peter was one of the Popes in Rome, thus the succession.
Peter, btw, was a BISHOP,,,,as the other 4 they were lovingly called fathers...papa...pope.

I have happily worshipped in Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Salvationist, Baptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Reformation, Brethren, churches/groups, all reflecting in some ways and degrees the corridor. Unlike many Protestant denominations, commendably Catholicism has not caved to the current spirit of the Age.

I always wonder how my old denominations are faring.
I'm far away now and only the CC is available to me, and I do have connections there after 25 years and living in a small town.
If you care to comment, if you have knowledge..it would be:
AofG and Nazarene

You said, [we must have faith in the CORRECT God]. I say, I decapitalise to say that there is not a correct god, since there is no incorrect god to contrast God to, and the language of polytheism should long ago have been killed off by the stronger monotheism of the NT over the OT revelation: there is one god, God, and God is the eternal society of father, son, and spirit, with a NT bias to use that term for the father (eg 1 Cor.8:6). BTW, the buddha never claimed to be a god, though Emp. Domitian did.

But Buddha is worshipped as god.
This is why I say that an incorrect god can be worshipped.
For instance, the American Indian worshipped the correct God...
they didn't now His name, but they knew he was spirit and "in the sky".
The Pacha Mama of South America would also not be the correct God.

PS: A complexity is that the terms θεοι/elohim, have biblical scope wider than strict monotheism (eg Jhn.10:34)—levels of meaning. My context, however, is of philosophical monotheism, where the so-called gods/goddesses translate out as mere divinities under deity.

OK. Agreed. Elohim could mean any god...a divinity.
But do you believe worshipping ANY of these divinities could be salvific?

Salus intra ecclesiam, denotes the idea of an exclusive salvation-level within Christ’s church, while not in itself implying that other deific levels are absent outside of the church. One cannot worship any other type of god, for polytheism is incorrect: there are no god-types. One can worship God while having different concepts of God, though I think ultimate salvation is deeper than any act, namely a core desire for God. On salvation-levels, see https://archive.org/details/salvation-now-and-life-beyond-241212/Salvation Now and Life Beyond - 250413.pdf.

Will check out your link.

 

[GodsGrace]

I focus on where in this interchange we do or might disagree. I appreciate our agreements.

I maintain that of course Roman Catholicism (likewise Methodism, Elimism, Orthodoxism, etc) is neither the church, nor a church, but at best of the church (Mt.16:18) and has local churches. My nose is not me, but is a part of me: me is the sum of all my parts. If my nose says it’s me, besides becoming a mouth, it has sinned. To some extent all Christian denominations, and inside or outside such, Christians, tap into the original church root. But many ideas, such as Apostolic Succession, have departed from the core NT basis, as did the slow move from local plural episkopoi (later called bishops), to key-city-area episkopoi (eg Alexandria, Jerusalem, Rome), and a primus inter pares pope (Rome), popes being first mooted generations after Peter. As early as Ignatius you can see change from the NT core position, with a church transfer of authority from individual priests—all Christians are priests—to local bishops.

At best, Catholicism is of the original church, but it is not the original church. C S Lewis spoke of Mere Christianity, the mutual corridor leading to many denominational rooms, of which Rome is one. I have happily worshipped in Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Salvationist, Baptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Reformation, Brethren, churches/groups, all reflecting in some ways and degrees the corridor. Unlike many Protestant denominations, commendably Catholicism has not caved to the current spirit of the Age.

You said, [we must have faith in the CORRECT God]. I say, I decapitalise to say that there is not a correct god, since there is no incorrect god to contrast God to, and the language of polytheism should long ago have been killed off by the stronger monotheism of the NT over the OT revelation: there is one god, God, and God is the eternal society of father, son, and spirit, with a NT bias to use that term for the father (eg 1 Cor.8:6). BTW, the buddha never claimed to be a god, though Emp. Domitian did.

