Episcopalian woman did our homily

[Sy_Noe]

Are laypeople or people from other Christian churches/denominations allowed to give the homily? (this is not “doctrine” teaching, as I understand it…just a sermon of sorts, right?)

Or does it have to be just Catholic priests?

If she’s Episcopalian, there’s a possibility she could be a priest or bishop.
But if even laypeople etc are allowed to do it, as I think another poster mentioned…then…it doesn’t seem to be breaking any rules or whatever.

.

Doesn’t have to be just a priest. I’ve been to RC Masses when a deacon has done it. I forget the subject matter but once I remember him saying how being married with children helped him relate to those who were in the pews that day.

 

[Hopey]

Short answer, no.
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. (GIRM 66, emphasis added)

and

The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants” ; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association. (RS 66, emphasis added).

 

[recentrevert]

I agree with you. Doesn’t sound like much harm was done or that she said anything all that wrong in her homily. And I agree I’m not sure what complaining would accomplish. I have recently written the diocese where I live 3 times asking if a practice in place at a local parish is allowed in Church teaching, I get automated replies that my email has been received and would be routed to the appropriate person for response. But they don’t answer. They did answer though what the geographical parsihes are for certain addresses.

The harm is that it gives the false impression that non-Catholics can teach Catholics about matters of faith with authority when actually it is Catholics who have to teach non-Catholics about faith because we hold the truth and they don’t. It also sets a bad example by being disobedient. Report abuses in writing to the bishop and don’t be discouraged if your letters are dismissed or ignored - you have done your duty and it is the bishop who will have to tell God why he didn’t put a stop to them.

 

[commenter]

Thanks for the reply.

I did consider that. But they have a history of rulebreaking and it’s continued. So I thought the best thing to do would be simply refuse to go there, and if anybody asks me why, I’ll tell them.

Avoid going to either extreme. On the one hand, don’t write a long letter to the bishop, detailing every liturgical or other abuse in the parish in the past decade, with cc to the Pope. Don’t demand a reply, don’t tell the bishop how to do his job.

But DO write that letter, charitably and briefly, not bringing up other issues. Sometimes there are other issues going on, in that parish or with that pastor, that you don’t know about; your letter might provide needed information towards action, though you might not know what or when that will be.

Also, write a brief letter to the parish council or trustees. While you would not want to quote canon law to the bishop (!), you need to cite to these people documentation as to why this action was incorrect. Don’t say “that’s why I’m not going to your parish anymore!”. Simply point it out as an FYI.

The bishop knows canon or liturgical rules better than you do, but he needs to be told that this happened, at this parish, on this date. The lay leaders know it happened, but need to be told why it was wrong. Avoid the temptation - very hard - to put in “and another thing, and another thing…”

 

[signit]

Avoid going to either extreme. On the one hand, don’t write a long letter to the bishop, detailing every liturgical or other abuse in the parish in the past decade, with cc to the Pope. Don’t demand a reply, don’t tell the bishop how to do his job.

But DO write that letter, charitably and briefly, not bringing up other issues. Sometimes there are other issues going on, in that parish or with that pastor, that you don’t know about; your letter might provide needed information towards action, though you might not know what or when that will be.

Also, write a brief letter to the parish council or trustees. While you would not want to quote canon law to the bishop (!), you need to cite to these people documentation as to why this action was incorrect. Don’t say “that’s why I’m not going to your parish anymore!”. Simply point it out as an FYI.

The bishop knows canon or liturgical rules better than you do, but he needs to be told that this happened, at this parish, on this date. The lay leaders know it happened, but need to be told why it was wrong. Avoid the temptation - very hard - to put in “and another thing, and another thing…”

Thanks, but another consideration is that this was about five years ago and I’m not sure they’d respond to something that long ago.

 

[Hopey]

Thanks, but another consideration is that this was about five years ago and I’m not sure they’d respond to something that long ago.

Are you in the Diocese where the Bishop is stopping all lay persons preaching the homily? If so, this may never occur again.

I give priests room for mistakes, usually. He allowed it for whatever reason, but if he isn’t still doing it, I may not take it into consideration anymore when seeking where to join.

 

[signit]

Are you in the Diocese where the Bishop is stopping all lay persons preaching the homily? If so, this may never occur again.

I give priests room for mistakes, usually. He allowed it for whatever reason, but if he isn’t still doing it, I may not take it into consideration anymore when seeking where to join.

