T
TableServant
Guest
I would tend to agree that common sense is the order here, but we can go too far on both ends of this debate, in my opinion. In my own preaching (3-1/2 years as a permanent deacon), I have not found the need or had a desire to use visual aides, props or “gimmicks”. However, in reflection as I read this thread, I must say that if the occassion presented itself, and the situation (including the community) were right, I can see myself using something other than just my God-given voice to make a point in my homily.I don’t think there is anything in the GIRM preventing cartwheels during the homily either. Common sense is in order here.
I can think of several points on the matter - that we (homilists) are human, and we are doing our best (inspired as it may be) to reach a human congregation, some of whom may respond or be touched by, or benefit from, some (name removed by moderator)ut other than the spoken word. That we, as homilists, struggle to find the best way to express the inspiration that we receive, and sometimes we, too, get “writer’s block”.
Now, of course, I am not endorsing a “theatrical production” for the homily, or a video taped instruction. Even though I’m a geek at heart, and a programmer by profession, I’m not looking for pyrotechnics and holographic displays. I believe that the best storytelling device that we have is the human voice. But I do know the struggle that it is to prepare a homily every week or more. I know the “blank stare” that some of you have referenced, or the “nodding-off parishioner”, not to mention the person who actually answered their cell-phone during Mass and started a conversation (not to start a whole other discussion)!
While we shouldn’t use visual aides and props as a crutch or become dependent on them for our homiletics, everything in God’s creation has it’s proper use, and if there is an item that, as used during a homily to illustrate a point (a mustard seed here or there), brings people closer to God, then I cannot, faithfully, argue against it.