Preaching Re-Imagined::section 3:chapter 4

The Roots of Speaching

Much of this chapter, Doug explains some changes that took place through the history of the church that led to sermons into the well crafted speaches. Back in the day (pre-industrial reformation) rural communities would have a residential pastor along with their own community's church. With the industrial reformation and people migrating into the cities the days of a "residential pastor" were fleeting. This opened the door for the itinerant preacher to come in, set up shop (large tent) and preach to a large community. Doug wrote:

Over time the issue in the minds of the pastor and parishioner was not How are we living with GOD? but What do you have for me to hear?

This transition in mindset made a lot of sense when I thought about it. Having a pastor directly involved and living in the community would allow them to ask the question How are we living..., and when the transition happened that would change the relationship between the pastor and parishioners.

A quote without context, but I believe that it stands strong on its own:

It's difficult to justify the more natural exression when the synthetic has become the norm.

and one more:

But we will flourish in settings where there is dialogue, where we become part of the learning and growing process of our congregations--not just as leaders, but as peole who are also learning and growing--in ways we never imagined possible.

The last quote seems a bit sensationalized, but I like it.

Preaching Re-Imagined::section two:chapter 3

Peter and Cornelius

Doug uses the interaction between Peter and Cornelius as an "exceptionally clear" picture of progressional dialogue. He mentions the misunderstanding of the Jewish people believing that Gentile believers would need to become Jewish to fully follow Jesus. Does this sound familiar at all. We might not be talking in terms of Jewish and Gentiles, but maybe Republican and Democrat might be a bit more applicable.

If you need a summery of the story here it goes. You can read about in Acts 10 and 11. Cornelius is a Gentile who fears GOD. Cornelius goes to the temple and is involved in all the activities that he can, as a Gentile. An angel appears to Cornelius and tells him to send some people to Joppa and to bring Peter back with them. The men go and while they are on they're journey Peter had a vision, too. Peter's get a vision of a sheet that has all "unclean" animals on it. GOD told Peter to eat the animals, but Peter said that he would never do that because he didn't want to defile himself that way. Peter is awaken from his vision by the men that Cornelius sent. Peter goes with the men back to Cornelius and it is at Cornelius' house that we see the full extent of Peter's vision. Peter understands that the Gentiles are part of the story GOD had for the Jewish nation too. This is a big deal. Especially if you remember that many of the Jewish leaders expected the Gentile to convert to Judaism to follow Jesus. This proved that Gentiles could go before GOD through Jesus on their own.

The rest of the story is pretty cool. You should read it for yourself and tell me what you think. Here's a quote from the book that I really enjoy:

I don't think it's an overstatement to say Peter was forced to rethink all he had done to this point.

I realize that my life isn't quite at the juxtaposition that Peter's was, but I feel as if right now I'm in a period of rethinking everything I've thought about ministry. I'm certain that's a good thing. I'm glad several of you are on the journey with me.

Preaching Re-Imagined::section 3:chapter 2

Understand Progressional Dialogue

I was surprised at the brevity of this chapter because I was hoping that I would be offered a greater understanding of progressional dialogue. Maybe that's typical of the mindset that we have been raised in-a box for everything, and everything in a box. Maybe my thoughts of progressional dialogue are to complex. Maybe it's much simpler than that.

This past Sunday I tried to offer the sermon through progressional dialogue. I started with a question, thrown out to everyone, about what they new about a person. People started responding and on occasion someone would take a comment in a different direction, but people would just roll with it. I did take time to expound things or seek clarity from the group and there were times when I was able to offer a directional understanding to the topic. Overall I felt very positive about it. I think that others felt that way, too.

Here's a quote from the chapter:

As pastors we spend years in theological training to make sure we know what we're talking about and that we're informed, educated leaders who won't toss out crazy ideas about GOD to the masses.

I think the attempt to try progressional dialogue is much easier for me because I haven't been through years of theological training. I don't have any degree in theo-anything. I got "B's" in high school Bible class. I continually question my understanding of the Bible and it's relationship within the context of a community of followers of Christ. There are many times in which I want to hear someone else's perspective on a particular passage or theme and this form of preaching allows that opportunity.

Doug often alludes to the Bible as becoming an member of the community. I like this imagery. I think that this places the Bible in the place of an active, living member of the community. Just in case I need to clarify, I'm not suggesting that we lower our expectation of GOD's Word to the place of a person who is casually attending the gatherings. I have the highest regard for the Scriptures because it has sustained thousands of years of Jewish and Christian history. That's something more than any of us can say.

