Preaching the Sunday
My friend David Petersen (at least I think it was him; I can’t find it now), pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Fort Wayne, wrote somewhere recently, “Preach the Sunday, not the text.” I was thinking about that during the reading of the first lesson yesterday, Ezekiel 37.1-14, on the valley of the dry bones. I became very disappointed with the sermon I was about to preach, as I began to realize all the ways it could have been improved by a more careful consideration of the day’s propers. I was also thinking about the man in the congregation who was baptized at our Easter Vigil. The Introit for the day was chosen with him in mind: “As newborn babes, Alleluia, desire the pure milk of the Word, Alleluia! Alleluia!”
My sermon was exclusively on the Gospel reading. That’s not a bad thing, but I sensed it was lacking.
Preach the Sunday, not the text. I don’t have a formula for how that would be done, but here are a few things I have in mind:
Each Sunday/Festival is larger than its component parts (called the Propers: the lessons, the prayer [collect] of the day, the Psalms [Introit, Gradual, Verse] – the hymns could be considered in this category as well). Each Sunday or Festival has an overarching theme to it, which each part (most especially the Gospel reading) serves to elucidate. Thinking about yesterday (Quasimodo Geniti), here are some of the themes:
- Antiphon, 1 Peter 2.2: Like new born babes, drink the pure spiritual milk of the Word, that you may grow thereby. This has in mind the converts received into the church at Easter, and what they should know be about – with broader application to everyone whose baptism was remembered/”renewed” at the Easter Vigil.
- Old Testament: Can these bones live? Breathing on the slain by the Spirit of the LORD points backward (at creation, the LORD breathed the breath of life into the man, and he became a living soul) and forward (in the Gospel reading, Jesus breathes on the Apostles and says, “Receive the Holy Spirit,” connecting Holy Absolution to man’s creation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, and the giving of the Spirit). All this raises the issue of man’s mortality and future.
- Epistle (1 John 5.4-10): Spirit, Water, and Blood testify/witness to the truth of Jesus. This connects the Sacraments to the death of Jesus (in John’s Gospel, blood and water pouring from the opened side (ch. 19), with the Spirit “handed over” to the Mother and the Disciple whom Jesus loves – i.e., to the Church)
- Collect: Since we’ve celebrated the resurrection, we pray that we might bring forth in our lives the confession of Thomas (in the Gospel) that Jesus is God and Lord.
- Gospel (John 20.19-31): Christ coming to the disciples, instituting the Office of the Ministry; proof of resurrection to Thomas; blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe; the 4th Gospel is written so that we can believe in Christ and have life in Him.
All that is larger than the account of Thomas, although that obviously (to me, at least) needs to have pride of place. What, then, is the overarching theme, or how are all these connected? I think there’s one more element: this is the Sunday after Easter. The Gospel lesson is obviously connected chronologically to that, but there’s another factor: Easter is our great festival, new members were brought into the church at Easter, and there’s a “now what” kind of feel to the day. The day’s propers address that “now what” – What does it mean that you are a man created by God, but now in the valley of dry bones? What does it mean that you’ve been baptized? What does it mean that Jesus rose again, for me, now? All that is addressed in the propers, which is what I wished I had attempted to do in my sermon.
So, what I’ve been thinking about based on the maxim “preach the Sunday, not the text” is that maybe my usual pattern of sermon preparation needs to be modified. Instead of studying the Gospel intensively, then looking at the propers if I have time and dropping in a few thoughts from them into the framework of the Gospel, maybe I should study the Sunday (i.e., all the propers) and preach the Gospel reading with those themes already in mind or forming the basis/foundation.
It’s what I do instinctively on the “big days” – Christmas, Easter, Pentecost. On those days, nobody preaches “just” on the text, but on the larger themes of Incarnation, Resurrection, Holy Spirit/Church. Same with Reformation, All Saints – any day that is more “thematic” in nature. It’s also what makes those sermons more difficult, in my opinion, especially when the theme is so monumental. What can I possibly say on the Incarnation or Resurrection of Jesus? Before I became a pastor, I would have thought Christmas and Easter would be the easiest sermons of the year to write. For me, they’re the hardest by far.
These are merely thoughts I’m toying with; I’d love comments from preachers and hearers alike – mostly hearers: you’re the people who have to put up with us lousy preachers. Some pastors have a “parishioners advisory board” to give constructive feedback on sermons and other aspects of ministry. I suppose I could ask the Elders to do that here, but it’s far too frightening a thought. There was nothing worse than Homiletics classes at seminary – I’ve never witnessed greater acts of cruelty than seminarians critiquing my sermons. I’m still scarred by it – seriously.
Related posts:
- Preaching to explain the Verba Pastor Mason Beecroft found this little gem from Luther, and...
- Festival of Good Preaching this Holy Week No, not mine. (Obviously.) Chaplains Jonathan Shaw (Army) and John...
- Sweet! I found this site which has the Propers in Latin....
- Trinity Sunday Sermon: John 3:1-15 A member of Immanuel who has now fallen asleep in...
- First Sunday after Epiphany The Gospel reading is the historic one for this Sunday:...
I don't have much wisdom. I struggle with the same thing. Let me know when you figure it out.
No, it shouldn't be a pretext for preaching on some other agenda. Maybe, though, it should be preaching on the "texts," not "text." Nobody really goes through the whole text carefully anyway – there's no time.
And in the era of 8-10 minute sermons sprouting up everywhere, I'm seeing not too many sermons dealing with the texts anyway, but rather/merely/only a topic, and frankly, they can get pretty rote and redundant, when every sermon turns into an exhortation to take Communion. But I digress. <g>
I'm *way* out of practice, but I'm going to offer some discussion anyway.
There is indeed a "theme" running through the pericopes for a given day. It's also expressed in the hymns used for a service and the propers of the day.
I appreciate what's said above about preaching the texts (plural). The people you serve have needs, flaws, sins, and sorrows. You attend to them as part of your vocation. The texts—and the thematic links between them—are what God is using to speak to them on the occasion of the Sunday. Without ridiculous allegorizing or stretching the text somewhere it doesn't fit, what is the message that is needed? What exposition or explanation helps to bring the texts into relief for your people?
As a hearer, I prefer when sermons tie everything together. I'm not picky about whether the main text for the sermon is the Gospel or one of the other texts for the day – but there's a reason those particular texts are chosen for that day, a common thread for every one of them. I like to hear how that provides some insight into the Gospel. I also like to hear Salvation's Achievement and Salvation's Delivery in there somewhere too. And Law and Gospel, of course.
Is that a lot to expect/ask for? Maybe. But I'm an idealist that way.
I like it! I frequently DO try to preach all the appointed readings, and invariably those are the homilies I personally find best. I didn't preach this Sunday, but the Church we attended had the pastor who did just that.
I try not to be stereotyped in this, but I do find myself falling into a pattern often:
OT to Gospel reading to Epistle
The OT frequently is a point of vivid departure and invites thought – and almost invariably it connects to the Gospel reading – and the epistle is like a grace note at the end.
Sometimes the collect of the day or the Introit's antiphon does merit mention – sometimes the gradual or verse (or tract).
And it's really not so much a preaching of the day, as asking what in the Word of God read on that day delivers the message of the whole? What does the Church and what does God through the Church wish to get into our heads, hearts, mouths, and lives today?
That's a very interesting pattern; I think I will actively keep it in mind to see if I can employ it as well. As you say, stereotypes are to be avoided, but I'm already in a stereotypical rut. Even a different stereotype would be good at this point!
I wasn't there on Sunday but I like how you do things normally. Also, I think it might be a distinction without a difference (Sunday vs. readings) since the propers are there because of the readings. Either way, I really like it when the focus of the sermon is on one, or really all, of the readings.
When you stop condemning me with the law and forgiving me with the Gospel, than I will take issue with your preaching. Until then keep doing what you do!
Richard and Mollie, you are both very kind. I'm acutely aware of how much I need to improve, though. Like Pr. Beecroft below, my greatest comfort is "the Evangelical framework of the Mass," which doubtless covers a multitude of homiletical sins.
