Evangelical Options in Preaching

I just looked up an interview that I felt was interesting on the preaching subject we've been discussing. It is on the 9Marks blog. A pastor/church planter named Mike McKinley is asking Steve Timmis, one of the authors of the book Total Church, about his claim that preaching need not always be 'monologue.'

I think it will be worth your time to read it.

Check it out HERE.


Here is one quote from the interview:

"What we are doing is challenging the privileged status of the extended monologue. At one level, it's a pragmatic argument: different contexts call for different approaches. But it's a principled pragmatism. The principle is the centrality of God's Word in the corporate life of God's people. How that is secured and sustained depends on the context. If you're in someone's front room, then you have opportunity to invite questions, respond to comments and explore issues 'on the hoof'. But all the time, the Bible is your reference point. You're bringing people under the gospel and showing them Christ. Here's the thing Mike: being Word-centred is not the same as being preaching-centered, and I want our churches to be the former. Now that will always involve formal teaching, and by someone gifted as a teacher, and it may involve preaching as extended monologue, but not necessarily. It might be worth your readers knowing that even if someone is teaching dialogically in a household context, the preparation required is equal to, and probably greater than that for a 30-40 minute monologue. Why? Because you have absolutely no idea what questions you're going to be asked as you are teaching! Someone can ask a doozy of a left-field question and you've got to make sure that your answer takes them right back into the passage your teaching. Dialogical teaching is not the same as a 'pooling of ignorance' where everyone has an equal say. Sometimes, you just have to tell people they are wrong, plain wrong."

Preaching 3 - Control and Authority

Part of Pagitt's problem with preaching (or speaching) is with authority and control. A couple quotes:

"The speaching act allows for the preacher not only to control the content, but also to apply the sermon to people's lives."

"The problem here is not just the delivery system but the assumption that what people need to know exists in the mind and plans of one person who is often little more than an acquaintance for most of the people in the church." pg. 119

Pagitt is not blaming preachers for this really. He says that the problem is that we've been taught that this is what the pastor is supposed to do and we haven't realized that there might be another way.

To those here who pastor/preach - are control and authority things that you think of often? Do you feel that others in our congregations see us as controlling truth? Do others here see their pastor(s) in such a way?

"Speaching" Preaching Re-Imagined - 2

Instead of evaluating Pagitt's ideas in my posts, I think I'll simply quote him and allow the interaction to take place in the comments. All are welcome to weigh in...

"...nearly every preacher would rightly cringe at the notion that preaching is just giving a speech or a lecture. Yet most preaching is done is such a way that it's hard to understand it as anything other than a speech that happens to have religious content. The 'speacher' stands in front of the 'audience.' The speacher is the only one with the microphone and therefore the only one with the power to speak on the subject at hand. The content of hte speech has been decided on with little, if any, input from those who are hearing the speech, and the conclusions are drawn by the speacher and no one else." Preaching Re-Imagined, pg. 48

Responses?

Preaching Re-imagined - 1

I am interested in preaching. I brought up the topic at our last meeting and it seems to be one of some interest. Doug Pagitt's book Preaching Re-Imagined has drawn a lot of attention and strong reactions from many. Let's take a look at it.

Pagitt begins with an assumption that he believes the reader will share - preaching doesn't work - at least not as we've thought of it (pg. 18) This is why preachers read so many preaching books and attend conferences etc. We are hoping to find a 'key' to make preaching work.

Pagitt does, however, believe that preaching is important. The problem, he says, is that we've made preaching into 'speaching' (a term he coins). More on this soon.

He says that we live in a time where the best of 'speaching' is available to us through recordings, mp3, the internet, etc. but it still has not had the desired result.

I'd like your thoughts on the question, is preaching as we know it a broken form of communication? Pagitt's claim is that the problem is not that we're bad at preaching, but that 'speaching' (bascially the sermon as a speach given by one person to a group) is just not effective regardless of how 'good' we are at it.

I have strong feelings about the subject, but I'd like to know yours.