Priest's greeting of lapsed catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frinders
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There’s definitely been a trend in the last 20 years in USA to shift the baptism to right after the Mass rather than during, perhaps for the reason you describe. From about the 70s to the 90s, there was an emphasis on baptism being part of the Mass so the congregation could welcome the new member or participate in the baby’s joining us as a member or something. The baptismal fonts in many churches were also front and center on the altar then. When we got married, the priest adamantly refused to move the wooden font away from the front of the altar, so it is in all our pictures and we had to move around it and the photographer was not happy having to shoot around it, but he managed.

I have since noticed that in that church as well as in several others, the fonts have been moved so they are still somewhere near the altar but in a less prominent place. In other even newer churches, they are back to being situated at the rear of the church, though still in the worship space.
 
Last edited:
I guess it’s what comes from people being more mobile. I imagine when my dad and his siblings were baptised in the 60s a lot of the extended family would attend the same church and it wouldn’t occur to typical working class folk to travel and stay overnight for a baptism.
 
I would say, “how would Jesus approach this”, also I asj myself how would I approach this.

Jesus would send the accusers away with a flea in their ear, I feel pretty certain about that. Faith starts as a mustard seed, very small, that is the start. Later, it grows into a tree. You can of course crush it, crushing a seed is comparitively easy, a tree one might find difficulty with.

Now how would I approach it: I would say “come in, come in”. Sit yourselves down and have a cup of coffee. Now how can I help you. They then say, we would like our baby baptised. I would then ask whether they were new to the parish, and if they said no, I would offer them some fairly easy literature not couched in in eviqualent of legalize, plus information and Mass times etc. Then I would take names and addresses for the register and ask what they want the baby called. A date can be fixed about six weeks ahead.

I would then say what a beautiful baby and how good it was that they were giving him/her the chance to grow up in a catholic environment, and say I look forward tro seeing them at Mass. When they turn up I would greet them as lost relatives, and intoduce them to other young couples who they would have something in common with.

That is a start, and if it doesn’t comply with rules, then change the rules.
 
There was a poster on here just yesterday that took offense at being told masturbating is a sin and that he should quit having sex with his girlfriend, and he’s a fairly active user.
 
You are aware that all of the Churches rules and such come from the teachings of Jesus right? They didn’t make stuff up just to make it hard.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
There was a poster on here just yesterday that took offense at being told masturbating is a sin and that he should quit having sex with his girlfriend, and he’s a fairly active user.
Click to expand...
Taking offense on an internet forum with strangers is one thing,giving someone a hard time in person with someone whose job and livelihood it is, that’s a different story altogether.
 
I was more referring to people being ignorant of church teaching on sex outside of marriage.

This poster was literally in shock that he was actually expected by the church to no do that.
 
So why do they ignore “Love your neighbour”? Just as an instance though, tell me where it says you have to attend Mass every Sunday.
 
I can appreciate the fact that some people are just not informed about the teachings about sex outside of marriage.

But a priest in clerical dress is like a uniformed police officer, that gives him authority that people will respect even if they aren’t knowledgable about the teaching.
 
Loving someone doesn’t mean never offending them.

“keep holy the sabbath” comes to mind.
 
JanSobieskiIII. So what was wrong with my approach. Further, St Paul was a pharisee, very learned in Jewish religion, and since you cannot teach old dogs new tricks, he would have remained a pharisee, just as I remain what I was. BTW. My job was to find out where the professionals were going wrong and correcting it. Basically there is the imprint of man in the churches rules, and who was it who said the sun went round the earth? Rules are made to be improved, by people with true vision like our Pope. If you check you will find what Jesus had to say about the rules, and it would be a good thing to check.
 
It’s definitely better to give the benefit of the doubt rather than the third degree. I don’t know what the answer is with families that have no desire to commit to attending mass.
 
Our Pope hasn’t done away with church dogma or doctrine. The rules are still the rules.

Not attending mass without good reason for missing is a grave sin.
Sex outside of marriage is a grave sin.

Both of those have to be rectified before someone is eligible for the Eucharist, and if your second son told the priest he had no intention of getting married or raising your grandchild in the catholic faith than the priest did the right thing.

You taking offense at it changes nothing, and you’re own personal interpretation of Jesus’ writings does not trump the magisterium’s.

Impress on your son the need to correct his mistakes, to marry his girlfriend, and follow the teachings of Christ’s church.
 
ConfusedLucy said:
I don’t know what the answer is with families that have no desire to commit to attending mass.
Click to expand...
I don’t know how someone would discern that someone had no desire to commit to attendance at mass.

Most people try to tell people what they think they want to hear. And a lot of people are really good at procrastination.
 
If there is a Catholic school with a good ofsted rating nearby and these folk have never been to the church before its a strong sign. I went to a Catholic school full of such parents.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Frinders said:
I would then say what a beautiful baby and how good it was that they were giving him/her the chance to grow up in a catholic environment,
Click to expand...
And how did you determine that that is in fact their intention? Does it matter that they intend to bring the child up in the faith?
 
Rau said:
And how did you determine that that is in fact their intention? Does it matter that they intend to bring the child up in the faith?
Click to expand...
Can’t you base it on the statement of the parents?

The appropriate canon says "Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licit

2/ there must be a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion; if such hope is altogether lacking, the baptism is to be delayed according to the prescripts of particular law after the parents have been advised about the reason."

Hope is supposed to be “altogether lacking”, for infant baptism to be denied. And it isn’t the parents that are expected to be ideal Catholics, but instead hope that the infant will be brought up. As an infant myself, my mum rarely brought me to church until I was ready for school. And infants aren’t required to attend, you know.
 
Augustinian said:
there must be a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion
Click to expand...
And for all we know the priest asked if they planned on rejoining the church as active members and they said no.

Frinder doesn’t know what went on there, she’s just upset that it didn’t go the way she wanted it to and is assuming that the priest did something wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top