Lay sermons permitted, Vatican tells Swiss bishops

  • Thread starter Thread starter fix
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to believe that either the Bishop’s conference was either being deceitful or misquoted, as the information posted in the article is in direct contradiction to what Cardinal Arinze stated in his interview on EWTN the other day concerning “ecumenical services” and non-Catholics receiving Holy Communion.
 
Locally, the church where I was baptized at has Call to Action nuns giving the homily. Yeah, and the bishop is no where to be seen…probably trying to get some money for his annual offering or whatever it’s called. Yes, the Vatican might as well re-name the diocese of Orlando to the diocese of Mickey Mouse because everything here is cartooney and fake.
 
are to be allowed to preach during Mass and baptise whenever a priest was not available
Click to expand...
This is a quote from the article referenced. OK, so HOW do you have a MASS without a priest present? This sounds like a misconstrual of existing teaching. When there is a Communion service because no priest is available, a lay person is allowed to offer a reflection based on the readings. This is nothing new, even when the Communion service is in lieu of Sunday Mass.

Is it possible that what the Swiss bishops actually received was confirmation of this and encouragement?

I am sure there is more to the story.
 
I’m more concerned about non-Catholics receiving the Eucharist.
The bishops, who announced to journalists following their return from their ad limina visit to Rome that they have secured Curial backing for their plans, have also secured the necessary permission for the Protestant partner in a mixed marriage to receive the Eucharist in a Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
 
What was the purpose of the GIRM and Redemptionis Sacramentum?

[64.] The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself,[142] “should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson.[143] 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”.[144]

[65.] 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 767 §1.[145] This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.

[66.] 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.[146]
 
I’m a little more concerned about the part where it talks about admitting noncatholic Christians to Holy Communion…That’s borderline heresy.
 
i would put any credit into it unless a Vatican paper announces such an occurrence – which I serious doubt will happen.
 
I’m a little more concerned about the part where it talks about admitting noncatholic Christians to Holy Communion…That’s borderline heresy.
Click to expand...
I don’t know whether or not its “heresy” or not, but its been done before so its not really new. Greek Orthodox, I believe, already can be admitted at any time, and other non-catholics including the Presidential Clintons have been admitted under certain circumstances as well.

I don’t think this is an earth shaking story, except of course for the spin that is being given to it.
 
The current track record of the media for correctly reporting Vatican instructions, Bishops’ statements, etc gives on little confidence in stories such as this.
 
40.png
Kielbasi:
I don’t know whether or not its “heresy” or not, but its been done before so its not really new. Greek Orthodox, I believe, already can be admitted at any time, and other non-catholics including the Presidential Clintons have been admitted under certain circumstances as well.
Click to expand...
As I recall, most or all Orthodox are allowed communion in the Church. That is widely acknowledged. But I do not believe that priviledge exists for other groups in the absence of grave reason (danger of death and knowing desire to accept the truth) and special permission by the hierarchy.

However, just because the Clintons were given holy communion does not mean they should have received holy communion! I learned of many attendees at my wedding ceremony that received holy communion even though they should not have done so. This happened despite very clear instructions given prior to the mass.
 
40.png
msproule:
As I recall, most or all Orthodox are allowed communion in the Church. That is widely acknowledged. But I do not believe that priviledge exists for other groups in the absence of grave reason (danger of death and knowing desire to accept the truth) and special permission by the hierarchy.

However, just because the Clintons were given holy communion does not mean they should have received holy communion! I learned of many attendees at my wedding ceremony that received holy communion even though they should not have done so. This happened despite very clear instructions given prior to the mass.
Click to expand...
I agree. Again, to paraphrase Cardinal Arinze from his interview, the conditions in which the Church would allow a non-Catholic to receive communion are so restrictive that “they should just become Catholics”. As for the non-Catholics receiving Holy Communion in an ecumenical service, his Emminence said that “not all Catholics meet the requirements to licitly receive Holy Communion, why would anyone think a non-Catholic could licitly do so [paraphrased]”.

We’re not getting the whole story here. As someone above mentioned, until there is some official word from the Vatican, I wouldn’t lend too much credence to this article.
 
Just FYI, if anyone reading the forums at this hour is interested, EWTN is just now rebroadcasting the interview with Cardinal Arinze I mentioned above (11:20 pm Eastern).
 
Here is another link with some additional information:
kath.net/detail.php?id=9719

The Swiss bishops seem to constantly contradict themselves, using semantics to make their weak case. In one sentence, the head of the bishop’s conference states that lay homilies are never to be allowed, then in another says that lay sermons or meditations are. The Swiss bishops’ instructions indicate that such sermons should always reflect upon the readings.

