[Questionable] homily and rushed confessions? [edited]

[Joan_M]

I have always been troubled as to the mechanics of this miracle. Did Our Lord keep pulling more food out of the basket, in which case why weren’t the people more amazed than they were. Or did He give this power to the Disciples as they went round the groups, in which case, why weren’t the crowds even more amazed, as they would have seen it happening close up. Imagine you were in one of those groups - wouldn’t you have been totally blown away by it?

Yes, they tried to make Him King - but they evidently weren’t impressed enough by what had happened to stay on His side and rise up in His defence in the last days of His life.
Nor did they follow Him around thereafter, demanding more free food.

The preacher pointed out that nobody in those days or even in these, would have thought of going on a long journey without some food tucked away. I see the miracle as being that the people were inspired to share - but that doesn’t preclude multiplication does it? Our Lord could very well have increased the amount available subtly, so that everyone had enough.

Calling a more nuanced interpretation of the Miracle ‘blasphemy’ is a misuse of the word, to say the least.

The “mechanics” of the miracle? A miracle is caused directly by the supernatural powers of God. It’s that simple. We do not get to know, much less understand the “mechanics” of it. That’s why it is a sign from God.

The crowd was, in fact, blown away by the miracle - that was why they wanted to take Jesus and make him king. They figured that they would never have to go hungry again, and, besides, if he could give them food when there was almost none, what else could he give them?

The journey was not that long. Remember, in those days, most people walked wherever they went. It was no big thing to walk 15 - 20 miles in a day. And, while they might have taken some bread and a bit of fish with them, this would only have been enough for one, or perhaps two, meals - if they did. If you read the passage, you get the distinct impression that their journey was done on the spur of the moment - you know, someone sees Jesus and the direction in which he is going, spreads the word, and everyone follows, most likely with no more than quickly grabbing up a hunk of bread before setting off. They would not know exactly how far he was going, but just wanted to catch up with him and hear what he would say.

Furthermore, since this miracle was a precursor to His giving us His Body and Blood, it had nothing to do with inspiring people to share the bit of food they had brought with them. It had everything to do with preparing them to be able to receive Him, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, each one of them receiving Him entirely.

I, too, have heard the dreadful homilies of how this was a miracle of sharing and clenched my teeth during them. Thankfully, the priest who used to give these homilies has changed! He no longer talks about the sharing but of the miracle of multiplication. And, no, he can’t explain the “mechanics” of it either. There are no mechanics - it’s a miracle. What God desires to do happens.

 

[Tsuwano]

You miss the main points of the story. The story was to prepare the Apostles for the Eucharist. Christ feeds the multitudes with the Eucharist.The Apostles -priests will feed the multitudes with the Eucharist. The multiplying the loaves and fishes was a miracle done by Christ. Not sharing by the people. It is also about his power to do great things for us. Yes , it also is about energizing us to do his work with our hands but that does not mean he did not miraculously transform that food. The church has always taught that Christ himself multiplied those loaves and fishes. This sharing thing is modernistic nonsense.It is blasphemy to say that a miracle by Christ didn’t happen and that he just got the Apostles to go around asking for food from the people and to tell them to share.

catholic.com/thisrock/2008/0801fea4.asp

catholicpreaching.com/index.php?content=homilies&homilies=19990801

crossroadsinitiative.com/library_article/689/Multiplication_of_the_Loaves_and_Fishes.html

zenit.org/article-26528?l=english

I haven’t missed anything. Not once in my post did I say that a multiplication of the loaves and fishes did not occur or that Christ did not perform a miraculous event. I said that a homilist does not blaspheme if he chooses to emphasize one aspect of the miracle over another aspect of it. I did not hear the homily so I am unaware of what was actually said by the priest, but from the information we were given I think the poster is overreacting to think that blasphemy was involved. I do not disagree with anything you wrote in your post and know enough about scripture to know that scholars interpret biblical events in a variety of ways. Sharing is clearly one aspect of this particular miracle of Jesus and certainly not nonsense, and the homilist was certainly not acting against the faith to point it out.

 

[Seatuck]

I haven’t missed anything. Not once in my post did I say that a multiplication of the loaves and fishes did not occur or that Christ did not perform a miraculous event. I said that a homilist does not blaspheme if he chooses to emphasize one aspect of the miracle over another aspect of it. I did not hear the homily so I am unaware of what was actually said by the priest, but from the information we were given I think the poster is overreacting to think that blasphemy was involved. I do not disagree with anything you wrote in your post and know enough about scripture to know that scholars interpret biblical events in a variety of ways. Sharing is clearly one aspect of this particular miracle of Jesus and certainly not nonsence and the homilist was certainly not acting against the faith to point it out.

If the food was provided by sharing then where is the miracle?

 

[Tsuwano]

If the food was provided by sharing then where is the miracle?

