will be posted this Lent; I prepared CPH's series Sacred Head, Now Wounded, and so the homilies belong to them. My apologies for those who usually read them here.
11 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I'm enjoying preaching them, as we purchased the series.
Make sure you get permission from CPH to preach them. With the LCMS's track record, can you just imagine being sued for preaching your own sermons? We have seen equally bizarre "issues" in this Alice in Wonderland Synod(tm). ;-)
Am I wrong for thinking that pastors really ought to preach their own sermons?
Buying someone else's and preaching them seems like cheating, like buying a term paper on the internet and handing it in to a professor. Am I just missing something here?
Actually, I enjoy Martin Franzmann's collection of sermons "Ha Ha Among the Trumpets" - outstanding work, not only for homiletical instruction but also good devotional reading.
Luther's postils are also wonderful for preachers to read and study, as are the vast collection of patristic sermons.
And, like Fridfeldt in "Hammer of God" there might be an occasional situation where circumstances make it impossible to write a sermon, and preaching a published sermon is better than no sermon.
But this strikes me as different. In this case, a pastor can plan on not writing sermons for his midweek Lenten services, opting instead to buy someone else's and just read them.
I'm sure these are outstanding sermons, but preaching isn't a one-size-fits-all matter. Each preacher knows his own flock, and it is his responsibility to preach to them - not simply download something off the internet or buy a "turn-key Lent kit" from CPH.
I had a pastor who used to buy his sermons from Creative Communications. Nobody in the congregation knew it - except the DCE, who discovered it by accident. He was appalled. He would literally hold the "script" in his hand while the pastor would preach these sermons as though they were his own. I thought this was dishonest and just plain lazy.
I think if pastors are using your sermons for guidance as to how to approach a text, or for his own devotional use, or for help in rhetoric etc. that's one thing. But unless I'm mistaken, these sermons are being marketed and sold as a "kit" that can be preached right "out of the box."
It even smacks of plagiarism - unless the buyers make it clear to their flocks that these sermons are in a sense, "guest preaching" rather than their own work.
I think we would all be appalled if we found out one of our colleagues were downloading his sermons every week instead of doing the hard work that preaching requires. Lent is hard work. But it's good for us pastors to spend the extra time and effort wrestling with the text instead of just buying a bunch of sermons.
And then there is the issue that sticks in my craw that this is turning a means of grace (as we believe preaching is) into a commodity. Again, buying a set of house postils for study and reference is one thing, but the intent here is for pastors to essentially glom off of your work. I don't see this as much different than downloading a term paper and turning it in to the professor.
Should CPH be involved in buying and selling what is in a very real sense an "indulgence" - meaning a means of absolution?
Maybe I'm all wet here (and please correct me if I am). But something just "isn't right in the state of Denver" as the daughter on Married With Children once said. Does CPH have a history of this? How long has CPH been selling kits of sermons for pastors to buy and preach? Something tells me Walther would be telling preachers to do their own work.
"Canned" sermons have been around quite awhile, I would guess. :) ["One's own "file copies" are another way of doing it, if they are re worked to remove dated material.]
Hearing them once is not so bad. Going to a.m and afternoon services and being treated to the same sermon, word for word, made me think some "coordination" could have been done. ;)
Helen
I can think of worse things than listening to one of Pr. Weedon's sermons! :)
For the first time ever (I think), I'm in disagreement with you. Don't like this feeling. :)
While I understand your concerns, I don't think using/preaching another faithful pastor's sermon is wrong in any way, shape, or form. If we truly believe what we say we believe, we're talking about the proclaimed Word of God here, not the intellectual property of a man. Can a sermon really be compared to a term paper?
And, while it is true that each pastor is called to a certain parish and to apply the Word of God to the particular circumstances of that parish, the Gospel is one-size-fits-all. I would argue that a good sermon (such is every single one I've ever read by you), which properly divides and applies Law and Gospel can be preached in any parish any Sunday. I think the attempt to over-personalize things to fit a specific context can sometimes even get in the way of the Word. I know I've been guilty of this myself from time to time.
