Advice to homilists: Please get to the point in six or eight minutes

[wynnejj]

“Some years ago in Hartford we all went to the church on a hot, sweltering night, to hear the annual report of Mr. Hawley, a city missionary, who went around finding the people who needed help and didn’t want to ask for it. He told of the life in the cellars where poverty resided, he gave instances of the heroism and devotion of the poor. The poor are always good to each other. When a man with millions gives we make a great deal of noise. It’s noise in the wrong place. For it’s the widow’s mite that counts. Well, Hawley worked me up to a great state. I couldn’t wait for him to get through. I had four hundred dollars in my pocket. I wanted to give that and borrow more to give. You could see greenbacks in every eye. But he didn’t pass the plate then, he kept on talking and talking and talking and as he talked it grew hotter and hotter and hotter, and we grew sleepier and sleepier and sleepier. My enthusiasm went down, down, down - $100 at a clip, till finally when the plate did come around I stole ten cents out of it.”

Mark Twain

That’s funny. It reminds me of a cause to which I gave $100. Within a year, I received a $100 in letter after letter back asking for more, so that they could continue their advertising and letter campaign. Towards the end, they tried sending me $1 to “prime the pump”. They did it again. I kept the $2 for a net loss of $98 of good intentions.

 

[irishpatrick]

Good post. Are you suggesting that Sola-Eucharist is sufficient without Biblical instruction? Are you saying that one shouldn’t question faith in that we get lost by that extraneous stuff? I understand the caution about getting caught up in negativity of our performance, but there seems to be a feeling that apologetics is never to apologize for negligence.

If I were to base my belief in the Holy Eucharist on the empirical evidence of the effect on communicants, then I would be puzzled by what I see with all the scandals that we see in the church, especially when the involved persons are daily communicants. The only reasoning which would reconcile my observations with my beliefs is to conclude that the Holy Eucharist is not necessarily good medicine for the disingenuous - the Cafeteria Catholic. And, selective sermons with selective subjects cater to Cafeteria Catholics.

As a young person, who questions all authority as a right of passage, the Catholic Church taught with selective sermons would not pass the test of Faith with Reason. I don’t believe that the style of sermon has much bearing on losing young persons.

It is really very simple. Faith is supposed to lead us to God. The Eucharist is God, and it remains God (Jesus) no matter what people do.

The idea of questioning authority as a “right of passage” is nonsense imo. Everyone can question anything they want, but in no way is it some right of passage to question authority, rather it is just something a modern culture has taught our young to do.

My point is also quite basic and simple: if one believes that Jesus is truly Present in the Eucharist in His Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, then they should desire Communion above everything else faith related. After all, the Eucharist is God and is the closest any human can get to Heaven on earth.

 

[irishpatrick]

Well that does not apply in any of the cases I’m reporting. The priest is simply a priest, not a ‘cult.’

And the Eucharist is hardly being derailed or neglected. The focus is on the entire message of that day’s Mass, with application of the readings provided by superbly prepared & perceptive homilists, who provide examples of how those readings extend into our daily lives, and should be nourishing us as does the Eucharist.

I am truly glad you derive such fruit from those homilies. It is my experience that every homilist is simply a human being, no matter how smart, holy or clever. Therefore, the absolute pinnacle of the faith is Jesus, not a person, it is the Revealed Word and His Given Body (Communion) that are truly Divine, not the opinion of a person who often speaks of his own interpretation of Scripture readings.

Please do not get me wrong, homilies are often quite wonderful and can often shed light on how to bring Christ more fully into our lives, yet imo the focus must always be on Jesus and not on a “superbly” created homily. I hear incredibly few homilies expounding upon the true miracle of the Eucharist and of its potental for complete transformation in our lives.

Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” To my knowledge, I cannot recall Jesus ever saying anything as strong about reading and studying Scripture, though St. Jerome once said : “…ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.” Yet, Catholics hear more Scripture during Mass, than any other Church.

Each person walks their own journey and I applaud your great faith and I applaud the fact that you derive much fruit from those homilies. I am just of the mind that if more people knelt before the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, the entire world would be transformed.

