Two homilies?!?!?

[tcaseyrochester]

I have posted on some liturgical and theological abuses I am dealing with on a couple other threads.

Last weekend, I needed to attend a Saturday Mass to allow my participation in a Sunday morning activity. My parish, Resurrection of Fairport, NY has a 5pm Mass, and another Fairport NY parish, Assumption, has a 4pm Mass.

I decided to check out the 4pm Mass at Assumption. I thought I might find some temporary respite from the irritating “stuff” I am dealing with at my own parish.

I was wrong.

Way wrong.

The “inclusive language” at Assumption was even worse than at Resurrection.

How?

The word “Him” was stricken from the readings, not just in reference to God, but in reference to Jesus!

Jesus is not to be referred to as Him? I guess the “Son of Man” is right out too .

Then a curious thing happened.

The presider (sorry I forgot his name) stood up to give his homily. His homily was excellent! Dealt with Fatherhood (it was Father’s day) and related our earthly fatherhood with God’s Fatherhood.

How curious, I thought. A few minutes prior Jesus was not permitted to be referred to as “Him.”

Then another extraordinary thing happened. The presider sat down, a woman arose from the front row, walked to the altar, and gave a *second “homily” :ehh: . * I do not know if she was the local Pastoral Associate, a nun, or simply a member of the parish.

I was amazed .

Her homily dealt with saving the church via all the “change” the church is undergoing .

Gee, I didn’t know the church needed saving. Furthermore, an outward denial from within the Liturgy of Jesus’s earthly gender is apparently what is required to save the church, that and the absence of the Sacrament of Holy Orders in the homilist, of course .

Odd thing is I got the distinct impression that the Priest didn’t buy into either the “inclusive language” stuff nor did he look too pleased about the second homily (Note: He was not the Pastor).

Alas, my hope of respite dashed. I fear The Diocese of Rochester may be beyond all help :banghead: .

Please pray for us!

 

[Paul_Francis]

I am disheartened to hear of the troubles in Rochester. I interviewed for a job in your area last fall; after hearing of these incidents, it may have been good for me that I did not get accepted. Perhaps the Lord knew that what was best for me after all.

 

[justme]

This is acceptable I believe… I do not like it either but Bishop Clark sent out a letter stating that after the priest gives his homily, or a shorter talk that the Bishop called a homilite, that a second person is then allowed to give a talk…

I think the USCCB has also stated that this is ok, but I could be wrong on this…

This is something the Bishop has done to stop the homilies given by the non-ordained, namely women, which I think he likes but knows he can not get around… This way he can get around it.

 

[mikworld]

I can’t remember where I read it, but it was somewhere official…
A lay person is permitted to give reflections as long as the pastor reviews what they are going to say and has knowledge that what the individual has to say will be in line with church teaching. The liturgical norm for a reflection is for the ordained minister to read the gospel, offer a short homily, and then invite the one to offer the refllection foward. They do this all the time with seminarians and students preparing for the permanent diaconate.
Sounds like this priest was perfectly in line.
God Bless,

Justin

 

[Servulus]

In August of 1997, 12 Vatican Congregations jointly published a document called: “INSTRUCTION ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COLLABORATION OF THE NON-ORDAINED FAITHFUL IN THE SACRED MINISTRY OF PRIEST”

The Holy Father, in Audience of the 13th of August,1997 approved that Instruction and ordered its promulgation.

Section 3 of the Instruction deals specifically with homilies. It says, in part:

"§ 1. The homily, being an eminent form of preaching, . . . also forms part of the liturgy.

The homily, therefore, during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, must be reserved to the sacred minister, Priest or Deacon(69) 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. For the same reason the diocesan Bishop cannot validly dispense from the canonical norm(70) since this is not merely a disciplinary law but one which touches upon the closely connected functions of teaching and sanctifying.

For the same reason, the practice, on some occasions, of entrusting the preaching of the homily to seminarians or theology students who are not clerics(71) is not permitted. Indeed, the homily should not be regarded as a training for some future ministry.

All previous norms which may have admitted the non-ordained faithful to preaching the homily during the Holy Eucharist are to be considered abrogated by canon 767, § 1.(72)

§ 2. A form of instruction designed to promote a greater understanding of the liturgy, including personal testimonies, or the celebration of eucharistic liturgies on special occasions (e.g. day of the Seminary, day of the sick etc.) is lawful, of in harmony with liturgical norms, should such be considered objectively opportune as a means of explicating the regular homily preached by the celebrant priest. Nonetheless, these testimonies or explanations may not be such so as to assume a character which could be confused with the homily."

This seems to apply in the situation you described. Hope that helps.

 

[Bobby_Jim]

I just have to say… I know the rules are that only the priest or deacon gives the homily, so that’s what should be done.

But I have heard non-ordained people give homilies before… some of them are quite bad. But I’ve heard some really good ones too. The good ones were from people with degrees in Theology or Scripture, and weren’t really pushing an agenda, other than to give the pastor a weekend off from writing a homily. Honestly better than many of the homilies I’ve heard out of our priests.

 

[tcaseyrochester]

justme:

This is acceptable I believe… I do not like it either but Bishop Clark sent out a letter stating that after the priest gives his homily, or a shorter talk that the Bishop called a homilite, that a second person is then allowed to give a talk…

Thanks for the post, two comments come to mind,

1.) I believe the practive of “homilites” as you cal them is specifically excluded in the recent “Redemptionis Sacramentum.” Lay commentary on the readings is permitted, but not in conjuction with the Homily (i.e. after Mass has ended).

2.) Bishop Clark has ignored the practice going on at Resurrection, where a Lay person gives a Homily every other week and the Priest sits and listens. I am aware of a great number of people whom have complained about this practice to the Diocese to no avail.

 

[tcaseyrochester]

Bobby Jim:

… some of them are quite bad. But I’ve heard some really good ones too.

Thanks for the reply Jim, but I really do not think it is an issue of whether they are good homilies or bad homilies, the issue is that the Diocese of Rochester continues to ignore the Canons of the Catholic Church.

 

[T.A.Stobie_SFO]

Make sure your bishop knows.

I have seen cases where people have claimed approval by the bishop for something he was opposed to.

If the bishop allows it, go to the papal nuncio, who will get the Vatican involved.

 

[pnewton]

justme:

This is acceptable I believe… I do not like it either but Bishop Clark sent out a letter stating that after the priest gives his homily, or a shorter talk that the Bishop called a homilite, that a second person is then allowed to give a talk…

definition

homi-lite - like a homily with 96% less truth.

homily, homilite, reflection - a rose by any other name…

 

[eLiturgist]

justme:

This is acceptable I believe… I do not like it either but Bishop Clark sent out a letter stating that after the priest gives his homily, or a shorter talk that the Bishop called a homilite, that a second person is then allowed to give a talk…

I think the USCCB has also stated that this is ok, but I could be wrong on this…

This is something the Bishop has done to stop the homilies given by the non-ordained, namely women, which I think he likes but knows he can not get around… This way he can get around it.

Sorry, justme, you seem to be misremembering something here. The quotes from Redemptionis Sacaramentum seem pretty clear. If you get a chance, could you dig up a reference to the USCCB document? Thanks.

You have a nice resoning about how this could be a way for Bishop Clark to “get around” something he disagrees with.

 

[MBS1]

Heck, we often have a lay person give the “homily” without any message from the priest - who is sitting up front listening. At least you get something from the priest. So, while it is not “two homilies”, it is not the priest either.

MBS1