Thanks for understanding.
A couple of us, in a recent incident involving a thoroughly lay (non-deacon) homily during the Liturgy of the Word, did walk out – separately, not in concert. He, like I, was absent only during the homily and at no other time. I returned when I calculated that the homily would probably be almost finished (so I wouldn’t miss any other part of the Mass). He stayed in the foyer and returned only when the homily was actually finished.
Thanks, Elizabeth.
If the lay teacher was actually giving the homily then it would have been an abuse, but occording to the OP the tacher gave a testamony, not a homily. The Deacon incorprated this testamony into his homily. I have done the same, ask for responses to questions, ask people to share experiances. There is nothing wrong with this practice.
I understand your response: I guess I am saying that logically if people really did believe in the real presence they would in fact attend Mass a great deal more than believers in fact do. Before i was an unbeliever I was a believer, and recall the pattern of the Mass.
So it was more important to you to “protest” the pastor or deacon not giving the homily–than it was to stay and receive the holy Eucharist (and the grace that flows from it) and offer up your prayers, praise and worship to God? Maybe offer up a prayer for the celebrant who allowed this? I guess I find that baffling. Is there more to the story? You mentioned that the pastor wasn’t there–did he just step out during the “teaching”? A deacon can’t celebrate mass–so who was the celebrant? We shouldn’t give up the grace we receive at mass lightly. Did you attend mass that Sunday somewhere else?
Actually, the idea that “only the clergy are allowed to talk during the homily” is itself not enshrined in any church document. In fact, the rubrics for childrens masses state that the homilist is allowed to dialogue with others as a teachable moment, and also states that these measures are allowed to be used for masses where both adults and children are present as well. So the idea that only the homilist may utter any words is NOT something the church teaches.
You can attend mass there and keep fighting for an end to the liturgical abuse. Make sure you donate your hard-earned money to a different and faithful group that is loyal to the magisterium.
It’s hardly worth responding to you since you
Of course, a deacon can be assigned to give the homily.Bottom line here is that the Deacon, who had the Pastor’s permission to preach the homily is completely in accord with Canon Law.
If this was a “one-time” thing, isn’t it the Christian thing to do to give this poor man the benefit of the doubt?
The Code of Canon Law states:
Canon Law # 766 "Lay persons can be permitted to preach in a church or oratory, if necessity requires it in certain circumstances or it seems advantageous in particular cases, according to the prescripts of the conference of bishops and without prejudice to ? can. 767, §1."
Canon law # 767 "§1. Among the forms of preaching, the homily, which is part of the liturgy itself and is reserved to a priest or deacon, is preeminent; in the homily the mysteries of faith and the norms of Christian life are to be explained from the sacred text during the course of the liturgical year."
...
For more information, please review the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) where it states:
“The Homily should ordinarily be given by the priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to the deacon, but never to a lay person. In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate.” (GIRM 66)
**At the request of Pope John Paul II, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament in Rome issued the document, Redemptionis Sacramentum (RS), for the purpose of stopping liturgical abuses. Regarding the preaching of the homily, the document reiterates GIRM 66 and adds the following:
“It should be borne in mind that any previous norm that may have admitted non-ordained faithful to give the homily during the Eucharistic celebration is to be considered abrogated by the norm of canon [law]. This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.” (RS 65)**]“If the need arises for the gathered faithful to be given instruction or testimony by a layperson in a Church concerning the Christian life, it is altogether preferable that this be done outside Mass. Nevertheless, for serious reasons it is permissible that this type of instruction or testimony be given after the Priest has proclaimed the Prayer after Communion. This should not become a regular practice, however. Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily, nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account.” (RS 74)
Non-Catholic ministers who are invited to "speak" on the Sunday of Christian Unity, in the spirit of ecumenism, does not enjoy an exemption to the above instructions. His/her speach cannot be confused with the homily, nor be a substitute for the homily that the priest is obligated to present to the faithful.
**“As was already noted above, the homily on account of its importance and its nature is reserved to the Priest or Deacon during Mass. As regards other forms of preaching, if necessity demands it in particular circumstances, or if usefulness suggests it in special cases, lay members of Christ’s faithful may be allowed to preach in a church or in an oratory outside Mass in accordance with the norm of law. This may be done only on account of a scarcity of sacred ministers in certain places, in order to meet the need, and it may not be transformed from an exceptional measure into an ordinary practice, nor may it be understood as an authentic form of the advancement of the laity.** All must remember besides that the faculty for giving such permission belongs to the local Ordinary, and this as regards individual instances; this permission is not the competence of anyone else, even if they are Priests or Deacons.” (RS 161)
The document goes on to explain that abuses such as this “are not to be considered of little account” and are to be "carefully avoided and corrected.” (RS 174)
Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily, nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account.” (RS 74)
We are entitled to our own opinions - of course.I know all of this, as I have studied graduate level theology, and my boss is a Canon Lawyer. I have talked extensively with him about the rules regarding preaching. I will agree that it is not something that should be done on a rgular basis, but if you look at the Canons I quoted, it is not something that is strictly forbidden.
This woman did not give the homily, the Deacon did, he just asked her to participate by giving testimony.
It seems to me, that if this is not a regular occurance, and was done in the light of a “stewardship” homily- this is a perfectly acceptable interpretation of the canon. Stewardship is not just about sharing one’s treasure, it is about sharing time & talent also.
IMHO, this whole discussion is making a mountain out of a mole hill,
and it makes me very sad.
Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily, nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account.” (RS 74)
I know you meant well and were doing what you thought was correct.
Interesting opinion -
There is no way I can charitably say this, but I think it needs to be said. You need to get a sense of perspective. There’s certainly no comparison between what you witnessed and a priest asking for more abortions. If the latter happened I would walk out and go read the sign in front of the church to ensure it was a Catholic one, because I doubt I’d ever hear that in a Catholic church.