Once again, in case ANYONE thinks I am PREACHING ...

1) In Case Someone Thinks I am Preaching ..., 2) Once again, in case ANYONE thinks I am PREACHING ...

First, I'm here commenting on:

Only Priests and Deacons May Preach. Why Is That?
March 3, 2016 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2016/03/only-priests-and-deacons-may-preach-why-is-that.html

Dwight (novus ordo possible clergy)

Women are not forbidden from preaching because they’re women. They’re excluded because they’re not priests or deacons.

[Omitting reference to a non-Pope]

The larger question remains however, “Why may only the ordained clergy preach at Mass?”

Me

Good question.

Dwight (novus ordo possible clergy)

First there is the practical point that the ordained clergy have the theological training and training in homiletics to equip them to preach. Certainly in the past when few of the laity were theological qualified to reliably teach the truth, preaching was rightly reserved to the clergy.

There are some strong argument now, however, to allow lay people to preach. Firstly, more lay people than ever before are theologically trained. Lots of lay folks have Master’s degrees in theology and above. Should they not be allowed to preach?

Me

Good point.

Except when the laymen were trained at institutions like Fordham University, where a "Father Jason" was apparently trained to apostasy.

That part is also an argument against ordaining people who come from Fordham University.

On this "Father Jason" character, see the CMI page and my comment:

Priest calls CMI heretical
by Lita Cosner
Published: 27 February 2016 (GMT+10)
http://creation.com/cmi-heretical

New blog on the kid : As Someone Said : You Catch More Flies with Honey than with Vinegar
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2016/02/as-someone-said-you-catch-more-flies.html

Dwight (novus ordo possible clergy)

However, when it comes to Mass there is more going on than simply teaching the faith. The whole Mass is a liturgical expression of the incarnation. Every aspect of the Mass is a celebration and recognition of the incarnation, passion, death and resurrection of the Lord. Indeed, it is through the Mass that this mystery comes alive and is applied to the everyday needs of the faithful.

It is necessary to get away from the utilitarian understanding of the Mass.

Me

Indeed. If anyone ever got there.

BUT the sermon is not a liturgic part of the Mass.

In Orthodox Church, sermon is put off till after Mass. Sometimes it is rather simply letting people who have questions about Gospel and Epistle ask the priest.

In Catholic Church, sermon after Gospel was introduced (at least large scale) at Council of Tours, 813. Why so? Because the Latin of the Gospel had, about ten years earlier, ceased to be intelligible.

Alcuin had reformed the pronunciation of Latin, which in Gaul was drifting off from Classical one and approaching the Gallo-Romance languages. So, pronunciation became more intelligible to priests from the rest of the Latin West in about 800, but at same time less intelligible to parishioners in Gaul. It was as if a Protestant sect had been reading from a Wycliff Bible, but with modern pronunciation, and suddenly had decided to read as Wycliff pronounced it centuries earlier (which would not have had the kind of purpose the reform of Alcuin had) : the people would very quickly cease to understand what was being read to them. And that is what happened around 800 in Gaul. Hence the decree 813 that Gospel should be read in Latin, and then a sermon in vernacular should explain what had been said.

That is why the priest (or deacon, if a deacon read Gospel) takes off part of the vestments before holding the sermon (or at least that is how things were explained in Lefebvrian seminaries, or those of Christ King, Sovereign Priest - I was earlier a friend of one who had been to both seminaries before becoming finally a married layman). The sermon is, properly speaking, not a fully liturgc act. The decree of 813 says sermons should be held on Sundays and major feast days - the most important Gospels must be translated. Not that it should be held every day, even if Mass is said every day, except Good Friday.

However, since sermon is supposed to be an explanation of the Gospel, and since Gospel is indeed a liturgic part of the Mass in the most full sence, and as close to Incarnation as the Catechumens get, those who had to leave Mass before the Sacrifice properly speaking, it is meet that sermon should usually be spoken by the one who liturgically read the Gospel.

There seem to have been derogations. St Francis certainly preached, and the question is, was it always outside Mass (as after Vespers or before Vespers)? Or if in Mass, was he ordained a deacon, or was he enjoying a derogation?

I don't know the answer.

I do know that myself I am NOT preaching in Holy Mass, have never done so, and probably never will.

I treat theology as a matter I write about - among other matters, and according to the competence I seem to have, and when not sure, I check or refrain from writing.

But it is a bad idea to imagine that just because I am a layman, I don't understand theology. It is also a bad idea to think that, just because I have no degree in theology, I don't understand theology. I studied it BESIDE my university studies, and sometimes with very good help from them. Also, through material from French conservative theologians, like Lefebvrians, like the Englishman in France or Provence, Father Bryan Houghton, like Dom Gérard, like earlier writers like those of Dictionnaire Apologétique de la Foi Catholique (though it is weak on inerrantism). Or like Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre by Michael Davies (who was a layman, but it was a priest of SSPX who gave me the book). Or, more recently, St Thomas' Summa online and Catholic Encyclopedia online.

It is thus an extremely bad idea to consider the theological parts of my blogs as my intruding on the right of ordained clergy to hold sermons. I am not doing so. I am writing, not speaking in Church. Also, some parts are more properly speaking grammatical or philosophical than theological. Obviously Dietrich von Hildebrand* was a Catholic philosopher and Heinz-Lothar Barth* is, like myself, though a better and more complete one, a Classical Scholar.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Friday after III Lord's Day in Lent
4.III.2016

PS, Here is by the way another layman, who sometimes writes very well on Christian subjects:

NCR : Blogs : Mark Shea : This is the Gigantic Secret of the Christian
by Mark Shea 03/01/2016 Comments (3)
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/mark-shea/the-gigantic-secret/

At the end, he cites Gilbert Keith Chesterton* and John Ronald Reuel Tolkien*./HGL

* If you didn't get it, both of them are/were laymen. (Repeat for the PS.)