The Eucharist
In this extremely informative AND entertaining talk, Fr. Mike Schmitz builds an argument about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
THIS VIDEO IS 45 MINUTES LONG. You will NOT be able to bang out this blog in just a few minutes.
Watch the video and take notes. How does Father establish ethos? In what ways does he appeal to the emotions of the audience? And explain how he uses logic to unfold his argument. Because this argument is so complex, you might want to use your notes as an opportunity to make a little outline so that you don't lose track of his argument. Finally, what is the part that resonates with you?
This video was sent to me by two recent ECC alumni who were lucky enough to attend the FOCUS conference in Chicago a few weeks ago. They loved it so much that they sent it to me in hopes that all of you would get the opportunity to see it! It is not one you want to miss.
Okay so honestly this blog is gunna suck because I’m in a hotel and leaving the county in 10 hours so yeah sorry.
ReplyDeleteI really like the beginning of this video because it is full of ethos. The story about love and how there are different kinds of love, kisses, hugs, and all those kinds of Ways of showing affection is very relatable and easy to understand. It’s also very, very funny which engages the audience a lot. Taking something and giving your whole self to someone is completely different even though modern society thinks they are the same. He switches from ethos to logos very slowly but you can tell the difference. He becomes very serious when he talks with logos, but the ethos is always lurking in the background. The stories given include both but provide so much more than just a story. The bride and groom story really hit me deep because it was an opening light. It truly opened my eyes about the connection between God and marriage. Everything is so connected so tediously that I could not even understand. Then the Bible comes through and he relates that story of the feeding of fish and walking on water which opened more doors. The people did not come back to believe in Him, they just wanted the food He could create. It really hit me on how much we take advantage of things today, including church. The part that stays with me the most is about the taking love and giving your whole self to someone. So many people these days are blinded by the wrong thing, taking love. Love should be given as a whole, taking will not be as strong. Giving your whole self to someone includes intimacy, truth, and pure love.
This could be very much better, but time was not on your hands as I know. This could probably be longer and more in detail but I know you’re leaving at 4 in the morning so I understand.
DeleteAlso I’m commenting twice to get my points because no one else posted yet. I think your topics were very well because you told us how opening the video was for you. I could tell you really enjoyed this video (also I cried a little just saying)
DeleteKristen, I felt that you did a really great job hitting on many of the major points that Fr. Mike made and describing how these relate to the three rhetorical appeals. I was also amazed by the way in which he really structured his argument and made it easy to understand. However, I do feel you should have gone a step further in your analysis and focused on the component in regards to the Eucharist, as this is what all of his stories relating to a gift of oneself eventually lead to.
DeleteI think you did a good job distinguishing between pathos, ethos, and logos, but like Isaac said, I think you should have included more about the Eucharist. I guess you were really pressed for time though, and I liked that you commented on your own blog.
DeleteKudos to you for getting this done! There were definitely some components missing, but, with the time constraints you were working under, I thought it was good! Hope you have fun!
DeleteThis is Dominic’s second comment:
Delete“Kristen: You have a really good analysis of Fr. Schmitz’s discussion, considering the time you had. You hit all the major points, and you knew what you were talking about. You may want to consider doing it earlier, perhaps the day before, the next time there is a trip, although I made a similar mistake with my comments. It was very good, otherwise.”
Part I
ReplyDeleteThis very informative, very thorough, and very passionate talk given by Father Mike Schmitz was truly a great talk that was chock-full of ethos, pathos, and logos. In the talk, Father Mike is arguing that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. Father Mike establishes ethos the very second he starts talking. His enthusiasm and humor immediately give him credibility, shattering the inevitable expectation that he is just another boring priest who is about to flap his lip at me for 45 about something I think I already know everything about. Heck, I knew this wasn’t about to be the case because his enthusiastic voice nearly made me deaf when I started the video! (I had the volume up too high on my headphones) His ethos was really cemented by his humorous pokes right out of the gate at people from his home state of Minnesota. His energy and enthusiasm also remained with him as he continued his talk; it didn’t fade as soon as he dove into the material. He really nailed the ethos.
