Skip to main content

The Social Location of the Preacher and the Blame Game

Since coming to NZ I have heard a common refrain despairing at the poverty of preaching in NZ, how preachers willfully abuse the scriptures and fail to feed their hungry people on the word of God instead feeding them a toxic mix of homespun advice, pop psychology and gratutuitous proof texting. 

As a foreigner i would confidently guess that the percentage of good preachers to bad ones here is probably the same as anywhere else in the world, though i'm not sure i have sufficient experience to know for sure.  But for sure the percentage of those NZ academics ready and willing to decry the state of preaching is sky high.  The accusation is always that the preacher does not respect The Word, that they are too busy pushing their "leadership" agenda to properly minister the scriptures, or that they just don't spend enough time in preparation - all of which may be quite true.

But like all of God's creatures the preacher is a product of their environment, most particularly the church, the academy that trained them, and of course our consumer society. Those despicable preachers cannot shoulder the blame for all their failings.  I could go on to list ten reasons why the Church as a whole is to blame for the situation (i mean who employs these turkeys?), or even twenty why the academy is to blame (when you divide biblical studies, theology, church history and homiletics into different subjects don't be surprised if they don't interact in the student's brain) but passing the blame from preacher to congregation to academy manages to culture only serves to mimic the post-lapsarian shuffling of feet of Gen 3:11-13.  Instead we need to work out the ways in which we can cover our nakedness.  Making preachers feel guilty for not meeting the standards of their theology teachers is not one of them.

The truth is (and here comes some of my own pop pschology) the worse a preacher feels about their preaching, the less time they are likely to give to it.  The more they feel those in the academy they look up to have set an impossible standard the less they will work to reach it.  The more the church praises them for giving them junk food instead of real meat the less likely they are to take the time to cook a square meal. 

In today's consumeristic world, which has fully infiltrated the church preachers serving MacDonalds will draw the crowds, while those serving finely honed nourishing food will only attract the connoisseur.  And even those who are drawn to "real preaching" are in danger of making a marketing choice rather than a real act of devotion.  Spiritual pride can still be found in those listening regularly to "biblical preaching."

There is no fix, but for those of us who care about this, and i do, i can only suggest the following homespun wisdom:

1. If you are a biblical preacher teach your congregation what biblical preaching is and how to train their preachers in it and let them train you! (and make sure you are actively training others)
2. If you are an academic adopt a different preacher each year, be nice to them and encourage them in their preaching of scripture.
3. If you are a frustrated congregant pray for your pastor and talk to him or her gently but matter of factly about what is missing from the sermons.

Let me know what you think, and how you get on :-)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

That one time Jesus got the Bible wrong

It's so typical isn't it? You are preaching all day long, training your disciples, sparring with the Pharisees, encouraging the poor and down trodden, healing the sick and casting out demons, all day, day after day, and even when you go up a mountain to get a rest the crowds hunt you down and follow you up, and then the one time you get a bit muddled up with some of the details of a biblical text . . . that is the one they write down in the first gospel - verbatim. At least Matthew and Luke had the good sense to do some editing. But Mark, he always had his eye on giving the public the "historical Jesus" whoever that is supposed to be . . . warts and all. Thanks a lot Mark!

Some think I made the mistake on purpose, just to show the Pharisees up.

For some there is no mistake worth mentioning, only a slightly ambiguous turn of phrase.

Others think I am doing something tricky with Abiathar's name, getting him to figuratively stand in for the priesthood.

It really has…

Thor Ragnarok and Parihaka: Postcolonial Apocalypse

Thor: Ragnarok is a riot of colour, sound, violence, humour, sci-fi and fantasy. As a piece of entertainment it is the best Marvel has produced so far. As in many of Taika Waititi's films the plot often seems secondary to the humour and a number of quirky moments seemed only to serve for a quick giggle. I left the theatre overwhelmed by the sensory experience, but ultimately unimpressed by any deeper meaning.

It wasn't until the second morning after my trip to the movies that I woke to the realisation that the movie could function as a profound postcolonial metaphor (I do some of my best thinking while alseep, also it can take me a while for the penny to drop). Unfortunately a quick google showed me that I was neither the first, nor the second to have this thought.

[Spoiler Alert!]

It's easy to miss with all the other stuff going on but Thor undergoes a postcolonial awakening during the film as he slowly realises that his beloved Asgard and its dominion of the nine realms …

Dale Martin does Mark

Dale Martin is an important and frequently controversial NT scholar. Those of us who can't make it to Yale to hear him teach can access some of his lectures, in fact his entire introduction to the NT course, through the magic of the internet.

Here he is holding forth on Mark . . .