Five Reasons I Manuscript My Sermons

[Matthias]

“1. Clarity. …
2. Brevity. …
3. Intentionality. …
4. Repeatability. …
5. Posterity. …”

(Pastor Brad Whitt, Abilene Baptist Church, Augusta, Georgia)

x.com

x.com

All good reasons. I didn’t manuscript my sermons, except for those which I delivered in the two classes on preaching which I was required to take in college.

Why didn’t I manuscript my sermons after graduation? I was a dialogue preacher. My sermons were planned beforehand but dialogue preaching allows for listeners to interrupt, ask questions and make observations. I preferred this style of preaching because it allowed me to meet the congregation where they were, not necessarily where I thought they were. Dialogue preaching keeps everyone involved; it isn’t the preacher delivering a lecture to congregation.

Today’s sermon title (example): “God is in the storm”

Sermon begins, I’m preaching in Exodus. Five minutes in someone in the congregation might ask about the storm on the Sea of Galilee where the Apostles were afraid and Jesus was asleep in the boat. I address the question from the pulpit, a member, perhaps several members of the congregation comment on my response, or perhaps add to it. I manage the conversation and return to preaching from Exodus. Someone in the congregation politely interrupts to offer an observation about the subject - perhaps disagreeing with something I said about it. We talk through it. I resume preaching in Exodus. A question is asked by a member of the congregation about exodus parallels in the New Testament. I hadn’t planned beforehand on addressing it in my sermon but I do now. And so it goes.

Time for the sermon ends. If the sermon wasn’t completed, I return to it the following week. Unless I’m led to address something more pressing. I work through books of the Bible one chapter at a time until the book is completed. Preaching on the book of Exodus (or any other book) might take me to many other books of the Bible during the sermon.

Every now and again, something would come up during a sermon that deserved more time than I had to give it. If it was serious enough, the following week I might not get back to Exodus (or whatever book I was preaching through) at all. I might spend the entire sermon time addressing in greater detail whatever the topic was that was brought up.

My college professors hated dialogue preaching. My congregations loved dialogue preaching. I was in the pulpit to serve my congregation, not my college professors.

Dialogue preaching has advantages and disadvantages, just as monologue preaching does.

There are few who practice dialogue preaching. It is generally looked down upon by monologue preachers as reducing the control of the preacher over the congregation. A certain amount of control is necessary in preaching but absolute control is not.

If you want to be a monologue preacher, then be a monologue preacher. It’s easier than being a dialogue preacher. No questions allowed during the sermon.

If you want to be a dialogue preacher, then be a dialogue preacher. It’s harder but more engaging than being a monologue preacher. Questions allowed during the sermon and encouraged.

Congregation members: Would you rather be “in the game” or just listening to it?

 

[marks]

If you want to be a monologue preacher, then be a monologue preacher. It’s easier than being a dialogue preacher. No questions allowed.

If you want to be a dialogue preacher, then be a dialogue preacher. It’s harder but more engaging than being a monologue preacher. Questions allowed and encouraged.

I've found monologue preaching is better fitted to a larger group, dialogue preaching to a smaller group.

Rather than a fully scripted sermon, I prefer to use short notes with incomplete sentences, so I'm not tempted to just read from my notes.

Much love!

 

[Matthias]

I've found monologue preaching is better fitted to a larger group, dialogue preaching to a smaller group.

Rather than a fully scripted sermon, I prefer to use short notes with incomplete sentences, so I'm not tempted to just read from my notes.

Much love!

That’s a good observation. I agree with it.

Some preachers are called upon to serve large congregations. Some preachers are called upon to serve small congregations.

I was called upon to serve small congregations. If / when a small congregation began to grow large, a new small congregation was formed. I could either pastor both (which never happened) or another pastor was raised up to serve the newly formed small congregation.

P.S.

The pastor of the new small congregation would be under no obligation to use dialogue preaching. Monologue preaching is the much more common choice, even in small congregations.

What numbers constitute a large congregation and what numbers a small congregation?

I don’t think there is any set number that defines it. I place the number at 30 or less for a small congregation; above 30 for large congregations. That will seem tiny to many readers. The number I used is arbitrary; a rule of thumb, we might say. I know of some congregations which have 100 or more and still think of themselves as small congregations.

Dialogue preaching for a congregation of 100 or more would be much more difficult, if even practical at all, than it is for a congregation of 30 or less.

 

[Matthias]

This is an interesting article on average church sizes in America.

Worship In The Average Church in America

Small and medium-small churches serve far more people than the super-mega-churches, mega-churches and large churches combined.

worshipleader.com

This source defines a small church as one that is less than 100 in size. (It also offers a definition of ranges for other sizes of church members.)

Using this source (rather than my personal rule of thumb) as our guide, I would conclude that dialogue preaching works well in some small churches, not all small churches. The larger the size of the church the less practical dialogue preaching becomes.

Monologue preaching is practical regardless of the size of the congregation. (And see again the other advantages of monologue preaching provided by Pastor Whitt in the OP.)

That’s one of the reasons (not the only reason) why my professors taught it to their students and insisted upon it in the classroom.

 

[Matthias]

If someone is looking for a church where the preacher uses dialogue preaching in the pulpit, he or she will have a very difficult time locating one. The closest most people will ever come to finding something similar to a dialogue preacher is a Sunday School Class teacher; not that there’s anything wrong with that.

In fact, I would encourage readers to think of dialogue preachers as Sunday School teachers. (That suggestion would be met with approval from my college professors.)

I’ve met many people who’ve said that they get as much or more out of their Sunday School Class than they do from listening to their preachers sermon in a formal church service.

Both styles of preaching engage. Dialogue preaching engages at a level that monologue preaching doesn’t.

Jesus of Nazareth is a Jewish preacher. Did he use dialogue preaching? Did he use monologue preaching? Did he make use of both styles of preaching?

 

[Matthias]

 

[APAK]

View attachment 44879

Excellent, like a running diagnostic check that will beep in you when you are in danger of getting out spec/sync with the word of God

 

[JohnDB]

If someone is looking for a church where the preacher uses dialogue preaching in the pulpit, he or she will have a very difficult time locating one. The closest most people will ever come to finding something similar to a dialogue preacher is a Sunday School Class teacher; not that there’s anything wrong with that.

In fact, I would encourage readers to think of dialogue preachers as Sunday School teachers. (That suggestion would be met with approval from my college professors.)

I’ve met many people who’ve said that they get as much or more out of their Sunday School Class than they do from listening to their preachers sermon in a formal church service.

Both styles of preaching engage. Dialogue preaching engages at a level that monologue preaching doesn’t.

Jesus of Nazareth is a Jewish preacher. Did he use dialogue preaching? Did he use monologue preaching? Did he make use of both styles of preaching?

And a whole year's worth of sermons still doesn't equal 10 minutes of time spent with friends to adjust poor behaviors. The friends do more every time with everyone.

And that's just the way things are. Nobody, and I mean nobody, seems to work with this concept. Sure some churches really promote small groups in the hope that friendships will form....but...

Even still....this idea of friendships is what constitutes the concept of elders or deacons all reporting back to a central person.

But for whatever reason....this system seems broken in the last 100 years or so. People saying they don't know who is their elder or deacon...they know their Small group leader or assistant pastor but that's it for the church leadership. Deacons and elders are like a vapor that's non-existent except in theory.

And where I like the concept of a small church...the reality is often different in that they become closed to new members. Newcomers find it difficult to break into the clique that is formed. Just saying.

 

[JohnDB]

More to the subject of the thread....

I separate the preachers into two groups differently. There are teaching preachers and morality preachers. Some do a bit of both. Sermon delivery? All sorts of ways this is accomplished.

Teaching preachers are extremely rare though. Highly sought after but extremely rare. Most pastors just preach morality with a scripture backdrop. As if the congregation doesn't know wrong from right.

But the congregation usually needs substance to back up their already existing morality and faith. Which is why teaching pastors are so highly sought after. Because if the congregation has strong faith...there ain't much they can't do. However the congregation consider it's the pastor's job to do all the evangelism when it is just another morality preacher.

I'm an old guy who's been in a lot of churches all over the place. Just saying....conversational or lecture delivery is not a big thing to stress... substance is.

 

[Jay Ross]

What I find as disheartening when listening to a "preacher" is that the basis of their understanding, and these days that understanding is that we have a brand new, with respect to age, covenant, i.e., a neos covenant. Whereas Christ taught that he had come to refresh, i.e., kaninous, make like new again the covenant. Christ often spoke of "Kainos" laws, covenant to refresh them for us.

What is required is that our "preachers/teachers" become immersed in the contextual understanding of Christ.

Christ made this very clear in one verse: - Matt 13:52: - 52 Then He said to them, “Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new {kaina} and ancient {palaia}.”

Sadly, what most "preachers/teachers" do is to teach that "Christianity" has been removed from the "Jewish" and that we now have a "brand new" covenant.

We are so focused on having a brand-new covenant, that we forget Christ came to only change/refresh the process by which we are redeemed with respect to God's covenant of Salvation which has existed since ancient times, from the time of Adam and Eve. God has always been looking at people and where they take root in their relationship with Him. We need to chose God's prepared fertile field in which to take root in. God always wanted to plant Israel back into His fertile soil whenever He gathered them back to Himself from which they can draw their nourishment from.

The reason why people who preach/teach fellow believers need to create a manuscript from which to preach/teach from is so that they can cross check the validity of what they intend to preach/teach actually does line up with the word of God.

So often their manuscripts only lined up with what other "respected" preachers/teachers taught and in doing so they would feel "safe" in presenting what was an "acceptable" sermon. Today the calling of preachers/teachers of the word of God is to gain a paid "Job" where their calling is a secondary consideration. Statistics of Churches in the western world support this premise. In "considered" third world churches where preachers/teachers have to put their lives on the line for what they believe and present as the Gospel of Christ, their churches are growing in strength unlike the Western world where the churches are diminishing.

In third world countries becoming a "Christian" is a reality that can cost them their life, whereas in the Western countries, there is an indifference to becoming a Christian as there are no challengers for the Western Christians to face as they live their lives hidden within their society. Many Churches seem to be just a fad and as the fad initially take hold they grown rapidly but just as quickly they die as their is no life within them to provide a reason for the people to line in and with Christ.

Shalom

 

[Matthias]

 

[talons]

I have heard quit a few sermons started this way , " I have an outline on what I was going to preach today but God has other plans "