 

[manualman]

IMO, it shouldn’t be an arbitrary limit on length. Instead, the bishop might consider establishing a confidential homiletics certification program. Establish a sliding sclae based on performance to allowable length.

Perhaps the 10 minutes discussed is ideal for a barely competant speaker.
But once he passes muster with the bishop’s delegated reviewer, he can be authorized to take up to 20 minutes.

 

[wynnejj]

It is really very simple. Faith is supposed to lead us to God. The Eucharist is God, and it remains God (Jesus) no matter what people do.

The idea of questioning authority as a “right of passage” is nonsense imo. Everyone can question anything they want, but in no way is it some right of passage to question authority, rather it is just something a modern culture has taught our young to do.

My point is also quite basic and simple: if one believes that Jesus is truly Present in the Eucharist in His Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, then they should desire Communion above everything else faith related. After all, the Eucharist is God and is the closest any human can get to Heaven on earth.

How can one evangelize if one doesn’t recognize the other person’s “right of passage” on his faith journey to question the authority of their current cultural belief systems? If that were true, Christianity would never have spread beyond Christ’s original disciples.

The point of the article is to keep young persons from leaving the church by adopting better preaching practices. I contend that many leave because they look to the church to receive the “unadulterated” truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They want the whole story and not what they want to hear. And, not saying what needs to be professed is tantamount to agreeing with secular society or, in the very least, suggesting that the church is not sure of its beliefs.

I am in total agreement that the Eucharist is God, and it remains God (Jesus) no matter what people around do. My point is that patterns of neglect in Church teaching authority at the local level, despite what people do, makes the understanding of Catholic truth an ambiguous, unclear message. It makes their moral authority highly suspect. Thus, young persons leave.

 

[irishpatrick]

How can one evangelize if one doesn’t recognize the other person’s “right of passage” on his faith journey to question the authority of their current cultural belief systems? If that were true, Christianity would never have spread beyond Christ’s original disciples.

The point of the article is to keep young persons from leaving the church by adopting better preaching practices. I contend that many leave because they look to the church to receive the “unadulterated” truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They want the whole story and not what they want to hear. And, not saying what needs to be professed is tantamount to agreeing with secular society or, in the very least, suggesting that the church is not sure of its beliefs.

I am in total agreement that the Eucharist is God, and it remains God (Jesus) no matter what people around do. My point is that patterns of neglect in Church teaching authority at the local level, despite what people do, makes the understanding of Catholic truth an ambiguous, unclear message. It makes their moral authority highly suspect. Thus, young persons leave.

I simply said I do not agree that questioning authority is a right of passage, not that questioning in general was wrong.

Preaching is good and productive, yet it can not compare to the Eucharist, and I feel the Church can do a better job of teaching about the Eucharist. If people knew that Jesus was Really there, how could they leave?

 

[irishpatrick]

How can one evangelize if one doesn’t recognize the other person’s “right of passage” on his faith journey to question the authority of their current cultural belief systems? If that were true, Christianity would never have spread beyond Christ’s original disciples.

The point of the article is to keep young persons from leaving the church by adopting better preaching practices. I contend that many leave because they look to the church to receive the “unadulterated” truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They want the whole story and not what they want to hear. And, not saying what needs to be professed is tantamount to agreeing with secular society or, in the very least, suggesting that the church is not sure of its beliefs.

I am in total agreement that the Eucharist is God, and it remains God (Jesus) no matter what people around do. My point is that patterns of neglect in Church teaching authority at the local level, despite what people do, makes the understanding of Catholic truth an ambiguous, unclear message. It makes their moral authority highly suspect. Thus, young persons leave.

BTW, the moral authority of Christ should be sufficient–His children are imperfect.

 

[wynnejj]

I simply said I do not agree that questioning authority is a right of passage, not that questioning in general was wrong.

Preaching is good and productive, yet it can not compare to the Eucharist, and I feel the Church can do a better job of teaching about the Eucharist. If people knew that Jesus was Really there, how could they leave?

