Charismatic Postures

[DebChris]

Thanks for the post. I like posts that are saying the truth and criticize positively towards the objective of good Christians.

I have to say it again - negative and uncharitable criticism and comment is very much a common spectre in church and parish life. Thus what you have in the parish, you would have it here in CAF, for they are invariably the same people that you would encounter everyday in church life.

Considering that we are church people, it should be surprising but actually not a surprise, for we are no better than just anybody else including those who are not in the church.

Ours is a very big parish, urbane and the seat of an Archbishop. If one want to listen to all the back biting among the different church groups and the parishioners, one’s life would be dramatically cut short, if one is to listen to all of them.

It is not easy for the priests too as there is too much complain and criticism, many of which are personal in nature.

And the different groups would just loath each other’s gut.

Sometimes what happened at the parish meetings, one would think they were some kinds of union election campaign instead of by church leaders.

There are people, who are vocal and like to speak up, and these are usually being heard, of course that means whatever their personal character and opinion is. The silent ones on the other hand, and perhaps the ones we would like to hear, are usually silent.

What I am trying to say, unfortunately people like to be clever, know better than the next Catholic in the pew. And to be known as such would usually make them feel better.

Would it be any different in the Forum? So, this is the kind of thing we have.

Like you, I am concerned for RCIA candidates and new Catholics to refer to the Forum because really the answers are not to be found here but only (name removed by moderator)ut and opinion of the posters, who, God knows, can be just anybody.

I usually skip posts that ask about liturgical abuse, or look more like perpetuating gossip than providing real answers.
Sometimes, I will look at a question that is being asked. Within the first few posts, it does appear that legitimate and helpful advice is being given. I don’t see where I can add anything to what has already been stated.
It is good when those of us who are cradle Catholics, or at least have been members of the Church for a long time demonstrate a shared knowledge, and the universality of Church teaching. We may say the same thing in different ways, but this is where the answers found on the forum can be helpful.
It is unfortunate when factions start to show, with each trying vie for top billing.

The OP was not asking about liturgical abuse, just about particular gestures that are used in worship. Historically, they can be traced back to our Jewish roots with a more recent usage during the liturgy. The overall goal of the Charismatic Renewal is simply that, renewal within the Church. It is not separate from the rest of the Church, any more than the Legion of Mary and other groups that meet together to worship at times other than the normal Mass setting. Many parishes do not have any Charismatic prayer group.

As I read through the thread, the general consensus is that none of the prayer gestures are done for the purpose of show. They are genuine expressions of worship as the Body of Christ gathers together. We do gather for worship.

Some of us were taught at a young age to cover our face as we kneel following receipt of Holy Communion. Others were not. My diocesan bishop a few years ago asked the diocesan priests to review proper receipt of Holy Communion. There are areas of concern that take precedence when it comes to ongoing Faith Formation. For many that formation will come from the homilies delivered on Sundays.

 

[Reuben_J]

It is good when those of us who are cradle Catholics, or at least have been members of the Church for a long time demonstrate a shared knowledge, and the universality of Church teaching. We may say the same thing in different ways, but this is where the answers found on the forum can be helpful.

I agree that many posters here give valuable (name removed by moderator)ut which is very helpful. My concern is things can be confusing and thus the difficulty in filtering the genuine ones.

It is unfortunate when factions start to show, with each trying vie for top billing.

Yes, probably that’s it.

The OP was not asking about liturgical abuse, just about particular gestures that are used in worship. Historically, they can be traced back to our Jewish roots with a more recent usage during the liturgy. The overall goal of the Charismatic Renewal is simply that, renewal within the Church. It is not separate from the rest of the Church, any more than the Legion of Mary and other groups that meet together to worship at times other than the normal Mass setting. Many parishes do not have any Charismatic prayer group.

As I read through the thread, the general consensus is that none of the prayer gestures are done for the purpose of show. They are genuine expressions of worship as the Body of Christ gathers together. We do gather for worship.

Some of us were taught at a young age to cover our face as we kneel following receipt of Holy Communion. Others were not. My diocesan bishop a few years ago asked the diocesan priests to review proper receipt of Holy Communion. There are areas of concern that take precedence when it comes to ongoing Faith Formation. For many that formation will come from the homilies delivered on Sundays.

The GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) is pretty clear on the employment of various rubrics. In our diocese, it seems the majority of the congregation do toe the line and there is minimal gestures that are not prescribed in the GIRM.

I would not go into the motive, if any, of people using prayer gestures as it tends to be counter-productive. I agree with what you said nevertheless.

 

[hydin]

“If this is the only exposure to the Catholic faith that a soul has in this life, will this post lead the person closer to the Church or further away?”

Father first, thank you for your service to the Catholic Faith.

I certainly hope you do not encourage hiding certain Truth to mislead those who have one exposure… they will find out soon anyway. Who is to say that soul is not looking for Authority and Truth not A “God understands” faith?

