Whenever anyone said anything about the need for a liturgical renewal in the Missouri Synod to the sainted Dr. Charles Evanson, he would quip that Von Shenck always said there was no sense in having a liturgical renewal until we had a preaching renewal. Evanson loved to put his wisdom into Von Shenk’s mouth. In any case, when Evanson was pushed on this he would declare that the liturgy never exists for its own sake or beauty. The liturgy, with all its attendant ceremonies, has a singular purpose: to communicate and serve the Gospel. The Gospel ought to be proclaimed and taught in such a way that it leads the people to the Sacrament and the Sacrament ought to be received in such a way that there was no doubt that the risen Body and Blood of Jesus is given to God’s people for the forgiveness of their sins and that it was driving them back into the Word even as it propelled them into the world as God’s own witnesses and ambassadors.

No surprise here: I agree with Evanson/Von Shank. I think before we could hope for a renewal in preaching, we need to think about what the ideal would be. In my mind, every Sunday service would have two high points: the sermon and the distribution. People would not only demand Holy Communion every Sunday and Communion for their children but they would also demand high level didactic, challenging sermons. They would not only prepare for Holy Communion by prayer, fasting, and confession, but they would prepare for the sermon. They would prepare for the sermon by reading the texts beforehand, by knowing the Church Year and its ceremonies, and by knowing the Lutheran chorales associated with each Sunday or next by heart.

The sermon would not be a one-time event performed on Sunday and then forgotten. It would be talked about on the ride home, at Sunday dinner, and even at work the next week. Our pastors would publish their sermons and the people would eagerly take them home, mail them to their friends, and review them. Such things, at least with sermons, were not unusual in Wittenberg when Luther was preaching at St. Mary’s.

I realize we aren’t all Luthers, but I don’t think that is the actual root of the problem. I think the problem isn’t so much our lack of talent as it is our lack of vision. We have misunderstood what a sermon actually is and we have listened too closely to the culture’s complaints about being boring. In the first place, if the sermon serves no purpose distinct from the Absolution, there is no way or need to have a preaching renewal and there is no real reason for the laity to prepare for it or to revel in it. But I think the sermon’s purpose is distinct from the Absolution. Its purpose is more than simply being another avenue for the forgiveness of sins and proclamation of the Gospel. Its purpose is also to open, explain, and apply the Scriptures to and for the people. That application should include teaching doctrine and history, rebuke errors and misunderstanding, exhorting to good works, explaining the church’s ceremonies, and giving practical advice about pious living. We need to renew the sermon’s didactic purpose and we need to challenge the laity.

For this to really happen, I think we have to be willing to bore people. Delivery should be downplayed. The work of listening attentively should be taught and encouraged. We must not amuse or entertain the people so that they enjoy the sermon but walk out without a change. While we can’t control what the Holy Spirit does, we must, as ambassadors of Christ and communicators, have purpose and intent in what we’re doing. If the lay people need to learn to honor and value preaching, and be willing to be bored in a sermon for sake of actually learning and retaining, then the preachers need to make it worth their while, that is to say, the preachers need to learn how to teach and how to dig deeper.

I realize this is all rather abstract, but I hope it can get us thinking about these things. What would a preaching renewal look like, what is the ideal, how would we go about working toward that?