Yes. I don't believe a lot of the people in the pews actually know what the Church teaches. There has been a kind of a breakdown of some of the "middle cogs" - the priests, I don't know if it is that some of them don't themselves believe what comes out of Rome, or that they, "in charity" don't like to offend the parishioners.
Once in a while the priest in my parish will state, during a homily, that the Eucharist is the Body of Christ... but that is about all the "authentic" Catholic teaching that I have heard. Nothing ever about Confession, Birth Control, etc. Most homilies are about loving your neighbor and/or living in the faith, and how much God loves us. Last week there was a visiting priest who gave a homily on how important it is to pass down the faith to your children and how that is our most important job. It was a great homily, but certainly begged the question "where are we to really learn the faith?"
In recent years, a lot of parishes have started Bible classes, and that is a great thing, but I could attend a Bible class in a Protestant Church and match the content found in the class at my parish.
To some degree, we've posted at cross purposes. My apologies. I didn't really respond to your post, but rather to my own memories.
Re-read post #111 after reading this one.
I should have began my post answering your question:
"I have never heard from the altar a sermon that contraception is mortal sin barring the communicant from Holy Eucharist. Have you?"
The answer is yes. Many, many times.
More in my youth and young adulthood, and more harshly.
But even in recent years. And not just about contraception. But abortion, pornography, homosexuality, other sexual sins, and other sins, as well. Including failure to attend Mass each Sunday.
When I was very little, these homilies were positively horrifying. Before I even knew what some of these sins were, I was frightened witless by what I heard. This is in the late 1960s, and the early 1970s.
The tone changed some in the later 1970s, and in the 1980s. But I still remember vividly in the early 1980s our pastor giving a homily at the children's Mass, and instructing the children whose parents weren't at Mass that Sunday to go home and tell their parents that they were going to Hell.
Regrettably, at that Mass, there was a man who had been persuaded to come to Mass for the first time in about 20 years. He didn't return.
I remember another priest at the same parish giving a homily about sexual modesty, in behavior, in terms of marital relations, in terms of even dress. I remember him asserting that rape is caused by scantily-clad women. Having a background in psychology, and having dealt with the issue on an academic basis, I was horrified. It left a bitter taste in my mouth. The memory of it is more bitter in later years, as the topic was brought home to me somewhat more personally.
As the '80s wore on, these homilies became less frequent, and less harsh. But at the churches I attended, they were given from time to time. At that time in my life, they were a challenge to me and my wife. But rather than homilies that condemned us to the outer darkness, they were homilies that appealed to our intellects, our hearts, and our desire to be good Catholics.
Also, during this time, and now we're moving to the late '80s, as I became more involved in parish life as a married man in my late 20s, I became more involved with the priests of my parish. I developed a moderately close relationship with one priest in particular who gently but firmly and consistently presented the teaching of the Church on the issue of contraception. We debated and argued and went around on it quite frequently. He never wavered in his fidelity to Church teaching, nor in his gentleness toward me. Which was quite an achievement for him, as I was far more obnoxious, obstinate, and arrogant then than I am now. If you can believe that. ;-)
As the '80s became the '90s, we moved again, and found ourselves in a parish with a positively charismatic priest who spoke quite often about sin, about specific sins, and about the need to amend our lives. We left the church in joy every Sunday! Even when he was telling us the hardest things! In retrospect, I imagine that that was about the final straw.
Our new pastor appears to avoid the topic of sexual sin. But the priests at the church down the street don't.
So, I will tell you, for the most part, yes, I have heard, and do hear homilies on this topic and related topics.
But where once the homilies were harsh, and paralyzing-fear-inducing, and quite frequent, today they are less frequent (and as I reflect on it, non-existent with our new pastor), and more gentle.
So, I didn't mean to say that these topics ought to be avoided.
I DO mean to say that I refuse to impute sin to a priest who rarely, if ever addresses them. That is a separate issue from whether I think a priest ought to address them. I can't in good conscience generally impute sins of omission to such priests.
I ALSO mean to say that the way these sins were addressed when I was very young seems counterproductive to me.
Finally, I'll note that I think this is a generational thing. The "yellers and screamers" of my youth are all dead now, or at death's door. The priests who address these topics in an effective way are in their 30s, 40s, and 50s. The priests who appear to shy away from them are mostly in their late 50s, 60s, and 70s.
This leads me to believe that the ones who don't preach on these topics don't do so out of reaction to the "yellers and screamers" who immediately preceeded them, and who literally did drive people from the Church, including most of my relatives.
Take this into account when next you decide what are the sins of priests.
sitetest
"But this thread was about examining root causes, like sexual immorality. And the author of the review and the book were attacked, instead of an examination of their basic premise.
"That is why I went off the deep end."
No, that's not true. What elicited criticism was your excerpting this piece from the entire review:
"If sexual autonomy is one’s goal, one will not want the traditional Mass as the central symbol of the Faith, for the very form it takes will always seem a reproach: one will want a pliable liturgy, something one can shape to one’s whims."
And frankly, the more I read this paragraph, the more offensive it is to me. Not because it is untrue that there are those who seek sexual autonomy, and not because it is untrue that that is a bad thing. Both things are true.
But it is a clear implied criticism of the Mass of Pope Paul VI. It strongly implies that the new Mass is inherently flawed. That is what I responded to most strongly.
sitetest