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

  • Thread starter Thread starter dizzy_dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I just emailed my parish priest regarding this issue. I rarely hear Catholic doctrine discussed during homilies. Abortion, contraception, homosexuality, these issues are hot topics in everyday life and priests should be guiding the flock.
If you don’t believe in Catholic doctrine you shouldn’t be Catholic. Cafeteria Catholcism irks me to no end. That, and screaming children, ringing cell phones, and parents who bring coloring books and video games into the pews for their children.:mad:
 
Silence_Dogood said:
quote=japhy]
That’s just completely foreign to me. I just can’t imagine having to cram so much into ten minutes.
Click to expand...
I think the difference is in what we are preaching about.

Of course, I don’t know how you do things, but I have a close friend who attends a non-denominational church. They have music and preaching. Every week, the pastor picks a theme to preach on, and sometimes he preaches for a few weeks on the same theme. In a sense, it’s like a teacher giving a lecture. He makes his points, giving scripture that he feels backs up his points. This, of course, takes time. He needs to introduce the subject, make a case, make a summary. If that is similar to your services, of course you can’t give a ten-minute sermon.

At Mass, the priest can’t pick and choose what parts of the Bible to read and discuss. The readings are from the lectionary. This is what happens at the parish I attend: the priest gives us background and historical/biblical context for all three of the readings. He then chooses one to discuss more fully, and in that discussion he helps us to learn how to apply it. Often there is some catechism in his teaching.

Over time, pretty much the entire Bible is covered. Because our priests don’t have to pick a subject and support it, and because over time we’ll hear about the rest of the Bible, a life-changing homily can happen in a short length of time.

For example, a couple of weeks ago one of the readings was the passage from Corinthians that you frequently hear at weddings. Our priest really raised the bar for us in teaching us about love and how to treat others. I’ve thought about that homily frequently these weeks. I consider myself a loving person, but I’ve now seen where I have to improve quite a bit. I know see areas where my ego gets in the way, things that were not apparent to me before that homily.
 
I have often wondered about this as well. There must be a special class Catholic seminarians take on how to preach badly. I find it hard to believe that anyone can preach as badly as most Catholic priests do out of pure natural talent. (I’m kind of serious about this–I do think that something about seminary training produces the particular kind of bland sermons you describe.
dizzy_dave said:
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.
Click to expand...
Homilies are supposed to be about Scripture. I think that’s the root of the problem–not that homilies shouldn’t be about Scripture, but that Catholic priests are generally taught a purely historical-critical approach to Scripture rather than a traditional one. Hence, they have little that they can say about Scripture that is relevant. They’ve been told that that is bad exegesis. But on the other hand they’ve been told that topical sermons are bad.

I’m not against historical-critical exegesis. But the particular way in which most Catholic seminaries seem to have reconciled historical criticism with Catholic orthodoxy is to create a wall of separation between theology and exegesis. Theology is based on Church teaching, exegesis on historical-critical method. That’s my explanation for why Catholic sermons are so rarely theological or devotional. (Either very conservative or very liberal priests are the most likely to get past this–the problem is with the average Catholic priest who is just trying to do what his professors taught him and doesn’t have great rhetorical gifts anyway.)

This is where the positive side of the Protestant doctrine of Scripture becomes evident. (I won’t say of “Sola Scriptura,” because that’s a tricky term and by my definition it is neither true nor necessary for the effect I’m talking about.) For Protestants theology is *supposed *to be based on Scripture. The problem with that is that Protestants often water down or change theology based on what they think exegesis dictates without giving due respect to the Christian tradition. But the beauty of it is that a Protestant sermon can be theological and exegetical at once–in fact it has to.

Edwin
 
Well for me, it was all about listening when I was a Catholic. There was one priest that always had really long, overdrawn homilies, with a monotone voice (He kind of talked like William Shatner with the changing inflections and pauses, but didn’t speak that way normally.) but he had really good things to say once I started listening. He had a homily on live that almost brought me to tears on the alter. I’m not Catholic anymore, but his homilies were always my favorite after that, even if mass was longer.
 
Contarini said:
I have often wondered about this as well. There must be a special class Catholic seminarians take on how to preach badly. I find it hard to believe that anyone can preach as badly as most Catholic priests do out of pure natural talent. (I’m kind of serious about this–I do think that something about seminary training produces the particular kind of bland sermons you describe.

