A Conversational Approach: Will it Preach?[1]
I. Summary
This article is the interaction of Mike Gilbart-Smith with Wesley Allen’s The Homiletic of All Believers: a Conversational Approach[2] and Doug Pagitt’s Preaching Re-imagined: The Role of the Sermon in Communities of Faith[3]. Smith began his article by saying that the "conversation" is one of the buzzwords in the twenty-first century church. It is polite, respectful, collaborative, revealing, humble and compassionate. It is also biblical; we must be quick to listen and slow to speak (Cf. James 1:19). Biblically centered conversation is a sign that a congregation is truly engaging God’s Word. Moreover, Smith refers to traditional preaching as "authoritative preaching." The term "conversational preaching" can mean several different things in one book, or even in one paragraph. He presented different ideas people are proposing when they recommend "conversational preaching."
1. A Conversational Context: One Voice Provokes Another
Sometimes an author calls for "conversational preaching" in order to emphasize the fact that churches are not just preaching centers, but communities of believers. "This kind of conversation requires the preacher to have not only an intimate relationship with the text but also with the congregation" (Pagitt, 187, cf. Allen 93). The desire to see an ongoing conversation about the gospel as a vital part of congregational life is commendable. The church to which Smith belong certainly cherishes conversation. Moreover, authoritative preaching doesn’t ignore the conversations that happen throughout the rest of the week. Another habit that Smith have picked up at their church has been to look through a page of the church’s membership directory when preparing sermons in order to think carefully about how the sermon can be applied to people in different stages of life. However, some writers offer more radical statements about the relationship of the sermon to the ongoing conversation of the church. The sermon ceases to be the starting point or the center of the conversation and becomes a significant contributing factor to the ongoing conversations owned by the community… As soon as we say that preaching is merely a peripheral voice in the ongoing conversation– rather than the center, fuel, and compass for its conversation– they have forgotten the source and foundation of Christian community.
2. A Conversational Tone: No Voice has Authority
"Conversational preaching," as it has been proposed, might also mean that the preacher shouldn’t speak with an authoritative one, and by tone I Smith explains both the tenor of one’s voice and the language one uses to frame or package homiletical propositions. "There is something dangerous in the life of the preacher who regularly tells others how things are, could be or ought to be" (Pagitt, 32). Again, Smith have some sympathy with those who have sat under pulpit-thumping preachers who scold their congregations week after week. Yet to say that some statements in the sermon should be tentative does not mean that all of them should be. The best way to protect against preaching that places authority in the personality of the preaching is to protect what he is calling authoritative preaching. Anyone who has attempted to preach expositionally should know how humbling it is. Preachers are not inerrant, which is why preachers themselves should initiate regular conversations for inviting correction.
3. A Conversational Hierarchy: No Voice may Lead
Perhaps one of the most frequently cited doctrines to suggest that authoritative preaching is unchristian is the priesthood of all believers. A belief in the priesthood of all believers compels us to reconsider our ideas about speaking and pastoral authority. Every believer has the Holy Spirit, and every believer has been enabled to understand divine truth better than the most intelligent and educated unbeliever. The Holy Spirit lovingly gives pastors and teachers for the edification of the congregation (Eph 4:11).
4. A Conversational Format: Every Voice must be Heard
Progressional dialogue doesn’t mean groupthink, discussion, or even agreement. It means we listen to one another in such a way that what one thinks cannot be left unchanged. It is certainly true that large group conversation about a biblical text can be very useful in revealing people’s understandings and helping many to move toward a better understanding of the text. Furthermore, authoritative preaching symbolizes and models the very nature of the gospel. One might find this uncomfortable.
5. A Conversational Hermeneutic: The Text has No Voice
Smith’s greatest fear for the removal of authoritative preaching from the congregation is that the Scriptures themselves will cease to be treated as authoritative. Many of those who advocate conversational preaching say that it is necessary within the present cultural climate because of postmodernism. The gospel confronts the relativistic assumptions of a postmodern age. In authoritative expositional preaching the question is not "what are the congregation’s perspectives upon this text," but "what is this text’s perspective upon the congregation." A conversational approach may comfort, engage, and affirm. But, in the end, it will not preach.
II. Critique
A. Affirmations
1. “…in order to emphasize the fact that churches are not just preaching centers, but communities of believers.”[4]
This is the only point that is, for me, agreeable. The Church is an evangelizer, but she begins by being evangelized herself. She is the community of believers, the community of hope lived and communicated, the community of brotherly love, and she needs to listen unceasingly to what she must believe, to her reasons for hoping, to the new commandment of love. She is the People of God immersed in the world, and often tempted by idols, and she always needs to hear the proclamation of the "mighty works of God"[5] which converted her to the Lord; she always needs to be called together afresh by Him and reunited. In brief, this means that she has a constant need of being evangelized, if she wishes to retain freshness, vigor and strength in order to proclaim the Gospel. The Second Vatican Council recalled[6] and the 1974 Synod vigorously took up again this theme of the Church which is evangelized by constant conversion and renewal, in order to evangelize the world with credibility.
B. Disagreement
Generally, I disagree with the whole article, because primarily its explanations about preaching were (almost) against the Catholic principles or teachings related to the subject matter. These are the replies pertaining to all structure and parts of the article:
"Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline."[7]
"The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."[8] This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
"Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."[9]
Each member of the People of God “has different duties and responsibilities with respect to the word of God. Accordingly, the faithful listen to God’s word and meditate on it, but those who have the office of teaching by virtue of sacred ordination or have been entrusted with exercising that ministry”, namely, bishops, priests and deacons, “expound the word of God”.[10] Hence we can understand the attention paid to the homily throughout the Synod. In the Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis, I pointed out that “given the importance of the word of God, the quality of homilies needs to be improved. The homily ‘is part of the liturgical action’ and is meant to foster a deeper understanding of the word of God, so that it can bear fruit in the lives of the faithful”.[11] The homily is a means of bringing the scriptural message to life in a way that helps the faithful to realize that God’s word is present and at work in their everyday lives. It should lead to an understanding of the mystery being celebrated, serve as a summons to mission, and prepare the assembly for the profession of faith, the universal prayer and the Eucharistic liturgy. Consequently, those who have been charged with preaching by virtue of a specific ministry ought to take this task to heart. Generic and abstract homilies which obscure the directness of God’s word should be avoided, as well as useless digressions which risk drawing greater attention to the preacher than to the heart of the Gospel message. The faithful should be able to perceive clearly that the preacher has a compelling desire to present Christ, who must stand at the centre of every homily. For this reason preachers need to be in close and constant contact with the sacred text;[12] they should prepare for the homily by meditation and prayer, so as to preach with conviction and passion. The synodal assembly asked that the following questions be kept in mind: “What are the Scriptures being proclaimed saying? What do they say to me personally? What should I say to the community in the light of its concrete situation?[13] The preacher “should be the first to hear the word of God which he proclaims”,[14] since, as Saint Augustine says: “He is undoubtedly barren who preaches outwardly the word of God without hearing it inwardly”.[15] The homily for Sundays and solemnities should be prepared carefully, without neglecting, whenever possible, to offer at weekday Masses cum populo brief and timely reflections which can help the faithful to welcome the word which was proclaimed and to let it bear fruit in their lives.
The art of good preaching based on the Lectionary is an art that needs to be cultivated. Therefore, in continuity with the desire expressed by the previous Synod,[16] I ask the competent authorities, along the lines of the Eucharistic Compendium,[17] also to prepare practical publications to assist ministers in carrying out their task as best they can: as for example a Directory on the homily, in which preachers can find useful assistance in preparing to exercise their ministry. As
[1] See Mike Gilbart-Smith, “A Conversational Approach: Will it Preach?,” IX Marks, no. 4 (May-June 2007): 5-9.
[2] Wesley Allen Jr, The Homiletic of All Believers: A Conversational Approach, WJK, 2005.
[3] Doug Pagitt, Preaching Re-imagined: The Role of the Sermon in Communities of Faith, Zondervan, 2005.
[4] Mike Gilbart-Smith, “A Conversational Approach: Will it Preach?,” 6.
[5] Cf. Acts 2:11; 1 Pt 2:9.
[6] Cf. Decree on the Church's Missionary Activity Ad Gentes, 5, 11-12: AAS 58 (1966), pp. 951-952, 959-961.
[7] DV 7; cf. Mt 28:19-20; Mk 16:15.
[8] Ibid., 10 § 2.
[9] CCC, 86
[10] Ordo Lectionum Missae, 55
[11] No. 46: AAS 99 (2007), 141.
[12] Cf. Second
[13] Propositio 15.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Sermo 179, 1: PL 38, 966.
[16] Cf. Benedict XVI, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis (22 February 2007), 93: AAS 99 (2007), 177.
[17] Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Compendium Eucharisticum (25 March 2009),
[18] Epistula 52, 7: CSEL 54, 426-427.
No comments:
Post a Comment