Where I would agree wholeheartedly with you is in the case of the pastor who makes a habit out of preaching someone else's sermons and never does the work himself. That would surely be appalling. But, using/preaching a Lenten series, or borrowing thoughts and ideas from other pastors you know to be faithul from time to time, is not the same thing.
I'll also say this: A lot of times, using/preaching another pastor's sermon has nothing at all to do with laziness. I can think of a few times when I spent hours upon hours preparing a sermon and then opted to preach a sermon written by someone else, adjusting it here and there, because I knew God's people would benefit more in doing so.
I'm not the least bit embarrassed to admit that the parishioners I serve have had their ears graced from hearing a homily or two from Prs. Beane, Weedon, Petersen, and others. And, I couldn't be more pleased that they'll be hearing the homilies by Pr. Weedon in the "Sacred Head, Now Wounded" series this Lent. Am I getting out of a little work by using the series? Yeah, a little. I'll still work with each homily, making minor adjustments and adding some things to fit my preaching style and apply to our particular circumstances, but not as much work as I'd do if starting from scratch. But, so what, God's people will be served well!
My concern in this matter lie on the opposite side of yours. When pastors begin to treat their sermons as copyrighted, intellectual property, I think they're forgetting what sermons are. I've had a few brothers ask me about using my sermons and my response has always been, "Feel free!" If someone else can benefit from the work I've done in preparing a sermon, amen!
But, like I said, I don't like disagreeing with you, and the fact that I do in this case makes me wonder if I'm not the one who's all wet!
In Christ, Tom
P.S. Beautiful new chasuble, by the way! Mrs. Hollywood rocks! :)
I agree with a good part of what you're saying. I'm not approaching this as an "intellectual property" issue - but ironically, that's what CPH has done. William isn't even allowed to post his own sermons on his own blog precisely because CPH "owns" these sermons as *copyrighted intellectual property!*
These sermons have now become commodities to be leased or licensed.
Lordy!
I believe the called pastor to a congregation is in a better position to determine what balance of law and gospel a particular parish needs at a particular time.
I'm afraid generic pastoral care, such as general sermons not written for a particular time and place, are a little like our health care system. The concept of the "family doctor" has largely been lost in favor of a market-driven conglomerate and overly bureaucratic model in which you draw a doctor at random based on the whims of one's insurance company. After all, a doctor is a doctor. In fact, how far are we away from having a computer program actually provide healthcare for us?
A doctor at a clinic may be able to crunch your symptoms and correctly prescribe a treatment, but the old fashioned family doctor "knows" his patients, and provides individual health care that goes beyond a mechanical diagnosis-treatment model. A sermon may, in fact, be a lousy technical example of a textbook law-gospel sermon, and yet, be exactly what the congregation needs to hear.
I think a pastor gets to know his flock - and his preaching, teaching, and pastoral care are suited to his flock. And the fact that you do tailor any sermons that you've picked up somewhere else is a good thing - but knowing how busy the life of the pastor is, there will certainly be situations where pastors will basically preach these sermons sight-unseen with no modification.
I'm concerned that buying sermons for Lent will become a habit so that the pastor can simply avoid extra work year in and year out. The "extra work" benefits both pastor and flock, and I think the idea of making Lent *easier* flies in the face of what Lent is all about - kind of like our tendency in New Orleans to see Lent as a time to gorge on seafood. Well, somebody has to make the "sacrifice." ;-)
Thanks for the response. I feel a lot better now, cause I can't find any disagreement with your latest post. Pshew! :)
Your healthcare analogy is quite well stated and offers good food for thought. And, your reminder of what Lent is all about is much appreciated, your concern being well justified in my book.
The only thing I would add to our conversation is that I think it is a tremendous blessing to be able to consult the sermons of faithful pastors, like you, as I go about my own sermon preparation. This was especially helpful to me when I switched to the one-year lectionary a few years back. To be able to see how pastors I know and trust have approached the texts has been a valuable resource of which I am most thankful. Far from serving to enhance my own desire to be lazy, consulting these sermons has proven, at least for me, to be further catechesis in homiletics which I have sorely needed. And, I say that having earned "A"s in every hom class I took at the sem. And, in saying that, I'm not denigrating the fine instruction I received from my hom professors in any way, shape, or form. I, personally, just needed more - still do and always will. And, I find that "more" in learning from my brothers (and from Luther and other fathers in the faith of yesteryear) how to be a better preacher. I hope all of that makes sense.
