Let's Talk.
Most Recent Posts.
- Approved Narrative Budget for 2013/2014 (0) »
- Gathering 2013 – Loving Our New Neighbour (0) »
- Ministry Leadership Event registration (0) »
- Gathering 2013 Promo Video (0) »
- Mexico Ministry Report (0) »
- San Jose Work Team – heading for home (1) »
- Bolivia Update (3) »
Most Commented Posts.
- Approved Narrative Budget for 2013/2014 (0) »
- Our Mission Statement in Draft (45) »
- History made in Bolivia today! (26) »
- preaching – a “third way” (16) »
Photos.
Archive.
- September 2013 (3)
- August 2013 (3)
- July 2013 (3)
- June 2013 (3)
- May 2013 (3)
- April 2013 (3)
- March 2013 (3)
- February 2013 (3)
- January 2013 (3)
- 2012 (168)
- 2011 (252)
- 2010 (196)
preaching – a “third way”
Posted by: len hjalmarson
Church: Aylmer, Ontario Aylmer
Date: July 13th, 2011
Scot McKnight advocates a genuine “third way” to spiritual formation that moves beyond a Sunday focus.
“A genuine Third Way will get beyond the Sunday morning sermon as the primary form of spiritual formation and education in a local church, and neither Belcher (Deep Church) nor Pagitt (Preaching Re-Imagined) seem to approach preaching through the lens of a larger formational program with clearly defined outcomes. A genuine Third Way will form a well-rounded and adaptable formation program that guides all sermons, all teaching, and all activities in the church. Sermons will be seen as one part of the formational ministry of the church. In other words, Third Way preaching is rooted in the overall outcomes of the church.
“If you want to read a book that will rock the pastor’s and church’s world, but which is very clear and will make all kinds of suggestions, I recommend Maryellen Weimer: Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. I have been suggesting for some time that the biggest shift will come in churches when they take education (especially for adults) seriously. We can tweak sermons and Sunday services all we want, but the only real substantive shift will occur when a larger vision for formation and education are shaped by outcomes.
“What is most needed is a complete spiritual formation approach to the entire church and for each person; outcomes need to be formulated by the leaders and the church so that the whole approach is embraced. Within the overall approach to realizing outcomes, which I would say are loving God, loving others and a life of holiness, sermons play a role and sometimes an important one. But serious formative changes occur when the individual and the group participate in, activate, and integrate what is being taught. (By the way, that last sentence requires pages of discussion.) And these formative changes take place within a set of outcomes. And, perhaps most importantly, they take place with spiritual directors, pastors, teachers and friends who come alongside to help a person.”
Len, thanks opening the discussion on this area of ministry. You have touched on a topic that my wife and I have discussed many times, specifically as it relates to the culture in which we are ministering.
I strongly agree that that adult education is a necessity in transforming the church, but I am finding it difficult to sell that idea in a culture that has always been apposed to education, and where adult education is looked on as a weakness. Do you have any suggestions?
You wrote “What is most needed is a complete spiritual formation approach to the entire church and for each person; outcomes need to be formulated by the leaders and the church so that the whole approach is embraced. Within the overall approach to realizing outcomes, which I would say are loving God, loving others and a life of holiness, sermons play a role and sometimes an important one. But serious formative changes occur when the individual and the group participate in, activate, and integrate what is being taught”.
Can you elaborate a bit more on this?
Sure, thanks for the dialogue!
Coincidentally, I just drafted a paper assessing where our church is at today in terms of the needs of our people and our ability to address those needs. And I am not in favor of a “needs based” approach per se, but simply recognizing that Jesus calls us upward – toward maturity and “the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4). How do we get people there? What does it look like to be fully human? Or put another way, what does maturity in Christ look like in practice? This begs other foundational questions about biblical anthropology – the imago Dei.
So – what is our telos? What is the end point of discipleship, given our broken world and even our limited ability to bring healing? And I think this measure should be more than individual and personal. I do believe the Spirit is speaking to the church about this in our day, reminding us that evangelism is more than words and that “we are God’s body language” to the world. We must both declare and demonstrate, proclaim and perform the gospel for this postmodern world to give us an ear.
The measure, as Scot McKnight argues, is “loving God and loving our neighbour.” Very practical measure that includes both inward and outward expressions. Relating this to education I”d rather speak of “formation.” SO the goal of Christian education is to be formed in the image of Christ. The end point of formation is love – to know as we are known, to love as we are loved. James K.A. Smith has done some good work on this in his last book “Desiring the Kingdom.”
Yes, but PRACTICALLY what does this look like. I agree that there is certainly within the EMMC culture a downplaying of education. I talk to so many people about involvement in different ministries but the default answer always seems to come back to “I don’t have the education to do that…” which is really just an excuse.
Education is not everything. As CS Lewis said, “Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil”. Education by intself does not make people more godly. That does not mean that Christian education is not important .
As a church we are trying to develop a discipleship training track that moves people towards Christian maturity. It is laid out in our mission statement – to exalt God, embrace one another, equip for service and extend the kingdom. It starts by helping people to experience the presence and power of God in worship. Then we try to connect people in fellowship through small groups. Then we try to encourage everyone to go through a series of 3 courses: Membership 101, Maturity 201 and Ministry 301. Along the way we help them to identify their SHAPE – spiritual gifts, heart, abilities, personalities and experiences. The last step is to help connect them with an area of ministry and mission according to thier SHAPE.
To answer the question, I think the easiest way to change the EMMC culture is through practical expereince. If you want to change a behaviour it starts with a positive decision. Make enough positive decisions and soon a habit is established and the culture is changed. For us, that means getting people who don’t go to classes to start going. We are doing this by offering a number of short exciting “felt need” classes Sunday mornings to get people back into the habit of Sunday School. These are classes on parenting, marriage, finances ect. We promote them well and make sure the content is relevant.
To go back to the original title for this thread I would encourage everyone to read John Stott’s great book I Believe in Preaching. The 30 min we spend behind the pulpit every Sunday is the most powerful part of any pastor’s week. Preaching changes lives. It changed mine. Of course it is only a part of the church’s overall vision and of course we should choose topics which build upon our Christian Education program. Let us never underestimate what an important part it does play.
This is true not only historically but also biblically. When Paul wanted to reach the city of Ephesus what did he do? He went to the places where large groups of people gathered and he spoke. When this no longer was possible he rented out a large lecture hall and held regular meetings where he spoke. Yes that was not all he did, but it was central to his ministry approach.
Well said Stephen! Too often we use an excuse for not doing things. In my personal life I’ve learned that doing God’s will comes before education … but then we’ve to be willing to learn by all means necessary.
We are somewhere along the journey of shifting from a program centered approach (a lot of classes) to life groups as the place where people are discipled. This puts the focus for us on equipping and training life group leaders as pastors and teachers and primary care givers. Yes – its a big shift.
The goal is still the same – a community of people following Jesus on his mission of redeeming the world.
I’m less convinced that preaching changes lives. I can count on one hand the sermons that had an impact on me. Granted, I may have a bad memory! I DO remember conversations that had an impact. But maybe then the question is “how can we change the sermon so that it becomes more like a conversation?” That question captures my interest. In our Saturday meeting we have interaction after the teaching. People are loving this and it does seem a more effective way of engaging hearts and minds.
I’m not convinced that Paul is the best model for a preacher. Remember the Gospel was taking root in a new culture so that was really kerygmatic – telling the good news – where we are more in the discipleship frame. Then again – we ARE in a new cultural location, at least in the urban centers.
For preaching books I recommend Tom Long, “Preaching from Memory to Hope.” The Scriptures tell a story, and preachers have to do the same.
Another question that relates preaching to the wider agenda of making disciples would be this: If life groups become the primary means for forming disciples and caring for people, how would preaching be part of that agenda? What we are thinking about is creating a curriculum that would integrate the preaching schedule and the life group curriculum. So life groups would be digging into the same passage that the preachers/teachers are in on Sundays. There is a lot of interest in this, and it makes perfect sense. People in life groups will then come to Sunday with their own questions and having already spent some time in the passage. To me this makes a 25 minute teaching slot a great deal richer.
You guys are complementary. We can’t only ask the practical questions – could be just pragmatists. Have to go back to Scripture and reflect together. But there has to be practical application too.
