POLL: What do you carry to the pulpit

You'd better have one ALL the time.

 

I've recently read many homileticians advocate that, if you use a manuscript, indent each sentence like a paragraph and double or triple space the sentences. Okay. That means the average preacher would have to carry dozens of pages into the pulpit! Do any of you manuscript preachers do this?

 

Tom:

I recently changed from mss preaching (which for me was 8-10 pages, arial 11 pt font, "web design", i.e., parapgraphs of three to four lines each, with 6 pt space before and after, to folded outline alone: 8 x 11 landscape, two-column, front and back, 3 pages total. These fit nicely into my Bible and allow me to refer to my notes without being locked to them.

 

I use 8.5 x 11 sheets cut in half to where they are 5.5 by 8.5, and I print my outline or manuscript on them (which I use as an outline). Trouble is, if I adopted the practice I described, I'd be carrying 20-25 pages in my Bible (I normally carry 2-4 in an outline and 10 with a full manuscript in Arial 10 pt type). Wondering if anyone had any experience with that.

 

My sermons are single spaced, 14-point, Roman type. I've been using that format for long enough, that I know that five pages in that layout will give me 15-20 minutes of sermon. (Usually more like 20.)

I have a "blank sermon" template that I use where I fill in the text, title, date, church, and liturgical date. Then I just start typing. A lesson learned several years ago has caused me to add the page numbers as well.

Joshua

 

15-20 minutes?

I preach expository, verse-by-verse sermons, and they take 45-50 minutes (and that's cutting them short!)

 

Different traditions Chris. "Expository" means different things to different people, but by the definition I'm familiar with my preaching is expository as well. It is centered solely and completely in the text, and has as its primary purpose recreating and clarifying what the text does.

Many "expository" preachers I'm familiar with try to preach four or five different sermons in one. I work very hard to avoid that, trying to preach one, tightly focused sermon that doesn't say anything the text doesn't. In the churches where I preach, the congregations are accustomed to 20 minute sermons/homilies; and I really don't see a need for longer. Too long, and the sermon becomes the focus of the worship service instead of one component in it.

Joshua

 

Chris, are any of your manuscripts available on the Web somewhere. I'd be interested in comparing our approaches. You wouldn't happen to be a lectionary preacher - since then we'd be likely to have the same texts.

Joshua

 

I fall in the middle. I used to preach 45 minutes at my previous charge because they were accustomed to some very notable preachers in Baptist life (Frank Stagg, Steven Drake, etc.)
When I came to my present church, I discovered that they were not exposed to exposition of Scripture til I got there. They were getting 20 minutes of "whatever." So I preach roughly 25-30 minutes. Hard to do and adequately cover a lot of territory so my series are longer.

 

I find it interesting that y'all seem to associate shorter sermons with a lack of expository preaching, whereas I associate longer ones with the same.

All in what you're used to I guess.

Joshua

P.S. I've found 14 point type to be much easier on the eyes. The Word Documents of my mss are the actual ones I preach from (although I'm not a true manuscript preacher in that I don't read from them verbatim).

[ July 25, 2002, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: Rev. Joshua Villines ]

 

I'm not doing that and I don't believe Chris is either. It's about content, purpose, and philosophy - not length. However, can you really explain and apply a text in 10-15 minutes? This is something that is hotly debated in homiletical circles so we won't solve the issue here. Still, it's worth talking about.

Incidentally Joshua, I'd like to see your template file and compare it with mine. Interesting how you referred that you learned to number your pages. Oh to have been a fly on the wall when you learned this

 

Tom, if you've got MS Word, I'll e-mail the template.

As for sound exposition in under 20 minutes, I'd be curious to hear whether or not you think I've done that.

Regarding the page lesson - lets just say it's a good thing I'm not married to my manuscript.

Joshua

 

A couple of comments of the discussion on sermon length and style. In my seminary (hardly a bastion of liberalism ) the profs tell us in the preacing classes to hold sermons down to 25-30 minutes. This is much shorter than sermons in traditional fundamental churches. The reasoning is that we live in a visual age and rare is the person who can speak at length and hold people's attention.