Nevertheless, your caution to not fall into the temptation of simply "mooching" off of the work of others is something we (or, at least, I) need to hear. And, certainly, there have been times when I've been guilty of doing that very thing, even though, for the most part, I would suspect that I probably spend more hours in sermon preparation than most, which is not a pat on my back, but a confession of my own weakness, in that I need to learn to become more efficient in this regard. I'm getting better, but it's a slow process for me. :)
But, enough rambling. Thanks again for the response.
11 comments:
I'm enjoying preaching them, as we purchased the series.
ditto what Randall said (but Weedon knew that.) It turned out last night's was incredibly timely for some of my hearers. (I wish it hadn't been.)
Dear William:
Make sure you get permission from CPH to preach them. With the LCMS's track record, can you just imagine being sued for preaching your own sermons? We have seen equally bizarre "issues" in this Alice in Wonderland Synod(tm). ;-)
Our circuit is doing a pulpit exchange and using the NPH series "Father, Forgive them". Also a very good series...
Former Vicar
Am I wrong for thinking that pastors really ought to preach their own sermons?
Buying someone else's and preaching them seems like cheating, like buying a term paper on the internet and handing it in to a professor. Am I just missing something here?
Reverend Dean,
I would think the history of Postilla in our Churches speak against the view you are espousing?
Dear William:
Actually, I enjoy Martin Franzmann's collection of sermons "Ha Ha Among the Trumpets" - outstanding work, not only for homiletical instruction but also good devotional reading.
Luther's postils are also wonderful for preachers to read and study, as are the vast collection of patristic sermons.
And, like Fridfeldt in "Hammer of God" there might be an occasional situation where circumstances make it impossible to write a sermon, and preaching a published sermon is better than no sermon.
But this strikes me as different. In this case, a pastor can plan on not writing sermons for his midweek Lenten services, opting instead to buy someone else's and just read them.
I'm sure these are outstanding sermons, but preaching isn't a one-size-fits-all matter. Each preacher knows his own flock, and it is his responsibility to preach to them - not simply download something off the internet or buy a "turn-key Lent kit" from CPH.
I had a pastor who used to buy his sermons from Creative Communications. Nobody in the congregation knew it - except the DCE, who discovered it by accident. He was appalled. He would literally hold the "script" in his hand while the pastor would preach these sermons as though they were his own. I thought this was dishonest and just plain lazy.
I think if pastors are using your sermons for guidance as to how to approach a text, or for his own devotional use, or for help in rhetoric etc. that's one thing. But unless I'm mistaken, these sermons are being marketed and sold as a "kit" that can be preached right "out of the box."
It even smacks of plagiarism - unless the buyers make it clear to their flocks that these sermons are in a sense, "guest preaching" rather than their own work.
I think we would all be appalled if we found out one of our colleagues were downloading his sermons every week instead of doing the hard work that preaching requires. Lent is hard work. But it's good for us pastors to spend the extra time and effort wrestling with the text instead of just buying a bunch of sermons.
And then there is the issue that sticks in my craw that this is turning a means of grace (as we believe preaching is) into a commodity. Again, buying a set of house postils for study and reference is one thing, but the intent here is for pastors to essentially glom off of your work. I don't see this as much different than downloading a term paper and turning it in to the professor.
Should CPH be involved in buying and selling what is in a very real sense an "indulgence" - meaning a means of absolution?
Maybe I'm all wet here (and please correct me if I am). But something just "isn't right in the state of Denver" as the daughter on Married With Children once said. Does CPH have a history of this? How long has CPH been selling kits of sermons for pastors to buy and preach? Something tells me Walther would be telling preachers to do their own work.
"Canned" sermons have been around quite awhile, I would guess. :)
["One's own "file copies" are another way of doing it, if they are re worked to remove dated material.]