Throughout the talk, Father Mike appeals to pathos in different ways. Most of the time, he subtly tugs at the heartstrings of his listeners. The “evangedating” story is the one example. Upon hearing that the tall, built farmer from Nebraska was not seeking a relationship with the Baptist girl, but with Jesus, you can just feel that Father Mike was trying to get the audience to say or think, “Awe, how sweet,” while also provoking some thought about relationships. Most of the pathos in this talk revolves around Father Mike simply provoking deep thought about Jesus’ presence in the Eucharist while also getting people to realize the gravity of the Eucharist.
Part II
ReplyDeleteAs with any good argument, logos is HUGE here. Not far into his talk, Father Mike begins to talk about the body and its role in intimacy. He knows (and implies that we should know) that all people are made to connect and be intimate with each other through physical contact. It also does not take much thought to understand that we are only able to be open about and display our love of others using our bodies. With this in mind, Father Mike points out that we have an inclination to touch things we like and that we have a desire to be intimate because it helps to build relationships and make us happy. After telling his story about how a lack of intimacy had adverse effects on the orphans of World War I, Father Mike moves on to the meat of his argument. He makes his point that Jesus gave us His body and blood to show God’s love to us and express His desire to be intimate with us. This makes complete sense, as God does not have a body, making Him unable to express that love and intimacy directly. Father Mike then offers the counter-argument that the Eucharist is more-or-less a symbol. But that is not an accurate statement. Bringing up the story of the Feeding of the Five Thousand, Fr. Mike talks about how the whole reason Jesus was able to divide the five loaves of bread among all of the people present was because it was a part of Himself, and believing that the bread is a part of Jesus is the only way we can truly achieve eternal life. Then, Father Mike talks about Jesus’ five oaths, which explain how He is present in the Eucharist, thus nullifying the argument that the Eucharist is only a symbol. Father Mike continues his discussion by arguing that if we do not wish to partake in the Eucharist, we do not wish to fully accept Jesus. He supports this argument by talking about the types of churches that do not celebrate the Eucharist. He provides the factoid that even though those churches may be more enjoyable, they’re completely missing the point by not offering the Eucharist. He isn’t dissing these churches, but simply explaining why their scope is somewhat flawed. As Father Mike nears the end of his talk, he points out that looks aren’t everything when it comes to accepting Jesus in the Eucharist. Jesus didn’t look like God as He made the slow, painful journey to His death on the cross, therefore He doesn’t need to look like God in the Eucharist.
Of everything Father Mike Schmitz discussed, the thing that resonated the most with me is that the whole reason Christ’s body is in the Eucharist is to provide a physical means for God to be intimate with us and express His love for us. Even though all the pieces were there, I have never really been able to put this together. I found it so cool that God has the same inclination to touch what He likes as we do. Because of this, I am walking away from this talk with a better understanding of what the Eucharist really is. I thought I knew everything there was to know about the Eucharist because of my Catholic education, but I am further enlightened after hearing that the Eucharist is God’s means of physically expressing His love to us, which is so freaking cool!!!!!!
Jarret, your analysis of Fr. Mike’s speech, I felt, did a great job of detailing fhe way in which he uses the three rhetorical appeals. It provided specific examples that backed up each argument made. Also, while I was reading your explanation of the way in which he uses the emotional appeal, I really began to think about his thought/research process (invention) when I came to the part about “evangedating.” (It made me think about the staycation when we were discussing the topic of invention.)
DeleteEach of the 3 parts you described were tremendous, but I think you described ethos the best. You were able to analyze specific behavior from him that allowed him to boost his ethos, and I think you did a really good job recognizing them.
DeletePart 1
ReplyDeleteWithin Fr. Mike’s speech at the SEEK 2015 Conference lies more than just a message of having a simple, everyday relationship with Christ; it is a message of intimate relationship with Christ: one of faith, one of full trust, and one of true love. To articulate this message of intimacy, specifically through the Eucharist, Fr. Mike uses the three rhetorical appeals — ethos, logos, and pathos. Each of these appeals allow him to captivate his audience, allowing for him to effectively argue his position of truth, goodness, and beauty.
