Lay participation in homilies?

[justbeinfrank]

I’ve seen a number of priests use lay people in their homilies in order to make a point.

For example, one priest had our choir sing a few lines of a song that pertained to his homily.

Another time, he asked the lectors to help him physically demonstrate something.

Another priest had a lay person – “behind the scenes” with a microphone – pretend that he was God speaking to the priest, interacting with him and admonishing him to reorient his life toward Whom it belongs. The whole thing was an act, of course, but it helped demonstrate important spiritual and moral points.

I was wondering, though – is all of this licit?

 

[katherine2]

Licit? I guess so. Maybe not a good idea.

I have been with preachers who, in small group settings, have some dialogue with the congregation. The preacher’s job is to explain the scripture readings. Sometimes, some response is helpful to know if you are having success on this.

 

[terrcatholic]

I think it is totally unacceptable, the laity think that the more they “partcipate” the quicker they get to heaven or they are expiating some sins, which I doubt they even know they have to as the New Church does not teach about sin anymore. Instead of trying so hard to participate in mass, how about after Mass, where the consecrated hands of the priest just gave you the body of our Lord, go visit a nursing home and do the Rosary, or go march in front of the abortion clinic to protest this horrible abuse. NO, the laity at the church now think that by doing some reading they are so holy and better than the rest, and it is, very banal and irreverant, as it is the Priest who spent the last 5 or 6 years in the seminary, lives a chaste life, etc and is better suited to read and perform the homily.

I must say at the Traditional chapels that I have attended, after mass on Sat all go right to the abortion clinic, or the sedality group along with the sisters go to the nursing homes to feed the people, bring them food, read to them, and pray the rosary. I think they have it right as to what the church used to do, and I am sure in a few orthodox parishes people still do this, but this whole idea of doing a reading,etc and participation is such hogwash, we are there for God, not to entertain ourselves and hold hands, but for God. The communal stuff should be left with the heretics and Protestants

justbeinfrank:

I’ve seen a number of priests use lay people in their homilies in order to make a point.

For example, one priest had our choir sing a few lines of a song that pertained to his homily.

Another time, he asked the lectors to help him physically demonstrate something.

Another priest had a lay person – “behind the scenes” with a microphone – pretend that he was God speaking to the priest, interacting with him and admonishing him to reorient his life toward Whom it belongs. The whole thing was an act, of course, but it helped demonstrate important spiritual and moral points.

I was wondering, though – is all of this licit?

 

[katherine2]

And which lay people beleive this? Could you give me a few names?

 

[Stephen-Maguire]

justbeinfrank:

I’ve seen a number of priests use lay people in their homilies in order to make a point.

For example, one priest had our choir sing a few lines of a song that pertained to his homily.

It’s been discontinued here, as one man went on so much at a funeral, that he over-ran, and other people were coming in for another funeral Mass.

It was fine at first, but as above, it got out of hand.

 

[terrcatholic]

All of the ones I know, let me ask you the question then, why would a lay person feel the need to hand out our Lords body, or do a reading from the Bible, when there job is there to WORSHIP our God, Our Lord, and Mary. If you can remember, in the latin mass missal, at least in the 1948 one that was not corrupted by the Mason Bugnini and John XXIII, there are pages illustrating how and what the faithful should do and how they are to participate in the mass (do you remember from the TLM what you are supposed to say when the Priest raises the Holy Blood up? Dominus Deus e Deus Meus, or My Lord and My God.

So again, please tell me why do you THINK the laity feel the Need to “Participate” at the Mass which is

katherine2:

And which lay people beleive this? Could you give me a few names?

 

[puzzleannie]

terrcatholic:

, why would a lay person feel the need to hand out our Lords body, or do a reading from the Bible, when there job is there to WORSHIP our God, Our Lord, and Mary.So again, please tell me why do you THINK the laity feel the Need to “Participate” at the Mass which is

some lay people “feel the need” to serve as lectors, “hand out communion” , lead singing as cantors etc. because for 35 years we have been asked to take on these roles every year at Stewardship commitment time, as well as to take other ministerial initiative in taking communion to the sick, bereavement ministry, social concerns, catechists, adult education, sacramental preparation classes, and other parish outreaches, because unlike the parish of the 50s there are no longer 4 or 5 priests and several sisters around to do all these things. The laity did not just leap up from the pews one day, shove the priests aside and start grabbing for liturgical roles to fill. In many dioceses “lay ministry institutes” were established to train people for various ministries, in service of the liturgy, and in other areas of service to the people of the parish. In every diocese I have lived in (5) over the last 20 years, there have been several parishes without a full-time priest assigned where a lay pastoral administrator, usually a sister or deacon but sometimes a DRE or other person, has been hired to run day to day operations, and where lay people do virtually everything except confect the Eucharist, witness weddings and hear confessions. They even conduct daily communion services and funeral services because priests are not available. So please don’t be so quick to accuse lay people of usurping the proper role of the priest and pastor, until you address the issue of why priests and religious left their “jobs” in droves, necessitating the plea for more lay involvement.

