Testimonial During Homily?

[RunningLawyer]

Hello,

I know this subject has come up in the past but I can’t get my search function to work.

At the start of the Homily, a priest said a few words about the subject being stewardship. He then introduced one of the parishioners who came up and delivered a lengthy talk about what brought him to this particular parish. It was a very nice talk, mixed with light humor and three personal stories. When he finished he received applause. It was in good taste, but I didn’t think that a layperson could make comments like that during the homily.

It was clear that the priests remarks were only one of introduction. The layperson’s testimonial was the main event. I did not think this was appropriate for the Mass, particularly the humor and applause. It had more of a feel of an evangelical protestant service. My wife thinks I am being too picky, but I don’t want our sacred traditions being eroded.

 

[japhy]

At the start of the Homily, a priest said a few words about the subject being stewardship. He then introduced one of the parishioners who came up and delivered a lengthy talk about what brought him to this particular parish. It was a very nice talk, mixed with light humor and three personal stories. When he finished he received applause. It was in good taste, but I didn’t think that a layperson could make comments like that during the homily.

It was clear that the priests remarks were only one of introduction. The layperson’s testimonial was the main event. I did not think this was appropriate for the Mass, particularly the humor and applause. It had more of a feel of an evangelical protestant service. My wife thinks I am being too picky, but I don’t want our sacred traditions being eroded.

The testimonial given should have been relegated to the end of Mass, with the other announcements.

On a Sunday, the bishop or priest or deacon is obligated to give a homily – that is, a sermon which draws from the Scriptures read at Mass – unless he cannot for a grave reason. A homily can only be given be one who has been ordained; that means it cannot be a nun or a lay person. It is always an ordained male who gives the homily. This is prescribed very clearly in multiple documents, including Canon Law (CIC 767). Here is just a small sampling of what other authoritative documents have to say on the matter:

Sacramentum Caritatis, 46: Given the importance of the word of God, the quality of homilies needs to be improved. … Hence ordained ministers must “prepare the homily carefully, based on an adequate knowledge of Sacred Scripture”. Generic and abstract homilies should be avoided.

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, “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.”

Redemptionis Sacramentum, 74: If the need arises for the gathered faithful to be given instruction or testimony by a layperson in a church concerning the Christian life, it is altogether preferable that this be done outside Mass. Nevertheless, for serious reasons it is permissible that this type of instruction or testimony be given after the Priest has proclaimed the Prayer after Communion. This should not become a regular practice, however. Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily, nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account.

Ecclesia de Mysterio, Art. 3, §1: The homily, therefore, during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, must be reserved to the sacred minister, Priest or Deacon to the exclusion of the non-ordained faithful, even if these should have responsibilities as “pastoral assistants” or catechists in whatever type of community or group. This exclusion is not based on the preaching ability of sacred ministers nor their theological preparation, but on that function which is reserved to them in virtue of having received the Sacrament of Holy Orders.

Inaestimabile Donum, 3: The purpose of the homily is to explain to the faithful the Word of God proclaimed in the readings, and to apply its message to the present. Accordingly the homily is to be given by the priest or the deacon.

 

[RunningLawyer]

Thank you for this excellent summary of references. By the way, I did communicate my concerns to the priest before I read your post. He maintains that as long as he says a few words about the scripture he may then invite a lay person to speak. I disagree with him, especially after reading your post.

This is the first time I have ever seen this happen at this particular parish. I will pray for my priest.

Thanks again.

Ralph

 

[japhy]

Thank you for this excellent summary of references. By the way, I did communicate my concerns to the priest before I read your post. He maintains that as long as he says a few words about the scripture he may then invite a lay person to speak. I disagree with him, especially after reading your post.

Thanks again.

You’re welcome. Please refer your priest to RS 74 (which I quoted above).

 

[agapewolf]

Instead of being so angry, how about thinking of the testimonial as a “prop” for the homily?

Our priest sometimes uses a prop…like a sign, a bird’s nest, a picture, or something to drive home a point.

the “testimonial” was the prop, just because the nature of the prop was a speaker, does not make it an abuse. There is nothing wrong with humor. Applause may be over the top, but the time that I’ve seen it following a speaker was just people’s natural reaction of encouragement and appreciation.

