Attend Mass or minister to the poor?

[Lapey]

:clapping: True. One of the last times I attended a Mass at the territorial parish for Catholics in my neck of the woods, the priest said something about the poor which turned me off from attending there. I’ve been to a Mass there once since. But I called ahead to get the celebrant schedule for that day. But since then I discovered the Baptismal policy of the parish and now both are issues for me and I can’t bring myself to attend there at all.

The baptismal policy???

 

[Lapey]

He is missing the Marks of the Church which are (1) the Gospel of forgiveness in Christ that makes us right with God and the benefits of the Holy Eucharist where we receives the Body and Blood of Christ who carried our sins on Calvery and wahed them away.
How does he know that it isn’t the devil that is calling him?

I hope I don’t seem condesending, but the four Marks of the Church are,“One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostallic Church.”

I get your point and agree.

 

[Lapey]

I find it disturbing that every single person responding to this has assumed that it’s all the guy’s fault. Perhaps the Catholic churches in his neck of the woods really deserve these criticisms.

Of course he’s being hopelessly unfair to the Catholic Church as a whole, but *his *experience may to some extent justify his conclusions. Maybe the Catholics he knows act as if it is an either/or.

Edwin

In my experience, when people leave the Church for a list of reasons such as this OP has stated, there was a serious disconnect before the decision was made to even consider leaving. A disconnect from truth of the Church’s true teaching and the missionary nature of the entire Roman Catholic Church.

If he cannot see the truths of the Eucharist, and the Heavenly worship of the mass, it is because of these disconnects, how is it the fault of the priest or the parish. We must make an effort to learn our faith! The twelve apostles made a decision to follow Christ and learn, yet one of them still after all he saw and lived, left Jesus and betrayed Him.

A person, who has been given the gospels and has been given the grace of Jesus in the Sacraments, has to be willing to listen to God, not his misguided and misinformed conscience. It is required to properly form the conscience in order to make the right decisions, not the popular or easy ones.

There is no way that the Holy Spirit would lead a person away from the Catholic Church unless this Church is not the truth, unless She is not the Church established on the Rock with Jesus as it’s cornerstone. As other’s have stated, he may have been led to start a service to the poor ministry, but from within Mother Church.

 

[wisdomseeker]

A fellow I know has left the CC. He said he didn’t feel like he was benefiting from attending Mass. He claimed he prayed for a long time, read scripture, attended different parishes but ultimately felt the Holy Spirit guiding him away from the CC and to a poor church in a poor part of town. He is now working with that pastor and having bible studies for kids. He has helped in building some low income houses, feeding the poorer people and he feels that’s the reason God called him away from the CC is because the CC has failed in those respects and none of the other parishes were offering anything for the poor, the teens, bible studies, etc. He says the Mass it not true worship because Catholics just attend and forget about the poor and about teaching the scriptures. He doesn’t believe the CC anymore because of all the scandal and that God is NOT looking for glorious buildings which Catholicism is full of. He believes that is the reason the western churches, be it CC or mainline denominations are loosing members by the millions.

Regrettably he is now full of anti-catholic rhetoric which I have heard time and time again. How would you reply? Not the anti-catholic rhetoric; that I can deal with.

I am not surprise by this. Millions have done the same. They have failed in their faith. They have let pride into their hearts as your friend thinks that he is better than those who sinned in the Church. He has condemned the Church for many things. He doesnt know what he is talking about. he is been deceived by those who have been deceived themselves. our Lord said: the house built on teh Rock, the waters and storms will come but they will destroy that house for it is built on the Rock. that you have it. our Lord knew that the storm and waters would hit HIs House, but she will not be shaken.

 

[TobyLue]

If he does understand and still rejects it he is in serious spiritual peril.

I did explain to him what “no Salvation outside the CC” means, and quoted him “The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me” and if he was rejecting the CC, he was rejecting the Father and thus putting his soul in danger. He said he didn’t believe that to be true. I told him that Truth was Truth and didn’t depend on his belief.

I have never encountered a Catholic Church yet, that did not have an SSVP kitchen in its basement (even if it was just one shelf of non-perishable groceries), and a stash of cots in a side room, for the purpose of feeding and housing the homeless and the desperately poor.

Actually there is a very active SVdP society in his parish and his parents are very involved in it. However, by the time this conference started, this guy seemed to already have a foot outside the CC as he was dating non-Catholics and besides attending Mass at that time he would also attend the services at his girlfriend’s churches. BTW the SVdP kitchen is massive and many city organizations and even many non-Catholic congregations will volunteer to go help in groups at the kitchen which serves three meals a day to 200-300 people at each meal.

If you see a lack in your local parish, this is a call from God to fill it.

Exactly. I’m not young anymore and I told him that my vision for him was to lead a youth group in the parish. He has good leadership qualities but I think some here are correct that it is his ego, and not being able to put up with the priest that was his problem. If your thinking why I didn’t start or approach the priest was due to distance, travel time, gas (you know the economy) family health issues, I switched to a parish that is just about 3 minutes away and also has very reverent Masses, very orthodox homilies, great organ music (sorry no guitar and folk kumbaya Masses).

My problem is not been able to think of responses on the spot. My brain does not work that fast at my age. I questioned why the Holy Spirit would tell a group one thing since that group believed in all honesty they were being led by the Spirit and another group felt the same way but was in contradiction. He said that maybe the Holy Spirit was telling them different things so they would come together to find the true answer. I should have told him that his thinking was downright heretical because God cannot deceive which is what God would be doing by telling somebody or group a wrong thing.

  For one even though he was 18 and making his own decision, he was still living at home and his parents would let him do whatever he wanted to and never sat down and discussed with him the dangers of attending non-Catholic  services.

The parish he was attending is very orthodox in its teachings. My son attended this parish’s school and catechesis was never a problem. This school continues to get high national awards for its orthodox religious teachings. However, I think this guy had issues with the priest. This priest is a great homilist, is super in the confessional, celebrates the Mass with such reverence but you don’t want to actually be “friends” with him. You have to be in the inner circle so to speak. The priest seems to be kinda cold towards the SVdP because he can’t dictate to them how to use the funds.

In my experience when people leave the CC one of the main, if not the main, reasons is because something happened that they got upset at the priest and inwardly will lash out at the CC by leaving. I knew for about two years that he was very close to leaving the Church because he would tell me things about the CC that I have seen in this and other forums that are blatantly anti-Catholic. He started reading the bible more and coming up with questions that I told him I knew for certainty that he didn’t come up with those questions himself but were put in his mind by attending non-Catholic services and also when he was in college joining a Christian bible study group and going downtown and asking people “are you saved?” Get the drift of which way he was drifting towards? I told him (since I would communicate with him mostly through e-mail) that if he had any questions regarding the Church to let me know and I would give him a full explanation. He questioned me as to why the Church was so legalistic and I gave him a thorough explanation and he replied that he didn’t agree with some of it. I tried to keep the communications opened so told him to let me know what he disagreed with but he never did.

Another problem, and this is my own opinion, was the parents. They were always going this way and that way and never would sit down with their children to pray and discuss Catholic teachings. I think it’s important for parents to make time for their children and make sure they understand sound Catholic doctrine. They can’t expect the school to do it all for them. Besides, the CC teaches that the parents are the principal educators of their children.

Thanks all for your contributions.
edited spelling and additions

 

[TobyLue]

The baptismal policy???

I used to work at a Church office a few months back and you would be surprised how many people would get upset when they would bring their children to be baptized and they wanted Joe and Jane who were living together and not married to be godparents and I told them they could not be. Or they wanted Judy and Jane, or they wanted some friend who was non-Catholic and I told them sorry, but they can’t be godparents. Also some objected to having to go through baptismal classes. They would say that in so and so parish, the priest never asked them if the godparents were married in the church. I told them what the Church taught about who qualified as godparents (as required by Canon Law) and I could not answer as to why the other priests never followed Canon Law.

There was previously a priest in that same parish, who as already retired and was at a different parish, who told once me that if somebody brought a child to be baptized, receive first communion etc. all he was concerned was giving them the sacrament and didn’t have time to put up with rules or keep records. It took me almost one year to get the Sacramental Books up to date and I still wasn’t able to get them all corrected as I was unable to reach some of the people. Regrettably many priest do whatever they want. So maybe this is what is meant by “The baptismal policy”. The archdiocese sent a letter to all priests that they must abide by Canon Law regarding the sacraments, but many priests choose to disregard it which is not right and they themselves are putting their souls in danger through disobedience.

 

[Lapey]

I used to work at a Church office a few months back and you would be surprised how many people would get upset when they would bring their children to be baptized and they wanted Joe and Jane who were living together and not married to be godparents and I told them they could not be. Or they wanted Judy and Jane, or they wanted some friend who was non-Catholic and I told them sorry, but they can’t be godparents. Also some objected to having to go through baptismal classes. They would say that in so and so parish, the priest never asked them if the godparents were married in the church. I told them what the Church taught about who qualified as godparents (as required by Canon Law) and I could not answer as to why the other priests never followed Canon Law.

There was previously a priest in that same parish, who as already retired and was at a different parish, who told once me that if somebody brought a child to be baptized, receive first communion etc. all he was concerned was giving them the sacrament and didn’t have time to put up with rules or keep records. It took me almost one year to get the Sacramental Books up to date and I still wasn’t able to get them all corrected as I was unable to reach some of the people. Regrettably many priest do whatever they want. So maybe this is what is meant by “The baptismal policy”. The archdiocese sent a letter to all priests that they must abide by Canon Law regarding the sacraments, but many priests choose to disregard it which is not right and they themselves are putting their souls in danger through disobedience.

Yes…agreed. Many misinterpret too. I’ve had a priest tell me that a Catholic who is not confirmed can be a “Christian Witness”. This is not true, canon law states that a non-catholic can be one, and prohibits a Catholic of being Christian witness. The God parent must be a Catholic in good standing and confirmed, only one is required, two are allowed and the norm.

Anyway, I am not a canonist, nor do I want to derail this thread, I was just curious if Cmatt was talking of something like what we speak, becaus emany priest “change or enhance” the requirements.

 

[CMatt25]

The baptismal policy???

Lapey, I’m still trying to find in the Bible where John the Baptist or when Paul baptized a household for instance, they did not baptize a child of a registered parishoner because that parishoner did not use envelopes. Yet a registered parishoner I know of, registered at this parish and who regularly attends there, was turned away from having their adopted child baptized in his parish for this very reason. I almost couldn’t believe it but sure enough this is the policy. No envelopes. No Baptism. Fortunately the person went 7 miles down the road and the priest there performed the Baptism with no problem. I understand the concept of wanting a record. But the 2nd priest needed no such thing.

 

[PennyinCanada]

Mother Theresa and her sisters got their strength from Christ in the Eucharist, and did both.
If your friend’s church didn’t have a bible study, why didn’t he see what he could do to put one in place? There was a lady I know, married 20 yrs, had a couple of kids. Her husband left and divorced her, and she went through this terrible ordeal. There was no group within the church, within the city, that helped divorced, widowed and separated, with the CC. She pulled one together after checking what others were doing.

I think there’s other issues with your friend. May he find his way back home like so many others who go to drink at other wells.

 

[Lapey]

Lapey, I’m still trying to find in the Bible where John the Baptist or when Paul baptized a household for instance, they did not baptize a child of a registered parishoner because that parishoner did not use envelopes. Yet a registered parishoner I know of, registered at this parish and who regularly attends there, was turned away from having their adopted child baptized in his parish for this very reason. I almost couldn’t believe it but sure enough this is the policy. No envelopes. No Baptism. Fortunately the person went 7 miles down the road and the priest there performed the Baptism with no problem. I understand the concept of wanting a record. But the 2nd priest needed no such thing.

That requirement would be an abuse against the canon which sets the norms for administering the sacrements.

But don’t take it too far the other direction as to expect the same situations in scripture to be present today. Scripture is the very beginning and the foundation, but not all is written, as scripture itself tells us.

Didn’t mean to leave the orriginal topic, sorry.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Lapey, I’m still trying to find in the Bible where John the Baptist or when Paul baptized a household for instance, they did not baptize a child of a registered parishoner because that parishoner did not use envelopes. Yet a registered parishoner I know of, registered at this parish and who regularly attends there, was turned away from having their adopted child baptized in his parish for this very reason. I almost couldn’t believe it but sure enough this is the policy. No envelopes. No Baptism. Fortunately the person went 7 miles down the road and the priest there performed the Baptism with no problem. I understand the concept of wanting a record. But the 2nd priest needed no such thing.

Well, Matt, let’s look at the possibilities.

Suppose a priest at a Church is approached, “Father baptize my child.”
“Well, friend, I see you at church regularly. I don’t know though about your Catholic faith. You see, you don’t use envelopes, so I don’t know if you contribute to the Church --which is one of the precepts–at all. If you don’t contribute to the church, and if I have only seen you there maybe the last year or two I’ve been serving, how can I be sure that you are going to raise this child Catholic when I don’t have any real record that you’re doing anything Catholic? I mean, this is a big church, and despite your ‘faithful attendance’ I might not have noticed your shining aura of sanctity or know you personally. That’s why I started the envelope policy. . .that way I know if you’re going to Mass and supporting the Church and even though it’s not 100% effective (nothing is), at least there’s a pretty good tangible proof that you are following the Church rules and that is a good indication you would bring up your child Catholic.”

Perhaps, Matt, this particular priest or this particular parish had had some very painful repercussions of people just saying, "sure, bring in the kid’, 'child is baptized and family NEVER DARKENS THE DOOR OF A CHURCH AGAIN and then years later child comes for confirmation or marriage and can’t understand why he ‘has to’ receive sacraments which he was never brought for, or why he can’t get married out in the woods, etc. etc.

Lucky St. Peter and St. Paul. All THEY had to worry about was death or torture. Oh wait, don’t I remember from Acts that with the Greek members complaining their widows weren’t getting served that the apostles ‘laid on hands’ and established men to take care of the bureaucratic details? I’ll just BET that Philip and Stephen, for example, didn’t handle things EXACTLY THE SAME WAY (because Philip’s church, for example, was full of gladiators and Stephen’s full of widows, and gladiators had more cash and more problems with drinking and sex and Stephen’s had more troubles with family issues) so that when Roscius the gladiator came in for baptism it was pretty straightforward, but when Claudia the widow came in at 9 p.m. with her grandchildren but NOT the children’s parents it might have been a little more, um, involved.

