Humor Headline News by Jeffrey Miller December 29, 2007 written by Jeffrey Miller December 29, 2007 Here is a headline that doesn’t sound quite right. KCK Priest dies after 63 years at the altar 13 comments 0 FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest Jeffrey Miller previous post The Area Code of the Beast next post Massive pro-family demonstration in Madrid You may also like Today's Priestess July 30, 2008 Pirouetting Jesuit July 22, 2006 4Give Count April 25, 2005 Blogging too much? May 31, 2007 Feast of the Guardian Angels October 2, 2006 Saints and their cars October 6, 2004 In Persona Christi Reflection July 30, 2006 St. John of the Cross, Priest, Doctor of... December 14, 2004 Planning to be a Doctor of the Church August 20, 2011 Random thought July 15, 2003 13 comments Fr. Christopher G. Phillips December 29, 2007 - 5:55 pm Terrible headline, but a wonderful story. I was very moved by this account of a priest who truly was a father to his parish. I’ve often thought that the frequent moving of pastors isn’t a good thing. After all, in society if families keep changing fathers, we call it dysfunctional. If priests are spiritual fathers, it makes sense to me that they should remain with their spiritual children as long as possible. Dean Steinlage December 29, 2007 - 7:51 pm May he rest in peace. Kelly Clark December 29, 2007 - 9:48 pm Actually, after reading the story, the headline reads, albeit accidentally, quite accurately. May this man rest in the peace of Christ. magdalen December 30, 2007 - 7:03 am I wish all priests had this sort of love for God and souls. joanne December 30, 2007 - 3:12 pm Hear, hear, Fr Phillips! You wouldn’t believe how many times I’ve heard people (many of them men) say that they left the church for a while after a beloved priest was transferred to another parish. There is an undeniable anger and grief that can effect parishioners when their pastor (or a parochial vicar) leaves and their sorrow is not acknowledged to be real or right. I used to think that it would be a good idea to at least have a transitional time wherein a new priest is introduced by stages to a parish so that they would know the Church cares and that it would dishonor their pastor if they were to be unwelcoming to his “replacement”. But now that most parishes seem to be relying on one priest, transitional time doesn’t seem possible. Monsignor Heliodore Mejak’s devotion to his parish AND his freedom to pursue his devotion, were admirable. Matilda December 30, 2007 - 6:59 pm Couldn’t agree more Fr. Phillips! And what about the toll it takes on those good priests who see their parishioners as their family members (not their customers). I don’t think moving priests is a good idea and would like to know more about when and why it began as it obviously wasn’t done in the past. Ray from Manila December 31, 2007 - 4:31 am Matilda, To prevent favoritism towards parishioners and the latter insinuating themselves too closely into the priests’ lives? I’ve heard that bandied several times. Fr. Christopher G. Phillips December 31, 2007 - 7:43 am In the interest of full disclosure, I should say that my thoughts about the stability of pastoral assignments grow out of my own experience. I was the founding pastor of our parish, and have been here for nearly twenty-five years, and (God willing) I will remain here for the rest of my priestly ministry. I have now begun baptising the children of those whom I had baptised as infants. I know I am far from being a perfect priest, but that only mirrors what we find in our own human families. But there is a sense of settled continuity in the parish, although that certainly doesn’t translate into having a static existence — we’re getting ready to move into our fifth building expansion. Not wanting to belabor it, but I would simply emphasise the point that in this constantly-changing society, perhaps a bit more stability in our parishes would provide a spiritual comfort that would be of benefit to our common life together. Obviously, there are situations in which it is best for all concerned that a change be made; but if a pastoral relationship is working, why change simply for change’s sake? Cornelius December 31, 2007 - 12:24 pm “He resisted attempts to have laypeople serve communion and said the host wafer should be served only from a priest’s hand, not in the hand of the recipient. He also wanted recipients to kneel for communion rather than stand.” A holy and orthodox priest. Eternal rest grant unto him . . . . Joe December 31, 2007 - 12:35 pm He resisted attempts to have laypeople serve communion and said the host wafer should be served only from a priest’s hand, not in the hand of the recipient. He also wanted recipients to kneel for communion rather than stand.” A holy and orthodox priest. Eternal rest grant unto him . . . . I echo these statements totally. Melody Vito December 31, 2007 - 11:22 pm Lord bless his soul. I am glad he lived to see the Motu Propio… MissJean January 2, 2008 - 2:25 am Fr. Phillips, I have a strong opinion that priests SHOULD move from parish to parish. Stability of the insiduous sort infected my hometown parish, beginning when I was a teenager. He was very good at getting lapsed Catholics to return – especially those who didn’t like the previous priest – but he usually accomplished this by giving them positions of “power” in the church. By the time he left, there was a strongly-entrenched clique that expected the next two priests to toe their line. (One did, and the other suffered badly.) My father has informed me that when his childhood priest was recalled to Rome, some of the parishioners stormed into their own church and destroyed the pipe organ. They were fond of having a priest who shared their ethnicity and worldview, so they threw a temper tantrum! cdm014 January 2, 2008 - 7:52 am I too am in favor of moving priests because I have seen people become too attached to priests who play fast and loose with the Mass simply because they are entertaining. letting people become too attached to priests like that does the faithful a disservice. Comments are closed.