MEGED:Help! Don't Like My Priest/Criticism of Priests

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1982
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I disagree. When a Priest or Bishop is in serious error, you have the obligation to tell him privately and in Charity, so that he does not continue to give scandal.

(A very few Priests and very few Bishops have made their own errors/disbeliefs public on You Tube, TV, or other public media. That was their decision.)

As a last resort and if the serious error continues, you have an obligation to contact the Vatican.
Remaining silent is what exacerbated the abuse issue.

NOW - As Catholics we must give the Office of our Bishops and Priests great respect and obedience in matters of Faith and Morals (as long as actions requested are within the teachings of the Church).

What would we do without them !

Please see the CCC 2nd Ed.regarding Bishops and Priests.

Pray for our Pope, all Bishops and all of our Priests. :signofcross:
 
I have to take issue with this. I agree with most of it, and I need to do much more praying for our priests. (And for humility, and charity.) …'scuse me for a minute. :gopray::signofcross:

But this:
Never again accept an out-of-the-way word about a priest, and speak no unkind word (about them). Even it were TRUE!
Click to expand...
I can only fall in with that in one sense. If Father is doing something that endangers his flock, and I know about it, I need to do something. But whatever I do, I must do with humility and charity, and without unkindness.

Thanks for making me think and learn about that.

God bless us all,

Ruthie
 
BlueSapphire said:
In light of all the media coverage of Priests etc., I thought I would post the following excerpt from the Pieta Prayer Book, (Our Lord’s Revelation to Mutter Vogel).

"One should NEVER attack a priest, even when he’s in error, rather one should pray and do penance that I’ll grant him My grace again. He alone fully represents Me, even when he doesn’t live after My example!

“When a Priest falls we should extend him a helping hand through prayer and not through attacks! I myself will be his judge, no one but I! Whoever voices judgment over a priest has voiced it over me; child, never let a Priest be attacked, take up his defense. Child, never judge your confessor, rather pray much for him and offer every Thursday, through the hands of My Blessed Mother, Holy Communion (for Him). Never again accept an out-of-the-way word about a priest, and speak no unkind word (about them). Even it were TRUE! Every Priest is My vicar and My Heart will be sickened and insulted because of it~ If you hear a judgment (against a Priest) pray a Hail Mary.”

“If you see a Priest who celebrates the Holy Mass unworthily then say nothing about him, rather tell it to Me alone! I stand beside Him on the altar! Oh pray much for my priests, that they’ll love purity above all, that they’ll celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with pure hands and heart. Certainly the Holy Sacrifice is one and the same even when it’s celebrated by an unworthy priest, but the graces called down upon the people is not the same!”

God Bless All!
Click to expand...
These words are beautiful, but it is a private revelation - how do we know that these words are the truth? As private revelation, are these words infallible? I find it hard to trust anything outside of the official teaching of the Magisterium, the catechism, and the Holy Bible. How can I trust these words that you quoted from a prayer book?
 
This thread is quite funny. Unless there’s some kind of serious error taking place in liturgy or theology then there’s just one thing to do: suck it up. Its called life, I’m sorry but you need to get used to it. You’re not going to like everyone you have to deal with in life and church is no exception.

A previous poster suggested you talk to him. My question is, what are you going to say, “I hate your personality”???
How would you like it if your parish priest decided to pull you aside and nitpick your idiosyncrasies?

Your parish priest is a human being who is someone’s son who’s simply doing the best he can. Unless there’s a serious liturgical or theological problem then just cut him some slack.
 
Hi guys,

I have a family member who umm…dislikes the deacon (thats puting it mildly.) A few things that bother him are that the deacon (in his eyes) often seems to be doing all the “important jobs” in the mass. He says that the deacon is “bullying” the priest to do what he wants. As well whenever he gives a homily, he will talk about his wife… a lot, and mention personal things (like kissing/hugging her, which doesn’t sit well with him.)

I have no problem with the deacon. I don’t enjoy his homilies too much but I attempt to find the wisdom within them (hard though it may be to spot them.) 😃 Yet this family member and others as well have voiced their dislike over him.

My suggestion was to ignore the deacon and listen to the mass or to write a letter to the pastor. Is their any suggestions you can make?
 
A start might be to clarify what your family member sees as the “important jobs” that the deacon is doing that he feels the deacon is “bullying” himself into, and compare those with the deacon’s valid role at Mass. The deacon’s valid role includes proclaiming the Gospel, occasional preaching of the homily, preparation of the cup, the Prayer of the Faithful, and distribution of Communtion, invitation to the Sign of Peace, and the Dismissal. Had to believe any deacon would successfully “bully” himself into a role reserved for the priest.