To begin, it is important to recognize the rhetorical component of the speaker: the speaker’s ethos. Throughout the course of Fr. Mike’s speech, it is clear that his message is sincere; he has a strong background in the subject of Catholicism and Eucharist, and, in this way, intimacy with Christ. This is a clear display of phronesis, or practical wisdom, as he has a firm grasp on the content, and is able to convey this message as a result. In addition, to cover the eunoia and arete components of ethos, he really focuses in on the fact that many, specifically his audience (college students), are always yearning for something more, for true love and intimacy in and with Christ. He juxtaposes the gentle, trusting love following a date with that of the “lion,” as he describes it, and the effects of each of these. In this way, he brings to light the fact that his audience desires the former, the trusting, faithful love that we can all find in Christ; by addressing this, he effectively established these components of ethos, as he shows he wants what is “good” and “morally virtuous” for those he is addressing.
Now, while it is important to view the ethos present within his speech, it is just as, if not more, important to see how he has established his ethos in the past. Fr. Mike is an individual with a respected brand who has established himself as a true teacher, one who wants what is good for those around him. He is not there and able to draw the attention of a large crowd “just because;” he is there because he is someone of virtue, and as mentioned before, sincerity. Following his address to SEEK, I proceeded to watch a few of his podcasts, and was drawn in by this same sincerity, same confidence, and same love for Christ that he displayed in his speech. This foundation of ethos, then, was quite essential for him to further establish it.
Fr. Mike’s primary argument within his address is the fact that the Body and Blood of Christ in the form of the Eucharist are literal, not symbolic; however, he does not explicitly state this from the beginning. This is not a mistake on his part, but rather, a strategic use of logic. He begins by stating that we all have connections with each other and long for intimacy; this is what we were designed for, love — a self-giving love. He proceeds to make a case for intimacy by speaking of the orphans of World War I who were provided with what was thought to be everything, but yet, they died. What caretakers soon realized was the fact that they needed intimacy, the caring love of a mother. When they were given this love, the death rate took a sharp decrease. After providing a few more examples of this type of intimacy, he then brought his audience into his primary argument, where he defended his position through the use of a variety of Scripture passages, specifically those from chapter 6 of the Book of John. In this way, it is clear that Fr. Mike wanted to ease whoever may be listening or watching into his less-accepted argument through the use of an example that everyone can agree on — that we not only want love; we need it. Through the use of this logic, then, Fr. Mike allows his argument to unfold with a sort of inductive reasoning, rather than the typical deductive reasoning, which almost perfectly suits his argument.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteThe third rhetorical appeal, pathos, while sprinkled throughout much of the speech, is most evident within the final portion of Fr. Mike’s speech in the story he provides regarding the young man he met while in college. At the end of Mass, as he details, this man would ALWAYS eat the leftover crumbs off of the floor from the “sustaining” bread. Fr. Mike, who did not understand why he would do this, proceeded to ask him why he did. This man detailed a story he heard about a young girl in Communist China, who every night, following the destruction of a Church, would come to take Communion off of the floor each night until the final night, when it was discovered and she was brutally murdered. That story stuck with the young man all the time. For me, the story and its emotion were breathtaking and had a major effect on the way I think about the Eucharist. This story, which truly brought together Fr. Mike’s ethos and logos, is what I felt sealed the argument.
In general, what usually strikes me the most about an argument is the reasoning behind it, the logos. But, while I was quite impressed by Fr. Mike’s use of inductive reasoning to support his argument, what resonated with me most were his story regarding the young man he met at Mass (which I detailed above), his ability to relate to his audience, and his more pathos-oriented approach to the Eucharist and its significance. Within one portion of his speech, he addresses the questions he has had in regards to his faith in the past, specifically about the Eucharist. I feel we are naturally drawn to those who are relatable and understand the questions we might ask, which is always the first step in starting a conversation. Without this, the divide present between various Christian denominations can never truly be bridged. Finally, in regards to his discussion of the Eucharist, I feel Fr. Mike does a great job of addressing the symbolism of the taste (or lack thereof) and sight of the Eucharist. Obviously, if we saw a glowing orb in front of us, we would most certainly feel unworthy of receiving Christ. However, as Father Mike states, Christ “hides” himself so that we do not feel that way; He wants us to feel welcome and deserving of His love. In a time when many try to judge the hearts and not just the actions of those around them, this aspect of his argument resonated with me. Much of his argument, especially these components, clarified for me the significance of the Eucharist, and this could not have been done with the ever present ethos, logos, and pathos.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIsaac, I think you did a wonderful job with this analysis. You found every main topic of Fr. Mike’s speech. I like how you added some quotes from him. Great job!
