Sermons

Jellybaby1

It's the Advent/Christmas season and of course we expect to hear sermons which are appropriate for the season, but why, oh why, do certain preachers use their old sermons over and over. I heard one this morning, the wording of which I know has been used more than once before. Are they not writing fresh sermons any more, is laziness taking over the church?

homer911

I think you are extrapolating a "little" based on one priest/minister..

Jellybaby1

All right, I probably went OTT, but I certainly do know a few preachers who have admitted to having a stock of sermons which they drag out now and again. I just would like a fresh sermon instead of an old dusted off sermon which I heard several times over the years. If I go to a different church of course it will seem fresh to me, though the congregation there may have heard it before. Maybe that's what I should do, become a travelling worshipper! My question still stands though. Are they not writing fresh sermons any more?

Thinkingaboutit

The oldest priest certainly is original in his homilies. For instance one Sunday he used the Franco-American Julien Green in contrast to another French writer to neatly make the point the particular Gospel writer was trying to make. A priest who tries not to be stale, but also to keep to and make a definite point. Too many fail at that, even if they aren't cogging.

Jellybaby1

I keep hearing the same phrases over and over. Its now beyond boring, its just stale! Great way to lose a congregation!

uck51js9zml2yt

I preached on the same passage on 2 consecutive weeks in churches 1000 km apart recently.
The issue isn't the same passage,it's the lack of fresh oil.

Jellybaby1

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

I preached on the same passage on 2 consecutive weeks in churches 1000 km apart recently.
The issue isn't the same passage,it's the lack of fresh oil.

Exactly! Thanks Tat! I of course expect to hear the same passages at the same times but where is the inspiration in lifting an old sermon from the filing cabinet every year or two, especially if the preacher has been ten or more years in a parish? Preachers, lift your congregations for crying out loud! It can be done! I've witnessed it and loved it! The church can only benefit from it when it is a fresh and inspired sermon!

KatyMac

I'm a CofI priest and would never use the same sermon. Now, sometimes I might use similar phrases especially around this time of the year. There are only so many ways the Christmas story can be told! I was at a service once and the visit of the angels to the shepherd was likened to a story being spread over social media - it held the attention of the younger members of the congregation.
It depends on who is doing the preaching, you cannot 'tar us all' with the same brush. (to use an over-used phrase!)

Jellybaby1

KatyMac wrote: »

I'm a CofI priest and would never use the same sermon. Now, sometimes I might use similar phrases especially around this time of the year. There are only so many ways the Christmas story can be told! I was at a service once and the visit of the angels to the shepherd was likened to a story being spread over social media - it held the attention of the younger members of the congregation.
It depends on who is doing the preaching, you cannot 'tar us all' with the same brush. (to use an over-used phrase!)

I never intended to tar all, sorry if my wording appeared that way - just expressed how I was feeling, that's all. I have explained that it wasn't the Bible passage being repeated that I found annoying. Really You'd have to be there year in year out to understand what I mean. When others in the congregation say on the way out, 'not again' you know its jaded.

theological

Over the last few years I've tried my hand at preaching. I'm thankful for a number of opportunities at my local church.

It's incredibly hard. I preached a 25 minute sermon on the end of John chapter 3 and it took me a month of intense work on the passage (and a lot of prayer) before something consistent came out.

It is worth pointing out as well that different church traditions within Anglicanism have a different approach. I grew up in a broad church Anglican church and we had a ten minute sermon on the lectionary passages. This could be up to three passages.

I've not been in many Anglo-Catholic churches. There aren't as many churches in Ireland than in England but I suspect they would want to spend more time on the liturgy than the sermon.

I currently go to an evangelical Anglican church. The emphasis is more on the sermon because of the conviction that God speaks in His Word. There's more emphasis on what the passage was saying to His people then and what it has to say to us. This is partially why my sermon was so long!

It depends on the expectation of the congregation. I think it'd be worth chewing over where you fall in this grouping. The Church of Ireland is mostly broad church and liberal. There isn't as much diversity as in the Church of England for example.

I find my home within the Evangelical wing of the church because I'm more interested in what God has to say to us than the structure of the service or the particular liturgical aspects (I love the prayer book but I'd like a good sermon from the Bible more).

antiskeptic

theological wrote: »

Over the last few years I've tried my hand at preaching. I'm thankful for a number of opportunities at my local church.

It's incredibly hard. I preached a 25 minute sermon on the end of John chapter 3 and it took me a month of intense work on the passage (and a lot of prayer) before something consistent came out.

It is worth pointing out as well that different church traditions within Anglicanism have a different approach. I grew up in a broad church Anglican church and we had a ten minute sermon on the lectionary passages. This could be up to three passages.

I've not been in many Anglo-Catholic churches. There aren't as many churches in Ireland than in England but I suspect they would want to spend more time on the liturgy than the sermon.

I currently go to an evangelical Anglican church. The emphasis is more on the sermon because of the conviction that God speaks in His Word. There's more emphasis on what the passage was saying to His people then and what it has to say to us. This is partially why my sermon was so long!

It depends on the expectation of the congregation. I think it'd be worth chewing over where you fall in this grouping. The Church of Ireland is mostly broad church and liberal. There isn't as much diversity as in the Church of England for example.

I find my home within the Evangelical wing of the church because I'm more interested in what God has to say to us than the structure of the service or the particular liturgical aspects (I love the prayer book but I'd like a good sermon from the Bible more).

Given the world at our disposal, it's probably unnecessary to put up with dull sermons.

A case of surf and ye shall find.

antiskeptic

I wonder about the model of church teaching. Very often you have a leader type who is tasked with any number of managerial roles. There is no particular reason why someone in that position should be good at constructing a sermon.

Consider the commission: feed my sheep.

It seems obvious that in order to feed others you need to be feeding yourself. And in order to feed yourself you need to have an appetite.

It follows that someone who takes an ambitious role concerning their own spiritual walk will come to recognize the multitude of areas in their own lives which require ministering to. And in seeking to be ministered to they will find themselves ministered to by God.

They can assume their flock will have those same need areas and can guide them as to how and where ministering is to be found in God. By having trodden the way themselves.

They can hardly guide where they themselves have not found guidance. To find need fulfilled where they themselves have not detected own need requiring fulfilling

It follows that teaching leaders need to be the pioneers, the explorers, the self examiners. An all round manager is probably not going to excel in this singular role. Yet church construction seems to place all round managers in the teaching role.

A case, perhaps, for the teaching aspect to be shared: whoever has something to say, because they have sought and found and have something to say, can say.

uck51js9zml2yt

theological wrote: »

Over the last few years I've tried my hand at preaching. I'm thankful for a number of opportunities at my local church.

It's incredibly hard. I preached a 25 minute sermon on the end of John chapter 3 and it took me a month of intense work on the passage (and a lot of prayer) before something consistent came out.

.

25 minutes ....I had 12 X 1 hour sessions over 6 days with church leaders recently plus to 2 Sundays. Not to mention 10 international flights to make it all possible. Add to the preparation a 40 hour day job, family and church life and you'll know what intense is

theological

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

25 minutes ....I had 12 X 1 hour sessions over 6 days with church leaders recently plus to 2 Sundays. Not to mention 10 international flights to make it all possible. Add to the preparation a 40 hour day job, family and church life and you'll know what intense is

Agreed. I'm still very much on the tricycle!

But I think it's important to say on this topic that different churches have different expectations and different people also which might lead to the OPs disappointment.

homer911

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

25 minutes ....I had 12 X 1 hour sessions over 6 days with church leaders recently plus to 2 Sundays. Not to mention 10 international flights to make it all possible. Add to the preparation a 40 hour day job, family and church life and you'll know what intense is

Not to mention your gardening project!

homer911

I think it must be incredibly difficult for a minister/priest/pastor to come up with something new to say about the Christmas story every year. There are of course lots of "online sermons" to beg/borrow/steal from but its very obvious if its not the minister's own work? Should this be a criticism? Personally I do not like scripted sermons, preferring a minister to deliver from his deep knowledge, or from rough notes, leaving room for the Holy Spirit to guide.

uck51js9zml2yt

homer911 wrote: »

Not to mention your gardening project!

Now that was a major omission

Jellybaby1

Once upon a time I was spoilt by marvellous preachers who could inspire me. I already had my faith, but those preachers were in the right place at the right time for me and they made the Bible come alive. But that was a long time ago. Now my Sundays serve merely a poor cobweb of flimsy sermons. Its soul destroying. I do of course understand that not everyone has the gift of preaching but then I ask why else are they ordained? If one does not have the gift of preaching surely they could find some other job to do that fulfils them.

antiskeptic

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Once upon a time I was spoilt by marvellous preachers who could inspire me. I already had my faith, but those preachers were in the right place at the right time for me and they made the Bible come alive. But that was a long time ago. Now my Sundays serve merely a poor cobweb of flimsy sermons. Its soul destroying. I do of course understand that not everyone has the gift of preaching but then I ask why else are they ordained? If one does not have the gift of preaching surely they could find some other job to do that fulfils them.

The likelyhood then was that you were at spiritual milk stage. And anything put in front of one with an appetite long unnourished would be gobbled up. And perceived as tasty by the recipient.

But you get tired of milk. And need meat and veg. And before long even more intricate culinary delights.

The church appears largely focused on dishing up the same old fayre. Some better seasoned and cooked than others but pitched at the same level.

The conclusion is that you learn to cook for yourself and not rely on others to cook for you. Convenience food has its limits. And having another dig and trawl and mine on your behalf is a convenience.

Jellybaby1

antiskeptic wrote: »

The likelyhood then was that you were at spiritual milk stage. And anything put in front of one with an appetite long unnourished would be gobbled up. And perceived as tasty by the recipient.

But you get tired of milk. And need meat and veg. And before long even more intricate culinary delights.

The church appears largely focused on dishing up the same old fayre. Some better seasoned and cooked than others but pitched at the same level.

The conclusion is that you learn to cook for yourself and not rely on others to cook for you. Convenience food has its limits. And having another dig and trawl and mine on your behalf is a convenience.

I wouldn't have described those wonderful preachers as having "put anything in front of me". One of them was so brilliant that he scaled to dizzy heights in the church (no not the Pope!), so no, it wasn't 'just anything'. I understand your 'milk and meat' suggestion but what we get now sure ain't anything like the meat the congregation deserves. What must the Lord think of it all I wonder?

Hotblack Desiato

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

Not to mention 10 international flights to make it all possible.

What's the carbon footprint of that lot?

You have no doubt heard of Skype or FaceTime?

We have a duty to safeguard our planet. Doing "God's work" should surely take account of that.

uck51js9zml2yt

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

What's the carbon footprint of that lot?

You have no doubt heard of Skype or FaceTime?

We have a duty to safeguard our planet. Doing "God's work" should surely take account of that.

If I didn't believe the earth would be consumed by fire one of these days in the will of God I'd be concerned about my air miles.
I do however and it will come to an end and my flying won't change the day of the end.

And considering places I went didn't have broadband, it would have been difficult and let's be honest here, you will happily disparage my beliefs so you couldn't care less about "God's work"

antiskeptic

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

If I didn't believe the earth would be consumed by fire one of these days in the will of God I'd be concerned about my air miles.
I do however and it will come to an end and my flying won't change the day of the end.

Have you thought this one through?

Surely you don't chuck paint down the drain and throw batteries into landfill and burn your plastic waste in you fire .. just because God is going to wrap things up at some point? Like, a child somewhere drinks water contaminated with dangerous compounds leached by your batteries .. on the way to God wrapping things up, can't be seen as okay? Surely?

It would seem fitting (and characteristic of God) that our cooking ourselves to death and, in all likelihood, bringing things to a final nuclear-induced boil, would be the way things pan out. Rather than God sending lightening bolts down from on high.

But to lean over the side of the saucepan and turn up the heat?

antiskeptic

Imagine sitting down in church every week to sermons as entertaining and pointed as this!


It all goes back in the box

uck51js9zml2yt

antiskeptic wrote: »

Have you thought this one through?

Surely you don't chuck paint down the drain and throw batteries into landfill and burn your plastic waste in you fire .. just because God is going to wrap things up at some point? Like, a child somewhere drinks water contaminated with dangerous compounds leached by your batteries .. on the way to God wrapping things up... can't be seen as okay? Surely?

It would seem fitting (and characteristic of God) that our cooking ourselves to death and, in all likelihood, bringing things to a final nuclear-induced boil, would be the way things pan out. Rather than God sending lightening bolts down from on high.

But to lean over the side of the saucepan and turn up the heat?

I never said we don't look after the earth but to think it's all going to burn up because we burn some turf is untrue. No doubt our mistreatment of the earth has caused it to be as it is but being afraid to have kids (as some are) because of the misconception that it will bring about the end of the world or to make a flight which will tip us over the edge?????

As Christians we believe all things are in His hands and the day is coming when everything will burn up and He'll start again with a new heaven and earth and those who've loved His appearing. It won't be a moment before He chooses.

antiskeptic

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

I never said we don't look after the earth but to think it's all going to burn up because we burn some turf is untrue

Are you denying man made climate change and the precipitous position things are at (according to the overwhelming body of science). Air travel is given as one of the bigger culprits??

No doubt our mistreatment of the earth has caused it to be as it is but being afraid to have kids (as some are) because of the misconception that it will bring about the end of the world or to make a flight which will tip us over the edge?????

Its not a flight that tips things over the edge, its the world carrying in with the behaviour that got us into this mess which will, if not already, tip us over the edge. This is basic stuff.

As Christians we believe all things are in His hands and the day is coming when everything will burn up and He'll start again with a new heaven and earth and those who've loved His appearing. It won't be a moment before He chooses.

None of that offsets our responsibilities. I was a bit taken aback with 10 international flights relating to a sermon - in the current climate context

uck51js9zml2yt

antiskeptic wrote: »

Are you denying man made climate change and the precipitous position things are at (according to the overwhelming body of science). Air travel is given as one of the bigger culprits??

We have 90 plus volancoes active under the Antarctic and wonder why the glaciers are Melting and the seas warming up.
Just Google it for some very reputable sources. it's not talked about..why?
My own opinion is that it suits an agenda
Glaciers melt, Seas warm up I'm sure it effects everything else in turn.

I recycle, have my own organic veggies and eggs, have a cow in the freezer that came from 200 yards up the road. Think of all the air miles I've saved

The rest of the herd was feed from grass I grew in my field for the last 2 months.

Hotblack Desiato

Katelyn Delightful Car wrote: »

I never said we don't look after the earth but to think it's all going to burn up because we burn some turf is untrue.

That's a gross misrepresentation of the issue of climate change.

No doubt our mistreatment of the earth has caused it to be as it is but being afraid to have kids (as some are) because of the misconception that it will bring about the end of the world or to make a flight which will tip us over the edge?????

If the end really is nigh, what's the point of having kids? Lots of cults like the Shakers took that view, hasn't ended too well for any of them. I'm sure you're aware claims of imminent apocalypse have been around for thousands of years. Only the bravest cult leaders actually put a date on it, though...

As Christians we believe all things are in His hands and the day is coming when everything will burn up and He'll start again with a new heaven and earth and those who've loved His appearing. It won't be a moment before He chooses.

Odd that other Christians can read the same Bible and come to entirely the opposite conclusion about our responsibilities to our planet.

As for the volcano theory, new one on me, is there any evidence that volcanic activity has increased since the industrial age? Antarctic you say, yet it's the Arctic that's melting? To me, sounds as crackpot an idea as the one that earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis etc are all the fault of the gays.

uck51js9zml2yt

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

That's a gross misrepresentation of the issue of climate change.



If the end really is nigh, what's the point of having kids? Lots of cults like the Shakers took that view, hasn't ended too well for any of them. I'm sure you're aware claims of imminent apocalypse have been around for thousands of years. Only the bravest cult leaders actually put a date on it, though...



Odd that other Christians can read the same Bible and come to entirely the opposite conclusion about our responsibilities to our planet.

As for the volcano theory, new one on me, is there any evidence that volcanic activity has increased since the industrial age? Antarctic you say, yet it's the Arctic that's melting? To me, sounds as crackpot an idea as the one that earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis etc are all the fault of the gays.

You never heard of it and therefore its not true syndrome

Google the rest. 90 identified so far

https://www.google.com/amp/s/relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/news/2013/11/131118-antarctica-volcano-earthquakes-erupt-sea-level-rise-science

https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=295861

Hotblack Desiato

Right so it's volcanic activity which has been around for many millions of years which is responsible for the climate effects were are seeing since the industrial age. The release of millions of years worth of stored CO2 in the same short period, is just a rather unfortunate coincidence.

Uhuh.

I'll stick with the science, thanks.

uck51js9zml2yt

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Right so it's volcanic activity which has been around for many millions of years which is responsible for the climate effects were are seeing since the industrial age. The release of millions of years worth of stored CO2 in the same short period, is just a rather unfortunate coincidence.

Uhuh.

I'll stick with the science, thanks.

We're is your evidence that this activity in the Antarctic has been around for millions of years?

Anyway this is all off topic so my conversation ends here.