Certainly understand you concerns and post. Others have mentioned the Girm and Rubrics “do not prohibit or encourage” hand raising, holding hands, and well, almost any act a person can make except the few that are spelled out. Naturally just as actions not specifically mentioned in the Bible are not always acceptable the same is true of some of these actions that some parishes are adopting. Like a EMHC openly Blessing a child or adult with their arms crossed and making a sing of the cross in the air or with touch does not harm anyone it does allow confusion in the exact people you mention you will not refer here. I had a Pastor until recently (he retired early) who refused to change the word “All” to “Many” as the new Missal does. Is it a big deal? We heard “All” for years… Then He preached that missing Mass could not be Mortal Sin. Did that change behaviors? Who knows. I do know one thing about this Priest, he was not obedient to his Bishop. Does that matter? I hope it does. I am not saying you are in anyway similar to my ex-pastor.

Small shifts from proper procedures in the Mass unfortunately lead to larger changes. Our parish was in an uproar when a song the Pastor added to allow a 3 minute exchange of peace was dropped by the new Pastor. We had been doing it for 20 years. He also stopped Mass for introductions after the entrance prayers… a nice thing, except if you had been preparing yourself to worship and suddenly you were focused on the people around you instead of God. Active teens refused to go to Mass at college because it wasn’t the same. It mattered, to them, in the wrong way.

In my Engaged Encounter the Priest advised all of us in a group that using the Pill was fine as long as we intended to have kids sometime. Today most practicing "natural Family Planning or whatever name it is given in a parish never hear the words “serious reasons” anymore. Who cares?

I guess it comes down to this. Does God care about any of this? Most Priests and Catholics say there is no reason not to receive the Eucharist just because you are divorced… with those who understand Grave Matter adding “as long as you are otherwise in proper standing to receive.” If the Catechism is correct, how many are receiving who should not be because some Pastoral Catholic told them a half truth? Does God expect the average Catholic to know their Faith?

It isn’t the big shifts that cause damage. Ordaining Female priest…(another of my ex-Pastors beliefs) is either OK or it is no OK. Easy to see. No Catholic disputes what the Church teaches… they may want it changed but they fully understand what is acceptable.

It is the small shifts, the ones that feel good and feel loving at the time that endanger our Faith. Is it a small thing when the laity does the same hand actions the Priest does? Well it proves they do not understand the role of the Priest in the Mass. Is that minor? Once informed of the meanings of what the Priest is doing with his hands, what the actions mean, if one still does the movements is that OK?

When a Priest or Bishop is disobedient does it matter what the issue is? The average Catholic is just waiting for an opening to believe in their own Gospel. When Mass is changed… when subjects are ignored… when a priest refused to say you can’t vote for a candidate who promotes abortion because their parish is voting for that candidate… does the Faith suffer? Sure it does.

The remarried only hear the voice saying Jesus loves them as they are… not that Christ’s own words, from His mouth said it was Adultery. Mercy is cool but so many forget to remind that it is when you turn back to God and agree to live His way… see Pope Francis’ speeches and letters (not interviews which are edited… see who am I to judge…about a single priest &specific instance not everyone…)

It is out of respect and obedience we follow the traditions of the Mass. When anything takes the focus of the Mass off Jesus and worshiping Him it does have an impact. God is no longer first. It is about ME. I am sure some will see this as too orthodox. Maybe. The Church Fathers sure didn’t allow minor changes and enforced procedures from the Didache on.

When the Church speaks we are to listen. If that is not true then what authority do we rely on? You? Me? a committee somewhere? Martin Luther? Andy Stanley? Isis? Each individual?

Do we understand what God really meant better than those who have come before us? Without having authority in big and little things the Faith becomes whatever I determine it is. You can’t suddenly limit what I can and can not change, nobody can.

 

[buc_fan33]

Father first, thank you for your service to the Catholic Faith.

Your welcome.

I certainly hope you do not encourage hiding certain Truth to mislead those who have one exposure… they will find out soon anyway. Who is to say that soul is not looking for Authority and Truth not A “God understands” faith?

This precisely illustrates my point. Of course I don’t advocate “hiding” certain truths. However, the way in which the Truth is presented matters. You don’t start learning advanced calculus in first grade. You’re not ready for it. Doesn’t’ mean calculus isn’t true. It means you aren’t ready. The fact that they will “find out soon” about the truths of calculus doesn’t mean first grade is the appropriate time to teach calculus.

Perhaps I’m reading too much into your remark, but it seems to me your immediate assumption is that I justify living apart from Christ and rationalize it away by saying “God understands.” Well, for starters, God DOES understand. That’s an objective fact. God understands the situations of our lives better than we do ourselves. That said, He also understand the eternal ramifications of decisions and loves us far too much to keep us in states that could objectively separate us from Him for eternity, or at the very least lead to greater suffering in this world.

Who is to say that the person isn’t looking for Authority and Truth? Well, the experience of an admittedly short time in the priesthood, but the conversations I’ve had with countless brother priests who have spent more years in priestly ministry than I’ve been alive. I can count on one hand the number of people I know who have been drawn to the Catholic Church due to an emphasis on rules and regulations. Literally. I can count them on one hand. I know hundreds though who have been drawn to the Catholic faith because of a deep encounter with Christ.

In fact, I saw dozens of them yesterday at a Steubenville Youth Conference. These young people were either not baptized or not Catholic but had come to the conference anyway. Literally around 50 young people came forward when the conference spiritual director called them down and said that they desired to become Catholic. I will all but guarantee you that every one of them fell in love with the Catholic faith through their positive interactions with other attendees, their listening to the talks which were almost exclusively focused on God’s love (as if that’s a bad thing!), and especially their encounter with the Living Person of Jesus Christ in Eucharistic adoration. Not one of them came to love the faith through an emphasis on marriage regulations, or whether a certain sin is mortal or venial.

