Please pray for a Legalistic Priest

[The_Curt_Jester]

This is supposed to excuse the rude behavior? He prays after confession hence he has license to be nasty?

Nowhere was he mentioned to be rude and nasty. You made that up.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

I personally know a somewhat young legalistic priest who can be very direct. However, he will give explanations so that people, should they wish (not all do), can understand his decisions. Some people love him, some people dislike him, but I’ve yet to find a person who doesn’t at least respect him.

 

[bmadamsberry]

I personally know a somewhat young legalistic priest who can be very direct. However, he will give explanations so that people, should they wish (not all do), can understand his decisions. Some people love him, some people dislike him, but I’ve yet to find a person who doesn’t at least respect him.

I might be employing a different definition than you when I use the word legalistic. When I use the word, I mean someone who follows the rules and rubrics to a strict adherence for the sake of it being a rule. In my experience, this type of person will never allow for leniency, even when it is prescribed. These people tend to worship worship as opposed to worshiping G-d.

This is separate from someone that follows the rubrics and the rules closely, but understands and allows for those times when the situation and/or context demands or needs change (for example, the location of Mass, the size of the church building, etc.)

 

[Brendan]

It’s odd that you should bring up this scripture quote in a discussion about legalism; in your quote Jesus was specifically rebuking the Pharisees for… legalism! As He did in this passage as well (Luke 18:11).

Actually. no He was not.

If He was condeming legalism, He would not have started out the critique of the Pharisees as such

Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

Note that He was telling the people that they needed to follow the teachers of the Law, for they sit in the Chair of Moses ( a position now filled in the Chair of Peter)

But that the current ‘crop’ so to speak practiced what they did not preach.

Can the same be said for the Church, either the Pope, the bishops, or the priest in question.

The chapter was on HYPOCRISY, not on any legalism.

We see that again in Mt 23:15

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You traverse sea and land to make one convert, and when that happens you make him a child of Gehenna twice as much as yourselves.

So Christ’s ire was NOT directed at those who followed the law, in fact He directed all to do what they law givers directed.

What He objected to was Hypocrites, those who said one thing and did another.

If the priest mentioned in the OP was doing such, if he demanded that those in his parish followed all the rubrics to a ‘t’, but deliberately did not do so himself, then yes, he is deserving of critcism. If not, if he asked no more from others that he will do himself, then there are no grounds for critcism.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Gentleness and kindness like this?

(Mt 23:27-28)

Is that what you consider to be kindness and gentleness? If a priest said something like that, would you consider it to be charitable and Christ-like?

Christ, as we know, is all-loving; so clearly harsh words are sometimes the loving and charitable thing to say.

.

Maybe…sometimes…but not ALL the time! I would hope that you would know this Brendan.

Christ was not harsh all the time for the sake of the law…He cared about the heart…if harshness all the time causes our brothers/sisters to stumble then what good is it?

 

[bmadamsberry]

So Christ’s ire was NOT directed at those who followed the law, in fact He directed all to do what they law givers directed.

What He objected to was Hypocrites, those who said one thing and did another.

If the priest mentioned in the OP was doing such, if he demanded that those in his parish followed all the rubrics to a ‘t’, but deliberately did not do so himself, then yes, he is deserving of critcism. If not, if he asked no more from others that he will do himself, then there are no grounds for critcism.

There are times when Jesus did direct his ire against legalism, or a misguided rigor to the rubrics. For example, Jesus was often criticized for healing people on the Sabbath.

I am not saying that Jesus did not criticize the hypocrites, nor am I pushing for priests to be loosey-goosey with the rules or rubrics. I am stating that the reason for the law are what should drive someone to follow them, not simply the fact that they are rules. Furthermore, priests must understand when a rule is supposed to be followed strictly and when the very same rubrics allow for leeway.

 

[Brendan]

Maybe…sometimes…but not ALL the time! I would hope that you would know this Brendan.

Christ was not harsh all the time for the sake of the law…He cared about the heart…if harshness all the time causes our brothers/sisters to stumble then what good is it?

Has this priest been harsh all the time? If so, where was mentioned in this thread?

Has the OP mentioned that the priest in quesiton does not care about the heart? If so, I missed that part to. Could you please point out where that was said?

