In response to our recent From the Archives concerning children’s sermons, a reader made the following comment that proposes a salutary explanation and apology for the practice:

Having Bible truths explained in a way that was understandable is biblical. Jesus explained the Kingdom of God using parables .Apostle Paul said in I Cor chapter 9 “ To the Jews I became a Jew…. to the weak I became weak, to win the weak…”. He is talking about identify and understanding those we try to reach. That would likely including speaking their languages. This is not to down play the means of grace. It is more of help a child of God grow in Christ by feeding them the right consistency of food.

I don’t know of anyone who would disagree with explaining biblical truths in a way that is understandable for all. In fact, this is a requirement of the pastoral office that the pastor be “able to teach.” And indeed, we should preach using our Lord’s parables as well as the many other narratives the Holy Spirit has provided us in Scripture. Our teaching should likewise make ample use of examples that our hearers will understand and resonate with. And indeed, we should preach in a language that is understandable to our hearers - whether as a matter of actual linguistics or rhetorical style. And we are called especially to let the children come to the kingdom, to catechize all of God’s children - including the newborns who may have been baptized only a few moments ago.

Indeed, the preacher must take all of this into account in his proclamation from the pulpit and in his instruction in the classroom.

I think the difference is whether or not multiple age-segregated sermons in the Divine Service is proper.

Certainly, our own Reformation heritage gives us a roadmap. For Dr. Luther famously taught, catechized, read Scripture, and sang hymns to his own wife and children, setting the example not just for pastors, but for fathers (or mothers, if the father is not in the picture). But we don’t see any instance of multiple sermons in the Sunday Divine Services of our Lutheran churches until very recently. In fact, our Augsburg Confession emphasizes that ceremonies teach people “what they need to know of Christ.” Children certainly pick up on ceremony. They quickly learn that there is a routine at home for morning and evening and before meals. In short order, they learn what the ritual of a cake with candles and ice cream and presents is all about. Some families have rituals involving coins in exchange for lost teeth, or certain stories that are read at certain times, or dad bringing home gifts after a business trip. Even if children can’t articulate the two natures of Christ or the doctrine of the Real Presence, they observe the ceremonial reverence involving the Lord’s Supper, and they quickly learn that this is no ordinary food and drink. In time, they will ask questions, and in time, they will learn more.

This is why catechesis is important, in the home and in the classroom.

It is certainly a challenge for pastors to preach in an inclusive way. For children certainly do think differently than adults. And it is also true that men think differently than women, the elderly think differently than the teenager, the lifelong Lutheran and the convert may have different points of view, there are differences borne of ethnicity, political bent, level of formal education, life experience, and certainly by generational cohort (such as Baby Boomers, Gen-Xers, Millennials, and Zoomers). There may well be among the pastor’s hearers, on any given Sunday, both hardened sinners who need a stiff dose of the Law, as well as the broken and contrite who desperately need the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins.

But what we don’t do is have a series of sermons for different demographics. There are no men’s sermons or women’s sermons (while there may well be a men’s bible class or a ladies’ group in the church). We don’t dismiss the kids from the children’s sermon only to bring up the retirees for their own “message” (although, the service below, posted on YouTube, includes a children’s sermon without children, but rather two elderly people sitting on the floor for their own sermon).

My own practice is to preach one sermon for all. It unifies our church, and it includes the children, even if the preaching is over their heads. It won’t be for long. They learn the English language the same way: by immersion. Children understand the language long before they set foot in a classroom or are taught to sound out the word C-A-T. Children learn by immersive exposure. I grew up in a Baptist church that segregated the children during worship. I went my entire childhood never having seen the Baptist version of baptism and the supper. They did not believe that ceremonies held teaching power, but at the same time, they know full well that it would send the wrong message if a Baptist minister were to genuflect at the table during the Words of Institution.

My own practice is also to teach the children every Sunday in the parish hall after the Divine Service. It is our form of catechesis and preparation for first communion. My students range from infants to those who are about ten (as entire families attend and participate). I know how to teach little ones. We have a lot of fun, and they learn the Bible, the Catechism, and the faith. I also preach daily office sermons to children of all ages in my capacity as Wittenberg Academy chaplain. I don’t dumb down my preaching. My hearers, though mostly young people in high school, also include those much younger, as well as parents and faculty members. I preach Jesus based on the biblical texts. I might preach a bit differently to, say, seminarians, or fellow pastors. But not much.

So I think the commenter’s heart is in the right place, but I disagree with her opinion that an age-segregated sermon is the best practice.

The logical end of her premise is to have a series of sermons based on demographic groupings. And I do believe that the vast majority of children’s sermons are counterproductive. Their good intentions notwithstanding, they turn the Divine Service into a show, into entertainment (not unlike old-time television program in which children would be spontaneously interviewed and “said “the darnedest things”). This practice also teaches the children to be irreverent and to lounge around the sanctuary as if it were the youth room. In their desire to be “relevant,” the adults (clergymen and/or laity of both sexes) preaching the sermon often become a spectacle: wearing funny clothes, using objects, trying to crack jokes, etc.

Indeed, ceremonies teach. What does the spectacle of a man or woman sitting with buttocks in the chancel, wearing silly clothes and trying to entertain the audience teach about the Divine Service of Word and Sacrament? How does this instill reverence and faith and the confession that Jesus is miraculously present, and that this one hour is the single most important time in our lives? Again, I don’t question the good intentions of the commenter, but I think there are unintended consequences in which the cons by far out outweigh the pros.

At any rate, the logical playing out of the premise of age-segregated sermons can be demonstrated in the following LCMS parish’s use of what we might call a Boomer Sermon, beginning at minute 12:00.