Why do homilies ..... well, stink?

[Shin]

This thread appears to use homily and sermon interchangeably. I think that may be incorrect (on the other hand, I am not officially Catholic for another 3 days!).

The GIRM uses the word homily (repeatedly without mentioning sermon).

Also, I have seen several places online define these terms as follows:

• A homily explains a passage of scripture and gives practical applications. (“In this passage, Jesus is saying… This applies to us today in such situations as…”)
• A sermon develops a point of doctrine or morals in a systematic way. (God is ______. Scripture describes this attribute in several places… or The virtue of _____ can be fostered in a number of ways; firstly…)

Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary appears to define homily as a subset of sermon.

I think homily more precisely defines what we have in the Liturgy of the Word (at least by Catholic definitions of the homily and sermon).

The books of sermons I have for Sundays and throughout the year for Catholic priests are generally called just that, books ‘of sermons’. Traditional Catholic priests I’ve heard say, ‘sermons’. When I first came into the Church there was one priest who insisted on ‘homilies’ being the proper word, and I took him seriously for a bit… then I encountered what I have and decided…

Sermons is the better word. Sounds best, frankly compared to ‘homilies’ which sounds softer and fluffier, which we need less of.

 

[EasterJoy]

Some of the homilies I am hearing lately border on the bizarre.

I am thinking that I might get him The Sermons of the Early Fathers for his birthday.

That’ll go over like a new vacuum cleaner for Mother’s Day, I’m thinking.
OK, maybe not that bad…
(But you might want to slip a restaurant gift certificate in that card, too.)

 

[jmcrae]

That’ll go over like a new vacuum cleaner for Mother’s Day, I’m thinking.
OK, maybe not that bad…
(But you might want to slip a restaurant gift certificate in that card, too.)

Good point.

 

[plato3]

Preaching this week why the game of life is more important than the game of football. Maybe dave will say it stinks.

GO PRO LIFE AD.

 

[EasterJoy]

Sermons is the better word. Sounds best, frankly compared to ‘homilies’ which sounds softer and fluffier, which we need less of.

In the secular world, homily and sermon are more or less interchangeable.

In Roman Catholic usage, though, the word homily is usually used when specifically referring to the preaching done within the context of the Liturgy of the Word, which is reserved for the ordained. The word sermon is the more general term, and would include preaching done outside the Mass by the laity. Only the ordained may give a homily; anybody can give a sermon (and some often do ).

I don’t think it matters much WHAT you call it - the words that come out of the priest’s mouth during Liturgy of the Word are severely lacking in many parishes. Semantics aside, they need to be far more serious about what they are saying and stop worrying so much about chasing people out of the pews.

~Liza

This is true of our collective effort to offer Mass in general, I am afraid. There is plenty of room for improvement on plenty of fronts, from the laity, the ordained, and everyone in between.

I think we do well to remember the advice now given to married couples: For every negative comment your spouse hears from you, you should be making no less than FIVE positive ones. Otherwise, the defensiveness of being constantly criticized will lead to both injury to the relationship and a turning off of the listening.

Remember that priests get an earful every time they even imply that not everybody goes to Heaven, that abortion is wrong, that we were given our material blessings by God not for ourselves only, but to share with those in need, and all of those uncomfortable truths that he is being “too negative”. (I have been stunned to hear the kind of homilies that I thought were great that instead gained the homilist a tongue-lashing from others.) Among the positive comments, how many are also along the lines of “way to go…you sure told them!”, which is often taken as just one more way of saying “Hit 'em hard, Father, just as long as you don’t hit me.” I think you might imagine how discouraging it is to hear that nobody seems to be savoring anything served up onto their own plate. It is no wonder homilists back up from solid food to milk.

When we get even a tiny bit of solid food on our own plate, then, let’s be sure to ask for more! If we can find anything that our homilist says that challenges us directly, I think we ought to comment and thank him for that, and not for the stuff that we did not take as being aimed at us. That is the way to encourage homilies that push us to listen to what the Gospel is saying to us. That we are not being told to avoid sins that we already avoid and not being challenged to learn to love virtues we already strive for is not our worry. IMHO, we weren’t put on this earth to lecture our physicians about how they ought to be treating their other patients. We do need to ask for care aimed at our own ills, and nourishment that hits an empty spot that we suffer from ourselves.

