The failure of Protestant Preaching

When I was a teen and into my young adult life, I was an avid sports fan. I used to turn to the sports page of the newspaper every day, before looking at any other section. Eventually though, my view of the sports world changed. At first it was professional sports. What was an advance for the players, free agency and collective bargaining (and thus ever changing team rosters) , eviscerated the identification of fans with "their" team. About the same time, the increasing presence and dominance of sports television --and its money-- changed "amateur" sports, and for many like me changed them for the worse.

Before I go off on this tangent too far, my point is that my interests in the news eventually came to rest on national politics. Of course, it ironic that the reportage of politics (and nearly everything else) has more and more come to resemble sports journalism!

Being trained to be a parish priest where preaching every Sunday is part of the vocation, I see a parallel in the communication of ideas in politics. In theology, words matter. Words matter in politics too, at least they are supposed to.

So... it has been quite an eye-opener to witness the ongoing controversies involving Sen. Barak Obama and what was his home church until just a few days ago. First there were the clips of Rev. Jeremiah Wright sermonizing after the 9/11 attacks and saying that America basically brought it on herself by being a bully around the world ("the chickens have come home to roost"). Rev. Wright then followed up with appearances in Detroit and Washington D.C. where he repeated similar statements. In fact, before the D.C. press corps he was mocking, sarcastic, mugging for the camera and generally scornful of most everyone present.

After that performance, Sen. Obama finally renounced Rev. Wright. Fast forward to last week, when radical Catholic priest Michael Pfleger gave a guest "sermon" at Trinity United Church. Hilary Clinton's ears must have been on fire. Fr. Pfleger aped Hilary's crying and made her the symbol of "white entitlement" and "supremacy." This pushed Senator Obama and his wife to resign from Trinity United.

The politics of all of this are being discussed all over the country, even the world. What I haven't heard or read is any commentary on the homiletics. As a preacher of the gospel, the videos of Rev. Wright and Fr. Plefeger preaching actually disturbed me. The mocking, the sarcasm, the playing to the audience for laughs and applause: all of these seemed to be ego driven to the extreme. Watching and hearing Fr. Pfleger with his breathy delivery imitating a hysteric Hillary, even to the point of weeping fake tears, I was reminded of nothing so much as a stand-up comedy routine. Yet this was supposed to be a Protestant "worship service" where the sermon is the central and defining element. These are examples of politically and emotionally charged preaching. This kind of preaching is not new, but it is certainly not normative in the history of the traditional Church. I am sure it can be found in the Church history, perhaps in Greece during the War of Independence, for instance, but this would be exceptional and not normative. It cannot be normative in that the gospel of Christ is not allied with any particular ideology or politics of this fallen world. The gospel is also divorced from fallen human passions. Jesus said, "be as wise as serpents and gentle as doves." There are indeed times that preachers should take the prophetic role, but giving way to one's personal passions is much different than powerfully speaking the word of God.

Protestantism, from the beginning has rejected the inner life of peace and spiritual detachment preached by the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church as exemplifid by true asceticism, whether monsastic or parish. The Greek people suffered greatly under the Ottoman Turks, but no Orthodox bishop (or congregation for that matter) would allow a Greek priest to preach resentment towards the Turkish people. The bishop would not do so because he knows that no matter how many scriptural reference such preaching could quote in support, it would not be preaching the gospel. The people would realize that no matter how emotionally satisfying this kind of preaching might be in terms of addressing the history of suffering under the Ottomans, it would be totally inconsistent with the liturgical hymns and prayers they are hearing, singing and praying.

When the sermon becomes the center of the service, then the sermonizer becomes the center of the service. The preacher becomes the service. Persuasive, charismatic preachers therefore create popular, materially successful churches (i.e. in terms of money and membership). How could this not lead to ego driven preaching? And of course, when one preaches to please the audience, one's ego is fed greatly and even given the patina of religious righteousness.

Certainly there are many Prostestant preachers who realize this danger and strive mightily to avoid the dangers I outline above, and may God grant that they do. However, this does not change the fact that this is an inherent flaw in their approach to God and His Church.

What now?

Well, the Cal Supreme Court has decided that same sex marriages must be allowed per the state constitution. Naturally, this is not something that our Church advocates. There is a good chance that a referendum to reverse this will be on the November Ballot. This would be an Amendment to the State Constitution. Hopefully it will pass, but they way our judiciary seems to work one wonders if and how even that can be subverted.

The bigger question is what will happen in the long run. This will remain an issue under the purview of various states until someone finds a case that the U.S. Supreme Court will take and then they could very well invoke the "full faith and credit" principle to say that a marriage in, say Massachusetts, has to be recognized in other states. Then... the only fix will be an amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage as solely between one man and one woman, something that will be vehemently opposed by homosexual activists and their allies. 

Who knows, maybe those who wish to retain the traditional definition of marriage (i.e. monogamous and heterosexual) will wake up to the changes around them and push back this wave of post-modernism. I certainly hope so, but the it will certainly be a sea change. I am afraid the "homosexual rights" issue is following the pattern of "abortion rights." In the latter case the war was pretty much lost over 30 years ago and even though the pro-life movement makes some headway (fewer doctors willing to do the procedures, the federal ban on partial-birth abortions), the slaughter of the innocents goes on.

What will happen? In my more pessimistic moments, I see the Orthodox (and other so-called conservative Christians) marginalized, even subject to governmental interference such as being legally liable for not hiring homosexuals in our parishes and institutions, for not being willing to marry same sex couples, or even for preaching against homosexual behavior from the pulpit. 

Just as real, and perhaps more seriously, will come the challenges from those in the Church who become convinced that the Church must "change with the times." We will have to be willing to confront these misguided brethren with the truth, and sadly show them the door if they will not be corrected.

A few years ago, someone asked me, "What do you think the future of the Orthodox Church in America is?" I thought about it very briefly and answer, "Just about everything." I still believe that. There will be many who seek and find the holy Orthodox Faith because they realize that what they have now is not going to fulfill them. There will be those who leave the Church because it seems, to them, too old-fashioned and "out of step with the times," too strict, not "compassionate enough". There will be trouble within, and from without large doses of indifference, increasing hostility and who knows, maybe even persecution.

For myself  I will continue to care very much  about our society and country and vote for the laws and leaders that I believe will allow for the freedom of expression (religious, political, and economic), and slow the head long rush away from traditional (read Christian) culture.  From the pulpit, I expect I will be more vocal regarding some of these issues, not to endorse a particular candidate or party, but as with abortion some issues are so profoundly morally that the Church must not be silent. And let us not neglect prayer, which is necessary for every good thing.

Forgive,

Fr Michael

One has to start somewhere

"I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.”
P.G. Wodehouse

Being inspired by some of the great blogs I have read over past few years, I finally decided to take the plunge. I am an Orthodox Christian priest of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America. I am a native Californian and my home and parish are also in California. I took the name of my blog from a quote from my favorite author (at least of the 20th Century), P.G. Wodehouse. Wodehouse, if you don't know, was a very prolific author of British farce. He was brilliant at it, and since he wrote comedy, he doesn't get enough respect. The quote (and the blog name) appealed to me due to due its humor and my own sense of whimsy.

Well that's my start. We will see where it goes from here.

Christ is Risen!
Fr Michael