DeletePart 1
ReplyDeleteThis talk given by Fr. Mike Schmitz is very in-depth and very informative. In his talk, his main argument is that when you receive communion at mass, you are truly receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus. He argues from a few different angles, and in my opinion is very successful, due to the pathos, ethos, and logos incorporated into his argument.
When Fr. Schmitz is establishing his ethos, he wastes no time. Right from the very beginning, he brings a lot of energy and enthusiasm, telling the crowd he is excited to be there. He is also a pretty humorous guy, and likes to make his audience laugh. To me, I think he established ethos a little different than a lot of speakers do, but it was extremely affective. When some people debate religious topics, it is very easy to lose them and no longer pay attention. With Fr. Schmitz, he is very energetic and passionate, which not only keeps the crowd engaged and following along with him, it also boosts his appeal to everyone.
Moving onto pathos, he makes it very apparent that he feels pretty strong about this subject. I thought Fr. Schmitz had an interesting way of conveying his passion and emotions though. When some people give religious talks and get fired up, they begin to shout and yell. He does not yell or get extremely intense, he stays calm and continues to make sure to keep the audience alert and laughing, but at the same time he is delivering his message with a lot of passion and enthusiasm.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteWhen looking at the logos, I think this is where Fr. Schmitz really shined. He begins by talking about a mission trip he made to a Jerusalem where he talked to some fellow missionaries about intimacy and the importance of the body. He talked about physical contact in relationships and how when you really like someone, you enjoy making contact with them. He makes the point that we need physical contact and intimacy to survive, and provides an example from World War I and World War II. In this example, he speaks about babies from World War I and World War II who were orphans. The children were well taken care of health wise (warmth, water, being fed) but they were still dying. They found that when they would pick up the children and held them, they survived a lot better. However, if God does not have a body, how can we have physical contact and intimacy with him? The answer is simple. God gave us love and intimacy through Jesus and the Eucharist Jesus gave us his body to us and for us, and this allows us to develop our own intimate relationship with him.
He then moves onto refuting that the Eucharist “is just a symbol.” He refers back to when Jesus fed 5,000 people by multiplying his body and blood. Those loaves and those fishes are examples of his bread and his body. If somebody refuses the Eucharist, they are refusing Jesus. He stresses the importance of receiving the Eucharist, because when you receive the Eucharist, you receive Jesus, and that is a crucial part of the Catholic faith. After discussing this, he compares it to other types of religions. He does not want to just tell them that their religious practices are wrong and a waste of time. Lots of them lack a true understanding of it and how great of a gift it truly is. With sound logic and great speaking skills, I think Fr. Schmitz crushed this argument out of the park.
One thing that really stuck with me was when he said “if you refuse the Eucharist, you refuse Jesus” A lot of people don’t understand that the bread is literally Jesus’s body and the wine is his blood, and it is not good to continuously miss out on them. The more we receive them, the better off we will be.
Erick, you did a great job at analyzing Father Mike’s talk. You went into great detail explaining logos, ethos, and pathos. I also liked how you directly quoted something from his speech and then explained what the quoted statement meant. Great job!
DeleteFather Mike Schmitz gave an extremely impassioned discussion at the Focus event. The discussion explained the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. Fr. Schmitz managed to separate his discussion from the rest of the speeches that night in his building up of ethos, and his logical approach to creating a basic understanding of the depth and complexity of the Eucharist.
