The Parable Nobody Talks about

You know the “Prodigal Son,” The “Parable of the Talents,” the “Good Shepherd,” and so on. But there’s one parable no one really gives a title to. They don’t talk about it much. One of the best homilies I’ve heard about it was by Fr. James Haley.

Liberal priests don’t talk about it because, contrary to the image they like to present, they’re not really concerned about the the poor. The ideology behind liberalized clerics is called “pluriformity“: application of cultural relativism to poverty, chastity and obedience.

Liberal priests are liberal because they want to appeal to the rich liberal parishioners and tell them what *they* want to hear, so they won’t withdraw donations.

Meanwhile, “conservative” priests are too tied up into Republican values.

Anyway, it can’t be read often enough:

16 And he spoke a similitude to them, saying: The land of a certain rich man brought forth plenty of fruits. 17 And he thought within himself, saying: What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? 18 And he said: This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and will build greater; and into them will I gather all things that are grown to me, and my goods. 19 And I will say to my soul: Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years take thy rest; eat, drink, make good cheer. 20 But God said to him: Thou fool, this night do they require thy soul of thee: and whose shall those things be which thou hast provided?

21 So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich towards God. 22 And he said to his disciples: Therefore I say to you, be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat; nor for your body, what you shall put on. 23 The life is more than the meat, and the body is more than the raiment. 24 Consider the ravens, for they sow not, neither do they reap, neither have they storehouse nor barn, and God feedeth them. How much are you more valuable than they? 25 And which of you, by taking thought, can add to his stature one cubit?

26 If then ye be not able to do so much as the least thing, why are you solicitous for the rest? 27 Consider the lilies, how they grow: they labour not, neither do they spin. But I say to you, not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these. 28 Now if God clothe in this manner the grass that is today in the field, and tomorrow is cast into the oven; how much more you, O ye of little faith? 29 And seek not you what you shall eat, or what you shall drink: and be not lifted up on high. 30 For all these things do the nations of the world seek. But your Father knoweth that you have need of these things.

31 But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.

(Luke 12:16-31, Douay-Rheims)

9 responses to “The Parable Nobody Talks about

  1. Just wondering, what do you think of “Father” (defrocked) David C. Trosch?

    • 1. How is this relevant to the accumulation of interest?
      2. I never heard of this person till you mentioned him.
      3. He’s not “defrocked”. First, there’s no such word in Catholicism. Technically, he’s only “suspended,” which is stupid, because he should be laicized. Murder is an impediment to holy orders, so the commission (or advocating) of murder should be grounds for laicization.
      4. He’s called the Pope a heretic.

      • If he calls the Pope a heretic, then he’s committed the same sin as Archbishop Lefbevre, and is autoexcommunicated.

      • I don’t know if there’s a canon regarding calling the Pope a heretic, but so far as I know, Lefebvre never did. The SSPX officially rejects sedevacantism and honors the past five popes.

      • I said basically the same sin, not exactly- the whole idea is if one publicly disagrees with Rome and shows themselves to no longer be in communion with Rome- then they’re autoexcommunicated (they’ve excommunicated themselves) without any need for a tribunal.
        These days, the SSPX is back in communion with Rome, AFAIK- though there was the slight matter of one of their priests being an anti-semite.

      • Well, there’s Bishop Williamson with his Holocaust denial, and one other priest who publicly said some pretty anti-Semitic things, that IIRC, were worse than Williamson. But Bishop Fellay has been pretty good about cracking down on them. In fact, he’s been better about handling the PR problems of the anti-Semites than the Vatican has.

        But to me the key is that, if Lefebvre had never done the illicit ordinations, the SSPX may never have gotten into seroius trouble at all. He did it to force the issue. There is some question of just how sedevacantist the SSPX really is, since the *reason* Lefebvre ordained his own bishops is that he disagreed with the form of the new episcopal ordination, and believes any bishop ordained by the New Rite is invalid.

        In any case, the SSPX may have never gotten in trouble for their views if they’d never forced the issue with the ordinations.

  2. Funny, in my very liberal parish I hear a sermon on this at least once every three years. Expecting a good one tomorrow, I’ll let you know.

    In fact, thinking back, I don’t know a single priest who doesn’t take the occasion of this gospel to preach against American materialism and for the simple life of true humility.

  3. Really? Usually in my experience they take the occasion of Gospels like this (I thought this one came up in the summer) to preach on “stewardship” and parish building funds.

  4. You’re right, I’m wrong- today’s gospel was the transfiguration.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s