Dear Brothers and Sisters in preaching circles there is some debate about whether modern day preachers should use the pulpit? What do you think? It’s a more complex issue than might seem at first glance – as an Order of Preachers it’s something we should have thought about.
Looking forward to your posts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Interesting question! I believe it comes under the heading of Thou shalt know thy audience (congregation) Having the small experience of preaching in North Dakota (Iwish I were there right now.) Many folks are not comfortable if the preacher is swishing up and down the aisle talking. They are very traditional, however, Fr. Kevin's 5:00 pm youth mass every Sunday is a different group who are not at all threatened by one moving about, but this mass is also in the Parish Hall, so everyone is on the same physical level.
Liturgy is theater, and the pulpit, center stage. A host of customs and traditions surround it.
My children like cartoons which "break the fourth wall", in which characters become aware of their readers. Doing so completely changes the story line of the cartoon. Stepping out of the pulpit breaks the fourth wall of liturgy. On one hand, it brings priests down into the midst of the congregation, and changes the authority of their words; on the other hand, it removes an invisible protective shield from members of a parish, changing the priest's words from a sermon into something like a conversation.
Bro. Harris is right; "thou shalt know thy audience" should determine whether and how often priests leave the pulpit; and it should not be done casually, but as a deliberate invitation to change the relationship of priest and parish.
Dominic did not use a pulpit when he preached to the heretic innkeeper.
Good comments Brother George, there is something inherent about geography and form (hence the great importance of the theology of artechiture in the sacramental traditions.
There are some other issues to related to this, again it is more complex than one thinks...
Look forward to them coming up
Like many thing at the service, the physical pulpit serves as a symbol. I would extend the example of Br Harris and propose that the symbol needs to be part of the understanding of why we are there. Various churches have pulpits of different types, some are combined with the lectern, some are of course rather ornate, require several steps to get into them and easily separate the preacher from the congregation.
I like it when a preacher comes down into the congregation (this happens at our Wednesday mass) but I also like the focus of the pulpit.
I see no reason as to why it cannot vary according to circumstance and the needs of both the preacher and the congregation.
I have never preached a sermon. However, I was a college professor for six years, and I used to walk around the class while I taught. I suppose that just came naturally to me, and I think somehow it helped me think on my feet. However, when I gave more formal presentations, i.e., to other academics, I stood at a podium, I suppose because it was a more formal setting. That seems consistent with what others are saying about preaching. I have no idea what I would do if preaching though.
Peace,
Scott
Sr. Jackie said:
I have never preached a sermon and I am enjoying all the comments everyone has written. I don't have a preference when I am in the "audience" during church as Fr. Kevin uses both and I have always been so impressed when he can preach without any notes.
However, I can relate to what Bro. George says about the "pulpit being center stage." And also the traditional aspect, as I like ritual and tradition. I can see where it would depend on the type of people in the congregation, like Bro. Harris mentioned.
I know when I do preach my first sermon I will have to be in the pulpit so I have something to hang on to, I will be so nervous!!!
Some of the wider issues behind this question is the use of notes or no notes. In some circles people are saying to connect with the emerging culture there is no place for manuscript preaching.
Related to this is that the pulpit creates a barrier between the preacher and the congregation - so some say no pulpit means more incarnational preaching.
And yes, there is more too!
Some say using the pulpit is a reminder to preacher and people that the preaching is not a person's mere opinion, but should be based on the authority of God.
Thoughts on these issues?
As Anglicans, we live in an uncomfortable tension: an episcopal organization and a priesthood of all believers.
In the same way, we are a liturgical church which professes the authority,efficacy, and immediacy of the Holy Spirit.
Perhaps we can look at the architectural design of a church as a default declaration of a preaching style. The congregation uses the design to say what type of preaching should go on within its doors.
Everyone has made wonderful points.
I like a manuscript and the physical presence of a pulpit, but maybe the pulpit is where we take it.
Post a Comment