An 8-minute homily? Is nothing sacred?
Via CNS, an interesting suggestion from Rome:
VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Homilies should be no longer than eight minutes — a listener’s average attention span, said the head of the synod office.
Priests and deacons should also avoid reading straight from a text and instead work from notes so that they can have eye contact with the people in the pews, said Archbishop Nikola Eterovic, secretary-general of the Synod of Bishops.
In a new book titled, “The Word of God,” the archbishop highlighted some tips that came out of the 2008 Synod of Bishops on the Bible. The Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, reproduced a few passages from the book in its March 10 edition.
The archbishop wrote that it’s not unusual for preachers to recognize that they have less-than-perfect communications skills or that they struggle with preparing homilies. Everyone should spend an appropriate amount of time to craft a well-prepared and relevant sermon for Mass, he said.
He said Pope Benedict XVI starts working on his Sunday homilies on the preceding Monday so that there is plenty of time to reflect on the Scripture readings from which the homily will draw.
Papal homilies always seem to go over that, if I recall — not that there’s anything wrong with that, actually. I grew up with 50-minute sermons from lay preachers, so a nice 20 minute homily is fine by me. Though I thought 12 minutes was the general guideline. Bloody Vatican, always changing things!
on March 11th, 2010 at 9:07 am
These kinds of rules remind me of English pedagogues who like to impose rules like, “The topic sentence of a paragraph should be the first sentence, and the paragraph should have no fewer than four additional supporting sentences,” with no reference whatever to the purpose or content of the paragraph within the larger essay.
It does not make for better writing, just as this rule will not make for better homiletics. Itwill merely make the homilies shorter.
I like Jim Pauwel’s rules for homilists that appeared some threads back. Somebody should give the Vatican his phone number.
on March 11th, 2010 at 9:12 am
Jean, I thank you, although I hope you will understand that nobody in my position wants a telephone call from the Vatican. Or even downtown.
on March 11th, 2010 at 9:53 am
I wonder if that will make it down here to Honduras, where homilies often are 25 to 45 minutes long! Some of these are quite good – but others……..
But here at times homilies have an extra added purpose – giving people a perspective on the news and the reality of the country unavailable otherwise. Archbishop Romero, of blessed memory, used to give long homilies, very finely crafted with the help of a team, which ended with news of the situation in the country, especially in terms of human rights. The people loved to listen to his homilies over the radio. A Salvadoran I know recalls walking through a rural village and hearing Romero’s homily completely, since everyone had their radios tuned to Romero’s Mass. His homily was evangelization, news broadcast, political formation from the standpoint of the Gospel, motivation, denunciation of human rights abuses, and a call for conversion. The homilies were very quotable. Parts of them can be found in Brockman’s collection THE VIOLENCE OF LOVE.
on March 11th, 2010 at 11:44 am
Who says you can’t teach an old dog new tricks?
As I look back on my days listening to homilies, I think 10 to 15 minutes of insightful and relevant content is about right. (A former asst pastor used to give homilies not exceeding ten minutes, and the people responded favorably to his consideration.)
We’re dealing for the most part, after all, with flesh-and-blood human beings with limited attention spans, things on their minds, etc.
Even in the adult training field, we stress the importance of “participation” as opposed to mere “atttendance”. Stand in front of a room full of people who might just as well prefer to be someplace else (in bed, on the golf course, etc.) and do all the talkin’, and you likely will begin “losing” them. (But, of course, you’ll still feel good about all that knowledge and information you imparted to them :)
Outside of the lecture hall or classroom, meet people where they are and as they are.
In this area, I’ll take psychology over “propriety”, the “is” over the “should”.
on March 11th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
The first year I was preaching I wrote out all my homilies. Then I began to preach from notes, but after a few months I noticed that I would leave the pulpit frustrated that I had not brought the homily to the ending I had hoped for, or had just missed the right word. And so I went back to writing them out and I have done so for the next 45 years. I have the text in front of me as I preach; I can look down at it and see two or three sentences in a row and deliver them while looking at the congregation. It seems to work.
I remember as a boy learning the rhythm’s of our beloved pastor’s voice. When it took on a certain intonation, you knew that he was nearing the end, or at least you hoped so; but often enough he would change intonations and you knew he was off on to another point, and this could happen two or three times Priests refer to this as circling but never landing.