Was Christ not sharing himself and his love in performing this miracle? If Christ’s sharing of himself inspires us to share ourselves with others, is this not also a miracle? Miracles occur in a variety of ways and may not always be measured by the degee to which they go against the laws of science or physics. A miracle of the heart is no less a miracle than to take one loaf of bread and change it into two. Indeed, a miracle of the heart, though perhaps less flashy, may be the greater of the two. One may inspire awe, but the other inspires conversion. One is open to a variety of intepretations, but the other, perhaps known to the recipient alone, reveals a truth that the recipient finds impossible to deny.

 

[Seatuck]

Was Christ not sharing himself and his love in performing this miracle? If Christ’s sharing of himself inspires us to share ourselves with others, is this not also a miracle? Miracles occur in a variety of ways and may not always be measured by the degee to which they go against the laws of science or physics. A miracle of the heart is no less a miracle than to take one loaf of bread and change it into two. Indeed, a miracle of the heart, though perhaps less flashy, may be the greater of the two. One may inspire awe, but the other inspires conversion. One is open to a variety of intepretations, but the other, perhaps known to the recipient alone, reveals a truth that the recipient finds impossible to deny.

No I cannot see this interpretation. Christ’s sharing of himself was not miraculous. He is Love. Of course he gave of himself. I have never seen any of the early church writings point to this sharing as a miracle. Please provide it . I don’t actually see Christ discussing the miracle of anyone’s changing heart in the passage. Where is it?
The Church has been giving us specific readings the last few weeks that point to something. The Eucharist. It is wrong to ignore it in favor of highlighting something else.Better to go with the Churches long held interpretation of the passage.

 

[nilofc]

I concur with you. Some people reduce the marvelous signs performed by Christ to a mere emotional revolution. I even heard someone said that the demon that Christ casted out from an individual was not really a demon but a case of epilepsy.

We have to really define what a miracle is…

Miracle - an effect or **extraordinary event ** in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.

To say that the multiplication of bread is a miracle that is comparable as to having the people move to generosity…is simply a discrediting of God’s work.

 

[Bluegoat]

Priests often choose to focus on one aspect or meaning of a reading for their homily, rather than discussing every implication. Especially in places where the sermons tend to be shorter - not all congregations enjoy the 45 min. homily. Sometimes they particularly want people to look at the reading from a different angle than what is usually emphasized, because it is easy for us to assume we “know” the story and it’s meaning. This is especially true for a very familiar story like the feeding of the 5000. Or maybe he has observed a problem with generosity or people being grasping in the parish. Or maybe something just struck him personally about the issue of sharing.

No homily is meant to be a complete treatment of scripture. And not all priests are able to express themselves as clearly as they would like, so some charity on that account is in order.

As for the confession issue - it might be best to speak to him personally. But I might ask myself first - was there some reason he was getting impatient with your confession? Were you being overly scrupulous or something else that might have frustrated him? I have no idea if that might be the case, but I think it is usually best to look at our own culpability first. Or if you talk to him, maybe you will find there is some banal reason, like he really needed to pee or time was running short.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please take any theological discussions to the Apologetics forum. Thank you all.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Thanks for editing the title.

Once more, I am not concerned about the confession, it was valid and that is all that matters. Now that I have found this out, the matter of the rushed confession can be dropped.

 

[YADA]

I concur with you. Some people reduce the marvelous signs performed by Christ to a mere emotional revolution. I even heard someone said that the demon that Christ casted out from an individual was not really a demon but a case of epilepsy.

We have to really define what a miracle is…

Miracle - an effect or **extraordinary event **in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.

To say that the multiplication of bread is a miracle that is comparable as to having the people move to generosity…is simply a discrediting of God’s work.

Please forgive me if this is too theological to discuss here …

I did not hear the homily and the OP only stated basically that his priest focused on sharing …

Yes - Jesus feed the 5000 men not including the women and children … That was miraculous … I highly doubt that the priest blashemed by preaching that the event was purely one of sharing and did not include a divine action of Jesus …

Let me ask you this question:

Where did the original fish and bread came from that Jesus “Multiplied” to feed the people? …

Hint: The bread and fish did not orginate with Jesus nor the apostles but with a young boy … who did in fact have to ‘Share’ his bread and fish … turning them over to Jesus - essentially sharing with Jesus … and that gift - little though it was - became the offering with which Jesus worked his miracle …

We make a similar offering at the Mass - the Bread and Wine [along with our monitary contributions] are what is offered in the Mass … the bread and wine offered and transformed into the Body and Blood feed us … the other contributions [a sharing of our gifts] are also transformed and used to the Glory of God and the furthering of the Gospel …

THIS does not deny the ability of Jesus to have miraculously fed the 5000 from out of nothing - AFTERALL - God created all of the universe from nothing.

ERGO - feeding a mere few thousand people from nothing is certainly possible and would be miraculous - YET Jesus decided to use the offerings of a child to work this miracle … Jesus decided to work His miracle through the offering of this child!

Which is why many [at least me ] believe the homily was probably not Blashemous or Heretical.