 

[Ghirardelli]

\A lot of it has to do, I think, with the modern spirit. Everyone wants to hold hands and get along and dance around “offensive” issues like sexual morality, abortion, sacraments, traditional values, and so forth. These, and Christ, are the meat and potatoes of the Catholic Faith, so it’s no wonder when key things are avoided only a boring malaise can result\

**Wrong.

Only CHRIST is the meat, potatoes, bread, beverage, salad, and dessert of the Faith.

“Traditional values” is a meaningless term. Remember that the Roman pagans had their own “traditional values”, too. And Christians were persecuted precisely because they did not uphold these traditional values.

The central sin in Christiam morality is NOT sex or its issues, but PRIDE.**

I think that central sin is actually why some so desperately want to hear fire-n-brimstone. For everyone’s benefit except their own as they have already mastered control of such sins.

 

[EasterJoy]

I think that central sin is actually why some so desperately want to hear fire-n-brimstone. For everyone’s benefit except their own as they have already mastered control of such sins.

I think there is some truth to that. Talking to priests and deacons, the negative feedback seems to be either that the ordained bluntly call things sins that people do not want to be told are sins and espouse virtues that people do not want to be told to pursue, or else the homilist fails to point out sins in others that people want pointed out or fails to encourage virtues in others that the complainer feels he or she already has. Well, that and “you talk for too long.”

They don’t get much complaining that “I struggle with this sin, I try and try and make no progress toward this virtue, yet I never hear you talk about it at all.” It is a complaint that a homilist would welcome, though, I’d think! It would be a change, anyway.

OTOH, I’m very lucky that way. I have caught myself wondering if the other people in the parish don’t ever get tired of hearing homilies that are obviously aimed straight at me!

 

[Incomplete]

Interesting thread. I know of someone who left the parish I go to because, she said, the priest never talks about sin. It’s also true that he doesn’t generally talk about adultery, abortion, or things like that, and doesn’t often use the word “sin”.

But then again, those who have committed adultery or had abortions know the Church teachings. And we all know to try not to sin.

My priest tends to give homilies that focus on the daily stuff we do that gets in the way of our relationship with God. He doesn’t condemn us with this, but tries to make us think. He has put stuff in a way that I’ve never thought of, pointed out things that are painfully true of me but that I never would’ve seen on my own.

No hellfire and brimstone, and not much on grave sins, but I have frequently heard words that have changed me. And I’m not alone.

And he does it every day. We’re very blessed. But if you’re looking for talks on the stuff we all know is sin, you might walk away disappointed.

 

[Shin]

In the secular world, homily and sermon are more or less interchangeable.

In Roman Catholic usage, though, the word homily is usually used when specifically referring to the preaching done within the context of the Liturgy of the Word, which is reserved for the ordained. The word sermon is the more general term, and would include preaching done outside the Mass by the laity. Only the ordained may give a homily; anybody can give a sermon (and some often do ).

I’ll note the Roman Ritual calls it a ‘sermon’ when the priest preaches at the mass.

And those books of sermons are entitled such things as “Sermons for all Sundays of the Year” by Saint this or that.

If homilies are simply sermons always based on scripture, well, I can give a homily outside of the mass too.

But apparently homilies and sermons are simply the same thing with at best stylistic differences.

I did a quick look up and read:

"In the Western Church, the sermon (sermo) and homily (homilia) were often interchangable. They seem to be so used in the titles of the printed collections which have come down to us: “Sermons of St. Peter Chrysologus” and “Homilies of St. Valerian.”

However, since the time of Origen (186-254 or 255), a distinction has been current between loÃgoß (sermo, discourse, sermon) and oJmiÃlia (homilia, homily). The term sermon is generally used to designate an artisitic production, and homily to denote an informal discourse. A sermon generally develops some definite theme; a homily explains or comments on a passage of Scripture. The sermon usually deals with a doctrinal or moral subject, and is more likely to contain a structural form of introduction, body and conclusion such as textbooks of rhetoric advocate. The homily is more likely to lack structural form, and move or even digress wherever the text leads the preacher. Generally, its purpose is to explain the literal meaning of the Scriptural passage, point out moral or ascetical applications, and perhaps develop accommodated or allegorical meanings."

