O
otjm
Guest
Considering that such has not really happened in 2000 years of history, I would not plan on seeing it in the next 10.
- Status
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
I know of at least one priest who is naturally a good speaker. And I was a Protestant for 17 years and there is definitely more of an emphasis on a good sermon in Protestantism because if you can’t preach well, people usually aren’t going to keep coming to your church. Of course, that doesn’t mean there was much of tremendous substance there either, just that perhaps the stories were interesting or there was some humor.
What I usually look for is substance, to learn something. Thus I think the emphasis should definitely swing back the other way to preaching on Catholic doctrine. Obviously, there is a wealth there on any number of subjects one can preach on. Further, I don’t think one would have to be a really good speaker to get something across of genuine value, and Catholics would be learning about their Faith at the same time.
I think the gospels are actually better as something to think about and meditate on in preparation for Holy Communion. And unless one is Bishop Fulton J. Sheen often there really is not much in a homily based on the gospels that is of real value.
Also, in Protestantism, the minister usually gets to preach on whatever scriptures he wants to,–whatever happens to catch his fancy. Priests don’t have that “advantage.”
I simply don’t think Priests should be restricted to preaching on the gospels, or having to tie in their homily to the gospels. If they want to, great, but I think they should have full leeway if they want to, say, preach on sanctifying grace, or purgatory, to do so (actually I think preaching Catholic doctrine should be the first priority), even if they aren’t able to tie it in to the gospel readings for that day. The gospels can stand on their own.
O
otjm
Guest
the issue ultimately goes back to Vatican 2 wanting to make Scripture more a part of our lives. Given that those in the Council had been around for a good bit of time in swhich sermons were given, I suspect tey knew what they were about.
It is not absolutley mandatory that no other issue be part of the homily apart from the readings, but the primary focus is to be on Scripture. As I said, purgatory is certainly a possible topic on the appropriate week; in fact, I think that the readings for next Sunday play into that. Whether or not that will be the issue of the homily, or touched on, will be up to the individual priest, although it could be argued that it is more about heaven than purgatory.
It just doesn’t make sense to me, if the readings are about the Eucharist, for example, to be giving a sermon on purgatory when that will come up in due time. And as someone else said, catechesis is important, but some of it needs to be done in a classroom. No one is ever going to get all the issues packed in if we go back to sermons unrelated to the readings; and the three year cycle was made to get more into Scripture and through it into matters of the faith. It ain’t broke, and it may need some polishing up and some tweaking (and training, to get to the real issue), but we don’t need to go back. We are already weak enough on Scripture but we are in the process of changing that. Let’s not get off that track.
Can it be better? Of course; there is always room for improvement.
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
No, in my experience, it is broke. It is a complete rarity to hear a homily of any substance. And if they aren’t going to be taught the faith in a homily, I doubt it’s going to happen in a classroom (which most Catholics wouldn’t attend) either. It reminds me of the emphasis on the unitive aspect of marriage as opposed to the procreative. There is a unitive aspect to marriage of course. But when it got emphasized over and above the procreative it seems as if the procreative aspect went by the wayside. So also emphasizing preaching based on the scripture readings leads priests to do just that. And so we get some forgettable thoughts about scripture, or personal anecdotes, and the doctrine developed over thousands of years goes by the wayside.
And it’s not so much the timing, it’s that too often preaching on Purgatory or the Eucharist is not done at all.
I also doubt if Catholics (most of whom aren’t going to Mass anymore anyway) are more immersed in scripture. There is something to be said for exposing Catholics to the same cycle of readings year after year as opposed to a three year cycle. Catholics are more apt to become familiar with the most important parts of scripture in a one year cycle.
P
peary
Guest
Wait until Arinze gets in LOL
O
otjm
Guest
given all the “smackdowns” that were predictied when Ratzinger was named to the office, I will not hold my breath.
O
otjm
Guest
I am not interested in arguing with you. I do not have universal experience; but I have been to Mass in the states of Utah, Oregon (multiple parishes), Washington, California and North Dakota. My experience is that we do not have many dynamic speakers, but shifting to a sermon isn’t going to change that. It is, however, my experience that I have heard a lot more of what you complain you don’t than would give anyone reason to “throw it all out”. Do they need more training? Some do; one or two are probably untrainable, and some could do the training. I have heard fantastic homilies that have made perfectly clear what is expected of a Catholic. Furthermore, it has been decided by Rome that they do not want the priest teaching doctrine, they want the priest opening up Scripture so that it guides our daily life. That does not mean either in my book or in my experience that doctrine does not come in; but the homily is not supposed to teach doctrine; it is supposed to teach us how to follow Christ.
There is a slight difference. One can know all the doctrine in the world and be a perfect atheist; one can know little doctrine but be a true follower of Christ.
Christ said “Come, follow me; pick up your cross and follow me.” He didn’t say Come, learn doctrine and be wise and knowledgeable".
I will be the first to say that catechesis has been worse than poor over the last 30 years or so; but that too is changing and I am doing my part to help change it. There are many things to catechize about and I do not mean in any way to minimize them; but the Mass is about worship, and about sending us forth to live as Christians and evangelize the world. And as Francis allegedly said, “Preach the Gospel, and if necessary, use words.”
I would much rather hear what the story of the Priodigal Son means to me - and by the way that is an excellent time to speak of Reconcilliation - but have you ever heard a homily about the other brother? I have, and that got under my skin way more than some lecture about Reconcilliation.
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
Well, the forums are a place for arguing, so if you’re going to respond to my post I’m going to (most likely) answer back. Part of the point of getting back to teaching doctrine is it doesn’t really require a dynamic speaker to do that. Just a priest who can learn the doctrine and convey it. I think it requires a whole other level of speaker to really open up scripture in a meaningful way. And even then at what point are Catholics going to learn doctrine?
