Homily on sexual morality

[Don_Ruggero]

Correct…which is why it would be prudent for online posters not to say that what he did was wrong.

Thank you for jogging my memory on a comment worth making:

@CilladeRoma: you spoke of the programme your previous pastor had put in place with regard to the ministry to the homebound, which this young priest has suspended.

You should be in contact with your former pastor since, as you say, the Bishop needed him in a larger parish – and therefore would have the Bishop’s confidence – to explain the ministry to the homebound that he had in place and how it operated.

That could be very very important, actually, in alerting the Bishop to what is happening in this parish and we have a special credence in the Bishop’s eyes. Your former Pastor is your best advocate, actually. That would be my suggestion.

Hopefully the Bishop and his curia will readily understand.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Yes, being young and being a recent convert are both relevant.

His age brings in his inexperience in dealing with people and being a “boss”. Both of which he admits are problems for him.

As far as attaching himself to pre-VII traditions, I have no problem with what he wants to do personally.

My issue comes with people who never knew anything or had any experience with the pre-VII Chruch who come in and start telling those who lived through it how wonderful it was.

Look, I am not anti-priest, anti-traditon or a raging liberal.

I am watching my parish implode because of some very bad choices that have been made by a young, inexperienced priest. It is very difficult and sad to see. I started the original post to see if anyone else had ever had any experience with a situation like this. From most of the replies- it has been no, no real experience, but hey, we think it’s great!

Well, it’s not so great. In fact, it is heart-breaking.

This is all very very well said.

One of the best things we did in my parishes was using just the model you describe regarding ministry to the homebound…making one of the family members an extraordinary minister so that they could take the Eucharist to their family member, following Mass. It was a success in every way. Some people who were homebound were able even to be daily communicants again.

When I think back to days long past, I am so grateful for the advances in pastoral care for the homebound – and for the extraordinary ministers who have become its backbone. The same, of course, for these wonderful ministers who make possible such greater coverage to hospitals and nursing homes, hospices and other institutions.

 

[TheLittleLady]

I am guessing the name is a play on the animal a “chipmunk”

 

[OraLabora]

Thanks Fr. Ruggero. A couple of months ago I was working at the abbey library with the monk who is librarian and the former oblate master and guest master, as I do every Wednesday. As I am keen on aviation (private pilot), he wanted to introduce me to someone he knew who was on retreat at the monastery that week, who is a commercial helicopter pilot. We had a nice chat with him. Afterwards he told me the helicopter pilot’s story. He ended up on the monastery’s doorstep a complete basket case, an alcoholic drug addict, whose life was a complete mess.

Dom C., the librarian and then guest master, took him under his wing. He sobered up, detoxed, started to put the pieces of his life back together and was able to achieve his dream of becoming a helicopter pilot. To this day he is clean and sober. And it is clearly obvious that he has a great deal of appreciation and affection for Dom C., as I do.

This is what Christian accompaniment, monastic-style is all about.

 

[ChunkMonk]

It seems that the ones most in favour of fire and brimstone are the ones needing it the least.

You didn’t answer my questions, which makes me think I know exactly what the answer is. As long as it’s a liberal soft and gentle, I am obligated to follow it. When it’s fire and brimstone conservatism, then I can rebel and blame the priest.

I’ll tell you this. All the soft and gentle ‘Welcome dear sinner!’ stuff never brought me back. It was fear of Hell.

Then why do you present yourself on a Catholic forum as having a connection to monastic life? That is grotesque…to represent yourself as a monk when you are not.

Maybe it’s something to do with being foreign but you and Ora-whatever are the obly ones to ever assume I am an actual monk. Most people see it as the silly name it is. Any way, I have never ‘represented myself’ as a monk.

Btw, I have never heard conservative, traditionalist priests encourage rebellion against older, liberal, progressive priests.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

This is what Christian accompaniment, monastic-style is all about.

Indeed…

 

[Don_Ruggero]

These are some mighty strong words.

And totally inappropriate.

You are comparing the comments of a learned priest in two different situations and trying to paint him as inconsistent. For shame.

It’s of no significance to me…what is important is that you have now a course of action for you and your fellow parishioners to pursue with the diocese to underscore that the most in need are the ones who are suffering in this circumstance. From there, the other situations can be explained in turn.

As Pope Benedict said so beautifully,

I would also like to emphasize the importance of the Eucharist. Received at a time of illness, it contributes in a singular way to working this transformation, associating the person who partakes of the Body and Blood of Christ to the offering that he made of himself to the Father for the salvation of all. The whole ecclesial community, and parish communities in particular, should pay attention to guaranteeing the possibility of frequently receiving Holy Communion, to those people who, for reasons of health or age, cannot go to a place of worship. In this way, these brothers and sisters are offered the possibility of strengthening their relationship with Christ, crucified and risen, participating, through their lives offered up for love of Christ, in the very mission of the Church.

I assure you of my prayers, that the diocese will help you in this most unfortunate circumstance.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Maybe I am being too harsh but it really bugs me that a young priest who is new to a parish is facing a literal organized coup against his authority because he happened to upset the balance. You said he’s been there for nine weeks and hasn’t really broken any rules or violated any laws, but he’s now facing total rebellion because he doesn’t do things the way your old priest did them.

