Get On With It! Or, How Homiletics Can Be Improved by Eliminating Unillustrative Introductions

It happened again. I watched a sermon by a friend. And it wasn’t bad, really. It didn’t have any overt heresy and the message seemed ok, if not exceptionally well delivered. But the congregation was very into it and I think he communicated his message.

Except I’m not sure that he did. Because when I watched it, I watched the first 3 minutes and tuned out. I did this several times. Several times I watched the beginning and tuned out and had to restart it. Why? Because it took 6 minutes to actually get to the point. 6 minutes. The first 6 minutes. That means that out of a 34 minute sermon 1/6th was devoted to an introduction that really didn’t add anything to the sermon.

That’s a problem.

That’s a tragedy.

But it’s not an uncommon tragedy. In fact, there is a crisis in American preaching – a crisis of crappy introductions that rob messages of their power and rob parishioners of their attention span. Because let’s not pretend that people don’t check out of a message they find boring. I’m a pastor. And I’ve been preaching sermons and messages for over a decade. I like preaching. I love listening to preaching. And if I can’t pay attention, then what chance does someone who really isn’t into rhetoric gonna do?

I mean, it’s possible that because I listen to so many great rhetors that I’m spoiled and have no patience for anyone who isn’t great. Maybe. But I tend to think that I have a pretty good attention span, and quite a bit of patience with people who are trying their best. But I think the proof that it’s not just me is the pressure to shorten sermons. It’s not ALL because of people’s short attention spans due to conditioning through television. It’s also because a lot of preaching is bad and boring. And one of the worst things a preacher can do is get off on a bad foot by having a boring beginning.

Now, let me pause for a sec and say that, yes, a good introductory illustration is exceedingly powerful – if its poignant and well delivered. But the fact of the matter is that very few speakers are really good speakers and to use a good illustrative intro you need to be a good speaker. And so there’s a dilemma. Preachers who may well be godly men who love their flocks and love God and love the word are struggling to give people a message that will help them follow Jesus, but they just aren’t great at preaching. So, they try to use illustrations and long introductions to spice things up. But that just makes it worse.

You seed, mediocre public speaking that gets to the point is infinitely better than mediocre public speaking that hims and haws and spends the time when the audience is most attentive dithering and not saying anything of consequence. Or, to put it another way, saying something poorly is a lot better than saying nothing poorly. And I think that that is actually fairly obvious. So why do people keep doing it? Well, I have a couple reasons why pastors and preachers feel shackled to the introduction. I’d like to list these problematic reasons and then offer solutions.

The Problemos:

1)     Too much topical preaching. You see, topical preaching, when done well, is really good. Some of the greatest preachers of all time – some of my heroes – are topical preachers. But preaching topically, week after week, year after year, requires a couple things. A) a LOT of talent. B) an immense knowledge of the Scriptures and theology to make sure that people are getting the whole counsel of God (though I have my doubts whether this is even possible) C) and immense amount of discipline to not just preach your personal preference. Very few people have this cluster of skills and personality traits. But because this is what the best (read: most popular) preachers do, then this must be the best method. However, oftentimes, what works for geniuses doesn’t work for journeymen. And this is particularly true in the performing arts (of which preaching is certainly part). Geniuses often eschew formal methodologies and get away with it – because their natural talent overtops the skills that conventional instruction inculcates.[1] But we’re not all geniuses. Those of use who are just your run-of-the-mill, lunchpail preachers can’t get by on raw talent and rhetorical prowess. We can’t do things their way any more than a beginner chess player can’t try sacking his queen every game like Mikhail Tal – I mean, he CAN, but he’ll remain a very weak player!

2)     We need the courage of our convictions. Too many times men walk into the pulpit (although pulpits are a bit passé, ey) and while they believe in what they’re saying they know that some people will reject their message and so they try to make the gospel palatable or relatable. The first words of their message are, essentially, an apology for preaching! Don’t apologize for preaching…ever. If you’re giving out the Word of God as it is to people as they are then you’re doing the Lord’s work and don’t ever apologize for that!