As far as his preaching style and topics, that’s a separate issue.
 
Mattapoisett64 said:
A start might be to clarify what your family member sees as the “important jobs” that the deacon is doing that he feels the deacon is “bullying” himself into, and compare those with the deacon’s valid role at Mass. The deacon’s valid role includes proclaiming the Gospel, occasional preaching of the homily, preparation of the cup, the Prayer of the Faithful, and distribution of Communtion, invitation to the Sign of Peace, and the Dismissal. Had to believe any deacon would successfully “bully” himself into a role reserved for the priest.

As far as his preaching style and topics, that’s a separate issue.
Click to expand...
I think that is pretty much what he does. I think this relative of mind is just imagining most of this, excluding the homily (I don’t even think thats bad.) Maybe I should explain what the Church has set out as vaild jobs for the deacon like you stated. Thank you. God Bless.
 
Jesus Christ:
“One should NEVER attack a priest, even when he’s in error”
Click to expand...
I think I’ll have that posted on my office door… 😃
 
In our local OF parish there are six smaller parishes. Most of the Traditionalists seem to gather at this one parish. We also have three Deacons(permanent) and they are all very liberal. So they tend not to get involved but about once a year in our small parish. They are very involved in the other 5 small parishes, however.

This is fine with us Traditionalists. One of the Deacons, in particular is very sarcastic with me and some of the others on those ocassions where we have met.

So my experience with permanent Deacons has not been very favorable.
 
You could always pray for your priest. I understand where you are coming from with the arrogance part…there is a priest where I go sometimes and he comes across so arrogant in his homilies. Not only is he arrogant, some of the stuff he preaches is false and/or heretical. He told told us two weeks ago that the Vatican prohibited kneeling during Communion!

The other thing with your priest is maybe he is a convert from being a Southern Baptist? We have about three priests in our diocese who are converts from the Southern Baptist religion.

The other thing with your priest being a “new” priest is that there has been a lot more emphasis on preaching in the seminaries in recent years. I think they have actually tried to copy some of the Protestant preaching styles in the seminaries to keep people more interested.
 
The deacon also raises the chalice at the elevation when the priest prays. 'through Him, and with Him, and in Him…". And outside of mass, he’s able to give blessings and officiate at baptisms, weddings (I think), wakes, and graveside services. In my parish and the neighboring one where I attend mass we have been very fortunate to have faithful and committed deacons. They never encroach on the role of the priest and some of them preach well. It’s left up to the pastor how often he wants them to preach.

A letter to the pastor to encourage him to preach the homily more frequently might not be a bad idea if it were phrased in just the right way, or offered helpful suggestions about how the deacon’s homilies could be more effective.

Does your husband realize that deacons are ordained (have received what might be termed the first level of the sacrament of holy orders)? They are appointed by the bishop and are given the faculty to preach by the bishop. Just as we receive the priest because he’s sent to us, we receive the deacon. Even if we don’t personally like him, we should show him respect.
 
BlueSapphire said:
In light of all the media coverage of Priests etc., I thought I would post the following excerpt from the Pieta Prayer Book, (Our Lord’s Revelation to Mutter Vogel).

"One should NEVER attack a priest, even when he’s in error, rather one should pray and do penance that I’ll grant him My grace again. He alone fully represents Me, even when he doesn’t live after My example!

“When a Priest falls we should extend him a helping hand through prayer and not through attacks! I myself will be his judge, no one but I! Whoever voices judgment over a priest has voiced it over me; child, never let a Priest be attacked, take up his defense. Child, never judge your confessor, rather pray much for him and offer every Thursday, through the hands of My Blessed Mother, Holy Communion (for Him). Never again accept an out-of-the-way word about a priest, and speak no unkind word (about them). Even it were TRUE! Every Priest is My vicar and My Heart will be sickened and insulted because of it~ If you hear a judgment (against a Priest) pray a Hail Mary.”

“If you see a Priest who celebrates the Holy Mass unworthily then say nothing about him, rather tell it to Me alone! I stand beside Him on the altar! Oh pray much for my priests, that they’ll love purity above all, that they’ll celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with pure hands and heart. Certainly the Holy Sacrifice is one and the same even when it’s celebrated by an unworthy priest, but the graces called down upon the people is not the same!”

God Bless All!
Click to expand...
However, if a priest is committing liturgical abuse, this needs to be brought up, charitably, of course. The priest cannot amend the Mass to his own liking and insert and imbed things into the Holy Sacrifice that do not belong there in the first place.

