Occasion- Text-Sermon A Case Study FRED

B.

CRADDOCK

Professor ofNew Testament and Preaching Candler School of Theology, Emory University

When occasion, text, and sermon are merged, then the text interprets the listeners and the listeners interpret the text.

N THIS ARTICLE I SHALL ATTEMPT to achieve three things: (1) reconstruct the step-by-step procedure by which a particular sermon was prepared; (2) reflect upon that procedure as it is reconstructed, explaining and at times justifying it, so that the reader may enter more fully into the entire process; (3) reproduce the sermon that was the fruit of this labor. (I say "reproduce" because, while a tightly knit manuscript was given in advance to the news bureau and to translators for non-English speaking persons present, it is my custom to speak without a manuscript. However, apart from casual opening banter with the listeners, I am confident the sermon given here is the same one given there.) Detailed recovery of the preparatory process is possible in part because of the preservation of notes and scribblings antecedent to the sermon. The greater contributor to the recovery, however, is the standard procedure I have long used for sermon preparation. The discipline of a regular routine commends itself for a number of reasons: one is less likely to be a victim of the highs and lows of emotions totally unrelated to the message or its occasion; one is more likely to be thorough in preparation; one is freed by the restraints of routine to explore, ponder, and imagine rather than having one's powers dissipated in the frustrating search for a way to get started.

I

I. INITIATING FACTORS

Specific preparation for preaching begins with the preacher's conversation with himself or herself. The subject is a simple question: What are the factors

59

prompting this sermon? Trite as it may sound, forcing oneself to respond to this question has many benefits: subjects too small or motives too low get weeded out early; vague sentiments must come to clarity; low degree anger (most ministers know about this) that is too general and diffused to be helpful is brought to the conscious level and made to give account for itself; and the paralyzing monotony of "another Sunday, another sermon" gives way to the recognition of the constellation of factors that makes each occasion for preaching unlike any other. For any particular sermon, the primary initiating factor may be an issue, an occasion, or a text. To be launched by a text, whether personally selected or provided by the lectionary, does not guarantee that the sermon will be an interpretation of Scripture. Some preachers start with a text and then visit every city but Nazareth. On the other hand, being prompted by an issue or an occasion does not determine that the sermon will be topical, with only marginal treatment of a text. There are those who move by habit and conviction straight to the Scripture, whatever the point of origin. In every case, the preacher should be reflective and honest about the germinating factors, whatever they be. This particular sermon was initiated by an invitation to preach in the closing service of the General Assembly of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), meeting in St. Louis in October, 1979. The invitation said the sermon would be in a context of worship which would focus on the assembly theme, "Proclaiming Christ Lord." It was requested that I apply the theme to the life of the local congregation, but that the choice of text and subject were mine. II.

COMING TO CLARITY AND CONFIDENCE

This step in the process takes the preparation from early vague and amorphous stirrings without text or subject to a clear statement of a theme which lies at the intersection of a text and the occasion for the sermon. It consists primarily of a careful analysis of the listeners in their context and of a selected passage of Scripture in its context. In other words, study now begins. In order to study there must be respect for sufficient distance for one to see and hear clearly. Distance between preacher and text, between preachers and listeners, and between text and listeners is not simply a historical, sociological and psychological fact grudgingly recognized. Distance can be fruitful for honest understanding, and also exciting as preacher and listeners grow in anticipation of negotiating that distance in the process of the sermon itself. In an age that puts a premium on immediate intimacy, distance has lost respect. The preacher will need to beware of collapsing distances too quickly in the haste to achieve for the listeners instant relevance and intimacy in relation to