 

[bmadamsberry]

Has this priest been harsh all the time? If so, where was mentioned in this thread?

Has the OP mentioned that the priest in quesiton does not care about the heart? If so, I missed that part to. Could you please point out where that was said?

The OP asked for prayers, and so would doubtfully give a full, complete run down. I don’t think the OP was complaining as much as he/she was asking for prayers. Therefore, I doubt you’ll find all of that information.

 

[Aginghippy]

I’m not going to be more specific- I have no interest in “naming and shaming” anyone. I also didn’t mean to start a big debate about law and grace.
I’m just asking for prayers- if you think it’s somehow wrong to ask the Lord to soften a priest’s heart, then don’t do it.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Has this priest been harsh all the time? If so, where was mentioned in this thread?

Has the OP mentioned that the priest in quesiton does not care about the heart? If so, I missed that part to. Could you please point out where that was said?

“There is a new, young priest with his first parish. He’s very orthodox and intelligent. The problem is that he’s a legalist. What I mean by this is that he is very good at “laying down the law” but he does it without compassion or grace or charity. I know people who he has really hurt.”

From the OP…

So I don’t think it is just once in a while…I don’t know where you got that it was only when needed…otherwise the OP would not have asked for prayers.

As far as whether the priest cares about the heart…that I don’t know…but it doesn’t appear to be showing through his actions.

So I stand by my post…and I will pray for this priest.

As an aside…if we don’t know the reasons for the rules…what good is it?

 

[jilly4ski]

I’m not going to be more specific- I have no interest in “naming and shaming” anyone. I also didn’t mean to start a big debate about law and grace.
I’m just asking for prayers- if you think it’s somehow wrong to ask the Lord to soften a priest’s heart, then don’t do it.

Not knowing this priest and only what you describe, this seems like the wrong prayer. I will pray that the Lord soften the hearts of the community which this priest serves. I will ask the Lord to give him the words and patience to explain to the newly softened hearts why they are doing what they are doing.

 

[Brendan]

“There is a new, young priest with his first parish. He’s very orthodox and intelligent. The problem is that he’s a legalist. What I mean by this is that he is very good at “laying down the law” but he does it without compassion or grace or charity. I know people who he has really hurt.”

I’m sure the Pharisees in Mt 23 felt hurt and possibly even angry as well too. That means nothing really.

and I will pray for this priest.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I’m not going to be more specific- I have no interest in “naming and shaming” anyone. I also didn’t mean to start a big debate about law and grace.
I’m just asking for prayers- if you think it’s somehow wrong to ask the Lord to soften a priest’s heart, then don’t do it.

I understand. But please also understand that I don’t think people know what you mean when you say this priest is legalistic. I thinkt the posts reflect that.

If all you really are asking people to do is pray for this priest, that’s fine, and we all ought to do it. But since none of us knows whether he needs prayer for this particular reason, we’re all just kind of baffled, I think.

 

[bmadamsberry]

Annabelle Marie;9396685:

“The Vatican said so” should be enough for any of us.

Not for me. The Vatican has done things in the past that were wrong, bull-headed, or didn’t speak out against evil being done. The Vatican is not infallible, only the Pope and the Councils (under certain circumstances).

While I have obedience to my Pope and my Church, that does not mean that I simply take them on their word that what they say is best in regards to discipline and practice. I obey, but obeying does not mean that I can’t complain, ask why, and state my disagreement. One can be a good, orthodox Catholic and still disagree on matters of discipline and practice.

Only in matters of faith and morals, when proclaimed in the correct manner, is “The Holy See said so” enough. You must be careful not to conflate the rubrics and rules with dogma.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

“There is a new, young priest with his first parish. He’s very orthodox and intelligent. The problem is that he’s a legalist. What I mean by this is that he is very good at “laying down the law” but he does it without compassion or grace or charity. I know people who he has really hurt.”

I’m sure the Pharisees in Mt 23 felt hurt and possibly even angry as well too. That means nothing really.

I’m praying for him too.

“The Vatican said so” should be enough for any of us.

If some doesn’t get more of an explaination, that is no reason to feel hurt or upset. That speaks more to a false sense of entitlement than anything.

