On interactive preaching
I believe we can say without fear of contradiction that live interaction was the norm of Jesus and the early disciples with the monologue being an exception.OK, so what difference does the form of our preaching make? Why does it matter whether preaching takes the form of a monolog or not?
So if the Scriptures favour interaction how did we get to the place where we have focused almost exclusively on how to give a good speech?
All I'm trying to do is to point out that in our Culture when adults get together they are used to participating and when they don't participate they don't function optimally.Good point. Probably the best single thing I learned in earning a degree in education is that the lecture method is the least effective in actually teaching anyone anything. Realistically, I'm not going to try to fight against the paradigm of the sermon as monolog. But in class and group settings, at least, interaction is indeed far superior to lecture.
Mr. Warby's essay is thought-provoking, and I recommend it for anyone concerned about finding more effective methods for preaching (HT: Leaving Munster).
1 Comments:
Glad you liked it, Dan. Moderation is a good idea for something this radically different from what most of us are used to. Not that it should be radical, but with so many centuries of monolog preaching, I can think of more critical battles to rage. But it does give us something to work toward. For this reason, by the way, I think small groups are a good idea for Sunday school, Wednesday evenings, etc.
Post a Comment
<< Home