PS: A complexity is that the terms θεοι/elohim, have biblical scope wider than strict monotheism (eg Jhn.10:34)—levels of meaning. My context, however, is of philosophical monotheism, where the so-called gods/goddesses translate out as mere divinities under deity.

Salus intra ecclesiam, denotes the idea of an exclusive salvation-level within Christ’s church, while not in itself implying that other deific levels are absent outside of the church. One cannot worship any other type of god, for polytheism is incorrect: there are no god-types. One can worship God while having different concepts of God, though I think ultimate salvation is deeper than any act, namely a core desire for God. On salvation-levels, see https://archive.org/details/salvation-now-and-life-beyond-241212/Salvation Now and Life Beyond - 250413.pdf.

Looks like a book I'd have to read.
Sorry.
I'm having a problem with my eyes and am deciding on an operation.
Just cataracts...but getting worse.
Guess I have to...

 

[GodsGrace]

I never could quite understand Catholicism. Saints…purgatory…annulments…???

The rcc does a great deal of good work in this world . Something of a Dorothy day fan, here…

Won't discuss saints or purgatory on this thread...
just will say that Jesus IS taught as being our savior.

I DO agree with annulments.
A marriage is an agreement made between two persons and God.
This is, thus, not a promise between the two persons,,,but an oath.
With God it becomes an oath,,,more than a promise.

IF the marriage is performed under certain conditions, it would necessarily become null and void.
Some conditions are:

• Lack of consent: The petitioner didn't intend to be permanently married or faithful
• Lack of capacity: The petitioner was underage, mentally ill, or had a substance abuse problem
• Lack of form: The marriage didn't follow Catholic canonical form
• Preexisting marriage: One spouse was already married
• Fraud: One spouse tricked the other into marriage
• Closely related: The spouses are too closely related

source: https://www.google.com/search?q=rea...3i10i160l3.6767j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[Christ_empowered]

I understand civil, secular annulments. Marriage is a contract. Dissolution of the contract is divorce. Declaring it null is an annulment.

I don’t get marriages that resulted in kids and a secular divorce resulting in a church annulment. Or why that should be necessary?

 

[GodsGrace]

I understand civil, secular annulments. Marriage is a contract. Dissolution of the contract is divorce. Declaring it null is an annulment.

I don’t get marriages that resulted in kids and a secular divorce resulting in a church annulment. Or why that should be necessary?

Where are children mentioned?
If there are children, it becomes more problematic.
UNLESS
The father is beating a child
or
Unless the father is squandering the families money and they are forced to live in poverty due to the father's habits.

There are some situations that DEMAND that an oath made before God be broken and the parties be liberated from each other.

An oath made before God is to be taken seriously...more than a contract signed at city hall.
God MUST BE obeyed and honored in an oath, marriage, situation.

If any of the situations I've listed become reality,,,,the oath is absolved because the oath on the part of the person has been broken.

It's like a bilateral covenant that has conditions that must be met.

 

[Christ_empowered]

The Kennedy family were always getting high profile Catholic annulments back in the day. The rcc has some process where people can get a church annulment after a secular divorce.

 

[GodsGrace]

The Kennedy family were always getting high profile Catholic annulments back in the day. The rcc has some process where people can get a church annulment after a secular divorce.

I think they got special treatment.
Which is wrong.

 

[Vinny37]

Hi Vinny,,,I almost missed this post!
Very happy that I didn't.


You quote Matthew 16:18 and then go on to state a nuance I don't quite understand.
My understanding of Matthew is that there is only one church. I suppose you mean that any denomination is a PART of this one church.
A PART of a big institution.

But I certainly don't believe Jesus meant there to be many denominations.
I believe He meant to have only one church....HIS church.

The reformation was necessary, in my opinion, however, it has created many problems and one is having different denominations.