In the context of the Mass, are a homily and sermon not one and the same?

(For those of you familiar, these bishops sound nauseatingly similar to the former bishop of Saginaw, MI, who gets significant attention in these forums!)

Regardless, they still offer NO PROOF of concurrence from the Holy See.
 
When will the insanity stop-This is what the problem of Vatican II has always been-that it is so loosly written that the left wing fringe has taken off and ran with it-and the Vatican and the Bishops cant stop it.

All must be repealed-the lay paricipation is not necessary-does not add faith or anything for that matter to the mass and the intent and goals of what going to mass is all about-to observe the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and receive Our Lords body. I have to look in my little “missalette” as that is what it is called now and compare it to my Traditional Missal-If it is called “The Lords Supper” as I have heard it called by many, than questions need to be raised
 
40.png
kmktexas:
This is a quote from the article referenced. OK, so HOW do you have a MASS without a priest present?
Click to expand...
There are really two points in that sentence. It’s saying that lay theologians are allowed to preach during Mass. It then says a layperson is allowed to Baptize if a priest is unavailable.

ab
 
This is exactly the same noise we’ve been hearing from the Modernists since the close of the council. They push their heresy and keep pushing until the CDF or the Pope finally gives them a pass “in an emergency.”

The next thing you know, BAM! It’s allowed and becomes “the norm.”

Two examples:
  1. “limited” use of the vernacular in Novus Ordo masses
  2. Altar girls
sigh

That drive to the FSSP “latin Mass community” (I guess it would be too much to ask for it to actually be a “parish”), while long, is looking almost required anymore…
 
Another thought!

I hope I’m wrong, but my guess is the scandal will play out like this:
  1. The Swiss Bishops make their statements (as we’ve seen already)
  2. Catholics just trying to be faithful to the Church will react with confusion and/or anger, claiming the Swiss should be condemned for their novelty
  3. Strong statements about the importance of the Priest alone giving the Homily will be presented by many (on these boards and in the Blogosphere at large), with continued condemnation of the Swiss Bishops
  4. The Curia will clarify that while it IS ok, it’s only for emergencies. More hand wringing and gnashing of teeth from the internet
  5. The Pope will issue a pastoral letter approving the use of Lay preachers, saying something about “lay genius”
  6. Some Catholics online will immediately twist themselves into pretzels justifying the “now approved” practice, using tortured logic and verbal gymnastics to claim that since the Pope said it, it MUST be “traditional.”
  7. Catholics who continue to condemn this novel scandal will be called “integrist, lidless-eyed freaks” for opposing the “spirit of Vatican II.”
As I said, I hope I’m wrong…
 
40.png
aaron_brown99:
Another thought!
Code: 
I hope I'm wrong, but my guess is the scandal will play out like this:

1.  The Swiss Bishops make their statements (as we've seen already)
  1. Catholics just trying to be faithful to the Church will react with confusion and/or anger, claiming the Swiss should be condemned for their novelty
  2. Strong statements about the importance of the Priest alone giving the Homily will be presented by many (on these boards and in the Blogosphere at large), with continued condemnation of the Swiss Bishops
  3. The Curia will clarify that while it IS ok, it’s only for emergencies. More hand wringing and gnashing of teeth from the internet
    5. The Pope will issue a pastoral letter approving the use of Lay preachers, saying something about “lay genius”
  4. Some Catholics online will immediately twist themselves into pretzels justifying the “now approved” practice, using tortured logic and verbal gymnastics to claim that since the Pope said it, it MUST be “traditional.”
  5. Catholics who continue to condemn this novel scandal will be called “integrist, lidless-eyed freaks” for opposing the “spirit of Vatican II.”

    As I said, I hope I’m wrong…
Click to expand...
Perfect “travel guide” to the VATII church. A new “flower” for thre Springtime of VATII.
Someone earlier asked “when will it ever end”. The answer is, of course, it is not intended to “end”. The VATII church plays “good guy, bad guy”. They send out the front line revolutionaries to intro a new “unapproved” practice. (The bad guys). The Vatican then complains (The good guys.)
Finally, after the flames and smoke die down, the “good guys” approve it, which, of course they intended to do all along.
Recycle begins for next tradition to be destroyed.
The signature says:
To destroy a Religion, you must first sever** its traditions**.
Code: 
For a big fat reason.
Say goodbye to your “church” folks, it’s nearly over the horizon…and it ain’t comin back short of a heavenly catclysm.
It’s not much more than a toy for the modernists. Not a single Saint from 100 or more years ago would even recognize the VATII church as “Catholic”.
If the Faithful do not fight back, NO ONE will, and your Church will be taken from you like the light removed by a progressive sunset.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top