Part of having a shepherd means that we generally have to be sheep. I know it generally irks the modern mindset to be so, but, hey the Church calls us to be counter-cultural, doesn’t it

And what is commonly forgotten about ‘being pastoral’ is that if the sheep isn’t going where you need it to go, you wack it on the butt with your staff and then drag it; kicking and bleating if necessary.

Well…I know from experience as a child…just I said so means nothing and does nothing to really have roots in your faith…it’s not about entitlement…it’s about learning and growing in your faith.

What you seem to be espousing is actually a very Pharisee type approach. And seriously…being a shepard means wacking a sheep on its butt and dragging it back to the fold? That will last funny…I never saw Jesus doing that in the gospel… A priest that has your approach will have only a bunch of wounded sheep…

Case in point…the whole…you miss Mass on Sunday because that is the rule is unlikely to make people go…and that is not real love. Asking someone what is taking the place of God that makes them miss Mass is for more likely to have an effect.

The approach that you seem to espouse is why many people have left the Church…I dont think I would want to explain that to Christ in the next life. You can’t beat people into salvation…

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Not for me. The Vatican has done things in the past that were wrong, bull-headed, or didn’t speak out against evil being done. The Vatican is not infallible, only the Pope and the Councils (under certain circumstances).

While I have obedience to my Pope and my Church, that does not mean that I simply take them on their word that what they say is best in regards to discipline and practice. I obey, but obeying does not mean that I can’t complain, ask why, and state my disagreement. One can be a good, orthodox Catholic and still disagree on matters of discipline and practice.

Only in matters of faith and morals, when proclaimed in the correct manner, is “The Holy See said so” enough. You must be careful not to conflate the rubrics and rules with dogma.

Just a clarification…the quote says from me but it was from Brendan…I don’t agree with his quote at all…

 

[Brendan]

Brendan;9396838:

Not for me. The Vatican has done things in the past that were wrong, bull-headed, or didn’t speak out against evil being done. The Vatican is not infallible, only the Pope and the Councils (under certain circumstances)…

In which case, here IS the words of an Eccumenical Council

1. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

Pastor Aeternus - Vatican I

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Not anywhere near me but in another universe far, far away…
There is a new, young priest with his first parish. He’s very orthodox and intelligent. The problem is that he’s a legalist. What I mean by this is that he is very good at “laying down the law” but he does it without compassion or grace or charity. I know people who he has really hurt.
Please don’t get the impression from this that I am, in any way, a liberal or dissenting catholic- I’m not. On the contrary, most of my friends think that I’M a bit of a legalist and/or religious fanatic because I take the teachings of the church seriously and attend daily mass.
Please pray that the Holy Spirit might come into his heart and infuse some love into him. A priest can do so much good or he can do so much harm.

I hate threads like this.

All we have is one side of the story. This poor priest is not here to defend himself. We only have the word of one anonymous user on the internet.

I always pray for priests. I will especially remember this one as it seems there are those out there against him.

I will also pray for the user who posted this.

 

[wasserfall]

I’m not going to be more specific- I have no interest in “naming and shaming” anyone. I also didn’t mean to start a big debate about law and grace.
I’m just asking for prayers- if you think it’s somehow wrong to ask the Lord to soften a priest’s heart, then don’t do it.

So far we don’t have any reason to think the priest needs any “heart softening”
Maybe the cranky parishioners are the ones who need some “heart softening”

 

[bmadamsberry]

bmadamsberry;9397000:

In which case, here IS the words of an Eccumenical Council

Pastor Aeternus - Vatican I

What about it? Are you suggesting that I said something contrary to what this Ecumenical Council said?

Again, obedience does not mean we have to like it or agree with it. Furthermore, it doesn’t mean that we have to agree that a decision made by the Vatican is the correct one. Instead, we are simply to obey.

Submission does not mean that we agree. Just look at St. Paul, who chastised St. Peter for being a hypocrite, or look at St. Catherine of Siena, who disagreed with the Pope’s location (at that time, Avignon), the way he ran the Papal States, and with the way he allowed the clergy to live. All the while, though, these two examples obeyed the teachings of the Church and the Pope, respecting his office and providing him the obedience he deserves.