Preaching by Design

Dennis M. Cahill

The mundane issue of preaching shape has been the ‘hot’ topic in the homiletical world during the last quarter century. It is not too much, as Eugene Lowry does, to call the new thinking a "paradigmatic shift" (O’Day and Long 1993, 95). Richard Eslinger (1987, 65) has described the change in sermon form as "the Copernican Revolution in homiletics." Numerous books have been written that focus particularly on the issue of sermon structure: Fred Craddock’s, As One Without Authority and Overhearing the Gospel; Milton Crum, Jr.’s Manual on Preaching; Eugene Lowry’s The Homiletical Plot: The Sermon as Narrative Art Form and Doing Time in the Pulpit: The Relationship Between Narrative and Preaching; Preaching Biblically, edited by Don Wardlaw; Richard A. Jensen’s, Telling the Story: Variety and Imagination in Preaching; and especially David Buttrick’s Homiletic.

Out of all this discussion has come an emphasis on inductive , narrative, and story preaching. And David Buttrick has contributed his own Homiletic of Moves. Much of the current emphasis on form tends to be an approach toward form that stress inductive movement, narrative logic, imagery, creativity and flexibility.

The responses to the new approaches to form have been varied. Some, particularly many evangelicals, have continued with business as usual-almost as if the revolution had never happened. Like flat-earthers in a round world they continue with classical homiletics in a rapidly changing field. Their preaching has not changed, and often the writings of their homiliticians do not even acknowledge the newer approaches to form.

Others have quickly-sometimes too quickly-seen the light and adopted the newer sermon shapes as the right homiletical approach for newer times. Tired of the ‘same old thing’ they have quickly grasped onto the newer approaches to the preaching task. These new approaches to sermon form have often seemed like a breath of fresh air, relieving the monotony of a pulpit which has at times become all too predictable. But often they have failed to realize the theological baggage which the newer forms of necessity bring.

And then there are those who don’t know what to think. Uncertain which way to go, they go with what works.

The question we ask as evangelicals deeply interested in homiletics is: how do we relate to the shape of contemporary sermons? Do we embrace them as the savior from the homiletic doldrums or denounce them as departure from the truth?

The Forces Which Shape Structure

We cannot hope to evaluate the newer forms unless we first understand the forces which have shaped contemporary thought about sermon shape. The newer sermon forms did not appear out of a vacuum. There are at least three major forces which have affected recent thought on sermon form: theology of preaching, literary criticism, and culture.

Theology of Preaching

Bryan Chapell is correct in noting the interrelationship of theology of preaching and sermon form.

It should be noted that many of the modern challenges to traditional sermon structure result from modern redefinition of the preaching task. When the Bible loses its authority sermons are less concerned with communicating its specifics than with leaving religious impressions and making moral challenges. This change of focus necessarily calls for structures more compatible with eliciting human perceptions and less concerned with communicating biblical information (Chapell 1994, 132).

In traditional homiletics the purpose of a sermon was to bring an idea or concept across the homiletical ‘bridge’ which connects the horizon of the text with the horizon of the listener. Traditional forms served this purpose well. The sermon was intended to convey an idea which would be written as a proposition.

But more recently the emphasis has been on the sermon as an event or experience. It is more a feeling, an emotion, or an event that is to be brought across the bridge. It is this view of doctrine that is reflected in David Randolph’s definition of preaching as "the event in which the biblical text is interpreted in order that its meaning will come to expression in the concrete situation of the hearers [italics added]" (Randolph 1969, 1). The sermon, then, is often seen primarily as an event. The sermon is not static, but dynamic; something should happen during the preaching time. We are to preach the text, not about the text. It is in this theological soil that narrative, storytelling and other more innovative forms have taken the deepest root. But sometimes in this approach the fact that the Bible does say quite a bit is overlooked.

The transition then has been from a conceptual approach to preaching to an event approach. This development has been paralleled in the advertising industry. Compare the old fashioned Tide commercial which attempted to prove that Tide was more effective than ‘Brand X’ with the more modern Nike ads in which athletic shoes or even the name Nike may not appear.

The preacher’s approach to preaching in terms of function is directly related to sermon form. When it was thought that a proposition was to be communicated, then a rational, discursive form predominated. But if feelings and attitudes are what is to be communicated, then non-direct, inductive preaching may be best. Those who advocate an event approach to preaching will probably gravitate toward a narrative or story form of preaching as the most effective means of communicating on this level. Some have recommended that these forms be used exclusively.

But it is not necessary to choose between cognitive and expressive models for homiletics. Sermons communicate on more than one level. Both ideas and feelings and attitudes can be part of the sermon purpose. Sermons are both conceptual and eventful. As Thomas Long points out, "Biblical texts say things that do things, and the sermon is to say and do those things too" (Long 1989a, 84). A sermon should have both a focus and a function (to use Thomas Longs’ language) or an idea and a purpose (cf. Haddon Robinson).

Evaluation

Evangelicals should agree with the emphasis on the sermon as event even while maintaining that the sermon is both word and event. If we understand sermons as both saying and doing then some sermon forms may not be appropriate (at least on a regular basis). Sermon forms that are overly vague, ambiguous and open-ended may be rejected as not communicating the idea of the text, while strict arguments or propositional forms may fail to do justice to what the sermon intends to do.

Literary Criticism

One of the more important concerns in recent homiletical thought has been the relationship between the genre of the text and the form of the sermon. We must "decide how to preach so that the sermon embodies in its language, form and style the gospel it seeks to proclaim" (Long 1989b, 12).

This homiletical concern began first in the field of literary criticism. Amos N. Wilder (1971) has demonstrated the essential connection between form and content. "Shape and substance are inseparable and mutually determinative," he states (25).

Form, then, is part of the meaning of the text. Homiliticians, building on the work of literary criticism, have suggested that the form of a text ought to have some influence on the form of the sermon. A sermon on a narrative text ought to be preached differently than a sermon on a proverb. The form of a sermon on an apocalyptic text ought to be different from the form of a sermon on a parable.

Traditional homiletics paid scant attention to the form of the text. The procedure usually followed was to exegete the passage, identify the central idea and then discard the form. Ronald Allen (Wardlaw 1983, 31) contends that "the preacher takes the passage (story, poem, letter, command) runs it through the mill of discursive logic, often in categories supplied by systematic theology, and boils down the residue like so much sorghum. The sludge of the form is thrown away."

More recently, however, there has been a firestorm of renewed appreciation for the integral relationship between textual form and sermon form. Why should the gospel "always be impaled upon the frame of Aristotelian logic," asked Fred Craddock (1971, 45), "when [the preacher’s] muscles twitch and his nerves tingle to mount the pulpit not with three points but with the gospel as narrative or parable or poem or myth or song."

Some have gone as far as to suggest that sermon form is determined by the form of the text. Henry Mitchell writes, "to select a form or vehicle different from the one inherent in a given text is to do violence to its divinely intended meaning, since meaning and form are inseparable. Thus a narrative parable text demands a narrative sermon form" (O’Day and Long 1993, 233).

But many homiliticians have recognized that the relationship must be less direct. They have noticed that text and sermon are different types of communication (literary vs. oral/aural), have different audiences, and different cultural contexts, and often will have different purposes. Therefore one cannot simply take the form of the text over as the form of the sermon. David Buttrick (1981, 56) states, "A sermon need not be bound by biblical form: the how and why of form is more important than the form itself."

A better approach is to allow the textual form to influence the shape of the sermon. Greidanus says that the sermon form reshapes the form of the text. "The significance of sermon form becomes evident when one realizes that this reshaping will distort the text’s message unless it is done with sensitivity to the text’s form" (Greidanus 1988, 141). Greidanus suggest that rather than imitation, the goal of sermon form is "respect for the text."

Thomas Long’s slender volume entitled Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible exemplifies Greidanus’ approach. Long asks five questions:

"1. What is the genre of the text? 2. What is the rhetorical function of this genre? 3. What literary devices does this genre employ to achieve its rhetorical effect? 4. How in particular does the text under consideration, in its own literary setting, embody the characteristics and dynamics described in questions 1-3? And 5. How may the sermon, in a new setting, say and do what the text says and does in its setting? " (Long 1989b, 24).

In this approach the textual form is allowed to influence the form of the sermon. The focus is perhaps more on the rhetorical function of the form than it is on the form itself.

David Bartlett (O’Day and Long 1993, 147-163) gives examples of how the genre of the text might influence the form of the sermon. In preaching on a parable we can make use of the image or metaphor of the parable. We can tell parables on the parable, that is, parallel stories. Or the preacher can tell the parable in modern dress. When preaching on the psalms we will not often speak in poetry. Rather we will allow the form of the text to come through by making use of the central imagery of the psalm. We can also make use of such poetic conventions as repetition and reinforcements. In preaching Paul we will enter into the discussion between Paul and his readers and will, as Paul does, begin with the good news and move to exhortation. In preaching the gospels we will always preach in light of the climax of the book, the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Evaluation

What should we make of this new interest in the relation between textual form and sermon form? Evangelicals should applaud loudly this new concern since it is a thoroughly biblical one. There are at least two things that we learn from literary concerns.

(1) We need to allow the rhetorical function of the text to influence the form of the sermon. This means that we must pay attention to genre and it’s function in a particular passage. At times this may mean employing the same form as the text. A narrative text will most often call for a narrative sermon. But at times the impact of the form of the text will be more subtle. We may try to interweave the imagery and tone of a psalm into the fabric of our sermon or make use of the symbolism of apocalyptic throughout a sermon on Revelation.

(2) The current interest in literary form also reminds us that if God has used a variety of forms to communicate his message, then the preacher would do well to use a variety of forms to communicate that same message today. Story, narrative, poetry and more didactic and reflective approaches can all be used in the proclamation of the good news.

Cultural Concerns

Another force which greatly affects sermon form and is an important shaper of contemporary homiletics is contemporary culture. The argument goes like this: our culture has changed in significant ways – indeed people listen differently today than just a generation ago. Therefore we need new sermon forms to communicate the old message to a new day. The preacher then must be a student of both Scripture and culture.

In Marketplace Preaching, Calvin Miller recalls us to preaching that engages culture. "Marketplace preaching is a call to get outside the walls and find out once again what people are talking about and what their interests and needs really are" (Miller 1995, 19). This leads Miller to an emphasis on inductive preaching (65).

The change in culture is a factor in much of the newer homiletical forms. A major impetus for Fred Craddock’s As One Without Authority (1971, 12) was the "radically changed situation" of his day. Any reading of current society must come to grips with the reality that though the ‘heart’ of humanity is not different, the lifestyle of our day is radically different from the lifestyle of even a generation ago.

Wade Clark Roof in A Generation of Seekers (1993, 36-51) lists five defining factors which shaped the lives of the Boomer generation. They are the upheaval of the times, affluence, gender revolution, higher education, and the media. Of all the above none has had a greater impact on rhetorical structure than the media. By age 16 the average baby boomer has watched between 12,000 to 15,000 hours of television (Roof 1993, 53). It has become the major source of information and perhaps more than anything else shaped their sense of reality. "Perhaps the most important impact of television was that it replaced the word with the image: Henceforth the dominant medium would be the fleeting, discontinuous flow of electromagnetic pictures" (Roof 1993, 54).

A primary change brought about by the electronic media is a return to orality. According to Kathleen Hall Jamison (1988, 29) "the central claims of Madison Avenue, of prime time television, and of widely viewed films have replaced those of the Bible, Shakespeare, and the great speakers as the lingua franca of contemporary oratory." Literate cultures are "characterized by objective, analytical, formal, logical communication" while oral cultures are marked by "subjective, informal and narrative forms of communication evident especially in personal and collective storytelling" (Willimon and Lischer 1995, 473).

This change in culture necessitates a change from a more literary toward an oral form of speech. Barbara Bates explains some of the implications of moving toward oral form:

"In a context of secondary orality preachers cannot assume that worshipers will know a large number of scripture passages, proverbs, or formulas by heart. Worshipers tend to retain concrete sensory images and well-told stories rather than long trains of reasoning or complex theoretical language (Willimon and Lischer 1995, 353)."