I think that I get the gist of what your saying now. The idea that many young persons feel that authority is guilty until proven innocent, and therefore obedience is never morally mandatory. If that’s it, you are correct in that it is definitely NOT a “right of passage” to disobey authority, but OK to question.

My observations in my neck of the woods perceive greater emphasis on professing the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. That is, I don’t think my parish is lax in that regard. And, I am gratified that they do talk about receiving the Holy Eucharist in a state of grace. This is all good.

In my own experience, I believed in the Real Presence. That changed when I discovered that the practice of abortion had been going on some 15 years, and had never hit my radar despite attending Sunday Mass regularly. When I learned the numbers, I was disgusted and my faith in Jesus & the Church was on the rocks. So I can understand why they would leave. Although I attended Sunday Mass, I stopped receiving the Holy Eucharist. I was in a position where I wanted to believe.

 

[irishpatrick]

I think that I get the gist of what your saying now. The idea that many young persons feel that authority is guilty until proven innocent, and therefore obedience is never morally mandatory. If that’s it, you are correct in that it is definitely NOT a “right of passage” to disobey authority, but OK to question.

My observations in my neck of the woods perceive greater emphasis on professing the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. That is, I don’t think my parish is lax in that regard. And, I am gratified that they do talk about receiving the Holy Eucharist in a state of grace. This is all good.

In my own experience, I believed in the Real Presence. That changed when I discovered that the practice of abortion had been going on some 15 years, and had never hit my radar despite attending Sunday Mass regularly. When I learned the numbers, I was disgusted and my faith in Jesus & the Church was on the rocks. So I can understand why they would leave. Although I attended Sunday Mass, I stopped receiving the Holy Eucharist. I was in a position where I wanted to believe.

I think we should never let the sins of others prevent us from being with and receiving Christ. The great and grave sins of Catholics should not, in any way, stop us from being with Jesus. If people were sinfree, or if they always did the correct thing, we would not need the Church or Jesus–and we’d already be in paradise. Yet, since we all sin, and since we sometimes gravely sin, we need our Savior Jesus and His Church, despite the failings of individual Catholics.

 

[curlycool89]

People do need to remember that it is a homily at Church. Not a lecture. There is a different. Mass is not a free drop-in-class on Catholicism. It is an encounter with Jesus Christ.

I have heard some amazing homilies from priests and they’re usually in the 10-15 minute mark for Sunday (usually 10 or less for daily), that were ad-libbed (not read). When they drag on too long, you start to forget what they were talking about.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I am truly glad you derive such fruit from those homilies. It is my experience that every homilist is simply a human being, no matter how smart, holy or clever.

Again, where do you get this? Who said anything about the priest is not a human being?

It’s not just “I” who “derive benefit.” The people of God, the Mystical Body of Christ “derives benefit.” Anyone who is listening openly, to a homily which is halfway well-prepared, thoughtfully delivered, and in line with the feast day or some appropriate theme, is a Catholic who is “deriving benefit.” That is the very intent of the Liturgy of the Word, which complements the Liturgy of the Eucharist, pointing to it as it does. They are two halves of a unifed whole. The homily, as part of the Liturgy of the Word, is not just something to be endured while looking at one’s watch until the Eucharist is celebrated. ! (As if the Eucharist is independent; it isn’t; it’s integral; all of the Mass is a unit.)

Therefore, the absolute pinnacle of the faith is Jesus, not a person,

Who on this forum, or even on this thread, said or implied otherwise? !

You seem to have a really strange assumption that a good homilist is on an ego trip, and/or that an appreciative listener to a good homily has his or her priorities wrong.

Please do not get me wrong, homilies are often quite wonderful and can often shed light on how to bring Christ more fully into our lives, yet imo the focus must always be on Jesus and not on a “superbly” created homily.

I do “get you wrong,” because I think you misunderstand what many of us are talking about, and you seem to think that nothing but the Eucharist is important. The Institution is one very important passage in the Gospels, and clearly the central moment of any Mass. No one is saying otherwise. People are saying that Christianity, and Catholicism, are the Eucharist and more: all of the Scriptures are the Inspired Word of God. While Jesus is unquestionably The Word, He himself repeatedly reflected on scripture, orally, and found it important to deliver rather long homilies at times (parables/sayings/sermons and explanations) all in an effort to get his folowers (Us!) to interiorize those words and live them.

