Not Fed By 10 Minute Liturgical Sermons?

[paleodoxy]

A friend of my wife's wrote this. They have been engaged in a lengthy dialog about the centrality of liturgy. We would both be curious to know how some of you might approach this...

______________

In many, not all, non-liturgical services it's usually the message that teaches and convicts. It takes an example from scripture and applies it to common circumstances in a way I can relate to. This usually takes more time than the 10 minute-ish sermon I get during liturgy. Perhaps I am thick skulled, but I need the 40 minute message to really drive the point home and soak it in.

It's quite possible that I have wrong expectations for what a church service should be based on my experience with non-liturgical churches. When looking into what the early church did (when not hiding from persecution) I see the vast differences. Part of me wants to embrace it against everything I've ever known (not EOC necessarily, but liturgy in general) but part of me wants to run screaming "legalistic and outdated". I can't help but think that the culture of the times had a lot to do with how church meetings were practiced. Plus, just because Synagogue had so much laid out for them with vestments and such in the OT, doesn't mean that we need that now. It's so hard to know what we should carry over, and what is non-essential.

Personally, I find it hard to focus on Jesus when I'm flipping through books and bulletians trying to figure out what we're doing. I never get to the why of the what so that I can turn my heart to the right place. I'm always just going through the motions.

This used to happen MUCH less when I went to charismatic churches. But now, I just see so much of the church looking so casual and worldly that I'm disgusted. Yes, we can call God "Abba, father", but how did we sink into such a place of horrid disrespect?! I'm not one to get dressed up on Sunday, but I don't want to be callused and casual towards God, especially on Sunday morning. I long for a form of order and respect, but not at the expense of being fed. And I know what you're going to say; that we are spiritually fed by communion.. but that's not what I mean. I need that, but I need the full sermon too.

I don't know what to make of the emotionalism that's so common in charismatic churches. I know it's partly just silly and fleshly and has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. But, it's not void of the Holy Spirit either. I haven't felt emotionally charged and refreshed by church in that sense in a very very long time and I miss it. There is something to be said for "feeling" inspired at church. I don't think it's wrong to want or expect to feel something when you worship God. I want to know that I drank living waters. I want to know that something spiritual happened and I want to feel it. I don't need to be slain in the spirit or whatever, and I don't need to wave my arms and cry. But I want to feel something. For whatever reason, I don't feel anything at communion. The Lord's Supper has always felt like an external act to me. I know your hair is probably standing on end, but that's just the truth of how I feel. I'm not denying that anything spiritual is happening. I'm honestly not sure what I think happens at Eucharist. Why would He have told us to do it if it wasn't significant. Is it just merely a remembrance, or is something supernatural happing and I'm eating His body and drinking His blood? Is it actually imparting grace, or have I already received all the grace I need? These are mostly rhetorical questions. There are so many different answers to these questions depending on who you ask. But, if it really is body and blood and spiritual, then why the heck.... How to word this.. It's going to sound cliche... My spirit doesn't "bear witness" or something. I'd like to think I'd feel some sort of confirmation of what has happened. I don't feel it.

I haven't felt much in a long time, and I want to.

[Jacob4707]

What is her liturgical church experience: Orthodox? Catholic? Lutheran? Episcopalian? What is she comparing her former Charismatic services to - i.e., where is she going to church now?

Those are just some questions to put her comments in perspective for me.

I do understand where she is coming from, though - it is something that I used to think and still do on occasion. However, as my prayer life becomes more disciplined, I find just as much conviction there as I did in long sermons, and they seem to have more impact, too. Sometimes a single phrase from something I've said almost every day for the last several months will hit me.

(Also, our priest usually doesn't do 10-minute sermons. Sometimes they're 20 or 30 minutes long. He's not emotional, and his sermon last week was not particularly dynamic, yet the Holy Spirit used it to bring one of the choir members to tears to the point where she had to step out of the service.)

[Protoevangel]

Point her here (http://www.stgeorgeportland.org/sermons.html) if she needs some meaty Orthodox sermons. My Priest is quite gifted in this area.

[ClementofRome]

Our sermons are always 20-30 minutes and are DEEEEEEP! Always edifying.