Preaching Re-Imagined::section3:chapter 1

Section 3 is titled "A Move to Something New." This section starts what might be considered the "actual book." While it seems as though Doug uses the first two sections as an introduction--to prepare his audience for the "application" of his message--I wasn't surprised when this didn't necessarily prove true. Remember, Doug is trying to present his book as a conversation in the best way he can. The last two sections are filled with short chapters that seem to ask for participation. So here I go, attempting a form of conversation.

Chapter 1: Speaching vs. Preaching

I assume that one of the expectations for this book might be the hope of being told the "right way" to preach, or perhaps not the "right way," but the "new, hip way." At times I find myself looking for those new methods to doing things, but Doug points out that he isn't really suggesting a new method. He writes:

But to me there is no way to separate the method from the message. As I will argue throughout the book, the way we "speech" creates a certain understanding of GOD, faith, life, authority, and power that is detrimental to the message we are attempting to live and communicate as pastors.

I think that this statement proves why some people, regardless of method, fall into the same ruts. I wonder, though, if Doug's statement isn't backwards? I think that our understanding of GOD shapes the way we create "speeches." A.W. Tozer wrote that our view of GOD is the most important thing about us. Our view of GOD shapes every aspect of our life. If this is true then our view of GOD would certainly impact the way we preach about GOD. Doug wrote: "My contention is that this way of preaching hurts our communities." I wonder if some of this has to do with the struggle for some churches to create community? I wonder if the relationship between the pastor and the congregation is because of the pastors approach to preaching.

I've realized that even in the short time that I've been preaching, my approach to creating a message is shaped by my understanding and relationship with GOD. I have a feeling that this is something that will continue for years to come.

Preaching Re-Imagined, pt 2.

The second section of the book is called "Preaching Beyond Speaching." From the title of this section I expected that this chapter would create the foundation for the rest of the book. It did. I'll start with a quote from this section:

We don't participate in Christian communities so we can produce and hear great sermons. We take part in the communities because we believe they're where we're formed and shaped to become the people of GOD-people who are actively living in the kingdom.

I really like his use of the word participate-as if each person is needed. Many of the churches I've been to (whether a part of the congregation or visiting) have left me with the feeling that it would be no different if I had never walked through their doors. I've always wanted Satellite to be a place where people could be involved. I feel like we (not just me) did this fairly well. I think one of the things that helped this was that the core people within the community were very welcoming.

On to a few core definitions that Doug starts to use.
The first is SPEACHING. Doug makes an important distinction between preaching and speaching. The difference is found in the "relationship of the presenter to both the listeners and the content:..." As I was reading this I realized that Doug wasn't trying to do away with preaching, but he is calling us to something more than what it has been left to. I'll continue the last quote "...the pastor uses lecture-like format, often standing while the listeners are sitting. The speacher decides the content ahead of time, usually in a removed setting, and then offers it in such a way that the speacher is in control of th econtent, speed, and conclusion of the presentation."

Doug's challenge to speaching is with, what he has coined as PROGRESSIONAL DIALOGUE. Progressional Dialogue is defined in the context where "the content of the presentation is established in the context of a healthy relationship between the presenter and the listeners, and the substantive changes in the content are then created as a result of the relationship." Progressional Dialogue is a stark contrast to Speaching.

This section is the longest section in the book. I think that this is in part because Doug is trying to show the need to step away from speaching. He lists 5 negative effects that speaching has on a community of faith: Creates one seat of Godly authority, Provides one clear message, Offers a sense of control, Reinforces a particular kind of relationship with the Bible, and Reinforces a particular kind of relationship between pastor and congregation. Doug uses the 5 effect to show that speaching cultivates a separation between the pastor and the community, and that the pastors understanding of the Word is the most important. One sentence that resonated with me is found just before he starts to lists the 5 effects. Doug wrote that "we continue to stand in front of our congregations and offer them our well-crafted speeches, hoping that somehow they'll find meaning in our words." This spoke to me because I've always struggled with my ability to craft a sermon. I feel inadequate in preparing a sermon. I haven't been through seminary. I haven't even taken a homiletics class. I do realize, though, that this might by why the people who have been a part of Satellite have continued with us. And perhaps why other people have not stayed with us. Some people are looking for "well-crafted" sermons with three points and colorful illustrations. That's not me.

