In the middle of the week I began thinking about how much of my sermon-in-the-making is the result of my own thinking. I know about the debate surrounding whether or not anyone can ever have a truly original idea. And I’m not talking about plagiarizing either.
I guess I’m asking you to think about what parts of your sermon development and delivery are your work.
Let’s begin with some thoughts about using someone else’s material:
On one side of the spectrum, think about those times when you rely on an English dictionary, thesaurus, or original language lexicons and theological dictionaries. Now go all the way to the other side of the line and think about borrowing someone else’s sermon title and structure.
In the middle I put quotes or paraphrases from our favorite authors, like Jonathan Edwards, Augustine, or William Goldman (author and screenplay writer of The Princess Bride).
So, what do I bring to the equation? Every week by the grace of God I…
- trace the argument of my preaching portion and discover how meaning is made before I know what that meaning is.
- determine how this text intends to elicit worship (I complete the sentence: “We worship the Lord this morning by…”).
- know enough about my congregants to know this text is relevant.
- create a structure that leads to the theological meaning of the text.
- talk to my listeners about their Christian experience from the text while I write out my sermon manuscript.
- make critical word-choices that affect how the sermon sounds (an ora-script within the manuscript).
- smile at them to let them know I love them.
- show them how the Christ-event makes this text come true for those who believe.
What did I miss?
May our Sunday “originals” continue to give God glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),
Randal
I just finished a series through the Gospel according to Luke. I used a book as my structure and outline, but I can guarantee that my sermons sounded nothing like the book, and, at times, may have contradicted the author of the book.
This was my second time teaching through the Gospel, and the first time, towards the end, I discovered the book and was somewhat amazed to see how much my sermons paralleled his book–no where near identical, but the overall flow was comparable. So this time, I just started from his basic outline because I am convinced that his approach to Luke is the best literary perspective I’ve found. It didn’t make sense to duplicate his work. I picked it because I’ve compared many commentaries, etc. on the Gospel, and while other books seemed to hit on parts of what he was saying, I thought he covered the whole best. But like I said, at each juncture, I covered what I felt fit what I needed to touch on, and I didn’t always agree with what he emphasized.
If I look back, every time I used another’s work, this has always been my approach. I start with their structure, but I build my own sermon on it. One thing I’d never do is quote or read from a sermon (in part, because I’d have to translate first) 😉 But to me, if it hasn’t come from my heart, my experience and my learning, then, first of all, if I tried, it would just fall flat, because I can’t fake it, but also, I believe I’d be doing a disservice to my listeners. They deserve more from me.
It’s always good to hear from you. I appreciate your integrity in the process and don’t envy your need to translate into another language. God help us both to continue to shepherd well through the preaching of His Word. What a privilege for us. I am also very glad, though, for scholars who spend tons of time on texts that we can only spend a few hours on in preparation for Sundays. Keep up the good work of faith, brother!
Thanks great ppost
You’re very welcome. I am glad when any of these can provide some help or, at least, spur on some thinking. God’s best favor on you today! Randal