 

[dhgray]

terrcatholic:

So again, please tell me why do you THINK the laity feel the Need to “Participate” at the Mass which is

Let just say, It’s a calling. Unless you participate, you will never know.

 

[serendipity]

Maybe theater acts is helpful to children, and I remember seeing a few while attending mass at a parochial school, which was preominantly for the kids, although the community was invited. However, I did not recall the message from the readings, as much as I to this day recall wondering from where “the voice from God” was coming.

I suppose it’s up to the dsicretion of the preist to decide what he needs to do to ensure that the laity are activly listening to his homilies. Personally,I prefer a homily that woudl thread the readings together and maybe expand on the teaching ambodies in them as represented through Catholic apologetics, especially as practicing this belief may be relevant to current issues in the community or world. We get so litle time with the priest, that I want to be learning as much of his wisdom as I can from the mass setting.

That is what I would prefer, however, I have very rarely experienced such a homily. Once about six months ago, for a daily mass on the feast of the Visitation, at a church where I was visiting (a chapel of a Carmelite monastery where priests take tern saying the mass there and none is exclusively affiliated with the chapel) the priest who presided gave such a lovely homily about the call to help others, and how Mary fulfilled this call with great urgency not only by agreeing to be God’s tool, but by rushing to the aid of her cousin Elizabeth even thought she just found out she was in a state of divine pregancy. I remember leaving thinking that it was the best homily I had ever heard.

The local priest here presents homilies as the teacher form the movie Ferris Bueller (which I never liked anyway), often punctuting his speech with “what does xyz mean… anybody? anybody?” before continuing with his sermon, and it annoys me to no end. It is not clear whether he actually wants a response or if he is creating some sort of dramatic atmosphere that he thinks is enthralling to the audience. It’s awkward to this day becuse he has been at the parish for about ten years, and still it seems the congregation ahs no idea wha the appropriate reaction is.

A lot of times the topics he chooses do not seem related to anyhting, and if so, then the relation is known only to him, because it was never articulated. Very rarely does he make any conneciton between what is stated in the readings and how to apply it to living a Catholic life. I try to get up early so I can travel more than an hour to the next church to hear homilies from whcih I can learn something.

 

[csbyrnes84]

Yes what you are saying is true, but I think you misunderstand the point. The people who want to force lay “ministers” onto the Church want the Church to become more Protestant and less Catholic.

If you want to be a Protestant, then that’s fine, you can keep your altar girls, and your Eucharaistic Ministers, and your bad 1970’s folk music, and you can hold hands around the altar singing Kumbaya until you turn blue in the face, but as for me I choose to be Catholic.

Jesus said that “By their fruits you shall know them,” (Mt 7:16). Where may I ask are the fruits of all of the changes which have taken place in the past 40 years? Is a decreased sense of the sacred, and the denial of the real presence a “fruit” of lay involvement? Is a decrease in vocations to the priesthood and religious life a “fruit” of lay involvement? Is the complete collapse of Catechesis and the complete lack of understanding of even basic aspects of the Christian faith by 95% of so-called Catholics a “fruit” of lay involvement? No, no, these are not good fruits that have been produced by the changes, but rather are bad fruit, and as Jesus said we shall know them by their fruit.

puzzleannie:

some lay people “feel the need” to serve as lectors, “hand out communion” , lead singing as cantors etc. because for 35 years we have been asked to take on these roles every year at Stewardship commitment time, as well as to take other ministerial initiative in taking communion to the sick, bereavement ministry, social concerns, catechists, adult education, sacramental preparation classes, and other parish outreaches, because unlike the parish of the 50s there are no longer 4 or 5 priests and several sisters around to do all these things. The laity did not just leap up from the pews one day, shove the priests aside and start grabbing for liturgical roles to fill. In many dioceses “lay ministry institutes” were established to train people for various ministries, in service of the liturgy, and in other areas of service to the people of the parish. In every diocese I have lived in (5) over the last 20 years, there have been several parishes without a full-time priest assigned where a lay pastoral administrator, usually a sister or deacon but sometimes a DRE or other person, has been hired to run day to day operations, and where lay people do virtually everything except confect the Eucharist, witness weddings and hear confessions. They even conduct daily communion services and funeral services because priests are not available. So please don’t be so quick to accuse lay people of usurping the proper role of the priest and pastor, until you address the issue of why priests and religious left their “jobs” in droves, necessitating the plea for more lay involvement.

