Video of Sermon
The 2016 Presidential Election: Voting from a Catholic Perspective
Watch this sermon. What makes it so important? What is his argument? Tell me what rhetorical strategies Fr. John Lankeit uses to make his argument. What does Fr. Lankeit NOT SAY that makes the sermon even more relevant? Who is the author of this sermon? And how does that play into it's rhetorical appeal? And finally, do you think the pulpit was the appropriate place to deliver this message? Why or why not? and why might this be considered controversial? (Hint: We are assuming that abortion is a non-negotiable. As Catholics and as Christians, we oppose abortion, so the controversy is not the abortion issue. It is something else.)
The election is a very huge topic of conversation these days with how close voting is. Something that is always talked about is how Trump is going to build his wall with Mexican money and how Clinton is going to make millions of jobs for our people. However, what is the topic that is most important for catholic voters? What about those millions of babies killed almost everyday simply because nobody was there for the mother in her time of need? In Fr. John Lanekits sermon we hear about the way one candidate allows the killing of children with no means of protection and how the other simply hasn't commented on the matter. Father John uses a very good rhetorical strategy by saying that he's helped a lot of women get back into their faith after being destroyed by their abortion and guilt. He gives examples of the pain that this procedure causes to families not just women. The author of this sermon left out a very big key that makes this speech all the more relevant. This key being he never said who exactly was for the abortion in the election, he left that up to the people to find out and to decide who to vote for. Father John also touches on how this sermon could be considered very controversial in the sense that some people believe priests and people of religious life should stay out of politics. In my opinion I believe that is taking away their right of speech in this country simply because they chose to follow Gods call for them. The way this speech was delivered was amazing in its own sense as well, because this shows how religious leaders can impact their followers and many other people as well in life. This sermon should be shared more around the world and throughout the US to allow people to truly think about this years elections and who we want to run our country.
ReplyDeleteYou go off topic a lot, please try to stay with what you're talking about. The wall was unnecessary to bring up.
DeleteI enjoy your opinions. Especially how you view the impacts the topic can change our views.
DeleteThis sermon preaching against the issue of abortion is in its own separate league of significance. While I personally disagree with a majority of Catholic Church teaching, I am pro-life. Unlike what the priest seemed to be saying, it's not a requirement to be a Christian in order to be pro-life. Abortion is a serious issue, everyone knows that. Like the Reverend said, it's a word that has been completely stripped of its meaning and has only become a term used to spark controversial debates. People of all faiths, beliefs, and moral codes need to acknowledge this. Father Lankeit was a seemingly well-educated man, who both utilized tone and body language during his homily. He became a little too "preachy" at times, but his delivery was still very solid in the end. He had this odd combination of welcoming and shaming in his tone, which contrasted well and aided him in his delivery. The priest knew the appropriate place to deliver his message: before a congregation of devoted pro-life advocates called Catholics. He knew his duty as a Catholic and spread his message to his followers. In my opinion, location and audience are the two key principles in delivering a speech like this. From my own personal experience, I've seen Catholic people spread their messages in inappropriate places. Sometimes they don't realize when people aren't listening to them. I've had a man of Christian faith give me a "get out of hell for free" card when I was in line for a heavy metal concert promoting "free thinking" and "individuality." However, I digress. I respect this priest and his message, because his standpoint is correct, both according to his faith and morally. It doesn't take faith to realize the dangers and inhumanity of abortion. All it takes is common sense and human decency, both of which have completely died during the course of this election. We're about a month away from choosing our next president, which is horrifying considering our options. Controversy has been created left and right from the two major party candidates. This issue is one of the many standpoints a candidate is "required" to have in order to help voters make their decision come November. However, what makes this one different is its significance to Catholics. Catholics aren't as devoted to issues such as gun control and immigration reform, they are solely concerned with how others live their lives and how they think. This is a scenario that they need to be a part of. It's a serious issue, and I believe their the only people who can deliver the appropriate message concerning this horrifying issue.
