Was there a good point or two in the sermon you heard at the Mass for your Sunday obligation? Let us know.
I’ll bet that many of you heard something about the SCOTUS decision Obergefell v. Hodges (same-sex “marriage”).
Let’s have a POLL. Choose your best answer. Use the combox to explain.
In Sunday's sermon, about SCOTUS's decision Obergefell v. Hodges there was...
- not a word. (49%, 725 Votes)
- extensive commentary. (29%, 434 Votes)
- some commentary, but not very much. (11%, 164 Votes)
- a brief mention or allusion only. (10%, 155 Votes)
Total Voters: 1,478
Loading ...On Sunday I said Masses in both the Extraordinary and the Ordinary Form. For my sermon for the Ordinary Form Mass, click below.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Men with glorious and elaborate robes have always tried to change God’s law…Nero, Henry the VIII…but they are just tyrants and barbarians. Some men, even in the Church, come with comforting and kinds words, with nice names…even Irish names (lol)…but they are the same…tyrants and barbarians.
Father was not pleased and looked ready to give some one a pop on the nose.
Not in the sermon, but he has addressed it in his section in the weekly bulletin.
I suspect that our priests were told not to say anything. I don’t know if it was our parish or the diocese, but I got that impression from the homily. Instead, Father talked about the thread of hope that runs through all the readings from Sunday. At the end, he said that thread of hope in God is our lifeline in times of political, social and moral upheaval.
Nothing was said directly and the upheaval line was only at the end, but the connection was clear to me.
Nada. As I was sitting there thinking that my disposition and attendance was becoming a “near occasion of sin” I realized that we hadn’t heard anything for years preceding the decision, so suddenly my attitude shifted and I prayed for our dear octagenarian priest, that his spine would stiffen but not from arthritis.
No direct mention of it, but the homily was all about making sure we are always prepared to die in God’s friendship at any time and being witnesses to our neighbors of the Truth of the Gospels. No mention of needing to go to Confession to make sure we can die in God’s friendship though, which was disappointing.
Went to a friend’s parish for a baptism and the priest spoke of nothing else. Talked about how many of us had friends, family, coworkers who were gay and that not telling them the Truth was doing them a disservice and leading them to sin was bad. And that we needed to drive forward and continue to preach the Truth.
Of course, this is in the Diocese of Arlington. Our Bishop is doing a conference on Saturday entitled “How to Prepare Spiritually for the Coming Persecution.” So I wasn’t shocked to hear a homily that was right on point. More than one person said to Father after Mass that it was just what they needed to hear.
Oh, yeah, I meant to send an email to you Father Z that the Diocese of Arlington VA is totally doing a conference that is entitled “How to Prepare Spiritually for the Coming Persecution.”
I only preached one mass, but I started by referencing the USCCB’s remarks about how Roe v. Wade didn’t change the definition of life, nor will this ruling change the definition of marriage.
I then hit on the nature of the argument and those that are pro: it’s based on emotions and passion which makes it almost impossible to argue rationally, and were you to argue against it, you’re immediately labeled a bigot and narrow-minded.
Then I talked about what the sacrament of marriage actually is, why it’s a sacrament and why homosexual unions can never be called marriage.
Finally I ended by entreating everyone to imitate the true love of Christ, poured out for us on the cross.
It went over well, although I had someone tell me that I’m not allowed to talk politics from the pulpit, and that included talking about Roe v. Wade. It’s a dangerous time!
Since the pastor at the church where I attended Mass on Sunday has had a girlfriend for many years, I wasn’t even slightly surprised that he said nothing about the issue. He never says a word about any moral issue, just reads some very brief, canned “don’t-worry-be-happy-God-loves-you” homily. I am happy to report, though, that he never has any liturgical dancers or giant puppets of doom at Mass.
Anglican Use (same readings as OF)
The permanent deacon gave a bit of a barnburner condemning our nation for turning away from God, starting with Roe v. Wade. He drew a comparison between those who laughed at Christ when He went to heal Jairus’ daughter with those today who scorn Christ and His Church. He said young people especially (I remember this point more clearly because I am, well, a young person) need to remain in the grace of God to weather the coming storm. The good deacon closed with this: “If you want to do something good for America, be a good Catholic!”
All in all, it was an excellent sermon, and exactly what I needed to hear to strengthen my faith.