I gotta tell her that I FEEL much more deeply participating in the D/L than I ever did in a Protestant church (now mind you, I avoided the overzealous emotionalism of the charismatic churches like the plague).

I have not yet partaken of the Eucharist, but I am afraid that I will fall apart when finally getting to do so. Even now I am emotionally moved to the point of petrification when I venerate the cross at the conclusion of D/L.

I personally am transported to another place during D/L.

[Protoevangel]

Yea, I'm with ClementofRome on the Eucharist. I can't partake yet either, but when I'm open to what's going on, the tears are flowing, and it's all I can do not to go forward to kiss the hand holding the chalice or prostrate before the Body and Blood of my Lord. When I'm not open to what's going on, and I'm thinking about this or that, it's all my own fault. It doesn't change anything except my own perception.

[Eusebios]

To me, it's quite simple. the Divine Liturgy itself preaches. The homily is simply not the focal point of the D.L., like it was in much, if not all, of my Protestant experience. The central focus of the D.L. is the reception of Holy Mysteries.
Many parishes have excellent opportunities for teaching to take place at times outside of the Liturgy.
Peace,
Don

[Dorothea]

Well, I've never really been but one time in a church that wasn't Orthodox, so I cannot compare. There are countless times during the DL that I am not fully into it because of my children. The constant distraction can be very frustrating, but I deal with it.

What I've found is that it's up to the person to become involved and deeply enveloped in the Liturgy. One has to really concentrate and focus on where you are and what you're doing, and that's a hard thing to do. It takes a lot of discipline and perseverence, imo. There are times I have that focus for a while through the DL, but it is rare that I make it through the whole service this dedicated, and it's a shame. My priest's sermons are usually 15-20 minutes, and they are always great and always what seems I need to hear at the time. As my priest said a few weeks back, "why do you think we pray some of the same prayers over and over and that the service is this long? So people can be focused by the time it's time for Communion. People come in frustrated, disoriented and maybe irritated from possibly the traffic on the way in, a spat with their spouse, family member, or what have you. The hour leading up to Communion prepares your heart, soul, and mind for His gift," or words to that effect. :)

[nutroll]

I've been to parishes where the priest preaches for 20 minutes, and I get hardly anything out of it. On the contrary, I have been to parishes where the priest preaches for 2 or 3 minutes and it is amazing. I think it has a lot to do with the priest having a gift for preaching. I don't want to hear rambling, I want to hear a lesson. However long that takes is fine with me.

[giddybiscuit]

What is her liturgical church experience: Orthodox? Catholic? Lutheran? Episcopalian? What is she comparing her former Charismatic services to - i.e., where is she going to church now?

Hi, this is paleodoxy's wife. :)

My friend is Lutheran. She's gone to a Lutheran church since she married her husband (who grew up Lutheran) 10 years ago; before that she went to charismatic churches.

Thanks for the replies, everyone.

[VickiY]

I think I would answer that the length of the sermon is not important...what is important is the quality of the sermon. How long does it take to read aloud any ofthe parables Jesus used to teach? Not 40 minutes, that's for sure...and yet the Word was spoken, and understood.

However, the purpose of going to Church is not, in the Orthodox faith, to learn, or to be inspired. It is, simply put, to worship God, and to partake in the Eucharist, which is the central act of the Liturgy, and this is done as Christ commanded us.

Worship has many components...praise, thanksgiving, entreaty...the words and concepts of the liturgy are those used in Scripture. We pray for the things we have been told to pray for...the Orthodox Church does not teach a "prosperity gospel" message...we do not pray for millions, we pray for our daily bread, our enemies, our loved ones, for health, for favorable weather, for many many things...but we are not a Church that feels one should pray for material things, as many mega churches believe. The litanies cover anything we need to ask of Him. Mind you, all Orthodox Churches can and DO add a request if the need is great enough to require a specific prayer.

For those who wish Bible studies, we have those, too...classes of sufficient length to explain and to teach in depth.