George E. Ganss, ‘The Fathers of the Church’

 

[stcalixtus]

I’m 37 and a lifelong Catholic. One thing I notice about Mass is the homiles are dry, and boring. In my diocese it seems to be the norm. Rarely do you hear a homily on sin, hell, the devil, abortion, birthcontrol, purgatory, confession, the real presence in the Eucharist, doctrine or dogma. These are all things we believe in as Catholics but never or rarely ever discussed. Our priest almost talked about confession over the weekend at Mass, but danced around it without saying what it was or much about it, he hinted at it but that’s it. Its usually “we are all going to heaven” or a feel good “love your neighbor.” All these are good (love of neighbor, etc.), but they seem to be lacking (homilies) in any substance. Any idea’s on why this is the case? Is this normal?

sounds like your problem, introspect…explore that concept.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

The art of homiletics might have been overlooked in the past… and rhetoric (a skill of preachers like Augustine and Chrysostom) is rare nowadays too. Take this phenomenal sermon of St. Augustine on St. John the Baptist (read in the Office of Readings for Gaudete Sunday):

Thanks for posting that wonderful homily! I very much enjoyed it. It’s rich with insight; no less than I’d expect from the Holy Spirit speaking through St. Augustine!

 

[Elizabeth502]

And, of course, you try to come up with something interesting and dynamic 52 weeks a year for 45 years.

Thankfully, Father, not all of us have such unrealistic expectations of high interest and dynamism.

And the proof that the amateur view from the pew is unrealistic is the reality of lay preaching, which in my nearby parish has bombed miserably whenever it’s been tried. Embarrassingly so. Not interesting. Not dynamic.

Also dry. Also boring.

As to the laundry list in the opening post, homilies were not meant to cover all of those areas. The homily is an opportunity to illumine for all of us the everyday, applicable morality & spirituality of the Word of God – one or all 3 readings. One first has to understand the range of application of those words (therefore, a firm grasp of scripture study is essential); one has to pray for insight; one has to develop a theme or two which will help universalize the connection to daily life that most of the congregation can relate to in some way individual to them. And the most effective speakers try to leave a little of the message open – precisely to encourage individual reflection, then or later.

None of the lay preachers I have heard have the theological knowledge to do that, nor the spirituality (by training, by personal immersion) to see & elucidate personal connections, nor the experience speaking directly & dynamically to a group about such topics. The homilies were all read, literally, like academic papers. Major yawn. (And not even good academics, but a lot of pretentious name-dropping and cerebral irrelevancies, even to an educated crowd.)

“Doctrine” and “dogma” do not in themselves make terribly good starting points for homilies, because they start with the cerebral in most cases, as opposed to scripture and personal decision making. I actually love intellectual homilies myself, but I will admit that they make a difference for me when the intellectualism is personalized.

Parishes hopefully should be offering, at least now & then, ongoing adult faith formation, including invited speakers, retreats, announcements about visiting speakers in the diocese, and all kinds of other opportunities to refresh & expand one’s faith knowledge (in addition or in substitution for parish offerings).

A homily, even a long one, is a relatively short moment, integrated into the liturgy – as opposed to mostly a catechism lesson. Its main purpose is to deepen one’s response to the Word of God within the sacramental experience of the moment.

 

[Mattapoisett64]

I’ll note the Roman Ritual calls it a ‘sermon’ when the priest preaches at the mass.

And those books of sermons are entitled such things as “Sermons for all Sundays of the Year” by Saint this or that.

If homilies are simply sermons always based on scripture, well, I can give a homily outside of the mass too.

But apparently homilies and sermons are simply the same thing with at best stylistic differences.

I did a quick look up and read:

"In the Western Church, the sermon (sermo) and homily (homilia) were often interchangable. They seem to be so used in the titles of the printed collections which have come down to us: “Sermons of St. Peter Chrysologus” and “Homilies of St. Valerian.”

However, since the time of Origen (186-254 or 255), a distinction has been current between loÃgoß (sermo, discourse, sermon) and oJmiÃlia (homilia, homily). The term sermon is generally used to designate an artisitic production, and homily to denote an informal discourse. A sermon generally develops some definite theme; a homily explains or comments on a passage of Scripture. The sermon usually deals with a doctrinal or moral subject, and is more likely to contain a structural form of introduction, body and conclusion such as textbooks of rhetoric advocate. The homily is more likely to lack structural form, and move or even digress wherever the text leads the preacher. Generally, its purpose is to explain the literal meaning of the Scriptural passage, point out moral or ascetical applications, and perhaps develop accommodated or allegorical meanings."

George E. Ganss, ‘The Fathers of the Church’

Odd. My copy of the Sacramentary (1985) calls it a “Homily.” (p. 367 - The Order of Mass: “HOMILY – A homily shall be given on all Sundays and holy days of obligation…”)

The GIRM appears to make 16 references to the “homily,” including “. . . a greater effectiveness of the word is fostered by a living commentary on the word, that is, the homily, as part of the liturgical action.” (GIRM # 29).

Our priests and deacons give homilies in accordance with the liturgical books and norms. Your experience may differ.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I’m not trying to be the devil’s advocate here because I love Mass. As soon as I am confirmed I will probably attend daily (or at least more often). However, the Prots have no trouble coming up with dynamics 52 weeks of the year. Hell, fire and brimstone brother.

I’m not so sure about that. I’ve been to a few Protestant services over the years for various reasons and I can’t say that their preaching was any better than our’s. Secondly, it depends on the Protestant church. Many don’t have schools, cemetaries, etc. so they have more time on their hands as well…

 

[benedictgal]

Perhaps we need to see what Pope Benedict XVI mentioned about homilies in Sacramentum Caritatis:

The homily

1. Given the importance of the word of God, the quality of homilies needs to be improved. The homily is “part of the liturgical action” (139), and is meant to foster a deeper understanding of the word of God, so that it can bear fruit in the lives of the faithful. Hence ordained ministers must “prepare the homily carefully, based on an adequate knowledge of Sacred Scripture” (140). Generic and abstract homilies should be avoided. In particular, I ask these ministers to preach in such a way that the homily closely relates the proclamation of the word of God to the sacramental celebration (141) and the life of the community, so that the word of God truly becomes the Church’s vital nourishment and support (142). The catechetical and paraenetic aim of the homily should not be forgotten. During the course of the liturgical year it is appropriate to offer the faithful, prudently and on the basis of the three-year lectionary, “thematic” homilies treating the great themes of the Christian faith, on the basis of what has been authoritatively proposed by the Magisterium in the four “pillars” of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the recent Compendium, namely: the profession of faith, the celebration of the Christian mystery, life in Christ and Christian prayer (143).

I am blessed to have a parochial vicar who is, arguably, the finest homilist in our diocese. His homilies are well-crafted and leave a lot of food for thought. He does his homework, reads the books written by Pope Benedict XVI and preaches with the mind and heart of the Church.

One thing that he does to augment his homiletics is to go to Pennsylvania each year to attend the conference that Dr. Scott Hahn puts together for priests on preaching. Every time he has gone, he has returned with a lot more fire in his belly. Would that all of the priests could attend these conferences, as they are most helpful.

Something else that could help would be for priests to examine the quality of the homilies preached by Pope Benedict XVI. The Holy Father offers fine examples of how the homily should be.

 

[EasterJoy]

I’ll note the Roman Ritual calls it a ‘sermon’ when the priest preaches at the mass.

And those books of sermons are entitled such things as “Sermons for all Sundays of the Year” by Saint this or that.

If homilies are simply sermons always based on scripture, well, I can give a homily outside of the mass too.

But apparently homilies and sermons are simply the same thing with at best stylistic differences.

I did a quick look up and read:

"In the Western Church, the sermon (sermo) and homily (homilia) were often interchangable. They seem to be so used in the titles of the printed collections which have come down to us: “Sermons of St. Peter Chrysologus” and “Homilies of St. Valerian.”

However, since the time of Origen (186-254 or 255), a distinction has been current between loÃgoß (sermo, discourse, sermon) and oJmiÃlia (homilia, homily). The term sermon is generally used to designate an artisitic production, and homily to denote an informal discourse. A sermon generally develops some definite theme; a homily explains or comments on a passage of Scripture. The sermon usually deals with a doctrinal or moral subject, and is more likely to contain a structural form of introduction, body and conclusion such as textbooks of rhetoric advocate. The homily is more likely to lack structural form, and move or even digress wherever the text leads the preacher. Generally, its purpose is to explain the literal meaning of the Scriptural passage, point out moral or ascetical applications, and perhaps develop accommodated or allegorical meanings."

George E. Ganss, ‘The Fathers of the Church’

If it is a good one, I’ll take it, and not care what the priest or deacon delivering it chooses to call it.

