you are not welcome here...

[WH1988]

I think we all should pray for more priests like the one you descibred.

You must understand that hating the sin is not hating the sinner. And telling people they are sinners (and thus, not welcome at the communion rail) is not hating them, but loving them instead, by sending a STRONG message, that nowadays many souls are not used to hear, that supporting abortion is a mortal sin. Many people are IGNORANT of the Church teaching, and using such a strong tone is necessary ir order to make people understand this isn’t “some strange idea of the Pope, or of Cardinal A, or of Bishop C” but is THE Church teaching.

Deo Gratias!

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

Hi

Well, Ok. I can see your point - to a point. However, wasn’t it Christ who made a whip and cleaned out His Fathers house? Overturning tables and setting things straight?

Wasn’t it Christ who called people a ‘‘Brood of vipers" with "Satan as their father’’?

I would agree that going off on the uninformed would be taking a risk - so far as having a loving attitude goes. But, people sitting in mass, knowing the difference between right and wrong - or at least who should know the difference - and being stern even to the point of offensive…well, that, to me, is calling a spade a spade. Sacrilege is serious. So is hell.

A Priest doing his job, protecting both the Eucharist and the parishioner, is to be commended.

Yes, to some it may look like he’s being mean, or unnecessarily stern - but, if we don’t take the Eucharist seriously - and the state of our souls when we go up for the Host - how can we expect others to?

I don’t think, personally, our job (or the Priests) is to dress everything up nice to attract people to the Church. If it were - we would have rock bands and have ‘bobbing for the Eucharist’ contests after Mass. Our job (and the Priests) is to promote the Truth, and the seriousness of it (including the Mass) as something that is already dramatically different from what everyone else follows, and, to boot, a life and death matter-of-fact proposition for people to make a decision about.

Leave the sugary words, clowns and balloons for those who need them to disguise their lies - we have the Truth - and the Truth speaks for itself.

Peace

John

 

[Rickwood]

As others have said, attitude is subjective. What is one person’s “bad attitude” is another’s “firm resolve”.

In my opinion some out there NEED to be offended. Maybe it’ll finally get them to think, and realize that there’s something wrong with their thinking.

True, some people need to be led by the hand and carefully and tactfully given the truth. Others need it given bluntly, for the sake of their soul.

Where is this parish? I’m looking to relocate soon.

While some people have ridiculously low thresholds to being offended, there is never a good excuse to be deliberately antagonistic or harsh. Not from the ambo.

“Blunt?” Sure. Nothing wrong with that at all. But being blunt does not mean we cannot also be loving and tactful.

 

[Rickwood]

Hi

Well, Ok. I can see your point - to a point. However, wasn’t it Christ who made a whip and cleaned out His Fathers house? Overturning tables and setting things straight?

Wasn’t it Christ who called people a ‘‘Brood of vipers" with "Satan as their father’’?

I would agree that going off on the uninformed would be taking a risk - so far as having a loving attitude goes. But, people sitting in mass, knowing the difference between right and wrong - or at least who should know the difference - and being stern even to the point of offensive…well, that, to me, is calling a spade a spade. Sacrilege is serious. So is hell.

A Priest doing his job, protecting both the Eucharist and the parishioner, is to be commended.

Yes, to some it may look like he’s being mean, or unnecessarily stern - but, if we don’t take the Eucharist seriously - and the state of our souls when we go up for the Host - how can we expect others to?

I don’t think, personally, our job (or the Priests) is to dress everything up nice to attract people to the Church. If it were - we would have rock bands and have ‘bobbing for the Eucharist’ contests after Mass. Our job (and the Priests) is to promote the Truth, and the seriousness of it (including the Mass) as something that is already dramatically different from what everyone else follows, and, to boot, a life and death matter-of-fact proposition for people to make a decision about.

Leave the sugary words, clowns and balloons for those who need them to disguise their lies - we have the Truth - and the Truth speaks for itself.

Peace

John

That priest is not standing in Persona Christi at the ambo…

Being loving and tactful need not include all the garbage you wrote about – that’s nothing more than noise. A priest can be loving and tactful while still being quite blunt and direct. To suggest otherwise is wrong.

 

[dang71]

It all has to do with love and tact. If a priest preaches in a teaching, fatherly way that anyone who supports abortion must refrain from receiving communion until they repent and confess, then that’s wonderful. It’s the right thing to do. On the other hand if a priest is harsh and deliberately antagonistic there is a problem – and it’s with him.

And no, this sort of behavior is not justified by wanting to protect the Blessed Sacrament. That can be done in a tactful manner. The harsh delivery on the other hand just turns people off. Worse it could be a factor in where their souls ultimately end-up.