ReplyDeleteIn his discussion, Fr. Schmitz appeals to ethos in one major way. Unlike all the other speeches often heard in homilies and events, Fr. Schmitz has a discussion with the audience. He speaks as if he is actually having a regular conversation with someone. He isn’t at an unattainable height, bearing down on the audience with a “greater than thou” demeanor, he comes down to their level and speaks to them as an equal. He uses personal stories from his life as a frame for delivering his point — God is the Eucharist. These personal stories he told — the husband finally seeing God’s Love at mass, the man picking up scraps of Eucharist from the ground, and his pre-seminarian dating escapades — all really struck a cord with me. Personal stories, with very few exceptions, all resonate well with me. It gives me a certain assurance that this person on the stage understands what they are talking about. They know their point through personal experience.
Fr. Schmitz uses clear logic to defend his argument, woven into the story of a Saint. Fr. Schmitz first dives into the Bible story of Jesus causing general confusion with His words. Jesus confirms that He indeed is within the Eucharist. Fr. Schmitz then dives into the story of a Saint who, upon hearing a speech about how Jesus is not within the Eucharist, simply asked the speaker if he would go against what Jesus directly said, “This is My Body, which will be given up for you.”
As I said previously, personal stories always resonate with me. In particular, the story of the man picking up scraps of the Eucharist, leading into the tale of the girl taking pieces of the Eucharist in Communist China, had a great affect on me. Risking so much just for the intimacy with Christ, it is really something that I thought everyone needed to hear at some point. Some things are worth taking risks for, Christ is one of them.
I will just come right out and say it, Fr. Mike Schmitz is an AMAZING speaker. I will be brutally honest in saying that religion is a very tough subject for me to pay attention to. I mean, after being in a catholic school for my entire life, hearing the same thing day in and day out can get very repetitive. Faith is a very touchy subject with me. It’s not that I don’t like religion, it’s more along the lines of just I can’t pay attention. So, with all of this in mind, for Fr. Mike to make me actually want to watch the talk for the full time is truly astounding. I think that he is a good speaker because of a few reasons. First, is his comedy. I am not a serious person by any means, I never have and I probably never will be. It’s just too boring to be serious, and that’s part of the reason why I can’t pay attention to anything else that deals with religion. It’s all just so serious and boring. Fr. Mike finds a way to add in some comedic relief. He cracks jokes every once and a while just to keep the audience enjoying themselves. Because, after all, isn’t that the main goal of a speech like this? The other reason I think he is such a good speaker is his how relatable he is. While most religion speakers are all like, “You have to do this, you can never do this,” he give his own experiences and shows that he has been there too. Not only is he a good speaker because of this, but also because of his ethos. He comes right out in the beginning, talking all about where he is from and talking about other countries. This is an amazing strategy, as it makes the audience feel closer and more at home when their country is mentioned. By far, my favorite part of this talk is the humor. It made me able to pay attention for the whole 45 minutes, which in the end allowed me to connect with the true message of the Eucharist.
ReplyDeleteI can relate very strongly to your struggles with religion. I can NEVER pay attention, but Father Mike entices you and makes you want to know more. Your review definitely resonated with me, and I’m glad you enjoyed the video!
DeleteGreat point that Fr. Mike’s humor helped him ease into the subject. I’m not going to lie, if Fr. Mike just talked the Eucharist out of the beginning, he would have lost my attention. Also, your summary of the speech as a whole showed me the important points Fr. Mike made.
DeleteFr. Schmitz delivers a wonderful piece of rhetoric to the members and attendees of the FOCUS conference. It was a complex argument which I didn’t fully understand, but here goes.
ReplyDeleteHe establishes ethos with his introduction, talking to the audience as if they were friends, not an audience at a convention or conference. He talks in a conversational manner and not in a “high-and-mighty” demeanor. He also uses many emotional examples and personal stories to tie it all together with pathos and seal his ethos.
His logos was difficult for me to detect, but it is evident in his discussion of the different Bible stories in relation to his argument. The story about the people only wanting the food and not to believe in Him really did resonate with me because often times we blindly accept good things without thanking the giver, thinking “I deserve it.”
Overall, this is a very good argument. It’s full of all three rhetorical appeals and the fact that there is such a concrete connection resonates and will stay with me for a long time
You have a few good points. However, I really think you need to put more effort and detail into your blogs. You just need to better explain what you are saying. By doing that, it will make your blog a little longer.
