Priest in the Nave

  • Thread starter Thread starter adstrinity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

adstrinity

Guest
Anything against this? Went to the church 5 minutes away from my house rather than 1h 45m away because of money/gas issues. I drive for the EF, but, the one nearest me (walking distance), is OF. It seems they have a new priest and he was in the Nave during his homily. …Seemed like a fairly traditional homily, but, I was just wondering about that. It’s unconventional, sure, but, anything specifically against it?
 
The General Instruction of the Roman Missal says
  1. The priest, standing at the chair or at the ambo itself or, when appropriate, in another suitable place, gives the homily. When the homily is completed, a period of silence may be observed.
I do not know what a “suitable place” is or of there is any other with more details. I remember seeing in a European cathedral that there was a tall place in the Nave from which the homily was given.

John
 
From the GIRM: usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter4.shtml
  1. The priest, standing at the chair or at the ambo itself or, when appropriate, in another suitable place, gives the homily. When the homily is completed, a period of silence may be observed.
(italics mine)

Apparently that priest finds the nave a suitable place for his homily.
 
Anything against this? Went to the church 5 minutes away from my house rather than 1h 45m away because of money/gas issues. I drive for the EF, but, the one nearest me (walking distance), is OF. It seems they have a new priest and he was in the Nave during his homily. …Seemed like a fairly traditional homily, but, I was just wondering about that. It’s unconventional, sure, but, anything specifically against it?
Sorry but i am trying to interpret the posting before trying to answer.But what do these mean?
EF,OF?

ger
 
Sorry but i am trying to interpret the posting before trying to answer.But what do these mean?
EF,OF?

ger
EF stands for “Extraordinary Form” which means the Tridentine Mass.
OF stands for “Ordinary Form” which means the Novus Ordo Mass.

As for the original post, I think that there is nothing inherently wrong with the priest coming down into the nave. However, I am afraid that sometimes it may give the impression that the priesthood and laity are equal, when in fact as St. Thomas Aquinas tells us, they are not. The priesthood is a higher state of living than the married life/laity.
 
However, I am afraid that sometimes it may give the impression that the priesthood and laity are equal, when in fact as St. Thomas Aquinas tells us, they are not. The priesthood is a higher state of living than the married life/laity.

I don’t see how where the priest stands during a sermon would give that impression.

In any case, the function of the ordained priesthood is only for this world.

And how would a married priest (of which there are quite a few; three in my city alone) fit into this dichotomy?
 
I don’t see how where the priest stands during a sermon would give that impression.

In any case, the function of the ordained priesthood is only for this world.

And how would a married priest (of which there are quite a few; three in my city alone) fit into this dichotomy?
It would mean coming down to the people’s level. It may promote humility, but it promotes a false sense of equality.

You make a good point. I’ll reword it this way: The priesthood is a higher state of life than being part of the laity. Also, the celibate state of life is higher than the married state.
 
Well thanks Thunderballs.I thought it was some of that texting stuff.As for the question.Since we miked the priest I have seen priest speak from the back of our chuch (blessing things)and the side of the church.Recently a priest spoke in the middle aisle of the church to do his sermon.I do not like it because I feel that the pulpit the parish built is the appropriate site for the sermon.
ger
 
It would mean coming down to the people’s level. It may promote humility, but it promotes a false sense of equality.

I don’t see it as meaning anything except that particular priest’s preaching style.

Think about this:

Marriage is a sacrament.

Celibacy is not.
 
I don’t see it as meaning anything except that particular priest’s preaching style.

Think about this:

Marriage is a sacrament.

Celibacy is not.
Again, I’m saying that it COULD be interpreted this way.

And St.Paul tells us quite clearly that celibacy is a higher way of life.
 
the GIRM said:
136. The priest, standing at the chair or at the ambo itself or, when appropriate, in another suitable place, gives the homily. When the homily is completed, a period of silence may be observed.

The majority of priests stay up in the sanctuary. Even with a mike, it can be hard to follow the homily when the priest is walking around in the aisles. However, it is not any kind of awful abuse for the priest to be down off the altar steps when he gives his homily.

I hope you are able to focus on the sacrifice during the Mass at this closer parish. Driving almost 2 hours to get to Mass is a hardship and I wouldn’t want to to become resentful or start to skip Mass because of the time and expense.
 
The majority of priests stay up in the sanctuary. Even with a mike, it can be hard to follow the homily when the priest is walking around in the aisles. However, it is not any kind of awful abuse for the priest to be down off the altar steps when he gives his homily.