 

[terrcatholic]

They left their jobs in droves, as you state, because that is what the intention of Vatican II was, to make it harder for the orthodox and conservative candidate to enter and make it through to ordination, admit only homosexual, liberal and “open minded” candidates so there can be an artificial priest shortage, so then the laity as yourself can "jump to the rescue and be a "Minister, (note even the Protestant name?), and the call to end celibacy, and admit married men and woman to the priesthood. All part of the Master Plan. But us conservative catholics keep plugging along. You see, if we were back in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, it would be you the liberal Catholic who would deny being a Chistian and just go which way the wind blows, while it would be the Conservative, Orthodox and Traditional Catholic that would never deny our Lord and go on to lay our life down for him. That is the difference that the liberal catholic mistakes as being “rigid”, no, we just Love our Lord so much we hate to see him being abused as he is right now.

puzzleannie:

some lay people “feel the need” to serve as lectors, “hand out communion” , lead singing as cantors etc. because for 35 years we have been asked to take on these roles every year at Stewardship commitment time, as well as to take other ministerial initiative in taking communion to the sick, bereavement ministry, social concerns, catechists, adult education, sacramental preparation classes, and other parish outreaches, because unlike the parish of the 50s there are no longer 4 or 5 priests and several sisters around to do all these things. The laity did not just leap up from the pews one day, shove the priests aside and start grabbing for liturgical roles to fill. In many dioceses “lay ministry institutes” were established to train people for various ministries, in service of the liturgy, and in other areas of service to the people of the parish. In every diocese I have lived in (5) over the last 20 years, there have been several parishes without a full-time priest assigned where a lay pastoral administrator, usually a sister or deacon but sometimes a DRE or other person, has been hired to run day to day operations, and where lay people do virtually everything except confect the Eucharist, witness weddings and hear confessions. They even conduct daily communion services and funeral services because priests are not available. So please don’t be so quick to accuse lay people of usurping the proper role of the priest and pastor, until you address the issue of why priests and religious left their “jobs” in droves, necessitating the plea for more lay involvement.

 

[caroljm36]

terrcatholic:

They left their jobs in droves, as you state, because that is what the intention of Vatican II was, to make it harder for the orthodox and conservative candidate to enter and make it through to ordination, admit only homosexual, liberal and “open minded” candidates so there can be an artificial priest shortage, so then the laity as yourself can "jump to the rescue and be a "Minister, (note even the Protestant name?), and the call to end celibacy, and admit married men and woman to the priesthood. All part of the Master Plan. But us conservative catholics keep plugging along. You see, if we were back in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, it would be you the liberal Catholic who would deny being a Chistian and just go which way the wind blows, while it would be the Conservative, Orthodox and Traditional Catholic that would never deny our Lord and go on to lay our life down for him. That is the difference that the liberal catholic mistakes as being “rigid”, no, we just Love our Lord so much we hate to see him being abused as he is right now.

Not fair. I didn’t become a Catholic until 1994 and it can’t be orthodox enough for me. I had nothing to do with Vat II but vaguely wish it hadn’t happened.

But as puzzleannie says, the call goes out every fall for people to serve in these various “ministries” and when a person like me is struggling with spiritual dryness, shyness, & alienation in a large parish well then you respond. You may rake leaves for someone one day, cook at the parish soup kitchen on another, then someone calls and asks if you’d like to take Communion to a paraplegic who can’t get to Mass. It’s allowed now so what do you do? I’m torn between wondering if something is really right or if it’s some bogus post-concilliar innovation of the Am Church. Is that really something I have to decide? That’s almost too much to ask, for me to stop doing something that is officially approved by the Church. For years I was a non-participant and all it got me is a feeling of not really belonging. Finally I decided that whatever life line the parish throws me to pull me outside myself, well I’m going to grab it.

 

[Servant1]

terrcatholic:

I think it is totally unacceptable, the laity think that the more they “partcipate” the quicker they get to heaven or they are expiating some sins, which I doubt they even know they have to as the New Church does not teach about sin anymore.

The Mass teaches about a lot of things. It is not the sole role of the Mass to “teach about sin.” NOR is the sole role of preaching to “teach about sin.” It is the role of the CHURCH - in many, varied aspects - to “teach about sin.”

Instead of trying so hard to participate in mass, how about after Mass, where the consecrated hands of the priest just gave you the body of our Lord, go visit a nursing home and do the Rosary, or go march in front of the abortion clinic to protest this horrible abuse.

It seems you have some notion that the lowly, poor, pitiful, powerless, impotent laity are some sort of second-class citizen of the Kingdom of Christ (Christendom) whose only work is to passively let the powers of the clergy “do their thing” to and/or for the laity. Surprise! Christianity - the Church, if you will - is a participatory life. It is not merely a relationship in which the first-class citizens (clergy) do things to and for the second-class citizens (the powerless laity). That reduces the word and sacraments (Holy Mysteries) to nothing more than magic.

It is not usurpation for laity to participate in the Mass, nor any other part of the life of the Church. It is their DUTY. It is their VOCATION. To be sure, not all are called to the same functions. But all ARE called to participate in the life of the church, both liturgically and otherwise. There has NEVER been a time in the history of the Church when the Church taught that the laity should be excluded from participation liturgically or ministerially.

There HAVE been times when pervasive clericalism and/or misunderstanding of varied and different roles of clergy and laity have caused confusion - on either side of the spectrum. But that is assuredly not the same as the Church teaching the exclusion of lay participation.

As I’m running out of space, will continue in another post…

 

[terrcatholic]

I respect that answer, very charitable and open.

caroljm36:

Not fair. I didn’t become a Catholic until 1994 and it can’t be orthodox enough for me. I had nothing to do with Vat II but vaguely wish it hadn’t happened.

But as puzzleannie says, the call goes out every fall for people to serve in these various “ministries” and when a person like me is struggling with spiritual dryness, shyness, & alienation in a large parish well then you respond. You may rake leaves for someone one day, cook at the parish soup kitchen on another, then someone calls and asks if you’d like to take Communion to a paraplegic who can’t get to Mass. It’s allowed now so what do you do? I’m torn between wondering if something is really right or if it’s some bogus post-concilliar innovation of the Am Church. Is that really something I have to decide? That’s almost too much to ask, for me to stop doing something that is officially approved by the Church. For years I was a non-participant and all it got me is a feeling of not really belonging. Finally I decided that whatever life line the parish throws me to pull me outside myself, well I’m going to grab it.

 

[terrcatholic]

*Not fair. I didn’t become a Catholic until 1994 and it can’t be orthodox enough for me. I had nothing to do with Vat II but vaguely wish it hadn’t happened.

But as puzzleannie says, the call goes out every fall for people to serve in these various “ministries” and when a person like me is struggling with spiritual dryness, shyness, & alienation in a large parish well then you respond. You may rake leaves for someone one day, cook at the parish soup kitchen on another, then someone calls and asks if you’d like to take Communion to a paraplegic who can’t get to Mass. It’s allowed now so what do you do? I’m torn between wondering if something is really right or if it’s some bogus post-concilliar innovation of the Am Church. Is that really something I have to decide? That’s almost too much to ask, for me to stop doing something that is officially approved by the Church. For years I was a non-participant and all it got me is a feeling of not really belonging. Finally I decided that whatever life line the parish throws me to pull me outside myself, well I’m going to grab it.*

 

[Fortiterinre]

This is a good example of some of the things on another thread about defining liturgical abuse. These examples don’t seem to be illicit but certainly show questionable judgment if done too much or in bad taste. Despite the title of this thread, I do not consider this so much lay “participation” in homilies but rather certain laity being something of a prop master or stage director for a rather theatrical preacher. We laity should not compose homilies because that is part of the Teaching Church, AKA, the hierarchy of the ordained.

 

[Servant1]

continuing…

terrcatholic:

NO, the laity at the church now think that by doing some reading they are so holy and better than the rest, and it is, very banal and irreverant, as it is the Priest who spent the last 5 or 6 years in the seminary, lives a chaste life, etc and is better suited to read and perform the homily.

Let’s start with the last statement first. Firstly, a homily is not performed. It is not a performance. As to reading a homily - a moderately literate 5th- or 6th-grader can read a homily. What makes a homily both important and difficult is the preparation that goes into it, and the education, study, and practice required to produce a good homilist.

If you take a few courses in Scripture, homiletics, and exegesis, you will find that others besides priests can be able to give good homilies. That being said, I don’t want to be seen as advocating the change of the norm away from priests (or deacons, at the priest’s and the bishop’s discretion) being the ones who deliver the homilies at Mass.