Our Latin Mass community had sacraments of Confirmation and First Communion (in the traditional rite) so we had our diocesan Bishop present. He also gave the homily at Mass. As well as speaking about the newly confirmed he also talked about having just the day before presided at the “silver and gold” Mass in our parish that commemorated couples that had significant wedding anniversaries (25, 35, 50, etc.). He spoke about the importance of traditional marriage and condemned the recent ruling by the Supreme Court.
Father talked extensively about the ruling, noting that we have to walk a very fine line. On the one hand, we must not accept the ruling and we must do everything in our power to resist, even if there is a financial or social cost. He told the story of when the FSSP seminary was to receive a $5000 gift match from Raytheon, but the company insisted that the FSSP sign a document stating that they agreed to a number of morally objectionable points. The FSSP refused to sign the document and ultimately had to turn away the gift because moral principles have no price tag.
On the other hand, we must avoid bitterness and harmful thoughts towards those that oppose us politically. We must not harbor ill will toward them and we must pray for their conversion. We must remember that God will prevail and avoid temptation to despair but likewise we must still treat charitably those who oppose and persecute us. Father reminded us of the early Christians who were willingly persecuted and fed to the lions.
It makes me sad that a plurality of responses in the poll indicate that not a word was spoken about the ruling. I wish everyone could have heard a similar homily. I know I needed it.
I was on retreat with a Marian of the Immaculate Conception. He spoke a lot about how this was like the legalization of abortion and that it goes against the natural law and against the proclaimed Truth of Christ. He preached on the need of the Divine Mercy for the United States. He also spoke on what mercy is and listed the corporal works of mercy and more importantly the spiritual works of mercy. It was a really good Mass.
Father’s homily here was one I will remember for a long time. I have rarely had one bring me to tears, but his did. I felt from him, what I can only describe as being the feeling our Lord must have had in the agony in the garden- minus the blood pouring from his head. He spoke about how his job as Priest is to be like that of the garment that Christ was wearing when the woman touched it. Priests are to bring to the people an encounter with the living Christ- not their own personalities. He has had so many people telling him, “say this”, or “Father, you must say that”, but he relayed that he has given his life to Christ, and he will not say anything that betrays that fact. It was moving, and I told him so. He reminded me at the end of Mass though, that we know who wins. With that, we parted with a smile.
OF: Father mentioned that the inset story within the larger story isn’t just a report of an interruption, but that it illustrates important points about the story of Jairus’ daughter.
The woman who approached Jesus made a great act of faith in so doing, and her faith healed her. Even though she was unclean, she approached the Lord confident that He would help her. The little girl could not do anything, but was still restored to life. As such, we should never despair, but persist in prayer, particularly in prayer for others.
In both cases, before these encounters with Jesus, these women were unable to do what they were made to do: to bring new life into the world.
Spade: Thanks for sharing that. I did some perusing of the Internet to see which diocesan bishops took to the stump themselves, and which appeared to duck under the radar following Friday’s decision.
I attended not one but two Masses on Sunday specifically to hear whether or not this was mentioned.
In the EF I attended, in a major East Coast city, the rather young diocesan priest directly and unabashedly addressed the issue in his sermon, excellently going point-by-point through the Natural Law and the Church law (a.k.a God’s Law), and how it has been completely ignored here, and also yet reminding us twice that we do not marginalize those with same-sex attraction either, as the Catechism teaches. Indeed, as he pointed out, it is not marginalizing anyone to maintain that marriage (even common law marriage) between one man and one women is an anthropological truth which cuts to the core of mankind itself. This priest delivered the same homily in the OFs he had otherwise offered that weekend in his parish. A number of people came up to him and thanked him after the Masses.
Then I went to a wealthy OF-only parish in the suburbs, and there was another relatively young priest saying a Sunday evening Mass. While he offered an averagely-decent liturgy overall, he didn’t even mention the SCOTUS once, not even any sort of vague, passing reference to “the times we are living in.” Nor did his homily even have anything to do with the readings. Instead, he gave a truly flowery talk about merely bringing people to see in us the joy of Jesus…or something. And then he made references to visiting the sick, and recovering alcoholics. The Prayers of the Faithful didn’t have anything either, and the priest made no other references at any other point in the “announcements” that preceded the final blessing and dismissal.
While the people at that Mass were mostly dressed like they all had come from a backyard barbeque or sporting event, and are probably your typical low-information voters, I can be sure *they* knew about the SCOTUS decision, even in their isolated little bubbles of life. Too bad the priest gave up a good opportunity to give a timely instruction on the Faith.
