M
metal1633
Guest
Eating and drinking in a state of sin does NOT diminish the Sacrament. It is a Sacrilage. You Eat and Drink CONDEMNATION
- Status
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
Well several of these priests were repeat offenders, continuing their pattern at the parishes they were moved to…so that concerns me, yes. I believe the bishop, after hearing the repeat offense by the same sinner time and time again, should have interceded on behalf of the sinner and the congregation by removing the priest from his responsibilities and insisting he receive psychological treatment.
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
Well certainly thank God that Christ is willing to work through a sinful priest because that is truly merciful on His part to protect all of his flock despite the sin of the priest. I am truly relieved and grateful for this nuance, though it still seems a bit odd. But, hey, it’s God - who am I to question why?
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
Ok, thanks for the clarification…do we still recieve the graces which come with the Sacrament when taken under those circumstances?
B
BayCityRickL
Guest
Having said all this as the experts have, I think the issue at hand is to find another priest who is not in obvious state of sin.
OK, you’re saying, good luck finding one. Well, I say, keep trying. I can’t believe how politicized this whole thing becomes. surely it is the responsibility of any priest to be in a state of grace and to be loyal to the Church. I would say express your views to the priest as you are making your exit from that parish. It is also scriptural to tell somebody when they’re making a mistake or committing a sin, so let’s not sin here by omission, methinks.
You wouldn’t go a corrupt auto mechanic by choice or to an incompetent physician, so why would you acquiesce to taking sacraments from a priest who is sinning notoriously. I think that’s the real issue here. Remember, there was a reason and value to the public repentences that used to take place in the early church, to wit, to ensure the conversion of the sinner. Why throw out this noble practice?
OK, you’re saying, good luck finding one. Well, I say, keep trying. I can’t believe how politicized this whole thing becomes. surely it is the responsibility of any priest to be in a state of grace and to be loyal to the Church. I would say express your views to the priest as you are making your exit from that parish. It is also scriptural to tell somebody when they’re making a mistake or committing a sin, so let’s not sin here by omission, methinks.
You wouldn’t go a corrupt auto mechanic by choice or to an incompetent physician, so why would you acquiesce to taking sacraments from a priest who is sinning notoriously. I think that’s the real issue here. Remember, there was a reason and value to the public repentences that used to take place in the early church, to wit, to ensure the conversion of the sinner. Why throw out this noble practice?
M
mtr01
Guest
Quite correct. And let us not forget the words of St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:Yes, but he insisted that they repent. Likewise, he told the adultress, for example, to “Go and sin no more.”
Jesus still eats with sinners and tax collectors in my parish.Except those that are obstinately impenitent in their sins ought to refrain from participation in “communion” as their communion is lacking without repentance.
Even though you like to color outside the lines, Alan, the Church is patiently and persistently there to correct you.
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
Oh I’m not looking to pass judgement or stir up any trouble at church. But since the priest’s state of grace does not affect the Sacraments we receive from him then I’m fine with leaving the rest between him and God. I was just worried that many followers were cheated out of their graces through no fault of their own since there aren’t any clear signs of trouble in a parish to read from these guys (or weren’t clear signs apparently). Glad to hear the followers were ok through the whole ordeal.
I guess the fact that the Church has not ousted these wayward priests for their addictions, but rather has allowed them to remain priests - and conduct Masses - has me really hesitant to take any real stand against homosexuality when it comes to the gay marriage thing.
You’d think it was clear cut that a pedophile or a gay priest would clearly be wrong and you’d expect some sort of real punishment to be handed down since, if they were exposed they certainly would be tried, convicted and sentenced in the public sector. But the Church not doing anything as drastic as all that tells me there is more to the story about how God expects us to respond to people in general suffering those addictions. I have to trust the Church knows what she is doing so I am uncomfortable taking a firm stand against these same type of sinners who are not priests. I’m really wrestling with the inaction of the Church in this regard…it’s quite troubling to me.
J
JimG
Guest
In many cases the bishop DID insist that the priest receive psychological treatment. After some months of therapy, the psychologists sent them back and said they were cured! So much for psychology. Sounds like this should be the subject of another thread entirely. But that was the whole point of the ecclesiastical conference that was held to establish national policies on sex abuse, which are now in place. For a long time, some bishops considered these men as sinners in need of repentance and reconciliation; while psychologists considered them to be sick and in need of a cure. It seems that the most egregious offenders were simply unrepentant homosexual predators. Those are, I hope, gone now.
B
boppysbud
Guest
Yinyang to put it simply the church settled this question about the sacraments done by sinful priests about seventeen hundred years ago.