To contrast the negative effects of speaching on a community, Doug offers the following "practices" of progressional dialogue: Re-imagined preparation, Delivery, and Listening. He also lists his assumptions of progressional dialogue: Assumes GOD's truth resides in all people, Provides a fuller understanding of the story, Shifts control to GOD, Alters the community's relationship with the Bible, Alters the relationship between pastor and congregation.

I'm excited to get into the rest of the book. I feel like Doug has done a good job of showing the need for a change in preaching. I'm sure that the rest of the book leads into expounding on the practices and assumptions of progressional dialogue. I'll leave you with a short paragraph from this section that I really like.

Because we've been wed to speaching for so long, we've trained our communities to respond to our speeches by asking themselves, How does this apply to me? as though the Word of GOD is some topical ointment. More often than not the will come up with some generic application-- be nice to my neighbors, be honest in my relationships, and so on. But is that really the best we can offer our communities?

I hope not.

Preaching Re-Imagined, pt 1.

Even before I opened the book, I knew that it was going to be different than most books I had read. I had read and loved another book by Doug, so I assumed that he would bring something fresh with this one too. And right off the bat, he does. The first "section" contains the usual introductions. The whats and whys and whos of the book. But the first thing that reminded me of the authorship of this book was that within the first section there is a "How to Read this Book" heading. Doug writes books differently. The first book I read of his was a book about his church, Solomon's Porch. The margins of the pages had journal entries from people within the church body. That was a weird, yet refreshing way to read a book about a church. This "How to..." section falls right in line. He explains that Section 2 has sentences and phrases which have numbers attached at the end. The numbers can take you to that particular chapter found within 4 different sections. He writes this to explain things:

For example, you might not be interested in the story of how I became a preacher but would prefer to go right to my suggestions of rethinking the role of the pastor. If so, you can skip point number five and go right to point 23.

I was really intrigued by this and found myself flipping through the book to figure out how this actually works. Doug explains that his reasons for this is because he wanted to write a book that felt more like a conversation rather that a "stagnate place of information" (my words). In this first section he shares a few phrases that seemingly elude to phrases that will become a foundation to the book: "progressional dialogue" (a phrase that he made up), and "speaching" (also made up, to refer to "the style of preaching that's hardly distinguishable from a one-way speech.")

I'm an underliner, a margin-writer, and a dog-earer, and Doug encourages this. He writes that the "book should not be left in its impersonal, published form. If it is, then it hasn't done its job of engaging you in the conversation." I like that. I can handle that.

Here's some things that I underlined and bracketed:

I find myself wanting to live life with the people of my community where I can preach-along with the other preachers of our community-but not allow that to become an act of speech making. Instead I want it to be a living interaction of the story of GOD and the story of our community being connected by our truth telling, our vulnerability, and our open minds, ears, and eyes-all brought together by the active work of the Spirit of GOD as we "Let the message of Christ dwell among (us) richly as (we) teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns and songs from the Spirit, singing to GOD with gratitude in (our) hearts." (Colossians 3:16)

These words remind me about the desire I have to be apart of a community that doesn't just rely on the history of faith to give us something to sing about, but creates expressions based out of our own personal history. I love the phrase "living interaction of the story of GOD and the story of our community... ." It reminds me that the purpose of the community is to find it's place within the redemptive story of GOD, and if the community isn't doing that, then it isn't doing what it is supposed to be doing. Here's one more quote:

The church is best understood not as the exclusive proprietor of all the things of GOD, but rather as the home base for those committed to living in rhythm with GOD. It is a means by which we extend GOD's hopes, dreams, and agenda in the world, not an end goal in itself. Nor is preaching an end in itself but one of the many ways we as Christians ought to seek to tend to the things of GOD.

These two paragraphs have given me much to think about within the past day and a half. Let me know your thought if you have any. I think I'm off to bed and on to Section 2.

book review.

Earlier this week I was waiting in anticipation of a little box from Amazon. I had ordered two books that had caught my attention. The first, The Forgotten Ways by Alan Hirsch, is a book that I am excited about reading. I haven't read any of Hirsch's books, but I continue to hear intriguing things about him and his vision of the church. The second book, Preaching Re-Imagined by Doug Pagitt, drew my attention because I've been thinking about the way that I preach/teach. I've read Pagitt before and love the way he talks about his church community.

I wanted to blog through one of these books. I don't have a format for it. I just want to put some thoughts down and try to generate some conversation with it. With in the last week I've seen three other people blogging about The Forgotten Ways, so that helped me decided to work through Pagitt's book first.



I'm looking forward to this. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask.