Sermons have been given something of a bad rap. They may not recover their rightful reputation, what with the current approach of many ministers spurred to brevity by congregations and sloth related to the responsibility, so limited to modest homilies that may fill twenty minutes or so of time. The entire service begins and ends within an hour period, and congregations go away with only a sketch for improvement of lives, families and society. We forget that in much of history the sermon was taken as the high point of the week by a significant percentage of the population. Alone, it could occupy one to two hours or more. We do not argue for length as an evaluation of the excellence of a sermon, but it does take time to gain full audience concentration, and time for a communicator to clinch the objectives of a message. We may forget that Jesus would preach to crowds for lengthy periods with breaks for meals. The Sermon on the Mount, an influential sermon in world society, included important context not now extant, and took hours to deliver in all. One is negatively impressed that persons who will give two or three hours to a football game, highly repetitive in its activity, and costly to produce, wince at the thought of a sermon of more than a half hour – at most. College lectures are longer. Do persons or sermons need repair?
Sermons and prayers from the ancients, and many nearer to our own centuries, are impressive indeed. They were extended and life-changing. The lengthy sermons of Jonathan Edwards and his close colleagues led to a change in the colonies that contributed to the development of a nation. The pivotal I Have a Dream speech of Martin Luther King, Jr. was a secularized sermon. About five centuries ago, Martin Luther was requested by the citizens of his town to preach to them daily in a sermonic context. He did so for a protracted period, with effectiveness. For decades I was invited to speak to many conferences, especially at conference grounds dedicated to concentrated Christian themes. At the beginning I was informed that I did not have to limit my time as sternly as I was doing. I was told that the people had come to the conference especially to hear well prepared sermons and presumed that an hour of careful listening was expected. There was a friendly joke about the matter: For conferences, folks expect longer sermons they may not prefer at home, because they pay fees for the conference and expect to get something for their money. My sermons both lengthened and improved. People talked to me more about what they felt had deeply impacted them. My best illustrations of the human condition have come out of those special events, and some garnered life-long friends with whom I continue to correspond. I grew spiritually from time concentrations I found in Scripture and human conduct. In sacred rhetorical study I discovered how substantive sermons had affected so many leading persons, even in secular contexts. The sermon is vital for expressing the yearnings of Christians for life orientation.
In the effort to accomplish excellent things in the Church growth movement there appears to have been lost effective preaching that marked the church. As one world traveler put it: There was a time when in most areas there were a number of ministers that one felt he had to hear on a Sunday layover. That is not so now in most areas. The return of substantive sermons well delivered might make a difference, not only in cultivating depth in the Christian experience, but in touching social improvement. We may forget that the Scripture has much to say about the social context of all peoples, and the importance to advance that practical matter from the pulpit. Scripture bears strong listening value. Someone must be speaking – in full and effectively. The sermon ought to be effective, biblical, current, persuasive, inspiring and life changing. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020