I've having recently been thinking about and blogging concerning the role of preaching in the church. The issue I’m trying to deal with is “Is preaching as it is done today, a monologue usually by one Senior ministor/pastor week by week to a passive audience, is that what the Bible intended for the Church?”. Recently, someone directed me to a talk by Mark Driscoll title d "Putting Preachers in their place" dealing with this issue. Driscoll argues yes and almost goes as far as to say to think otherwise might put you in the category of being a cult or a sect.I’m a big fan of Driscoll and I listen to his sermons regularly. However, I must say that I did not find the argument in this talk convincing.
Driscoll supports his argument by referring to numerous passages of preaching by Jesus, Paul and other Apostles, but nearly all these passages are in the context of preaching to Non-believers outside of a church. The context is different so to then argue that preaching is essential part of church from these passages I don't think is right.
Driscoll says that Acts 13 clearly shows that there was a team of preachers at the church in Antioch. But when you look up Acts 13:1 it says “Now there were in the church at Antioch prophets and teachers”. O.k. it is possible there were a team of preachers at the church in Antioch but is this what the verse is actually saying? Is these passage advocating the current practice of most churches of one pastor preaching every week?
Don't mishear me. I’m not against preaching in church. Not at all. I’m just questioning whether preaching by one pastor every week in church was what the Bible is advocating. I believe that the word of God is central to church. I’m just not sure that preaching by one ordained person though is what the Bible is teaching. It could possibly, but it is not as clear cut as people make out. I think there is room for several teaching elders. Does preaching have to be a monologue? Is the Bible teaching this?
In Driscoll’s argument for preaching being the central part of church he goes to the teaching of the Reformers, Calvin and the like and their definitions on the marks of the church. But he does not show us where from the Bible this is evident.
Looking at preaching today. Almost all of it is done in the church to believers and hardly any to non-believers. In the New Testament most of the preaching is to non-believers. Preaching in the church context and what form it took I don’t think is clearly addressed as opposed to preaching outside of church to non-believers were there are numerous examples.
I'm happy to be corrected or convinced otherwise. Please do. But please take me to the Scriptures. However, if the current model of one pastor/minister preaching a monologue week by week to a passive audience arose through church traditional or practice then we need to recognize that this is what it is and not read back church traditional into the Scriptures.
5 comments:
Yeah - preach it brother!
I think a 'natural' multilogue might work well, even if 1 person prepared the bulk of the content. It's only when there's too many people in attendance that this no longer works.
I also agree. I wonder why we are so attached to the present monologue model...
I've attended a church were most of the pastors preached at some point (I think the lead pastor preached at least half the time), and that worked well.
I do find it strange that we want "the word of God" to be central to our gatherings, but the bible readings take very little time compared to everything else, and are often done very badly.
I think there's alot to be said for dramatic readings of scripture followed by a discussion (led by someone with good insights).
(Thanks for your blog, by the way, I found my way here through a mutual blogging friend, I think it was Allan).
Dear Peter,
I guess that's why we are trying to implement a church model with smaller numbers (8-12) where this "multiloguing" can be possible. Conversely, this may be one of the reasons why most churches prefer monologue due to the greater numbers and difficulty in practically facilitating "multiloguing"
Rich
Dear Donna,
Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment.
I agree we could do bible reading a lot better. Sometimes they can be a bit a bit token and done without much thought or preparation.
Dramatic reading would probably help people to actually listen and take it in rather than "phase out".
I agree a discussion afterward would be helpful, but I wouldn't want that to be the only thing we did concerning God's word (and I don't think you are suggesting this).
I think it is helpful for people to think through the Scriptures during the week, discuss it with others, and then share at Church. I think this is more helpful then thinking on the spot.
Rich
Great post. Nothing much to say except that I appreciated the way you addressed this and it got me thinking, I agree!
Post a Comment