ReplyDeleteI disagree when you said the priest was a little to "preachy." I am not sure what you meant by that. Don't you think that the standpoint of abortion should be "required" as much as gun control or immigration? There is probably as many people that care about a view of abortion as much as owning a gun, or abound immagrints in our country.
DeleteHow can a priest be "too preachy"? Just as the father said, we is doing as God told priests from way back in the Old Testament times. He's preaching exactly what needs to be preached.
DeleteThis is Emily Evers using Allie Gier's phone, we are on our way home from tennis doubles tournament. Sorry if this doesn't show up. But nick, I like how you included your beliefs and your views to the piece. It adds an extra piece of knowledge to those of us that didn't view the piece in ways that you did. Good job!
DeleteThere are certain topics that people attempt to refrain from at all costs; and two of them happen to be abortion, and the 2016 presidential debate. Few aspects of similarity found within the topics include the false notion that choices are far more important than the moral correctness of our actions. Just as Very Reverend John Lanekits stated, the devil will manipulate situations in our lives that will potentially divide us from Jesus Christ. However, the intellectuality of the devil is where we begin to astray. Not once will he blurt out, "LEAVE! DON'T YOU LISTEN TO HIM (Jesus)!" LISTEN TO MEEEE!!" He knows those of Christ's loyal children love him, will not involuntarily deny Him, and will reject those propositions brought up by the devil. Not only is the devil intelligent, he is very sneaky. He knows your path, he knows what temptations you have a hard time fighting off; he knows all of that. So his master plan is to put snares in our life to catch us in sin. Once we do it, there's not going back; you can't undo it. Being firm in your faith at one point, for example, the devil can't change. However, what he'll do is just wait and wait for you to finish. "Welcome back, how was your weekend? You may have been with Him, but here's "this," and "this too" to welcome you back into those temptations I remember you having." Abortion works in the same fashion for mothers. I can imagine the devil siting on the curb of the abortion clinics smoking a cigarette and having the appearance of a snarky, yet convincing personality that will pull the questioning mothers closer, and closer to him until they are at the doors, or even in the rooms of the clinic. The emotional distress mothers are put into is nothing one can relate to unless you are/ were physically faced with the same mentally driven battle. In continuation, how can Hilary Clinton support abortion when she has a daughter of her own, and a granddaughter? The twisted notion of her ads presenting the importance of children, yet she supports pro- choice? The devil can't control your love for Jesus Christ, but he will find ways to seclude you from him. If we know what the candidate presents and supports are against our Catholic rooted beliefs, and we still choose to grant them the advancement with our vote, then our souls are in great peril. How can we walk up to the altar before the Body and Blood of Christ and say we accept him, "Amen." when we support the killing of an innocent, and helpless heart beat. As Catholics, we need to have the trust that the duties of our priests are being portrayed in such ways as Jesus Christ would do. As in the book of Ezekiel, Jesus discussed politics stating "the wicked man will die in his sin." In my opinion, the pulpit was the very best place to discuss such matters because those strictly, and boldly taught in a tasteful, yet "to the point" type of way is how the audience relates to such topics. When something is talked about in the pulpit, it seems to have an obscure essence to the talk. People either listen, and take points into account, or they deny the message being told and have the outlook of the devil saying, "That's your opinion and it's pretty far fetched, here's my proposal," an instant conversion.
ReplyDeleteI love the beginning of this blog and the way you describe how the devil will temp us. It was a really good how you mention you can't undo something and how you give your views on the sermon. Great job!
DeleteEmily, I like how you incorporated a passage from the Bible into your blog. "The wicked man will die in his sin" is very true. It's something new offered to the table. Keep up the good work!
DeleteWhat makes the sermon important was the fact that it handled serious real-life issues. His argument was: Every Catholic is obligated to not vote for someone who supports abortion. Some rhetorical strategies that he used were pausing and examples (Borders, Affirmative action, Capital punishment). He used the examples to later emphasized his point of how since no one would make it legal to kill an innocent black/Hispanic man , why should abortion be legal? Fr. Lankeit doesn't say the political candidates names, nor the parties names, which makes the sermon more relevant because if one doesn't know who he is talking about, than they shouldn't even vote. The author of this sermon is a priest named Fr. John Lankeit. This plays into the rhetorical appeal because he has a duty to lead the people to the promise land, and so the people are more inclined to listen to him. The pulpit was an appropriate place to discuss the issue because the church is also a place of meeting. The people who were there wanted to hear the priest preach what he wanted to preach. Talking about politics in the pulpit might be considered controversial because some Catholics who go to church don't think it's a priest's duty to talk about politics.
ReplyDeleteTim, I like how you get right to the point but you should use more examples from the video and tell everyone what your thoughts on the sermon were!
DeleteGood work, Tim! Try to be more descriptive with your points, and to cover all of the questions in the prompt. Also, I really likeed how you opened your blog up with the importance of the homily.
DeleteI think that the sermon was important because of a much more specific reason than "serious real-life issues." I think for a topic like this, getting to the point isn't extremely effective.
DeleteI like your ideas of the blog but I would've liked it if you expanded more on them.
DeleteWhile the issue of abortion is in important think to consider when electing a president, there are other factors that should oroabbaly be considered by the populace.
DeleteIn the current state of this presidential election, something as refreshing as this sermon comes around once in a blue moon. The media coverage of the race is riddled with news that doesn't have to do with politics. All I seem to find is the latest gossip about each candidates personal lives. This sermon is important because it brings us back to the issues at hand, through a pure catholic viewpoint. His argument emphasizes the importance of choosing a candidate that best supports our catholic faith and how to do just that. While watching his sermon, he uses many rhetorical strategies that were extremely effective. He uses definition to explain something he uses in the sermon, such as when he mentions affirmative action. He explains what this is, in a relatable way, as to not leave people like me hanging. He includes the audience in the sermon when he asks them questions and to raise their hands for yes or no. I thought he establishes ethos when he explained he had been a priest for 10 years and the experiences he has had. He also ties in perfect Bible quotes that I thought felt a little anecdotal. The aspect of his sermon that I found was most refreshing was that he never said the words democrat, republican, Trump, or Clinton. Without saying these words I found myself more invested into the topics of question he brought up, and I didn't have the immediate negative reactions when I hear the candidates names. Without saying names, I bet many people couldn't place each policy with a candidate. The author of this sermon was not the priest himself. The priest was only relaying the message God wants us to follow through relatable and intriguing words. If people were able to realize that the priest was not stating his own opinions, but teachings from God, the people listening were more effected. I also believe that the pulpit was an appropriate place to be because when we are in a church we should already be thinking in a catholic viewpoint. There are always people who are going to think something is controversial. The other day in class when our textbook was calling out Harry Potter, I was genuinely offended. There were definitely other people in the class that could not have cared less. I personally don't think the sermon should be considered controversial. He was relaying a message from God in a place we should be most intent to listen.