Also, all of the references to the documents are not completely exhaustive of all situations of grave pastoral need…

I know of a person who is a deacon candidate, he is an instituted acolyte. He has special permission from the Bishop to preach because there were no spanish speaking homilists… he only did it occasionally, and had the “homily” written down and approved before hand. He has already taken a vow of obedience to the Church.

 

[japhy]

Instead of being so angry, how about thinking of the testimonial as a “prop” for the homily? Our priest sometimes uses a prop…like a sign, a bird’s nest, a picture, or something to drive home a point.

Who’s being angry? Anyway, a speech given by another person in the place set aside for the homily is not a “prop”. You’re making excuses, pushing the “spirit” of the law as far as can be done.

Also, all of the references to the documents are not completely exhaustive of all situations of grave pastoral need…

I know of a person who is a deacon candidate, he is an instituted acolyte. He has special permission from the Bishop to preach because there were no spanish speaking homilists… he only did it occasionally, and had the “homily” written down and approved before hand. He has already taken a vow of obedience to the Church.

See, that’s a very particular instance that you have documentation backing up the Bishop’s permission. Are we to assume that there is permission given for every rule-bending/breaking we witness in the liturgy? That’s a bit too liberal for me.

 

[agapewolf]

I wasn’t referring to the speaker instance when speaking about the acolyte. I was rebutting some of the bolded parts of the documents you quoted.

Not everything is as it seems, not everything that appears might be an “abuse” is.

My “angry” comments were not directed at you, and possibly should not have been mentioned here, because I don’t see any “anger” displayed here… however, I see it many places on this forum when people are shouting “abuse” at something that isn’t at all.

I am in no way making excuses for anyone. I don’t know the priests intentions…but my parish did something similar…the priests gave a small homily about stewardship, and the speaker did an amazing job, really did serve as a prop. I’m not making up excuses at all. It was very clear how it functioned.

and do not accuse me of “pushing the spirit of the law”:. You have me labeled already.I am all for obedience with the Mass. I’m tired of people (and this is in no way reference to you or your comments here) trying to be more Catholic than the pope. Again, not in reference to you at all, but this is exasperating. There have been people here admitting that they travel around Mass to mass hunting for abuses.

I don’t want to hijak the thread, and I am not interested in getting into this argument about what “side” and so forth. I’m just defending myself here.

 

[japhy]

I wasn’t referring to the speaker instance when speaking about the acolyte. I was rebutting some of the bolded parts of the documents you quoted.

I am in no way making excuses for anyone. I don’t know the priests intentions…but my parish did something similar…the priests gave a small homily about stewardship, and the speaker did an amazing job, really did serve as a prop. I’m not making up excuses at all. It was very clear how it functioned.

Redemptionis Sacramentum 74 is very clear about when and how lay testimony can be given at Mass. It does not give permission to use lay presentations as “props”.

I’m tired of people (and this is in no way reference to you or your comments here) trying to be more Catholic than the pope.

I’m just trying to be as Catholic as Francis Cardinal Arinze.

 

[RunningLawyer]

Agapewolf, I am the original poster. I reviewed my post and response and do not see how you could interpret what I wrote as anger. I suggest it is you who may have some issue. I even specifically mentioned that the layperson’s talk was well received. I just suggest that it was inappropriate to be given during the time for the homily.

I would like to know the references to which you refer.

Also, please rest assured that I think very highly of the Parish which I am now attending, and the clergy. When I mentioned my concern to the Priest I did so with respect, and we are now in friendly dialogue.

 

[agapewolf]

Agapewolf, I am the original poster. I reviewed my post and response and do not see how you could interpret what I wrote as anger. I suggest it is you who may have some issue. I even specifically mentioned that the layperson’s talk was well received. I just suggest that it was inappropriate to be given during the time for the homily.

I would like to know the references to which you refer.

Also, please rest assured that I think very highly of the Parish which I am now attending, and the clergy. When I mentioned my concern to the Priest I did so with respect, and we are now in friendly dialogue.

And please, before suggesting to me that I have some issue, read my other posts. You will see why I brought up such an issue, and also my acknowledgement that it didn’t belong here, so relax.