I really like your understanding that the sermon is not the whole of worship but is a part of the worship of the living God. With regard to the classic “three pointer”, I am not as concerned about the format as the content. We have morning and evening worship services where a certain book of the Bible is expounded verse by verse (or section by section). It can take one or two years to finsh one book. To some, this may sound dreadful but as congregants we are treated to a feast week in and week out. The preaching portion of worship is usually about 40 minutes and helps us get the sense of the what’s going on in the text and so often points us to the Word Himself. Pointing people to Jesus Christ and exalting Him is paramount. I appreciate your desire to make sure people get that one point in a sermon. I hope that you can convey the gospel and the glory of God in that time as well.

Sincerely,

Maarten

I think one of the biggest parts for me in this how does the sermon function in the whole event of worship. Are we talking about a few songs, offering and than THE sermon, as if it’s really the reason people are there? I think that’s very problematic. However, if the sermon functions as part of an entire worship event, as one element among many that attempt to drive toward an encounter with the living Word, I think it can be better.

One thing I’ve taken from my days with Junior High students into my preaching is that I have little regard for the classic “three point sermon.” I personally always hated filling in the blanks or taking prescribed notes on a sermon and that’s often what you’d have to do to get much out of a 45 minute sermon. So instead, I tend to preach for 15 minutes or so with the idea that I want to convey one point, that’s it. I also try to point out how this single idea plays out outside of the worship service.

Does this measure up to reclaiming or retooling the sermon, not exactly, but I do hope it steers away from some of abuses of the lecture sermon that has become so common in the West.

Rhett Smith, in his postI Can’t Listen To Another Sermon, is puzzling:
“I’m obviously a firm believer in preaching….I’m just wondering if we need to change some of our methods. I know I need to.”
In the comments, I tried to ad…

I have found some hope in Eugene Peterson’s Eat This Book and his discussion of the lectio divina (the Bible as a tool for spiritual formation, not just information).

I have noticed that when I implement it, some of the students who are normally bored out of their minds by lecture are suddenly engaged and participating. Then again, I usually have the luxury of a group of 15-20 students.

I’m just as guilty.

rhett

But I think it’s time to experiment.

I agree…I think unfortunately, the sermon event has become the life of the church, or the event of worship….but there are so many other elements….obviously the proclamation of God’s Word is crucial and the pinnacle of our worship in many ways, but I don’t think that has to be done in the sermon…at least in the way we have been doing it.

However, if I’m going to be speaking to a group, I prefer a conversation. I’ll often stop and poll the crowd. Sometimes I’ll do an impromptu Q&A. Sometimes if a stellar worship leader is around and I feel moved, we’ll have a song in the middle of a talk.

Whatever it is, whatever it means, I generally agree with you, especially in non-mega church settings. I don’t know how this works with large groups (1,000 plus) though. Would it be feasible to have a conversation with a group that large? I just don’t know.

Great post, Rhett.

However, for those whose faith is exercised one hour a week (or two hours), preaching doesn’t seem to be doing it.
What reflects from the face of the hearer is not the glory of the Word proclaimed. It’s a shame.

It feels like the question isn’t how do we save preaching, but how do we invite the listener into an engaged lifestyle of Christ following in which preaching is one course in the feast at the table of the Lord?