1005 K Tue 30 Jul 2002
Here is part of the homily by Pope John Paul II at World Youth Day on 28 July, as reported by the Vatican Information Service:
It has been widely reported, including on the front page of The Age.
Someone defined "immoral" as anything that you feel bad about after. It make some sense to me. If people believed something was the wrong thing to do, why would they do it? They wish to do good, whatever they understand "good" to be. Afterwards people examine their conscience and perhaps see that what they did was not good.
Its difficult to know what priests and religous are wishing. What can be observed is their actions, particularly their public actions in the liturgy. The liturgical books provide statements on how things should be done. Here are a few that I see as being widely disregarded:
Not everyone failing to follow the liturgical books with do so with a bad conscience. Many would not know what the books say. But it is particularly difficult to believe that priests can be ignorant of them. They have years to learn about liturgy before their ordination.
Lots of Catholic magazines are writing about a book "Goodbye, Good Men" by Michael Rose. I have not read it. A review in AD2000 by John Webster (August, page 12) describes the central thesis as being that the priest shortage is artificial and contrived and that it is symptomatic of wider theological and liturgical problems in the Church.
It stands to reason that problems in liturgy will relate to problems in the priesthood. Say a seminarian learns that the book says the reader is to sit in the sanctuary with the priest. If this is widely ignored, what does he do? If the book is correct, a lot of people are doing the wrong thing. What does his conscience tell him? Will he follow the book or the people? The book will not decide if he is to be ordained, people will.
In the next part of the homily the VIS reports:
Posted by J.R. Lilburne, 30 July 2002.