Is it me or MOST Churches in America will preach about how Men & kids should honor God specifically but no sermons about how Women should act ?

[Paidiske]

True, but the central argument is that rhetoric and persuasion are always at play, whether we admit it or not. Once this is recognized it becomes incumbent upon us to undertake "sustained and serious reflection on both the art and the ethics of persuasive religious speech." Or in other words, I would say that the first step towards ethical homilies and evangelization is admitting that persuasion and rhetoric are at play. Once that occurs the most egregious abuses have already been avoided.

If my comments came across as denying that persuasion or rhetoric are at play, then I didn't make myself clear. But one can be persuasive without being prescriptive.

 

[zippy2006]

If my comments came across as denying that persuasion or rhetoric are at play, then I didn't make myself clear. But one can be persuasive without being prescriptive.

Okay, sure, but the discussion grew out of a consideration of the relationship between the shepherd and the sheep. The article speaks about rhetoric as having an end or aim with respect to another person's behavior, for example, "Insofar as respectful listening facilitates this encounter, listening becomes a tactic—a move one makes with some end or aim in mind."

The shepherd is trying to get the sheep to do something, and the preacher will inevitably make use of rhetoric to achieve their goal. So I would say that even if moral preaching does not explicitly prescribe, it is still attempting to change thought or behavior via rhetoric and persuasion.

The presupposition of the article is that in Western Christianity even this kind of persuasion is viewed with suspicion. Your earlier posts gave me the sense that you view a homily as a neutral offer of advice, where the preacher has no motive to influence thought or behavior.

 

[Paidiske]

The shepherd is trying to get the sheep to do something,

I think this, in itself, is not the right way to see it. My congregation(s) are not there for me to try to get them to do what I have decided is best for them. Rather, there is an ongoing dialogue in which together we work out what we are - and are not - going to do.

Your earlier posts gave me the sense that you view a homily as a neutral offer of advice, where the preacher has no motive to influence thought or behavior.

Not so much advice as perspective. "Here is a perspective on what today's reading, or readings, might invite us to reflect and pray on." Not that I am telling them what to think, much less what to do, but that out of study, reflection and prayer, I offer them something to consider, with which they can do as seems best to them.

 

[zippy2006]

Not so much advice as perspective. "Here is a perspective on what today's reading, or readings, might invite us to reflect and pray on." Not that I am telling them what to think, much less what to do, but that out of study, reflection and prayer, I offer them something to consider, with which they can do as seems best to them.

Exactly, and this sounds like a rejection of not only prescription but also persuasion, rhetoric, aims, ends, tactics etc.

Or in other words, I would say that the first step towards ethical homilies and evangelization is admitting that persuasion and rhetoric are at play. Once that occurs the most egregious abuses have already been avoided.

 

[Paidiske]

Exactly, and this sounds like a rejection of not only prescription but also persuasion, rhetoric, aims, ends, tactics etc.

To my mind, it's not a rejection of persuasion, but it's about an ethics of power. And not misusing the power of the pulpit to control or manipulate the congregation.

 

[zippy2006]

To my mind, it's not a rejection of persuasion, but it's about an ethics of power. And not misusing the power of the pulpit to control or manipulate the congregation.

But we've already been over that. If you're attempting to persuade then you're attempting to persuade. If you're not attempting to persuade then you're not attempting to persuade. So are you attempting to persuade? If you're uncomfortable giving a clear answer to this question, then I would suggest that it is because you're trapped in the same space as Barron and Ivereigh.

 

[Paidiske]

But we've already been over that. If you're attempting to persuade then you're attempting to persuade.

Which is different than being morally prescriptive. Especially if what you're attempting to be persuasive about is not moral shoulds or shouldn'ts, but a vision of God's reign in this time and place, which will then have moral implications.

 

[Valletta]

It has been my observation that Catholic homilies play a much smaller role in the mass than the sermons do in Protestant services. Catholic homilies are usually relatively brief and, in my experience, quite focused on exhorting the congregation to contribute more generously.

I’ve never heard a Catholic homily that exhorted the congregation to contribute more generously.

It would be the exception for a Catholic homily to focus on urging people to give more generously. Although we pray portions of the Psalms and others parts of the Bible during Mass, the homily is almost always about one of the three readings from Holy Scripture, most often on a Gospel reading. Now Catholics don't tithe, so maybe once or sometimes even twice a year there might be a video instead of the homily from the bishop urging people to give to Catholics Charities. They usually announce it in advance. It is at least mentioned during Lent that Lent is the season for fasting, almsgiving, and prayer.

 

[zippy2006]

Which is different than being morally prescriptive. Especially if what you're attempting to be persuasive about is not moral shoulds or shouldn'ts, but a vision of God's reign in this time and place, which will then have moral implications.

Okay, so you would say that in your homilies you attempt to persuade about a vision of God's reign, and you intend this persuasion to have indirect moral implications, but you don't attempt moral persuasion directly (because you see this as prescription). Is that right?

 

[Paidiske]

Okay, so you would say that in your homilies you attempt to persuade about a vision of God's reign, and you intend this persuasion to have indirect moral implications, but you don't attempt moral persuasion directly (because you see this as prescription). Is that right?

I would say that it does have indirect moral implications, but that generally speaking, the moral aspect is not what I consider the purpose of preaching to be.

 

[Valletta]

There is an difficult balance to achieve in achieving the goal of enabling a congregation to have a well-rounded understanding of the Bible. One must admit that there are very large passages, such as the genealogies at the beginning of I Chronicles which are simply mind numbing. For the Christian the New Testament takes obvious precedence, sometimes to the complete neglect of the Old Testament. It is a challenge to balance the New with the Old Testaments.