60

Occasion- Text-Sermon Interpretation

the ancient text. Otherwise, the result can be a smothering of both text and listener. Study that respects the integrity of both usually uncovers more than enough analogies and points of identification to bridge the distance. 1. The listeners. Who are they, what are they doing here, and what are their immediate circumstances? Lay and clergy delegates to this assembly have been together for almost a week. Long hours each day have been spent hearing reports, approving slates of officers, listening to speeches, and debating resolutions on issues private and public, near and remote, heated and cold, doctrinal and political, denominational and ecumenical, possible and impossible. Tempers have flared, votes have been taken, arguments have continued in hallways, hymns have been sung, speakers have been applauded, old friends have been greeted, and the eucharist has been shared. Everyone is tired, clothes are dirty, name tags are lost, mimeographed copies of everything are everywhere, and it is time to go home. This is the last session. New officers will be installed, followed by a brief service of worship, and a closing sermon. Obviously this sermon would not be the occasion to endorse nor oppose any resolution dealt with during the week. Neither is it a time to introduce any new issue. The sermon might well be one of healing, but not with thin optimism. Feelings run too deep. It could be celebrative, but not glibly. All celebrations carry some pathos. It probably should serve as a rite of passage, a turning of attention from the assembly hall homeward. Local congregations should come into focus in such a way that returning to pulpits, Sunday school classes, youth groups, and board meetings will be anticipated as vital and important and not as a step down from the really big business of a general assembly. In this particular church body, the local congregation has always been central in decision making as well as in worship and witness. The sermon, then, will address the audience as lay and clergy leaders of local congregations from which they came and to which they go. And to and for that group the sermon will dip into the assembly theme, "Proclaiming Christ Lord." 2. The text. The very choice of a text is itself a significant interpretive act and is not done indifferently. If preaching is to be Word of God, it must not only be true, but appropriate. "Meet and right" is still a good expression. At this point, what is to be said in the sermon is not even embryonically present, so there is no danger here of going in search of a text to bless what has already been determined. However, two factors have converged to form a magnet which can be passed slowly over the pages of Scripture to attract fitting texts: the statement of the assembly theme and the image of a local congregation.

61

The theme moves the preacher to the New Testament rather than to the Old. Within the New Testament, this theme has its richest development in passages that apply to Jesus the statement of Psalm 110: 1: "The Lord says to my lord: 'Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool' " (RSV). More than 30 times in the New Testament this verse is interpreted to announce or explicate the Lordship of Christ over death, over history, over the cosmos, over the church. This magnet draws immediately from those books where Psalm 110 is used most visibly: Acts, Ephesians, Hebrews, and some letters of Paul. But when the image of a local congregation is combined with the theme, the search narrows quickly. It is in the letters of Paul that one gets the clearest view of a group of Christians in a specific place trying to live out the gospel under the conditions of that place. It is Paul who lets us see inside congregations with names and addresses. So the question now is, Does Paul anywhere proclaim the Lordship of Christ (not necessarily in an interpretation of Psalm 110: 1; that early lead does not have to be followed) in addressing a particular issue in a particular congregation? Many texts offered themselves immediately (Rom. 10; I Cor. 8, and Phil. 2 being leading candidates). However, since it had been determined that this weary, last-night, goinghome audience would not be up to another heavy issue, nor would it tolerate treatment of an issue so akin to one already argued as to appear covert support or opposition to a resolution still quivering from heated debate, several of these great texts had to be put aside. Given the circumstances, the listeners could not be expected to follow Paul through a discussion of the destiny of Israel (Rom. 10), or the nature of resurrected life and the final defeat of death (I Cor. 15), or the grand hymn to Christ as servant-Lord (Phil. 2). However, I Cor. 8 carried within it a constellation of factors that seemed to make it, tentatively at least, a fitting text. A specific congregation was being addressed on a specific issue; the issue was not, on the face of it, still burning for these present listeners; and yet the issue was such as to evoke from Paul the recitation of a formula proclaiming Christ as Lord. If I Cor. 8 did not deal with a matter still alive in current church talk, so much the better. Listeners could experience enough distance to relax and observe Paul at work. Paul's method and not the issue might be the better focus anyway. And if a subject as occasional and as practical as the proper menu for Christians in Corinth were so respected by the Apostle as to be informed and disciplined by evoking a creedal formula proclaiming Christ as Lord (v. 6), then the text might lead us to hold the local church and its immediate problems as worthy of our best attention and most careful theologizing. So far, so good, but we are still standing outside the text. A careful investigation of what I Cor. 8 says will determine if it is to provide the substance

