Preaching is a weighty responsibility. In particular, we preach to largely the same congregation week after week. Such a responsibility is quite different from coming to a new group every time we speak. Every once in a while, I find it helpful to read material that helps me reflect upon what I am doing when I preach. Here are a few reflections.
Karl Barth, in his volume Homiletics, states,
‘There is no need, then, to consider the problem of what should come first, second, and third. The preacher has only to repeat what the text says.'
Barth rejects introductions, conclusions, and sermon divisions out of his theological conviction that humanity can do nothing to make the Word of God effective and should not try to do so, perhaps because of his dislike for the artiness of the sermons of his day. For Barth, sermon form only served to obscure the Word of God. Preachers, he argued, need not make much of the issue of sermon form.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that the biblical preachers and writers did have a concern for design. Long argues that the New Testament writers were intentional in their rhetorical design and that New Testament preaching was based on the preaching of the synagogue, which was complex in its communication strategy.
Consider the difference between Paul's sermon in Acts 13 to a largely Jewish audience in the synagogue and his sermon in Acts 17 to a Gentile audience in the Greek marketplace. In Acts 13 Paul's sermon is filled with Old Testament references and theology. In Acts 17 Paul takes a very different approach, appealing to an altar to ‘an unknown God' and quoting from Greek poets, while not using a single quotation from the Hebrew Scriptures. These two sermons reflect different audiences and thus different rhetorical designs. They are designed differently, but they are designed.
Most of us seek faithfulness to the Bible as we understand it, and yet, also seek to relate to the needs of the congregation. William H. Willimon (Pastor: The Theology and Practice of Ordained Ministry, 2002, Chapter 6) refers this to the pastor being a servant of the Word. He opens with a reminder that being a servant of the word is sometimes to deliver painful messages. In that sense, preaching can be like surgery. He seems grateful for the Reformation recovery of an emphasis upon preaching. He uses the example of a finely constructed sermon by Paul in Acts 17, after which Paul had only a meager positive response. For him, this is a sign that as much as one may build connection with the audience, when it comes to specifically gospel messages, the response may not be so positive. As Paul puts it I Corinthians 3, one preacher plants seed, another waters, but God gives the increase. However, he seems to grudgingly grant that preaching is respectful conversation between the gospel and the world as we have received it. He is much more enthusiastic in saying that preaching is a confrontation, assault, announcement, and collision with the received world. This can be painful.
In Communicating for a Change, by Andy Stanley and Lane Jones (2006), Stanley refers to people who simply preach through the Bible verse by verse, and another group who primarily want to teach the Bible. He rejects these notions because they are not consistent with what he thinks should be the goal of preaching, which is life change, not just information about the Bible. Thus, he thinks the goal is to teach people how to live a life that reflects the values, principles, and truths of the Bible. The goal is life change, not just something more to think about. Well, life change is what I recall from my Seminary preaching courses was the objective back then as well, but some thought the best way to do this was "expository preaching." Some preachers could do it very well. In any case, for Stanley, this means a focus on application, inspiration, now, and some texts become more important than others. Your preaching asks the so what and now what questions.
In this general vein, one of the suggestions often made regarding preaching is that one should begin with the "felt needs" of the congregation. This can be helpful advice. Yet, I came across a good reminder recently that I found insightful. Felt needs can actually distract us as preachers, for often, the "felt needs" of people are due to a misdirection provided by society, pop culture, or advertising. In one sense, the problem people think they are having is not the problem. People think they need all sorts of things they don't need, and they are distracted from the things they do need. I think this is one reason why preaching requires study, prayer, and discernment. The preacher can be just as deceived as can the people, unless he or she gives careful attention to the Bible passage from which one is preaching.
Adam Hamilton suggests that we preachers need to look at the year and make sure that we cover five areas. One is a "fishing expedition," aimed specifically at those outside the church, but encouraging members of the congregation to invite their non-Christian friends. Two is discipleship, three is pastoral care, four is equipping or sending, and five is vision-casting. Thinking of my preaching in the way Hamilton suggested has proven helpful to me. .
I largely preach from the lectionary, a guided three-year study that has a psalm, a reading from the Old Testament, a reading from an epistle, and a reading from a Gospel. However, most people in the pew would hardly be aware, for I do not mention it. I usually select one of the passages to focus upon. Since I prepare a group of messages at a time, I usually end up developing a series of messages. In my retirement I have been reviewing past sermons, notes, and studies of the lectionary passages. I plan a page that focuses upon what I have learned through the lectionary. Here is a link to the studies of individual passages.
https://lectionarypondering.blogspot.com/
What I have learned to do in preparing messages is to search for an insight about which I become excited and can hardly wait to share. Tom Long (The Witness of Preaching, 1989, p. 45) says that the biblical preacher goes to the biblical text, in service to the congregation, hoping to make a discovery. Then, the preacher announces the discovery to the congregation. Stanley refers to this as picking a point. What is it I want to say? For him, if life change is the goal, then having more than one point is not effective. The "point" to which he refers is an application, insight, or principle that becomes the glue that holds the other parts together. If you preach a series, such a "point" should hold the series together as well. What is the one think I want my audience to know and what do I want them to do about it? For him, the discovery of this point often comes late in the process. Personally, I find that it will often take much study before I come across the "point" that I can hardly wait to share with people. He adds that you then make sure that you build every part of the message around this point, for you are taking people on a journey. Old time preachers call it the "burden" of the sermon. Such a "point" is a burden that weights so heavily one the heart of the preacher that he or she must deliver it. Tom Long says that preaching begins in encounter with the biblical text, doing so prayerfully, playfully, and obediently. Leander Keck (The Bible and the Pulpit, 1979) calls it priestly listening. Preachers cannot be simply great talkers. They must first be great listeners. Dietrich Bonhoeffer (Life Together, 97-98) makes it clear that ministers need to remember that they do a greater service to others than speaking. The death of spiritual life, he says, begins with a failure to listen. Willimon says this also means being good readers, attenders of movies and plays, and simply being with others. When we think of the Bible in the way that Willimon desires, the Bible is questioning us, searching us. Thus, he wants us to consider several questions to ask of the text. What is there about the text that is unusual, challenging, strange, or engaging? How can I develop and design the sermon on this text? Then comes questions related to delivery, how shall I say it? Willimon suggests scheduled times during the week when preachers engage in the difficult, solitary task of study. True, pastors have public roles that compete and at times overwhelm.
Stanley refers to the next step as creating a map. What is the best route to the point? This imagery is helpful to me, largely because the journey metaphor for peaching is helpful to me. Every sermon becomes an invitation to a journey. You have the larger goal of a life change, and the specific goal of a point or destination. The rest of the message is a journey to get to that point. In my preaching, I aim for an introduction, usually connected with something going on in the world. For Stanley, this is the orientation (Me) and identification (We) part of the sermon. He tells a story about himself. Such a story is to establish common ground with the listeners. My hesitancy here is that from my background, too much emphasis upon self is a blockage to communicating for life change. In my introductions, I am usually sharing some of the my reading or experience of the world that might bear upon the point I want to communicate. The next part of the map is to reflect upon the passage of Scripture. Stanley refers to this as "God," meaning what the Bible says about the issue raised in the introduction. The point is to engage the audience in the reading of the passage as part of the journey, and not just read it. Given this approach, scripture, along with reasonable exegesis of the text, and along with the attending creeds and other historic affirmations of Christian faith, form the background of my messages. I share only a little of this background. Frankly, although some find it interesting, I try to reserve it for classes. When preaching, the focus is life change. Getting into too much detail on the text can dilute the power of the text. The next step for me is to offer some suggestions for application. Stanley calls this "you" in the sense that the preacher now gets specific about the application of the point to today and our following of Christ. Rick Warren offers six guidelines for putting applications into sermons. First, always aim for specific action. Second, model it from your own life. I agree with him that offering a personal witness to the truth of what you are saying in your life is important. I also think a preacher needs to be careful here. One can give the impression of lifting up oneself. Third, ask penetrating questions. Fourth give specific action steps. If I could talk with Rick, I wound want some caution here. If we as preachers are too specific in action steps, we can give the impression that we have worked out everything already for them. Some Sundays, we need to leave the congregation with more questions than answers. Some Sundays, we may need to let them fill in the blanks, rather than always filling it in for them. Fifth, offer practical examples. Steve Brown suggests that communicators need to illustrate their messages with stories. Sixth, offer people hope. I like this, by the way. People struggle plenty in life without preachers laying on another layer with which to struggle. Offering the hope of moving forward in life, in the presence of God and power of the Spirit, is an important part of our task as preachers, I think. For Stanley, the conclusion "we," is to engage in a powerful ending that drives home the point.
Rick Warren has popularized the notion of filling in the blank messages. Stanley, however, does not like this. He thinks that distracts from the notion of you as a preacher internalizing the message. Stanley wants the preacher to consider the question, What is your story? Thus, Stanley will use the fill in the blank approach at seminars but not for sermons. Yet, for Rick, I suspect that going to his church is like going to seminar, so it may be all right in his setting. In any case, I largely agree with Stanley here. I do have a sermon to go in which there are usually two or three things to fill in, and this usually as other ideas to explore. What I like about it is that it gives people something to chew upon during the week. Yet, I must confess, I have little way of knowing if people are actually doing that. I have toyed with the idea of a "sermon" class, in which we go over some of the points in the sermon to go insert and discuss it. In any case, Stanley suggests that most preachers want to become more conversational in their style. The preacher needs to tell the sermon rather than preach it. If the preacher constantly refers to notes, it is a sign of not internalizing the message. The outline of the sermon needs to become your friend in internalizing the message. One needs to reduce it to five or six pieces or chunks of information.
Adam Hamilton suggests that every sermon should have the five following elements. Stanley refers to the need to engage the audience in every sermon. I think this list from Hamilton is a good way to get at that engagement. It is all part of keeping people on the journey with you. One is to teach something people did not know before. To expand on teaching, Steve Brown of Preaching Magazine communicators should be lucid. If someone wants to take notes on what one says, could they do so? Two is to inspire. One of the ways to do this, I think, is to be what Steve Brown calls passionate. If you do not care about what you are saying, why should anyone else care? Three is to offer practical help. Steve Brown suggests that communication needs to be therapeutic. It recognizes a problem and offers a solution. The solution may be like that of a doctor, in that the prescription will sometimes feel good and sometimes bad, but the objective is to heal. Four is to call to action. Five is to be creative, interesting, and intriguing. Steve Brown uses the term unconventional. He thinks the greatest sin of any communicator is to bore the audience. Do not say it the way everyone else is saying it.
Stanley then suggest that each preacher needs to find his or her voice. What works for you? As Chuck Swindoll puts it, know who you are, accept who you are, and be who you are. It addresses the issue of authenticity. All of this is good advice if you or other people think you need to mimic Rick Warren or Beth Moore.
For Stanley, the final part of the sermon map is to start all over. What is the next step? First, ask the information question: What do they need to know? Second, ask the motivation question: Why do they need to know it? Third, ask the application question: What do they need to do? Fourth, ask the inspiration question, Why do they need to do it? Fifth, ask the reiteration question, How can I help them remember?