John Nolan states the following about traditional Requiem Masses:
I would question whether a homily (essentially the priest's own take on things) should be allowed to interrupt the funeral Mass in the first place; in a traditional Requiem it isn't.
Letting the liturgy speak for itself seems to be an alien concept to the postconciliar generation of priests. So at Mass we have so much explanation that the main purpose of the liturgy would appear to be didactic; even weekday Masses are rarely allowed to proceed uninterrupted; one even finds a homily at Vespers.I appreciate a good sermon on a Sunday, provided it is well prepared and doesn't take too long. But I don't go to church to be preached at.
MY WORD OF GOD COMMENTS: I did not know that homilies/sermons were not offered in pre-Vatican II times. That seems very alien even to me.
As a very thoroughly trained spirit of post Vatican II priest, the Liturgy of the Word is promoted as a co-equal with the Liturgy of the Eucharistic. The homily of course was seen as integral to the Liturgy of the Word and equal to the Word.
Some might recall that in many churches after Vatican II, the real Presence of Christ in the tabernacle was moved from the center high altar to a side altar and the word of God was enthroned on the opposite side altar, because of the real presence of Christ in the Bible. Some though would enthroned the Book of the Gospels on the old high altar after reading the Gospel.
I do not give a homily at our Tuesday Low EF Mass, although I do at our daily OF Mass.
Is elevating the priests words during the homily, no matter how banal, pastorally insensitive or just plain heretical something that has led to priestly liturgical narcissism and elevated the personality, looks and antics of the priest to be the shining STAR 🌟 of the Mass, Requiem or otherwise?
And now that priests can be vilified so easily in order to remove him, does the homily become a shooting star 🌠 like a clay pigeon being shot at by the laity?