Philip Arthur Bence PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

283
still authorititative manner.'" And, in this manner,
the Church teaching office, historically and currently,
offers its interpretation of Scripture and, more
importantly, the Christ event. Thus, "It is only in the
interplay of the two [Scripture and tradition] that the
reality of what is merely written in Scripture comes to
be, that is, can be procla1med."2
For Rahner, the ultimate authority of a sermon lies
not in its source, whether that be Scripture or
tradition. The authority of any message lies in its
content.
From the pope down to the associate pastor in
the pulpit, the fundamental-theological
grounding of the faith, both in theory and
practice, is not sufficiently presented along
with the truths of the faith. Generally only a
call to the formal authority of the Church is
made, as if the formal authority of the Church
were more convincing than the contents of what
is said. Mostly the reverse is true (underlining
mine)."5
2. Selection of Material from Sources
Following the spirit of that quotation, 'Rahner
lecturers' move back toward a more conservative position
on the criteria for selecting preaching topics. Priests
preach what they do because God, through established
church tradition, directs so. More than the other
lecturer groups, 'Rahner lecturers' stated that preaching
must be true to God (table 31). In selecting the primary
purpose for the teaching of preaching, this group gave
first priority to "helping students see God as the
ultimate source of preaching (26).