The early church worked so hard to reject heresies and yet we have heresies in our denominations today.
I see the word CHRISTIAN under a person's avatar and then find out they don't believe Jesus is God or they don't believe in the Trinity and other such belief systems.

Agreed. I believe this was due to the fact that it was necessary to have authority in the church in order to keep it consolidated. Of course the CC went much too far in this respect since persons cannot be forced to be a believer...
Re the Pope...you probably know that there were 5 popes in the important areas...3 of which you state...they were:
Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople. It was decided, at some point, to have only 1 Pope and it ended up being the one in Rome since by then the power of the church was in Rome. Can't remember when,,,but within the first few hundred years. Thus the CC declares that Peter was the first Pope...in a way they're correct...but not totally. He was ONE of the first popes and since he was in Rome, the lineage goes back to him.

I DO believe even Protestantism needs some kind of authority.
I read too many strange ideas on these forums...I had started a thread once about needing
a Protestant Pope. I didn't do too well !

OUR belief must be personal....
but the church should be one.

Don't agree.
I believe the Catholic church is the original church.
What other denomination was around back then?
None.
The Apostles taught others and so on---the succession you mentioned...
the church then was universal,,,,catholic,,,and Peter was one of the Popes in Rome, thus the succession.
Peter, btw, was a BISHOP,,,,as the other 4 they were lovingly called fathers...papa...pope.



I always wonder how my old denominations are faring.
I'm far away now and only the CC is available to me, and I do have connections there after 25 years and living in a small town.
If you care to comment, if you have knowledge..it would be:
AofG and Nazarene

But Buddha is worshipped as god.
This is why I say that an incorrect god can be worshipped.
For instance, the American Indian worshipped the correct God...
they didn't now His name, but they knew he was spirit and "in the sky".
The Pacha Mama of South America would also not be the correct God.


OK. Agreed. Elohim could mean any god...a divinity.
But do you believe worshipping ANY of these divinities could be salvific?

Will check out your link.

I think it would be unproductive time to rehash or to strengthen all of my disputed prior positions, and one or two have only dawned to me as a light through fog, over many a long year. If I have offered some good seed, may it in time grow. But none of that seed, good or otherwise, is essential to good Christian life. Rome is not my favourite home, obviously, but I could live happily in a local Bible believing Roman Catholic church, without fully accepting Catholicism on a fair number of its doctrines. I liken each denomination to a class within a school, each teacher being good in some subjects, and poor in others.

I have heard Catholics before, thank God for the Reformation, and wish that Luther were back. In his days, Catholicism was very short of catholic Christianity. I agree that lacking a hierarchy, Protestantism has tended to anarchy. There are strengths and weaknesses both sides of those tendencies, and likewise between communism and capitalism.

I hold that historically the Roman Catholic concept of the Latin term, pope, developed in leaps and bounds. Yes, you may say in Latin-speak, that the Greek patriarchs were popes, both variant forms of abba/father (αββα/πατηρ Gal.4:6), but it was not their self-designation, and would you say that the apostle Paul was a pope (1 Cor.4:17)? Rome’s earlier primus inter pares claim, and Gregory the Great’s move to assume secular control, took it way beyond a biblical ecclesiology.

Peter was of course an apostle (not all apostles were elders/presbyters (Ac.15:6) and not all elders were apostles).

Peter also identified an elder (1 Pt.5:1-2: πρεσβυτερος did not mean ‘priest’, but they did practice oversight—επισκοπω; Ac.20:17,28—επισκοποι).

So yes, in today’s parlance but with yesteryear’s meaning, Peter was a bishop, howbeit historically never to Rome’s church.

As to division, church history is replete with such divisions, certainly in the anti-heresy creeds which cut out the weeds. The fact remains that many heretics were still loyal to Christ, even if befuddled. Even in Paul’s day, Corinth showed fractures (I am of Paul!). Christ knew it would happen within his church. It’s part of what we are, both stable and dynamic.

