Have sermons always been this dull? And do we need to be more careful about what we sing?

In my first appointment at one of my five churches when it came to the sermon Brian would close his eyes and to all intents and purposes he looked asleep. Not very encouraging for a young minister but it turned out he closed his eyes so he could concentrate on the sermon. I think if I tried that in my current worshipping context I would soon be asleep!!! 

Over these past three years I have observed the body language of those around me, and you soon pick up how people can appear to be listening but the mood tells you they have switched off, though alert enough to know when to smile or laugh at some inane joke. Some preachers barely look at the congregation so it's not surprising they fail to see they are not connecting. For some it's clear the homily is just something to be done or got through so they can get onto the communion.  Of course it's different now being on the other side of the lectern/pulpit after so many years as the preacher, but I don't have a burning desire to get back there. So I need to be careful not to be over critical.

I have no idea how many sermons I have preached over 45 years plus. I always believed the preacher needs to convey an understanding of the text without just repeating it. To then discern within the text how it speaks to us today. To convey a message that speaks to the world in which people live, while offering the hope that we are moving towards living fully in the Kingdom of God now and for eternity. I am sure many of my sermons fell well short of this ideal. Sometimes the treadmill of turning out another sermon dulled the experience both for me and the congregation. I have listened to hundreds of sermons growing up in church life, and to be honest, I know you don't really recall them individually. It's not about an individual sermon, it is the cumulative effect of insights prayerfully honed, that gives to the listener a Godly world view. This makes seeing God at work in the world possible and the challenge to know what it means in reality to follow Christ Jesus. I guess I have always, even subconsciously, understood preaching/sermon to be a sacrament to be handled with great care, for the word of God is a dangerous disturbing Word.

So I now sit in the pew as it were. There have been times when I wanted to scream out.... 

'What are you talking about? 

For goodness sake give us some examples of what it means to follow? 

What does it  mean to be prophetic today?  

Instead I hear very holy homilies that when you take them apart say absolutely nothing. Just words, words, words. Holy language delivered in a holy way with no cutting edge, no challenge, and more often than not, no reference to the world in which we live. So why would anybody bother coming to worship? 

Looking back, 'not through rose tinted glasses" I'm sure it has always been a tension to speak of God and the interaction with God's world. Battling against the mindset of  "politics and religion mustn't mix". Hence why some choose pious platitudes that feed the individualism that afflicts parts of the Christian church. This enables people to divorce a Sunday service from the rest of the week and in fact most of Sunday. It becomes the "holy hour with coffee and cake' So those who want to retain their prejudices about others can do so. Those who foolishly think it's all going to be sorted when Christ comes again can avoid doing anything. This latter view means the care of the planet is irrelevant, you can go on consuming the earth and polluting the planet at an unsustainable or repairable manner. It makes Christian faith a very personal private matter rather than the community based call of Jesus in the Gospels. 

One of my son in law's jokes about my wanting a social gospel when he asks what was the service like on Sunday, and I bemoan the fact the world doesn't get a look in except maybe for the prayers.  But am I wrong to dare to hope for a sermon that does not feed the "lets pray for peace" but then not do anything about creating justice which is the foundation for peace. 

If we are to have a diet that is not even milk, let alone meat, then maybe we have to look afresh at the hymns we sing. Surely here is an activity that can potentially enable the congregation to participate in a way to feed the mind and heart. But no it can also be the great divide. Hymns chosen to please, often without any reference to the theme of the worship for a given Sunday. Over the past couple of years the reality is I note we have sung a very limited number of hymns and songs in worship. They barely raise any form of challenge but appear to keep folk content with the safe and familiar. They speak of a world that no longer exists, did it ever? But there is a wealth of hymns out there that could be used to teach disciples about God and faithful following. For if sermons are heard and quickly forgotten then it's clear hymns are not. Their repetition and their tunes plant the words into the minds of the hearers. As one hymn writer John Bell has said and written 'what we sing in our youth will feed us in our old age'. So if they are meaty challenging words they will provide a diet for years, but if they are flimsy, poor theology, even with a good tune they won't. If the latter don't be surprised if the congregation doesn't have the tools for engagement in talking about God. They will fall asleep or wander off in the sermon and never make the connections between what we do in services and the world in which they inhabit. 

How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!.  Romans 10:14-15