I believe that the time of long lectures, when someone spoke for an hour and the audience was condemned to sit and listen to whatever they were given, is…perhaps over–not just for me but for everyone. What we need in theology and in the church is–Oh, I don’t want to use that wretched word again–”conversations”. What I mean is simply that we should talk together and try to arrive at answers together, instead of someone trying to present something to other people as though the Holy Spirit has dictated it to him in person.
I posted that quote by Karl Barth back in August of 2006 when I was really wrestling over the topic of preaching. And I’m still wrestling over this topic.
You can see some of my thoughts on this topic below:
- Thinking Out Loud, Dialogue in Preaching & A Word from Karl Barth
- Preaching, teaching, lecturing, dialogue or conversation?
- The Myth of Expository Preaching
- More on expository preaching
But it just seems like I can hardly sit through a sermon these days. This is probably more a statement of my own heart and disposition right now than it is anything about a sermon. But maybe also, I’m just tired of the way we have been preaching sermons for years and years. My students are probably pretty sick of the way that I go about preaching sermons as well, that’s why I have been wrestling over the topic for years.
But what you have is a vicious cycle that continually reinforces itself. You have the tradition of the typical expository sermon, presented in three steps or points, coupled with the expectation from the audience to hear that same method of presentation. But while this cycle continues, I often get the sense, and often hear the conversation, that both the preacher and the congregation are wanting something different. We just don’t know how to get out of the cycle. Or maybe we do, but we just don’t have the courage to try something different, take some risks, fail at some things. So what you have instead, is people literally bored out of their minds every Sunday while someone up front speaks at them in a very non-engaging style. And what you probably have as well is speakers and pastors up front bored out of their minds as well.
As I mentioned before, my former student, Brian Kiley, who is now a college pastor, has been posting some fascinating stuff on the topic of preaching. Read his posts Am I a Speacher? and Implication vs. Application. In these posts, Brian is reflecting on Doug Pagitt’s book, Preaching Re-Imagined.
Drew Sams is trying to figure this out as well, as he is in the midst of a blogging series on the use of story in youth ministry.
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. So let me leave you with another quote from Barth about the power of preaching.
This is why the movement of the Word as preaching was so crucial to his interpretation of the Word as threefold event. By the logic of his doctrine of the Word, it was only as Christian preaching that the Word remains ongoing. The Word becomes present as preaching in the same way that the Holy Spirit makes God present to us. That is, just as the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, the Word as preaching proceeds from revelation and scripture. Barth’s point was not that the revelatory and scriptural forms of the Word cannot be made present. Rather, just as the Father and Son are made present only through the movement of the Spirit, the Word as revelation and scripture are made present “in, with, and under” preaching and only through preaching.
By “preaching” Barth meant more than Sunday sermonizing or even the general ministerial work of pastors. Preaching included all forms of genuine Christian witness, including, “whatever we all ‘preach’ to ourselves in the quiet or our own rooms.” It included even the work of theologians, insofar as they understood and practiced theology in a ministry of the Word of God and therefore a form of preaching, he argued. (The Barthian Revolt in Modern Theology: Theology Without Weapons, pp.78)
I would love to hear your thoughts on preaching? What do you think? Is it just me, or are you feeling the same thing?
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
At the moment, I’m working through this as well. I’m wondering if preaching wouldn’t have a more holistic place in the life of worship, if weren’t THE life of worship. I have a spiritual observance that is rather robust at the moment, so I look for sermons to listen to. It adds. The artform is masterfully handled by many.
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?
I’ve been speaking for years (okay, decades, yikes I’m old), but for the past 5 or 6 years I stay far away from “preaching”. Granted, I do it in camp and retreat settings, not church, so maybe it’s different.
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.
I don’t know….those are questions I was asking myself in some of my earlier posts. You may not be able to have a conversation with a crowd of 1,000 people in a Sunday morning service. But I think there are ways to make that congregation part of the service, whether it’s during the week (addding questions, thoughts, insights, doing interviews, etc. with them), or doing some random Q and A during the service.
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.
It is funny how most churches haven’t re thought or re done a sermon but they have rethought and redone worship. I find this odd and obviously you do a little too. Postmoderns typically want to interact, but very little about a sermon or message involves interaction. I guess maybe a bigger question is how else big churches can provide a message to everyone without using the form of a sermon.
Tyler….great point. Musical worship is always evolving, and churches experiment with it all the time…even doing different services to “meet the needs” of those with that musical taste. But it seems that even though we change the worship, add a service, etc…we just import the same sermon.
I’m just as guilty.
rhett
I have been wrestling with similar questions about preaching for some time. It seems to me that certain spiritual gifts or practices like preaching are overemphasized or exaggerated, while others are either suppressed or politely ignored.
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.
Rhett, and here I’d thought you’d figured this out already…
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.
Hi Don.
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
Sign: gnvkb Hello!!! kawtz and 1144chkasnpywu and 2217 My Comments: Thanks. We look forward to hearing from you again and for your opinions on the world of work.
Sign: wdpad Hello!!! qnzez and 1764heyrsvtzwn and 5756 : Great!
{ 1 trackback }