This all took place in one of the major archdioceses which the Pope will visit this fall, and whose archbishop had come out just hours after the SCOTUS decision Friday with a public, cogent and orthodox response.
The pastor at my parish and the visiting priest not only included the courts decision and what marriage really is in their homilies, but also read Archbishop Kurtz’s statement at every mass for the people to hear. My pastor commented later saying that if we do nothing now and not fight against this today, we will regret it and the same laziness and lack of fight will happen exactly like it did when abortion was legalized.
A hearty thank-you to Father Z for posting your sermon. It is joyful to hear the sounds of babies, etc. at Fr. Heilman’s parish. [Though they can make preaching a challenge.]
EF.
Father alluded to it, in the course of a sermon on how to be a saint- a favorite topic of his…
What do we do in hard situations? Whatever makes us holy.
God knows we’re here in this particular time and place, He will not abandon us.
How do we combat serious habitual sins? By removing power of the Devil, by prayer and by
penance. All three together, or it won’t work.
I took three pages of notes, but those are the high spots.
I should point out that we regularly have excellent sermons on the sacrament of Matrimony,
in case anyone thinks he was avoiding the topic.
Let me begin by saying, we have a humble, but phlegmatic pastor, so I was somewhat surprised when he gave a passionate homily on the wrongheadedness of the Supreme Court’s decision on same sex marriage. He gave six, well-reasoned explanations of why this was wrong and what the consequences would be to souls afflicted with this disorder. He feared what it would do to children in general and to families. As to our country, he expounded on the inevitable repercussions, warning that the Almighty was not to be trifled with. While he despaired for our country, he warned us, much like you have, that worse is yet to come. I think we were all stunned with his candor and well understood his warnings. While he encouraged prayer, I can’t say it’s the total answer, though I must trust in the Lord.
Eastern Catholic Church. The gospel was the healing of the Gadarene demoniacs. Father mentioned how it was better to be the pigs because they would rather be dead than be possessed by demons, and they did drown themselves. Meanwhile the Gadarenes saw what Jesus did and told him to leave their town. They preferred the demons to being saved. Father then made a comparison to the Obergfell decision, how even though it came down by judicial fiat it was nevertheless applauded by so many. The people prefer their demons to the liberating truth of Christ. He then went on to say it’s ultimately our fault for not being faithful to Christ and proclaiming the truth of the gospel, starting with the bishops and going all the way down the line. He urged us to be faithful and proclaim the gospel with charity.
Our Sunday EF Mass in Knoxville was the first solemn high Mass of a young diocesan priest ordained Saturday who—as a high school student back in 2005–had served our very first indult Mass in Knoxville. So the especially invited visiting homilist set aside all current issues–and even the diocesan fund appeal that had been scheduled for the day’s Masses—to discuss, interpreting the Latin and English-translated words of the traditional Latin rite of ordination, what it means for the priest to act in persona Christ in offering sacrifice for the propitiation of sins and in forgiving the sins of men. Incidentally, looking at all the young faces around the altar and in the sanctuary—celebrant, deacon, subdeacon, priests attending in choir, none of them ordained more than an year or two, all of them staunchly orthodox—it occurred to me that these faithful young priests represent (Deo gratias) the Church of the future, rather than the “spirit of Vatican II” priests and bishops who are on their way out, however lofty the places in the Church they may occupy at the moment.
I hit it pretty hard. As it happens, I’d talked about this only a few weeks ago, and was tempted not to say much this time, because I’d addressed it pretty thoroughly so recently, both in a homily and the bulletin (i.e., a four-page article on marriage and sexuality). But I decided there was no way I couldn’t talk about it.
Not only that, I talked about it at the wedding on Saturday. I didn’t analyze the decision, I simply referenced it, on the way to explaining what is unique about marital love: it’s complementary by nature and it’s fruitful, i.e., producing children. Other forms of love, however beautiful, do not change the uniqueness of this.
Went to a Catholic Eastern Rite Mass (forgetting the term they use at the moment), nothing but Mercy with the Charleston shootings and then Mercy for those who are homosexual. Nothing condemning rather, providing an analogy between the Jews in the Old Testament who were rigid followers of the law, etc. Making it sound that we should not be “rigid” with the law like they were. Needless to say, I won’t be back.
EF: Priest (young) spent all of his sermon on it, drawing parallels to Roman empire and being required to worship gods or false idols of the empire. Persecution resulted to the Christians who would not participate. Now we will be having this false idol in our times, that the elite and powerful will require us to ‘worship’. As Catholics we cannot support this.