62

Occasion- Text-Sermon Interpretation

and experience of the sermon. It is possible that it will remain the text but radically alter what has been anticipated thus far. Then again, it may be put aside in favor of another passage. To be honest with the text, the interpreter will listen to it with all three of these doors open. Work with the text itself occurred in three movements. a) Reading the text several times and responding immediately with ideas, questions, feelings,and triggered recollections. This is a playful time but completely indispensable for interpretation and preaching. Without the inhibiting presence of lexicons and commentaries, the text raises its own questions, makes its own statements, creates its own experience. One is not "getting up a sermon;" one is listening. In the spontaneity of this time a question may arise which will govern all the careful exegesis that follows. Notes scribbled here should be kept because they may provide a method for re-experiencing the text in the sermon itself. Re-creating in public one's own engagement with a text can be very effective preaching. Reproducing here all that was prompted by the text is not necessary, but the following excerpts may help the reader sense the nature of the first encounter with the text. Permit a stream of consciousness in the following re-creation of this process. "And now concerning" - apparently the subject had been brought up by the Corinthians and Paul is responding-" ... food offered to idols" - obviously a pagan practice in the city, touching the lives of church members who were recently in idolatry and whose friends and relatives still are. What exactly was involved is not clear. To be researched. Some of the Corinthian Christians were apparently dealing with the problem on the basis of "knowledge." What kind? From whom? Paul discounts it in favor of love. In fact, he says being known of God is better than knowing. Paul repeatedly quotes someone: "all of us possess knowledge"; "an idol has no real existence"; "there is no God but one." Sounds like mottoes or slogans. Who is saying these things? They are true, are they not? Then why is Paul displeased with them? Paul seems not to want to argue whether or not there are many gods and lords but is content to resort to confessional speech, "yet for us . . . . " Is confessional language enough in a pagan culture? Paul does some quoting of his own: "there is one God ... , and one Lord, Jesus Christ . . . . " Since he does not elaborate, maybe they already know his quotation. Sounds like a creed. Maybe he is just reminding them. Seems to fit but not fit. At any rate, Paul now denies that all have knowledge. Some are "weak" and can be caused to stumble by the free behavior of those with "knowledge." Apparently nothing is directly addressed to the "weak," but he writes to "you, a man of knowledge." Sounds sarcastic. At least, the sentences are barbed. "Know" and "knowledge" are the often repeated words, and obviously refer to the problem not the 63

solution. "Being known (of God) is better; "love" is better. In Paul's opinion, apparently someone's right answers are not the right answers. But their answers (if that is what is quoted by Paul) are right. What is wrong with right answers? Something must be; Paul brings in a familiar creed to shut them down. How could anyone be right and yet wrong? Any analogous case come to mind? Does Paul really address the issue or does he suddenly move to another ground? Some questions are out of order because to answer them directly is to inadequately represent the gospel. Maybe that is why Paul recites the creed (v. 6) before going on with his very practical pastoral advice. The use of the creed in this context is striking, like a mountain governing all the surrounding terrain. May be the exegetical key. b) From these musings the investigation moves next to the contribution of lexicons, commentaries, and dictionary articles. My own method is to back away at this point and get the larger picture first. The articles of First Corinthians in IDB (vols. 1, 5) served quite well for this purpose, as well as for reconstructing (theoretically) the sequence of Paul's whole correspondence with Corinth. Then I move in closer and fix in mind the overall outline of First Corinthians, and in particular the section beginning at 7: 1 which deals with a series of matters about which the church had written to Paul. Our text centers upon one of those matters. The specific investigation of the text begins with what has been called "establishing the text." This is a check for any important variant readings in the text. A preacher without Greek can handle this with some confidence by using Bruce Metzger's A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Also, the better commentaries will call attention to any textual problem. Except for a rather late addition to verse 6 in order to make the creedal formula trinitarian, this text is relatively free of variants and may be studied with assurance that we have what Paul wrote to the Corinthians. Perhaps it should be said that this step in the preparation is not simply paying tribute to one's academic days. Taking the text seriously begins by asking, What words did the writer write? The next task is to try to understand what the Corinthians understood when they read these words. Here the commentaries are most helpful (I used for this sermon the commentaries by Conzelmann, Hering, Barrett and Bruce as well as Schmithals' study of Gnosticism in Corinth). Some of the reading was basically for information on the practice of food sacrificed to idols. Other reading facilitated re-entering the debate as to whether the "knowledge" discussed here is Gnostic in nature. The commentaries also enlarge the discussion by relating what Paul says here about concession to the weak brother to what he says elsewhere, as in I Cor. 10:23-33 and Rom. 14:1-23. A 64

Occasion- Text-Sermon Interpretation

great amount of attention is properly given to the confessional formula in verse 6. It is called an "omnipotence formula," having close kinship with Stoic formulations about nature, and appearing in similar form elsewhere in Paul (Rom. 11:36; Col. 1:16). Since it is obviously quoted in this context, the statement has its own history, perhaps as a baptismal confession. Here in our text Paul does not insert comments that would turn the creed into an argument. It seems rather to function as a reminder of their confession of faith, and as such, towers above the clever slogans generated out of the Corinthians' knowledge. c) The third movement of the interpretation of the text is to close all the commentaries and dictionaries and read carefully again the entire text. The larger context provides the occasion for this passage but does not substantively nourish or govern its interpretation. "And now concerning" begins a new topic quite distinct from what precedes or follows 8: 1-13. The notes from the first exploration into the text are now reviewed with a critical eye: the intervening exegetical work has clarified some early questions, confirmed some impressions, and destroyed others. In turning toward the sermon, certain decisions must now be made. One, Paul's advice (vs. 7-13) about being sensitive to the conscience of the weaker brother will receive only minor attention. This is justified not only by the nature of the audience but also by the text itself. The real grappling and clash of prespectives come in verses 1-6. Two, little or no time will be given tothe debate over whether Paul is dealing with Gnostics. An arrogant, condescending attitude is out of order whether the source of one's "knowledge" be a classroom, the Bible, or a vision. Three, the primary focus of the message will be upon the two perspectives offered by the text for viewing and dealing with issues in the life of the church. The Corinthians had answers in the form of mottoes and slogans; in contrast, Paul re-introduced their confession of faith. III. THEME The evidence that step two is complete, that one has arrived at clarity and confidence, is the ability to state in one affirmative sentence what the sermon is going to say. This theme may not appear as such in the sermon itself, but it will discipline all the content and arrangement of the sermon just as a destination disciplines a journey. The theme is the content in digest; it is the "what" of the message. Of course, a sermon is more than a transfer of information; it seeks to enable the listeners to appropriate and experience the message. But until a theme can be clearly stated, the preacher is not ready to begin writing a sermon.

65

For this sermon the theme is The recovery of our historic confession offaith can redeem the churchfrom the arrogant pettiness of the current sloganism.

IV.

