Thursday, 5 March 2015

A Pastoral Approach

The reflection questions related to the forthcoming Synod have been around for a while now, and I was discussing my responses with another priest the other day. We agreed that it is extremely difficult in today’s world to engage in a pastoral encounter without the risk of offending the person we speak to, who may well –with their entire family- alienate themselves from all participation in the life of the Church (which no one wants to see happen). We discussed how some priests seem to accommodate everyone with open arms, while some are perhaps coldly black and white and refuse Communion even at the altar rail. I want to share with you my own approach to things, and will begin with two experiences from my own ministry.

Some years back, in another parish, I preached on chastity and noted that while we must always uphold the Church’s teaching and be willing to say what constitutes sin, that we must never judge the person or leave them feeling judged, since only God can judge a soul. I don’t know how well I did, because at the end a young man asked to see me privately, at which meeting he said he was grateful not to feel judged because of his situation. I reassured him that we never judge and condemn persons, at which point he said, “I can see that, which is why I wonder if you would marry me and my partner. We’ve been living together for some years and never thought we’d find a priest willing to bless our union”. When I asked if whether he or his girlfriend had been married before, he informed me that his partner was another man. “What do I do now?” I thought, “I don’t want him to feel judged but I can’t give approval to his lifestyle”. So I simply said it wasn’t possible for me to bless his relationship because while the Church would not judge him or his soul, we are obliged to assess situations and acts as being in harmony with or contrary to God’s law, and objectively his lifestyle was not in accord with God’s laws, which puts his soul in jeopardy. I advised him that if he wished to continue sharing his life and home with this man, that they should refrain from genital acts and put strategies in place that will help them to avoid such acts and value other each as persons. He left without any harsh words of anger, but disappointed and frustrated.

A second encounter was with a man who, having heard roughly the same homily some years later, told me he was angry because I had suggested because he was living with a divorced woman whom he was planning to marry he shouldn’t come to Holy Communion, while his own priest had told him it was fine because after all they were not kids; they were in their sixties and planning to marry. The approach I used that day is one I have used ever since.

First off I asked him what he understood to be the Church’s teaching on marriage and sexuality. Having listened I said that my understanding of he Church’s teaching was that outside of marriage all forms of intercourse are gravely sinful, and that perhaps his own priest had not fully understood his situation: would the man be willing to look at the Catechism with me so we could check out the Church’s teaching together? He agreed, but on reading the relevant sections thrust the book towards me and said he disagreed with and would continue doing as he was doing now; that it was his own priest he was going to heed, not me or some book from an old man in Rome. He refused a further appointment and left the presbytery very angry with me (in reality with his Church; I’m only its mouthpiece).

These experiences shared, I explained to my fellow priest that my pastoral approach with all those in irregular situations is basically the same: I begin by asking them what they understand to be the Church’s teaching about their situation/lifestyle, and why she teaches it. I then ask if they are willing to check this out with the Catechism (this allows them so challenge themselves by such information-receiving, rather than be rebuffed by me and left feeling that no exploration has been done). If they are in situations where they ought not to receive Holy Communion, and when they have looked at the Catechism with me but still say they will continue to receive Holy Communion, I advise them not to, and say that if they do, then they should do so in a parish where they are not known so as to avoid giving scandal; that if they approach me for Holy Communion I will give them a blessing but cannot give them Holy Communion since I don’t want to compound their situation with unlawful reception of the Sacrament.

My approach has always been the same. Some folk I have spoken to have regularised their situations; others have abstained from Holy Communion while others have been determined to live by their own choices. But I have informed without enforcing which is, I think, all I am asked to do, which leaves me at ease with my conscience.

What leaves me irritated is that many clergy seem to allow all and sundry to receive Holy Communion and to baptise whatever comes to the door, whether there is any practice of the Faith or not. Such clergy are respected as good, caring men, while priests like myself who initiate pastoral strategies that are not undemanding but which uphold the proclamation of the Faith while enforcing nothing, are seen as rule-bound or cold-hearted. Yes some folk are offended by our support of the Faith in our pastoral encounters, but they are at least given the Truth so as to stand before God with their decision-making and self-responsibility intact, rather than facilitated in situations damaging to their souls. Well-intentioned, good-hearted pastors whose pastoral encounters focus on caring for the feelings of folk rather than their souls provide comfort to folk for this world only, and not necessarily for the other.