Very edifying and good to hear this hit straight on in the sermon.
I heard a lengthy and detailed account of the events leading up to the decapitation of Sts. Thomas More and John Fisher, contrasted with the quick capitulation by 25 of 26 English bishops to the demands of the King. The pastor went on to say that challenges to the Church’s tax exempt status should be expected, and that this would be devastating if successful, but that nevertheless the gospel would be preached, on the streets and in the alleys if necessary.
By comparison, the Abp’s response was an anodyne statement about how we all must walk together (but to where?).
Was out of town for the weekend, so I went to a parish that I had been at 20+ years ago, in a sleepy little town. Father used his experiences from his recent vacation, looking through old cemetaries, to make the point that God sees the world and people in a true way, that we do not. Though we may believe we see the reality of a situation, God sees it truly and with love and mercy. Good homily, though I wish he would have touched upon the SCOTUS decision.
On the other hand, I found out that this priest, who is also the pastor of another parish 10 miles away was a Lutheran pastor before converting to Catholicism and becoming ordained. He also has EF every other Sunday and on Fridays! So well done!
No direct mention of the court decision in the homily I heard, although there were so many allusions to it that I wondered whether perhaps Fr. had been told not to speak about it directly.
Fr. spoke about having faith and never giving up. The woman in the Gospel had been ritually unclean for 12 years and seen many doctors. Many might have given up in this seemingly hopeless situation and said, why bother? But she had faith and went to Jesus. Jairus’ daughter was already dead. People in the crowd said, why bother? But Jesus told her family to have faith, and raised her from the dead.
Fr. then went on to speak of the ways in which we can demonstrate our faith and persevere even when it seems hopeless. He mentioned Roe v. Wade and said that even though abortion is legal, we shouldn’t just give up and say, why bother. Instead, we keep pressing on, praying and lobbying for change. The Supreme Court doesn’t decide what is Truth, he said, Truth comes from God.
Father talked about martyrdom. He called the Supreme Court decision “tyranny and an abomination” and then talked about how to get ready for martyrdom… the verbal kind first, followed by the “ordinary form” of it. We are participating with the saints of all the centuries, and with Christ himself. We also had the text of the USCCB condemnation of the decision in our bulletin. It was a bracing, encouraging, strengthening word.
Thanks for posting all these great homilies! I was at an EF mass in another parish on Sunday but the priest was not somebody I’d ever seen before (a visiting Irishman, possibly) and didn’t say a word about it, although he did read the Bishop’s very good letter first.
On the other hand, an informal survey of friends living in my home parish indicate that the letter was not read there yesterday. I think one of the problems even good bishops have is the presence of a lot of disloyal lower clergy, so it’s wonderful to see these great homilies.
As I’ve said before, Father was “diplomatic” although he made some excellent points. Mostly about how the Supreme Court can’t change what the Church teaches. But he did say that the Church might “expand” it’s definition of marriage in the future. At least, he seemed to imply this. My fiance asked him about this (politely) after Mass and was given a shrug of the shoulders and a “we’ll have to see” type answer. I don’t think Father really meant to imply that the Church would change Her teaching, he was trying to make some other point that he wasn’t articulating well. (Maybe? Best case scenario…cutting him some slack I guess you could say) But this puts my poor mind in a pickle and no mistake. I thought this was infallible teaching. Color me confused by this homily. I’m just going back to the Catechism and re-read some things.
I went to Mass at a parish notable for its ‘social justice’ message and I honestly did not expect anything on the subject. The sermon was a solid preach based on the readings, with a good theological primer on the relationship between the fall, original sin, and sickness and death. At the end, father closed off with a reference to the Fortnight for Freedom and the coming celebration of North American independence and the priest said that the U.S. notion of liberty is getting “out of hand.” This was his teaser for “coming attractions” at next week’s sermon so it will be interesting to see what he says next week.
Regretfully I must vote for “not a word.” But I don’t blame the visiting priest, just returned from the archdiocese mission in Venezuela. It was “misson appeal” Sunday, so we got a 20 minute dialogue about the mission with a couple allusions to the readings thrown in. I fancy our pastor would have discussed it had he been here this weekend.
The sermon was on Pope Francis’ call to be aware of the poor. Not a word on the decision.