Homilies are supposed to be about Scripture. I think that’s the root of the problem–not that homilies shouldn’t be about Scripture, but that Catholic priests are generally taught a purely historical-critical approach to Scripture rather than a traditional one. Hence, they have little that they can say about Scripture that is relevant. They’ve been told that that is bad exegesis. But on the other hand they’ve been told that topical sermons are bad.

I’m not against historical-critical exegesis. But the particular way in which most Catholic seminaries seem to have reconciled historical criticism with Catholic orthodoxy is to create a wall of separation between theology and exegesis. Theology is based on Church teaching, exegesis on historical-critical method. That’s my explanation for why Catholic sermons are so rarely theological or devotional. (Either very conservative or very liberal priests are the most likely to get past this–the problem is with the average Catholic priest who is just trying to do what his professors taught him and doesn’t have great rhetorical gifts anyway.)…
Click to expand...
I know what you mean, but I think that model of preaching is being abandoned. I’ve heard many homilies from seminarians (transitional deacons) and new priests, and what you describe doesn’t describe the homilies I have been hearing in our archdiocese. I have been amazed.
 
non_vac said:
Record one of Joel Osteen sermons, and play it instead of the priest’s homily. It will definately hold the attention of the congregation, and most people will probably get more out of it.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? Joel Osteen is a Financial Advisor pretending to be a preacher, probably so he can skip out on his taxes. He never even says the name of Jesus Christ in his sermons.
Needless to say, he has no clue what a Mass is, or anything about what faith is about. He thinks an abundant life means you’re wealthy $$$$, not sanctified by grace.
 
EasterJoy said:
Ahem. I think you’re selling yourself short.

From the Compendium (boldface mine):
“277. How is the celebration of the Holy Eucharist carried out?
CCC 1345-1355
CCC 1408
**The Eucharist unfolds in two great parts which together form one, single act of worship. **The Liturgy of the Word involves proclaiming and listening to the Word of God. The Liturgy of the Eucharist includes the presentation of the bread and wine, the prayer or the anaphora containing the words of consecration, and communion.”

If you’re not all there for the Liturgy of the Word, you’re not all there for the Eucharist. It is a public celebration and an actual handing on of Apostolic Tradition that requires that one of the ordained proclaim the Gospel and deliver the homily in which the Scriptures are opened for the people. It is a prayer of listening, and it is an integral part of the single act of worship that is the Mass.
Click to expand...
 
EasterJoy said:
Ahem. I think you’re selling yourself short.

From the Compendium (boldface mine):
“277. How is the celebration of the Holy Eucharist carried out?
CCC 1345-1355
CCC 1408
**The Eucharist unfolds in two great parts which together form one, single act of worship. **The Liturgy of the Word involves proclaiming and listening to the Word of God. The Liturgy of the Eucharist includes the presentation of the bread and wine, the prayer or the anaphora containing the words of consecration, and communion.”

If you’re not all there for the Liturgy of the Word, you’re not all there for the Eucharist. It is a public celebration and an actual handing on of Apostolic Tradition that requires that one of the ordained proclaim the Gospel and deliver the homily in which the Scriptures are opened for the people. It is a prayer of listening, and it is an integral part of the single act of worship that is the Mass.
Click to expand...
Well said !
 
Obviously the original poster has never been to the church I go to here in Ohio. Our parochial vicar is a wonderful preacher. The head priest is not that bad either. I have heard some bad ones though especially during my time in the protestant church. I remember one done by our former dean here at MTSO where all I could think about was what I was going to fix for dinner.
 
dizzy_dave said:
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?
Click to expand...
Why do homilies stink? That would be a good question if all parishes had homilies that lacked the important subjects you mentioned. It’s my understanding that the homilies are to tie in all the readings for the day and explain how they’re related to each other. Sometimes we get that, sometimes we don’t. A great homily may be inspirational, but it doesn’t confer any grace upon us. Protestants give great sermons because they have absolutely nothing else to offer. The most wonderful, beautiful, and inspirational thing the Priest celebrant can ever say and does say is “Happy are those who are called to this supper” which should be translated to “Happy are those who know what it truly means to be called to this supper” And that my friend beats the best homilies ever spoken.
 
I find it distasteful that it comes down to this: some parishes have budgetary goals.

Because of weak catechesis, conflicting “opinions” of priests and deacons, bloggers, forums, and all sorts of secular bombardment, there is an enormous sub-section of the population of The Catholic Church that does not obey or accept 100% of the teaching of The Catholic Church.

It’s no wonder that on this forum and even in my own parish there are “shades” of Catholicism and priests have to serve in such an atmosphere. It’s tough.

Because of the “shades” of Catholicism, the priest has a very fine tightrope to walk: not alienating Catholics who may be heading in the right direction, not lose those who are heading in the wrong direction but not offending those Catholics who are strong in The Faith and believe and follow what the Magisterium teaches.

Simply put, the priest desires everyone to attend mass, partake of the sacraments if possible and make a charitable contribution.
 
the best words coming out of a priest i’ve heard so far

“Blessed are the poor, for they know and understand the need for God in their lives, morethan anyone”😃
 
GodLovesTheSpek said:
I find it distasteful that it comes down to this: some parishes have budgetary goals.

Because of weak catechesis, conflicting “opinions” of priests and deacons, bloggers, forums, and all sorts of secular bombardment, there is an enormous sub-section of the population of The Catholic Church that does not obey or accept 100% of the teaching of The Catholic Church.

It’s no wonder that on this forum and even in my own parish there are “shades” of Catholicism and priests have to serve in such an atmosphere. It’s tough.

Because of the “shades” of Catholicism, the priest has a very fine tightrope to walk: not alienating Catholics who may be heading in the right direction, not lose those who are heading in the wrong direction but not offending those Catholics who are strong in The Faith and believe and follow what the Magisterium teaches.

Simply put, the priest desires everyone to attend mass, partake of the sacraments if possible and make a charitable contribution.
Click to expand...
Anyone who has been overjoyed to get a “C” in a required speech course can tell you that it doesn’t take the pressures of some budgetary agenda to be a poor speaker.

Moreover, I think it is fair to say that it is also wrong to be so fond of hearing the recitation of juridical facts that make up only one part of our faith that one can actually hear a homily and condemn it simply because the priest’s remarks failed to openly accuse the listeners of any particular sin listed in the Catechism. This is not to accuse anyone in this particular discussion, but I have heard people complain about sins not mentioned in a priest’s homily, only to find that the sin being complained about was not one that the complainers had ever struggled with! I can understand it if one’s own sins are never confronted, but on what basis does such a person have cause to complain when the sins of others are not? It is like if I were to complain that my doctor had not set any broken legs during the week when I came to see him for influenza. My mild case of influenza may be much less serious than someone else’s broken leg, but some weeks influenza is the biggest problem the practice is seeing. Certainly, it is the disease I ought to be most interested in hearing about that week.

If a priest thinks that gossip is a more pervasive problem in his parish than abortion, then I don’t blame him for preaching on gossip instead of pro-life issues. It is OK for a physician to treat the diseases he sees, not the worst ones in the medical textbooks. Let’s not even start on the truth that a parish full of vicious gossips may leave a woman in the parish who is pregnant out of wedlock more tempted to choose abortion.

This is not the kind of homilies I think the OP is complaining about, but one of the best pro-life homilies I have ever heard asked everyone present how they treated women and girls who were pregnant out of wedlock, or single parents raising small children, and asked them to consider whether their behavior made a child born outside of marriage seem more like a blessing or more like a curse. It did not talk directly to the women making the choice at all, but it was very, very powerful.
 
I haven’t heard many bad homilies over the last two decades. Our last three pastors have done very well. The Deacon’ s homilies are not quite as good but at least they don’t “stink”. But if you are hungry for a good homily, I’ll share one of our pastor’s homilies with you. (after the Gospel is read by the Deacon starting at 02:17)
Third Sunday in Ordinary Time- Homily by Fr. Lappe
 
As a former “born again” Protestant Christian, I was used to 1-1 1/2 hour sermons every Sunday morning. As a relatively new Catholic of five years, my first thought was, “The entire Mass is only an hour? Are you kidding me?” Most homilies are only 10-15 minutes at most, so in a way I was disappointed because there seemed lack of substance; i.e. there wasn’t a whole lot to intellectually sink one’s teeth into. Don’t get me wrong, though, concerning homilies vis-a-vis The Liturgy of the Eucharist. As a former Protestant, I used to go to church to hear a good sermon, but as a Catholic my primary purpose is to receive Christ in the Eucharist, and the homily, whether good or bad, is kind of a by-product of the Mass. The senior pastor at our church gives very ordinary, uninspiring homilies while other priests are quite gifted speakers. Perhaps that might explain why the church stopped printing in the bulletin which priest would be presiding at a particular Mass the following Sunday in order to prevent parishioners from avoiding one priest in favor of another. At any rate, I really could care less which priest presides since I am there to praise, honor and worship my one and only God, and receive Him in Holy Communion. While we’re on the subject, I must say that there is a priest in Las Vegas at a church where my daughter’s family attends who is utterly and absolutely brilliant. His homilies are so astoundingly magnificent that he comes close to getting a standing ovation. The bottom line, I suppose, is this: If one thinks that a good homily is an integral part of Mass, then go ahead and church hunt for a good preacher. Otherwise, put up with an occasional “stinker” since the really only important thing is to receive Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
 