I hope you are able to focus on the sacrifice during the Mass at this closer parish. Driving almost 2 hours to get to Mass is a hardship and I wouldn’t want to to become resentful or start to skip Mass because of the time and expense.
It’s more of a hardship to go to the Masses where they hold hands during the Our Father, the priest faces the people, and Sister Missionary gives the homily begging for money. The Latin Mass has brought more sense to the Mass and makes me appreciate the OF more. I get it better now. If I had just a little disposible income, if I was not afraid of being in the red, I would have made that drive, I will make that drive, but, that didn’t happen. Because of the Latin Mass, I am able to appreciate the sacrifice at the OF (even though Father DOES NOT keep his pointer finger and thumb together after handling the Host).

Thank you for all who answered.
 
I don’t see it as meaning anything except that particular priest’s preaching style.

Think about this:

Marriage is a sacrament.

Celibacy is not.
What does celibacy have to do with it.

Do you mean

Marriage is a sacrament
Orders is a sacrament
Some have received both
Some have received neither
Some who are married live a celibate life
Some who are in orders live a celibate life

But which life is holier: Marriage or Orders or neither or both?

I think it would be better to stick to “Where should the homilist stand? (or sit)”
and why.
 
I think it would be better to stick to “Where should the homilist stand? (or sit)”
and why.
Wherever the homilist wants.

Seriously, I have seen homilists who stood in one place, right behind the Ambo. I have seen some who stepped down to immediately in front of the congregation. I have seen the same homilist do both, at different times.

Other posts have shown that there is some “room” in the rules for the homilist to speak from wherever they choose, within reason.

I think it has to do with the style of the homilist, the topic, the surroundings and the occasion for the liturgy. Being closer to the people makes the homily somewhat more intimate and personal, and reminds me of Jesus preaching in the middle of a crowd rather than of God speaking from high on a mountain or from somewhere in the clouds.

I think if it is done in a natural way, so that it isn’t contrived or out of place, preaching the homily from places other than at the Ambo should not be a problem.
 
It would mean coming down to the people’s level. It may promote humility, but it promotes a false sense of equality.

You make a good point. I’ll reword it this way: The priesthood is a higher state of life than being part of the laity. Also, the celibate state of life is higher than the married state.
The celibate state is a higher state only if you’re a religious who has made a vow of chastity. A secular or diocesan priest does not make a vow of celibacy. He makes a promise of celibacy to his bishop. Canonically and theologically there is a difference.

When a religious makes a vow of chastity, which obviously includes celibacy, he or she becomes a consecrated person. When a secular man makes a promise of celibacy prior to his ordination, he does not become a consecrated man. The promise of celibacy is a discipline, not an act of consecration. Therefore, the Church does not see it as part of the sacrament of Holy Orders, but as something that is added for those men who are single and wish to become deacons. In actuality the promise is not made when one is ordained a priest. It is made at the the ordination to the diaconate, if the man is not married.

Whether the cleric (the proper term for deacons, priests and bishops) is married or not, he is not a lay person. Those who are ordained belong to the clerical state. The Church does not view it as a higher state in sanctity, but it is part of the hierarchy of the Church. In this regard, even deacons are part of the hierarchy of the Church.

As to preaching in the nave, the question has always been an interesting one, because the rubrics us the phrase “other suitable place”. The usual place from which to preach would be the chair or the ambo.

Some deacons, priests and bishops do preach from the center of the sanctuary or even from the floor of the nave. My guess, only a guess, is that it depends on the person and the layout of the church building. Some church buildings are wider than they are long. The pulpit or ambo is usually to one side of the sanctuary. When the congregation is wider than it is deep, then you feel as if you were in a corner and very far from the other side of the congregation. In those cases you tend to move toward the center, even is you have to stand in the nave.

I know that when I have preached in certain churches that are designed in a semi circle, I feel as if I’m in a corner and in the Churches that are longer than they are wide, the ambo is comfortable, because I can see everyone.

Another concern sometimes is the fact that the accustics of some churches are horrible. If you have never stood up in a sanctuary you have not had the experience of hearing your voice come back at you. You tend to look for a position where you can speak without having to listen to yourself.

The reason for moving into the nave may be personal preference, accustics, or better visual contact with the entire congregation due to the architecture of the building. Certainly, accustics and visual contact would count as good reasons to find a more suitable place.

But the rubrics are very clear that the homiliy should be delivered from the chair if the preacher is a priest or a bishop or from the ambo for all clerics: deacons, priests and bishops. However, the ruling has nothing to do with the difference between the clerical and the lay state. It is because the celebration of both liturgies: Word and Eucharist should take place in the sanctuary. This is the paradigm that was handed down to us from Judaism. If you go to a synogogue the entire liturgy takes place on the sanctuary. The rabi, cantor and other minsiters never leave the sanctuary as this is the Holy of Holies. This tradition was kept alive by the ancient Church.

I’m not sure if this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top