29 comments:

  1. Since Vatican II, the word pastoral for many so-called Gaudium et Spes bishops and priests have been nothing more than a euphemism for accommodation, permissiveness and misguided compassion. Typical of a pastoral approach detached from the truth enshrined in doctrine and entrusted by Divine Revelation to the Church. Bishops and priests who feed Christ's lambs and sheep using this approach are nothing but hirelings, dysfunctional pastors and priestly fathers, more interested in filling up pews than heaven.
    Judging by your post, I can only conclude that your parishioners are very blessed to have a truly fatherly priest that genuinely cares and considers the spiritual welfare of the souls Christ's Body has entrusted to him. I commend you Father Gary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Greg.
      Indeed, pastoral sensitivity has become pastoral sentimentality where to avoid hurting feelings we avoid the application of the faith.
      God Bless
      PS Some parishioners do not feel blesed but burdened with me: teaching from the catechism and ad-orientem liturgy with Latin does not suit those who favour relativism and community-focused worship.

      Delete
    2. Father, all Catholics in whatever station of life we find ourselves are called to be true and faithful to their baptismal vocation of being a holy, royal priesthood. Bishops and priests as pastors and leaders of Christ's Church, have publicly promised to be the principal living examples and witness of this vocation. For many years now I have witness the spirit of Vatican II hierarchy give the impression that their life and vocation, as a servant of the Church is one oppressive burden from which they need to free themselves. If some of your parishioners find your ministry, which is your vocation to holiness a burden rather than a blessing then it is because they have been influenced by these leaders. Not only has their leadership and ministry been detached from the Church's doctrines but from the living presence of Christ in his Church. These consecrated leaders no longer subscribe to the Church and her priesthood as Christ willed it, as the apostles hand it on, and their fruitlessness can be seen everywhere. They are incapable of passing on faith let alone evangelizing anyone.

      Delete
  2. Your approach is exactly right, Fr.

    Clergy who are lax with God's Law do a great injustice to the people they lead down false paths, but they also cause no end of problems for the rest of us who try to be faithful to Christ. They raise false hopes and expectations in the people they are supposed to serve, and then we take on the mantle of "the bad guys" when we present them with the truth - no matter how sensitively it is done.

    If we adopt such laxity for the sake of keeping people "happy" then we are no better than the Pharisees castigated by Our Lord in Matt 5. As He taught authoritatively, the spirit of the Law regarding the Commandments is far more demanding than the letter of the Law - despite popular conceptions to the contrary.

    Another "pastoral approach" I have encountered is to say that if the adulterers etc. are ignorant of the gravity of their sin, then they are not sinning seriously and so it is ok for them to receive Holy Communion. This leads to a strategy of keeping people in ignorance so that the pastor can avoid unpleasant situations, and ignorance then becomes elevated to the level of a sacrament.

    IMHO if men are not prepared to apply the law of the Church with justice and true charity then they are not fit for ordination in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Deacon Augustine.
      Indeed, As I pointed out to someone the other day, it is not about me holding to my principles or even obeying the law of the Church, rather, if is about holding to Divine revelation which is applied and protected by the law of the Church for the good of the people and the safeguarding of their rights.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  3. Dear Father

    If half the clergy in Britain were of your mindset then we wouldn't have so many problems !!

    As a convert I just can't get my head around the idea that Priests wink and nod at people living lifestyles not conformed to the Church, or for that matter the people thinking that the Church should conform to their standards rather than Gods.

    I remember reading an article in the Spectator by Louise Mensch last year in which she stated that whilst she is living with a man who is not her husband, she doesn't go up to Holy Communion because she respects the Church's teachings. I can't condone her adultery but at least she respects Our Lord enough to refrain from sacrilege.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, JAMC,
      Its because priests are good-hearted and don't want to hurt anyone that they don't put the Church's disciplines into practice, but it is not good, as you note.
      God Bless

      Delete
  4. Thank you for being honest and truthful with people. You really love them and want their salvation. Showing them the Catechism allows them to see that you are not just giving your opinion but are giving them the truth as taught by the Church. God bless you. Obviously, you are willing to suffer for the truth and are willing to suffer for the souls in your care.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Ellen.
      I truly want no one to be lost.
      I would day I'm willing to suffer in my proclamation of the truth, but I wish I found it easy to live by ! We can all talk the talk but can we walk the walk/ I fall a lot (hopefully, not mortally!)
      God Bless

      Delete
  5. We judge the actions of other people every day in our life, whether it may be at work or at home. However, we are never supposed to judge the actions of people when it relates to the truth of Jesus Christ? This is does not make any sense to me. As a former agnostic, we need the truth told to us directly. It was not a so-called pastoral approach which converted my heart, but the unashamed truth of Jesus Christ from evangelical preachers along with Mother Angelica. We use the "I will not judge" out of our own fear of proclaiming the truth. We are afraid of the possible outcomes of proclaiming this truth. When we are in sin, we will say "do not judge me" as a convenient cover for our sin. I am not saying pound people over the head, but we cannot be afraid as only the truth of Jesus Christ will convict our hearts and hopefully lead us to repentance. We cannot condemn, but we can surely judge the actions of people, again, it happens every day with each and every one of us.

