'If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing'. (1 Cor 13:1,2).
Preaching recently on this chapter it struck me forcibly how the 'best' preaching with the 'best' doctrine fits neatly into Paul's description of what amounts to precisely 'nothing' without love. When all allowances have been made for Paul's polemic against Corinthian immaturity about gifts and for what scholars call hyperbole, it is still a damning indictment of many of our values. What is impressive, what is spectacular, what attracts admiration, is so much more desirable than what reflects the character of God.
So if I take this seriously, what difference would this make to my preaching? What would a sermon that was an act of love look like - or sound like?
1. It would be an offering of love to the Lord. First, my love is to be for him, and only then for the people in the pews. My preaching must first be an expression of loving God with all my heart, soul and mind. Its first aim would be the glory of God and only then the good of man. I would want to please him, not man, and not seek glory from man (1 Thess.2:4,6).
2. It would be part of my presenting my body as a living sacrifice, my reasonable worship(Rom 12:1).
3. It would be the use of my gifts in love, as Paul exhorts the Corinthians, which means primarily that it is for the 'common good' (1 Cor 12:7),to edify, to build up, the church (14:3,4,5 etc). As Paul constantly insists in chapter 14, communication in the church must be intelligible. Can the people understand this? Is it getting through to them?
4. In preparation therefore I would think more specifically about the good I wanted to do the people. Reading something about sermon preparation recently, the author mentioned in the penultimate paragraph of a substantial lecture, that 'the sermon must have application'. That is probably how I have usually approached things. But if love informed my preaching, would this be adequate? Would I not be thinking all along in terms of application, not just as something which the sermon 'should have'? How else is a sermon to build up the church?
5. I would think of the flock of God as my children for whom I am responsible (1 Thess.1:7,11).
6. I would want to share with the people not only the gospel but my own self (1 Thess. 2:8). I would want to show in my preaching that I cared for them and wanted them to know Christ and grow in Christ, exhorting and encouraging with all earnestness.
7. I would realise that preaching was not only the work of 40 minutes or so but part of a life of labour for the gospel (1 Thess 2:9; Acts 20:18-24).
8. I would be more thankful for the people, praying for them more diligently (1 Thess 1:2,3).
9. I would earnestly want Christ to be formed in them (Gal 4:19).
10. My preaching would be patient, not envying (no oblique criticims of other churches or ministers who seem to be doing better than you), long-suffering, not registering impatience with any member or the church; kind; not boastful, so no self-references which glorify me; and not arrogant as if I knew it all or was the really important person in the church; not self-seeking or irritable or resentful ('keeping a record of wrongs' - ever used a sermon to take revenge on someone you had not the courage to face personally?); would not gloat over wrongdoing but rejoice in what is good; it would be an expression of my bearing all things, hoping all things, believing all things and enduring all things.
I have a long way to go.
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment