Dolours this is a wonderful experience you had. It prompted me to write to you a few things that popped into my head. I am not trying to give you any spiritual direction as I am not advanced enough in the spiritual life for that but I just felt I needed to share a couple of things. First off don't desire to receive messages or have experiences. There is nothing wrong with them, but we should not seek them as the devil can use that desire to fool us. That being said, we should be open to being led by The Lord. These small inner promptings (as long as they are good) should be followed. That tugging at your heart you felt towards the Tabernacle almost certainly was one of these. Our Lord speaks to us in whispers. As you pointed out though you tried to tell yourself you were imagining it and left. God won't ever force us. He gives us small prompts and it is up to us to reply. The more we listen to the prompts the closer we come to Him. That is just my experience anyway. I am not master at prayer. I don't hear voices or receive revelations either, but I would say God "talks" to me in other ways. Quiet, tender and loving ways. What I would do in your place is go back in front of the Tabernacle at some point and say to God you are sorry you didn't listen to His call that day. Ask Him to help you be open to these prompts in the future. Perhaps you have already done something similar to this by now, it is just an idea I had. Hope I'm not being "preachy". I just felt a prompt to write this to you so I did
You're not being preachy at all and I have done that. I don't ask for signs or feelings. I just ask God to hold tight to me and not let me lose my salvation. That said, there are times I could do with a little hint from Heaven.
Run from that place as fast as you can. Find somewhere that is faithful to Church teaching. Please. Prayers for you!
Trust your instincts. Jesus is drawing you into his Church. Fr. Martin doesn't always preach a different Gospel. I say not always because we don't know what Gospel he shares with his friends in university theology departments who flaunt their opposition to settled Church teaching. We don't know what it is that he can share with them off camera but hasn't the guts to say on camera because, as his faculty friends remind us, he's a priest. Nobody ever asks what is it about his priestly status that prevents him saying openly about the faith that he shares off camera. Beware people, especially the ordained, who are reluctant to preach the faith both in season and out of season. What Fr. Martin does is preach some of the Gospel - the easy teachings. He leaves the hard teachings unsaid, giving the false impression that the Gospel can be changed or can mean anything you want it to mean. On camera, he edges very close to the line of heresy while never actually crossing the line. When he hits the heresy wall, he prefaces what he's saying with phrases like "I have to be careful here" and goes on to deliver a message that is open to interpretation by the listener. There's a kind of nod, nod, wink, wink message being sent that those opposing the hard teachings are simply ahead of their time and that the Church will catch up with them when it's as "enlightened" as he and they are. An example of that is his claim that Jesus learned from the Canaanite woman. He doesn't go as far as the Lutheran theologian who said that it shows a sinful woman changed Jesus and if Jesus can change so can Church teaching. I don't doubt for a minute that that's what Fr. Martin is reluctant to say on camera. He has bought the Luteran's heresy that Jesus, who our Church teaches is the same yesterday, today and always, was changed by a sinful woman and if a sinner could change Jesus, then so can people embracing sin as good change the Church which is the body of Christ. Jesus Christ, the God who is love showed us what love is by dying on the cross. Fr. Martin and his friends would turn Jesus into the pagan god Eros. Fr. Martin preaches the faith "in season" when he preaches only the easy teachings. He doesn't preach the faith "out of season" when he refuses to preach the hard teachings, especially to the lukewarm or non-believers. The RCIA class using his book is a red flag. It indicates that they are promoting him as an authority on Jesus. If they were in some remote area where Fr. Martin's campaign to change Church teaching on sodomy was unknown, using his book would be excusable. In a university where Fr. Martin's controversial statements are well documented, it's a sign that they see him as a more reliable authority than the Pope who authorised the publication of the Catechism.
If you think my comments are 'aggressive', you must be very easily frightened. I won't deny they're accusatory, because I still accuse you of smearing and slyly attempting to blacken peoples' names via innuendo without providing any facts or explanation. Do you not consider McElroy might be the 'aggressive' one by accusing people like me of being a 'cancer'? A cancer is something that must be completely excised, utterly rooted out, something that is possessed of entirely no good, whatsoever. Do you think that's a tolerant, bridge-building, charitable way of speaking of fellow-Catholics? Where in the homophobia you accuse us of is there such a hate-filled description as comparing anyone to a 'cancer'? I hope these 'aggressive' questions don't frighten the little snowflake too much (we all know this passive-aggressive nonsense is a front for evasion, don't we?)
Fr Martin perpetuates a lie - the 'born gay fable'. Thus the whole edifice of his work is based on straw foundations. He rejects that part of the Catechism that explains that homosexuality is of a psychological genesis. He also rejects that part of the Catechism which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity and intrinsically disordered. He rejects the latter and prefers his own trite phrase 'differently' ordered. He pontificates to the masses that Catholic teaching on homosexuality is 'needlessly cruel' and 'needlessly hurtful'. His is the mantra of pandering to subjective feelings as opposed to accepting the objective truth. He then has the gall to accuse those who accept the traditional teaching of the church as explained in the catechism as 'homophobic'. The latter word you are too fond of using on this forum as well, David - when you resort to name calling you begin to lose the argument! Fr Martin only 'cherry picks' those parts of the Catechism that suits his agenda and seemingly the only line he uses from the catechism is 'that homosexuals must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity'. I agree with the latter as I do with the former. All deserve to be treated with respect and compassion but true compassion cannot be divorced from the truth. I accept the whole truth of what the Church teaches rather that cherry pick those bits that suit my whims. Homosexuals deserve to hear the whole truth of what the church teaches so that through the call to 'chastity they gain the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection'. What is needed in the world and in the Church is a 'revolution of honesty'. The truth sets people free and the truth is ultimately Christ who desires that all come to Him to be healed and restored.
Thank you all very much for the prayers and the input. I feel much better about trying to enter the Church somewhere else now. I was relieved right after my conversion because I knew that I'd found the remedy (or, rather, that the remedy had found me); I never suspected that the institutional church might also be part of the cause of societal collapse.
I doubt very much that 'homophobes' exist on this forum, Carol. In my previous school (secular) ---- many years ago now! I befriended an openly 'gay' man and often gave him a lift home in my car as he could not drive. I was very fond of him and considered him a friend. Our friendship was based on mutual respect. He accepted my Christian perspective and he was generous enough not to hold that against me! I was able to witness to the truth of Christian love which sees beyond the labels and sees the humanity of the individual. I went the extra mile and felt true compassion for him. I have often thought about him over the years and indeed pray for him that God in his mercy would grant him the gift of conversion. He would not consider me homophobic in any way rather I think that he would defend me to the hilt! Presently in one of my senior classes in History (in a Catholic school) I have a student who has 'come out' recently as 'gay'. This does not bother me as I accept him the same way I accept the other members of the class, perhaps if anything I show him more generosity than the others because I have true compassion for his soul. I only see a human being to love. For me, homosexuality is just another form of human brokenness and broken human beings needing our love and compassion. But they also need the truth of the Gospel so that they can be truly set free to live in union with the Triune God. There are two sides to this coin - compassion and truth.
Hang in there. I am in RCIA now and had a similar experience (though not with RCIA) at another Parish. I now attend a different one which is a distance away but is well worth the drive. I felt the exact same way as you.
Garabandal, I agree about the members on the forum. I think the statements from Bishop McElroy will create more division. After I watched the video that Dolours posted about Father Martin, I had very similar thoughts to yours which you expressed very well. I honestly did not see the harm in the pope stating, "Who am I to judge" but I believe that this statement has caused more confusion for some. anyw, I hope that you find a better situation somewhere else.
I think that Pope Francis would have done us all a big favor by reiterating that "we don't judge our fellow man, but it is our duty as Christians to judge actions within the context of right or wrong", therefore clearing up any (surprise, surprise) ambiguity and not leaving his "who am I to judge" statement open to personal interpretation.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/father-martin-says-homosexuals-not-bound-to-chastity FATHER MARTIN: HOMOSEXUALS NOT BOUND TO CHASTITY NEWS: US NEWS Trey Elmore • ChurchMilitant.com • September 20, 2017 Claims Church teaching on chastity not authoritative if not "received" by LGBT DETROIT (ChurchMilitant.com) - Father James Martin is saying that chastity is not required of homosexuals. In a video posted on YouTube on September 20, the Jesuit claims the Church's teaching on chastity is not binding on the consciences of the faithful because it has not been "received" by the people. It's a denial of the infallible teaching authority of the Catholic Church in matters of both faith and morals. He also said in a post on Facebook, "Things can always improve. And the Holy Spirit knows what She's doing" (emphasis added).
Fr. Martin's recent video and FB post only serve to further validate the wisdom behind the university's decision to disinvite him. He doesn't seem to be handling the rejection of his liberal message very well.
It seems that its all fun and games for this so called Catholic Priest, Father Martin. And what did our Lord tell us about....... 'to sin against the Holy Spirit'?
Isn't perverse mercy a sin against the Holy Spirit. To say God meets us were we are, He loves us as we are, He understands how we live, He knows our weakness, so we don't need to change, repentance and sorrow doesn't mean change, we continue to live as we have, because God is merciful. This is the mercy we hear about so often these days... "It was not, as the Scribes and Pharisees complained, sinners clinging to their sinfulness who came to Jesus, but sinners repenting." Jerome
The University didn't "wisely" disinvite him. They whined about having to disinvite him because they were outed for supporting him and his agenda.
