Printer-Friendly Version  

Dr. Dale Keller, Associate Professor, Taylor University

 Abstract: Oftentimes in homiletic endeavors, techniques of the message construction and delivery take precedence. While not denying that importance, this paper considers another aspect by probing the relationship of preacher to God. The author contends the God-human relationship must take precedence.

Ever since reading some of Marshall McLuhan's work in graduate school, I have been hooked. What was as fascinating to me as his conceptual insights was the diversity of understanding by various others when expanding/explaining those same ideas in their own terms. It is not uncommon to find expositors, while focusing on the same phrase, contending McLuhan was proposing concepts that were vastly different and often in opposition. The phrase "the medium is the message," or the later version, "the medium is the massage" is one of those terms that has a diversity of explanation. Since the phrase is incorporated in my title, it would be a wise idea to expound what I mean in order to help my readers better understand my thoughts. 

 In his book Understanding Media (1964) McLuhan explained that media impact their environment in a manner that changes the context, and thereby the people in that context. Expanding on this idea in a later article in Canadian Architect (1966) he went on to say that a new medium did not just add itself to what already existed; it transformed it into something different. His biographer, Philip Marchand (1989) related McLuhan felt this occurred "because the medium was not just the physical object but all of its appurtenances and the vortex of energy it created." (p. 167) 

Supporting this interaction of medium and meaning, Brummett and Duncan (1992) argued that the role of the medium in communication needs to be included in the process of analysis.  Citing McLuhan (1964) they suggest that the medium would be better understood as "mediation," the process of extension. 

We have known since the Sophists that speakers, texts, audiences, and contexts interact to manage distribution. . .We argue in this paper that media are discursive constructions fully as much as are "messages," "texts," or even human subjects involved in communicating (Brummet & Duncan, 1992, p. 229-230).

Hence, when people say they are watching television, the medium is more than just the electronic box that sends pictures and sound.   

Rhetorician Kenneth Burke wrote "every way of seeing is also a way of not seeing." (1965, p. 49). Taking a slightly different angle and using a term he created, Burke related that a medium often acts as a "terministic screen," somewhat like blinders on a horse. For example, most people "watch" television primarily for entertainment. Through continual exposure to television in this manner, the viewer becomes subconsciously trained in the "proper" or "natural" method of interacting with television, that it "should" entertain. If such repetitive, subconscious "training" is not realized and challenged, the viewer may make decisions about information retained from a medium (say television) in a much different manner than the same information gleaned from a newspaper, magazine, or book. Or, when comparing television programs, one with more and one with less of the entertainment element, the latter will usually be judged as inferior.  The entertainment value often outweighs and/or overwhelms a critical analysis of the message alone (Keller, 1996).  

More could be considered in this discussion of the medium and message, but for our purposes it is hoped enough has been written to establish a connection between the two. The title of this conference is Preaching to Listeners: Communicating with Contemporary Audiences. How is this dynamic at work when a preacher delivers a sermon? In other words, how does the preacher as medium impact the sermon message? We consider these questions below, attempting to expand the consideration to include not just the preacher-listener dynamic, but also the preacher-God dynamic. 

THE PREACHER AND THE MESSAGE 

I bring to my love of homiletics a strong foundation of communication theory. A major aspect of this perspective is a conviction that sermons are interactive, involving both preacher and congregation. I agree with L. Carrell (2000, p. 166), "Preaching is communicative. Not sender to receiver, but interactive, simultaneous, co-creation of meaning. (Italics mine.) Not a monologue but a dialogue." Focusing mainly on areas such as hermeneutics, outline structure, and delivery techniques (though all are important to consider), is a one-sided, monologic approach. We need to reconsider the process that is taking place, remembering the crucial part of the listener in the creation of meaning. 

Accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior and be saved from your sins," or something like that, has meaning and power and relevance only if the congregation has some notion what, humanly speaking, sin is, or being saved is, or who Jesus is, or what accepting him involves. If preachers make no attempt to flesh out these words in terms of everyday human experience (maybe even their own) but simply repeat with variations the same old formulas week after week, then the congregation might just as well spend Sunday morning at home with the funnies." (Buechner, 1992, p. 186) 

In the words of a commonly-quoted proverb, it is not so much what is said that is communicated as how it is interpreted. Whenever symbols are shared in human communication, interpretation is a major part of the sense-making process of communication. As we attempt to concretize our abstract thoughts through the use of word-symbols, we use a medium that is less than perfect. The same words have slightly different meanings to those who use them. The word "dog" brings to your mind different feelings, experiences and meanings than it does to mine (especially if you did not deliver newspapers in your younger days as I did!) Preachers concerned with exemplifying competent communication will take the time and effort to consider such things as the construction of their main ideas as well as the development and support of an argument from the listener's perspective. But we must not stop there. 

THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF IDENTIFICATION 

Kenneth Burke, the influential 20^th century American rhetorician, contended that identification is the most important aspect of persuasion, writing "you persuade a man only insofar as you can talk his language by speech, gesture, tonality, order, image, attitude, idea, identifying your ways with his" (Burke, 1969, p. 55). Although Burke is concerned with person-to-person communi-cation, this idea relates to God-to-human interaction as well. 

Anthropologists understand that what a human creates reveals much about the creator. There are numerous publications in print or electronic media that relate how the use of scientific study and logic allows the modern researcher to gaze into the thoughts, order and ideas of past cultures, based on the analysis of artifacts. Add computer simulation, and you get a sense of how things appeared and functioned as well. This same investigative method is evident in scripture, relating to the God-human relationship. Consider that the psalmist and later Paul both relate creation itself gives evidence of God�s existence (Psalm 19:1-4 and Romans 1:18-20). Both are suggesting that much like the anthropologist gleaning insight by analyzing artifacts, so humanity can glean insights through analysis of their physical worlds because the created speaks of the Creator.  

With this in mind, we narrow our focus to scrutinize the role of the preacher and sermon during a worship service. Aristotelian rhetoric teaches that whenever a rhetor begins speaking, audience members are individually developing their sense of the speaker's ethos, especially if they have not heard this person speak previously. Questions arise such as how believable is this person? Does s/he seem trustworthy? What kinds of grounds do they give for the claims that are made? Such realization helps us better understand the linkage between speaker and message. If the speaker is a known entity, as in the case of most Sunday morning services, all the past interactions, perceptions, conceptions, even deceptions are recalled within listeners in ethos formation. Whether or not such conclusions are valid is not the point. Rather, the wise communicator knows such a dynamic exists, using that knowledge in design and delivery. 

The diagrams below is included to help visualize the concurrent dynamic that is at work.  (Diagrams not included)

As the preacher is a reflection (gray arrow) of the Creator, so the sermon is a reflection (gray arrow) of the sermonizer. Notice the dual roles of the preacher.

The goal is to get the Creator's message to the listeners through the dual media of preacher and the sermon created. The preacher plays two roles at once, depending on perspective. When considering the preaching event as an act of human communication, the important thing to realize is that the preacher acts as a co-communicator. However when considering the interaction from a theological perspective, the preacher is the very medium through which the words of God are transmitted.

Not only do sermons reflect their human creators, we need also to remember that the humans who create them are reflections of their divine Creator as well. I argue that the relationship between preacher and God must be the primary importance. If the channel between preacher and God is unused or cluttered, it will have profound impact on the preacher as the medium through which the words of God are spoken. This connection also is crucial in the role of the Holy Spirit as one given to us as a Helper in both sermon construction and delivery on the preacher's part , and to overcome misinterpretation on the listener�s part as meaning is co-created. 

Identification between preacher and God

Last spring, our campus hosted Ravi Zacharius as speaker for a multi-university conference on student leadership. During one of his sessions, he related to how some personal friends invited an unbelieving neighbor who was a physician to one of his past events. The next morning, while driving to the airport, the friends told him the doctor found his talk "very compelling, very persuasive." After a slight pause she added, "I wonder what he is like in his private life." Zacharias concluded that such questions are the more difficult for Christians, preachers or not, to consider (Zacharias  2002). 

Communication theory reminds us of a need for congruence between nonverbal and verbal cues in the effort to avoid miscommunication. When there is a mixed message, as when a speaker's words tell of an event of great excitement and his/her corresponding nonverbals have all the expression contained in a photograph of a dead fish, the result is dissonance in the perceivers, something they want to alleviate. A common strategy for this is reconsideration the full message package; both the words used and the corresponding nonverbals. And, as the nonverbal aspect of the message package is richer in the amount of insight that can be gleaned (i.e. from such areas as gestures, facial expressions, voice tone, volume leve,), they are usually given more credence by the interpreters. 

Relating to preachers and their created messages, this dynamic clarifies a search for congruence by interpreters between the words said and the life lived (see Burgoon, 1993, and Ekman, 1993). Like it or not in our culture, the preacher is the primary model to which the listener looks when attempting to validate the words spoken. When a listener senses a difference what is spoken and how a life is actually lived, they are given (from their perspective) a way out, a "reason" not to feel accountable to apply what they heard. Hence the crucial role that the preacher's overall life plays in the sermon process. (Again, fairness is not the issue here, in the words of Walter Cronkhite, "that's the way it is.") The preacher is, in a large way, the message. 

The regeneration and renewal that are foundational in Christianity are inside jobs. Scripture teaches that the external is a by-product of the internal (Matthew 6:19-34, I Timothy 4:8). I believe it was A.W. Tozer who taught that in order to do right, we first have to be right, and in order to be right, we first have to think right. If we hope to communicate effectively with contemporary audiences, we first need to make our devotional life a priority, allowing for changes in our thought and essence. And, such matters must be a priority. If preachers are the media through which the truth of God is communicated, rhetorical technique and communication expertise, though important, are not enough. As it is out of our inner beings that our words will flow, the need for diligent scrutiny of the status, health and growth of the inner self is highlighted. Jesus stressed the primacy of the internal in His words of warning to the Pharisees ("first clean the inside of the cup--so that the outside of it may become clean also." Matthew 23:23-28, NASB), words with direct relation to sermon construction and delivery. 

I grew up about 60 direct miles from the Grand Canyon. I remember the first time I took my soon-to-be-wife to the North Rim. When we arrived, even though I had been there numerous times in the past, we both were stunned, sitting silently in wonder at that awe-ful place. It trumpeted the name of God, it spoke to both of us of His majesty. On a later trip back to Arizona, I was walking through an airport terminal and overheard a conversation between a new arrival from the eastern United States and his western host. The new arrival elatedly previewed all the things he wanted to do during his visit, primary among which was visit the Grand Canyon. When his western host heard this, he looked at his guest, puzzled by his obvious excitement. "It's just a big bunch of rocks." Same place, different interpretations. It was what was inside that made the difference. Since my wife and I know the Creator of the Grand Canyon, allowing and encouraging Him to reshape and renew us from within, we could see more than just a nice rock arrangement in His handiwork. 

Bringing the idea closer to our discussion, there's a parallel to a person singing a solo in a worship service. One person, a nominal Christian, may be trained in music, have a professional vocal delivery and faultless breathing. Another person, though gifted with natural musical basics, may not be as polished as an artist. However, if the latter is communicating primarily out of her/his love and knowledge of God, that person will have a greater impact on a congregation gathered for worship, even if their technique might be unprofessional. Likewise, unless the preacher spends time with God, allowing His essence to flow through and change from within, s/he may be a good performer, the prophetic impact the message is inhibited. The human medium influences the message (sermon), especially as, in our considerations, that medium itself is a creation of the Message (God).  