DeleteDominic is unable to access the blog right now, so he asked me to post his comments on here.
Delete“Luke: Although you made some good points, I think you can tell by everyone else’s posts that there was a lot more to dissect in Fr. Schmitz’s discussion. Many posts went into multiple segments due to length, and yours was extremely brief and lacking in detail. I think we both know you could have put a lot more into this.”
When a person has a platform that they can use to reach a large number of people, it is amazing to see them use it for good. In this talk by Father Mike Schmitz, he does just that. He is a well known speaker in the Catholic community. His ethos, subsequently, was previously established. He also mentions his home town and several personal details while joking with the audience; this makes it easy for them to connect with him on an personal level while respecting his knowledge as a professional. Father Mike does an incredible job of using every day occurrences and relatable experiences to help listeners understand the message that he is trying to convey. By doing this, he uses both logos and ethos. He gives examples of dating as a simple way to discuss a complex subject. As his story progresses, Father Mike continues to use examples that build on each other so that people who have not experienced these things for themselves can still understand the points that he is trying to make. These examples are growing points in people’s lives such as dating and marriage. People can then relate his message to their own lives, make a connection, and bring some of the aspects from his talk back into their own lives. My favorite part was definitely the part where he talks about marriage. I obviously cannot relate to that from my own life, but Father Mike does such an amazing job of describing the incredible bond that is formed in marriage. I love going to mass with my friends, and I once took a friend who was not Catholic but thought they might want to be. It really does feel different to experience something that awesome with someone else. Father Mike makes me excited to experience something like that again because his example perfectly encapsulates what it feels like to share something as deeply intimate as your faith with someone that you truly love. I have actually watched this talk before quite recently after Catherine Cerroni sent it to me. She told me that I would love and appreciate it, and she was definitely right.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis is awesome. You found all of the main parts of the speech. I’m really glad you liked this talk. I think you should have talked more about the logos more. Great job!
DeleteI love how you mentioned the part about the bond we get through marriage. And also I agree with where he got his ethos from, he already had it before the speech. This is a great analysis!
DeleteWhen I first read the assignment, I was not very willing to watch a forty-five minute video of a priest talking. I thought it was going to be a very boring talk about basic information. However, I was proven greatly wrong. Father Mike Schmitz is one of the best speakers I have ever heard by far. He did a great job at establishing logos, ethos, and pathos during the whole entire talk. It was easy to see that Father Mike Schmitz has a great relationship with Jesus because he knows how to always put his faith first. He did a great job of arguing his main idea — how to have an intimate relationship with Jesus.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as the speech started, he established established a few forms of ethos such as moral virtue and practical wisdom. Father Mike Schmitz is someone who knows what he is talking about. He is able to greatly explain what the Eucharist really is, and he knows a great sum of information about Catholicism. I also think that some ethos was established as soon as he started talking. Right away, he was very energetic, loud, and had a smiling face. In order to loosen up the crowd, he told quit a few jokes too such as when he mentions that he gets paid extra to say “focus” and “seek.” Also, he tells the audience how they know if someone is the one. Moral of the story, if you are married to someone, they are the one. He mentions that we are made for not only a normal relationship with Jesus but an intimate one too.
This talk was filled with logos. Logos was established the most amongst the three. The first thing mentioned pertaining to logos is that love is when you give your whole self. By giving everything, you are being intimate. Jesus strives to be intimate with us because we are made for him. Father Mike Schmitz also pertains to logos when he mentions the difference between symbolically and literally. Symbolically is easy to be accepted such as that Jesus is the vine, and we are the branches. However, literal is hard to accept. For example, Jesus’ body is the bread, and his blood is the wine. If we do not strive to receive the Eucharist, then we do not not strive for Jesus. Because no Eucharist means no Jesus. Father then continued to say that someone should leave if they do not believe because the scripture can not be changed. We need Jesus. Finally, Father Mike explains that if we are too sick for mass, then we are too sick for anything else.