3)     We need the convictions of our courage! Too pastors they don’t really believe that what they’re saying is NECESSARY for the spiritual growth of the people who are about to hear what they say. And, often, it’s because it isn’t. Too many men are coming up and boldly asserting their opinions instead of the Word of God. And that’s a fast road to nowhere.

Some Solutions (respectively):

1)     Preach Lectio Continua. Start in Genesis and work your way through the Bible. Preach entire books and genres. Preach through the Bible and then several things will happen. A) You won’t need to introduce completely novel material every week. You and your congregation will know what’s next by – you know, literally looking at the next pericope! B) You’ll have the advantage of your audience being familiar with the context and so you won’t have to introduce more than what is absolutely necessary. C) Illustrations that ARE used will apply directly to a text that fits into a context that’s familiar and will, therefore be more natural and easier to understand.

2)     Believe in the Word of God. If we actually believed that the Scriptures are Divinely Inspired and are Living and Active and Sharper than any Two-Edged Sword – literally God Breathed – then why do we need some little illustration. Just get into the Bible. It’s God’s Word that matters, not my take on it! Quit apologizing for the Bible and just preach it. You have to actually take off before you can land the airplane. And too many fail to land because they’ve failed to launch!

Addressing Critiques:

So, it’s possible that someone would say, “Well, Lukey, even presuming you’re right why shouldn’t we emulate the best and try to become like them? Aren’t you setting preachers up for long term mediocrity?” The problem is that there’s a difference between emulating someone and trying to be someone. Look, I played Rugby in college. I liked it. And I wasn’t terrible. I could practice like great ruggers and I could do some of the things they did – but if I got on the field against the All Blacks or England or South Africa, I’d get hurt. Being able to do what someone else does doesn’t mean you can do what they do. I can play chess – so does Magnus Carlson – but I could play Magnus a million times and literally probably never win a game. So, telling pastors who lack the rhetorical skill to do what a great genius does is not the soft bigotry of low-expectations, but not setting people up for failure.

We all have limits. Some people’s limits mean they can’t dunk a basketball – some people’s limits mean that they can’t speak extempore before a live audience and thrill them and chill them and get them to follow you. That’s OK. You can be a good preacher without being a great one! And the world needs a lot of good preachers.

Some might say, “But Luke, this is how people are taught to preach”. I know. That’s why we need a cadre of young seminarians marching with placards at the seats of Spiritual Academia chanting, “Hey-Hey! Ho-Ho! Sermon intros gotta go! [Repeat ad nauseam]. Is doesn’t mean ought. If it isn’t effective either fix it or dump it.

Some might say, “But Luke, good sermon intros are really useful”. Sure, they are – so is dunking the basketball from the foul line. But I can’t do it. So is being able to remember 1,000s of chess games move by move, with variations, and the names of the players, and the year, and the location of the tournament. But I can’t do either of those things because I’m neither a world class baller or chesser. If you can’t do something well enough for it to not be a hindrance, then don’t do it! You don’t need it.

Sermon Intros are unnecessary; they augment the text. But they aren’t the text and we can get along just fine without them. If you don’t need it and all it’s doing is dragging you down, then cut bait and move on.

In Conclusion:

Unfortunately, I have to say to many of my co-laborers, “you’re doin’ it wrong”. Just get in the pulpit and give the Word of God. Stop trying to be Piper of MacArthur or McGee. Just be yourself and give out the Word. We can have confidence that God will use it. We don’t need to improve it. We just need to get it out and let it do its work. As a great preacher once said: you don’t’ put a tiger in a cage to protect the tiger! It can take care of itself. Don’t try to take care of the Bible – it’ll take car of itself: we just need to let it out of its cage!

A Footnote:

[1] In the brilliant book Land of the Firebird, Suzanna Massie describes how some Russian art critics thought that the native genius of the Russian soul meant that formal European Conservatory education was unnecessary because it could never produce the greats – the greats had to be born. But, as is pointed out in the book – not every composer NEEDS to be a generational genius – it’s good to have conservatories so that a nation can have a host of competent musicians and directors. There’s significant overlap here. Also, someone stole my copy of Land of the Firebird years ago and that makes me sad.