Someone who participates in the full weekly liturgical cycle, where the day begins at Vespers, and pays attention to what is said, and the Scripture that is read as part of the Vespers and Matins (Orthros) services, and the saints that are commemorated on that day, and what it was they did to merit sainthood, and the hymns of the day, and then completes this with the Divine Liturgy itself, and observes the feasts and fasts of the Church, learns in a more complete and organic way...they are literally part of the liturgical year, and like all years, has things that are done, said, and remembered on their special days. This tends to make the readings clearer, as they "fit" in place. Most Protestant churches give a sermon or readings based on whatever the pastor feels moved to...with few exceptions such as Easter and Christmas. This gives a more disjointed approach to Scripture, and perhaps as such requires more information in the form of lengthier sermons. It would be as if someone picked up a detective story, say, and read the chapters once a week, out of any order. At the end, one would have read it all, but would require more time to assimilate what went on. In the Orthodox Church, if one follows the readings, they follow along with the events that took place at the same time of the year we are in, giving a much more coherant picture. Things flow, and it is easier to spot the application to our own lives. I've often noticed that many Protestants will memorize verses by chapter and verse, but be unclear as to the applcation and the meaning of those disjointed verses. The Orthodox on the other hand, can almost NEVER tell you chapter and verse, but we know the verses, and what they mean, as they are deeply part of us, as we live them, and the events they portray, each year.

I hope this made sense...I'm trying to pay attention to my cooking and type this at the same time. :S

[ClementofRome]

Hi, this is paleodoxy's wife. :)

My friend is Lutheran. She's gone to a Lutheran church since she married her husband (who grew up Lutheran) 10 years ago; before that she went to charismatic churches.

Thanks for the replies, everyone.


HEY MRS. PALEO!!! So nice to meet you.

Uncle Clem

[Dorothea]

I think I would answer that the length of the sermon is not important...what is important is the quality of the sermon. How long does it take to read aloud any ofthe parables Jesus used to teach? Not 40 minutes, that's for sure...and yet the Word was spoken, and understood.

However, the purpose of going to Church is not, in the Orthodox faith, to learn, or to be inspired. It is, simply put, to worship God, and to partake in the Eucharist, which is the central act of the Liturgy, and this is done as Christ commanded us.

Worship has many components...praise, thanksgiving, entreaty...the words and concepts of the liturgy are those used in Scripture. We pray for the things we have been told to pray for...the Orthodox Church does not teach a "prosperity gospel" message...we do not pray for millions, we pray for our daily bread, our enemies, our loved ones, for health, for favorable weather, for many many things...but we are not a Church that feels one should pray for material things, as many mega churches believe. The litanies cover anything we need to ask of Him. Mind you, all Orthodox Churches can and DO add a request if the need is great enough to require a specific prayer.

For those who wish Bible studies, we have those, too...classes of sufficient length to explain and to teach in depth.

Someone who participates in the full weekly liturgical cycle, where the day begins at Vespers, and pays attention to what is said, and the Scripture that is read as part of the Vespers and Matins (Orthros) services, and the saints that are commemorated on that day, and what it was they did to merit sainthood, and the hymns of the day, and then completes this with the Divine Liturgy itself, and observes the feasts and fasts of the Church, learns in a more complete and organic way...they are literally part of the liturgical year, and like all years, has things that are done, said, and remembered on their special days. This tends to make the readings clearer, as they "fit" in place. Most Protestant churches give a sermon or readings based on whatever the pastor feels moved to...with few exceptions such as Easter and Christmas. This gives a more disjointed approach to Scripture, and perhaps as such requires more information in the form of lengthier sermons. It would be as if someone picked up a detective story, say, and read the chapters once a week, out of any order. At the end, one would have read it all, but would require more time to assimilate what went on. In the Orthodox Church, if one follows the readings, they follow along with the events that took place at the same time of the year we are in, giving a much more coherant picture. Things flow, and it is easier to spot the application to our own lives. I've often noticed that many Protestants will memorize verses by chapter and verse, but be unclear as to the applcation and the meaning of those disjointed verses. The Orthodox on the other hand, can almost NEVER tell you chapter and verse, but we know the verses, and what they mean, as they are deeply part of us, as we live them, and the events they portray, each year.

I hope this made sense...I'm trying to pay attention to my cooking and type this at the same time. :S
Right on. I'm going to my first adult Orthodox class this evening. :)

[giddybiscuit]

HEY MRS. PALEO!!! So nice to meet you.

Uncle Clem

Thanks, Uncle Clem! Good to meet you, too.