DECIDING

How TO SAY

IT

Trying to write a sermon prior to this point is to put the reapers in the field with the sowers. The first three steps release one into the pleasure of step four. Now that I know what I will say, how shall I say it? Many possibilities are open, but not all. Certain constraints are to be respected. For example, the form of the sermon should be congenial with the form of the text. Preaching that treats beatitudes as exhortations or paradoxes as syllogisms violates not only form but content. Of course, there are limits here. A text that is a prayer does not have to be prayed, but a sermon on that text which forgets it is a prayer, that does not in some sense address God as well as the people, will be flawed by discontinuity with the text. A good sermon seeks the hearers' experience of the text and not simply their knowing what it says. However, and it bears repeating, the preacher is constrained to use a method that will convey rather than obscure the theme. Attentive listeners should be able to state the theme even though the preacher never said it as such in the sermon. Another constraint upon choice of method is the condition (physical, emotional, and otherwise) of the listeners. The sermon's length and weight as well as style of delivery will take into account what is known about the circumstances that will prevail on the occasion of the actual preaching. There is no need to itemize all the factors that entered into the decision about the form and movement of this sermon. It is hoped that the reader will discern in it my awareness of what has been said above about the listeners and about the text. The sermon was prepared and delivered with two expectations. One, that the listeners would be brought, without feeling accused or judged, to identify with the Corinthians with all their bright and clever slogans in response to church problems. Two, in that identification, that they be able to hear in sharp contrast Paul's recitation of the confession of faith. If these two hopes were met, then the text interpreted the listeners, and the listeners interpreted the text. V. THE SERMON "Renewing a Sloganized Church" I Cor. 8: 1-13

I hate to interrupt your packing, but we have one more matter to consider before we go home. In their advance planning, the program committee thought it appropriate to discuss one issue at this particular session because

66

Occasion- Text-Sermon Interpretation

the local congregation is in the spotlight both in this evening's program and in this subject which I am to introduce. They were wise in seeing appropriateness in their plans, but are now questioning their wisdom in having us ponder so unsettling a matter on the eve of our departure. They feel a final session should be more benedictory in nature. Their nervous suggestion to the moderator that tonight's program be altered was totally out of the question. This assembly does not convene again for two years, and the issue cannot wait. This discussion must take place now. You can imagine with what sighs of relief the assembly leaders received the information that this problem had reared its ugly head in an earlier period of the church's history and had been dispatched clearly and quickly. Since the church has preserved the record of that prior case, there is no reason why we cannot read it here, make a few clarifying comments, and be done with it. It is evident from your stirring and whispering that you have already guessed the unavoidable issue confronting us: Can we as Christians eat meat that has been sacrificed to idols? Before anyone says anything, let me read the record. (Read I Cor. 8:1-13) In keeping with his pattern of starting churches in metropolitan areas, Paul began a congregation in Corinth, Greece. Also in keeping with his pattern, he did not stay long. Eighteen months in Corinth was enough time to impress upon the converts that the Lordship of Christ was to be lived out in work, witness, and daily associations, but it was not enough time to answer their questions. In the absence of clear guidelines, answers were created by various members with a mind to imposing them upon the others. Confusion, competition, and power plays fragmented their assemblies. Paul was finally located in a distant city; Chloe sent trusted servants to lay the situation before him; Stephanus and other leaders had gone to Paul for advice and consultation; a letter was written from the church to Paul containing a list of troubling questions about what it meant to be the church of Jesus Christ in Corinth. That letter is lost, but its contents are known from Paul's answer. In I Cor. 7:1, he begins, "Now concerning the things about which you wrote," and one by one he responds to their questions with a word of the Lord, or lacking that, with his own best judgment. If my spouse is not a Christian, they asked, should we stay together? May widows remarry? Since Jesus and Paul were single, is being married less spiritual? Are we to dissociate ourselves totally from old friends? Are women free to take the lead in worship? Is each one to do his or her own thing in our meetings? How do our common meals differ from those we once had at pagan temples? And while you are at it, Paul, explain the resurrection of the body.

67

Within that letter was a question about the practice of eating meat dedicated to pagan idols. Such meat was served in services of worship to those idols but also was available for purchase in the market. Prior to conversion, the Corinthians had accepted it as normal: meaningful to some, a matter of indifference to others, as is usually the case among practitioners of religion. This particular question seems simple enough, calling for, at most, an answer of three sentences. Christians know idols are the creations of human minds and hands. Therefore, meat ritually slaughtered and dedicated before these idols is totally unaffected and can be consumed with no questions. However, if a brother or sister fresh from baptism is still bothered by such practices of so recent a past, abstain in the presence of these persons. After all, God himself tempers the wind to the shorn lamb. Good answer. Next question? Not yet. This situation in the church at Corinth is much more problematic. After all, such answers as have been suggested they already have. They know these things. In fact, in asking the question they have made sure that Paul knows that they know the right answer. "There is only one God," they say. Right! "Idols are nothing," they say. Right! "We all know this," they say. Right! Then what is the problem in a church that knows the answers to its own questions? Whatever it was, Paul regarded it as of major proportions, important enough for him to bring from his arsenal the heaviest weapon. Here it is: "For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." This confession of faith is called an "omnipotence formula," a statement affirming God as creator and end of all things and Christ as the mediator and means of life for the world and for ourselves. Paul used this grand, all-embracing expression of trust in God on at least two other occasions. The church in Colossae, strongly influenced by a world-denying, super-spiritualism with the motto "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch" received a letter from Paul. In that letter he used a form of this omnipotence formula: God created and sustains the universe through Jesus Christ and through Jesus Christ everything visible and invisible, physical or spiritual will be reconciled. And the church at Rome, experiencing Jew-Gentile tensions and perhaps some anti-Semitism, apparently had decided that now Jews are out and Gentiles are in. To that situation Paul wrote, and included the omnipotence formula: There is one God and Father of us all and in the final triumph of his love, all shall be embraced. From him, through him, to him are all things. But why here? A congregation quarrels over its menu and Paul reaches for his biggest answer. I would have suggested "Let your conscience be your guide" in order to save this formula for addressing the really big problems,

68

Occasion- Text-Sermon Interpretation

such as, What shall be the final destiny of the human race? Now there is a question worthy of the omnipotence formula. But Paul is the wiser pastor. He knows that congregational problems are big problems. If the lives and relationships of a body of believers are seriously affected, how can there be any bigger problems? It may not seem so to some of us, especially when away from home, experiencing the church in a larger manifestation, wrestling with issues that touch the lives of thousands. But suppose, upon returning home, the Sunday school superintendent calls you to say the lead teacher in the Junior High Department quit because an assistant teacher introduced different curriculum material written by her uncle in Phoenix. What would you do? Just sit quiet, hoping it will pass over? Decide the problem is too small to be worth the hassle? Soothe ruffled feathers so no one will quit? Why not "Let your conscience be your guide?" After all, the omnipotence formula must be saved for the big issues. Paul was of the opposite mind. If the problem seems petty, he says, then let that pettiness be the occasion for allowing the congregation to see and to experience the size and significance of our confession: One God, from whom and to whom everything; one Lord Jesus Christ through whom and by whom we have our common life. Paul shared his deepest, richest, fullest and grandest insights with small huddles of quarreling people. He did not serve them quips and quotes while saving his big stuff for a major address in Athens. Whatever the complaints those churches had about Paul's ministry, one thing they could be sure of: When he was present they were not theologically undernourished, they were not served a thin diet of expedients devoid of the immensity of God's grace. If they listened, their understanding of church and the Lordship of Christ has size. But it is not always and everywhere so. Many congregations are suffering. Some feel put down, being called upon to discuss and to decide on matters of magnitude and complexity for which they are in no way prepared. No omnipotence formulas have been passed through their minds and imaginations, no lessons shared or sermons preached that provide the grand context into which problems may be set. In the course of time, these souls and their appetites shrink to fit the food supply. Then when the big issue comes by, it is looked upon as foreign, certainly not a matter for the local congregation. Let the regional office, or the national office deal with it. And then comes more put down, more stereotyping of recalcitrant congregations that feel they have no choice but to defend themselves while trying to handle the immediate problems that mean survival or extinction. In the meantime, none of them is lifted or encouraged by the omnipotence formula. These are scenes of hunger that never make the cover of Time or Newsweek. Some members, of course, refuse to starve. They forage for food in