 

[EasterJoy]

This is what good homilies/sermons seem to me to have:
a) It is about what the Word of God just proclaimed is saying, and not about some topic pulled out of who knows where.
b) It picks a point, maybe two, and sticks to it. It does not try to say every good or learned thing the homilist has ever learned that pertains to the readings.
c) It is crafted for oral delivery, not written exactly as it would be if it were meant for a reading audience. The speaker is aware of the need to facilitate listening. He uses rhetorical devices that help the memory and engage the attention, remembering that nobody has a tablet and pen for keeping notes and that everyone has just come in from a world rife with distractions.
d) It is not purely emotional, but has substantial intellectual content, even if that content is straightforward and simple. There should be a “there” in there somewhere.
e) It is truly challenging without being unnecessarily accusatory. No one who hears it should walk away thinking that while they have learned something, they have not been asked to do anything, examine anything, or change anything, nor should they feel they are such worthless cases that there is nothing to be done. The call to greater repentance and deeper virtue is Good News, after all!
f) It speaks to the whole Body, to the broad range of vantage points from which those listening might experience this challenge, and not just those who are personally faced with a particular temptation or situation. Every part of the Body goes away with some way in which to participate in facing the challenge, even if the topic is a very particular sin or a particular state of life. For instance: when the topic is vocations, even those who do not have a call to the priesthood have a way to support those who do, or who might. Even those with no chance of facing a pregnancy out of wedlock have things they can do to help those who do. There is no such thing as private sin, not just in the effects, but in the effort to avoid it and make recompense for failures, too. Likewise with holiness. No one becomes holy by proxy, but the pursuit of holiness is non-sensical if not done for the sake of the entire Body. Homilies/sermons at Mass ought to reflect that.

I give extra points if a homily ties in with an ongoing message that is unfolding in the context of the liturgical year…this is where we are, and this is the greater meaning that is seen from where we have been and where we are headed, or this is what today’s Gospel says, and this is the greater meaning that we see if we take it in the context of this Gospel as a whole. But that doesn’t have to be there for a homily to be extremely effective. Homilies aren’t about meeting our desires, but about helping us to realize God’s will.

IOW, the main thing in a homily is that it cooperates in the fulfillment of this ideal:
“For just as from the heavens the rain and snow come down
And do not return there till they have watered the earth, making it fertile and fruitful,
Giving seed to him who sows and bread to him who eats,
So shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth;
It shall not return to me void, but shall do my will, achieving the end for which I sent it.”
Isaiah 55:10-11

The homilist is supposed to help those assembled realize that in deed. That is the main thing. That is, I think, what we should be looking to take away froma homily, too.

 

[mick321]

After reading thru this thread, I realize that I am fortunate in that I have not heard a boring, irrelevant, or poorly prepared sermon in several years.

Our priests - actually Canons Regular of two separate religious orders - are very skilled at preparing and delivering sermons that blend the Scriptural readings of the day with a bit of the rich history of our Holy Faith to produce homilies which are applicable, relevant and inspirational to genuine Catholics.

With gratitude.

M.

 

[Shin]

Odd. My copy of the Sacramentary (1985) calls it a “Homily.” (p. 367 - The Order of Mass: “HOMILY – A homily shall be given on all Sundays and holy days of obligation…”)

The GIRM appears to make 16 references to the “homily,” including “. . . a greater effectiveness of the word is fostered by a living commentary on the word, that is, the homily, as part of the liturgical action.” (GIRM # 29).

Our priests and deacons give homilies in accordance with the liturgical books and norms. Your experience may differ.

I’m beginning to suspect a possible change in terminology, perhaps of recent origin.

 

[PJM]

In replying the the OPQ…

I suspect that there are two reasons.

**1. FEAR!

1. Political correctness**

FEAR:

in 1970 about 75% of self professed Ctholics attended weekly and Holy Day Mass

TODAY THAT NUMBER IS LESS THAN 25%

in 1970 about 65% of ht same group went to Confession at least once per year

TODAY THAT NUMBER IS ABOURT 10%

[PEW REPORT 2008]

Political correctness is it’s own form of religion today. Noone dares “offend” anyone! That is why homilies stick so often to translating the Bible WHICH TOO IS NECESSARY, an pretty much avoid all attempts at teaching our Catholic Faith. It’s certainly a heck of a lot easier, and safe territory.

In the background of couse is the money issue.IT DOES TAKE MONEY TO RUN CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS. I wonder however if there are any stats on how many vocations come out of todays CS system? Certainly the education is better; BUT what about faith issues?

Support of Catholic Schools is often the major expense factor for a parish.

As a group [with notable exceptions like EWTN and the Extrodinary Form Churches] we are missing the boat on educating those of us in the pews on what Catholics Believe and WHY, what the Church teaches and WHY, and I see no signs of a change comming anytime soon.

Let us pray,