Identification: a two-way street 

The incarnation is the essential act of identification. While on earth, consider how Jesus identified with His listeners. He used examples, questions, and stories from common life when communicating concepts of the God's Kingdom. These are good examples for all of us to consider. As we do so, we must remember a key difference between us and our example. Unlike Jesus, we do not know intimately about God's Kingdom, we have not lived in eternity with the Father. Beyond that, we have the problem of sin, in all its manifestations, to deal with. Hence the importance of first establishing and maintaining the discipline of study, meditation and prayer that enhances our own remaking in the divine image. As a result of proper alignment at this more crucial level, people are best prepared to speak with unction to specific audiences, at specific times, specific messages to enhance Kingdom understanding. 

As we consider the pragmatic aspects of communicating with contemporary audiences, we need to be mindful that there is more to communication than technique. Yes, we need to consider the language, stories, examples and questions that we use in our sermons. The preacher should have awareness of the culture at large and the subculture within the church. It is a good idea to gather data about the specific audience, or audiences in general, allowing a more customized sermon.

It would be beneficial for both preacher and congregation to systematically plan for times of gathering feedback from our audiences allowing for better understand the level and effectiveness  of the preacher's communication. (Sidebar: In the arena of better understanding our listeners, I highly recommend a book mentioned earlier: The great American sermon survey: The inside scoop on what preachers and their listeners think about sermons (Carrell, 2000.) Using a nationwide survey, it reports on a variety of areas relevant to people desirous of being the best communicators they can when preaching.)  

One final, but important exhortation: don't limit the potential offered through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. When combined with prayer, His guidance, instruction and creative power enhance both message creation and message interpretation. His direction and conviction are crucial to the homiletic endeavor (John 14:26, 16:7-8, 13-14). Ask for such influence, and expect it to come. As we learn to discern between His voice and others, we have a greater opportunity to tap the divine resources made available to help take the static out of our imperfect channels (I John 2:27). More could (should?) be written here, perhaps in a follow-up study. 

Our western cultures laud pragmatism. We want to know what works. We search for the newest insight or technique that we can apply to help us reach our ends. Here's my bottom line. Don't forget that while it is important to know (oida) communication theory and rhetorical technique, it is more important that the preacher knows (epiginvskv) the Great Communicator and Creator. Selah

 

REFERENCES

Brummett, B., & Duncan, M. C. (1992).  Toward a discursive ontology of media.  Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 9(3), 229-249. 

Buechner, F. (1992). Listening to your life: Daily meditations with Frederick Buechner. San Francisco: Harper-Collins. 

Burgoon, J. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12, 30-48. 

Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. (2^nd). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. 

___. (1984). Permanence and change: An anatomy of purpose, (4^th). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. 

Buttrick, D. (1993). Preaching to the faith in America. In L.I. Sweet (Ed.), Communication and change in American religious history (pp.302-319). Grand Rapids, MI:  Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 

Carrell, L. (2000). The great American sermon survey: The inside scoop on what preachers and their listeners think about sermons. Wheaton, IL: Mainstay Church Resources. 

Ekman, P. (1993). Facial expression of emotion. American Psychologist, 48, 384-392. 

Keller, D. (1996) A rhetorician ponders technology, or why Kenneth Burke never owned a 'personal' computer." Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(1). 

Marchand, P. (1989). Marshall McLuhan: The medium and the messenger. New York: Ticknor & Fields. 

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: McGraw-Hill. 

____. (1966). The invisible environment. Canadian Architech, May, 71-74. 

Sire, J. (1995). On being a fool for Christ and an idiot for nobody: Logocentricity and postmodernity. In Phillips, T. & Okholm, D., Eds., Christian apologetics in the postmodern world (pp. 101-127). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. 

Zacharias, R. (Speaker). (2002). Apologetics in a postmodern world. (Cassette recording 04-12-02). Upland, IN: Taylor University.