ReplyDeleteNice job, Bobbi! I really enjoyed your intro and your reasonings behind the rhetorical straggles used in the homily. I also liked the setup of your blog, and how well it flowed.👍🏻
DeleteThe homily given by Fr. John Lankeit touched many different crowds including logos, pathos and ethos. He states that there isn't one political party in US history that has been perfectly aligned with Catholic teachings. However, when a Catholic is voting there is always a candidate of lesser evil and who is farther from the catholic teachings. As Catholics we are too take into consideration who will stand closer to the catholic teachings. Father John is not only talking to Catholics but all people that are willing to listen. He is talking to all races and all religions and he uses emotions to convince them to stay close to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Father states that all women who have chosen to get an abortion can be forgiven and that the mercy of God is so much bigger than their sins. If they repent they will receive the grace of God. He is calling everyone to the Catholic Church just as Christ has. Father Johns argument is that Catholics have an obligation to vote for the lesser evil. Father asks the crowd if they would vote for someone who would make it legal to kill a black or Hispanic and no one agreed. He asked the crowd if that Hispanic or African American got in the whites way and started affecting their education and personal life would they kill them. Would they vote for someone who allowed this to happen? No. between Trump and Hillary neither follows the church teachings but who is closer to the teachings of the church? Hillary wants to expand the availability of abortion and she will allow this to happen up until the birth of the baby. She wants to use US tax dollars to help pay for the millions of abortions. Most abortions are happening today because women say that the baby will effect their personal life and that the baby will make the availability of education harder. Why are people okay with killing babies but would never think about killing others. Killing is killing no matter who you are or what the reason may be. Capital punishment is never the right thing even when the person is guilty but what about all those people who were innocent and were executed for someone else's crimes. In abortion the same thing is happening but an innocent person is always being put to death! In my opinion father did a great job with describing killings of all kinds and who Catholics should vote for not only in this election but in every election. It was a smart tactic that he gave this sermon on the pulpit because he had everyones attention and the situation was placed in front of Jesus Christ and the church. People may say that priests need to stay away from politics but as their jobs they are to guide us not only in the catholic but in the political views of life because they are related in so many different ways. Father John is restating the words of our bishop and he does it in the church for a better rhetorical appeal.
ReplyDelete"The right to life means allowing people to live and not killing, allowing them to grow, to eat, to be educated, to be healed, and to be permitted to die with dignity," stated our loving and passionate Pope Francis. This is my favorite pro-life quote, and I was excited when I read this weeks blog prompt. The homily that was given on October 2, 2016 by Fr. John Lankeit was the most powerful and important homilies I have heard regarding the 2016 presidential election. The reasoning for this homily's importance was because Father was educating us on the Catholic perspective of the presidential election. With this education, he was also giving us a warning on the dangers of voting with full knowledge of the Catholic perspective of these candidates. Let's refer back to this homily. Fr. John was mainly arguing on the topic of abortion, and how we as Catholics with full knowledge of the candidate's beliefs, can be in grave danger. He never came right out and said which candidate believed what, but he did make the point of saying one candidate is pro-abortion. The use use of syntax was very well executed in this homily. At the beginning of the sermon he stated, "But, suppose a candidate for president promoted a policy that would make it legal for someone to kill a black person if that black person created a hardship for them getting the education they desired. How many of you would be comfortable voting for that candidate?" He went on to give more examples, and then he referred back to our own 2016 candidates and confirmed that we do have a candidate that does promote these policies with one exception. Father then explained that one candidate promotes abortion. This is an example of the rhetorical strategy of syntax that was cleverly used in this homily. I do believe that church was the most perfect place to give this type homily because this crucial message had to be delivered to practicing Catholics. Mass is where we come not only to fulfill our Sunday obligations, but we are also there to learn how to become closer to Christ. Father was teaching us how important it is to make the right choice in electing our president, and the risk we would be taking if we purposely voted for a pro-choice candidate. Some people do not like talking "politics" in church. I think the reasoning for this is because some Catholics feel uncomfortable when it comes to these topics, and they think it is inappropriate to be discussing abortion in church almost like it's sinful. Rather, church is the best place to be talking about such a popular topic to inform the congregation on the dangers of this horrid action. Finally, Fr. John concluded with telling the congregation, "A priest who is more concerned about the state of his people’s souls than they are themselves, deserves the esteem of his people for his willingness to speak such difficult truth to them with genuine love—to put the welfare of his people’s souls ahead of his own reputation, popularity or comfort. Such a priest should receive respect, admiration and support, rather than their resistance or criticism...Because the priest who said these particular words is your bishop and mine." This is why we must love and pray for our priests because they have devoted their lives to helping others get to heaven and find a more intimate relationship with Jesus Christ.