Seems to me the danger of preaching is what it always was – spoon feeding people rather than finding a way to get them into the word – so I am liking the integration thing. Let’s get into the word together in our groups where we can wrestle and also apply. Stephen are you talking about what you are doing or are these plans? Sounds pretty good.
I’m not sure we use “preaching” the way the NT uses it. Seems that there it is evangelism, where Paul is either in the marketplace preaching, or in the community of faith doing didasko – teaching disciples. HOpefully we aren’t doing evangelism among the converted.
John, agreed, we have rolled teaching/preaching into one where in the NT they are different. Most of what we call “preaching” is really teaching and disciple making.
There is a good argument that the form of our present gatherings including the sermon was invented by Luther. Nothing wrong with that of course it has served us well. But also nothing sacred about it. The functions and end goal are what is important, how we get there (forms) can change.
Another integration piece for us is Facebook. We create a new group with every teaching series; allows us to interact a bit and even generate questions to dig deeper. We can learn more digging together than if just the preacher/teacher is doing the preparation.
My two cents into a good discussion. From a post on Church Multiplication
Why are We So Ineffective in Making Disciples? by Katie Driver
Posted on July 13th, 2011
One of my classes at the University of Minnesota this spring was focused on adult education and particularly, how adults learn and retain that learning.
Let me share some basic points regarding adult education that many years of research have shown:
1. Adults retain 90% of what they learn if they teach it to someone else, and have immediate application of what they learn.
2. Adults retain 75% of what learn when they practice it.
3. Adults retain 50% of what they discuss in a group.
4. Adults retain 30% of what they see demonstrated.
Look at those percentages and think about it in the context of how it relates to making disciples. Paul told Timothy to be effective in his ministry of making disciples and extending the Kingdom when he exhorted Timothy’s efforts with; “so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” 2 Tim. 3:17.
Click here for full article.
http://www.cmaresources.org/article/why-are-we-so-ineffective-in-making-disciples_katie-driver
Jacob
great point. Learning is not merely collecting information and the best learning takes place outside classrooms and even outside groups. The best value of group interaction is to process and reflect on what we experience outside the group.
I’m teaching my first doctoral seminar in January, and what I love about that environment is that it is driven by the student as much as by the professor. But its still a classroom and it begs practical outflow. One of the books I want to read this year is on learning:
http://tinyurl.com/3g2wh9m
Oh, while we are talking about leading through preaching and what this looks like, below is an excerpt from an article in my new post -” Another Look at Paul”. I quote Timothy Gombis from an article “The Paul we think we Know”. Is he right?
“Evangelicals place a high priority on leadership, perhaps because historically our movement has been carried along by strong leaders. The great figures in our heritage have been powerful speakers and compelling visionaries, many of whom have built colleges, seminaries, and, in some cases, entire denominations. These are also the traits we want to see in our pastors.
Thus we intuitively assume that Paul was someone just like this. We think he must have been a compelling figure, a charismatic and decisive leader, and a powerful speaker. From the moment of conversion, he immediately put his great abilities to work for Christ, taking over the leadership of the church and becoming its powerful spokesperson.
When we look at the evidence from the New Testament, however, we find a very different picture. Surprisingly, Paul was not a captivating speaker. He was aware of the Corinthians’ criticisms of his preaching: “For some say, ‘His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing’” (2 Cor. 10:10). Just like these early believers, we find his letters rhetorically compelling. But we would be wrong to assume his preaching had the same effect.”
But this is only because Paul never attended a good seminary so he lacked a class in “mastering rhetorical skills” ie. preaching 101
. Or was he intentionally unimpressive because he wanted their faith to rest “not on persuasive words but on the power of God” ? (1 Cor. 2)
Not sure – but it helps me to remember that there is a piece I have to do before I preach, that preparation requires prayer and if the Spirit doesn’t speak in all this I am wasting my time..
I believe there is a huge difference between preaching and teaching. Teaching is all about information. Preaching is all about transformation. The goal is not to teach a lot of facts and information but to take one simple concept and help people apply it in their everyday lives. It is the application that is important.