No: I checked the link in one of the other posts and that is not my Diocese.

 

[WilT]

What you talkin bout Willis??!!
.

NICE:thumbsup:

 

[Last_Things]

So vote with your feet, and your wallet. That’s what I ended up doing when I got tired of lame liturgies, poor music, priests composing their own collects to replace the ones in the missal, rearranging the order of the Mass… and I could go on.

When did I wander into protestant answer forums?

 

[Last_Things]

That’s pretty much it - our homily from a few weeks back was delivered by a local Espicopalian “reverend” that was female. She did an absolutely lovely job, but it seemed wrong. Is this acceptable?

Is this a Sunday homily at a Catholic Mass presided by a priest?
Did the priest sit down after he or the deacon read the Gospel or did one of them speak for a little bit first before she spoke?

If it is a weekday Mass, then a homily is not necessary and he could technically invite someone to offer a reflection.
If it is a Sunday Mass, then the priest or deacon needs to offer a homily, no matter how short, before taking a break from the Mass to allow another person to speak. Doing this after the homily is not really appropriate, but it sometimes happens.
If the priest sat down and let a heretic speak instead of offering a homily, then he is absolutely in the wrong.

 

[OraLabora]

When did I wander into protestant answer forums?

When did I wander into the personal insults forums?

Seriously, if a parish is too heterodox, find one that is orthodox. What is so “Protestant” about that?

 

[Picky_Picky]

The harm is that it gives the false impression that non-Catholics can teach Catholics about matters of faith with authority when actually it is Catholics who have to teach non-Catholics about faith because we hold the truth and they don’t. It also sets a bad example by being disobedient. Report abuses in writing to the bishop and don’t be discouraged if your letters are dismissed or ignored - you have done your duty and it is the bishop who will have to tell God why he didn’t put a stop to them.

You could perhaps add to your letter a complaint about the last Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, preaching at Mass at Lourdes at the invitation of Pope Benedict’s Vatican.

 

[WilT]

This was more where I was going with it, as this question wasn’t a “who you gonna call?” but a “was this okay?”

She was not giving a talk about being a missionary or calling for donations or anything.

She actually did the homily on Pentecost Sunday, so it was over a month ago. Our church is known to be “progressive” Oh, well.

It is not ok. I think everyone is trying to help you find a solution to this by sending you to your Bishop. It is a grave abuse and it needs to stop fast.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

You could perhaps add to your letter a complaint about the last Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, preaching at Mass at Lourdes at the invitation of Pope Benedict’s Vatican.

A little Internet research would seem to document that what the Archbishop of Canterbury celebrated and preached at was an Anglican “Mass” celebrated in a Catholic venue, yes at the invitation of the Vatican, but not at a Catholic Mass. The occasion was a visit to Lourdes of an Anglican Marian society, which is nice, but was not the circumstance as you portrayed it. At the time this occurred, some note was made of the confusing images and messages that resulted from all this. Apparently such confusion continues to this day.

 

[Picky_Picky]

A little Internet research would seem to document that what the Archbishop of Canterbury celebrated and preached at was an Anglican “Mass” celebrated in a Catholic venue, yes at the invitation of the Vatican, but not at a Catholic Mass. The occasion was a visit to Lourdes of an Anglican Marian society, which is nice, but was not the circumstance as you portrayed it. At the time this occurred, some note was made of the confusing images and messages that resulted from all this. Apparently such confusion continues to this day.

That’s interesting: do you have a source? Everything I’ve read on the subject says it was a Catholic Mass. Even that the celebrant was Cardinal Kasper. Here’s a Catholic news source:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/archbishop_of_canterbury_branded_papal_puppet_for_sympathetic_lourdes_remarks/

 

[Picky_Picky]

And here’s a Canterbury source:

rowanwilliams.archbishopofcanterbury.org/articles.php/1223/archbishop-of-canterbury-to-preach-in-lourdes-for-150th-anniversary-of-the-visions-of-the-blessed-vi

 

[Elizium23]

Comparing the Lourdes International Mass to the OP’s incident is not appropriate. Cardinal Kasper is the president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, his presence and invitation to the Archbishop of Canterbury leads me to a well-founded belief that the proper permission was granted to derogate from the law, if necessary from Pope Benedict XVI himself.

At the same time it is altogether possible that no permission was necessary, if +Kasper gave a proper homily and ceded the floor to the Archbishop at an appropriate time. I don’t have full video or a transcript of the Mass, so it’s hard to tell.