Another difference the discussion is highlighting is the difference between traditional homiletical forms (which I suspect most of the posters here use) and narrative preaching (which I think Joshua uses though I haven't looked at your sermons in a while). My last several sermons have been narrative. I have sought to find the tension in the text (in the story) and use it to drive home the main point of the sermon. In the process, I leave out extraneous points--points which I would tend to make if I were using a traditional homiletical form. Narrative tends to contribute to a shorter sermon in my mind. And what I have found is that my sermons are shorter, but are quite provacative. People tend to stick around after church, ask questions, and discuss how we as Christians are to live out the truth of the passage in the coming week.

 

I agree with John MacArthur in answer to the question, "How long should a sermon be?"

How long should a sermon be?

 

I have gobs of respect for John MacArthur, but his homiletical theory is a little inadequate for my tastes. I say this because MacArthur majors on preaching from epistolary material. Other types of literature he sees as as great for illustrating epistolary truth, but by his practice and by his stated philosophy in the book he edited on expository preaching this is his view. I think his method is great for what he does and he is a great example of what one can do in epistolary passages, but not all of the Bible, yea, not even the majority of the Bible is epistolary. Other types of passages need exposition and that exposition should reflect the flow of the text. That is why narrative passages beg for (perhaps even demand) a narrative form of homiletic to do them justice. If we preach the whole counsel of God we must utilize more than epistolary material. When we preach non-didactic passages, we should utilize a homiletical form that is fitting.

[ July 25, 2002, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: swaimj ]

 

I know nothing about John MacArthur, but his approach does seem better suited to the epistolary texts (on which I am the weakest as a preacher).

You are right that I preach using a narrative model, and that all of the preachers (Buechner, Taylor, Craddock, Buttrick, etc.) who have influenced me are narrative preachers - although Craddock dislikes the term.

Joshua

 

Chris quote MacArthur:

Here is where Mac goes out of play, IMHO. He just undoes what he wrote in the prior paragraphs. Spurgeon, Charles Alexander, and many other greats did sound preaching and preached at about 30 minutes and advocated that others do so as well. I would argue that it doesn't necessarily take 10-15 minutes to give the background of a passage on every text. Remember, Dr. Mac has been in one church a very long time and has conditioned his people for this style of preaching.

Very perceptive. I prefer Alistair Begg as a model for expository preaching over Mac, becuase Begg has great skill at preaching the text regardless of genre. The skill lies, as Alistair would tell you and says often at his conferences, is "listening" to the text.

As for the narrative sermon forms, I think it is a tragedy when we try to cram an epistolary or other text and try to force it into a narrative form, just as much as it is a tragedy when we try to take a narrative and force it into an epistle. It's like trying to put a square peg into a round hole....and the peg is five times the size of the hole I know the postmodern homiletic leans toward making everything a "story," but this is not suited for all texts. Remember that expository preaching is based on the philosophy that the content,flow and development of the sermon is based on the content, flow, and development of the text(s).

Despite it being championed in moderate/liberal circles, a number of this camp's homileticians join Craddock in showing a disdain for the narrative "cookie cutter." I believe I've read Willimon critique this model. One might argue that Lowry would even do so, though many might be surprised at that because his sermonic plot lends itself well for many narratives. Again, the key is preaching that reflects the genre of the text and not cramming the text into our favorite homiletical mold.

 

More from MacArthur:

 

That's a pretty good quote, but when MacArthur says

and when he says

I have to snicker, because he's had a few too many forced alliterations in his sermons for my liking. We cannot at the same time draw attention to the cleverness of ingenuity of the preacher and at the same time draw attention to the exalted Christ. We cannot at the same time give the impression that we are clever and that Christ is mighty to save. Author unknown.

 

Tom,

In hearing Craddock speak on narrative preaching, I've never heard him show disdain for the concept, just the term. The implication I got was that he felt like more complex things happen with a sermon than simply narrative - which I think is true.

I certainly try not to force a particular mode onto the text. For instance, this Sunday I'm leaving behind the important Genesis ancestral narratives (all though discussing polygamy this Sunday might have been fun) because the NT lectionary text is a long section of "Kingdom of God" material from Matthew. Since the text is not really a narrative one, I won't preach a narrative sermon.

Nevertheless, the vast majority of our Scriptures are stories, and lend themselves well to narrative preaching.

Joshua