usemelord said:
The bottom line, I suppose, is this: If one thinks that a good homily is an integral part of Mass, then go ahead and church hunt for a good preacher. Otherwise, put up with an occasional “stinker” since the really only important thing is to receive Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
Click to expand...
The Liturgy of the Word is an integral part of the Eucharist! This is not an opinion; rather, the Church teaches it to be true.

I would say this, rather: if you are in a parish with objectively poor preaching, but you can hear the Word of God in it in spite of this, that is fine. The Holy Spirit is able to do that. If you find the poor preaching where you are to be an obstacle to your ability to hear, though, then look for better preaching, either supplementing by prior study (online homilies, books, that kind of thing) or by finding somewhere else to attend Mass. Please do not discount the importance of the Liturgy of the Word, though. It is a prayer of listening, a major and indispensible part of the one act of worship that is the Mass, and it should not be given short shrift.

Also: encourage good preaching whereever you hear it. Even negative feedback is necessary, but if the positive outweighs the negative you are more likely to be heard. And pray, pray, pray for our priests and deacons!!
 
My Dearest EasterJoy: With all due respect, I did not say that The Liturgy of the Word was not an integral part of the Mass. Of course, it is. Any Catholic who knows anything about Mass understands that. But, what I did say was that if someone is looking for a “good homily” (as an integral part of Mass), then perhaps they need to re-establish their priorities.
 
usemelord said:
My Dearest EasterJoy: With all due respect, I did not say that The Liturgy of the Word was not an integral part of the Mass. Of course, it is. Any Catholic who knows anything about Mass understands that. But, what I did say was that if someone is looking for a “good homily” (as an integral part of Mass), then perhaps they need to re-establish their priorities.
Click to expand...
Right off the bat, if you mean by “someone looking for a ‘good homily’” a person who goes to Mass to be entertained and looks to the homily as the centerpiece of that entertainment package, I’m with you. That is a messed up priority.

But if someone is looking for a truly good homily, really good and substantial Catholic preaching with substantial exhortation and catechetical content, they have their priorities in a great place. They may rightly decide that other aspects of their situation make their need for outside compensation for that fault in their own parish something worth living with, but when homilies are consistently poor that is a serious fault. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with looking, and looking hard, for a parish where one can depend on hearing a good homily, instead.

A good homily, as I believe has been pointed out by Benedictgal (I get these threads mixed up, sometimes), is something our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI himself has identified as a high priority! I’m not accusing you of this, but instead clarifying what I mean: there is a sentiment afoot in the Church that good preaching is some sort of an optional consolation prize only really needed by Protestants who don’t have faith in the True Presence, that we are nourished by Holy Communion only, and not by the preaching we hear. That is not true!!

From *Sacramentum Caritatis: On the Eucharist as the Source and Summit of the Church’s Life and Mission
  • (boldface mine):
    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).
 
GodLovesTheSpek said:
I find it distasteful that it comes down to this: some parishes have budgetary goals.

Because of weak catechesis, conflicting “opinions” of priests and deacons, bloggers, forums, and all sorts of secular bombardment, there is an enormous sub-section of the population of The Catholic Church that does not obey or accept 100% of the teaching of The Catholic Church.

It’s no wonder that on this forum and even in my own parish there are “shades” of Catholicism and priests have to serve in such an atmosphere. It’s tough.

Because of the “shades” of Catholicism, the priest has a very fine tightrope to walk: not alienating Catholics who may be heading in the right direction, not lose those who are heading in the wrong direction but not offending those Catholics who are strong in The Faith and believe and follow what the Magisterium teaches.

Simply put, the priest desires everyone to attend mass, partake of the sacraments if possible and make a charitable contribution.
Click to expand...
I am not so sure financial concerns impact the homily. The problem of “cafeteria Catholics” is worrisome. I tend to be hard-line and conservative but know it is not helpful to push people away. That said, my hard core side likes what Second Exodus says on this topic. It’s a good read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top