I am enjoying reading Barth’s, Homiletics. In the preface, Bromiley previews Barth’s “belief that closeness to life, important though it is in the sermon, must not be at the cost of closeness to the text” (p. 14). That got me thinking about whether or not we preachers sound like our world with respect to our voice and delivery. Closeness to life is another way to speak of relevance; closeness to the text, of course, speaks of preaching with accuracy.

Lately, I have wondered if all TV news anchors and field reporters take a course in how to speak or how to sound while they’re reporting the news. Listen to them and you’ll discover that they all sound the same. At the risk of overgeneralizing, I’m suggesting that there are two dominant preaching styles, the traditional preacher and the conversational preacher. The conversational preacher includes the real relevant, seeker-sensitive approach.

What do you sound like when you preach? Would our listeners say that we sound like a preacher (with respect to how we say what we say)? When we report on what God has said, do we sound like all the other contemporary, seeker-sensitive preachers who evidently took the same class on how to speak or how to sound? We must be constantly aware of the tension between closeness to life (relevance, or, in this case, sounding relevant) and closeness to the text (accurate reporting). I loved Barth’s advice: “For in preaching it is always better to be too close to the text than to be too thematic or too much in keeping with the times” (p. 117).

Sometimes I wished just one TV news reporter would break from that mold, be real, and talk to me about what happened.