Father Joseph Illo, pastor of Star of the Sea parish in San Francisco, gave a 12-minute homily on Sunday, March 5.
Two pilgrimages in today’s readings: Abram a pilgrim on the way to Heaven.
Peter, James, John on Mt. Tabor.
Lent is a time of self-denial.
Steep, narrow is the way to Heaven.
Many priests, bishops, and cardinals have fallen off the way and point to a way other than Christ’s as he has given to us in the Bible and the Magisterium of the Church. It’s my job as your pastor to point this out. If a cardinal, for example, is pointing to a way other than Christ’s, you must pray for that cardinal….
There are some cardinals today who are pointing to a way other than Christ’s when it comes to the Life issues, the sacred inviolability of every life and those issues that pertain to human love and marriage.
15-second excerpt:
Some will say the we need to change the Church’s teaching on what is very clearly given us in the Bible on our relations between men and women, men and men, and women and women. And if those people especially leaders in the Church point to a way other than Christ’s persist in this heresy, they will go to Hell.
This is terrible.
Jesus did not say the things that this priest says He said on Mt. Tabor.
If you cannot speak the Truth about a Gospel that you just read….
“Jesus did not say the things that this priest says He said on Mt. Tabor.” I only heard the excerpt and read the small amount of text provided us in the thread. There was no reference to Mt Tabor therein, so I suppose you have access to the rest of the homily where Fr. Illo does make Mt. Tabor the location of, well, whatever the priest said that the rest of us can’t access. But lay people are smarter than that; any claim that Jesus is recorded to have spoken a sermon on Mt. Tabor is confusing Mt. Tabor with the unnamed mountain of the Sermon on the Mount in Matt 5-7. It is highly doubtful, therefore, that Fr. Illo confused the two. In the end, it appears you just don’t like Fr. Illo’s point of view– perhaps either the sacred inviolability of every life, or the obvious references to homosexuality…or something else?
If you click the blue link that says 12 minute homily, you can see it.
The point of the sermon is fine.
Fr. Illo didn’t think he was quoting Jesus to Saint Peter, especially since we all know that Jesus didn’t speak English to Saint Peter. In that brief portion of the homily, I think he was trying to explain some principles in contemporary, applicable terms. Fr. Illo said, “In other words, Jesus said to Peter…” He didn’t claim those were the exact words of our Lord Himself.
What is it that he said that you find wrong?
I mean that sincerely (as I didn’t hear anything untrue).
Here is a link to the homily:
I do not want to play these games.
not me, if you’re the same person as “terrible,” I am not “playing games.” What is it that he said that you find wrong?
(As previously noted, Fr. Illo said, “In other words, Jesus said…”) I listened to the entire homily. That’s why I’m wondering what you found wrong with it. You said it was “terrible” and I didn’t hear anything that sounded terrible to me.
“This is my beloved Son. Listen to Him. He will show you how to get up a mountain and down a mountain.”
No The Father did not say that.
“Peter wanted to stay. Jesus said “No it’s time to go down.”
No he didn’t.
And saying “In other words…” whatever you are putting in your own words, should be the same meaning, not stuff you make up.
And the point of the homily being listening to God and doing His Will…
Not listening to God (reading the Gospel) and then making things up.
Why can’t people just tell the truth? Why does he think he should embellish the Word of God?
Like I am going to believe there are heretical Cardinals going to hell (should never have been said in a sermon either) from someone who can’t tell the truth about Jesus and just makes things up.
making things up (if you’re the same person as “not me” and “terrible”), thank you for your reply. Then, do you think the Church should change her teaching and no longer have homilies and simply read the Scriptures and proceed with Mass? Homilies are an ancient practice of the Church (and the Jews before us). They help explain the Word of God in light of our Tradition and its application today. If we simply heard (or read) God’s Word (alone) then it seems we’d be more like our Protestant brothers and sisters who are free to interpret the Bible as each of them thinks is appropriate. We hear the Scriptures in the context of the Church. And, it’s because of a lack of clarity and fidelity that the Church changed her practice, currently allowing only priests or deacons (or bishops, of course) to preach homilies at Mass. I understand your point, but I don’t think Fr. Illo was “just making things up.” My thoughts.
Sir, why do insult my intelligence?
I said I did not want to play these games and you assured me that you weren’t playing games..
I like Father Illo. I like his Masses. This homily where he added things to the Holy Scriptures was not his best.
I have seen priests, during their homily, reopen the Lectionary to make sure that they were quoting it correctly.
The way you have treated me in this is not acceptable although I take it as my punishment for criticizing a priest.
I will give you the win, sir.
Fr. Illo was not always quoting Christ and the others literally but paraphrasing. You can look that up if you do not know what it means. Good theologians and priests do that all the time.
Yes I know what paraphrasing means. It does not mean making things up.
This is an excellent sermon, and Fr. Illo relies on the teachings of and interpretations of past saints, who relied on even more ancient saints, who passed it down to us, not on something he has made up. God bless him.
“This is my beloved Son. Listen to Him. He will show you how to get up a mountain and down a mountain.”
Maybe in California.
And in this Transfiguration the foremost object was to remove the offense of the cross from the disciple’s heart, and to prevent their faith being disturbed by the humiliation of His voluntary Passion by revealing to them the excellence of His hidden dignity. But with no less foresight, the foundation was laid of the Holy Church’s hope, that the whole body of Christ might realize the character of the change which it would have to receive, and that the members might promise themselves a share in that honour which had already shone forth in their Head. About which the Lord had Himself said, when He spoke of the majesty of His coming, Then shall the righteous shine as the sun in their Father’s Kingdom Matthew 13:43, while the blessed Apostle Paul bears witness to the self-same thing, and says: for I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the future glory which shall be revealed in us Romans 8:18: and again, for you are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. For when Christ our life shall appear, then shall you also appear with Him in glory Colossians 3:3 . But to confirm the Apostles and assist them to all knowledge, still further instruction was conveyed by that miracle. St. Leo the Great
My message was meant to be in answer to “The Holy Church’s Hope’s” post Mar 8 at 10:48 am.
This finally put it in perspective for me. Sam Kinison “These people live in a desert.”
I am not saying it is the finest sermon ever, just that it is excellent for the people to whom he is speaking. St. Jean Vianney barely made it through Latin class, yet he most definitely was the right man for the vocation. God uses all kinds of people to get through to us. I have learned much from people who spoke only “folk” English and never even went to high school as an example. I have also learned from the well-educated, or supposedly well-educated. As old as I am, there is not a day I have not learned something new. “Old dogs CAN learn new tricks”.
I concur.