Also, as it pertains to this thread, yes, people were praying with hands in the air. Thousands of them. And yes, this was attractive to their peers.

Certainly understand you concerns and post. Others have mentioned the Girm and Rubrics “do not prohibit or encourage” hand raising, holding hands, and well, almost any act a person can make except the few that are spelled out. Naturally just as actions not specifically mentioned in the Bible are not always acceptable the same is true of some of these actions that some parishes are adopting. Like a EMHC openly Blessing a child or adult with their arms crossed and making a sing of the cross in the air or with touch does not harm anyone it does allow confusion in the exact people you mention you will not refer here.

With respect, no it doesn’t. I will agree with you that these actions are out of place. But, I have never met someone who had a misunderstanding about the distinctions between clergy and laity from an EMHC giving a blessing. Now, is there a need for catechesis in this area? Yes. Certainly. That lay EMHC is “firing blanks” so to speak. Fine. When I instruct my EMHCs, I ask them not to do this. But, is it a hill I’m willing to die on? No. In terms of the top 25 problems and needs facing my parish, this probably comes in somewhere around #50 or so.

I had a Pastor until recently (he retired early) who refused to change the word “All” to “Many” as the new Missal does. Is it a big deal? We heard “All” for years… Then He preached that missing Mass could not be Mortal Sin. Did that change behaviors? Who knows. I do know one thing about this Priest, he was not obedient to his Bishop. Does that matter? I hope it does. I am not saying you are in anyway similar to my ex-pastor.

Let us pray for your former pastor. Obedience to one’s bishop is a certain path to holiness for a diocesan priest.

 

[buc_fan33]

Small shifts from proper procedures in the Mass unfortunately lead to larger changes. Our parish was in an uproar when a song the Pastor added to allow a 3 minute exchange of peace was dropped by the new Pastor. We had been doing it for 20 years. He also stopped Mass for introductions after the entrance prayers… a nice thing, except if you had been preparing yourself to worship and suddenly you were focused on the people around you instead of God. Active teens refused to go to Mass at college because it wasn’t the same. It mattered, to them, in the wrong way…

…Do we understand what God really meant better than those who have come before us? Without having authority in big and little things the Faith becomes whatever I determine it is. You can’t suddenly limit what I can and can not change, nobody can.

I shortened your quote to fit within the character limit. If anyone would like to see the full quote, it’s a couple of posts above this one.

Ok. It seems to me that you’ve had a bad experience and are extrapolating that experience onto anyone who suggests that the first and most important element of faithfulness is not worrying about whether or not women can become priests, but helping people encounter the Person of Jesus Christ. Being pastoral is not a bad thing. In fact, Jesus demands it. If there is one person who is drawn to the Catholic faith because of an emphasis on rules, I will all but guarantee you that there are hundreds more who are pushed away. That doesn’t mean rules and doctrine are not important. They’re vital. But, they are secondary to a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Perhaps you suspect that if you came to my church, you would encounter a priest who begins Mass by saying, “Hi everybody! Welcome to Mass! It’s great to have you all gathered here to celebrate God’s love! Before we begin, let’s turn to our neighbor and greet one another!” Nothing could be further from the truth. I begin Mass as the Church asks, “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” and then one of three options for a greeting.

Being orthodox is not antithetical to being charitable. I fear that in some circles, the two are seen as being in opposition to each other. However, quite on the contrary, the more orthodox we are in belief and practice, the more charitable we necessarily must be, for orthodoxy and orthopraxis are ordered towards helping people grow in union with Christ, who is Charity incarnate, for charity is love, and God is love.

This is the biggest issue I see when working with scrupulous people. There is an overemphasis on rules. They see God as a divine lawgiver who is ready with a bolt of lightning to strike them down if they fall into mortal sin. They see the Christian life as simply following a bunch of rules. This is anything but the Christian life. The Christian life is following a Person. “For freedom Christ set us free,” Paul tells us in Galatians. To be honest, as I read some of these threads, if I didn’t know any better, I would think that Paul’s words could be rewritten to say, “In order to enslave his people to the GIRM, to Canon Law, and to the moral law, Christ reemphasized the 10 Commandments, with an emphasis on Commandments, not *suggestions/I.”

The irony is that if someone is enslaved to sin–take pornography use as an example–and this person is fighting hard to overcome this out of some fear that God hates her, that God will be angry because of her addiction, whatever, the person makes no progress in overcoming the vice. However, real progress is made almost immediately as soon as the person simply turns to Jesus and realizes He loves her.

Without going into great detail, as a confessor, I can say that there is a great difference between these two types of confessions:

Person A, “Father, I used alcohol. I know getting drunk is a mortal sin, so I want to bring that to confession.”

Person B, “Father, I had a deep encounter with Christ, I felt His love in a way I’ve never felt before. I’ve been getting drunk regularly and I want to stop because God’s love is so much more real! I don’t ever want to lose this connection I have with Him.”

Now, both penitents receive God’s mercy, both may fall back into their sin and need to come back to the sacrament. But only Person B has any real chance of growth in virtue, because only this person understands that God’s grace, love, and mercy are the driving forces behind authentic growth in the spiritual and moral life. One person is trudging along merely out of fear; the other is sprinting because he has fallen in love with Christ.

I would welcome it if one of my brother priests would chime in and either affirm what I’ve said here, or correct me and tell me why I’m wrong.*

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m not a priest, Father, but everything you are saying rings true to me.

I could write a long thing but I’d rather just say the more I read on CAF, the more I think about just restricting myself to praying in the prayer intentions forum.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I would welcome it if one of my brother priests would chime in and either affirm what I’ve said here, or correct me and tell me why I’m wrong.

To this old priest and retired professor of theology, I think you have said it well.

 

[hydin]

Your welcome.

You don’t start learning advanced calculus in first grade. You’re not ready for it. Doesn’t’ mean calculus isn’t true. It means you aren’t ready.

(Father, Certainly one must adjust the teaching according to age. It is quite a leap to say you should not teach a first grader calculus because they are not ready to saying you should not teach a remarried outside of the Church for the second marriage because they could not get married in the church why that is bad. If the first grader dies Jesus is not going to ask you why didn’t you teach them calculus? If the remarried person dies that night He very well may ask why you didn’t say something. Maybe Jesus sent him to you for that purpose. Building a straw man then knocking it down is not valid. We are talking eternal life not math. Waiting a day or week or month could have huge consequences for the remarried man… not for the first grader.)

Well, for starters, God DOES understand. That’s an objective fact.

(Again, I inferred that those in sin, rather than repenting or changing their ways - like one who divorces for selfish reasons… Grave matter - the divorce, no mention of remarriage yet in the Catechism, - use the “God understands ME” as permission to remain in sin and still receive the Eucharist. Certainly I realize God understands us. God understood all those who chose Hell and are choosing Hell. His understanding of us is not in the context I used as a reason to speak the truth.)

Not one of them came to love the faith through an emphasis on marriage regulations, or whether a certain sin is mortal or venial.

(Again, you build a straw man and knock it down. If you turn back toward God and his way Mercy flows. If you seek Him He runs to you. Why did females love the early Church? Why was the early Church held in awe? One of the reasons is the regulation on marriage. No more divorces over burnt toast or by saying :I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you… if a man said it 3 times she was out… {Ironically the current count to 3 has its roots in that tradition} It is interesting that even your example followed a “rule” come down front… I state again, ignoring sin in one who is well aware of that sin or knows enough that they should check as the Catechism speaks to when defining Mortal Sin culpability and an informed conscience in detail. For a real example, a couple married in the Catholic Church hear at least 3 times that marriage is forever and no man should break it. (vows 2 times by Priest, 2 times when the couple each repeat the vows, 3 times if they do not and say I do only… including the Nuptial blessing) Ignoring this could place the remarried couple in grave danger… Catechism, not my words.)

Also, as it pertains to this thread, yes, people were praying with hands in the air. Thousands of them. And yes, this was attractive to their peers.

(more straw… it was not Mass and using movements only mentioned for the Celebrant to use to signify certain things. Those gestures have meaning in the Mass.)

With respect, no it doesn’t. I will agree with you that these actions are out of place. But, I have never met someone who had a misunderstanding about the distinctions between clergy and laity from an EMHC giving a blessing.

(Well Father, you prove my point about confusion in your example. Your example has a confused person expecting a Blessing from the EMHC… Obviously confused… they are approaching a EMHC in a Mass where as you say the EMHC is “shooting blanks” rather than going to the line leading to a Priest who is the only one of the two who is clergy and can actually give him a Blessing. If the person did not have a misunderstanding about the role of Clergy they would never end up in the EMHC’s line expecting one. Even if they didn’t know the first time, once refused a Blessing by the EMHC they would know the second time. If the EMHC gives a Blessing and they return the next week to an EMHC to receive a Blessing they have been confused by the EMHC, who as you also said, at your church should know better.)

t.

Father every situation is different. Priest today hate to speak of Divorce likely being sinful according to Church teaching for the filing party unless it meets the situations spelled out in the same. It is easy to avoid. How many approach and receive who are divorced due to no danger or no risk of financial harm but because they no longer want to be married to that person? How many hit the confessional and confess divorce but know they are not repenting and simply regret their action but would do it again? How many Priests tell those same people that they are forgiven and their penance is to reconcile with their spouse, if available, as Canon Law directs the spouse to do when danger is not present?

If the Church teaches us what is proper and it is ignored to comfort the person in the moment is it loving? Jesus himself shows us an example with the woman at the well. She is ready to convert and wants this water… 15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.”
16 Jesus said to her, “Go, call your husband, and come back.”… Jesus calls her out on her sin, lovingly… He does not ignore it. We know what happened next… She left, without her water jug (a detail mentioned to show she no longer needed well water - had the eternal water now). He did not worry about her feelings and let her join Him without hearing the Truth. That is all I am suggesting, to follow that example when the situation is similar… no first graders were at the well. Jesus also spoke the Truth with no regard for feelings in John 6. Every time they protested He spoke harsher Truth… He never watered it down so they would come back next week and maybe get it. That would not have been loving.

 

[Jennifoo]

It’s always been my understanding that the laity are not to use the orans position at Mass, but may do so in private prayers outside of the liturgy. ( I do this.) It’s also my understanding that we are not to hold hands during the Our Father or try to force others to hold hands. ( I’ve had people try to force me and it makes me uncomfortable.) Another thing I often see is people giving the secular peace sign during the Sign of Peace instead of a handshake.

I don’t necessarily see these as Charismatic as there are no Charismatic prayer groups in our area.

I agree with Fr. David that even if Charismatics use them during Mass it doesn’t make it right.

I think there needs to be catechesis on this for the laity.

 

[buc_fan33]

Father, Certainly one must adjust the teaching according to age. It is quite a leap to say you should not teach a first grader calculus because they are not ready to saying you should not teach a remarried outside of the Church for the second marriage because they could not get married in the church why that is bad. If the first grader dies Jesus is not going to ask you why didn’t you teach them calculus? If the remarried person dies that night He very well may ask why you didn’t say something. Maybe Jesus sent him to you for that purpose. Building a straw man then knocking it down is not valid. We are talking eternal life not math. Waiting a day or week or month could have huge consequences for the remarried man… not for the first grader.

Right, but we’re not talking about marriages, at least, I didn’t think that was what we were talking about. I thought we were talking about people being exposed to the faith for the first time, in essence, first graders…spiritually and theologically speaking. What have I said that would lead you to believe I would in any way support divorce and remarriage?

This is not a strawman argument. It’s called pedagogy. We do it all the time. Even God did it. He didn’t reveal His entire essence in the Old Covenant, but only after the Incarnation, and even then, in a certain sense, only after the sending of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

Again, I inferred that those in sin, rather than repenting or changing their ways - like one who divorces for selfish reasons… Grave matter - the divorce, no mention of remarriage yet in the Catechism, - use the “God understands ME” as permission to remain in sin and still receive the Eucharist. Certainly I realize God understands us. God understood all those who chose Hell and are choosing Hell. His understanding of us is not in the context I used as a reason to speak the truth.

Again, what would lead you to believe I either believe or teach otherwise? Of course we need a well-formed conscience. No one is suggesting otherwise.

Again, you build a straw man and knock it down. If you turn back toward God and his way Mercy flows. If you seek Him He runs to you. Why did females love the early Church? Why was the early Church held in awe? One of the reasons is the regulation on marriage. No more divorces over burnt toast or by saying :I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you… if a man said it 3 times she was out… {Ironically the current count to 3 has its roots in that tradition} It is interesting that even your example followed a “rule” come down front… I state again, ignoring sin in one who is well aware of that sin or knows enough that they should check as the Catechism speaks to when defining Mortal Sin culpability and an informed conscience in detail. For a real example, a couple married in the Catholic Church hear at least 3 times that marriage is forever and no man should break it. (vows 2 times by Priest, 2 times when the couple each repeat the vows, 3 times if they do not and say I do only… including the Nuptial blessing) Ignoring this could place the remarried couple in grave danger… Catechism, not my words.

Again, no one–certainly not I–have said anything about divorce. What paragraph of the Catechism are you referring to, specifically? I’m not even completely sure what I’m responding to here, that divorce is a mortal sin? CCC 2384 says that “Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law.” Where have I suggested otherwise?

more straw… it was not Mass and using movements only mentioned for the Celebrant to use to signify certain things. Those gestures have meaning in the Mass.

I don’t deny any of this, other than your claim that it’s a strawman argument. All I can and will say is that I’ve known very faithful priests who have pastored charismatic parishes who encourage their people to pray in this way. You’re correct…the orans position does have meaning for the celebrant, praying on behalf of the entire congregation. It’s deeper than that, but that’s a good start. However, the point isn’t that the people are imitating the priest. It’s that they are using a posture of prayer that is a cultural expression, if we understand “cultural” in a broad sense to include people who have inclinations to pray in various ways, not merely to refer to ethnicities.

Well Father, you prove my point about confusion in your example. Your example has a confused person expecting a Blessing from the EMHC… Obviously confused… they are approaching a EMHC in a Mass where as you say the EMHC is “shooting blanks” rather than going to the line leading to a Priest who is the only one of the two who is clergy and can actually give him a Blessing. If the person did not have a misunderstanding about the role of Clergy they would never end up in the EMHC’s line expecting one. Even if they didn’t know the first time, once refused a Blessing by the EMHC they would know the second time. If the EMHC gives a Blessing and they return the next week to an EMHC to receive a Blessing they have been confused by the EMHC, who as you also said, at your church should know better.

Fair enough. Perhaps the person is confused (both the recipient and EMHC). I think we could make an argument appealing to the priesthood of all the baptized, but that’s a different topic for a different day. The question isn’t whether or not this should be done. I think we are in agreement that it shouldn’t be. However, the question is how to best deal with it. I don’t find a direct rebuke to be particularly helpful in most cases. (The whole, “You attract more bees with honey than with vinegar” argument.)

 

[buc_fan33]

Father every situation is different. Priest today hate to speak of Divorce likely being sinful according to Church teaching for the filing party unless it meets the situations spelled out in the same. It is easy to avoid. How many approach and receive who are divorced due to no danger or no risk of financial harm but because they no longer want to be married to that person? How many hit the confessional and confess divorce but know they are not repenting and simply regret their action but would do it again? How many Priests tell those same people that they are forgiven and their penance is to reconcile with their spouse, if available, as Canon Law directs the spouse to do when danger is not present?