Although large passages might be read during a service, it requires a really diligent listener great effort and intelligence to make sense of the passages. This is where, of course, the homily fits in. It is, in my opinion, an impossible task to elucidate a lengthy passage of scripture in the space of ten minutes. In my few visits to Catholic churches I was quite amazed to discover that all but one priest devoted the homily to the topic of money, specifically the necessity for the congregation to step up their giving. My even fewer visits to Episcopal churches have served me with a variety of homilies, some very good and some quite distant from the Bible passages.

It is the exception for a Catholic homily to make the homily about money. How many Catholic masses have you attended in the last ten years?

 

[zippy2006]

Catholic homilies are usually relatively brief and, in my experience, quite focused on exhorting the congregation to contribute more generously.

(When I read this I did not take "contribute" in the narrow sense of "give money".)

 

[Valletta]

(When I read this I did not take "contribute" in the narrow sense of "give money".)

You must have missed his previous post.

 

[Valletta]

Catholics have been trying to get back to more Biblical sermons, but even if this were to occur the sermons would remain much shorter and less elaborate than Protestant sermons.

I don't remember a time when the major focus of Catholic homilies was not about Bible readings. That being said, the Catholic mass is not focused on Bible study, the focus is on Jesus:
I. THE EUCHARIST - SOURCE AND SUMMIT OF ECCLESIAL LIFE
1324 The Eucharist is "the source and summit of the Christian life."136 "The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch."137
1325 "The Eucharist is the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being. It is the culmination both of God's action sanctifying the world in Christ and of the worship men offer to Christ and through him to the Father in the Holy Spirit."138
1326 Finally, by the Eucharistic celebration we already unite ourselves with the heavenly liturgy and anticipate eternal life, when God will be all in all.139
1327 In brief, the Eucharist is the sum and summary of our faith: "Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking."140

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 2 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 3

 

[bbbbbbb]

True, but the central argument is that rhetoric and persuasion are always at play, whether we admit it or not. Once this is recognized it becomes incumbent upon us to undertake "sustained and serious reflection on both the art and the ethics of persuasive religious speech." Or in other words, I would say that the first step towards ethical homilies and evangelization is admitting that persuasion and rhetoric are at play. Once that occurs the most egregious abuses have already been avoided.

I agree entirely. Thank you.

 

[Hazelelponi]

What do you mean ?

There's an amount of feminism in both liberal and conservative churches and if you make the women angry you loose the whole family.

I'm a woman, I've noticed a certain amount of this though I've not been Christian long.

I will say, that you have to pay attention to how the women dress, the more conservative the women in the church dress the more sermons that church preaches on women in general.

If the women aren't dressed modestly you'll never hear a sermon on women in that church, not a conservative one.

 

[Hazelelponi]

I hear plenty of sermons about how children should honor their parents.

I hear plenty of sermons about how men should be respectful and not live in lust and be sexual immorality

But for women………….. I rarely hear anything specifically about them in most church sermons.

I hear more Churches talk about the LGBT community sin more than I’ve heard sermon’s talk about them.

But I could be wrong and it could be me so correct me if I'm wrong and tell me if im right

^^^ good sermon

 

[Valletta]

I agree entirely. Thank you.

I was wondering, because of your comments on homilies at Catholic mass, how many Catholic masses you have attended in the last ten years?

 

[The Liturgist]

It would be the exception for a Catholic homily to focus on urging people to give more generously. Although we pray portions of the Psalms and others parts of the Bible during Mass, the homily is almost always about one of the three readings from Holy Scripture, most often on a Gospel reading. Now Catholics don't tithe, so maybe once or sometimes even twice a year there might be a video instead of the homily from the bishop urging people to give to Catholics Charities. They usually announce it in advance. It is at least mentioned during Lent that Lent is the season for fasting, almsgiving, and prayer.

Or in a traditional Latin mass, or a Byzantine Catholic liturgy, the homily will be about the two lessons (except for traditional Latin masses in the Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites, or the traditional liturgy of the East Syriac Rite used by the Syro Malabar and the Chaldean Catholic churches, for the former feature only an Epistle and a Gospel, or in some Traditional Latin Masses, the first lesson is from the Old Testament, except at the Paschal Vigils Mass, which has twelve Old Testament lessons, or four after the ill-advised changes made by Pope Pius XII in 1954, and likewise the Vesperal Divine Liturgies of the Byzantine Rite such as that on Holy Saturday which has a common origin with the Roman Rite Paschal vigil). Only the Gallican rites like the Ambrosian and Mozarabic, and the East Syriac, normally begin with one or in the East Syriac case, two, Old Testament lessons (although this may also have been a custom in the West Syriac Rite; since the 1970s the Maronite liturgy now uses the same problematic three year lectionary as the Novus Ordo Missae).

Historically, in the Byzantine, Armenian, Coptic and Latin mass, the idea was that the prophecy is to be read in the Divine Office, for example, at Vespers the night before in the Byzantine Rite.

 

[The Liturgist]

I would say that it does have indirect moral implications, but that generally speaking, the moral aspect is not what I consider the purpose of preaching to be.

I myself am of the expositional school, with a Trinitarian and Incarnational approach. I agree with you that a prescriptive approach can be problematic, in that it comes across as preachy and patronizing if done poorly. The only exception I might make is that in a few cases people might not be aware of certain historic Christian moral precepts, and also the laity look to us for guidance on how to behave in particular circumstances, for example, when our faith is challenged, and it can be useful to remind people of what our Lord said, for example, about loving those who persecute us.

But most of the objectionable sermons I have come across are those which seek to be explicitly morally prescriptive.