And then to see this encouraged by others, that makes it very painful. I would feel the same way if he was ‘liberal’ and your parish was hyper-conservative or whatever. Even actual abuses by priests should be handled with care by the laity, but you aren’t even alleging abuse. You’re just saying you don’t like the way things are changing. Perhaps it doesn’t help that your post somewhat sounds like the “insider clique” that every Church has is upset and feels like they need to teach this priest a lesson about who is really in charge. That kind of stuff really bugs me.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Yes, you are being harsh, because none of what you think is even remotely true.

There is no “rebellion”.
It is genuine concern for the pastoral needs of the parish. That is what is being upset.

I understand all too well what damage cliques, I assure you, and anyone else who may feel that way, this is not the case.

I , nor does the rest of the parish want this priest to fail, or to get in trouble. We want him to know that we have needs, customs and traditions too. All we are asking is for the common courtesy of some dialogue as to why he is make so many changes so fast.

 

[Rau]

he’s now facing total rebellion because he doesn’t do things the way your old priest did them.

Or is he facing fierce objection for taking steps that adversely affect those they are meant to serve, and for which he expresses no good reason? Sounds like a Prima facie case for a “polite please explain”. He is not a medieval king.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

My issue comes with people who never knew anything or had any experience with the pre-VII Chruch who come in and start telling those who lived through it how wonderful it was.

Which is something many of us of that age group experience.

Of course, what such people say has no basis in what really was.

 

[KMG]

The laity do not determine “the pastoral needs of the parish.”

I am seriously fascinated at how this thread brings out Don Ruggero and the argument of, the laity should be encouraged to go report this priest…who has done nothing in violation of Church teaching…and on another thread, the views of the laity were condemned as uneducated and meaningless.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Again. This is comparing apples to oranges in an attempt to make a priest look bad.

I have repeatedly stated that we are not “out to get” this priest. There is genuine concern that pastoral needs are not being met. And just who exactly is better than stating that fact but the very people whose needs are not being met.

 

[KMG]

Again, we have no idea what abuses this priest may be aware of that must be stopped…and nothing reported of this priest’s decisions violates Church teaching or acceptable practice.

 

[KMG]

I remember the Church pre-Vatican II, and have quite fond memories.

 

[CilladeRoma]

There are no abuses!!
These are decisions that have been made with little (name removed by moderator)ut or experience with anyone, including his own parish staff.
This is the problem. The laity have rights too. We have no problem listening to what this priest has to say and trying to have a dialogue and reach a mutually agreeable compromise.

 

[FrDavid96]

There are no abuses!!
These are decisions that have been made with little (name removed by moderator)ut or experience with anyone, including his own parish staff.
This is the problem. The laity have rights too. We have no problem listening to what this priest has to say and trying to have a dialogue and reach a mutually agreeable compromise.

This is why your posts are a bit confusing.

You keep repeating that “pastoral needs are not being met.”

I’ve read through the thread. I do not see anywhere, anything that indicates that pastoral needs are not being met.

Maybe you don’t want to articulate what they are. Fine. I respect that.

It’s just that it is very difficult for someone here to understand what you’re trying to say.

It isn’t that we don’t want to listen…it’s that nothing you have said so far is an indication that any pastoral needs are going unmet.

If you said that he no longer offers daily Mass, or that he won’t do any blessings, or that he doesn’t visit the sick, or that he doesn’t preach on Sundays, or cancelled the religious Ed. classes, or any number of other things, then we might understand you better.

So far, it seems like he may (just may) have gone a bit overboard in a homily. OK. We all give some bad homilies from time-to-time, and that’s especially true of a newly ordained priest.

Other than that, you’ve told us that he is actually exercising his proper ministry by taking Communion to the sick. Good for him! That’s his job and his proper ministry. We need more priest like that.

You just keep repeating that pastoral needs aren’t being met, but we don’t know what they are. Now, it’s none of our business either. If you choose to share them (without revealing anything identifying), that’s up to you.

 

[CilladeRoma]

What you see as his “right”, the parish, just about every priest & deacon I know personally and many people on this forum, see as a failure to meet pastoral needs.
I have been involved with the pastoral care of the sick and home bound in my diocese for many years, in many different capacities. What he has done is unprecedented, and there has been no reason or explanation given.

This was originally about a homily, and looking for advice from people who have dealt with this. Apparently there is not much experience, which tells me, thankfully this is not a huge problem.
Other information was offered, just so people didn’t think I was just here to complain. The homily was just another thing in a series of events that has caused anguish, sadness and hostility.

 

[Rau]

the laity should be encouraged to go report this priest…who has done nothing in violation of Church teaching…

The actions of a priest are above criticism, above reproach unless he violates church teaching? Don’t be ridiculous.

 

[Rau]

Again, we have no idea what abuses this priest may be aware of that must be stopped…

No, we don’t…so he can explain himself to a concerned and responsible parishioner, or if he prefers (or if that is precluded for some other reason), to his superiors. There is no obligation on parishioners to be docile or apathetic in the face of unexplained actions that detract from the pastoral care of parishioners (assuming that is their assessment).