Thanks again, everyone, for the responses. I've told her many of these things already but I wanted to see if there were some better ways of putting them, and this helps me. My friend seems to be searching but she is rather cynical about a lot of things. I pray she will come to find the truth.

[Oblio]

Hi Mrs. P, welcome to TAW.

Not sure if this was mentioned, but ditch the service books :)

I'd like to re-emphasize that Divine services are services to God, that is their primary purpose, teaching and inspiration of His servants (us) is secondary. It is a Western tradition born of the 'Enlightement' and 'Rationalism' to use a time of worship for primarily a learning experience. This is why Pews were installed in churches during that era. While it is important that we hear the word of God in our services, and nowhere will you hear more than in the Orthodox Church, and a usually brief sermon (but often profound and deep like Scripture) to address it's meaning and relevance is given, but our satiation is never the center of worship, the Holy Trinity is.

[Thekla]

I second the advice of Oblio -- no service book (in the Liturgy) for awhile.

Also, the hymns are homilies.

[disasm]

I second the advice of Oblio -- no service book (in the Liturgy) for awhile.

Also, the hymns are homilies.
I agree completely. I used the service book the first week. After that I stopped using it, which forced myself to listen and use my other senses. About the 3rd or 4th time I was starting to understand what was going on, and I still realize something new every week.

Sam

[Xpycoctomos]

Below are some ramblings of mine that, if you're not up to reading (I don't blame you... sometimes I treat these forums simply as my diary to organize my thoughts "out loud" :)), at least go to the very last paragraph where I have some questions a lot of you may be able to answer. Thanks!

Some of my thoughts on sermons:

Longer isn't better: As VickY and others said. I grew up Lutheran (LCMS if that matters?) and in MY experience, spanning several Churches in many different cities and even ethnic backgrounds, although all in the Midwest, the prevailing thought was that Longer IS better. Don't get me wrong, there are pastors that gave wonderful long sermons... but for most of them, the first 5 minutes were good then you were just left thinking "when is this going to end?"

Although I PERSONALLY prefer shorter sermons (10 min to me is perfect), I think that long sermons are great. My namesake Saint John Chrysostom apparently gave sermons that lasted hours! And, actually, something tells me that he would probably not be very happy about the 10 min sermons were he on Earth today (how he feels about it in heaven now though... who knows?). However, my opinion is that if you do not have the gift of gab, don't do it. The message will be much clearer and louder if it is short rather than garbled up in a bunch of filler. If you do, than go at it. But always make sure that every minute is as useful and important as the other. There is a priest at a nearby Greek Parish (who surely by no coincidence was raised for most of his life as a devout Reformed Protestant) who gives longER sermons (15-20) and every minute is actually fascinating. He has a very trained style, the stories he tells always related, he gives great historical and theological background info and is a wonderful and patient teacher, and the message throughout it all is consistent, simple and to the point. (This is a problem I always had with the traditional Concordia Model that always seemed to have three major points... I just couldn't keep up). You could tell he put a lot of preparation into his sermons. My priest's style is TOTALLY different. He doesn't have the gift of gab necessarily, but his short sermons are wonderful. The don't follow a format of any kind really (except that he always starts off re-telling the Gospel of the day which is a little wierd to me but he was trained that way by his spiritual father) but they are heartfelt adn the message is loud and clear, simple and applicable and they often don't go beyond 5 min.

Preparation: It is of course possible to be lazy in preparation and I do have to say that preparation is VERY important. My old pastor (who gave reeeeally long but good sermons, albeit too complicated many times) was trained that for every minute spent DURING the sermon, an average of hour of preparations should go into that. Now, I don't know that an hour is always necessary, but I do think that almost ANY priest (unless they honestly have a mystical gift as it seems Fr John Chrysostom did) can beneift from putting much more time into preparation of the sermon than the length of the sermon. Surely there are exceptions but I do think that while it is wrong to make the sermon the focus of the liturgy, it is equally wrong to act as if it's not too important or somehow dispensible. I feel fairly confident that Fr Tomas (Hopko) would agree on this point (or rather, I agree wiht him on this point) and I think that mindset exists in the Orthodox Church, even here in North America. Fr Hopko says there should NEVER EVER be a divine Liturgy without a prepared sermon even if it is a weekday one where only two or three show up. He says that is inexcusable (although I don't remember his exact words, that was the gist). He actually started off saying that at EVERY liturgical gather (vespers, etc...) there should be some kind of sermon and then he went on from there to say that at the VERY least at ever DL.