Visiting priest I have never seen before at an OF Mass. He read a statement from Bishop Conlon – it was quite short, but he said that it was a legal decision, not a moral one. Then the message basically restated the Catechism on the matter.
This decision was bad timing, as the priest’s homily regarding the readings was fantastic. I hope to see this priest again.
We got similar points to the homilies heard by NickD and e.e., except that Father did mention Obergfell explicitly (unlike e.e’s) and that it wasn’t a barnburner like NickD’s. Father seemed very concerned that Catholics not say mean things about this stuff in person or on social media, although he acknowledged that most of the nastiness is coming toward us these days. (Btw, the general impression I got was that the music minister had prepared for post-Charleston stuff about racial understanding, and most of the petitions were more toward that. Although I don’t know what music’s appropriate for “your government decides to do something unconstitutional that also goes against Church teaching.”
I wanted to clarify my choice of “a brief mention or allusion only.” Father’s homily was very powerful. In the 15 minutes he preached he only spoke of “recent events” in the final four minutes. But he set it up beautifully.
Father spoke of John the Baptist since his feast had been on Wednesday. I knew he would get around to recent events and he did, near the end. John the Baptist was beheaded because he spoke against Herod’s unlawful marriage. Father was much more eloquent than I can be when he made it clear that we ourselves may be called upon to become martyrs like John the Baptist in upholding the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He did not use the words “gay marriage” and truly the issue goes much deeper than that anyway.
Is it okay to post a link to his homily?
http://augustinethomas.com/working/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150628_nativity_john_baptist.m4a
Although Father gave an excellent homily on the daughter of Jairus ( ie death is NOT the end ) ,
the silence about the Scotus ruling was deafening.
pax et bonum
Our younger-ish (three years out of seminary approximately) priest was preaching. A couple of nods to Charleston, not a word about SCOTUS or marriage. Sometimes I think our priests live in a giant vacuum of generalities.
Not a word. Slightly surprised, but we’ve had gay ‘marriage’ for a decade now. However, Father’s homily was very good. He talked about the Pharisaical interpretations of the law and how we love to find loopholes (such as all-you-can-eat seafood Fridays). He then went on to discuss how although the bible might not mention certain moral questions, between the bible and the teaching authority of the church, the church can pronounce on various moral questions. He explicitly stated that IVF was an “objective moral evil” – this is the first time in years that I’ve heard a priest say this, and certainly in the strongest terms possible. He then went on to remind us that Friday is still a day of penance (although he didn’t elaborate, I got the certain sense that he was in favour of no meat as that penance). This is certainly rare in Canada, where the bishops try to even excuse the Lenten Friday abstinence. And further, he preached against work on Sunday (although with a small jab at old moral manuals, because as he stated, sometimes things which were considered labour in the past, are now considered recreation and thus permissible for Sundays). So, overall a very strong homily in all of about 7-10 minutes.
At least one person walked out of our pastor’s homily.
Local EF: not a word. I was surprised.
I heard two Sunday homilies, one was a Mass of Thanksgiving by a new priest who preached at this Mass himself, and it did not discuss SSM but was a straightforward homily on the readings of the day. I also stopped in to an evening Mass to hear the Cathedral rector’s homily, which did speak the truth about the problems facing us and our society as a result of the Supreme Court decision about this matter. These comments were maybe 1/3 of his homily but I would call them substantive, undeluded, and for him, vigorous.
On Friday evening I had attended the Diocese of Madison ordinations, and Bishop Morlino gave a homily that was more current events oriented than some of his other ordination homilies have been, and did certainly discuss this, while not de-railing the focus of the occasion.
On Saturday I attended one of the most beautiful Masses I have ever attended, the first Mass of Fr Chris Gernetzke, Solemn High Mass in the Extraordinary Form. I really found this moving, and had so much of a sense of how this beauty was thanks to not only years of dedication, prayer and study by the new priest but a whole community of dedicated Christian people, the other clerics and servers, the choir, etc etc.
Not a word mentioned about that decision, though I did hear the buzzword “diversity” mentioned during the intentions.
Mass in EF. Father mentioned the SCOTUS decision in both his customary Spanish lead-in (this being California) and in his longer English sermon. It was clear he had read the dissenting opinions because he specifically mentioned Justice Scalia’s use of “putsch”. He was blunt about the coming persecution, but solid as always about the sureness of our victory if we but keep the faith handed down to us. His SCOTUS references weren’t the sole topic, though, since he spent equal time on why Catholics don’t do “fellowship” well, and needn’t feel terribly abashed about it. (!!) Very fine preacher; I wish we had more like him.
I felt I had a moral obligation to preach on the decision, if I did not, I thought I was doing the very thing that this world wants — to silence the Gospel. Well, I refuse to cooperate with that attitude. This whole experience has made me recommit to preaching the Gospel and our Catholic faith in a deeper level.
I heard Bishop Morlino address the ruling at ordination on Friday evening. I agree with Elizabeth: it’s not his standard format for ordination homilies, but it was needed, and it was a solid and reaffirming call to faithfulness. I was at the same Mass of Thanksgiving that Elizabeth attended on Sunday morning. My observation was that our dear newly ordained priest was relieved to get through what he had prepared. He did a fine job. I guess I wasn’t surprised that he didn’t mention SCOTUS, but I also would not have been surprised if he had done so. Perhaps I’ll find him next Sunday and see if he has any remarks about it then, when there is less interior pressure, if that makes sense. I was not able to get to the later Mass to hear Monsignor’s homily, but others who attended mentioned the conviction with which he spoke. Those who had attended the 9:00 at Pine Bluff had good things to say about what they’d heard as well. :)
At Sunday morning’s OF, Father mentioned the Supreme Court decision, its wrongfulness, and our devotion to traditional marriage. Didn’t go on at length but was direct. After Mass I complimented him on mentioning it and he said “I have to.”
A majority of the time when my sister and I go to the TLM, we will have already been to the N.O. with our parents (more or less to keep domestic peace). Not a peep at the N.O., but at Fr.’s last TLM in his current parish he used the decision as an opportunity to remind us, as the epistle said, not to render evil for evil. He spoke of how for those of us who the devil knows he won’t have much luck tempting to embrace these popular lies, he will instead tempt us toward an attitude lacking in charity. Basically, we must oppose such evils and speak the truth against them, but we must do so without bitterness, despair, or responding in kind to any nastiness that will inevitably come our way.
Many thanks to all priests here and everywhere, who mentioned the SCOTUS decision in their homilies. We had not a peep, and we didn’t expect one. In the northeast we predominantly have the Church of Nice. I get annoyed with liberals, and they are the majority here, but honestly, what else would we expect when the Catholic faith here is so utterly milquetoast. It just is, and on some level you can’t hold the sheep entirely accountable for the natural result of that, celebration of disasters like this SCOTUS ruling and the obvious disregard of our Constitution. If the shepherd allows the sheep out of their pastures and into dangerous fields, well, they are going to go. They aren’t contemplating the wolf, that’s the shepherd’s job. We are not informed on the ways of “serious” Catholicism, virtually never. How anybody finds their way to it can only be grace. Younger Catholics are especially less likely to find it. They don’t even have memories to draw from.
I suspect our Bishop has silenced any mention of the decision.
Chastisement seems a certainty. We have become frighteningly arrogant and atheistic.
LauraZim: I also had the thought that with so many of his priests present an ordination is also an occasion for the bishop to preach to his presbyterate, so I was glad for the things he said. The dear new priest whose Mass of Thanksgiving we both attended Sunday was hearing confessions today before the evening Mass which I think he had been scheduled to concelebrate but he wound up continuing to hear confessions while Mass began without him, then said a private Mass after, with his parents and a couple of us parishioners remaining for that. I thought this was just about right and I thought Fr Z would approve that as actually more ideal.
Not a word during Sunday mass, but I heard Bishop Olmsted speak on it at length at an ordination mass on Saturday.
Elizabeth–Absolutely!! I sort of knew going in that we were going to hear from Bishop Morlino on the subject. You’re so right in the way you stated it earlier, too, in that he did not detract from the occasion with what he said, but it *mattered*. His homily was substantive and instructive, and I was thankful to be there to hear it.
Beautiful about Fr. G. continuing to hear confessions…he did put the call out there this this morning; it’s great to know that so many were able to attend, and that so many had their confessions heard. There are indulgences abounding, no doubt!
I’m so glad you asked!
We went to a Saturday night NO vigil. The comment was, “A person….who I hope is not here tonight… said to me, ‘Father, God must be so sad about the recent decisions of the Supreme Court’, and though I didn’t tell that person, I will tell you, God does not feel emotions therefore he is not sad about the decisions.” and then something to the effect of if God is not saddened by things, we shouldn’t be sad either.
After Mass, I asked Father about Jesus as the second person of the Holy Trinity weeping for Jerusalem and His agony in the garden. He said that those were part of His human nature not His divine nature. I asked about God’s anger documented in the bible, and he said that was from the old testament and something to the effect of God’s not like that anymore.
Is that to say He was bad before, but He’s all better now? Isn’t that a heresy?
God’s a person, well, God is three Persons, but He loves, and gets angry and sorrows….doesn’t He? If creation was made in for and through love, and God is love, then surely He feels love? And that’s a n emotion.
Father preached in a tone of great sadness about how Jesus is with us even in situations where we might not think so, which I took to be a possible allusion to the Supreme Court decision.
It was an OF Mass I attended, and was initially pleased to hear our priest begin by mentioning the SCOTUS decision. Unfortunately, it deteriorated. He began well, though. Here’s the gist of it.
Marriage is between a man and a woman, and always will be, no matter who says otherwise. The nation has had a wake-up call here. The Catholic Church will no longer “be able” to “perform” civil marriages. That’s a disappointment, “a great sadness”, in that it will push the Church and the state farther and farther apart. [He said something I found odd about how the Church and state were really close together through the action of the Church’s “performing” marriages for the state — that was eyebrow-raising time.] He predicted that we may eventually have no Catholic judges, no Christian justices of the peace (he called it “a dangerous situation,” although I didn’t hear any explanation of why), because they will be unable to perform civil marriages. [I thought he danced around the plain words of the matter — I think he intended the meaning to be “Catholic/Christian JPs who desire to do the will of Jesus by not witnessing sham homosexual “marriages” will be forced out of their jobs one way or another.”] He did mention the USCCB letter, but if he said anything other than it exists and that it was “good”, I missed that through taking notes.
Then he went into discussing the readings. That was not too bad, until he got around to saying that we “are invited to ask for grace”, and gave us an example (and I quote, I think, verbatim): “Jesus, help me to ask for Your victory over death” And he repeated it: “We are invited to ask for grace: Jesus, help me to ask for Your victory over [sin].”
To me, “Help me to ask for” sounds like pure unadulterated-but-thankfully-defunct ICEL language. I was reminded sharply of “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Cor. 14:8)
I need to say, though, that he talked about how the readings all had to do with death in some way, and he listed the seven deadly sins by name and said that they all lead to spiritual death. He didn’t elaborate, though. That was nice to hear — it’s not often that the seven deadlies get mentioned.
Suburbanbanshee: I don’t know what music’s appropriate for “your government decides to do something unconstitutional that also goes against Church teaching.”
“A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” popped into mind as soon as I had read that — and after seeing the lyrics, I know why!!
1. A mighty fortress is our God,
a bulwark never failing;
our helper he amid the flood
of mortal ills prevailing.
For still our ancient foe
doth seek to work us woe;
his craft and power are great,
and armed with cruel hate,
on earth is not his equal.
2. Did we in our own strength confide,
our striving would be losing,
were not the right man on our side,
the man of God’s own choosing.
Dost ask who that may be?
Christ Jesus, it is he;
Lord Sabaoth, his name,
from age to age the same,
and he must win the battle.
3. And though this world, with devils filled,
should threaten to undo us,
we will not fear, for God hath willed
his truth to triumph through us.
The Prince of Darkness grim,
we tremble not for him;
his rage we can endure,
for lo, his doom is sure;
one little word shall fell him.
4. That word above all earthly powers,
no thanks to them, abideth;
the Spirit and the gifts are ours,
thru him who with us sideth.
Let goods and kindred go,
this mortal life also;
the body they may kill;
God’s truth abideth still;
his kingdom is forever.
http://www.hymnsite.com/lyrics/umh110.sht
Saturday Mass – Father spoke about the oath he took when he became a pastor – and how he had to do certain things , ect. He did allude to the SCOTUS ruling but nothing major. This was his first homily at that parish so he had a lot to address.
Sunday – We got a LOT about it, how we should respond and how the Justices were wrong. Father included somethings we should not do (attend gay weddings, ect )He alienated more than a few people and I counted about a dozen who walked out.
Father spoke of Pope Francis’s call to help of the poor of the world. Nothing on the decision.
Not being from the US,I didn’t answer the poll.
Our parish priest had an great sermon on the rarely mentioned topic of death. He spoke of what death is, why do we have to think of it (memento mori!) and what comes after it. I really liked it!
It is also worth noting yesterday’s feast day of sts. Peter and Paul, patrons of our parish, which was really nice.
