Preaching as renarrating and inviting
David Fitch has posted a second installment of his "The Myth of Expository Preaching" series at Out of Ur. Although he once again misuses the word "myth," he has some hard-hitting points:
The primary move of preaching will not be sentence-by-sentence exposition & explaining, then an application. Instead the primary move of the preacher will be to describe the world as it is via the person and work of Jesus Christ, then invite the hearers into this reality by calling for submission, confession, obedience, or the affirmation of a truth.I don't see how good expository preaching doesn't do this, but in any case I'm looking forward to Part 3.
In Brueggemann’s words, we preach to “fund imagination.” Through proclaiming the Word, the Spirit reorganizes perception, experience, and even faith to enable hearers to live in the reality of Christ’s work, respond to Christ, and obey. This kind of preaching subverts the dominant habits of thinking and the ways our imaginations have been taught to see the world. Instead of dissecting the text, making it portable, and distributing it to people for their own personal use, the preacher re-narrates the world as it is under the Lordship of Christ and then invites people into it.
When I preach I see my role as the herald of the new world that has been inaugurated in the death and resurrection of Christ. Whether in the Old or New Testaments, I am unfurling the world as it is under the work of God down through history and ultimately in Jesus Christ. I always start by narrating a common experience from a personal story, a movie, a piece of literature. I try to expose the way we might be living under an alternative interpretation of the way things are. But then I move to the text for the day, read it and start to unfold the reality as it is in God thru Christ. Finally, I then move to invite the gathering into this Christ-reality, looking for responses we can all make to live more faithfully out of who He is, what He has done, and where He is taking us and the world.
posted by Milton Stanley at 8:33 AM
2 Comments:
I know some would diagree with me, but I think the use of personal examples and cultural examlples is often overused. I would rather find illustrations from the Bible. While I love good films (and even host a monthly film night), I don't think they carry the adequate weight for allusion that a Biblical story might.
Dorothy Sayers suggests that allusion bring the power of the orignal text to bear on the current text. Thus if I use more Biblical allusion, I begin to bring the weight of those stories into the current story.
We live in a Biblical illeterate culture, and I am referring people on the pews not the non-churched. So the more we fill their imaginations with Biblical stories, the more likely they can enter into the story themselves and come to realize they are part of the tale.
So for me, I like expository teaching but I like to linger over the allusions in the text, tell the stories and brings the imagination into the encounter with the text.
I agree, Doug. I don't remember where I first saw this line of thought, but someone has pointed out the parallels between OT Israel and Postmodern culture. In the OT, paganism was always associated with the visual (idols) while the worship of JHVH was word-centered. It's the same challenge today: present the power of the Word in an image-oriented culture.
Post a Comment
<< Home