On to the first statement in the quoted paragraph above. I echo what another respndent to your posting has asked: WHAT laity? Who? Just WHO is it that thinks they are better than the rest? By “the rest,” does that mean those who do not participate in the liturgy in some appropriate way? Or is the appropriate way to participate only passive? Only as a recipient? It seems to this reader of the quoted comments that the writer is becoming presumptuous enough to judge the character and souls of those who “do some reading.” As if participating in the liturgy by daring to read the Scriptures aloud were some sort of sin, per se.

The Magisterium of Holy Mother Church has declared that participation in the liturgy by the laity reading the Scripture lessons - other than the Gospel - is not just admissible, but desirable. Please elucidate exactly what problem you have with this teaching of the Church.

More next post…

 

[terrcatholic]

Just posted on the BBC, note how the liberal press and Catholics are even using the sex scandal to promote their agenda of female participation, as they describe the “upheaval” as due to greater laity participation and woman involvement

Church sex scandals’ heavy legacy

By Robert Pigott
BBC religious affairs correspondent


**The agreement of a Roman Catholic diocese to pay $100m (£53m) in compensation to victims of sex abuse takes the Church in America past another milestone in the settlement of its long drawn out scandal. **

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40692000/jpg/_40692689_church203.jpg Several US archdioceses had to file for bankruptcy over the scandals

The fact that the Diocese of Orange, in Los Angeles, is spending so much in meeting the claims of only 90 people, with another 544 cases outstanding there, gives an idea of the crippling financial burden on the Church.

Lawyers working on the litigation say abuse could eventually cost $1bn.

Other dioceses have found the price of abuse more than they can manage.

The Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon filed for bankruptcy last July. Tucson in Arizona and Spokane in Washington chose to follow suit.

The Archdiocese of Portland has begun an advertising campaign, calling on anyone abused by priests there to come forward, as part of the bankruptcy procedure.

The story is far from over. A report published last February by a committee of inquiry showed that more than 4,000 Roman Catholic priests had been credibly accused of abuse since 1950.

There were more than 10,000 victims, mostly boys.

Fewer donations

Groups representing those assaulted by priests and church workers insist there could be thousands more.

They say it can take decades for victims of abuse to come forward, and that the average age is 44.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img...bc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif **It may be some time before the Church in America recovers the prestige and authority lost since the scandal unfolded **http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif

People often wait for their parents to die, thinking that to reveal the abuse would shame and disillusion them needlessly. For its part the Church in America says the abuse crisis broke out suddenly and then died rapidly away.

However, the scandal’s legacy could be profound, because it comes at a time of upheaval for the Church. There is already restiveness among American Catholics over the Church’s reluctance to give lay people - especially woman - a greater role, and rebellion over the Vatican’s stern line on contraception.

The sex abuse scandal is likely to produce greater pressure for a review even of the compulsory celibacy of priests.

There could be physical changes too. Congregations are declining in many dioceses, and the supply of priests dwindling.

Falling collections

The large compensation payments - coupled with the move of Roman Catholics to the suburbs - have already forced the Archdiocese of Boston to close a sixth of its parishes.

Boston - one of the four largest archdioceses in the US with an estimated two million Catholics - has paid almost as much in compensation as Orange.

Since the scandal first broke in Boston, churches there have been getting significantly less in the collection plate.

As part of the settlement in Orange, Bishop Tod Brown is to make a personal apology to each person assaulted by a priest, nun or church worker. Bishop Brown told a press conference he knew that the victims had already begun their healing process. However it may be some time before the Church in America recovers the prestige and authority lost since the scandal

QUOTE=bear06]Who says it’s OK to quote Greely or Kung? It seems that the double standards are being applied by both sides but not those of us in the middle. Heretics on either side should be used!

 

[O.S.Luke]

Just a reminder: the word liturgy is taken from a Greek word (leitourgia) that literally means “work of the people.”

You can’t have liturgy without participation. How that takes place in a homily is up to the priest.

O+

 

[WanderAimlessly]

justbeinfrank:

I’ve seen a number of priests use lay people in their homilies in order to make a point.

For example, one priest had our choir sing a few lines of a song that pertained to his homily.

Another time, he asked the lectors to help him physically demonstrate something.

Another priest had a lay person – “behind the scenes” with a microphone – pretend that he was God speaking to the priest, interacting with him and admonishing him to reorient his life toward Whom it belongs. The whole thing was an act, of course, but it helped demonstrate important spiritual and moral points.

I was wondering, though – is all of this licit?

Of the three, I would probably say #3 and most likely #1 would be inappropriate since this is direct laity particpation.

#2, however, may be OK based on the interaction. You do not say what was the participation was. For example, if he ask for a show of hands on a question, that would probably be OK.

These are just my opinion.

PF