On Preaching in the Context of Worship

Some thoughts on preparing sermons in the context of an Anglican worship service which have been forming in my mind for the past few weeks.



Much has been written and said in the past few decades about interpreting texts in their context.  As Erika Moore, professor at Trinity School for Ministry, often says, "Context is King."  The literature on contextual interpretation definitely proves Dr. Moore's point.

This applies on multiple levels in the case of exegesis (dealing particularly with the Biblical text).  When looking at the meaning of a particular word, we are encouraged to look up the possible meanings in a Greek or Hebrew dictionary to see what other uses in the outside literature tells us, but the most deciding factor is the sentence which surrounds that word.  For determining what a particular sentence may mean, we look at the surrounding sentences which make up the paragraph.  And this process continues on to higher levels.  Paragraphs are considered in light of sections, sections in light of the entire chapter of the Biblical book, chapters in light of the whole book, the book in light of the surrounding books, books in the whole Testament, and, more recently, each Testament in light of the other Testament.  And these steps of interpretation are very important for the preacher, but I think that there is more to preaching than just saying what the text means in each of these lights.

I do not mean to say that this is not an important function of preaching.  I am a firm believer in expository preaching, in which the focus of the sermon is telling the congregation what the text is saying, and how it applies to them.  However, as anyone who has prepared a sermon for a congregation before knows, you can not put all of this information into one sermon and still hope to be effective.  The vast majority of congregations are not interested in tracking the development of a word's meaning through the Greek medical texts, mystical material, and then into the New Testament epistles.  Nor should they be.  As interesting as that information is, this is not the purpose of the sermon.

I once asked Justyn Terry, dean/president of Trinity, what the difference was between preaching and teaching.  His answer was, "In preaching, you aim for a response."  I think that this is a wonderful distinction.  It gives focus to the preacher as they approach the text and decide which information to include.  However, it begs the question, what response?  This is where my thoughts started a few weeks ago as I began to prepare my first sermon in my new position as curate at Holy Spirit Anglican Church.  What is the response for which I am aiming?

This led me to think about the next context for preachers; the worship service.  Again, much has been written about this, of how preacher need to consider their audience.  Where are they in life?  What sorts of illustrations are they likely to understand, and which are most likely to be effective?  What message does the Lord have for this gathering of His people?  However, something which struck me in my preparation was more than the congregation, but the actual service of worship.  What does the structure of the worship service tell me, as a preacher, about the response for which I am aiming in the sermon?

In the Anglican tradition, the sermon is placed in the first half of the service, the Liturgy of the Word.  The other half of the service is the Liturgy of the Table, or Holy Communion.  Simon Chan, in his book, Liturgical Theology characterizes this division as promise/fulfillment.  In the first half we hear of God's promise to reunite us with him and in the second half we experience the fulfillment of this as we receive the Body and Blood of Christ in bread and wine.  Chan does acknowledge the already/not-yet nature of these things; that there is still a greater fulfillment of Christ's kingdom to come, but we do already experience that through the Spirit in the bread and wine.

So, given that the sermon is in the 'promise' section of the service, the task of the preacher is to explain the texts in such as a way as to show the clear promise of God to His people.  More than information, we are to further reveal what Scripture itself reveals: a God who pursues us for His honor and glory.  But again, what is the response?

In Chan's scheme, the two portions of the service lean towards one another.  The promise section only makes sense when placed with the fulfillment, otherwise the fact of Jesus' work is not fully revealed as restoring the relationship between God and man in communion.  Likewise, the fulfillment makes no sense without the promise, otherwise the service fails to reveal a God who is faithful to His promises and who has willed salvation from the start.

In terms of the sermon, this means that our sermon should be 'forward leaning' like the portion of the service in which it is found.  The response for which we are aiming is for people to eagerly approach the God's table, seeing there the fulfillment of His promises to be with us and to provide for us.  All this is a response of worship, of recognizing who God is and approaching Him through His Son, Jesus Christ, being filled and empowered by the Holy Spirit.

The more that I think about this, the more it helps me as I prepare to preach to the congregation.  This further layer of context, the context of the worship service, helps me to see the sermon as part of the flow of worship, and not an info-mercial before we move on.  The focus on Christ's body and blood as serves as a check against me preaching myself, but keeps me grounded in the task of a steward of God's mercies.  "For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake" (2 Cor 4:5 NIV).