Priest going to bar, casino, race track?

Brother, I know this off topic but you said the revelations at Fatima hold no obligations on the church.

That contradicts John Paul II:
“The appeal of Our Lady of Fatima is so deeply rooted in the Gospel and the whole of Tradition that the Church feels that the Message imposes a commitment on Her.”

[quote="notredame_999, post:21, topic:215656"]
Brother, I know this off topic but you said the revelations at Fatima hold no obligations on the church.

That contradicts John Paul II:
"The appeal of Our Lady of Fatima is so deeply rooted in the Gospel and the whole of Tradition that the Church feels that the Message imposes a commitment on Her."


One has to take what the Holy Father is saying in its porper context. He is not making a doctrinal statement. In other words, he is not saying that one has to take the messages of Fatima as imperatives. He is saying that the central message of Fatima is so consistent with the Gospel and the Tradition that the it cannot be ignored, because to do so would be inoring the Gospel and the Christian tradition.

But one has to take a close look at the central message of Fatima. What is that?

Ans. Prayer and conversion.

It is to this central message that the Holy Father is speaking. Obviously, prayer and conversion are central to the Gospel and the Christina Tradition.

The other claims that people make that Our Lady said and we must do are not binding on the Church, because they are not part of the Gospel or the Christian Tradition. They are not wrong either. Simply put, they are not binding.

Why are they not binding?

Ans. When a message cannot be supported or refuted by Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium it falls into the realm of the extraordinary. It can be believed and may be worthy of belief, but it need not be believed to be faithful.

The Church always assumes two things in these cases:

  1. God will never reveal anything new through miracles, because all public revelation is closed.

  2. The person who receives the message may not always communicate it clearly or correctly. Unless the message can be reconciled with the Gospel, Tradition and Magisterium, it is not proclaimed as part of the faith.

A lot of times, messages are prophetic. Therefore, they cannot be reconciled with the faith of the Church. All that the Church can do is wait and see. The problem is that people want to take these messages and apply them to everyone as if they were dogmas. It gets worse when people confuse themselves, because it's not Our Lady confusing them, they do it to themselves, that is when people forget that in matters of faith and morals, Peter outranks Our Lady. Our Lady never assumes to govern the Church and has never tried to do so in any apparition or miracle. Human beings make these demands. "Our Lady says so; therefore, the Church must do so." That's not the way that the Catholic Church works. "Peter says so; the Church must do so." It is when Peter says that we must follow something that everyone should stand and ask, "How high should I jump?"


Br. JR, OSF :)

[quote="HCC, post:17, topic:215656"]
If your primary concern, as someone discerning the priesthood, is anything other than imitating Jesus Christ, growing in holiness, the distribution of the sacraments, teaching the truths of our holy faith and the salvation of souls, I would say go join Green Peace. We don't need more secular priests with drinking and gambling problems.

Where is father? Oh he's down at the dog betting tracks havin' a few cold ones. Yeah, we definitely need more priests like that!

Notredame_999, you are all over the map. Eastern Orthodox Church, SSPX, Fr Gruener, diocesean, EF Only, drinking, gambling, time need a good spiritual director. I'm beginning to think you're a troll.:shrug:


I agree with HCC.

Allow me to ask a very simple queston. Where would you like Father to be when he’s not on duty?

Let’s look at the life of a secular priest.

  1. He has no religious community to go home to at night.

  2. He has no religious community to spend the day with when he’s not on duty at the parish, school, hospital, etc.

  3. He’s not supposed to be on call 24/7. The diocese expects him to keep a work schedule like any other profession. Today, this may mean office hours from 8-5 and an evening meeting once or twice a week, just like any othe proessiona.

  4. He has no schedule for payer. He is his own superior, his own cheneral chapter and his own constitution. The Church does not have the authority to regulate when and how much he prays. She actually does regulate the prayer life for male religious, but not secular clergy. This men are exempt from such regulation, because they are not consecrated men.

  5. Many of these men live alone or if they share a house with other priests, they are not a family or community. They don’t even have to talk to each other, if they choose not to do so or be friendly toward each other. It’s a residence, not a religious house.

  6. They get paid a salary, like any other secular man.

  7. In the past, secular priests were usually ordained in their home diocese. Therefore, they lived with a family member or close enough to go visit mom and siblings every week on their day off. Today, with a more mobile society, many of these men are ordained for a diocese that may be on the other side of the country.

  8. They are allowed to select their friends and to have relationships outside of the priesthood.

So what do we expect them to do when they’re not on duty? Do we really expect a secular man to be on duty 24/7?


Br. JR, OSF :slight_smile:

Just wondering, where did you read it was a primary concern? Having a drink at a bar or going to a horse race constitutes a having a drinking or gambling problem? I guess eating at a restaurant is an eating problem? You might want to do a little self evaluation if you are convinced these minor diversions could lead a person astray so easily.


Actually I think we do need a few like that. I grew up with a priest like that; he was very good at relating with his parish and inspired several young men and women to choose religious vocations. Even though he was in his late 60s and early 70s he was very vigerous and enjoyed the company of friends. I guess showing that being a man of God didn’t mean kneeling before an alter 24/7 helped.

My 27 year old nephew just became a priest; the young people of his parish were shocked to see him arrive for his first mass in his 1971 Corvette (that he restored himself).

[quote="SamH, post:25, topic:215656"]
My 27 year old nephew just became a priest; the young people of his parish were shocked to see him arrive for his first mass in his 1971 Corvette (that he restored himself).


Now that is COOL!:cool:

If ***every ***social occasion must involve alcohol or gambling, it’s a problem- whether you actually get drunk or not. There are plenty of things to do that do not involve alcohol or gambling, and as long as a person doesn’t limit themselves to the activities that involve those things, it is fine. If they limit themselves, it would seem to me there is some sort of excessive attachment.

If God wishes me to become a priest, I think I would still go to football games and I would have a very hard time giving up tailgating (when I have the chance). Which might include a beer or too, and lots of bbq.

When I graduated from a Catholic university and returned home, I volunteered to act as the Asst YM. Being that this was in South Florida, our HSYM summer trip was a one day trip to Freeport in the Bahamas, a night at a hotel and a return trip. Our Assoc Pastor came along as an additional chaperon. On the way over he taught me how to play roulette in the ship’s casino. He was from a wealthy family, drove a Lincoln and enjoyed good food.

Sixty-percent of priests are not religious. They are diocesan. They are secular men who can do all of these things. They can be rich, travel, own a nice car and a nice house, have as many things as money can buy. As long as they do it all morally, they are within their rights.

The many restrictions that we try to apply to priests were meant only for brothers, not for priests. Because it’s the brothers who are the consecrated men. Eventually, many priests became religious. Obviously, they had to give up many privileges that the secular person enjoys, because they have to live as the brothers live.


Br. JR, OSF :slight_smile:

There were two openly-homosexual priests around these parts. One of them "came out" and declared he was finally going to move in with his boyfriend and protest the Catholic Church. I guess a little race trackin' and hitting the sauce occasionally isn't as bad as being gay or a child molestor!

Depends on the intent. If he’s, say, using parish money to gamble, drink, etc., then yeah, that might be bad administration of the church treasures. If he’s doing it for pastoral reasons, then it’s fine (our archbishop did that - I was trying to find the article for it). Besides, it might be a reminder not to commit the sin of gluttony (or using the Lord’s name in vain at the race track) when the archbishop is standing right behind you.

It does depend on a few things. If the priest is betting on the San Francisco Mighty Giants, then he's ok. If he's betting on Texas, he needs a sacramental confession ASAP! :D

Why do we want to impose on secular priests rules that were meant for consecrated religious?


Br. JR, OSF :)

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit