Thanks for the reference. You’re the man at that sort of thing, I’m learning! : )

At any rate, I think you’re exactly right about the role of hearing, even in Scripture. At the same time, I’m curious to get into work about some of the neuroscience that’s being done on vision and its impact on us. This is one point where it’s easy to slip into the sort of false dichotomy that I eschew.

Lots of thoughts about that, especially in the context of sermons doing something to us.

Also, whether we are too focused on information is and interesting question. I mean, a central critique of a lot of evangelical churches is that they DON’T contain much doctrine, but are just trying to make people feel good. The classic “3 illustrations surrounding a verse” sermon is pretty popular, after all. But those illustrations are all non-propositional, non-doctrine related.

Which is amusing to me, when I think about it. My parent’s generation of evangelicals were doing story-centered preaching before it was cool. : )

But your question deserves, I think, another post. Maybe I’ll write one on Sunday.

matt

And maybe the anecdote suggests another point worth exploring – What type of rhetoric is a sermon anyway? What is its purpose and how is it accomplished? I think one of the unfortunate legacies of overly doctrinaire fundamentalism is that we’ve come to see the sermon as a lecture in which information (right doctrine) is passed down to the congregants in order to help them avoid other information (namely, bad doctrine). But the more I consider the question, the more I dislike this sermon-as-lecture approach. What are your thoughts?

I think that is an accurate assessment. And yes, generally I think we approach sermons by thinking too much. There’s time enough afterword to reflect and think hard about it, but the sermon is fundamentally an opportunity to hear from God–which happens best when our minds are still, I think.

I have had a similar experience to Lewis, which is why I think rote prayers are so important. I should write a book about this stuff.

Matt

I’m reminded of something Lewis said (or I think he said). It was easier (better?) for him to be prayerful during liturgical prayers because he knew that what was said was orthodox; he didn’t have to bother with thinking about whether the prayer was correct. However, if a public prayer was spontaneous, he always found himself thinking more “is this true” than being prayerful.

That’s a great question. I’m pretty convinced that doing the above actually helps in bad sermons, as well as good ones.

I’d be curious to hear other responses to this question, and maybe I’ll write a second post next sunday: The Discipline of Listening to a Bad Sermon.

Bad sermons are clearly an opportunity to practice charity, and there may be only one greater demonstration of charity than intercession for another. Justin Taylor once quoted someone (David Powlinson, maybe) who said something that still resonates with me: “The mature person (or wise person) is easily edified.” That line has really chastened my criticisms of sermons, even the ones with content I disagree with.

Let me toss a question back, since I am struggling to think of anything specific beyond what I wrote: is there something unique about bad sermons that requires disciplines beyond the one’s I’ve listed above?

matt