Originally posted by Nemesio
Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]I have never heard the topic of abortion raised in a homily.
The current and past Popes have mentioned abortion in their homilies.
You seem knowledgable about Roman Catholicism; you can't tell me
you've not heard the Pope speak on this!
In America, abortion homilies are commonplace.
Why would i e tacit acceptence of a situation which She considers unacceptable.
Nemesio[/b]
The current and past Popes have mentioned abortion in their homilies.
You seem knowledgable about Roman Catholicism; you can't tell me
you've not heard the Pope speak on this!
I naturally discounted the Pope and I think it disingenous to include him. The Pope's homilies are delivered to very different audiences. I would be very surprised if he
explicitly preached on abortion, contraception or homosexuality in front of an open audience and not in circumlocutions to, say, members of the curia.
In America, abortion homilies are commonplace.
I can only speculate from my own experiences in Australia. Our cultures are not radically different. Abortion homilies are almost non-existent. I really doubt that if I visited a random American parish, I would find abortion extensively discussed.
Why would it be inappropriate to bring this in a homily, given that the Church teaches that it is a grave moral issue?
Because the homily firstly is not a medium for theological education. Secondly, since many children are present at Mass, parents might not want their children exposed to the idea of sex and contraception quite yet. Maybe in some parishes that is acceptable, maybe in others it is not.
Nemesio, I really do not see why you are being so obstinate on this issue. Just because priests are uncomfortable about discussing it in a homily does not mean that the whole issue is completely ignored and does not mean that their immediate motivation is greed. As I pointed out earlier, a priest might counsel parishioners through other ways: the confessional, marriage preparation, catechesis classes. I have heard that the American conference of bishops has planned to return the special blessing of the womb to the marriage rite.
Why not? What do you believe the purpose of the homily is?
Firstly, to expound on the meaning of the Scripture in a non-academic manner and relate this to real life; seconly, to deal with the pastoral concerns of the parish. But the priest must also take into account whether a discourse on the three persons of God or contraception would really have any impact on the congregation. Maybe he would feel that by exhorting them to a better prayer life they would realise the evil of contraception and decide for themselves to learn about the Trinity.
A 'shortage of priests' should be no excuse for tolerating what the Church calls in its own language 'anathema!' A priest who denies the validity of the Sacraments is excommunicating himself by definition! He is lying to the people. The Church, if She wants to be an intellectually honest institution, has an obligation to its flock and to Herself to pare out these heretics.
I disagree. A priest is not a robot. He will at times have theological issues with the Church. He will have crises of doubt. Sometimes, he might not even be aware of being in conflict with the Church. The bishop has to take a broader view, seek to address his problems, and only when the priest refuses to toe the line should he take such action.
This is actually not true. Confer from Canon Law:
Yes, it it true. The person must be
persevering in
manifest grave sin. A priest does not have the right to deny Communion unless the person has publicly denied the moral teaching of the Church (such as a Catholic politician who supports abortion and, despite admonishment from the bishop, refuses to recant) or, for example, ahomosexual who presents for Communion while wearing the rainbow sash.
Under no other circumstances can the priest deny Communion. Firstly, because no one can know whether another is in a state of grave sin. The priest cannot know whether the person has repented and seeks Communion with a contrite heart. Nor can the priest know whether the person knew that the matter was of grave kind -- the person may have been misdirected by another priest or received a faulty moral education from his parents. So even if the priest knows that a couple practices contraception, he cannot know whether they are in a state of grave sin. And I really doubt that a priest would even know such details about their sex life.
Pursuant to my last point, the priest has a duty to inform his faithful
that they are not to come to the Table if they are carrying the burden
of grave sin.
Of course. I have never denied that duty. What I have denied is that the homily is an appopriate medium for this. I remember you once said that you would be more comfortable if more priests would discuss sexuality more in church. I think many parisioners disagree.
Whose fault is that? The priests are charged with the education of the
faithful. Since you seem to advocate being silent on moral matters in
the pulpit, then what other opportunities are there for the faithful to
become learned?
I mentioned this in my earlier post. Priests must prepare couples for marriage. Some parishes also have catechetical classes. It is also important to note that the true burden does not just lie with the priest but with parents.
[226]§2. Since they have given life to their children, parents have a most grave obligation and possess the right to educate them. Therefore, it is for Christian parents particularly to take care of the Christian education of their children according to the doctrine handed on by the Church.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PV.HTM
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops also has several departments dealing with contraception which have the responsibility of communicating church teachings to the laity on matters of family and life.