ReplyDeleteDon't start with a quote, I want to hear your voice first!
DeleteThe controversial part of this argument is who is arguing it. I believe that it is a priest's duty, as a servant of God, to deliver this message. Others may see this as, as he stated, a priest preaching politics. Because I believe this is his duty, I also believe that the pulpit was both an appropriate and relevant place for this argument to be presented. Those in church are practicing Catholics, therefore it is necessary for them to hear how to act as such when voting. The argument Father presented was that no person who calls themselves a Catholic should cast a vote that supports murder of innocent people. The reason that this was important to discuss is because of the election coming up in November. As he said, "Ignorance is not acceptable," especially when voting for someone who is attempting to determine the life of another. Although I keep referring to what Father said, this sermon was written by the bishop. This bishop appealed to patheos from the very beginning when he mentioned the killing of minority groups for person gain. The audience felt guilt and anger after hearing such a scenario, and felt sadness along with many other things when they found out that that is exactly what abortion is. The bishop also used repetition very well. Ethos showed the most at the end when the true author was revealed, but also when a priest's duty was discussed. One of the most relevant pieces of this argument as well as one of the best rhetorical strategies was not mentioning either the political party or presidential candidate that supports abortion. This made people think about it, or used logos, in order to bring them to a conclusion. Also, it makes people see, through that thought, that they are not preaching politics, but rather they are preaching TRUTH.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more with you, Morgan. I think more priest should be preaching the truth, rather than what people want to hear.
DeleteI also agree very immensely with how people of religious life should be able to speak their mind whiteout worrying about what the community will say.
DeleteTo start a sure fire argument, talk politics or religion. To start an ongoing feud, talk both." This is the saying my pastor usually opens with if his sermon is going to be about politics. He's not wrong, however. Many people like to listen to what they want to hear, especially in this day and age where overcome is offended by everything it seems. It's important to have priest and pastors alike preach on such controversial subjects such as abortion, like Father John did. His argument was simply that if we are to thrive and live under the label of Catholics, then we must start practicing what we believe. Bringing up the 2016 election only added to his wonderful speech. I think people aren't educated in what the candidates are actually proposing, rather what they hear from media. People like to hear what they want, so if one party says one thing they like, then they're sold. However, for us as Catholics, it's important that we look deeper than just words. Father John had the right idea to preach politics from the pulpit because the united states was built as a Christian nation. Therefore, a priest had every right to speak about the country he lives is. As he stated, it's his job to direct the nation and tell its citizens whether or not they're living according to the Christian values it was built upon. From way back in the Old Testament times, God has instructed the priests to do so. Father John didn't say who the candidates where or what they party for each stood for. This made his sermon, or the bishops sermon since he's the author of it, even more meaningful. The fact that this might be considered controversial is so true because people think that preachers are supposed to tell how god loves everyone therefore everyone will go to heaven. This isn't the case, as Father John clearly stated "the women who've committed the sin of abortion must ask for forgiveness and be cleansed of their sin through the sacrament of confession." When a priest starts preaching about fire and damnation, that's where people get turned off. It is a priest job, again, to direct the people under God's laws. There should be no controversy about it. Aside from the political and religious point of view, father John also used many rhetorical strategies. I think his most important strategies was when he stopped before getting into detail about his sermon and spoke specifically to those who had already commuted the sin of abortion. He gave them an outlet of opportunity to be cleansers and saved. He also appealed to many logos I think because he talked more about the beliefs each party for the presidential election. All in all, Father John knew what he had to preach on and he preached it in he most beautiful way possible.
ReplyDeleteAbby, I'm really digging how you opened up with a quote from your pastor. I completely agree with what he said. Subjects like politics and religion have so many different views of interpretation, so it can be difficult to find points everyone can agree on.
DeleteI have to agree with Tim, what your pastor said is true. However, it sounds like his mission to start constroversy, much like this priest was in some cases.
Delete