Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

avatar

Wilkes to Preach the Homily Again

February 21st, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Paul Wilkes, an author who promotes “Cafeteria Catholicism”, will once again deliver the homily at a few Diocese of Rochester churches. In 2009, Mr. Wilkes preached at Church of the Assumption. This time around, Wilkes will be preaching the homily (yes, the homily — despite the Church’s frequent admonitions that lay persons may not preach it) at three east side parishes: St. Louis, Church of the Transfiguration, and St. Catherine of Siena.

From the St. Louis bulletin:

See this previous post for reasons why inviting Mr. Wilkes to preach is a bad idea.

I trust that these priests received prior permission from Bishop Clark for this to take place, and that the bishop has instituted Mr. Wikes as one of his “authorized lay preachers” so that this may (allegedly) be legal?


Side note: I apologize if some of the formatting is out of whack in these links. When we moved the old posts over from Blogger, many of the quotation marks, paragraph alignments, and videos were distorted in the process.

Tags:

|

10 Responses to “Wilkes to Preach the Homily Again”

  1. avatar Eliza10 says:

    “A dinner for teens and their families will be held after Mass”. Well they know how to get to parents. Disobedience to the Magisterium is celebrated with the teens who know no better, and with their parents who have few (or no) places to turn to provide for their teens a community of believers. This is as good as it gets in the DOR for parents who seek Catholic fellowship for their teens.

  2. avatar Monk says:

    Abuse of our children in the DoR is not just physical.

  3. avatar annonymouse says:

    Which part of the Code of Canon Law do the pastors of these parishes not understand?:

    Can. 766 Lay persons can be permitted to preach in a church or oratory, if necessity requires it in certain circumstances or it seems advantageous in particular cases, according to the prescripts of the conference of bishops and without prejudice to can. 767, §1.

    Can. 767 §1. Among the forms of preaching, the homily, which is part of the liturgy itself and is reserved to a priest or deacon, is preeminent; in the homily the mysteries of faith and the norms of Christian life are to be explained from the sacred text during the course of the liturgical year.

    This is an outright abuse, and Bishop Clark has no option under canon law other than to stop it. Unless, of course, he chooses to look the other way.

  4. Here is the text of my brief Amazon review for Wilkes’s agenda-filled book Excellent Catholic Parishes:

    That Wilkes includes both an entry for Chicago’s Old St. Pat’s, a veritable showcase of bizarre, 70’s-style liturgical abuses, and a reflection on liturgical dance, an innovation absolutely prohibited from celebrations of the Western/Latin rite (see “Notitiae” 11 [1975] 202-205, Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship), should give you some indication of the ideological thread that runs through this book. The parishes highlighted here are precisely the sort of horizontally-focused places that prompted Pope Benedict’s pending and much-needed “reform of the reform.”

  5. avatar Matt says:

    From a DOR Priest when I brought up the fact that even Bishop Clark’s ‘local norms’ don’t allowed the nun to preach the ENTIRE homily:

    “I’m good at my job…and DON’T go quoting Canon Law or the GIRM at me, as if I haven’t read it. I find it insulting.”

    (Well, gee, Father, that seems to imply that you’re deliberately and knowingly ignoring canon law…)

  6. avatar Eliza10 says:

    “I’m good at my job…and DON’T go quoting Canon Law or the GIRM at me, as if I haven’t read it. I find it insulting.”

    That’s an everyday example of typical DOR arrogance.

    Being “personally insulted” is a handy way to discount the person you are speaking to, and a sure way to distract from the topic at hand, and avoid a real discussion to boot. This should work; if not, there is always the other tried-and-true DOR method: demonize the person who dares question your agenda.

    These methods are NOT employed by people of good will…

  7. avatar Matt says:

    I always like to point out that there’s a big difference between “being offensive” and saying something that leads someone to “feel offended”

  8. avatar Snowshoes says:

    Of course, in all charity, and to save OUR souls, we must address the abuse, once us confirmed Catlicks know about it, to the proper authorities, preserving the principle of subsidiarity, from the pastor up to and including the appropriate Vatican Congregation, as necessary.

    If we are caught in such a Mass, (if we have prior warning, we should try to attend a different Sunday Mass with a priest or deacon homilist), we should leave at least for the balance of the “abuse which is occurring where the homily should be”, and go out and kneel on the steps of the church and pray in reparation our our sins and the sins of all the world, and for the salvation of those responsible for the abuse. OUAI! IDOU, if the majority of the congregation would do this, the abuse would end. St. Peter, First Pope, Pray for us. Spread the word.

  9. avatar annonymouse says:

    Rather than quote canon law or the GIRM, Matt, you should go to the arrogant priest and explain that the faithful have RIGHTS! We have the RIGHT to a homily preached at Sunday liturgy, not by a nun or book author, but by an ordained priest or deacon. This is about a violation of our RIGHTS as the Christian Faithful!!

  10. avatar tantumblogo says:

    I thought it was against the rubrics to have a lay person say the homily? In fact, I’m sure it is an abuse – this is not permitted. Fr. Z has a post on this just today.


-Return to main page-