It was able to be seen that Father had emotion, but not like most people. He was able to always remain calm during his whole entire talk. He was happy and never got upset about anything he was talking about. I also think pathos was present when he mentioned how the girl at the end would eat the Eucharist crumbs off of the floor. I think this woman thought this was the only way to be loved by Jesus. However, there is more than one way to be loved by our Savior. The stories that were told were supposed to really let the audience think about how much some people with do in order to be closer to Jesus.
We are scared of commitment sometimes, which is why Jesus hides. He hides so we do not have to. He wants us to believe in our faith and strive to have a good relationship with him. We need to be willing to let him love us. In confession, you would think we are the ones asking for forgiveness. However, Jesus is actually begging us to forgive himself. We are not only made to have a relationship with Jesus, but made to let him give us his whole body when we receive the Eucharist. One drop of blood and one crumb of His body is enough to save the whole entire world.
I one hundred percent agree with the amaIng job Fr. Mike did on establishing his ethos. His fun and upbeat attitude on the subject helped him in his arguement.
DeleteYou were very thorough in your analysis. You did a great job with ethos, and I am glad that you used an example of the kinds of jokes he told. Your discussion of logos was also very on-point. I also loved your last paragraph, as it really sums up what the talk was about.
DeletePart 1
ReplyDeleteWhen I first read the assignment, I was not very willing to watch a forty-five minute video of a priest talking. I thought it was going to be a very boring talk about basic information. However, I was proven greatly wrong. Father Mike Schmitz is one of the best speakers I have ever heard by far. He did a great job at establishing logos, ethos, and pathos during the whole entire talk. It was easy to see that Father Mike Schmitz has a great relationship with Jesus because he knows how to always put his faith first. He did a great job of arguing his main idea — how to have an intimate relationship with Jesus.
As soon as the speech started, he established established a few forms of ethos such as moral virtue and practical wisdom. Father Mike Schmitz is someone who knows what he is talking about. He is able to greatly explain what the Eucharist really is, and he knows a great sum of information about Catholicism. I also think that some ethos was established as soon as he started talking. Right away, he was very energetic, loud, and had a smiling face. In order to loosen up the crowd, he told quit a few jokes too such as when he mentions that he gets paid extra to say “focus” and “seek.” Also, he tells the audience how they know if someone is the one. Moral of the story, if you are married to someone, they are the one. He mentions that we are made for not only a normal relationship with Jesus but an intimate one too.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteThis talk was filled with logos. Logos was established the most amongst the three. The first thing mentioned pertaining to logos is that love is when you give your whole self. By giving everything, you are being intimate. Jesus strives to be intimate with us because we are made for him. Father Mike Schmitz also pertains to logos when he mentions the difference between symbolically and literally. Symbolically is easy to be accepted such as that Jesus is the vine, and we are the branches. However, literal is hard to accept. For example, Jesus’ body is the bread, and his blood is the wine. If we do not strive to receive the Eucharist, then we do not not strive for Jesus. Because no Eucharist means no Jesus. Father then continued to say that someone should leave if they do not believe because the scripture can not be changed. We need Jesus. Finally, Father Mike explains that if we are too sick for mass, then we are too sick for anything else.
It was able to be seen that Father had emotion, but not like most people. He was able to always remain calm during his whole entire talk. He was happy and never got upset about anything he was talking about. I also think pathos was present when he mentioned how the girl at the end would eat the Eucharist crumbs off of the floor. I think this woman thought this was the only way to be loved by Jesus. However, there is more than one way to be loved by our Savior. The stories that were told were supposed to really let the audience think about how much some people with do in order to be closer to Jesus.
We are scared of commitment sometimes, which is why Jesus hides. He hides so we do not have to. He wants us to believe in our faith and strive to have a good relationship with him. We need to be willing to let him love us. In confession, you would think we are the ones asking for forgiveness. However, Jesus is actually begging us to forgive himself. We are not only made to have a relationship with Jesus, but made to let him give us his whole body when we receive the Eucharist. One drop of blood and one crumb of His body is enough to save the whole entire world.