 

[Bluegoat]

Well, Matt, let’s look at the possibilities.

Suppose a priest at a Church is approached, “Father baptize my child.”
“Well, friend, I see you at church regularly. I don’t know though about your Catholic faith. You see, you don’t use envelopes, so I don’t know if you contribute to the Church --which is one of the precepts–at all. If you don’t contribute to the church, and if I have only seen you there maybe the last year or two I’ve been serving, how can I be sure that you are going to raise this child Catholic when I don’t have any real record that you’re doing anything Catholic? I mean, this is a big church, and despite your ‘faithful attendance’ I might not have noticed your shining aura of sanctity or know you personally. That’s why I started the envelope policy. . .that way I know if you’re going to Mass and supporting the Church and even though it’s not 100% effective (nothing is), at least there’s a pretty good tangible proof that you are following the Church rules and that is a good indication you would bring up your child Catholic.”

Perhaps, Matt, this particular priest or this particular parish had had some very painful repercussions of people just saying, "sure, bring in the kid’, 'child is baptized and family NEVER DARKENS THE DOOR OF A CHURCH AGAIN and then years later child comes for confirmation or marriage and can’t understand why he ‘has to’ receive sacraments which he was never brought for, or why he can’t get married out in the woods, etc. etc.

Lucky St. Peter and St. Paul. All THEY had to worry about was death or torture. Oh wait, don’t I remember from Acts that with the Greek members complaining their widows weren’t getting served that the apostles ‘laid on hands’ and established men to take care of the bureaucratic details? I’ll just BET that Philip and Stephen, for example, didn’t handle things EXACTLY THE SAME WAY (because Philip’s church, for example, was full of gladiators and Stephen’s full of widows, and gladiators had more cash and more problems with drinking and sex and Stephen’s had more troubles with family issues) so that when Roscius the gladiator came in for baptism it was pretty straightforward, but when Claudia the widow came in at 9 p.m. with her grandchildren but NOT the children’s parents it might have been a little more, um, involved.

This is meant to be ironic, right?

 

[CMatt25]

Well, Matt, let’s look at the possibilities.

Suppose a priest at a Church is approached, “Father baptize my child.”
“Well, friend, I see you at church regularly. I don’t know though about your Catholic faith. You see, you don’t use envelopes, so I don’t know if you contribute to the Church --which is one of the precepts–at all. If you don’t contribute to the church, and if I have only seen you there maybe the last year or two I’ve been serving, how can I be sure that you are going to raise this child Catholic when I don’t have any real record that you’re doing anything Catholic? I mean, this is a big church, and despite your ‘faithful attendance’ I might not have noticed your shining aura of sanctity or know you personally. That’s why I started the envelope policy. . .that way I know if you’re going to Mass and supporting the Church and even though it’s not 100% effective (nothing is), at least there’s a pretty good tangible proof that you are following the Church rules and that is a good indication you would bring up your child Catholic.”

Perhaps, Matt, this particular priest or this particular parish had had some very painful repercussions of people just saying, "sure, bring in the kid’, 'child is baptized and family NEVER DARKENS THE DOOR OF A CHURCH AGAIN and then years later child comes for confirmation or marriage and can’t understand why he ‘has to’ receive sacraments which he was never brought for, or why he can’t get married out in the woods, etc. etc.

Lucky St. Peter and St. Paul. All THEY had to worry about was death or torture. Oh wait, don’t I remember from Acts that with the Greek members complaining their widows weren’t getting served that the apostles ‘laid on hands’ and established men to take care of the bureaucratic details? I’ll just BET that Philip and Stephen, for example, didn’t handle things EXACTLY THE SAME WAY (because Philip’s church, for example, was full of gladiators and Stephen’s full of widows, and gladiators had more cash and more problems with drinking and sex and Stephen’s had more troubles with family issues) so that when Roscius the gladiator came in for baptism it was pretty straightforward, but when Claudia the widow came in at 9 p.m. with her grandchildren but NOT the children’s parents it might have been a little more, um, involved.

Hi Tantum, like Lapey I don’t want to derail the thread. I only brought up Baptism in relation to my own experience at a parish where I also had an issue about a statement made regarding the poor in a homily at a Mass I attended. But like I said, though I disagree with the policy, I understand the concept you outlined. Lapey though says it is an abuse of canon. Anyway we should probably get back to the topic. Peace be with you Tantum! God bless you!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

This is meant to be ironic, right?

Epic fail. Sometimes I should just stifle that ironic impulse and that was one of them. Hope I didn’t derail the thread!