abs-cbnnews.com/nation/regions/04/19/11/priest-tells-rh-bill-supporters-leave-mass
Hahaha, over here in the western world our priests don’t do enough apparently, and over in the east they do overkill!
I don’t opt for either. Surely there is a way of approaching this issue without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It seems to me the priest in question lacks both imagination and charity.
I agree with you here. People may start off as supporting the bill, but through the Holy Spirit, a homily (or several) may convince them to change their minds.
I agree. On the other hand I want to support this priest. For sure the promoters of the culture of death want to get their hands on him
Did Jesus lack imagination and charity when he overturned tables at the Temple of Jerusalem? We have to be careful that we do not impute a negative strain on priests who openly speak of the hypocrisy committed by anti-life and anti-family Catholics.
You are right.
This is a very good point. The priest is doing his job by not mincing words and telling the people straight out that they’re not behaving like Catholics by supporting this bill. What’s the point of them going to mass if they’re not practicing their faith? Better for them to go home and think about what they’re doing to their souls instead of pretending everything’s alright.
But how do you make this happen? Turn the communion line into a question and answer line with, “do you support the RH Bill?” If yes then no Eucharist.
No, I don’t think Jesus lacked imagination or charity when he overturned the tables in the Temple of Jerusalem, but I do think this priest lacked imagination and charity. He could have approached the issue in a less confrontational way, allowing those members of the community who are in error to reflect on their mistakes and, with dignity, approach the issue from a different perspective. He could have started a dialogue which would have allowed the entire community to understand why those who supported the bill are wrong. He could have worked in such a way as to not alienate others, even those who support his position, by his heavy handed, we versus them attitude. Self righteousness is not the same thing as righteousness, and yet this poor priest has opened himself up to this charge in the way he approached the issue. As for Jesus, his ministry for three years was one of engaging the community in dialogue and attempting to build ties with those who needed change. His miracles were worked not only for those who believed as he did, but for those who did not as well. All he asked for was faith in him, not a member’s card. Jesus overturned the tables in the temple after three years of ministry and dialogue. His first call for change was not one of confrontation, but of communication. surely the priest in question could have discovered a better way to approach the issue than by creating division within the very community he is called to serve. The priest is correct in asking people to reflect on the positions they hold which may spiritually separate them from the Church, but he is incorrect, at this stage, in asking those people to separate themselves physically from the community.
Except for those who have committed public Scandal that the Priests know about,But how do you make this happen? Turn the communion line into a question and answer line with, “do you support the RH Bill?” If yes then no Eucharist.
In a way the priest wasn’t personally attacking anyone except for the politician whom he singled out. We have a saying in the Philippines, “bato-bato sa langit, ang tamaan wag magagalit.” (rock on the sky, whoever gets hit should not get angry). Usually when someone makes a statement that could hurt someone’s feelings, but its said in a way that its not directly pointed at someone specific and its left to each one’s conscience if they will get hurt by the statement or not.
But the priest also doesn’t know who are the supporters of the bill. He made a statement and if no one budged then he wouldn’t know.
As I have mentioned previously, we have to be careful that we do not impute a negative strain on priests who openly speak of the hypocrisy committed by anti-life and anti-family Catholics. How are priests being self-righteous when preaching what the Catholic Church teaches? When the priest in this case reminded the anti-life and anti-family Catholics that their disputes with Catholic teaching are incompatible with their worship of God, it was up to those Catholics to stay and reflect. That they chose to leave shows that the anti-life and anti-family Catholics were more concerned with their prestige than God’s. If they needed Him, they would have stayed notwithstanding the scolding from the pulpit.