I admire your desire to improve your preaching. That is commendable and inspiring! For what it is worth, I think there is a great deal of comfort that comes from knowing the style, and form of my pastor's preaching. The church knows the voice of our Lord. On an earthly level, a church knows the voice of its under-shepherd. This does not excuse laziness on the parts of the congregant or pastor, but it aids in understanding the content of what the pastor is preaching. From a performer's perspective, sometimes the standard musical devices speak to a crowd more than the newest artsy-strepitusy (I couldn't resist
) interpretation. Just a thought….
Pr. Esget,
As a recovering evangelical, I confess I get too worked about the homily. In reality, it is the most human and frail part of the Divine Service as I am most involved. Whether we are more expository or topical, as long as our proclamation points the people to Christ in His gifts, then we are giving His people what they truly need. Besides, how many people really remember the particulars? I only pray they will say after I am gone, "He sure talked about Jesus, Word, Baptism, Absolution, and Holy Communion all the time." I am thankful for the Evangelical framework of the Mass to preserve the Holy Gospel in our midst. Give them 8-10 minutes and point them to the Eucharist…
Anyway, your sermons are thoughtful and Christ-centered. I don't think many of us are ever entirely pleased with our offerings, but we trust that the Lord works through them. And I certainly trust His work through His sacraments.
pax,
+Mason
Excellent! Thank you.
Pastor Petersen highlighted this comment in a post located here: http://redeemer-fortwayne.org/blog.php?msg=11127
Pastor Petersen highlighted this comment in a post located here: http://redeemer-fortwayne.org/blog.php?msg=11127
I think that part of the point of preaching the Propers (including the Gospel reading) as the foundation for the sermon is best served by using the One Year Lectionary. I think this teaches the liturgical calendar best. Sometimes I work from the Collect of the Day outward to the Propers attempting to find the reasons why the assigned collect was written based on the texts we use. This of course precludes the OT lesson. However, I do think the editors of the LSB One Year tried to remain within the bounds set by the other lessons. I realize that where collects do not have historical precedent this is a problem. Luther Reed's 'Lutheran Liturgy' is helpful with brief histories of the collects. Pius Parsch's 'The Church's Year of Grace 'and Lindemann's 'Sermon & the Propers' are also helpful.
Anyone have any other resources for studying the Propers?
I really like Parsch. I had read Lindemann first, and when I got Parsch, found out that Lindemann borrowed quite heavily from him. I'd love to know if there are other good works like that. I've been using off and on "Preaching from the Whole Bible" by Giertz, who takes more of a topical approach to each Sunday (e.g., "What does the Bible say about the Last Judgment?"). It's helpful.
Borrowed heavily? Now that is the best construction possible for plagiarism!
One thing I've taken away from reading Pr. Weedon's sermons is an exhortation not so much to *take* Communion but to be *in* Communion with Christ.
http://www.ctsfw.edu/academics/faculty/pless/Chur...
Or, you could base your sermons on David Luecke's suggestions…
http://www.luthersem.edu/word&world/Archives/...
As a hearer of the Word, I appreciate when the pastor preaches on the text closely, while being aware of the Sunday in the Church Year. I would not be much impressed if I felt that the lectionary readings were merely pretext for some other agenda, no matter what it is: liturgical, or otherwise. I think what troubles me more about some Lutheran preaching these days are the sermons that are 8-10 minutes long, quite formulaic, and kind of rote, with the obligatory discussion about the Lord's Supper at the end.
Text and context are always interconnected in preaching. Context will bring different things to light in a text, which is always multi-faceted. Consider the Gospel for Palm Sunday and the 1st Sunday in Advent. Same text, radically different contexts, very different sermons (hopefully!). There are different contexts too: church calendar, canon, cultural, congregational.
This is why sermons tend to have an expiration date and are good only at certain specified locations.
There is an interesting continuation of this discussion at, fittingly, Pastor Petersen's blog: http://redeemer-fortwayne.org/blog.php?msg=11127