The “holier/better than thou” attitude seems to be all too common in extremists – both “liberal” and “conservative.”

thanks Rickwood, for picking up on exactly what i was intending (and describing it much better). we have had several priests before this traditional one, and they all taught true, authentic Catholic morals, but none were so “harsh” or “antogonistic”. i cringe at the liberal abuses as much as any traditionalist, but i’ve always felt we should act out charitably while still maintaining our authentic Catholic morals. a friendly conversation will do a lot more to win over a wayward soul than a “holier than thou” sermon.

 

[Rickwood]

I think we all should pray for more priests like the one you descibred.

You must understand that hating the sin is not hating the sinner. And telling people they are sinners (and thus, not welcome at the communion rail) is not hating them, but loving them instead, by sending a STRONG message, that nowadays many souls are not used to hear, that supporting abortion is a mortal sin. Many people are IGNORANT of the Church teaching, and using such a strong tone is necessary ir order to make people understand this isn’t “some strange idea of the Pope, or of Cardinal A, or of Bishop C” but is THE Church teaching.

Deo Gratias!

It’s all about how the message is sent. Do it in a harsh and/or antagonistic manner and the priest is doing a huge disservice to his flock.

The content can remain the same…

 

[Rickwood]

Fr. Corapi has been accused of the exact same problem. Without hearing such a priest, it is unfair to judge his delivery. His facts are correct.

I have never heard such accusations…

 

[jmcrae]

Hi

Well, Ok. I can see your point - to a point. However, wasn’t it Christ who made a whip and cleaned out His Fathers house? Overturning tables and setting things straight?

Wasn’t it Christ who called people a ‘‘Brood of vipers" with "Satan as their father’’?

There are some people who need to hear messages like that, and Christ, reader of hearts, knew who they were.

We, on the other hand, are commanded to do everything with great love and kindness. We are not Christ.

Sacrilege is serious. So is hell.

Which is why the delivery of the message is just as important as its content. There is no point in delivering a message in such a way that it cannot be heard or properly understood.

Yes, to some it may look like he’s being mean, or unnecessarily stern - but, if we don’t take the Eucharist seriously - and the state of our souls when we go up for the Host - how can we expect others to?

I will tell you what every elementary school teacher in the world already knows - nobody can learn, who is not first loved. Love is absolutely essential to the learning process.

By the way, it is perfectly possible to dress up the Church and the Mass in an attractive way, without doing any of the ridiculous things that you propose - we’ve been famously doing so in the Catholic Church for nearly two thousand years, with the world’s greatest music, art, and oratory.

 

[Rickwood]

thanks Rickwood, for picking up on exactly what i was intending (and describing it much better). we have had several priests before this traditional one, and they all taught true, authentic Catholic morals, but none were so “harsh” or “antogonistic”. i cringe at the liberal abuses as much as any traditionalist, but i’ve always felt we should act out charitably while still maintaining our authentic Catholic morals. a friendly conversation will do a lot more to win over a wayward soul than a “holier than thou” sermon.

We have a retired monsignor who often preaches on the need for going to confession. He is very blunt and very direct. He is also extremely loving, tactful and informative. He notes that most pastors would have trouble being as blunt/direct as he is.

On the other hand he is NEVER deliberately antagonistic, harsh or judgmental.

I think something else comes into play here. Some priests are just poor preachers and they really don’t know that they are offending/turning-off their flocks…

 

[bilop]

It would be interesting how people on this thread would respond if the priest preached strongly against those who question VC2. If he tore into those who deviated from what the Church actually directs – say those who insist on kneeling during the Agnus Dei despite differing directions from the local bishop; those who condemn the practice of proceeding up for a blessing during confession even if the local ordinary allows it; those who condemn the use of any EMsHC, etc. etc.

This priest is playing to the “traditionalist” mindset. Don’t expect an non-skewed group of responses on this forum…

So your comparing those things to supporting the murder of unborn children?!

Catholics are free to disagree in matters of discipline, which include everything you mention.

Catholics are NOT free to disagree on doctrine, which is what abortion is.

I see nothing in the OP’s post that says this pastor is being uncharitable; blunt maybe. But some people may need to hear the blunt truth.

Look where “I’m OK, your O.K.” has gotten us.

God Bless

 

[WH1988]

I honestly think we should refrain from commenting the attitude of the priest, because we were not there, and, most of all, because it’s not to us to judge - we must be charitable, and avoid jugding the priest at all costs. The content was correct, the tone, we’ll never know, and even if it wasn’t the best tone, we should thank God for this orthodox priest and pray for him.