Redemptionis Sacramentum obligates everyone, including the faithful, to charitably point things out in error. If the priest refuses to listen and to make amends, then, the next step is to address this issue to the bishop. If the bishop does not do anything, Redemptionis Sacramentum gives the faithful the right to address this to the Holy See.

What you quoted is from private revelation. We are not obliged to believe in private revelations.
 
I’m wondering if the text needs nuancing. Let me explain myself.

In our rule and our constitutions we do have a pasage written by Francis himself that obliges every one of our brothers to avoid passing judgment on any superior, deacon, priest, bishop or pope under Francis’ personal promise of eternal damnation. At first glance it appears as if one cannot use critical thinking and as if it is Francis doing the damning.

However, when one studies what was behind the writing of the admonition one finds that at the time the laity had made it their “job” to attack the clergy at every turn. Francis is trying to protect his brothers from anti-clericalism. Therefore, he proceed to describe the behavior of the anti-clerical movement and to condemn it. It is not he who is dong the sentencing to eternal damnation, but Christ who does it, because as scripture said about Christ and the Apostles, “He who hears you , hears me.”

Francis did not need to explain himself, because the brothers undestood. But 50 years later, Bonaventure had to explain the history to that third generation of brothers who had never met Francis.

Maybe the writer is speaking about a great truth, as was Francis, but it may need nuancing. When Bonavneture nuanced Francis’ admonition it played out a little differently. The brothers may never pass judgment on any religious superior or member of the clergy. They must always obey, even when that superior or member of the clergy is wrong, because God is pleased by their obedience. We know this to be true, because it was revealed to Francis by Jesus himself and the revelation was confirmed by a Bull from Pope Honorius III. However, there is also another admonition it in the same revelation, which is also sealed by the Pope’s Bull. That adomition says that no one in authority may ever command or exepect from another what the Church has identified as sin. To decline is not disobedience.

There is a third admonition in the same document, fraternal correction is an act of charity as long as it complies with three rules: 1) It must be done in private. 2) It must be done by someone who has the auhority to correct and 3) It must be done by someone whom Francis has deemed worthy of correcting others. There is not condemnation of Fraternal correciton. However, for the sake of charity and justice, fraternal correction must be properly excecuted by those who have the autority and the knowledge to do so. That’s going to vary from one situation to another.

For example, we do not use this too often, because our belief is that each of us a far greater sinner than the next person. Therefore, we alway refer those cases in need of correction to those who are better than we are so that they can execute the correction.

This is what I mean by nuance. You have to take what was written in that passage and place it in its proper historicla context. Then you have to decide by whose autority the statement was written. When you put it together ,then you can restate it in a way that is clearer for the 21st century reader. If having done all of this you find that it is consistent with the teaching of the Chruch, then it is valid.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
With all due respect to JREducation, inasmuch as I did not quote his post because it was rather lengthy, there is something that his words, in my opinion, do not take into account.

This is what Redemptionis Sacramentum has to say:
  1. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters
    [183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.
Click to expand...
[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.290 It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.
Click to expand...
If the Holy See had not considered liturgical abuse to be such a serious matter, it would not have promulgated Redemptionis Sacramentum. Bringing the commission of liturgical abuse to the priest who may be engaged in doing this is not a criticism of the priest. The greater harm, in my opinion, is the rupture that such abuse causes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In this case, silence on matters involving liturgical abuase is, in my opinion, equal to ascent.

While I can see JREducation’s point about fraternal correction, RS did not indicate that such was to occur based on someone having authority over the party being corrected. Were that the case, then what about St. Catherine of Sienna who pretty much told the pope that he had to leave the comfort and security of Avignon and go back to Rome? Obviously she was not in a position of authority, but, she told it like it was.
 
benedictgal said:
The priest cannot amend the Mass to his own liking and insert and imbed things into the Holy Sacrifice that do not belong there in the first place.
Click to expand...
LOL of course he can. Aren’t there about 20 messages per week on this website alone about priests doing this during so-called ordinary form masses?
 
pro_multis said:
LOL of course he can. Aren’t there about 20 messages per week on this website alone about priests doing this during so-called ordinary form masses?
Click to expand...
Just because he does it, that does not mean that it’s right and proper.
 
Not to worry–I LOVE our priest…he does so much and more. He shows the love of Christ everyday. I’m sure that there are those people who have a gripe about this or that. Maybe about his homilys because it hits them right where it hurts…😃 To me…that just means that he is doing what is supposed to do:thumbsup: And if he has one that hits me right where it hurts…well that means I need to start doing what I’m supposed to do…😉
 
Flame4 said:
Hi guys,

I have a family member who umm…dislikes the deacon (thats puting it mildly.) A few things that bother him are that the deacon (in his eyes) often seems to be doing all the “important jobs” in the mass. He says that the deacon is “bullying” the priest to do what he wants. As well whenever he gives a homily, he will talk about his wife… a lot, and mention personal things (like kissing/hugging her, which doesn’t sit well with him.)