It was called the HERESY of Donatism. The Donatists insisted that sacraments done by sinful clerics were invalid, and that former heretics returning to the church had to be re-baptised.
The church ruled that sacraments done by sinful or heretical clerics were still valid, and that heretics returning to the church did not require re-baptism, only confession.
If sacraments given by sinful clerics were invalid, who really knows, the interior dispostion or sinfulness or lack thereof in any cleric? It would put the validity of any sacraments done by any clerics in doubt.
It was called the HERESY of Donatism. The Donatists insisted that sacraments done by sinful clerics were invalid, and that former heretics returning to the church had to be re-baptised.
The church ruled that sacraments done by sinful or heretical clerics were still valid, and that heretics returning to the church did not require re-baptism, only confession.
If sacraments given by sinful clerics were invalid, who really knows, the interior dispostion or sinfulness or lack thereof in any cleric? It would put the validity of any sacraments done by any clerics in doubt.
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
Well it was time somebody thought of this! Thank you 'budboppysbud said:
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
Are they, though? I think that’s what concerns me…how many are still in the system?
Not that it really matters now, though, since my main concern about the validity of sacraments for the parishioners is resolved. That’s really why I raised the question to begin with, I wanted to make sure we were ok regardless of the status of our priests. Now that I know we aren’t in jeopardy because of them then I guess I can pretty much let the issue go - leaving it in the hands of the Church.
Still, it makes me hesitant to respond to non-clergy homosexuals with such a black and white conviction as many orthodox catholics and Alan Keyes would have me do. I honestly don’t know what it right or wrong anymore in that regard because of the mixed signals the Church is sending out.
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
Thanks, BobbysBud.
V
Viki59
Guest
Practicing homosexuality is a sin; having homosexual urges is a temptation to be resisted.
We are to love the sinners and hate the sin: a distinction that is not really that hard, but that many people have a great deal of trouble understanding. They tend to see it as hypocrisy. But really, it’s what Christ does for all of us: loves us and tries to heal us of our sins.
T
Teresa9
Guest
Dear friends
Every person alive on this earth is a sinner, throughout all history there have only been two who have no sin and that is Jesus and Mary. All others are sinners and sin to some degree or other, therefore every Priest on this earth is also a sinner, as such, their Priestly vocation to be ‘another Christ’ for you is not impaired, neither is their capability to perform the Sacrament of the Eucharist, even if the Priest does not believe that at this point the materials of bread and wine become the body, blood, spirit and divinity of Christ.
God Bless you and much love and peace to you all
Teresa
Every person alive on this earth is a sinner, throughout all history there have only been two who have no sin and that is Jesus and Mary. All others are sinners and sin to some degree or other, therefore every Priest on this earth is also a sinner, as such, their Priestly vocation to be ‘another Christ’ for you is not impaired, neither is their capability to perform the Sacrament of the Eucharist, even if the Priest does not believe that at this point the materials of bread and wine become the body, blood, spirit and divinity of Christ.
God Bless you and much love and peace to you all
Teresa
K
KCT
Guest
Masses by sinning priests? I wasn’t aware that priests were perfect!
—KCT
—KCT
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
I was following the mass extra closely this week, particularly the Eucharist part and had that 'lightbulb moment"…
Father washes his hands before he begins the Eucharistic prayer and at the time says “Wash away my inequities, clean me from my sins”…
Do you think that’s what keeps the Sacrament secure for the rest of the congregation? It would make sens…even though it isn’t confessed to a confessor, at least the ritual purifies that sacrament for that mass, no?
Father washes his hands before he begins the Eucharistic prayer and at the time says “Wash away my inequities, clean me from my sins”…
Do you think that’s what keeps the Sacrament secure for the rest of the congregation? It would make sens…even though it isn’t confessed to a confessor, at least the ritual purifies that sacrament for that mass, no?
Y
YinYangMom
Guest
I’m not expecting them to be perfect…but, c’mon, repeated pedophilia and homosexual acts is among the ‘biggies’. I was wondering if sins that huge would affect the congregation unknowingly. Apparently not, though, which is a huge relief.
S
stbruno
Guest
Last year in This Rock magazine, an article was written by a priest out east that just bolstered my faith in the church and most importantly in the sacraments. He said, St.Francis deSales who rose up at the height of some serious heretical times in the church, said: Sacraments are priest-proof. All sacraments are meetings with Christ and He certainly is present at all of them. And there is no blemish on him despite the priest performing them. Yes, all the masses are valid unless the faculties of the priest have been removed by his bishop. Thank God!
- Status