I hear incredibly few homilies expounding upon the true miracle of the Eucharist and of its potental for complete transformation in our lives.

Why do you need a priest to tell you what apparently you already understand? That’s not why I need a priest. I get how transformative Eucharist is. I need to hear how the 2 readings during the weekdays and the 3 readings on Sunday, work together to illumine God’s word and get me to reflect on how I can bring that very understanding to the Eucharist.

St. Jerome once said : “…ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.” Yet, Catholics hear more Scripture during Mass, than any other Church.

Given what St. Jerome said, it’s apparently good that they do. Why do you object to Catholics hearing scripture explicated? I could understand if the priest approached scripture with reverence and the homily with care, but approached eucharist with irreverence and carelessly. Where is that occurring?

I am just of the mind that if more people knelt before the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, the entire world would be transformed.

Amazing that you think that reflecting on Scripture and kneeling before the Blessed Sacrament, are mutually exclusive, or need to compete with each other in some artificial contest. Does it occur to you how many people bring their Bibles to adoration, or upload the day’s readings or some other readings into their smartphones, and then bring those into adoration to think about that while they’re there? (Lots of people in the Liturgy & Sacraments forum talk about that; personally, I find technology distracting during prayer, but that’s not the point: the point is that people do see the connection between God’s Word in scripture and Jesus the Word. They don’t see them as opposed!)

 

[trials]

I would agree that 10 minutes is a good average length for sermons. However, like others said, it is a shame when people focus too much on the homily and use that to judge whether a Mass was “good” or “bad”. I’m sure you’ve heard people come out of Mass afterwards saying, “brilliant sermon” or “I nearly fell asleep” as if the homily was the pivotal point of the Mass. And I would have been guilty of this in the past too, so not judging here - I was one of these people.

I think that the whole Fr. Corapi affair has enlightened me as to the importance of focussing on the Sacrifice of the Mass, not on the priest as preacher. And in discussions with priests I’ve often felt that some of the quieter ones, who aren’t such great talkers, often feel a little stung when parishioners tell them about such and such a priest who gave a brilliant talk, etc, etc.

 

[irishpatrick]

Again, where do you get this? Who said anything about the priest is not a human being?

It’s not just “I” who “derive benefit.” The people of God, the Mystical Body of Christ “derives benefit.” Anyone who is listening openly, to a homily which is halfway well-prepared, thoughtfully delivered, and in line with the feast day or some appropriate theme, is a Catholic who is “deriving benefit.” That is the very intent of the Liturgy of the Word, which complements the Liturgy of the Eucharist, pointing to it as it does. They are two halves of a unifed whole. The homily, as part of the Liturgy of the Word, is not just something to be endured while looking at one’s watch until the Eucharist is celebrated. ! (As if the Eucharist is independent; it isn’t; it’s integral; all of the Mass is a unit.)

Who on this forum, or even on this thread, said or implied otherwise? !

You seem to have a really strange assumption that a good homilist is on an ego trip, and/or that an appreciative listener to a good homily has his or her priorities wrong.

I do “get you wrong,” because I think you misunderstand what many of us are talking about, and you seem to think that nothing but the Eucharist is important. The Institution is one very important passage in the Gospels, and clearly the central moment of any Mass. No one is saying otherwise. People are saying that Christianity, and Catholicism, are the Eucharist and more: all of the Scriptures are the Inspired Word of God. While Jesus is unquestionably The Word, He himself repeatedly reflected on scripture, orally, and found it important to deliver rather long homilies at times (parables/sayings/sermons and explanations) all in an effort to get his folowers (Us!) to interiorize those words and live them.

Why do you need a priest to tell you what apparently you already understand? That’s not why I need a priest. I get how transformative Eucharist is. I need to hear how the 2 readings during the weekdays and the 3 readings on Sunday, work together to illumine God’s word and get me to reflect on how I can bring that very understanding to the Eucharist.

Given what St. Jerome said, it’s apparently good that they do. Why do you object to Catholics hearing scripture explicated? I could understand if the priest approached scripture with reverence and the homily with care, but approached eucharist with irreverence and carelessly. Where is that occurring?

Amazing that you think that reflecting on Scripture and kneeling before the Blessed Sacrament, are mutually exclusive, or need to compete with each other in some artificial contest. Does it occur to you how many people bring their Bibles to adoration, or upload the day’s readings or some other readings into their smartphones, and then bring those into adoration to think about that while they’re there? (Lots of people in the Liturgy & Sacraments forum talk about that; personally, I find technology distracting during prayer, but that’s not the point: the point is that people do see the connection between God’s Word in scripture and Jesus the Word. They don’t see them as opposed!)

We seem to have reached a point of our conversation turning into a serious confrontation, which was certainly never my intent. I apologize if I upset you and I thank you for the response. I take the blame for derailing our discussion, I most likely did a very poor job of explaining my views.

I am sincerely glad you derive much fruit from the homilies you have heard. It is wonderful to know and thank you for sharing that.

 

[irishpatrick]

I would agree that 10 minutes is a good average length for sermons. However, like others said, it is a shame when people focus too much on the homily and use that to judge whether a Mass was “good” or “bad”. I’m sure you’ve heard people come out of Mass afterwards saying, “brilliant sermon” or “I nearly fell asleep” as if the homily was the pivotal point of the Mass. And I would have been guilty of this in the past too, so not judging here - I was one of these people.

I think that the whole Fr. Corapi affair has enlightened me as to the importance of focussing on the Sacrifice of the Mass, not on the priest as preacher. And in discussions with priests I’ve often felt that some of the quieter ones, who aren’t such great talkers, often feel a little stung when parishioners tell them about such and such a priest who gave a brilliant talk, etc, etc.

Well said.

 

[Sarabande]

I don’t mind long homilies as long as they are well-thought out, prepared, intellectual, substantive and delivered well. There are few homilists, in my opinion, who fit into this category, which is fine with me. I’m ok if there isn’t a good homily either. I look at a good homily as an extra bonus to the mass, not the reason for attending mass. Sort of like having good sacred music at mass as an extra bonus. Both can be spiritually enriching in different ways. Although it’s preferable to have both, it’s not the reason why I attend mass. I have had a really good homilists, though, who knew how to be concise and to the point in under 10 minutes. They are also great.

 

[wynnejj]

I don’t mind long homilies as long as they are well-thought out, prepared, intellectual, substantive and delivered well. There are few homilists, in my opinion, who fit into this category, which is fine with me. I’m ok if there isn’t a good homily either. I look at a good homily as an extra bonus to the mass, not the reason for attending mass. Sort of like having good sacred music at mass as an extra bonus. Both can be spiritually enriching in different ways. Although it’s preferable to have both, it’s not the reason why I attend mass. I have had a really good homilists, though, who knew how to be concise and to the point in under 10 minutes. They are also great.

I look at the sacrifice of the Mass as a Christian family dinner. After all, it is modelled after the Last Supper. The primary purpose is the meal which fortifies the body & spirit. I like good background music that is conducive to enjoying my meal. You can go to a meal where there is no discussion. Or you can go to a meal where there is light chatter. Or you can go to a meal where there is an important family discussion. Usually I want one of the latter two, rarely the first (if I’m in a bad mood).

Light chatter all the time makes me want to miss the meal all the time. The people have happy clown written all over their face, and it is difficult to see beyond the facial paint. In fact, I’d like to throw the meal right in their face, if there is an important family matter to discuss and it is left un-discussed forever(?).

Serious discussion all the time makes me want to miss the meal all the time. The people have sad clown written all over their face, and it is difficult to see beyond the facial paint. In fact, I’d like to throw the meal right in their face, if we beat a subject to death.

For me to want to come to the family meal, there has to be light chatter and serious discussion about important family matters.

Otherwise, I’ll go get my meal elsewhere - maybe, fast food.

There are important family matters that need discussion since the family is what is most attacked by secular values. I keep getting light chatter.

 

[irishpatrick]

I look at the sacrifice of the Mass as a Christian family dinner. After all, it is modelled after the Last Supper. The primary purpose is the meal which fortifies the body & spirit. I like good background music that is conducive to enjoying my meal. You can go to a meal where there is no discussion. Or you can go to a meal where there is light chatter. Or you can go to a meal where there is an important family discussion. Usually I want one of the latter two, rarely the first (if I’m in a bad mood).

Light chatter all the time makes me want to miss the meal all the time. The people have happy clown written all over their face, and it is difficult to see beyond the facial paint. In fact, I’d like to throw the meal right in their face, if there is an important family matter to discuss and it is left un-discussed forever(?).

Serious discussion all the time makes me want to miss the meal all the time. The people have sad clown written all over their face, and it is difficult to see beyond the facial paint. In fact, I’d like to throw the meal right in their face, if we beat a subject to death.

For me to want to come to the family meal, there has to be light chatter and serious discussion about important family matters.

Otherwise, I’ll go get my meal elsewhere - maybe, fast food.

There are important family matters that need discussion since the family is what is most attacked by secular values. I keep getting light chatter.

Quite often, likely more often than not, the serious family discussion is based on one person’s interpretation of Divine realities. Keep that in mind.

 

[tabbey48]

Obviously I’m in the minority. I love long, well-thought-out, well-prepared homilies. Nothing disappoints me more than a homily which has obviously been prepared by a deep thinker of a priest, that abruptly stops on some artificial dime, when clearly much more could be said. I attend three different churches where all the homilies, thank goodness, are long, theologically well prepared & well integrated, intellectually stimulating, spritiually insightful, and thought-provoking.

And one of those churches has largely young attendees. Obviously the survey didn’t include that parish.

I agree with you. As long as the Priest has something worthwhile to say, I’ll sit there and listen! And I’ll take notes!!

And, by the way, some of our Catholic young people who are leaving us and going to the Evangelical Protestant Churches are going to get a LOT more than a 10 minute sermon…

 

[James924]

I look at the sacrifice of the Mass as a Christian family dinner. After all, it is modelled after the Last Supper. The primary purpose is the meal which fortifies the body & spirit. I like good background music that is conducive to enjoying my meal. You can go to a meal where there is no discussion. Or you can go to a meal where there is light chatter. Or you can go to a meal where there is an important family discussion. Usually I want one of the latter two, rarely the first (if I’m in a bad mood).

Light chatter all the time makes me want to miss the meal all the time. The people have happy clown written all over their face, and it is difficult to see beyond the facial paint. In fact, I’d like to throw the meal right in their face, if there is an important family matter to discuss and it is left un-discussed forever(?).

Serious discussion all the time makes me want to miss the meal all the time. The people have sad clown written all over their face, and it is difficult to see beyond the facial paint. In fact, I’d like to throw the meal right in their face, if we beat a subject to death.

For me to want to come to the family meal, there has to be light chatter and serious discussion about important family matters.

Otherwise, I’ll go get my meal elsewhere - maybe, fast food.

There are important family matters that need discussion since the family is what is most attacked by secular values. I keep getting light chatter.

Although I disagree with the popular post-concilar view of the Mass as primarily a supper or meal and urge caution in the application of it, I agree that important things are what need to be preached and, important things are definitely not being preached.

To clarify what I meant in the first line: if you look at the rubrics and what they are supposed to symbolize, they symbolize calvary, and the old testament sacrifice (which is fulfilled in the mass). I would say those are the things upon which the mass is primarily modelled. Certain parts of it might be modelled off the last supper, but I would say that is secondary or tertiary. I may be wrong.

 

[irishpatrick]

I agree with you. As long as the Priest has something worthwhile to say, I’ll sit there and listen! And I’ll take notes!!

And, by the way, some of our Catholic young people who are leaving us and going to the Evangelical Protestant Churches are going to get a LOT more than a 10 minute sermon…

They would not leave if they knew they were leaving Christ!