Combining Gospel and Homily?

[dbacks5439]

Today, my priest went to the ambo and begun the intro to the Gospel, “Holy Gospel according to John…” Then he goes into the homily. He talked about John 17 and the prayer of Jesus. He divided the prayer into 3 sections and explained each part. He then reads the Gospel and ends the Gospel/Homily the same as he ends the Gospel reading. Then we started the Nicene Creed.
Is the melding of Gospel and Homily allowed?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Today, my priest went to the ambo and begun the intro to the Gospel, “Holy Gospel according to John…” Then he goes into the homily. He talked about John 17 and the prayer of Jesus. He divided the prayer into 3 sections and explained each part. He then reads the Gospel and ends the Gospel/Homily the same as he ends the Gospel reading. Then we started the Nicene Creed.

Is the melding of Gospel and Homily allowed?

That is a new one. The reading of the Gospel and the homily are two different and distinct things.

 

[John_Lilburne]

It can be argued that there can be an introduction before the Gospel and a homily after it.

The argument for the introduction, is from the 1981 Introduction to the Lectionary for Mass:
“15. There may be concise introductions before the readings, especially the first. The style proper to such comments must be respected, that is, they must be simple, faithful to the text, brief, well prepared, and properly varied to suit the text they introduce.”

Pope Benedict in the 2007 Sacramentum Caritatis:
“**The liturgy of the word **
45. Together with the Synod, I ask that the liturgy of the word always be carefully prepared and celebrated. Consequently I urge that every effort be made to ensure that the liturgical proclamation of the word of God is entrusted to well- prepared readers. Let us never forget that “when the Sacred Scriptures are read in the Church, God himself speaks to his people, and Christ, present in his own word, proclaims the Gospel”(135). When circumstances so suggest, a few brief words of introduction could be offered in order to focus the attention of the faithful. …”

The 2002 GIRM also allows introductions “before the readings”:

“31. … In addition, he may give the faithful a very brief introduction to the Mass of the day (after the initial Greeting and before the Act of Penitence), to the Liturgy of the Word (before the readings), and to the Eucharistic Prayer (before the Preface),”

Does “before the readings” mean before all the the readings, or before each reading? I think it could be understood as before each reading, as the 1981 Introduction to the Lectionary clearly allows.

But if the priest blends the two, so people are confused about what it the Gospel and what is the introduction, he has broken rules.

From the Introduction to the Lectionary for Mass:
“12. In the celebration of Mass the biblical readings with their accompanying scriptural chants may not be omitted, shortened, or, worse still, replaced by nonbiblical readings.”

From the 2002 GIRM:
“309. … From the ambo only the readings, the responsorial Psalm, and the Easter Proclamation (Exsultet) are to be proclaimed; it may be used also for giving the homily and for announcing the intentions of the Prayer of the Faithful. The dignity of the ambo requires that only a minister of the word should go up to it.”

So the Gospel must be from the ambo. The homily may be from the ambo. The words of introduction to the Gospel should never be from the ambo.

 

[palmas85]

Today, my priest went to the ambo and begun the intro to the Gospel, “Holy Gospel according to John…” Then he goes into the homily. He talked about John 17 and the prayer of Jesus. He divided the prayer into 3 sections and explained each part. He then reads the Gospel and ends the Gospel/Homily the same as he ends the Gospel reading. Then we started the Nicene Creed.

       Is the melding of Gospel and Homily allowed?

I’ve seen it done that way at the cathedral herein San Diego with the Bishop presiding. The Gospel was actually read in its entirity but split up into several parts to allow the instruction from the homily. I liked it because doing it that way it was possible to more completely get the message across.

 

[Mintaka]

There’s nothing preventing the priest from quoting the Gospel or other readings extensively (or even in their entirety) during the homily. Indeed, quoting sounds like a very good plan. Many of the great homilists did this. You will notice that our Holy Father always starts by quoting the text he’s preaching on.

But the readings, and the Gospel reading, are holy. You don’t walk all over them in boots. You don’t break the actual reading up. Why? Because God is talking, and it’s presumptuous to interrupt Him.

Generally, God speaks to individual members of the congregation in a different way and on different topics than to that individual priest who’s giving the homily. It’s good that the priest should, as they say, “break open” the Gospel, and it’s part of his job to teach. But it’s perilous to make his interpretation more privileged than the actual Word of God. It’s controlling. It’s wrong.

My personal feeling is that introductions are dorky and break the mood, but at least it’s not during the reading.

 

[docholmes]

How Odd, Same thing happened yesterday here @ mass. The Homily and Gospel were “blended” for lack of a better term. I thought I was back with my Grandmother @ the Church of the Nazarene when this was going on. Out of respect, I did sit down when asked to do so by the priest but after thinking it over if one wanted to be defiant of this would you continue to stand throughout the entire “Blend” until the end of the proclamation was read? But then my head began to think more and more. He’s brand new to us. This is his 3rd weekend of masses, and the “Letter to the Law” Pharisee gosepl of the sinner bathing the feet of Jesus with her tears, annointing them with oil, and drying them with her hair. Is it a shot across the bow, a sorting of the goats and sheep, seperating the wheat and the chaff? Does one stand up and say, HEY, wait a minute, that’s just not right!! And risk being “Labled” by their new priest? Is it an attempt to figure out whose zealous, whose apathetic, whose indifferent or whose just plain ol Ignorant? To me it just made me feel “Very Uncomfortable” as it happened. To top it off (yes some of us see the liturgy as one continuous prayer) the Eucharistic Hymn was Ubi Caritas. Well, I know what it is to love and to be loved and I LOVE THE Church, which makes me wonder about this whole thing and how to approach the situation with our new priest. Guarantee I’ll use the word “unusual” and not Unorthodox, but knowing me a Fruedian Slip will ensue and Hiliarity will be out the window

Doc

 

[drafdog]

Another tempest in a teapot.
The priest didn’t omit or alter the reading. His commentary was confined to the reading. No fault, no foul.

Matthew

 

[maryjk]

Another tempest in a teapot.
The priest didn’t omit or alter the reading. His commentary was confined to the reading. No fault, no foul.

Matthew

But in PA, he did. I was on vacation and attended a Mass with a visiting Priest.

Instead of reading the Gospel, he told everyone to sit down, then he read a line or two, talked about them. On to another line or two, then talked about them.

Big fault, big foul. I read the Gospel after Mass, since I didn’t get to hear it.

 

[Teflon93]

I think there’s grave danger in doing this.

Mass is not about the priest, it is about Christ, about God.

This was clearer pre-Vatican II when the priest performed his duties in such a manner as the faithful were essentially eavesdropping. Once the American Church in particular elected to turn the altar around, it became a ritual performed for an audience.

The homily is not the highlight of the Mass, as the sermon is the highlight of the Protestant sevice. It is intended to help us understand the readings used in the Mass. Making the Gospel simply raw material for a homily degrades both. It is elevating the Cliff’s Notes over the text to the detriment of both.

Priests who substitute their interpretation of the Gospel for the real thing do their flocks a real disservice.

 

[docholmes]

But in PA, he did. I was on vacation and attended a Mass with a visiting Priest.

Instead of reading the Gospel, he told everyone to sit down, then he read a line or two, talked about them. On to another line or two, then talked about them.

Big fault, big foul. I read the Gospel after Mass, since I didn’t get to hear it.

That’s What Happened here last Sunday. It was’nt that he ommitted the Gospel but that it was a few lines…Reflection…a few lines…Reflection…Etc.

 

[bilop]

I saw this at Mass once. I asked a Priest I trust about it, and he said it is definitely not licit.

God Bless