My priest said nothing about the SCOTUS ruling nor will he in the future because I’m pretty sure he wholeheartedly supports it. After Mass, though, in private, he did emphatically object to a kids’ softball tourney being held on a Sunday (Not during church hours, just on Sunday) because “Sundays are family day.” So helpful.
“He alienated more than a few people and I counted about a dozen who walked out.”
Good. One of my favorite priests, who gives “no compromise” homilies might have had somebody walk out while he was listing sins (including divorce and gay “marriage”). After mass he, rather concerned, asked us if he’d said anything that people would take offense too.
I said, “Who cares? Anybody that walks out probably needed to hear whatever offended them.” Lord knows I needed to hear stuff I didn’t like more than once.
Father didn’t mention the SCOTUS decision directly, but you could easily tell he had it in mind. (Since the parish is eastern rite, I don’t know if they get as spun up over the events in America; I would agree what’s going on in Ukraine right now is far more dire.) Father’s point was that what happened Friday was the result of a loooooooooong history of kicking God out of our schools and every facet of public life. I think one reason I love this priest so much is because, like me, he focuses on root causes than the specific blossom; what evangelical Protestants never really accepted, and why they “lost,” IMHO, is because they thought that they could leave the roots, (secularism, contraception, divorce, etc.,) and just cut off the flower’s head and somehow that was supposed to work? (Last part is my point, not Father’s, and just where my mind went after his homily.)
“God’s a person, well, God is three Persons, but He loves, and gets angry and sorrows….doesn’t He? If creation was made in for and through love, and God is love, then surely He feels love? And that’s a n emotion.”
Dear KateD,
God, in His Divinity, is what is called impassible, which means that He does not suffer pain or pleasure. This is because God is wholly Other and not a part of the created universe, so he is not harmed by it. In the Old Testament, the statements that God got angry, etc., are analogies for how God acts. We have to be able to talk about God, so we use the closest thing we know – how we react, but, technically, God is one, simple, pure, being and getting angry takes parts. Your pastor was wrong when he said that God changed from the Old Testament to now. He is eternal and unchanging. God has, always, been impassible.
God, in His humanity (Jesus) knows all of the human emotions, however, follow…love is not an emotion. Emotions are the results of actions and too variable to form the basis for right actions. Love is: to will the authentic good of the other, both for their sake (love of neighbor) and God’s sake (love of God through ones neighbor). Love is an act of the will informed by reason. Faith informs the reason what is the loving thing to will and the will wills it. Emotions come later, after the will finishes.
Hope that helps.
The Chicken
Thank you, Chicken!!! For taking the time to respond. Yes, it does help. :) It gives me a leaping off point..
I will look up impassibility of God.
Not a word, although I cannot say I’m surprised. Father talked about the difference in the reaction to the shooting in Ferguson and the shootings in Charleston. It was an interesting point, but I saw more than one raised eyebrow after the homily. I think everyone was disappointed, although I was a bit afraid of what might be said.
In our community (I’m a religious priest) we have had three in a row on basically how we have to be nice to those we disagree with and be tender to their delicate feelings. Nothing on how the generation I am replacing as a vocation director has utterly dropped the ball on teaching the facts about the Sacraments and basic Church teaching! Nothing! There is plenty of the nonsense similar to what the editor of America is saying: HOMOPHOBIA EVERYWHERE! Be honest, the fake homophobia is simply disagreement about the nature of human marriage. Not much else…no hate, no death wishes, nothing… Without a doubt there are many priests who hold that good Catholics can believe in SSM and remain in good standing in the Church. I shot a video on this and was thwarted from posting it because of this issue. Can I get some support on that reality or am I in the wrong?
Fr. Andrew: I am just a measly lay person, but I will support you and pray for your vocation and your video.
Excellent sermon from our pastor:
http://imlaysacredheart.org/homily.htm
I’m happy to say, we can always count on Fr. Paul Ward!
No mention of the SCOTUS decision, but a good sermon nonetheless, on anger, about which I think we need fully to understand as we prepare to confront the Enemy and his burgeoning minions.
Anger in itself is not bad. It can be wrong if it either (a) is disproportionate or (b) causes us to do wicked deeds, use wicked words, or harbor wicked thoughts toward our neighbor, toward whom we are always obliged to act in charity.
Jesus, help our neighbor and make us more like Thee Whose Sacred Heart is perfectly filled with Divine Charity!