I have no problem with the deacon. I don’t enjoy his homilies too much but I attempt to find the wisdom within them (hard though it may be to spot them.) 😃 Yet this family member and others as well have voiced their dislike over him.

My suggestion was to ignore the deacon and listen to the mass or to write a letter to the pastor. Is their any suggestions you can make?
Click to expand...
I am certainly going to follow this thread! The permanent deacon in my parish is our cross to bear. Without getting into details he takes a horrific toll on the Mass due to personal arrogance, limited intrinsic gifts and what must have been a terrible formation. It’s very tough.

On the other hand we have a transitional deacon in our parish right now and a permanent deacon from another diocese who will be with us while he is on academic sabbatical. Both are just wonderful.

It’s truly heartbreaking to see just how much a good deacon can add to the Mass in light of just how much our permanent deacon detracts from our Masses – and will no doubt for years to come.
 
I find some serious faults with this. It sounds good on the surface, and in a perfect world where the only faults of a priest are the occasional remark, accidental liturgical abuse, or other minor thing. But in the real world, there are bigger issues. What about a sexual abuse priest? What about a priest that commits a serious liturgical abuse on purpose? What about a priest like Michael Louis Pfleger? I am very weary of anyone that can find no fault in a priest, bishop, or pope. There are differences between things that I don’t like, and things that need to be corrected (sometimes these are the same things, sometimes not).
 
benedictgal said:
With all due respect to JREducation, inasmuch as I did not quote his post because it was rather lengthy, there is something that his words, in my opinion, do not take into account.

This is what Redemptionis Sacramentum has to say:
Click to expand...
I didn’t mention RS, because that’s not the question. The question is about correction. I was sharing the principles of correction. These have never changed.
If the Holy See had not considered liturgical abuse to be such a serious matter, it would not have promulgated Redemptionis Sacramentum. Bringing the commission of liturgical abuse to the priest who may be engaged in doing this is not a criticism of the priest. The greater harm, in my opinion, is the rupture that such abuse causes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In this case, silence on matters involving liturgical abuase is, in my opinion, equal to ascent.
Click to expand...
Again, the question is about correcition. I did not hear anyone ask about what to do in the case of a liturgical problem. Had I heard or see that question, I would have responded accordingly.

Benedictgal, we have to recall that not everything is a liturgical problem, even when it’s posted on this forum. People often posts questions that cover a wide area over and beyond liturgy and we have to give the responses according to their questions.
While I can see JREducation’s point about fraternal correction, RS did not indicate that such was to occur based on someone having authority over the party being corrected. Were that the case, then what about St. Catherine of Sienna who pretty much told the pope that he had to leave the comfort and security of Avignon and go back to Rome? Obviously she was not in a position of authority, but, she told it like it was.
Click to expand...
Let’s look at two points here:
  1. There is a chain of command that must be followed. RS does not encourage people to avoid that. In fact, it specifically mentions going to the bishop before the Holy See. It respects the chain of command. This is not new to the RS. This has been in place for over 1,000 years. This is the very thing that I was speaking about before in my earlier post. Followt the chain of command, regardless of the abuse or the wrong done.
  2. St. Catherine’s statement to the Holy Father has been the excuse for more abuse by those who want to govern and control the clergy than any other that I can think of. The fact is that it did not happenas people have said, so don’t let people fool you. There is a wonderful lecture by the Dominicans on St. Catherine. It was on EWTN last year. Maybe you can find it through them.
I was surprised to find that much of what is attributed to her never happened. This was one of those stories. The friars explain the story as follows. Catherine and the pope were on very friendly terms. One would call it first-name basis. The Holy Father knew who she was and was very fond of her and trusted her judgment. He had known her before he became pope. Catherine had earned his admiration and affection, not only because of her wit and sinsight, but also because she always concluded every communication between her and the bishops or the pope by expressing her love and obedience to the Church. She always said that she would accept whatever the bishop or pope decided. This humility was very different from how she is protrayed. She is often prortrayed as uncomprimising with the bishops and popes. This is not true at all. She was honest, informative and helpful to them. But she was alwasy willing to submit to their choices and she let them know this. Her approach to them was very much in line with that of other great saints: Francis, Teresa of Avila, Bernard, Mother Teresa and so forth. All of these folks were honest, but not confrontational or challenging.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top