17 Comments
Comment deleted
Aug 11, 2022
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Yep. Some lay preachers would be an absolutely treasure, like Stefanick, mentioned in this thread. Some would be an absolute cancer. Cynical me thinks the latter would dominate the former if this were some universal program.

Expand full comment

We live in a golden age of lay preaching, as witnessed by so many great podcasts and YouTube channels. By all means listen to these. But preaching at mass is a fundamentally liturgical function, where Jesus explains the scriptures as on the road to Emmaus. This should always be done by the priest standing in place of Christ in the liturgy.

This is such a terrible idea I bet Francis does it.-1-

Expand full comment

The analysis is not about preaching at Mass, but about regulating and normalizing the other kinds of lay preaching that happen in the Church.

Expand full comment

That is true, but you did tease the idea at the end. And do you really think the Spirit of Vatican II crowd will be satisfied with lay preachers everywhere except at mass?

Expand full comment

Woops. If I teased that idea, I certainly did not mean to! My apologies!

Expand full comment

Actually, reading it properly, I don’t think you did. Maybe my spidey senses are too on edge.

Expand full comment

Understandable!

Expand full comment

This strikes me as a terrible idea. A lot of you said about lay preaching is true of clerical preaching - some do it really well, others do it poorly, some become celebrities in a problematic way, some are more orthodox than others... If the Church can't effectively regulate it for priests then how can we expect her to do so for lay people? The main thing I envision here is some orthodox and inspiring lay person in Chicago being disallowed to speak in public about his/her faith, to everyone's detriment. In my experience (and R. R. Reno said something similar, look up his piece "Catholicism after 2018"), the best quality stuff is orthodox but not part of the institutional Church. (eg, the pillar. And FOCUS and Catholic Answers and a million other thriving apostolates.)

Expand full comment

This is basically equivalent to the licensing regimes by states. This exclusively would be used to stop lay preaching, not encourage it.

The end result of these suggestions is a denial of the call of all Christians to evangelize. We have a group of lay preachers: all confirmed Catholics. We don't really need them to preach more in churches but in their families and workplaces. And they don't need special permission from anyone to talk about Jesus.

Expand full comment

***A robust “office of preacher” might also rein in some problematic excesses already experienced in the Church. ***

I tend to agree with this sentiment. There's already the rise of the lay preacher happening in the Church and while some are refreshing and edifying, some voices need official suppressing. My daughter put me on to the ministry of Chris Stefanick a few years ago and he strikes me as having a definite charism of lay preacher.

Expand full comment

“The quality of the lay preaching can be decidedly …mixed .” Isn’t that true of clerical preaching as well?

I doubt more Vatican control over summer conferences is what the Holy Spirit is urging.

These conferences bear great fruit and do not need over sight like the JP II Institue received.

Please judge by the fruit. This ia season of the laity. Look at Ascension Press, Halo. Focus,SOP Hard as nails, and The Pillar All full of fruit. Where is the fruit from Vatican initiatives?

Expand full comment

"Where is the fruit from Vatican initiatives?"

That is the correct question. But we also need to define what constitutes fruit. People showing up to random events does not constitute fruit. Making and forming disciples of Jesus is what fruit looks like - a difficult thing to measure, but easy to see. All those lay initiatives clearly create and form disciples. I think Rome and dioceses misunderstand what fruit actually looks like.

Expand full comment

I certainly hope Francis does not establish a role for lay preachers. Right enough, he is drawn to bad ideas like a moth to a flame.

Lay preachers already exist, they are called 'Protestants'.

Such a move would be another blow against the necessity of the Priest who, since the 2nd Vatican Council, has seen almost every aspect of his crucial role and identity farmed out to lay people.

Few really know what Priests are for anymore. I certainly didn't, until I took an interest in the traditional faith. A Priest has many roles,. but primarily he is concerned with offering sacrifice.

In the modern mainstream Church, recognition of the Priest's role is greatly diminished. Lay people can do nearly everything he can - and often do, while the elderly Priest dozes in his seat.

The necessity and centrality of the Priest is not widely known in the modern Church. One reason, I am sure, why vocations are lacklusture in so very many places.

In the traditional Mass, when the Priest hands the Server his Biretta, just prior to the start of Mass, the Server actually kisses the Priest's hand when receiving the item. A way of marking out that the Priest's hands have been specially anointed specifically to offer Sacrifice and appropriately handle the Eucharist.

All this meaning, symbology and - most significantly - coherence is lost in the modern Mass, where every Tom, Dick and Harry handles the Eucharist.

Expand full comment

I can appreciate your liking of the old Latin Mass, but I like many other Catholics have a longing for a more ancient form of Eucharist that models Jesus and the Last Supper where the Priest embodies Jesus in the rite of Thanksgiving.

In the post Pentecost era, the focus didn't seem to be on the Apostles as Priests but as preachers/evangelists. Priests served the faithful but it was the evangelists that went out and drew people to Christ. That charism seems to have faded over the years and Priests were expected to be all and everything. I think there is a place for al the charisms today.

Expand full comment

I don't think there is a more ancient form of the mass, it feels more like you are projecting ideas from the 1960s onto the early Church. What would this "rite of Thanksgiving" be giving thanks for, except for the sacrifice of Calvary? Why indeed would anyone bother to model the Last Supper unless it were the first sacrifice made present?

1 Corinthians 11 is the best picture of how the early Church celebrated the Eucharist, just a few years after the Resurrection. There were some people messing it up even then, but the most important bit is Paul underlining that Jesus said to do this not in "thanksgiving" of me, but in "remembrance" - that is making present - of me. This was, is and ever shall be the Church's understanding of the Eucharist.

Expand full comment

I just want to take 30 seconds to make sure that everyone on the thread knows the etymology of "Eucharist" (carry on.)

Expand full comment

This is an interesting idea.. however the quickest way to kill a good thing is to subject it to bureaucratic oversight and credentialing. Dioceses are no exception.

This is the thing I have never understood about people arguing that lay preaching in Mass is a good idea. (Note: JD is NOT arguing for that) for goodness sake, no one is stopping you going to your local piazza/shopping centre/community garden/whatever and preaching whatever you want. A YouTube channel is not that hard for a boomer to manage. But you don’t have a right to a captive audience trying to fulfil their Sunday obligation to spout your theory about Jesus the nice fuzzy rabbi you learned in that one theology summer course you did in the 70s. Its bad enough when Fr used to let random spokespeople from various charities get up in the homily time and ask us for money. I see less of that at my current parish thank goodness.

Expand full comment