Fr. Mike Schmitz‘s talk was so inspiring. Honestly, I thought it was going to be just another boring Jesus freak who wants to squeeze more and more information about he Lord into my brain and I did not want to watch the whole thing. I’m glad I did. The presentation was just the opposite of what I described. He began the presentation with a lot of humor and continued it throughout the entire speech. I believe that this is how he established his ethos. He relates to the audience because he has had many of the same experiences as them such as first dates. He also wanted a deeper relationship with Christ. This is why I think people went to that speech, to learn more about a Christ and how to find a deeper, intimate relationship with God. Fr. Mike is an amazing rhetor. He planned out a great argument and delivered it extremely well. He made the crowd excited to learn about Jesus and the Eucharist. While giving this speech, he remained upbeat even when talking about something that was really emotional for most people. The main thing that I took away from this presentation was that It is okay to seek a greater, deeper relationship with God. For. Mike talked a lot about forgiveness and I think that part of the speech was great because we can always learn more about forgiveness because we, as imperfect humans, constantly need it.
ReplyDeleteYou did a good job identifying Father Mike’s argument, which was of course the true presence of the Body and Blood in the Eucharist. However, I feel that you gave an overly-abridged analysis. I feel like you could have gone into some more detail. But you managed to identify the main components, which is always important.
DeleteI think you did a good job analyzing Father Mike’s speech. You had a really good point on how he established his ethos through humor, and I couldn’t agree more that I went into the speech with the same mindset as you. Good job!
DeleteFr. Mike Schmitz did an amazing job with his speech. In the beginning he established his ethos by relating to the audience with his past stories. He also made references that the audience would understand such as from the Adams family. These stories and understanding of the audience connects them to get their attention for his speech. Fr. Mike starts his conversation of intimacy in a slow and progressive way. He uses his experience on a first date to aid in the understanding of the want to have love and intimacy. He explains situations that most people have gone through to explain why their end result was happiness. He explains that we need love and love is shown through our bodies. Fr. Mike clarifies that this does not mean people go around giving themselves away, rather people give themselves as gifts, such as a gentle kiss. He explains this statement with a story about a man and woman on their first and second date. His examples lead into his topic of intimacy with Jesus. We believe we cannot physically touch Jesus, but Jesus is present in two of God’s great gifts: love and the Eucharist. Fr. Mike explains that the love we feel from others is the same love from Jesus. Jesus gave us the ability to love, and we use his love. That, personally, blows my mind that Jesus is present in all those who love us: parents, family, friends. The Eucharist is Jesus. Fr. Mike uses the Gospel of John to help us understand when Jesus is speaking symbolically or literally. Using the Bible is a great resource due to the fact that those are God’s words, therefore this is logos. Fr. Mike also thoroughly goes through this Gospel line by line to dive deeper into its meaning. After presenting his resources of the Bible, personal experience, and others’ stories he truly states his argument: it is possible to have an intimate relationship with Jesus. His speech opened my eyes to the importance of the Eucharist and how Jesus gave us everything in order to love us. This love is like no other and I’m excited to see the happiness from God’s never ending love.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Father Mike telling past stories greatly appealed to ethos. The first date story was a good example of this. Good job!
DeleteYou backed up each of your points very well! I agree that him using personal stories and the Bible made him more credible. Good job!
DeleteFather Mike Schmitz used many rhetorical devices throughout his presentation to make it very successful. He was able to appeal to the audience which made them more likely to listen. Father Mike wanted to show that we need intimacy with Jesus just like we have intimacy with most people we love. He established his ethos by giving background stories about himself such as how his first date went. He also gave many modern examples that the audience could easily understand. Father Mike talked in a very light hearted way which I believe appealed to the audience in a great way. Most times, in all honesty, people who speak of Jesus often seem like “holy freaks”but Father Mike spoke in a way that could be easily listened to and liked very well. He didn’t just talk all about Jesus but he spoke about how Jesus works through all of us. The love we see in everyone is the presence of Jesus in that person which is amazing and mind blowing in all ways. He explains that Jesus gave everything for us and as a result he now lives in everyone of us. If we can see that love he gives then we truly can become more intimate with Jesus. He backs up all of his use of logic with specific examples whether it be from the Bible or personal experiences. By being able to back up his points it made his argument more sound. After watching his presentation, I know realize that I need more than just a relationship with Jesus and I also need to live through the love he gave me and spread it to everyone else.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete