Here is my assessment of the dynamic of preaching vs. not-preaching at Mass, Extraordinary Form (EF) vs. Ordinary Form (OF).
In the two respective Forms of the Roman Rite, the preaching/not-preaching is an anti-climactic reversal of orientation in opposite ways.
In the EF, the sermon is anti-climactic, interrupting the transcendent action of the Mass and going down to the immanent dimension of the priest face-to-face with the congregation, hence the sign of the cross before and after the sermon to exit and return to the Mass.
In the OF, not to give the homily would seem to be anti-climactic, because it truncates the immanent dimension of the dialogue with the people already happening in the vernacular/versus populum pulpit, meant for preaching. Not to preach might seem to be a premature interruption of the immanent action of the Mass (the Liturgy of the Word) which should climax in the personal witness of the preacher.
In this regard, recall that Pope Benedict XVI did not preach during his first Mass (OF) as Pope, but after it.
PRIMUM NUNTIUM SUMMI PONTIFICIS BENEDICTI XVI POST CONCELEBRATIONEM EUCHARISTICAM CUM CARDINALIBUS ELECTORIBUS IN «CAPPELLA SISTINA»
Picture: Saint Vincent Ferrer. Timete Deum et date ille honorem, quia venit hora iudicii eius.
Picture: Saint Vincent Ferrer. Timete Deum et date ille honorem, quia venit hora iudicii eius.