From within with Roman Catholic tradition, Hans Küng said, “When we look at the lost unity of the Church of Christ and the considerable rigidity of the Catholic Church, the question arises with great force; is there a way back, which would also be a way forward, from this primacy of dominion to the old primacy of service and ministry?” (Küng’s The Church, 1986:469).

With you I sigh whenever I find a patently non-Christian, waving the Christian flag. I’m reading Breda Cox’ Fashionable Goodness, which shows how Goodness was not fashionable among many Anglicans in Jane Austen’s days—what’s new? Jane bucked the trend, and, one might say, preached pre-evangelism.

I accept that sincerely worshipping the divinities, even saints, can be salvific, as can going to hospital. Salvation is a big term. I do not believe that any rite or confession is necessary for ultimate life, howbeit potentially beneficial to life in the here and now. Paganism was at Primary school level; Christianity is at tertiary level, so vastly more salvific.

 

[Vinny37]

Looks like a book I'd have to read.
Sorry.
I'm having a problem with my eyes and am deciding on an operation.
Just cataracts...but getting worse.
Guess I have to...

Yeah, in the same boat with cataracts.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yeah, in the same boat with cataracts.

Let's pray for each other...to be calm in facing this thing.
We're in God's hands...truly.
I won't say more...maybe after we both have the "procedure" done.

Will reply to the post above in the a.m.
Too tired due to some circumstances and I enjoy your posts.

 

[Vinny37]

Let's pray for each other...to be calm in facing this thing.
We're in God's hands...truly.
I won't say more...maybe after we both have the "procedure" done.

Will reply to the post above in the a.m.
Too tired due to some circumstances and I enjoy your posts.

Blessings.

 

[GodsGrace]

I think it would be unproductive time to rehash or to strengthen all of my disputed prior positions, and one or two have only dawned to me as a light through fog, over many a long year. If I have offered some good seed, may it in time grow. But none of that seed, good or otherwise, is essential to good Christian life. Rome is not my favourite home, obviously, but I could live happily in a local Bible believing Roman Catholic church, without fully accepting Catholicism on a fair number of its doctrines. I liken each denomination to a class within a school, each teacher being good in some subjects, and poor in others.

You've perfectly explained what I've been doing for the past 25 years.
I have priest friends and am involved in the local parish.
I joined this forum 10 years ago because I really needed fellowship with my fellow Protestant believers.
The CC is good if it can be taken as you've described.
Too many doctrine that were added on after the first few hundred years that are not biblical, and which some priests don't even believe to be correct.

I have heard Catholics before, thank God for the Reformation, and wish that Luther were back. In his days, Catholicism was very short of catholic Christianity. I agree that lacking a hierarchy, Protestantism has tended to anarchy. There are strengths and weaknesses both sides of those tendencies, and likewise between communism and capitalism.

Agreed.

I hold that historically the Roman Catholic concept of the Latin term, pope, developed in leaps and bounds. Yes, you may say in Latin-speak, that the Greek patriarchs were popes, both variant forms of abba/father (αββα/πατηρ Gal.4:6), but it was not their self-designation, and would you say that the apostle Paul was a pope (1 Cor.4:17)? Rome’s earlier primus inter pares claim, and Gregory the Great’s move to assume secular control, took it way beyond a biblical ecclesiology.

Agreed.
Re Peter. He was a Bishop. The head of an important area...I DO believe he was in Rome and was the Bishop of Rome. If it's true,,his body is buried under St. Peter's Basilica.

As to being a Pope,,,he was called Papa,,,as were the other 4 Bishops of the 5 important geographical areas of the time. I wouldn't say he was THE POPE, as it's understood today. But let the Catholics be happy..it's other matters that disturb me more. One is purgatory...another is confession...I have my reasons. Some need to have their sins confessed and absolved...so be it. (by a priest).

Peter was of course an apostle (not all apostles were elders/presbyters (Ac.15:6) and not all elders were apostles).