69

whatever places are available: Bible study groups; prayer and share circles; self-awareness seminars; praise the Lord retreats, re-enforced with claims for one's space and with self-assertion. If, as a member of a congregation, I become convinced that the care and feeding of my spirit is entirely up to me; if I find the only action in town is a highly suspect "soul spa" offering weekly massages by well-meaning but poorly-informed leaders; and if the only book store in town providing Christian literature is laughed at by the thoughtful, including my cynical minister who, in the meantime, offers no alternative, what do you suggest I do? It is to me absolutely impossible for a church that is theologically and biblically undernourished, that has experienced repeatedly the putdown of being tossed problems without adequate resources or preparation, that has endured the spiritual violence of strange religious groups bombarding them with Scripture and smiles amid calls for allegiance and money; it is, I say, absolutely impossible for such a church even to hear, much less to obey, the calls to mission and ministry around the world. This is not a condition to justify criticism or judgment. It is a plea for renewed investment of time and care and resources so that the congregation can again have the health necessary to become a center for proclamation and service to the world. A congregation that is not continually nourished by its confession of faith, that is not daily called to think, act, and live the abundance of its trust in the grace and judgment of God the Creator; a congregation that is not experiencing and reflecting upon the life-giving presence of Jesus Christ, will turn to slogans as substitutes for the confession. In Paul's absence, some members of the Corinthian church captured the truth in catchy slogans. "There is only one God;" "Idols are nothing;" "We know the truth." When Paul heard it, he was drawn into the game for a moment and responded with one of his own: "Knowledge puffs up, love builds up." Then he caught himself. He realized how the conditions of that church were reflected in those slogans. Slogans capture some aspect of truth. But that is the problem: they capture and display rather than engage and share responsibility in the issues of our faith. Slogans are the coinage of those unable or unwilling to discuss or wrestle with the immensity of the gospel, those who desire to possess the truth in simplistic quips and quotes, thereby ending thought, stopping growth, and owning rather than being owned by the Word. Or, in Paul's terms, knowing rather than being known. Having been so long without the nourishment of the grand confession, this congregation is trapped in the slogan game, competing in the creating and marketing of answers that are clever, quotable, and, of course, final. Some months ago I was giving a lecture on Galatians to a seminary class. I had worked hard to move with honesty and clarity through Paul's discussion of

70

Occasion- Text-Sermon Interpretation

law and gospel. At stake were issues vital to me, and I assumed, vital to the class. Near the front sat a pleasant fellow with a large unopened Bible before him. When references to the text were made, he did not turn to them. He took not a single note. But he smiled contentedly throughout the lecture. At the close of class, he said to me rather triumphantly, "Prof, the whole thing in a nutshell is, 'If you hold him up, he won't let you down.' " I could think of nothing to say. What was there to say? Recently, a preacher of unusual insight dealt with the tough fragility of love. He struggled with the difficulty of helping without violating other human beings. He drew his breath in pain to share a particular story of one person's suffering and of that church's repeated but finally futile efforts to minister. Some of us in the sanctuary that day were left immobile in anguished silence. Following the benediction, a man near me cut through the heavy air with this certain word: "The way I see it, the Lord helps those who help themselves." How nice to sit above the world and quote the truth. There is no way a conversation can begin. Truth is captured, reduced, packaged, and pronounced; case closed. How demonic slogans, catch phrases, code jargon can be! Exclusive, proud, final. Can you top this? No open sharing; no vulnerability; no risk; no arms or legs or heart of faith. Gotcha! Answers, always answers, short, simple answers, painless answers without Gethsemane, without wrestling all night with the will of God. I do not offer criticism, only a lament, because I am a part of the church of which I speak. Slogans are the undernourished church's substitute for the gospel. But it is not so where the omnipotence formula is confessed. Paul remembered that and so quickly withdrew from agreeing or disagreeing with the slogans. He paused and said, "As to your quotes and quips, whatever. But let me remind you of the confession made when you were baptised: . . . for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." The popular logic must be broken: that petty questions get petty answers; small problems get small solutions. No; our response to all that is small or petty or trivial is the re-affirming of baptismal vows, re-claiming and proclaiming the immensity of the gospel, stretching minds and hands and hearts to say again with awe and wonder the grand confession. Just now, our need is not answers, not even the right answers. What we need now is faith with some SIZE.

71