AND the other possiblility is that the priest was having a “Bad Day” in the homiletics department … or Lost his train of thought … :doh2:

OR the OP missed something or failed to make a connection got destracted …

 

[nilofc]

Please forgive me if this is too theological to discuss here …

I did not hear the homily and the OP only stated basically that his priest focused on sharing …

Yes - Jesus feed the 5000 men not including the women and children … That was miraculous … I highly doubt that the priest blashemed by preaching that the event was purely one of sharing and did not include a divine action of Jesus …

Let me ask you this question:

Where did the original fish and bread came from that Jesus “Multiplied” to feed the people? …

Hint: The bread and fish did not orginate with Jesus nor the apostles but with a young boy … who did in fact have to ‘Share’ his bread and fish … turning them over to Jesus - essentially sharing with Jesus … and that gift - little though it was - became the offering with which Jesus worked his miracle …

We make a similar offering at the Mass - the Bread and Wine [along with our monitary contributions] are what is offered in the Mass … the bread and wine offered and transformed into the Body and Blood feed us … the other contributions [a sharing of our gifts] are also transformed and used to the Glory of God and the furthering of the Gospel …

THIS does not deny the ability of Jesus to have miraculously fed the 5000 from out of nothing - AFTERALL - God created all of the universe from nothing.

ERGO - feeding a mere few thousand people from nothing is certainly possible and would be miraculous - YET Jesus decided to use the offerings of a child to work this miracle … Jesus decided to work His miracle through the offering of this child!

Which is why many [at least me ] believe the homily was probably not Blashemous or Heretical.

AND the other possiblility is that the priest was having a “Bad Day” in the homiletics department … or Lost his train of thought … :doh2:

OR the OP missed something or failed to make a connection got destracted …

I think you should read the post again before you reply brother.

He said People were to moved share.

If it was only the child… sharing his bread and fish… there will be no discussion here…because that child truly shared his belongings. But to tell us that PEOPLE’s stubborn and selfish hearts were moved to generosity is putting extra biblical data to the text… and that will reduce God’s miracle to a mere emotional shove.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

IMHO I agree with those posters who have stated that there is not enough information to determine if the homily was heretical [Blasphemous or other].

Nor can we comment on the “confession” experience …

Nor the need receive Reconcilliaion before receiving Communion.

There is just not enough information int he cryptic post …

Write a letter to the Bishop? Please, letters to the Bishop should be for only the most serious offenses … How can you even write the Bishop regarding the ‘interuption’ of your confession … though you ar perfectly free to discuss all that transpires in the confessional the Priest cannot discuss any aspect of the confession due to the seal even with the Bishop …

Context is eveything, whether it occurs in the confessional, a homily or a general guestion regarding the reception of Communion …

There are those who believe [and sincerely] that one should receive Recincilliation weekly and that if you do not then you should not present yourself at Communion …

There are those who believe that you never need to make a confession before receiving our Lord … the reality lied somewhere in between and has many aspects that impact the Truth - a Truth that though nuanced is knowable … Your cousin should read the catechism and then make an appontment with the Priest, an orthodox Spitul Director or knowledgeable Catholic to discuss any questions …

If you do not care for you current parish, then feel free to find a better fit …

II would just want to add that we are required to confess all mortal sins, and I doubt too many of us get through life without committing any. However, we were not privy to the entire conversations between cousin and priest (and neither was the OP) so we don’t know what conditions the priest might have placed on his comment, nor the specific question the cousin asked.

Again, the OP did not give enough detail for a judgement to be made. But certainly he is free to start attending at another parish if he chooses.

 

[YADA]

I think you should read the post again before you reply brother.

He said People were to moved share.

If it was only the child… sharing his bread and fish… there will be no discussion here…because that child truly shared his belongings. But to tell us that PEOPLE’s stubborn and selfish hearts were moved to generosity is putting extra biblical data to the text… and that will reduce God’s miracle to a mere emotional shove.

Well I did not hear the Ho,ily … was the priest purely re-telling what happened or was he performing the function of a Homilist - which is to make the scripture readings relevent for the people present? … Perhaps the "message? the priest was sharing is that we should be ‘moved’ to share and have our gift ‘multiplied’ by the Lord without thinking about the size of our ‘gift’ in relation to the ‘need’ …

Sorry, Brother but a ‘one liner’ description of a homily that summerizes it and asks if it is heresy or blashemous because it discusses ‘sharing’ is rife for discussions … I ask you to go back and read the many early ‘jump on the wagon’ “YES” posts … followed by those who decried the “Fact” that it was a ***Miracle by Jesus ***and not related to “Sharing” in any way… I was only pointong out that Jesus made a decision to work His miracle through the “Shared Gift” of a mortal person - and a young person …

Perhaps it is you Brother who needs to go back and read through all of the thoughts being expressed …

And if you still disagree with my post - you are fee to do so … Likewise - certainly - I - [edited] being well over the age of 21 , and a citizen of the free-est nation on earth ought to be able to share my thoughts … don’t you think?


Pax Chiste