I don’t recall anyone saying anything about marriage. I’m not going to discuss confessions, for obvious reasons. But, please cite the Canon to which you are referring.

If the Church teaches us what is proper and it is ignored to comfort the person in the moment is it loving? Jesus himself shows us an example with the woman at the well. She is ready to convert and wants this water… 15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.”
16 Jesus said to her, “Go, call your husband, and come back.”… Jesus calls her out on her sin, lovingly… He does not ignore it. We know what happened next… She left, without her water jug (a detail mentioned to show she no longer needed well water - had the eternal water now). He did not worry about her feelings and let her join Him without hearing the Truth. That is all I am suggesting, to follow that example when the situation is similar… no first graders were at the well. Jesus also spoke the Truth with no regard for feelings in John 6. Every time they protested He spoke harsher Truth… He never watered it down so they would come back next week and maybe get it. That would not have been loving.

I’m really not sure why you seem to think that I water down truth. I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve made mistakes. I often times go back over a conversation I’ve had with a couple I’m preparing for marriage, for instance. I wonder if I could have said something differently. I wonder though, have you ever been in this situation? How did it turn out?

This is a hypothetical scenario, not based on anyone in particular. But, suppose you are a priest. A young couple comes to you for marriage prep. Neither party has been married before. They go to Mass sporadically. They never received any catechesis growing up. They are cohabiting, and have a one-year old son. They are open to taking NFP classes, but clearly only to jump through the “hoop.” They are rather adamant that they have no intention of ceasing to use contraception in their marriage. What do you do?

Option A: Tell them to leave, that they are not living as the Church understands marriage, and that you will not marry them if they continue in this lifestyle.

Option B: Walk with them, and try to progress them down the road, even if just a little bit.

This is the dilemma that priests are faced with on a regular basis. It’s rare that I have a couple come to me who is not cohabiting. If statistics are correct, Catholics contracept at roughly the same percentage of society at large. Statistically, in the United States, I think only about 25% of Catholics go to Mass on Sunday.

For that matter, how do you approach Christmas and Easter as a priest?

Option A: Remind all those people who haven’t been at Mass since last Christmas that they are not to present themselves for Communion, or

Option B: Welcome them and try to coax them into coming back the next week?

There are plenty of priests who choose Option A in both scenarios, and plenty of laity who would prefer they choose Option A. Personally, I don’t often choose Option A, but it’s a choice I wrestle with on a regular basis, as does every single priest I know. If you have a better solution, please, by all means, I’m all ears.

 

[hydin]

I don’t recall anyone saying anything about marriage. I’m not going to discuss confessions, for obvious reasons. But, please cite the Canon to which you are referring.

( I will include the prior canon for context I would think these critical for marriage issues- Can. 1153 §1. If either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too diYcult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving, either by decree of the local ordinary or even on his or her own authority if there is danger in delay.

§2. In all cases, when the cause for the separation ceases, conjugal living must be restored unless ecclesiastical authority has established otherwise.)

I wonder if I could have said something differently. I wonder though, have you ever been in this situation? How did it turn out?

This is a hypothetical scenario, not based on anyone in particular. But, suppose you are a priest. A young couple comes to you for marriage prep. Neither party has been married before. They go to Mass sporadically. They never received any catechesis growing up. They are cohabiting, and have a one-year old son. They are open to taking NFP classes, but clearly only to jump through the “hoop.” They are rather adamant that they have no intention of ceasing to use contraception in their marriage. What do you do?

(So the question is much broader than the one you present. You also have other Catholics looking at how they are handled, friends, family people who just know them in passing who are impacted by this decision.

I think you start way back at the foundation and ask if they believe in God. Walk with them there. Let them tell about God and use questions to show how their logic may be flawed. Show the why to some of the rules with out God. How sex bonds a couple hormonally. How the pill really works as admitted but the drug companies… it aborts a fertilized egg 8% of the time… 1 out of 12 months. How it makes the only reason not to have sex “because I do not want to” and the pressure that brings. Of course here is another topic usually not addressed… that NFP is to be used for serious reasons.{The contemporary Church document, Humanae vitae, which articulated the reasons why NFP is acceptable, uses the words “serious” and “grave” to indicate the distinctions which spouses need to consider as they seek to plan their families according to God’s will. more here. usccb - http://www.foryourmarriage.org/when-can-we-use-nfp/} If a couple uses NFP using say finances as the issue then live in a house and drive two BMW’s that would not seem too serious. NFP can be misused and often is. Should we not tell those using it the Pope’s teaching so they use it instead of the pill? If it is used sinfully good intentions do not remove the sin.

Yes Father it is a hard call. So many as you have, look at a person or two people and focus the concern there. Dozens are watching and are not considered. Do we love those in sin yes, totally. Is it loving to withhold what we know from them? One doesn’t have to kick them out … common tactic to avoid discussion today… my way or the other extreme.

It is not A or B… it never is. It is A and B. If a teaching (not at rule, the teaching of Jesus) say adultery if remarried with out a Decree of Nullity, if you mention that to a divorced and remarried Catholic is it the first time they have heard it? Of course not or they would not be sitting in front of you. So mention it, ask about their thoughts. They are coming to you for a reason… they know where they stand, no need to ignore it or beat them over the head with it. Admit it is an issue that exists then move on to where the teaching came from and how long it has existed. Let them know they can be forgiven for the choice they made (90% of the time with full knowledge of what they chose) Give them options… it is up to them to choose God.

If they do He will run to them with Mercy. The son had to come to the property of the father… BUT the Father was watching for the prodigal son to return… everyday - when he returned to the father the rich man ran (rich men at the time didn’t run…) treated him as a lost soul found and rejoiced. The father did not go to the pig sty and tell the son he could come home and avoid starving. The son had to come home. Once the father saw the steps toward home he ran and walked with the son.
see below word limit

 

[pianistclare]

Nothing to add, except that I always find it appalling that people feel like they can tell any priest about his life and/or ministry.

I think this is the single biggest problem on CAF.

Disrepect.
People are free to disagree. But when priests take time to help us understand things, we ought to listen.

To the priests on this thread: thanks for your patience and may the Lord continue to bless you in your ministry.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Nothing to add, except that I always find it appalling that people feel like they can tell any priest about his life and/or ministry.

I think this is the single biggest problem on CAF.

Disrepect.
People are free to disagree. But when priests take time to help us understand things, we ought to listen.

To the priests on this thread: thanks for your patience and may the Lord continue to bless you in your ministry.

Frankly, I find it nothing short of remarkable. Appalling is an apt word.

In my visits to the United States, I did not find this sort of behaviour in my interactions with people…I would not have received it well nor would they likely have forgotten the reaction such behaviour would elicit.

Thank you very much for your kind words, Pianist Clare.

 

[hydin]

Even Pope Francis who is speaking of Mercy more than any other Pope when formally speaking or writing (but not in interviews) is careful to include when you turn the father, when you repent, when you realize your mistake and return to following God’s will… prior to mercy. We want to give it up front and hope they understand. That has not worked well anywhere. Why? Could it be because Catholics see rules bent, ignored, delayed or even spoken against in their parishes and determine we are no different than the church down the road.

We have confusion over the exact words of Christ defining remarriage as adultery. Something caused that. Jesus speaks absolutely clearly and we determine it is better to not bring it up and walk with them? Jesus ate with sinners and surrounded Himself with them. He never chose to be silent so they would stay with Him and walk more. John 6 pretty much shows how Jesus handled those who did not want to hear the truth. He also mentions shaking dust off sandals and makes statements about those who deny Him. When we make a choice to protect others from the Truth are we not, at least for the moment, denying Him?

What does the couple living together expect you to say? They know they are not following church teaching on mass and sex. Not mentioning it so they do not feel uncomfortable in their sin improves their chances for taking the teaching seriously?

One of my kids told me of an Ash Wednesday service where the campus church (at college) was packed the Priest who was loved by the students, stopped at the end of his homily and told the kids how glad they were there. Said he noticed that many had not been coming to Mass and wanted them to receive the Eucharist but explained the need to go to confession first. That he could not let them come forward with out telling them the danger that could bring. He also said he would stay after Mass and hear confessions. Many stayed and church attendance went way up. Was it the Holy Spirit? Had to be. But the kids knew they should be going to Mass. They knew they should not receive. He spoke truth. Some did not come back. Most did. He cared so much about them he was willing to risk their leaving (sounds like free will and God to me) rather than not lovingly protect their souls. They felt that love. They watched a true believer and chose to stay. He knew if he was silent they were endangering their souls… and he would be showing them it was all right to continue doing as they were, no matter what the church said by that silence, at least that night.

I think the above covers your other points. I mean no disrespect. I have had tough situations as you mention. I have watched marriage crumble because a Priest told someone seeking divorce “of course divorced people can receive Communion” as an offhanded comment to a direct question. The person asking later told me they would not have filed if they would have been told their was a chance they would be in Mortal Sin… the Priest thought he was being Pastoral. Instead he signed the divorce decree that affected an active and devote Catholic family… and their friends… Three more active couple had one spouse file for divorce that year… all are still EMHC’s. Most teach in the school of religion or run retreats. What do the kids think about divorce? no big deal. I have seen our parish allow one who works with teens on staff post openly on facebook vacation photos of her on vacation with a “date” (she was one of the couples noted above) within 3 months of her divorce bragging about how good it felt to be loved… and 75% of her 300 “friends” she posts to are Catholic youth… what do they think about shacking up?

I watch another couple, support openly their daughter who is living with another woman and openly acting as the man in the relationship with wonderful details on facebook when 200 friends are youth or members of the parish… including all the staff …and they teach and serve in visible roles in the parish. One photo is them marching in a parade the next a statement about faith. Both are EMHC. What do those who see their stance against the Church think as they get Jesus from their hands? I have helped the husband, who does not go to the marches… whose eye are so telling as he struggles with a painful situation. He knows the truth. Is telling him everything is fine loving him? He knows what his daughter’s decision means, if our church is teaching truth.

So yes Father, I have had to deal with speaking truth. Some do not like it or do not want to hear it… They all have a common position… Their Truth is what matters most. If our Faith is as Jesus intended it to be, they are in grave danger. How do we not say something or delay telling it to them? What if they die before we get around to feeling comfortable bringing it up?

I had a child get married recently. The couple had been away at college in separate towns and moved away from their home town too. They picked a parish church where they had never attended but was near where the Bride wanted the reception to be. They attended marriage prep in their home parish and got all the approvals needed to get married in the distant church. (no they never lived together and were both saving themselves). The Priest at the distant church, met with them several times prior to the wedding. At the wedding his homily was a wonderful story of marriage and the sacrament. all woven around asking them all the questions, in front of all these witnesses, that would deny them a Decree of Nullity later. It was gentle. I am not sure anyone else noticed. Doesn’t matter.

It doesn’t have to be A or B. It is harder to pull off but worth it if a soul is saved. He did say we would be face the same difficulties he faced. I do not want to hear Him ask me why I didn’t say something. I don’t want to hear “I was counting on you, I sent them too you…”

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Even Pope Francis who is speaking of Mercy more than any other Pope when formally speaking or writing (but not in interviews) is careful to include when you turn the father, when you repent, when you realize your mistake and return to following God’s will… prior to mercy. We want to give it up front and hope they understand. That has not worked well anywhere. Why? Could it be because Catholics see rules bent, ignored, delayed or even spoken against in their parishes and determine we are no different than the church down the road.

We have confusion over the exact words of Christ defining remarriage as adultery. Something caused that. Jesus speaks absolutely clearly and we determine it is better to not bring it up and walk with them? Jesus ate with sinners and surrounded Himself with them. He never chose to be silent so they would stay with Him and walk more. John 6 pretty much shows how Jesus handled those who did not want to hear the truth. He also mentions shaking dust off sandals and makes statements about those who deny Him. When we make a choice to protect others from the Truth are we not, at least for the moment, denying Him?

What does the couple living together expect you to say? They know they are not following church teaching on mass and sex. Not mentioning it so they do not feel uncomfortable in their sin improves their chances for taking the teaching seriously?

One of my kids told me of an Ash Wednesday service where the campus church (at college) was packed the Priest who was loved by the students, stopped at the end of his homily and told the kids how glad they were there. Said he noticed that many had not been coming to Mass and wanted them to receive the Eucharist but explained the need to go to confession first. That he could not let them come forward with out telling them the danger that could bring. He also said he would stay after Mass and hear confessions. Many stayed and church attendance went way up. Was it the Holy Spirit? Had to be. But the kids knew they should be going to Mass. They knew they should not receive. He spoke truth. Some did not come back. Most did. He cared so much about them he was willing to risk their leaving (sounds like free will and God to me) rather than not lovingly protect their souls. They felt that love. They watched a true believer and chose to stay. He knew if he was silent they were endangering their souls… and he would be showing them it was all right to continue doing as they were, no matter what the church said by that silence, at least that night.

I think the above covers your other points. I mean no disrespect. I have had tough situations as you mention. I have watched marriage crumble because a Priest told someone seeking divorce “of course divorced people can receive Communion” as an offhanded comment to a direct question. The person asking later told me they would not have filed if they would have been told their was a chance they would be in Mortal Sin… the Priest thought he was being Pastoral. Instead he signed the divorce decree that affected an active and devote Catholic family… and their friends… Three more active couple had one spouse file for divorce that year… all are still EMHC’s. Most teach in the school of religion or run retreats. What do the kids think about divorce? no big deal. I have seen our parish allow one who works with teens on staff post openly on facebook vacation photos of her on vacation with a “date” (she was one of the couples noted above) within 3 months of her divorce bragging about how good it felt to be loved… and 75% of her 300 “friends” she posts to are Catholic youth… what do they think about shacking up?

I watch another couple, support openly their daughter who is living with another woman and openly acting as the man in the relationship with wonderful details on facebook when 200 friends are youth or members of the parish… including all the staff …and they teach and serve in visible roles in the parish. One photo is them marching in a parade the next a statement about faith. Both are EMHC. What do those who see their stance against the Church think as they get Jesus from their hands? I have helped the husband, who does not go to the marches… whose eye are so telling as he struggles with a painful situation. He knows the truth. Is telling him everything is fine loving him? He knows what his daughter’s decision means, if our church is teaching truth.

So yes Father, I have had to deal with speaking truth. Some do not like it or do not want to hear it… They all have a common position… Their Truth is what matters most. If our Faith is as Jesus intended it to be, they are in grave danger. How do we not say something or delay telling it to them? What if they die before we get around to feeling comfortable bringing it up?

/…/

You are in violation of forum rules by your post.

DISCUSSION FORUMS

1. Messages posted to threads should be on-topic. If you wish to discuss another topic, start a new thread.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=2

The topic of this thread is “charismatic postures”.and the moderator is advised of this.

 

[buc_fan33]

Thank you for your opinion. All I can say is that I try to do the best I can with what I have. I fail regularly. Please pray for me.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Thank you for your opinion. All I can say is that I try to do the best I can with what I have. I fail regularly. Please pray for me.

Father, that is an exceedingly gracious response on your part.

That a lay person would dare to address an ordained cleric in the tone used in the posts I saw is a lay person undeserving of any response…at all.