Spirit-ed Conversation in Covenant Community:

Tuning the Ear for a Listening Art

Listening for the WORD

Responding to a Sermon

Helping Preaching Happen

How and Why it Matters

Adapted and expanded from Surviving the Sermon: A Guide to Preaching for Those

Who Have to Listen. Cowley Publications: CambridgeMA, 1992

Listening for the WORD

Whether our primary place is the pulpit or the pew, all of us are engaged in preaching. How can we, regardless of role, most effectively listen to, reflect on, and talk about the sermons that we hear? That question is easier to ask than to answer, because Preaching Discernment Groups are not like other “discussion groups” in which we may have participated—groups like:

  • Fan clubs—where “star performers” are indiscriminately applauded
  • TV talk shows—where strongly held convictions are tossed out (or hurled)
  • Political focus or market research groups—where ideas are tested for popularity
  • Therapy or support groups—where members offer mutual affirmation and nurture
  • Speech contests or jury deliberations—where ratings are given or verdicts rendered
  • Advisory committees—where job performances are reviewed and “critiqued”

It can be very difficult to avoid slipping into the patterns of these groups. Their characteristic behaviors are modeled for us constantly. We do not easily shed the experiences we have had in such groups when we come together to talk about a sermon. What, then, is distinctive about a healthy sermon discussion?

We do not gather just to “be nice” to the preacher, to exchange pious sentiments, to sniff out tendencies toward heresy, to administer criticism “for the preacher’s own good.” Some of what takes place, in fact, can (on occasion) sound similar to what we might say and hear in some of these other groups. When we gather for preaching discernment, the deepest question is not: What are we supposed to do? But, rather: Who are we invited to be? Our primary identity can be described as follows:

A Community of Covenant Listeners in Spirit-ed Conversation

This identity connects us, whether, at any given time, we happen to be a preacher, a respondent, or a group facilitator. More is required than simply employing the principles of healthy group dynamics. First and foremost, we gather as expectant listeners for “The Word of the Lord”—as that comes to us through the words we share with each other. We ground our exchanges in the pattern of Divine Revelation and Human Response that permeates and animates the whole of Judeo-Christian tradition.

How can we honor this commitment in the practical interchanges of a Preaching Discernment Group? The process can effectively unfold within a framework like the following:

  • Each group session commences with centering silence, or common prayer.
  • No notes are taken during sermon delivery. A time of quiet follows for listeners to make notes. The group waits until all have finished writing (or drawing!)
  • The preacher is invited to express her/his immediate feelings, to speak about the sermon preparation process, and to request specific feedback. This initial response is brief, and doesnot include further elaboration, explanation, or justification of what has just been preached.
  • Listeners then respond to the following questions, in sequence:
  1. What have we heard and seen in the sermon just preached?

A descriptive reportof sermon contentand listener awarenessONLY,

NOTan evaluative assessment of theological competenceor homiletical skill

  1. Where in God’s name is this sermon taking us?

A expression of where and how listeners experience the dynamic focus of the sermon—where the sermon invites and empowers us to move in our individual/corporate faith adventure

3. What strategies does this sermon employ to evoke what we have experienced?

A second leveldescription of homiletical craft and hermeneutical stance—

NOTan approval of, or a disagreement overEITHER

4. What advantages and disadvantages do we see in these strategies?

Every sermon strategy employed comes with particular benefits and particular liabilities.

An initial attempt at evaluative consensus will be approached in that awareness—and in that spirit.

  1. How might this sermon grow into a fuller, more effective expression of God’s Word to its

particular listeners through this particular preacher?

Respecting the preacher’s own hearing of the Word, listeners pose the question: “What would happen IF . . .?”

6.What observations or insights about preaching (our own, or in general) arise from the

process of listening to, and reflecting on this sermon?

We do not simply “take turns” speaking, listening, and helping each other. What we hear in the preaching of

someone else always helps our own. What we offer others preacher has implications for ours, as well.

  • At the end of the session the preacher is invited to respond to the hearings and the discussions that the sermon has evoked.

These centering points for “Spirit-ed Conversation” maximize the professional learning possibilities for all participants. Difficult issues are not masked or skirted in interchanges that are shaped by this process. Whether the issues are homiletical, hermeneutical, sociological, or theological, the discussion generates light, rather than heat.

It takes some practice for this process to become natural. When preaching discernment groups get “up to speed,” however, they are free-wheeling and imaginative. While the moving energy embodied in the sequence of these steps is always honored, the process need not (and will not) degenerate into aregimented, mechanical procedure. These guidelines are only a means for choreographing our participation in the Dance of God’s Spirit among us.

For maximum focus and energy in discussion session, the six questions above can be concentrated into the following FOUR:

1)What are we still hearing?

2)Where might this be leading?

3) How does this sermon play?

4)How might this sermon grow?

Responding to a Sermon

1)WHAT ARE WE STILL HEARING?

(What do we continue to see, smell, taste, and touch—immediately and reflectively?)

  • Points
  • Pictures
  • Phrases
  • Feelings
  • Free Associations
  • Fresh Insights
  • Hanging Questions
  • High Energy “Spikes”
  • Centering “Chords”

2)WHERE MIGHT THIS BE LEADING?

(Where in God’s name are we GOING? Where does this seem to be TAKING us?)

(What is the sermon’s dynamic direction for us? What are we moved to do?)

For Example:

  • To offer thanks, praise, or petition
  • To confess doubt, wound, or misdirected behavior
  • To think further upon, or differently about
  • To talk things over with others
  • To plan, undertake action, enlist the action of others
  • To agree, disagree, or “press the issue”

3)HOW DOES THIS SERMON “PLAY”?

(Through what strategies does the sermon help listeners “Make Sense of the Gospel”?)

  • As “GAME” — The Play of Spirit-ed Voices:

[An interaction of Scripture, Culture, Congregation, Liturgy, and Preacher]

  • As “MUSIC” — The Play of Rhetorical Instruments:

[An orchestration of Images, Stories, and Arguments/Ideas]

  • As “DRAMA” — The Play of Narrative Plot:

[A Sacred Mystery of Tension, Sequence, and Suspense]

4)HOW MIGHT THE SERMON “GROW”?

(How can the “good work begun” in the sermon be even more effectively “performed”?)

  • What costs and benefits are involved in these patternsof “sermon play”?

[There are no “cost free” sermon strategies. What is gained/lost by those used?]

  • Questions posed TO the preacher:

“What would happen IF ...... ”

[How might this sermon look and sound when it “grows up”?]

[What changes in this sermon might produce:

-- A more vital center -- a more energetic thrust?

-- A more effective engaging of Spirit-ed voices?

-- A more effectively orchestration of rhetorical instruments?

-- Aplot more authentic both to the mystery of life and the Mystery of Grace?]

  • Questions posed WITH the preacher:

“What seems distinctive in this preaching voice?”

“How does it seem to be developing over the time?”

“What possibilities and challenges might lie in store for this preacher?”

  • Questions for CONTINUING REFLECTION:

What other matters might we fruitfully consider?

[Issues exegetical, theological, social-political, congregational, pastoral, homiletical,

communicational, personal]

Helping Preaching Happen

Congregations have a significant share in the ministry of preaching—one involving far more than simply "sitting there and taking it". Preaching is not a "solo performance" by the one in the pulpit or a "spectator sport" for those in the pew. Preaching is a sacred conversation, in which the Word of God is heard through ongoing dialogue undertaken by every participant in a faith community.

In an Episcopal understanding of the Eucharist, the celebrant convenes the community, and leads it in the Great Thanksgiving. He or she cannot "make it happen," however. Christ is sacramentally present to a community in bread and wine only if the Eucharistic prayer is offered by at least "two or three gathered together in His name".

In like manner, a sermon is not simply a speech that a single preacher composes and delivers. A sermon is a preaching event that unfolds in the spaces and interactions between preachers and listeners.

One way or another, a conversation is always going on when preaching occurs—even though congregational responses maynot be audible (and may consist in no more than: "This is boring; I am out of here!").

What role can the congregation play in the shaping of preaching events? A three dimensional one:

  • Conversational listening with the preacher before the event.
  • Active informed listening during the event.
  • Discerning mutual listening with the preacher after the event

Congregations are often exhorted to listen to the preacher during the event; but seldom invited to listen with the preacher before or after the event. Perhaps it is no wonder that the injunctions to “LISTEN!” are often abstract, moralistic—and less than very effective! Congregational participation during the second stage is likely to be more effective if it were enlisted and engaged throughout the entire process. How might this happen? The full congregation can seldom gather for communal listening before and after the Sunday sermon, but trained and designated representatives can do so—in accordance with principles like the following:

Conversational listening with the preacher BEFORE the event

Several images in contemporary culture need to be named as potential demons, and exorcised:

  • Fan clubs—where “star performers” are indiscriminately applauded
  • TV talk shows—where strongly held convictions are tossed out (or hurled)
  • Political focus or market research groups—where ideas are tested for popularity
  • Therapy or support groups—where members offer mutual affirmation and nurture
  • Speech contests or jury deliberations—where ratings are given or verdicts rendered
  • Advisory committees—where job performances are reviewed and “critiqued”

Participating in a community of sermon preparation is not a theological free-for all, where individuals take the opportunity to "blow off steam," "make their point," or "have their say." Simply passing the microphone around, and giving people "the floor," does not guarantee a genuine sermon conversation. It may, in fact, shut such a conversation down.

Similarly, a community of sermon preparation is not primarily an opportunity for the preacher to test the waters—to take a poll—in order to see what will sell. As Fred Craddock observes, preaching is articulating what people need to say; it is not telling them what they want to hear.

Those who gather to help a preacher listen for an upcoming sermon do need a nurturing space in order to express what they deeply think and feel. Furthermore, the sharing of contrasting, even conflicting perspectives is an essential prerequisite to vigorous, vital sermon speech. But something different is going on when we gather to discern the Word of God than personal affirmation, assertiveness training, conflict management, or dealing with the wounds of “inner children.”

The vivid portrayal of community discussion presented in Acts chapter 15 is an instructive counter-model to these current cultural images. In that meeting of the "Jerusalem Council," there is frank, vigorous expression of personal experience and conviction. There is also disciplined mutual attentiveness in the face of strongly conflicting opinions. The apostle James, convenes the assembly, and eventually takes responsibility for interpreting and announcing the “sense of the meeting.” And he does so with explicit reference to conversations that have been conducted throughout the history of the faith community, as those conversations have been recorded in its sacred scriptures.

What might a similar conversation pattern look like in the community preparation of a sermon (or a sequence of sermons) for a contemporary congregation? Perhaps something like the following:

1)Careful, prayerful, repeated readings of the assigned Scripture lessons by all participants prior to a convening of the group.

2)A period of silent centering and focusing prayer after the group has gathered and greeted one another.

3)An oral, meditative reading of the text—followed by silence—and then another reading.

4) A succinct namingof images, issues, actions, tensions, questionspresent in, or directly connected

with the Scripture text that have caught the various attentions of gathered participants.

  • These sharings should be focused in single sentences, and recorded where visible to all.
  • No participant should offer more than one observation at a time.
  • The "naming" stage should be conducted without discussion, except insofar as an observation by one participant triggers an observation by another.
  • The preacher may facilitate and record, but should not be an active participant at this stage.

5) An additional oral, meditative reading of the text.

6) A naming—as above—of concerns

  • in the congregation
  • in the community
  • in national/international affairs.

7)A brief presentation by the preacher (perhaps with a succinct handout) of historical, theological, literary dimensions of the text that are relevant to deep, contextual listening (as distinct from an initial, spontaneous hearing).

8)The following question, posed for interactive discussion: "What do we need to hear through a sermon in light of our listening to the Scriptures, to the stories of our own lives, and to the circumstances which we face as a community?"

The preacher/discussion leader may now take a more active role, but primarily as one who evokes an interchange of ideas, images, feelings, and experiences. As relevant, the preacher may contribute to the discussion, but should not control it.

9)An integrating summary by the preacher (or other appointed discussion leader) of "the sense of the meeting," or of the distinctive issue currents that have surfaced in the conversation.

10)A "brain storming" session (conducted as in 4 and 6, above) in which images, insights,

observations that might have sermon relevance are offered. This discussion is not an

attempt to arrive at consensus, or to "fix" the preacher's sermon "Problem." Rather, it is a

sharing of resources to seed the preacher's vision. If a communal sense of specific sermon

strategies or shapes emerges from this discussion, that is fine; but it is not the intent—which

is to open things up for the preacher, rather than to tie things down.

11)A period of silent reflection and closing prayer, with an invitation to continue a prayerful upholding of the preacher through the subsequent stages of the preaching process.

The sermon preparation community is not a sermon writing committee. The ultimate responsibility for sermon shaping will reside with the preacher—who understands the preaching role as one of speaking for and with, the community, rather than to or at them. The preacher IS accountable to the community for his or her careful listening. The preacher is NOTaccountable to the group for issuing in the sermon a set of "minutes" or a "joint resolution."

At the beginning of future meetings, it will often be helpful to ask briefly what group members in the sermon subsequently preached, and how their earlier hearings were reflected in what the preacher.

ultimately delivered. It will not be surprising if areas that surface in preparation for one sermon find their way into sermons preached later on. Preaching is, after all, an ongoing conversation. Care will

wil be taken on the part of all participants to respect the confidentiality of the group. The preacher will use personal information only with the explicit consent of the one from whom it came.

Some preachers, or group participants might worry that the sermon event following such a reflective discussion would be less interesting, since it has been the subject of a previous discussion (rather like the second hearing of a story that was entertaining or engaging the first time around). This is seldom, if ever, the case. The opposite is almost always true. Anticipatory energy is heightened--all have a shared investment in the sermon's unfolding. The sense of mutual support among the designated "preacher" and the participants in the sermon preparation community is palpable. Even though such a process is not frequently practiced, I believe it is the normative ideal. Once they have tried it, all participants may wonder why the preparation of preaching should ever be undertaken any other way.

Active, informed listening DURING the event

The middle dimension of sermon listening is at once the easiest and the most difficult. The easiest, because all that is required is focused, receptive openness. Particularly if the listener has participated in the prior listening, she or he will be tuned already to dynamics at work in the sacred conversation of which the sermon to be delivered is a part. The most difficult, because, in a so-called “age of communication,” our senses are more barraged and overstimulated, than they are invited and engaged. “Attention deficit disorder” may be as much a cultural phenomenon as it is an individual pathology. With all the noise to which we are continually subjected, it can be very difficult to listen.

We are manipulated by communication media—sometimes even consciously and willingly. We are also, at times, on guard against our own gullibility. The preacher faces listeners who come to church with contradictory predispositions toward what will be proclaimed. We can be critically resistant and uncritically accepting—and often both at once.

There is no deep listening without critical listening. Genuine critical listening, however, has nothing to do with looking for something to “criticize” in what the preacher says, or how the preacher says it. Critical listening is knowing what to listen for, and how to interact with it.