Peter also identified an elder (1 Pt.5:1-2: πρεσβυτερος did not mean ‘priest’, but they did practice oversight—επισκοπω; Ac.20:17,28—επισκοποι).

So yes, in today’s parlance but with yesteryear’s meaning, Peter was a bishop, howbeit historically never to Rome’s church.

Yes. I know that many believe Peter was never even in Rome.
I can't debate this.
Who could know for sure?

As to division, church history is replete with such divisions, certainly in the anti-heresy creeds which cut out the weeds. The fact remains that many heretics were still loyal to Christ, even if befuddled. Even in Paul’s day, Corinth showed fractures (I am of Paul!). Christ knew it would happen within his church. It’s part of what we are, both stable and dynamic.

OK. But Jesus also spoke about HIS church and said we should be one.
I'll tell you why the divisions bother me....
There can only be one truth -- or there is no truth.

From within with Roman Catholic tradition, Hans Küng said, “When we look at the lost unity of the Church of Christ and the considerable rigidity of the Catholic Church, the question arises with great force; is there a way back, which would also be a way forward, from this primacy of dominion to the old primacy of service and ministry?” (Küng’s The Church, 1986:469).

Ah. My wish. To go back to the first or second century and just stay there.

With you I sigh whenever I find a patently non-Christian, waving the Christian flag. I’m reading Breda Cox’ Fashionable Goodness, which shows how Goodness was not fashionable among many Anglicans in Jane Austen’s days—what’s new? Jane bucked the trend, and, one might say, preached pre-evangelism.

Before the 1800's I believe it was about behavior. Then the born-again idea set in.
I'm not sure it was such a good idea...but not to debate it here.
I found this link re the book...it sounds really interesting:

“Fashionable Goodness” by Brenda S. Cox ~ Book Excerpt and Giveaway

Today’s post is about Brenda Cox and her just-published Fashionable Goodness: Christianity in Jane Austen’s England. You can follow the other blog posts on this tour here. [See at the end of this p…

janeausteninvermont.blog

I accept that sincerely worshipping the divinities, even saints, can be salvific, as can going to hospital. Salvation is a big term. I do not believe that any rite or confession is necessary for ultimate life, howbeit potentially beneficial to life in the here and now. Paganism was at Primary school level; Christianity is at tertiary level, so vastly more salvific.

I like Romans 1:18-20 or thereabouts.
It seems to explain all.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Confirmed and received Eucharist

I received the gift of a chaplet with a card with the prayer of the Divine Mercy - which is a prayer that has appealed to me personally, and I wish to pray it often. I have since looked up Saint Faustina and read some of her diary entries, too.

 

[GodsGrace]

Confirmed and received Eucharist

I received the gift of a chaplet with a card with the prayer of the Divine Mercy - which is a prayer that has appealed to me personally, and I wish to pray it often. I have since looked up Saint Faustina and read some of her diary entries, too.

Very beautiful prayer.
Nice to know about some saints that were blessed by Gid in a special way.
I studied Teresa D'Avila's book some years ago. Good. THE SEVEN ROOMS OF THE CASTLE,,,,I think.

I know you'll keep your eyes on Jesus, who went to the cross for you.

It was a special moment in life for you.
God bless you with His presence.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I mentioned choosing Saint Thorlak as my confirmation Saint, and that he was believed to have been autistic.

Here is a page from a website about it all:

The Prayer of Consecration via Saint Thorlak | Autism Consecrated

by Father Mark P. Nolette – Autistic Priest/Hermit Many autistic people, as well as their families, friends, and other fellow Catholics, have found in Saint Thorlak a powerful and compassionate intercessor before the Lord. Saint Thorlak, …

autismconsecrated.com

Here is a prayer to choose to consecrate one's autism:

Holy Thorlak,

I come before you as a Christian and an autistic person.

As a Christian, I seek to love the Lord with all my heart, with all my mind, with all my soul, with all my body, and with all my strength. I seek to love my neighbor as myself. I seek to see Christ in the least of my sisters and brothers, as He has taught me. I seek to be close to Him always; close in prayer, close in the Sacraments, close as I read the Scriptures, close as I love others, close as I welcome the love of others for me.

As an autistic person, I know that Christ is the Truth, the ultimate Source of all truth that I seek. I know that God is Love. When I love anything intensely, I am beginning to know it as God does. I want to love as God does. I can feel that love, but I don’t always know how to show it. I don’t always know how to speak or act when I’m with other people. I have to confront great anxieties and fears at times. Certain sounds, smells, colors, or other things really hurt me and make it very hard for me to be with other people. I don’t know all the social codes and misunderstand what others say, and they misunderstand what I say. I often have a hard time knowing what I feel, let alone expressing my emotions. Some people see me as someone they would rather not be with, or someone who has nothing to offer. I desperately want to do the right thing, but I often don’t know what the right thing is.

Holy Thorlak, I need your help. In your life, you had to struggle to speak and be understood. You felt isolated and misunderstood. You felt anxieties and depression. And yet, in your love of God you found strength in your weakness and became a compassionate shepherd to those whom God entrusted to your care.

Holy Thorlak, I now entrust myself to your care. I wish to consecrate my autism to God by following the way you exemplify. I offer my weaknesses – my anxieties and fears, my depression and awkwardness, my sensitivities and my isolation. I offer my gifts – my great love for my interests, my desire for truth and integrity, my passion for justice, and every other gift I have received from God. I consecrate all of this, all that my autism has given me, to God.

Holy Thorlak, pray for me, that my autism may be a means of God’s love, wisdom and strength. Guide me and show me how I can best serve God and others through my autism. Show me how what I thought of as weakness, or what some people called weakness, is really a way for God to bless me and to bless many through me.

Holy Thorlak, I ask all of this of you that I might become a true follower of the Lord just as you were in your life. Please pray for me to the Lord that He might bless me and bless others through me. Let me be that mustard seed, that measure of yeast, that seemingly small and insignificant thing that becomes a great blessing by God’s love. Let it all happen for your own mission, Holy Thorlak, and for God’s glory. May Our Blessed Mother, Mary, and all the angels and saints join you in prayer for me as I consecrate my autism.

May it all be according to God’s Word, now and forever.

Amen.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Very beautiful prayer.
Nice to know about some saints that were blessed by Gid in a special way.
I studied Teresa D'Avila's book some years ago. Good. THE SEVEN ROOMS OF THE CASTLE,,,,I think.

I know you'll keep your eyes on Jesus, who went to the cross for you.

It was a special moment in life for you.
God bless you with His presence.

I think I should study the lives of many of the Saints. I think it is very motivating for me to see how others served God and how He worked through them.

 

[GodsGrace]

I mentioned choosing Saint Thorlak as my confirmation Saint, and that he was believed to have been autistic.

Here is a page from a website about it all:

The Prayer of Consecration via Saint Thorlak | Autism Consecrated

by Father Mark P. Nolette – Autistic Priest/Hermit Many autistic people, as well as their families, friends, and other fellow Catholics, have found in Saint Thorlak a powerful and compassionate intercessor before the Lord. Saint Thorlak, …

autismconsecrated.com

Here is a prayer to choose to consecrate one's autism:

You might remember that my 24 year old granddaughter is on the scale....not so bad so we're thankful of that, but as you know, it affects everything.

Keep her in your prayers.

 

[evenifigoalone]

You might remember that my 24 year old granddaughter is on the scale....not so bad so we're thankful of that, but as you know, it affects everything.

Keep her in your prayers.

It does.

I can add her to my regular prayers. If I may ask, what is her name? I will probably add on to pray for all autistic people as well, but if it's okay I can pray for her by name.