A further implication of the media age is participation. Marshal McLuhan is well known for introducing the concepts of hot and cool mediums. A medium that calls for multi-sense involvement and participation is labeled ‘cool’. ‘Hot’ medium, on the other hand, excludes involvement and participation, and usually involves only a single sense (Hall 1971, 11). Television is a ‘cool’ event for it requires the listener’s participation. This suggests that the television generation needs a higher degree of participation. Preaching forms that do not engage the listener in the dialogue of thought will not be effective.

It is precisely for this reason that Fred Craddock in 1971 argued for the inductive approach to preaching. Inductive preaching involves the listener to a greater extent. The same is true of narrative and story. The listener must participate.

Intimacy is a further feature of the media age. "Instancy and intimacy would be the distinguishing features of [the electronic] media" (Roof 1993, 54). Quentin Schultz notes that television creates intimacy through close up shots (Willimon and Lischer 1995, 471). A conversational and oral style combined with narrative and story imagery will work to create a sense of intimacy in non-television preaching.

Evaluation

The danger in too much emphasis on culture is the tendency to begin with the needs of the culture and going to the Bible for answers rather than beginning with the Word of God and then seeking the needs of the culture. There can be a tendency to do what works without much serious theological reflection.

And yet, the preacher cannot ignore the cultural winds that swirl. To the extent that it is theologically faithful, the wise preacher will seek to use sermon forms that are more culturally relevant.

It is out of the soil of theological, literary, and cultural concerns that modern sermon designs such as inductive, narrative, and story preaching and even David Buttrick’s Homiletic of Moves have sprung.

Discerning Use of Contemporary Approaches

So what does all this say about our sermon design? Which way do we go? Some will choose to continue with traditional sermon structure-"if it’s not broke, don’t fix it". But others respond by pointing out "it is broke" and needs the radical surgery of story, narrative or even Buttrick’s Homiletic of Moves to relate to contemporary congregations. Confusion reigns and we are tempted to go with what ‘works.’ Yet out of the confusion some direction can be discerned.

A number of years ago Dr. Haddon Robinson (1993) stated in a class: "There is no such thing as sermon form!" By which (I believe) he meant that there is no particular sermon form that must be used and that a variety of sermon forms are possible. We can therefore make discerning use of both more traditional and more contemporary sermon forms in our preaching. The following considerations may help us in designing our sermon structure.

Design should be governed by the intention of the sermon. Begin with the recognition that sermon design must be governed by intention. Not every text has the same intention and not every sermon shares the same purpose. And as in architecture form must follow function. We will not arbitrarily select a sermon design prior to considering the intent of the text and of the sermon.

Recently some homileticians, while recognizing the contributions of the newer ‘event’ designs, have begun to move the homiletic world back to what may be called design governed by intention. In this approach it is the intention of the text and the sermon that should govern rhetorical design, not any preconceived understanding of sermon structure. Says Robinson,

"To test a form at least two questions should be asked: (1) Does this development communicate what the passage teaches? (2) Will it accomplish my purpose with this audience? If a form communicates the message, by all means use it; if it gets in the way, devise a form more in keeping with the idea and purpose of the Scripture (Robinson 1980, 127)."

This approach then is not committed to any particular form, but to the form that best fulfills the intention of text and sermon.

Design should be influenced by the literary form of the text.

Literary criticism has taught us of the unity of form and content. We will want our sermons to reflect the genre of the text. Evangelical homiliticians particularly have failed to see the rich connection between the textual genre and sermon form, often plodding along in their classical rhetorical structures oblivious to much of the biblical and theological thought going on around.

The obvious illustration is narrative. Since the Bible is primarily narrative, Calvin Miller (Duduit 1992, 103) asks, "Why then do our preceptual sermons so often roar on, entirely out of sync with the Bible’s narrative mode?" Certainly our sermons could and should begin to reflect the narrative reality of the biblical landscape. Especially rich in potential is the use of narrative logic which allows for so much flexibility in development.

We will surely at times want to retain the form of the text in our sermons and at all times to allow the genre of the text to have a proper influence on the sermonic form.

Design should be affected by the rhetorical situation.

The intention of the text and the sermon and theological concerns must have the place of priority in our sermon designs, but the wise preacher is not unaware of the rhetorical situation of the world in which we live. Our understanding of the culture in which we live are useful in structuring our sermons.

Design should be concerned with variety.

One of the key lessons we can learn from the contemporary discussion about form is the need for variety. Many pastors are caught in the rut of designing sermons in one stock way week after week after week. Some are caught in the rut of classical rhetoric, others have dug a new narrative rut. But ruts are ruts.

Three truths argue for the use of variety in form. First, the Scriptures themselves reflect variety. This is seen not only in the variety of genre but also in the variety of form in the speeches and sermons of Scripture.

Second, we should vary form for the form of a sermon tends to form world view. Craddock in his text Preaching tells us that "form shapes the listener’s faith" (Craddock 1985, 173).

Ministers who, week after week, frame their sermons as arguments, syllogisms armed for debate, tend to give that form to the faith perspective of regular listeners. Being a Christian is proving you are right. Those who consistently use the "before/after" pattern impress upon hearers that conversion is the normative model for becoming a believer. Sermons which invariably place before the congregation the "either/or" format as the way to see the issues before them contribute to oversimplification, inflexibility, and the notion that faith is always an urgent decision. In contrast, "both/and" sermons tend to broaden horizons and sympathies but never confront the listener with a crisp decision (173, 174).

And lastly, we should vary the form of our sermons because our listeners have different styles of listening. Calvin Miller (Duduit 1992, 108), in arguing against the overuse of narrative preaching, warns that "in every congregation there exists a strong percentage of souls whose life orientation is less story-oriented." In any congregation some are more preceptually oriented, some are more narrative oriented. The incomplete sermon may fit some but not others. We must vary the form of our sermons.

Conclusion

Sunday sermons come in many sizes and shapes. There have been bombastic, declaratory sermons that bring great conviction, rational arguments designed to convince, gripping narratives that make us feel that we were there, erudite teaching sermons that grant us greater understanding, andsermons filled with imagery that inspires and lifts us up. The mystery of preaching is that God has used all kinds.

But the nagging question remains "what will be the shape of this week’s sermon?" Intention, literary form, the rhetorical situation, and the need for variety will help us to design God’s message for the coming week. Preaching must always be by design.

Reference List

Buttrick, David G. 1981. "Interpretation and Preaching". Interpretation 35 No. 1 (Jan.): 46-58.

Chapell, Bryan. 1994. Christ-Centered Preaching. Grand Rapids: Baker Books.

Craddock, Fred. 1971. As One Without Authority. Enid, Okla.: Phillips University Press.

Craddock, Fred. 1985. Preaching. Nashville: Abingdon.

Duduit, Michael, ed. 1992. Handbook of Contemporary Preaching. Nashville: Broadman Press.

Eslinger, Richard L. 1987. A New Hearing: Living Options in Homiletic Method. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Greidanus, Sidney. 1988. The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Hall, Thor. 1971. The Future Shape of Preaching. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Jamison, Kathleen Hall. 1988. Eloquence in an Electronic Age. New York: Oxford University Press.

Long, Thomas G. 1989a. The Witness of Preaching. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press.

__. 1989b. Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Miller, Calvin. 1995. Marketplace Preaching. Grand Rapids: Baker Books.

O’Day, Gail R., and Thomas G. Long, eds. 1993. Listening to the Word. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Randolph, David James. 1969. The Renewal of Preaching. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Robinson, Haddon W. 1980. Biblical Preaching. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

Robinson, Haddon W. 1993. Class Lecture. Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.

Roof, Wade Clark. 1993. A Generation of Seekers. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.

Wardlaw, Don M. 1983. Preaching Biblically. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

Wilder, Amos N. 1971. Early Christian Rhetoric. Cambridge: Harvard Uiversity Press.

Willimon, William H. and Richard Lischer, eds. 1995. Concise Encyclopedia of Preaching. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.

<< Back to list