Homily on sexual morality

  • Thread starter Thread starter CilladeRoma
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Many prayers for a good meeting next week.

Again, I haven’t experienced this type of situation first hand, so I can’t advise you from a place of having successfully navigated this. My best advice would be to try to befriend the priest as much as possible. Invite him over to dinner. Be friendly. And be sure to point out the good things that he is doing. Then, hopefully, he will be more open to hearing concerns from you.

Like with the visitation ministry, it really is good that he wants to participate in that himself. Having the priest pay personal visits to the sick and homebound is a beautiful thing. And of course he is correct that people don’t need to receive Communion every week. He knows that. You know that. However, the sick and homebound are now experiencing a loss of something they used to have. That’s going to sting no matter what. They desire to receive the Lord in the Eucharist. That is a good thing that should be encouraged.

I guess my general approach is to affirm the good being done, and bring up the negative in such a way that places the focus more on the undesirable consequences (i.e. the parishioners who are hurt) rather than on finger-pointing.
 
And we all still plan to do that. Never said we were going to stop visiting.

What is sad is that people who are used to being able to be part of the community, by receiving communion from their home parish visitors, on a weekly basis are no longer going to get that grace.

Anyway you cut it- that is very sad to me.
 
Thanks.

I am really trying to be the voice of reason at the parish. I have had many people all sorts of crazy ideas that I have to help see through their anger & frustration.

We can use all the prayers we can get, so thanks again! 😀
 
Last edited:
exnihilo said:
I’ve experienced a very good and orthodox priest run out of a parish because he implemented some changes well into his pastorship and after educating the laity as to why. I’ve seen what angry lay people can do to a dedicated priest. That is sad to see when it is the priest who dedicates his life in a special way in service to the laity.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen things like this happen before, too. I really don’t think that’s the scenario the OP is experiencing, though. From what she has described, he has made some changes that aren’t necessarily wrong, but aren’t seeking to address any abuse. I knew a priest that had to make some pretty sweeping changes right off the bat because, for example, the “bread and wine ministers” would just go back to the sacristy and grab some unconsecrated hosts if they ran out while distributing Communion. That’s the type of thing that needs to be addressed right away. The OP has described nothing like that.

And yes, it’s possible there are things going on that even the OP doesn’t know about. And yes, she should give the priest the benefit of the doubt (and it seems that she has as far as I can tell). But he’s also a young priest and (from what I gather) this is the first parish he’s in charge of. So it’s not disrespectful to (gently, charitably) point out that some of his decisions are alienating his parishioners. You can do the right thing in the wrong way. And he is learning, too.

The OP didn’t come here just to gripe and vent and put down her priest. She is looking for feedback from people who have been through such things before. I’m a strong advocate for respecting our clergy and being humble and obedient as much as possible. And I think the OP would agree with that. But it doesn’t exclude a little brainstorming on how best to manage the problems that arise.
 
ChunkMonk said:
I like passionate homilies. I like fire and brimstone.
Click to expand...
That’s you’re prerogative. I happen to prefer a more humble Benedictine approach, which might explain why I hang around in a monastery so much.

I will say this: I know of a number of people brought back to the faith by the monks of the abbey in which I’m sitting as I write this on my lunch break. Very broken people: drug addicts, alcoholics, sexohaulics, divorced, abused, you name it. Not only back to the faith, but on the road to healing. Oddly, the monks choose instead to remind them of God’s love, to never despair of His mercy, they only have to ask, and to remind them that Christ can be their constant companion, ready to help them back on their feet when they hit hard times, or fall again.

I would be hard pressed to name a single Catholic in my acquaintances who were brought home by fire and brimstone, and I know more than one turned off by it.

It seems that the ones most in favour of fire and brimstone are the ones needing it the least. In other words, the fire and brimstone homilies are largely preaching to the choir of True Believers.

I suspect that in at least some fire and brimstone lovers (not saying this is you) there’s more than a little « thank God I’m not like that sinner over there… »
 
Abraham and Sarah had a child when they were under the impression they couldn’t “create life”.
 
It sounds like the parishioners have already decided that they don’t like the priest, and are working against him rather than allowing him to do his job.

It seems like he believes that EMHCs are overused in the parish. Has anyone suggested continuing to visit the sick without bringing them Communion? For many of them, that weekly visit is probably their only contact with someone outside their homes. You could still bring them the Mass readings and pray with them.
 
God isn’t trying to establish a new covenant with every post-menopausal or post-hysterectomy couple… :roll_eyes:

Being realistic, there is no modern evidence of spontaneous post-menopausal pregnancy.
 
Last edited:
CilladeRoma said:
Spouses, except in extreme situations, will no longer be able to bring Communion home to their homebound spouse (or same for adult caregivers), all of who were duly trained.
Click to expand...
That’s not their ministry in the first place. It isn’t their role. That’s the role of the pastor (administrator) or some other priest, or even a deacon if no priest is available.

If the priest is taking them Holy Communion once a month, that’s sufficient, and even better because only he can offer them the other priestly ministries, especially Confession and (if appropriate) Anointing.

The problem is not that the priest took away their role, but that their role was misunderstood because of the practices of the previous pastors.
 
MikeInVA said:
…
It seems like he believes that EMHCs are overused in the parish. Has anyone suggested continuing to visit the sick without bringing them Communion? …
Click to expand...
I’ve dealt with this same issue.

Too often people don’t want to visit the sick unless they’re performing the role that properly belongs to the priest. It’s an indication of where their true priorities lie.
 