Now, I have a question for anyone who is familiar with any Orthodox seminaries (especially the ones here in North America). How do they train their seminarians in sermons? Is there as class dedicated to it? Is therea certain method or a few methods taught? What is that? What is our classic method? I have always been curious on this.

Thanks in advance.

John

[Xpycoctomos]

I... fourth Oblio's advice :)

[rusmeister]

My comments to entirely reasonable doubts and concerns like that:


It's so hard to know what we should carry over, and what is non-essential.

I imagine the Apostles had the same problem - which is why they hammered out Tradition.

Agree with Oblio - if the service books get in the way, ditch 'em.

Why should sermons be limited to church services? You can get them all over the place - you can read or listen to podcasts. Why must the sermon be necessarily part of the service? (Maybe she (he?) thinks that it is we who are being served?)

From the very beginning I was aware of a desire to seek feelings (I think of it as a desire to generate the 'right' feelings and call it "the factory of feelings") and set myself to not seek them. Should this desire to seek feelings be what determines the Truth? Feelings come and go. What if we based our marriages on our feelings rather than on the promises we made? Think of all the divorces that would.... oh yeah....a lot of us do just that.

[Xpycoctomos]

Why should sermons be limited to church services? You can get them all over the place - you can read or listen to podcasts.
I completely agree!

Why must the sermon be necessarily part of the service? (Maybe she (he?) thinks that it is we who are being served?)

I have to say here that I think Liturgical history shows that the sermon was always seen as a necessary a part of the Liturgy as much as the litanies and Epiclesis. Agreed that the Epiclesis is the central focus of the Liturgy and should be that way, but all of that (litanies, the Gospel, the Epistle, etc... are equal players in preparing for that moment. I don't think it is anthropocentrico to say that a sermon is a necessary part of the Liturgy. What's anthropocentrico is to say that THAT should be the focus, and not the Body and Blood of God Himself which would be theocentrico.

[Mary of Bethany]

I would say that my Priest is a very good "exhorter". He takes the Gospel as a starting point and relates it to how we live our everyday lives, seeking theosis. He usually talks for 20 mins or so, and can get rather lively as he feels passionate about what he's sharing. He likes to use humor, too. He just really wants to teach us to live every day as prayerful Christians, never giving up the struggle against the things of this world.

Mary

[fuerein]

You know... I've never really been fond of the huge 30-45 minute sermons. Sure some people can deliver a great hour-long sermon, but so many people I've seen when trying to create a sermon that lasts even 30 minutes end up with this 3, 4, 5 point sermon with minor sub-points to each major point. The main points only nominally related. etc. By the time person is entering their closing comments I've completely forgotten what the message started out being about. A short sermon often forces the speaker to decide what is really important, to ignore the tangents and rabbit-trails that so often are a distraction in longer sermons, and to choose their topic carefully rather than trying to covering everything in one sitting. I've almost always gotten more from a short concise sermon than a long rambling sermon. just my 2c.

[Shubunkin]

Ours has a sermon of about 20 minutes or so. It varies from week to week. Usually, they are quite good, and last me all week, or at least few days. Last Sunday, I was so tired it was difficult to concentrate on the homily.... I struggled to keep up with the thought. I do need more sleep. :o

[Xpycoctomos]

You know... I've never really been fond of the huge 30-45 minute sermons. Sure some people can deliver a great hour-long sermon, but so many people I've seen when trying to create a sermon that lasts even 30 minutes end up with this 3, 4, 5 point sermon with minor sub-points to each major point. The main points only nominally related. etc. By the time person is entering their closing comments I've completely forgotten what the message started out being about. A short sermon often forces the speaker to decide what is really important, to ignore the tangents and rabbit-trails that so often are a distraction in longer sermons, and to choose their topic carefully rather than trying to covering everything in one sitting. I've almost always gotten more from a short concise sermon than a long rambling sermon. just my 2c.
I agree completely with your 2c.