Ireland Reff/ Marriage

[truthfinder]

​For the life of me i can not off hand even contemplate how one could work in how homosexual marriages are wrong and what anyone can do about it into a homily after the reading of the Gospel, that would take some considerable stretching considering the homily is to be focused on the Gospel , not just any particular current event less one can tie the two together, If the attitude is that the Bishops need to be better leaders, i wouldn't so much call that leave well enough alone, but more of a lack of what could have 38% of the voting public of Ireland of told their bishops, or what in the world can lay people write to their bishop about to then turn to his priests and go look, speak up about this, stop worrying, leave the worrying to me.

 

 

​This is part of the problem.  Faithful priests often think they are hamstrung to the Gospel in their preaching.  They aren't, if they've read the various instructions.  And in cases like a universal vote in matters that affect society and morals, it is incumbent on the clergy to preach on these matters.  They absolutely can preach on matters of faith, moral and catechesis, not just the Gospel - although the bible contains all of it anyways. There are ways to link the the readings and preaching together.    The bishops should have absolutely been stronger, but in the end, it is the priest who has more regular interaction with the parishioners (even they attend church at all). Considering there were at least a couple priests who openly stated that they were voting yes, it's not just the Bishops. 

[superblue]

​This is part of the problem.  Faithful priests often think they are hamstrung to the Gospel in their preaching.  They aren't, if they've read the various instructions.  And in cases like a universal vote in matters that affect society and morals, it is incumbent on the clergy to preach on these matters.  They absolutely can preach on matters of faith, moral and catechesis, not just the Gospel - although the bible contains all of it anyways. There are ways to link the the readings and preaching together.    The bishops should have absolutely been stronger, but in the end, it is the priest who has more regular interaction with the parishioners (even they attend church at all). Considering there were at least a couple priests who openly stated that they were voting yes, it's not just the Bishops. 

​The two I highlighted i did not know about, for the few priests who did vote yes, i guess one can only hope that their bishop will speak to them and clear the matter up.  

 

Now at least here in the states and i am very roughly speaking of what i think i have heard, priests are not allowed to preach about which candidate to vote for and why, i have no idea if that pertains to voting in general. How that goes for other Countries/States i am not sure either ,  but for Ireland at least it seems evident now they had the opprotunity to speak up more than they could have.

 

So then why are they so scared to lose money and anger parishoners if that is the case ? They can not be fired, is the goal to keep the church open no matter the cost, or is it to spread the Gospel, and bring people to Christ ?   I cant for the life of me figure out how managers in a company be it home depot, or what ever, can get their kicks out of treating their employees poorly, and get away with it, as long as they keep their customers happy and bring in a big bucket of cash at the end of the day, versus your parish priest,  which now seems to be railroaded by his laypeople , to appease them , just as long as donations keep coming and pews are filled.  ( i seriously doubt Mosques and Temples are run this way i would be very surprise if they were )

Is the Bishop hammering the priest to keep the money coming in, and it is a major problem if money has so corrupted our lives that we hear do not let money be a false god and run your life, to now it is literally tieing a preists hands behind his back because he doesnt want to make someone mad and or his bishop ?

[Nihil Obstat]

Truthfinder is right. While it might often be desirable to link the homily to the readings, that is certainly not a hard and fast rule. The issue is exactly this; if priests feel bound by that then they will never preach on these timely issues, and that is quite simply unacceptable. The homily is the very first place where priests need to be bringing this up.

[truthfinder]

​The two I highlighted i did not know about, for the few priests who did vote yes, i guess one can only hope that their bishop will speak to them and clear the matter up.  

 

Now at least here in the states and i am very roughly speaking of what i think i have heard, priests are not allowed to preach about which candidate to vote for and why, i have no idea if that pertains to voting in general. How that goes for other Countries/States i am not sure either ,  but for Ireland at least it seems evident now they had the opprotunity to speak up more than they could have.

 

​I'm not entirely sure about the States, nor Ireland, and even in Canada.  But there's a big difference between a priest giving a homily saying if you don't vote for candidate X you'll go to hell (which definitely did happen in Canada in the 19th century), and a priest laying out the issues of the election and remind the congregation of the seriousness of voting.  

I certainly see your concern about bishops demanding that collection rates stay up and being priests being afraid to risk the collection by preaching on controversial topics.  

[PhuturePriest]

The best homilies I've ever heard were when the priest forwent the Gospel and preached about Catholic teaching concerning the social issues of today. I remember when one retired priest made a stellar (and very passionate and angry) homily when the HHS Mandate was passed, and then finished off the homily by having us all join together in the Saint Michael Prayer. 

Had it not been a liturgical abuse, I would have clapped.

[Nihil Obstat]

Yesterday my priest gave a brilliant homily on the number of people who will be saved. Not particularly linked to the day's readings, but that does not really matter.