    Andrew Nelson
    USA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Andrew.
      Oh yes, we ARE to judge the actions of people when it relates to the truth of Christ. We are to judge actions, not people, means we must judge what they do by the truth of Christ, but we canot jusdge their state of soul, which only God can see. They may be 'in good faith' as we used to say. That said, if they are acting at odds with the Truth then we must put in place the disciplines of the Church not so as to punish but so as to bring them to a realisation of the gravity of their actions. Even excommunication is seen by the Church not as a punishment but as a remideal act designed to bring about repentance.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  6. Father,

    Different jobs require different skills and degrees of courage. I have always thought being a priest being prepared to act “in persona Christi” must require an exceptional amount of both.

    But it works both ways. Those are to be used. To tell someone they are in sin with the risk of driving them away must be difficult. But to do otherwise would be to create confusing example and could endanger other souls. There are limits to personal responsibility, even that of a priest.

    The sin not the sinner is a principle that has worked for a long time and there is no reason to change it.

    Your job as a priest, or a pope for that matter, should you ever get that far, is to judge the sin.

    More than ever Father I think this mess in the current Catholic Church comes back to the idea of routine reception of Holy Communion, regardless.

    In the pre-Vat II Mass, if I remember right, about 30% went to Communion, and the rest stayed in the pews, somewhat admiringly if I remember right, while matters were sorted out or maybe they just disagreed and drifted away - but at least we all knew where we stood.

    The quicker we get back to considering the reception of Holy Communion as exceptional and wondrous, to be done only if all is right - the better!


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Jacobi.
      "The sin not the sinner is a principle that has worked for a long time and there is no reason to change it." Agreed.,This is the core of the matter.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  7. Why don't priests, especially when a spouse has been through(unwillingly) the annulment process and successfully defended their marriage, face down adulterers with preauthorized formal excommunication(Papal, so it is universal), if repentance and restitution are refused by an abandoning, adulterous, spouse and their lover who claim to be Catholic? This is EASILY shown to be just or injust with the information that is learned in the annulment process, unless the process in incompetant. Responsibility for an unjust divorce and civil remarriage is certain in every case I have learned of where their has been strong opposition to a divorce and to a nullity process. I DO NOT agree with excommunication, as I mention above, when the circumstances are not clear. Injustice should NEVER be part of any pastoral action or canonical action.

    Instead, the "couple" are accepted in all but a Church wedding and this goes on as long as they want it to.

    I know this to be reality in many instances and it is the most painful violation the Catholic Church can allow to a faithful spouse with the exception of marrying the unrepentant adulterers. This is exponentially worse and malignantly perverse when the abandoning adulterous spouse is given custody of the children of the marriage they abandoned, as they cover up their abandonment(as occurred in our case) and this outrage is forced upon young children

    For this abandoned spouse it is little different than endless rape, that is medicated so the physical pain is subclinical but the mental pain NEVER stops! AND, it continues to haunt the children who know the circumstances.

    I cannot properly describe the depravity of the pastoral practices of the Catholic Church with sufficient outrage.

    Oh, how I wish I could address this upcoming synod and confront fake priests like Bergoglio and Kasper and their lot before the gathering of bishops.

    These men are diabolical monsters and that is not an adequately negative description, by FAR! They are facilitating crimes of monumental injustice and in reality are accomplices. I think, knowingly and willingly in adultery.


    Karl

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you karl.
      If someone has defended the validity of their marriage successfully the priests ought to uphold it and call the unfaithful spouse out of any adulterous relationship. One can only presume that the priest does not know their marriage was decelerated valid if he is accepting the second relationship at Communion -which is, as you say, unjust toward the abandoned spouse.
      God Bless.

      Delete
    2. Yes, Karl, you describe a monumental scandal and injustice, and cruel abuse of the abandoned spouse and wronged children, by habitual collusion by the Church in desertion and adultery.

      Delete
    3. Thank you, Lynda.
      The abuse of the Annulment process by deceptive claims etc, as well as failing to take into account abandoned spouses and children when condoning civil 'remarriage' after divorce, is a real injustice and a deception of those involved, in that the 're-married' spouses are not at rights with God, even thought they appear to be by being admitted to Holy Communion.
      God Bless

      Delete
  8. Sorry about the spelling and grammatical errors, not to mention the long windedness of the above comment Father. I'm no good under pressure. What I meant to say was that, if liberal bishops and priests find the 'Church of the past' with her priesthood and teaching onerous and burdensome, then the laity will do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You speak the truth Father. I wish more Clergy would not be so afraid to say what is right - they would be supported

    ReplyDelete
  10. Many thanks for this post. I hope it is heeded by those who need it, whether they know it or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Father.
      I do hope your health is holding out. Prayers offered.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  11. What messages are bishops and priests sending to Catholics, and the world indeed, about the living presence of Christ in his Church when they give Holy Communion to all and sundry? What are they doing to the Church's mission and her sacraments of initiation when they baptize without first evangelizing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Greg.
      I think they are saying 'God loves us as we are' which, while i do not dispute it, is only half the story: 'and calls us on by grace to greater things because He loves us too much to leave us there' is the rest. I have to say that Vatican II's fundamental 'Universal call to holiness' is being discraed by many who want irregular lifestyles affirmed to as to express half the love of God as indicated above.
      God Bless..

      Delete
  12. This is heartbreaking, Father. I pray for priests who are courageously doing the right thing but are getting almost no support from those who should be backing them up. It must be very lonely. Everything's upside down. My mother and I were refused communion twice in front of the whole congregation. We were Catholics in good standing, the priest knew us by sight after two years but knew nothing of our story. Couldn't understand what was going on. Finally, I stumbled on the answer on the internet, when I read of case after case of people being refused Communion because they were either genuflecting or kneeling to receive. That's what we were doing — a quick genuflection that wasn't holding anyone up, but we were the only ones doing it. So, people are refused Communion for adoring Our Lord, but not refused for living in sin. But in shaking the dust from our feet of that parish, we started on the journey that finally ended in finding the Traditional Latin Mass in another parish. The deepening of faith that has arisen from the TLM is such a pearl of great price — worth far more than what we paid in being scandalized and mortified in the former parish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for commenting.
      It may be lonely to try to do the right thing, but all least one knows one is is doing the best one can for God and for souls.
      Your experience is appalling. Enforcing modern ways on Communicants is perhaps their way of trying to show people that God wants to be intimate with us, but this harsh approach does not speak of the love of God at all. I am sorry that you have had such an experience; I have others relate the same kind of thing to me. it is uncommon, but should really be absent, especially at the Communion rail. Strangely, it is traditional priests who are seen as being hard and unpastoral. yet I don't know any who would refuse Communion at the rail (though we might take the folk aside afterwards).. I don't think refusing folk communion in the way you were was in any way warm and pastoral, and though the intent may well have been good, its concrete act is questionable.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  13. I am glad to learn of your pastoral approach, when you encounter a person or couple living unchastely who are either unaware or unconcerned that this means they should refrain from receiving the Eucharist. When pastors don't step up and give guidance to the faithful (hard as it is to do that concerning sexual matters) so much confusion -- and yes, scandal, results. I always have the feeling at my parish Church that I am being unloving of others when I only want the moral teachings professed clearly. I'm so discouraged sometimes, for I think a lot of people have been misled over the years (by a lack of guidance like yours) to think that the Church will someday condone homosexual unions, for example. We have many gay couples in our Cathedral parish, all of whom receive communion and it's never suggested that they consider living chastely. It feels like a kind of hypocrisy to be Catholic and to dismiss -- tacitly or openly -- Church teaching. The suggestion is that the Church's teachings are not loving, or that we don't have enough love ourselves to accept the challenge they present to us. I'm just so discouraged sometimes with how little we trust in God's grace to transform our lives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, maria.
      It is never unloving to speak the truth, for the Truth is Christ. Don't be discouraged; Christ has all things in His hand.
      God Bless

      Delete
  14. You speak the truth Father, thanks for this post.
    God bless you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you.
      I have to say it is Christ alone who speaks the Truth. The Church and her ministers (such as myself) can only hand it on. That us what i try to do.
      God Bless.

      Delete

Please comment using a pseudonym, not as 'anonymous'.
If you challenge the Magisterium, please do so respectfully.
We reserve the right to delete from comments any inflammatory remarks.
If we do not reply to your comment it is through lack of time rather than interest.