I agree that hearing doctrine taught isn’t by itself going to make anyone a saint, but I would call it a good start. And since the doctrine is Christ’s, hearing it taught might move people along further in holiness than listening to what a particular priest happens to think about a particular passage of scripture.
If the priest happens also to be a dynamic speaker, then well and good. But as you’ve noticed, that isn’t often the case. So better that they teach something with a bit of substance. Or, at the very least, Priests ought to be taught to use the scripture as a springboard or a tool to teach doctrine, with the emphasis on the teaching of doctrine.
U
universalindult
Guest
*** Ranjith: ‘Rebellion’ Against Motu Proprio Gravely Sinful***
This story is huge, and you folks choose to argue over a minor point raised by the archbishop about homilies?
Pathetic.
This story is huge, and you folks choose to argue over a minor point raised by the archbishop about homilies?
Pathetic.
O
otjm
Guest
Well, it doesn’t require a dynamic speaker to give a decent homily, either. Opening up Scripture doesn’t require a whole other level of speaker so much as it requires one either read the resources and use them, or be steeped in Scripture. The ones who drive me nutty are the ones who don’t know what the point is they are trying to make; and it wouldn’t matter if it was a sermon on purgatory or a homily on next week’s Gospel; neither are going to get someone anywhere.
We had a lot of catechesis before Vatican 2, and we had a whole lot of people who defined being a follower of Christ as showing up for Mass on Sunday to fulfill their obligation - in just before the Gospel and out as soon as Communion started - and not committing a lot of mortal sins. Seems to me that following Christ is a bit more than that; and if you disagree, please read the story again of the young man who asked Christ what was necessary to gain heaven. The story didn’t stop with following the commandments.
You are really focused on doctrine. Go read my previous post; an atheist can learn doctrine. Filling people full of doctrine was nice, but didn’t get them past the bare minimum. I think Christ calls us to more than the minimum. Note: I am not anti doctrine; it has its place and is important; but it is not as important as knowing how to be a better Christ centered Catholic. There is a reason that the Church wanted a change. It is time we get that change fulfilled.
Again, how many parishes have you really experienced? You seem to be saying that none of them are doing much of anything; and I am suggesting between the lines that it isn’t as bad as you make it out to be.
R
rien
Guest
The rebellion of some bishops is why I suspect Rome hesitated on this. IMO the Catholic church is in defacto schism in many dioceses and almost some whole countries. This only spotlights that.
But demand for the TLM seems to have been tepid since the MP. One post here notes a big dropff in attendance after the first week.
IMO the MP will end up just a blip in church history. Patrly for reasons of bishops refusing to obey - but moreso IMO from a lack of interest generally among Catholics.
But demand for the TLM seems to have been tepid since the MP. One post here notes a big dropff in attendance after the first week.
IMO the MP will end up just a blip in church history. Patrly for reasons of bishops refusing to obey - but moreso IMO from a lack of interest generally among Catholics.
O
otjm
Guest
One of the things that is hard for some to understand is that whatever is happening in the US in the Church is not necessarily indicative of anywhere else in the world. Issues of the SSPX, while they seem to get a lot of attention and comment, are nowhere near as ingrained and dramatic in the US as they are say, in Brazil or in France. I think there is a presumption among some that the MP was aimed at the US, but given the very small handfull of SSPX adhearants in the US as opposed, say to France, would lead one to consider that Benedict 16 was more concerned about the status of the Faith in Europe than in the US. It is the Dominicans in Holland who have fallen of the edge of the Earth, not in the US (and not to say we don’t have our own brand of crazies here) on the other end of the spectrum; and it is in major parts of Europe that weekly Mass attendance is at or below 5%. It is the European Union that is trying to rewrite history and write the Church out of it completely. It is not that Benedict 16 has no concerns for the US, but rather that I think we may have an overblown sense of our place in the world, per the Church.
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
Hey, universalindult, thanks for the comment
Yea, I brought it up because the archbishop brought it up in his article. And, by the way, whether or not doctrine is taught in homilies is not a minor point.
Feel free to bring up another point from the article if you want to.
I will now continue to make more of my pathetic comments on this issue.
B
Brennan_Doherty
Guest
I am not disagreeing that knowing doctrine is a bare minimum; however, it is foundational. And if Catholics aren’t being taught the faith at Mass I don’t think most of them are going to run out and get it elsewhere.
Showing up to Mass, not committing mortal sins, going to confession if you do would probably constitute a huge revival in terms of the way the Catholic faith is practiced nowadays. Pre-Vatican II Catholics are often criticized as being merely “Pray, pay, and obey” and yet now we seem to have quite a large number of Catholics who neither pray, pay, or obey.
I have experienced a number of parishes, probably not as many as you, however.
It reminds me of the way fasting on Fridays was done away with and instead one could substitute doing a good work instead. Sounds good at first, right? Going beyond just the bare minimum of abstaining from meat and launching out into something higher. Yet, in practical terms, what has happened? Most Catholics aren’t even aware of the requirement for a good work, and pretty much all abstention from meat on Fridays has been dropped.
I just hope we can get back to teaching the bare minimum (as it is foundational) and then Catholics can use that to go for more.
R
rien
Guest
I agree - the Pope has no armies - or whatever Stalin said.
But basically this tells me that Rome has no control. The universal shephard is maybe not? I think the reluctance of Rome to issue the MP is being played out.
It does call into question, IMO, basic catholic teaching/dogma. I am no longer Catholic but this is playing out in a way that reaffirms my decision to leave the church. One day I simply stopped believing in the church’s teachings on the Papacy. Seems like I am in good company with more than a few in the hierarchy if the archbishop’s comments are taken at face.
- Status