[truthfinder]

Yesterday my priest gave a brilliant homily on the number of people who will be saved. Not particularly linked to the day's readings, but that does not really matter.

​Thinking back, some of the best sermons have been on weekdays because they have even more liberty then than on Sundays.  Fr. gave a superb capital punishment sermon (which I believe he repeated and made longer on a Sunday).  Wish I could have heard this one. 

[Nihil Obstat]

​Thinking back, some of the best sermons have been on weekdays because they have even more liberty then than on Sundays.  Fr. gave a superb capital punishment sermon (which I believe he repeated and made longer on a Sunday).  Wish I could have heard this one. 

I made sure to record this one. Wish I had for the capital punishment one.

[Ice_nine]

Yesterday my priest gave a brilliant homily on the number of people who will be saved.

​somewhere around 2.45 million right? Anything else is heresy

[Yaatee]

So Ireland is patting itself on the back on their recent ruling, and once pandoras box is open, it is near impossible to shut.

 

I am finding it rather odd, I really thought Ireland was a big time Catholic place being St. Patrick and all that history, or at least really religious in general with the fighting between Protestants and Catholics.  The history of Ireland i am not that booked up on.... So an reasons for this taking place other than flat out blaming satan. Could parts of the USA having legalized gay marriage have been a cause...

 

thoughts.

 

​I thought that I had posted a commentary on this post, but I can't find it now.  The people of Ireland were subject to severe abuse by religious, both male and female for at least a century, possibly longer. There was no recourse as the abuse involved young people, mainly orphans.  The abuse of youth by religious was perhaps worst in Ireland.  It will take a long time for the Irish to recover from this, and the Catholic church in Ireland probably never will recover completely, and will certainly never recover its former power.  For centuries they thought that their worst enemies were the English (they were), only to find out that Irish religious were preying on them too.  In this referendum, many expat Irish from Europe and the US actually returned to vote in it.  This referendum is a direct rebuke to the Catholic church.

[Nihil Obstat]

​somewhere around 2.45 million right? Anything else is heresy

Few. The gist was that it is few.

[Kia ora]

too bad that not even god's sacrifice on the cross could sway most of stubborn humanity. oh well i hope the saints pray for us the poor foolish deluded majority in hell. 

Edited May 30, 2015 by Kia ora

[Nihil Obstat]

too bad that not even god's sacrifice on the cross could sway most of stubborn humanity. oh well i hope the saints pray for us the poor foolish deluded majority in hell. 

The damned have no use for our prayers. 

[Kia ora]

that may be true. the damned have no use for your prayers. but lovers don't love because it's 'useful' to love. they love because they are loving people in character. doesn't matter if you tell them that their love won't bring a person around. it's just who they are.

god never gives up on us. hopefully the saints don't either.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Kia ora

[Yaatee]

Is there any proof, or even evidence, that anyone is in hell?

[PhuturePriest]

Is there any proof, or even evidence, that anyone is in hell?

The New Testament, many accounts of the Saints, and Our Lady of Fatima, whom said most people go to hell.

[Ice_nine]

Few. The gist was that it is few.

​That's depressing. It's a breeze trusting in God's mercy when nearly everyone around you that you know and love will writhe in hell for all eternity.

[Ice_nine]

How does one not despair?

[Guest]

Almost everyone is going to burn forever in hell. God is good.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Guest

[Yaatee]

Almost everyone is going to burn forever in hell. God is good.

​Exactly.  As I understand it, no one is obliged to believe in apparitions, or all of the writings by the saints.  Many saints have made a lot of mistakes, including some recently sainted. No one is perfect, not even the saints.

The New Testament was written in Greek.  Jesus spoke in Aramaic.  Is it known what, in Aramaic was the exact meaning of the word "hell"  translated into Greek, then Latin, then English, actually meant?  Has anyone asked Israeli ancient Hebrew/Aramaic scholars regarding this?

The definition of qualifying for hell appears to involve knowing that a sin is mortal, freely assenting to it, committing it, and, to get into hell, dying before any sort of contrition.  I think that the concept of free assent is outmoded. One's "free will" is determined by one's genes, family background, and innumerable traumatic incidents, large and small, in one's lifetime. Almost everyone suffers from some sort of mental illness, illusion or delusion.

I find the preoccupation with the damned and hell on this forum disturbing.  My impression is that there are some phat folks to are comforted thinking about all those people in hell, burning forever, boyoboyoboy, am I glad that I'm not one of them because I go to confession everyday--or some such.

I observe that cardinals, bishops and the Pope don't talk much about hell nowadays. That doesn't mean they don't believe in it--they may, though I suspect that definitions vary--but they aren't talking about it.

Pope Francis is the one who said, "Who am I to judge?"

To posit that almost everyone is going to burn in hell forever suggests that God has failed.  I think that if God has infinite mercy, it will cover a lot of sins.