As a preaching pastor a recent Christian Examiner article caught my attention. (unfortunately the article was not archived by CE online, but see later) The title of the article was a "Growing number [sic] of pastors preach ‘borrowed’ sermons."
I took personal umbrage with the almost accusatory tone of the title; in fact, the title is accusatory. Unless one reads the entire piece there is the subtle hint ...
I took personal umbrage with the almost accusatory tone of the title; in fact, the title is accusatory. Unless one reads the entire piece there is the subtle hint ...
1. that pastors are borrowing sermons without authorization
2. that this borrowing is actually stealing (note the quotes)
3. that ipso facto borrowing a sermon is wrong
4. that there is an increase in this wrong behavior
5. that the increase threatens someone or something, spiritually
Backtracking to the World Magazine article, I discovered the original title is worse: "More and more pastors lift entire sermons off the internet — but is the practice always wrong?" Who cares what the answer to that question is? The first clause of the title has already prejudiced most readers ... especially those with low opinions of pastors, and who think they all should get “real” jobs.
The piece opens with a couple of examples of preachers getting in trouble with their flocks; one well-placed man was fired. Any church which fires a pastor, as indicated in the article, for preaching another’s sermon could only be justified if that preacher claimed the material as his own ... i.e., flagrant plagiarism. World Magazine chose not to reveal that information. The center of the debate seems to be the Internet, which has created a plethora of new variables inside the preaching tent.
I’ve had an Internet presence since May of 1998, when I founded Pastors Pastor as a ministry to busy pastors, evangelists, and missionaries.
Our Mission Statement said:
The piece opens with a couple of examples of preachers getting in trouble with their flocks; one well-placed man was fired. Any church which fires a pastor, as indicated in the article, for preaching another’s sermon could only be justified if that preacher claimed the material as his own ... i.e., flagrant plagiarism. World Magazine chose not to reveal that information. The center of the debate seems to be the Internet, which has created a plethora of new variables inside the preaching tent.
I’ve had an Internet presence since May of 1998, when I founded Pastors Pastor as a ministry to busy pastors, evangelists, and missionaries.
Our Mission Statement said:
The mission of Pastors Pastor is to assist busy co-laborers. To help them reach a lost and dying world with the Good News of liberty in Jesus Christ. We'll do this by helping them save that most precious of commodities, TIME! We will share what God has shared with us ... sermons, illustrations ... FREE! Our propensity to reinvent the wheel each Sunday is not in the best interest of the lost, nor does it seem to be all that pleasing to the Lord!
Any subscriber could use any of our materials unconditionally. Over 2,500 took advantage of the offer ... many in third world countries. At last count, we had subscribers in over 110 countries. So the itinerate lay preachers who worked in the gold-mines of South Africa or who labored in a Muslim lands were sermon thieves? I don't think so!
- I personally know what it was like to pastor a church, raise a family, try to have a life, and remain on the cutting edge of ministry in generalI personally know what it was like to have to meet all the demands placed on me and still find the eight hours plus it takes to generate a meaty message for Sunday – plus bibles studies and other preaching/teaching requirementsI personally know the Saturday afternoon writer’s block that plagues so many in the pastorate
So I said to myself, "Self, God couldn’t possible want us to recreate the wheel week after week just for the sake of saying proudly, 'Me and God built this! Ain’t it great?'"
Proclamation of the word is in vain if it is in the logos of the pastor and not in the rhema of the Lord. If we for one minute believe our proclamations are preacher dependent, then whatever fruit we bear it cannot be the fruit of the Lord.
Assuming we're not talking about plagiarism here (that is, failure of the preacher to give credit where due), nor word-for-word preaching of another's message (even when credit is given), I have three opinions I'd like to lay on the table -
Proclamation of the word is in vain if it is in the logos of the pastor and not in the rhema of the Lord. If we for one minute believe our proclamations are preacher dependent, then whatever fruit we bear it cannot be the fruit of the Lord.
Assuming we're not talking about plagiarism here (that is, failure of the preacher to give credit where due), nor word-for-word preaching of another's message (even when credit is given), I have three opinions I'd like to lay on the table -
1. I believe the bible is not silent on this
2. I believe he who thinks a preacher must preach fresh twice each Sunday hasa. a false or faulty expectation of their preacher3. I believe the critics are agenda driven and the Lord is offended by their views
b. little understanding of the anointing of the pulpit
c. a shallow perhaps PC grasp of right and wrong
d. difficulty understanding spiritual life elsewhere as well
e. little practical interaction with the word of God
f. a Pharisee's spirit at heart
f. a belief he knows the pastor's job better than the pastor
g. no idea of who the enemy of the Bride of Christ really is
Many New Testament epistles were called "circular letters" and were actually sermons ... multiple copies were sent forth with multiple messengers to multiple preaching points; according to some quoted in the World Magazine article these men should have been fired.
So. if a Wycliffe translator translates a Whitefield or Spurgeon sermon into Swahili in order that it can be read in multiple villages ... I suppose there's something wrong with this too.
And the snobbish comments concerning training and ability are so horizontally man-centered I suppose poor old D. L. Moody should never have entered a pulpit. And I understand the delivery of Edwards' "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" was read in toto, and not well at that ... poor ignoramus wouldn't have a chance today.
What, oh what, has happened to the Bride's leadership if this has become an issue!
Continued in Part Two ...
So. if a Wycliffe translator translates a Whitefield or Spurgeon sermon into Swahili in order that it can be read in multiple villages ... I suppose there's something wrong with this too.
And the snobbish comments concerning training and ability are so horizontally man-centered I suppose poor old D. L. Moody should never have entered a pulpit. And I understand the delivery of Edwards' "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" was read in toto, and not well at that ... poor ignoramus wouldn't have a chance today.
What, oh what, has happened to the Bride's leadership if this has become an issue!
Continued in Part Two ...
No comments:
Post a Comment