I do not think preaching is an invention of the modern church. The early church was to select elders who were “able to teach” for a reason. As churches increase in size the need for gifted teachers also increases.
I agree with Jacob that preaching is often an ineffective way of doing it. One of the things Jesus did was to telll a lot of stories which I think is extremely important. I can preach the same principle every year and no one notices but if I telll a story I told 10 years ago everyone remembers. That is because story telling is so powerful.
I agree that the preaching should be discused by the small groups. A number of our small groups use the Sunday sermon as the basis of their group discussions. This allows interaction with the topic and helps in application. I always post in full text of our Sermons online so that people have it days before the service. That way people who are weak in English can print it and follow along on Sunday so they do not miss anything.
Again, I am not saying that only the sermon is important – a good Christian education program must include all elements of exalt, embrace, equip and extend. People hear a message on Sunday, they talk about the application of it during the week in a small group, the topic is enforced through elective classes and online resouces and then the concepts are practiced and retaught through invovlement in service and ministry. You hear it, you interact with it, you enforce it and then you practice it and teach it to others.
If Paul was really unimpressive in public speaking then why was he often invited back after he had spoken somewhere?
Stephen, yes, great point on storytelling! I’ve been reflecting quite a bit on that lately — Jesus told all kinds of stories, and they were an invitation to learn and to enter the kingdom, a different way of seeing the world. So powerful.
If we take Paul at his word, or rather the words he reported from others, he wasn’t impressive. But his words were witnessed, as he says in 1 Cor. 2, by the power of God – by the Spirit, and even in concrete demonstrations of power.
3I came to you in weakness
with great fear and trembling. 4My message
and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive
words, but with a demonstration of the
Spirit’s power, 5so that your faith might not rest
on human wisdom, but on God’s power.
I’d like to see that more often among us. I wonder how open we really are to the presence of the Lord? Perhaps if we were honest we fear God more than love him – a growing edge for many of us. But his heart is to bring peace, to restore, to heal, to save, and to embrace – the heart of the Father.
These are HUGE conversations! WOW! One element which I am finding is missing with regard to the theological shaping of the community of believers, is a lack of coherence in the practices of the church…specifically with regard to the sacramental life of the church. In many ways, we have lost our theological vocabulary, and meaning which we derive from such practices as following the church calendar year, observing special seasons such as Advent, Lent…etc. Often, things like coming to the communion table as one body becomes more of a “drive-by shooting” where I’ve been hit by something, but am entirely unsure where the significance was. There is a suspicion of things which smack of “liturgy”, and a certain preoccupation with maintaining a narrow approach to theological engagement, which leaves little room for divergent perspectives. These are some of my experiences thus far within much of EMMC, though not all.
I don’t take Preaching and Teaching to be mutually exclusive enterprises of the church. I tend to see the entire worship service as the shaping element of the people, where the sermon is one of its parts. This is especially true if the services are intentionally cohesive, but when I began my ministry in my present church, I could not identify this kind of cohesiveness. In fact, the sermon almost NEVER lined up with the rest of the service, and for me, that made what we were doing unintelligible. There was little intentionality infused into our worship. Now, there are many things which give me hope…there seems to be an openness to learning in different ways. Perhaps, as far as preaching goes, we will one day explore other methods. We can not assume that the lecture model works for everyone. Somehow, we still believe that is the only way to do preaching.
No action on this thread for some time, but I thought I would contribute again. This coming Sunday, July 28, our church will be worshipping together in our banquet hall downstairs instead of in the sanctuary like we usually do. The focus will be on exploring faith through dialogue. The western church has relied so heavily and for so long on the monologue approach to preaching, and some of us are wondering if the early Anabaptists may still have something to teach us. Dialogue can be a bit frightening for many Christians. It is a practice which demands from us to lay aside our judgements of other perspectives, and if forces us to truly listen to one another, and not impose our sense of right and wrong, which usually seeks to move toward uniformity. Christ’s church is called to unity, but that is not the same as uniformity. It is also a difficult endeavour, as dialogue does not demand perfect resolution or harmony of perspectives or ideas. I invite your prayers over our service this Sunday. My Christ be glorified, and may our fears be cast out by perfect love for one another, through the gift of the Spirit of Christ. Thank you!