 

[Rickwood]

So your comparing those things to supporting the murder of unborn children?!

Catholics are free to disagree in matters of discipline, which include everything you mention.

Catholics are NOT free to disagree on doctrine, which is what abortion is.

I see nothing in the OP’s post that says this pastor is being uncharitable; blunt maybe. But some people may need to hear the blunt truth.

Look where “I’m OK, your O.K.” has gotten us.

God Bless

Please don’t ever try to speak for me again. I wrote what I wrote – your inflammatory inferences are your own.

 

[Rickwood]

I honestly think we should refrain from commenting the attitude of the priest, because we were not there, and, most of all, because it’s not to us to judge - we must be charitable, and avoid jugding the priest at all costs. The content was correct, the tone, we’ll never know, and even if it wasn’t the best tone, we should thank God for this orthodox priest and pray for him.

In that sense I also think it’s quite wrong to lionize behavior that the OP described as driving people away.

The discussion cannot be one sided. It’s quite possible the priest is harsh and antagonistic and that must be considered within the context of this discourse – it cannot simply be discounted.

 

[WH1988]

The discussion cannot be one sided. It’s quite possible the priest is harsh and antagonistic and that must be considered within the context of this discourse – it cannot simply be discounted.

Even if he is (and I doubt it, and I prefer to refrain from calling all those things to a priest), what can we do about it, except praying?

Where does critizicing a priest due to something we have absolutely no idea how it was lead?

One thing is saying that something the Priest say was wrong, because that is objective, either it is true or isn’t, either is according to the Church doctrine or it isn’t.

Discussing about a tone is completely a waste of time. If he wasn’t charitable, blessed be God for what he said. If he was charitable, blessed be God x2.

Pray instead!

 

[leonie]

If the worst example you can come up with is that he admonished pro-abortion politicians to not receive communion in a state of mortal sin, it’s probably not him.

It’s probably those of us who are used to be tiptoed around.

I hope that it shakes some people up.

 

[jam070406]

It sure sounds as if he is based on the OP. In any event you certainly do not know that he is not acting this way.

The fact is we weren’t there and we should refrain from lionizing any priest who is turning people away from his parish. That much HAS been established.

I SERIOUSLY doubt people are actually leaving due to the contents of the message. I would strongly suspect they are leaving due to its delivery and tone.

And the OP also makes it quite clear he is no fan of the EF or Traditionalists. So what are we to draw of that? This certainly doesn’t present an objective view of the priest in question or the way he may have or may not have been conveying the message.
So no, I don’t agree with your opinion that it is clear from the OP.

 

[dang71]

The content was correct

everyone is invited to the wedding feast, it is up to us to accept that invitation. for a priest to say we are “not welcome” is absolutely incorrect. it is correct to say that those not in a state of grace need to correct their situation before they can attend the banquet, but to say someone is not welcome or is not invited is incorrect.

even if it wasn’t the best tone, we should thank God for this orthodox priest and pray for him.

i agree we should pray for this, and all, priests.

 

[fix]

It would be interesting how people on this thread would respond if the priest preached strongly against those who question VC2. If he tore into those who deviated from what the Church actually directs – say those who insist on kneeling during the Agnus Dei despite differing directions from the local bishop; those who condemn the practice of proceeding up for a blessing during confession even if the local ordinary allows it; those who condemn the use of any EMsHC, etc. etc.

This priest is playing to the “traditionalist” mindset. Don’t expect an non-skewed group of responses on this forum…

There is an objective part to this issue and a subjective part. The analogies you offer seem misplaced here. The priest in the OP is addressing pro abortion supporters. Nothing in what has been related seems contrary to what the Church teaches.

Why bring up all the other stuff?

 

[jam070406]

I honestly think we should refrain from commenting the attitude of the priest, because we were not there, and, most of all, because it’s not to us to judge - we must be charitable, and avoid jugding the priest at all costs. The content was correct, the tone, we’ll never know, and even if it wasn’t the best tone, we should thank God for this orthodox priest and pray for him.

I agree with you. This discussion should end. If the tone is something to be addressed then the OP should take it up privately with his priest.

 

[dang71]

If the worst example you can come up with is that he admonished pro-abortion politicians to not receive communion in a state of mortal sin, it’s probably not him.

It’s probably those of us who are used to be tiptoed around.

I hope that it shakes some people up.

i think it speaks volumes that a group of people from the parish submitted a petition to the bishop complaining about this priest (which i stated in the OP).