Is Preaching the Greatest Enemy of Modern Chrisitianity?

Go to any protestant evangelical church on any Sunday and, more likely than not, the sermon is the main event. But could it be possible that preaching is the greatest driver of spiritual apathy in the modern church?

It seems almost heretical to make such a statement, but it may be the most profound paradox the Christian church must successfully wrestle with in order to maintain its relevancy.

That's right. Preaching may be greatest detriment to spiritual formation in the 21st Century. Before we dismiss this notion, it is important to consider how the modern church's addiction to the the preaching paradigm is growing more and more irrelevant in a post-modern society.  This is difficult for the traditional Protestant to handle.

We've been conditioned for the "sermon model" since birth. In fact, the sermon has always been an important part of Christian liturgy, dating all the way back to the book of Acts. The sermon will always be important, but over-reliance on any single method can be counter productive.

How?

Primarily, preaching enables neutral engagement with the Word of God.

For the preacher, the sermon is an incredibly engaging experience with the Word of God.  A well-crafted and well-delivered sermon requires hours of deep thinking, theological wrestling, and preparation. When I preach, I find the experience intense and spiritually nutritious. I find God speaking to me and shaping me through the entire process.

For the congregation, the sermon can be incredibly engaging, but it can also be the easiest part of worship in which to "check out". Don't misunderstand. Preaching can be effective and is. The Holy Spirit can work through the worst sermon and still produce kingdom building results. My argument here is that, for many people, the sermon is the least engaging portion of worship.

How easy it is to day-dream or drift during even the best of sermons? And when the Holy Spirit moves, there is no externally driven accountability to act on that movement.

Additionally, the passive posture of the congregation in the "sermon model" does not allow for active engagement with the word, mentally or spiritually. It's easy to let the words go in one ear, come out the other, and leave the worshiper unchallenged and unchanged.

I think this passive posture explains, in some way, the spiritual apathy we see in many congregations today. The apathy is driven by the fact that we don't force people who are actively seeking to actively engage in the Word on a consistent basis. One way, "from the pulpit" communication does not force the congregation to actively wrestle with the Word or the concepts being delivered in the Sermon.

Our post-modern culture is about "interactive". This means less control over the agenda. "Interactive" hands at least some of the control over to the audience. "Interactive" may be less efficient than preaching, and possibly more risky.

It is bizarre to think that sitting and listening to a sermon may be encouraging spiritual apathy. To grow, we need to do more than just listen. Every man, woman, and child who darkens the door of a church needs to be spiritually nurtured. That means they need to be given more opportunity not only hear the Word, but to also be able to digest, discuss, and respond to it in community. We can argue that Sunday School or small groups is the place for dialogue. True. But the biggest and most relevant opportunity to spur dialogue is in that primary worship time. The question is "how do we change our methods to foster more engagement?"

This is where the seeds of the next spiritual revival reside. Not from behind the pulpit, but out in the congregation, as believers are encouraged to grapple with the Word in a more active manner.

The church is asleep in the pew. It's time to wake them up and get them talking.