For what it’s worth, a typical homily used to occupy two pages, single-spaced, 12-point type. Now that my eyesight is more comfortable with larger type, they’re shorter.
on March 11th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
I am very glad that attention is turning to that. For people in my family the homily is such an important part of the Mass, and one that we lay people can do almost nothing about. It almost doesn’t matter what specific advice is given: as long as the advice results in priests spending more time and effort on their preaching, that has to be a good thing.
on March 11th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
In formation we were advised to keep homilies to 7-8 minutes. Considering that few priests or deacons are extraordinary preachers, I would say that’s a good limit. Those who can hold the attention of the assembly should feel free to go on longer. Of course the problem is with those preachers who *think* they’re extraordinary and therefore avail themselves of the longer time, much to the chagrin of the assembly!
on March 11th, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Jesus said: “The very hairs of your head are numbered…If you ask God for bread will s/he give you a stone? (of course not) “Mercy over sacrifice. I have prepared a place for you.” I have come to call sinners to God.” “Remember the importune beggar.” “How much more will God watch over you than the birds of the air and the lillies of the field………”
If we heard sermons on the above at least 20 times a year there would be little need for people to rush to the self help section or other gurus or false prophets.
on March 11th, 2010 at 4:00 pm
“In formation we were advised to keep homilies to 7-8 minutes.”
Same with us. For me it’s a stuggle – mine tend to be a little longer.
Using Fr. Komonchak’s rule of thumb of two pages, single spaced, 12 point type – for me, that would be 10-12 minutes. Mine are usually a bit shorter – usually 1 full side plus 2/3 of another.
on March 11th, 2010 at 4:01 pm
How long did it take to plow through the Sermon on the Mount?
on March 11th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
Last night at my parish’s Lenten vesper service, a “reflection” on the reading (The Prodigal Son) was given by a woman who is a professor of bible studies at Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley.
She talked for about 15 minutes, and it seemed like 15 seconds. She actually got an ovation (this is NEVER done at our vesper services!) from those in attendance.
The acceptablity of a longer homily/reflection/whatever is based on the skill, knowledge and believability of the person making the presentation. 20 minutes of a good homily is not enough and 8 minutes of a lousy one is 7.9 minutes too long.
Of course, the persenter under discussion is a Protestant pastor and, as such, trained in the art of preaching and expected to be skilled at doing so.
What are Catholic priests trained in?
on March 11th, 2010 at 4:51 pm
Gettysburg Address came in at just over two minutes.
on March 11th, 2010 at 5:02 pm
It saddens me to hear this! Yes, I acknowledge that modern technologies have given us short attention spans. I notice that those working behind the scenes in internet, television, cinema, radio, etc., are tailoring their material to appeal to us with short bursts loaded with attractive imagery.
To wit, the new media is made to appeal to an individual’s tendencies. It is ego-centric. Which is why the Church SHOULD NOT DO THIS.
I watch a movie so that I can be entertained. I do not go to Church for ME. I go for God. It is our responsibility as the parishioner to adjust ourselves to better receive the Lord’s message–and not the other way around.
How dare we. What’s next, ten minute breaks during Mass?
on March 11th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
“What’s next, ten minute breaks during Mass?”
I may have mentioned this – I once went to mass at a church in the suburbs of Detroit that does this! Right after the intercessions, I think. They called it “friendly time” – everyone chats and chuckles for a few minutes, then the priest calls everyone back to order.
on March 11th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Irene–
Good choice for a comparison. The main speaker that day was Edward Everett, who spoke for two hours. Darned if I can recite even a tiny portion of what he said. And many consider Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address his greatest speech, or at least his second greatest. Given when the outcome of the war was a foregone conclusion, its words of healing and its complete lack of tiumphalism make it especially remarkable. More remarkable still is that Lincoln had but two years total of formal education. He’d memorized large sections of the King James Bible (and Shakespeare, too), internalizing not only the KJV’s content but also its rhythm and style.
Fr. Komonchak–
Very admirable that you’ve adhered to your two-page limit even as the size of the type increased. (I’m assuming you maintained the same margin widths through the years. ;) )
on March 11th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Mr. Collier: I hadn’t thought of that—I can just reduce the margins of my page! Thanks.
on March 11th, 2010 at 8:05 pm
“Friendly time” I suppose is a natural extension of the travesty the Peace has become. In the Episcopal Church I sometimes attend, the rule is that you do not leave your pew, you “peace” only those whose hands you can shake without stretching, which limits you to four or five people.
You do not use peace time as an opportunity to buy or sell raffle tickts, show people pictures of your grandchildren, remind your friends about tomorrow night’s bowling schedule, try to enlist someone to serve coffee after the service, or speculate about whether the recent newlyweds are “hatching.”
You must say, “God’s Peace with you,” or “The Peace of the Lord.” You do not say, “Say, Jim, where’s the ol’ ball and chain?” or “Looks like Father’s putting on some weight.”
You should shake hands briefly (one pump). You do not grab someone hand and arm with both of your hands, smack people on the back, or let your kids wring each other’s hands until one of them starts yelling.
Re writing out homilies, I wish more priests would do this. Too many priests and deacons seem to get up there and wait for the Spirit to hit, and, barring that, they fall back on long, lugubrious stories about their dear departed mothers who made them pray for hours for the conversion of the Commies and slap them senseless if they so much as swung their feet in the boring parts.
on March 12th, 2010 at 1:20 am
In my previous parish, the associate pastor, right after his ordination, at first gave very interesting, well structured homilies, but often a bit stilted. After a couple of years, he gained confidence, started finding a rhythm, and sometimes sounded inspired in addition to having a carefully organized sequence of points. I always looked forward to hearing him. He deservedly drew rave reviews in the parish and sometimes beyond. But after a couple more years, having gained yet more confidence, he started preaching from mere outlines (I think), more and more freely, and the homilies were beginning to lose their structure and to be less varied, more repetitive, and only loosely connected to Scripture. I was often disappointed.
Then he got assigned to a different parish, and since then, I have not heard anything good or bad about his preaching. I expect that he is now content to give hastily prepared, “good enough” homilies. He is talented enough that he can quickly gather a few ideas, and then improvise around them to make them into a tolerable homily. I think that it’s such a shame. During Mass there is a captive audience for the homily; it’s such a great opportunity for him to share his faith and his understanding of Scripture with us. It could make a difference in our lives.
I don’t know if he got discouraged because we never acted on his advice (no uptick in the number of confessions after his preach on “why go to confession”…), or because he thought no one was listening (so many people seem distracted during homilies), or if the novelty wore off, or if he got too busy with his other responsibilities, but I think it’s a shame.
on March 12th, 2010 at 8:40 am
Claire: Why don’t you write a letter to this priest, along the lines of what you’ve written here?
Stop me if I’ve told this story befoe: A priest ordained three years before me took Jesus’ word about not giving thought beforehand as to what you should say–”The Spirit will give it”–to apply to homilies also, and for that reason he never prepared his sermons but waited upon the Spirit’s gift. Once I concelebrated Mass with him and while he was preaching I noticed that a few people I knew were moving their lips in an odd way. After Mass I asked them what was going on. “Oh,” they replied, “we have a weekly contest to see who can guess how many times Father will say “Ya know” in the course of his homily, so we have to count them.”
on March 12th, 2010 at 9:55 am
It seems to me that a homilist should have something to say with reference to Scriptural texts just read, be able to say it well, and be able to say it within an appropriate time frame in relation to the service that is the occasion of the homily. Currently I can count two presbyters whose homilies I hear who are consistently in the A/B+ range. The rest fall within the mediocre to dismal range. Either they have nothing to say that is relevant or their presentation of what they have so say is badly muddled–or, which may be for the best, the defects in their English make evaluation impossible.
on March 12th, 2010 at 10:18 am
Thanks for the suggestion. I will think about it…
on March 12th, 2010 at 11:18 am
There are some funny dynamics in preaching. My parish is relatively large – there can be 1,000+ persons at a Sunday morning mass. Everyone has their own history, prejudices, attention span, and so on. So who knows what will ring a bell or “stick” with a certain person. What one person thinks is life-changing will bore the socks off of the person next to her.
on March 12th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
Claire: Re: Fr. K’s suggestion: I recently told a priest in confession that in the middle of mass (at another parish) I found myself thinking about how much I disliked the music minister’s theatrical demeanor. Instead of saying, “be more charitable” or “pray harder”, my confessor said, “I think you should complain. It’s a pastoral issue.” I had had no intention of complaining and worried that it was uncharitable, but I did. My letter wasn’t rude, but it was pointedly critical. The pastor spoke to me about my note later, and he was… thrilled. He was happy that I was paying enough attention to things that matter in the mass to take it up with him, regardless of whether he agreed with everything I said. Indifference is a much bigger problem than criticism. Your comment was only gently critical, anyway. So I agree with Fr. K. You should write to him. The priest might not only benefit from it, he might even appreciate it.
on March 12th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
“I do not go to church for ME. I go for God.”
“Then [Jesus] said to them, ‘The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath’” (Mk 2:27). The liturgy is ultimately God’s gift to us. Even our willingness to give thanks to God is ultimately his gift to us.
“Indifference is a much bigger problem than criticism.”
So true. As a friend once informed me, “The opposite of love isn’t anger or hate. It’s indifference.” Or, to paraphrase Jesus, When you reached out to help someone, you were helping me; when you ignored the person needing help, you ignored me.