The OP’s case is a random parish priest ceding the floor to a random Episcopalian minister at the time appointed for the liturgical homily. If this happened as the OP describes it, and lacked permission from the competent authority, then it is an abuse in a way that +Kasper’s Mass was not.

The next logical question is, “who is competent to derogate from the law about the homily?” It would appear that diocesan bishops do not have this authority. Therefore in the OP’s case, it is extremely doubtful that proper permission was obtained, while in the case of Lourdes, it is highly plausible that it was.

 

[Picky_Picky]

Comparing the Lourdes International Mass to the OP’s incident is not appropriate. Cardinal Kasper is the president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, his presence and invitation to the Archbishop of Canterbury leads me to a well-founded belief that the proper permission was granted to derogate from the law, if necessary from Pope Benedict XVI himself.

At the same time it is altogether possible that no permission was necessary, if +Kasper gave a proper homily and ceded the floor to the Archbishop at an appropriate time. I don’t have full video or a transcript of the Mass, so it’s hard to tell.

The OP’s case is a random parish priest ceding the floor to a random Episcopalian minister at the time appointed for the liturgical homily. If this happened as the OP describes it, and lacked permission from the competent authority, then it is an abuse in a way that +Kasper’s Mass was not.

The next logical question is, “who is competent to derogate from the law about the homily?” It would appear that diocesan bishops do not have this authority. Therefore in the OP’s case, it is extremely doubtful that proper permission was obtained, while in the case of Lourdes, it is highly plausible that it was.

I don’t know if the YouTube video of the then Dr Willams’ address gives you any clues. It certainly seems to scupper the confident assertion by Tarpeian Rock that this was an Anglican occasion. And it scuppers the statement earlier in this thread that Anglicans should not be seen instructing Catholics (of course on a separate occasion Dr Williams addressed the Catholic Synod of Bishops, so he is evidently not thought an inappropriate teacher). So perhaps we are left with the question of whether the OP’s priest had permission. Answer: we don’t know.

 

[Elizium23]

I think it is an unnecessary generalization to say that Anglicans should never instruct Catholics. Surely there are many Catholics I would not want instructing other Catholics! And surely the Archbishop could be trusted on an important occasion and locale to choose his words wisely and not offend Catholics of whom he is a guest. It is even possible that he submitted his remarks to Catholic authorities beforehand for vetting, but it seems more likely that, given the dignity of his position and rank, he was simply trusted to do the right thing.

It seems to me like the Lourdes incident was designed in good faith and well-intended as a step forward to foster Christian unity. The case may be that the OP’s incident was also, but given the marked difference from Lourdes, I would venture to say that it more likely served to hinder unity and trust, as it was neither the place nor time for ecumenical gestures contrary to the prescriptions of the law.

We can similiarly compare the washing of Muslim’s and women’s feet in prison as performed by Pope Francis. As Pope, he is especially situated to both derogate from the law and to make notable gestures of peace and unity. He can rightly be lauded for taking that opportunity to send a message. At the same time, a parish priest without the authority to do so could rightly be reprimanded for doing exactly the same thing.

 

[Picky_Picky]

I think it is an unnecessary generalization to say that Anglicans should never instruct Catholics. Surely there are many Catholics I would not want instructing other Catholics! And surely the Archbishop could be trusted on an important occasion and locale to choose his words wisely and not offend Catholics of whom he is a guest. It is even possible that he submitted his remarks to Catholic authorities beforehand for vetting, but it seems more likely that, given the dignity of his position and rank, he was simply trusted to do the right thing.

It seems to me like the Lourdes incident was designed in good faith and well-intended as a step forward to foster Christian unity. The case may be that the OP’s incident was also, but given the marked difference from Lourdes, I would venture to say that it more likely served to hinder unity and trust, as it was neither the place nor time for ecumenical gestures contrary to the prescriptions of the law.

We can similiarly compare the washing of Muslim’s and women’s feet in prison as performed by Pope Francis. As Pope, he is especially situated to both derogate from the law and to make notable gestures of peace and unity. He can rightly be lauded for taking that opportunity to send a message. At the same time, a parish priest without the authority to do so could rightly be reprimanded for doing exactly the same thing.

I follow your argument. And of course Williams was not only well known to Kasper but also well known to and respected by Pope Benedict as a distinguished fellow theologian.