CilladeRoma said:
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
Click to expand...
How do you know he has no experience with pre-Vatican II, i.e., traditional latin mass? One does not need to have attended mass prior to 1962 in order to have a familiarity with the Latin Mass. Besides, you speak of the pre-Vatican II era as if it were some kind of war like age to have been lived through. Why? The Tridentine Mass is wonderful.
CilladeRoma said:
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!
Click to expand...
One also does not need to have been physically present for a homily on Catholic sexual morality in order to have an opinion on such a homily’s merits. I’ve never had the pleasure of physically listening to a priest preach a homily on sexual morality, but I sure would love it.

What’s the problem with that? The pulpit provides an attentive audience who are in need of hearing these things. I wish it’d be done more often.
 
Without going into detail I can understand the upset that can result from a new priest with very different ideas from his predecessor. And I can understand the upset felt by the housebound (and their spouses) from not being able to receive Communion at home as frequently as they have become used to (that is an issue that needs delicate handling ).

But are you so sure that there are not people in your parish who welcome the new direction? I’m not a ‘rad-trad’, but if a new priest arrived saying that he would be giving sermons on difficult teachings, reducing the numbers of EMHCs and steering the parish in a more traditional direction, I think I’d be quite pleased.

If he was young and a convert, I’d be happy about that also. Young priests seem full of fervour and converts seem passionate about the Catholic Faith.

Perhaps give him a chance?
 
I do believe in grace. And I do understand and see daily in parish work that people resist grace. They fight it tooth and nail.
What else would we talk about in classes? This is our faith. We cover everything. And it’s always because parents won’t do it.
We had a child in class whose Father thought he could beat him into being straight.
When he hung himself, we really had to explain the teachings of the church to the teens because they were CONFUSED. PArents say one thing, explain the church teachings erroneously, and tragedy occurs.
When children hurt, we are there.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
Classes are there for a reason. We don’t just sit around and look pious.
I know that’s not what you mean, but really…we don’t send that “you’re done” message. People just refuse to comply. And the children pay the ultimate price. It’s not me that pays for competitive cheerleading that conflicts with their Sunday obligation not to mention classes. It’s not me that values Eagle Scout over Confirmation.
The priests don’t overschedule the teens. Their parents do.
Children receive grace in Baptism. They receive it in the Sacrament of Penance. When they receive Holy Communion weekly.
We are not leaving the children unequipped in terms of grace.
Why wouldn’t parents want their kids in church???
That is the real question.

Peace.
 
Did I say I was not going to give him a chance?

Look, I understand all of this. I am being approached by people of the parish who trust me, and who know that I have the education to give them answers.

We are talking about a priest who has not taken even a minute to get to know anyone.
He has been in our parish for exactly 9 weeks.

Our previous Partor was a very holy, orthodox priest. We are not a parish rife with abuses. We are in this situation because our Bishop needed our Pastor and his experience to take over a much larger parish. It has all come as a very big shock to these people and now they feel like no one cares about them or their needs at all.

It is a very difficult situation, and one that I hope many of you never find yourself in.
 
OraLabora said:
I would be hard pressed to name a single Catholic in my acquaintances who were brought home by fire and brimstone, and I know more than one turned off by it.

It seems that the ones most in favour of fire and brimstone are the ones needing it the least. In other words, the fire and brimstone homilies are largely preaching to the choir of True Believers.

I suspect that in at least some fire and brimstone lovers (not saying this is you) there’s more than a little « thank God I’m not like that sinner over there… »
Click to expand...
My issue is it seems to me like those who like ‘fire and brimstone’ aren’t denying that other approaches can be useful. They aren’t saying they can’t see how someone could be turned off by this. But the people who don’t think ‘fire and brimstone’ is helpful categorically say that approach is helpful for no one. I see no reason to believe this.

I like fire and brimstone because it motivates me. I like it because I need to be reminded of just how bad sin is. Homilies like this might be necessary to keep the ‘choir’ motivated.

As for motivations I could speculate those who don’t want to hear fire and brimstone don’t want their consciences tweaked about sins they aren’t serious about stopping. I am not doing so. My point is why speculate at all about motives?
 
OraLabora said:
I would be hard pressed to name a single Catholic in my acquaintances who were brought home by fire and brimstone, and I know more than one turned off by it.
Click to expand...
I am a bit mystified as to why they would be so against it. Plenty of Protestant evangelicals seem to be brought to the Lord by a good dose of fire and brimstone followed by a mercy message.

And as I stated above, I was a bad sinner for a long time, and I am never going to be the person pointing fingers at somebody in the next pew as being a worse sinner than me or feeling good about the priest “sticking it to” a bunch of “bad people”. I simply believe in being clear and direct about what the Church teaches on sin.

Edited to add, I can’t help but feel that Catholics being turned off by talking about sin is the result of what happens when priests are either afraid to mention the word “sin” for 50 years or there is so much confusion in the Church over that amount of time as to what is and isn’t acceptable that everybody got lost off the path.
 
Last edited:
I wish your parish well and hope things work out in the end. I think that unless people have been in this sort of situation they don’t really realise how painful a process like this is.

I will include your parish in my prayers.
 
Last edited:
I think this is so beautiful. Pope Francis (and others before him) speaks so much about accompaniment. We need to remember that this is how we bring people to Christ.
 
exnihilo said:
It may be not the best decision, or his motivation may not be expressed as well as it could be. But it remains his right.
Click to expand...
I didn’t think the priest’s “rights” were in debate, rather the quality of his decisions and their acceptability to members of the parish. They have the right to disagree, object, complain to the priest and to the bishop. Some view the members of the parish as owing complete docility to the priest, but that’s not a commonly held position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top