Hearing them once is not so bad. Going to a.m and afternoon services and being treated to the same sermon, word for word, made me think some "coordination" could have been done. ;)
Helen
I can think of worse things than listening to one of Pr. Weedon's sermons! :)
Larry,
For the first time ever (I think), I'm in disagreement with you. Don't like this feeling. :)
While I understand your concerns, I don't think using/preaching another faithful pastor's sermon is wrong in any way, shape, or form. If we truly believe what we say we believe, we're talking about the proclaimed Word of God here, not the intellectual property of a man. Can a sermon really be compared to a term paper?
And, while it is true that each pastor is called to a certain parish and to apply the Word of God to the particular circumstances of that parish, the Gospel is one-size-fits-all. I would argue that a good sermon (such is every single one I've ever read by you), which properly divides and applies Law and Gospel can be preached in any parish any Sunday. I think the attempt to over-personalize things to fit a specific context can sometimes even get in the way of the Word. I know I've been guilty of this myself from time to time.
Where I would agree wholeheartedly with you is in the case of the pastor who makes a habit out of preaching someone else's sermons and never does the work himself. That would surely be appalling. But, using/preaching a Lenten series, or borrowing thoughts and ideas from other pastors you know to be faithul from time to time, is not the same thing.
I'll also say this: A lot of times, using/preaching another pastor's sermon has nothing at all to do with laziness. I can think of a few times when I spent hours upon hours preparing a sermon and then opted to preach a sermon written by someone else, adjusting it here and there, because I knew God's people would benefit more in doing so.
I'm not the least bit embarrassed to admit that the parishioners I serve have had their ears graced from hearing a homily or two from Prs. Beane, Weedon, Petersen, and others. And, I couldn't be more pleased that they'll be hearing the homilies by Pr. Weedon in the "Sacred Head, Now Wounded" series this Lent. Am I getting out of a little work by using the series? Yeah, a little. I'll still work with each homily, making minor adjustments and adding some things to fit my preaching style and apply to our particular circumstances, but not as much work as I'd do if starting from scratch. But, so what, God's people will be served well!
My concern in this matter lie on the opposite side of yours. When pastors begin to treat their sermons as copyrighted, intellectual property, I think they're forgetting what sermons are. I've had a few brothers ask me about using my sermons and my response has always been, "Feel free!" If someone else can benefit from the work I've done in preparing a sermon, amen!
But, like I said, I don't like disagreeing with you, and the fact that I do in this case makes me wonder if I'm not the one who's all wet!
In Christ,
Tom
P.S. Beautiful new chasuble, by the way! Mrs. Hollywood rocks! :)
Dear Tom:
I agree with a good part of what you're saying. I'm not approaching this as an "intellectual property" issue - but ironically, that's what CPH has done. William isn't even allowed to post his own sermons on his own blog precisely because CPH "owns" these sermons as *copyrighted intellectual property!*
These sermons have now become commodities to be leased or licensed.
Lordy!
I believe the called pastor to a congregation is in a better position to determine what balance of law and gospel a particular parish needs at a particular time.
I'm afraid generic pastoral care, such as general sermons not written for a particular time and place, are a little like our health care system. The concept of the "family doctor" has largely been lost in favor of a market-driven conglomerate and overly bureaucratic model in which you draw a doctor at random based on the whims of one's insurance company. After all, a doctor is a doctor. In fact, how far are we away from having a computer program actually provide healthcare for us?
A doctor at a clinic may be able to crunch your symptoms and correctly prescribe a treatment, but the old fashioned family doctor "knows" his patients, and provides individual health care that goes beyond a mechanical diagnosis-treatment model. A sermon may, in fact, be a lousy technical example of a textbook law-gospel sermon, and yet, be exactly what the congregation needs to hear.
I think a pastor gets to know his flock - and his preaching, teaching, and pastoral care are suited to his flock. And the fact that you do tailor any sermons that you've picked up somewhere else is a good thing - but knowing how busy the life of the pastor is, there will certainly be situations where pastors will basically preach these sermons sight-unseen with no modification.
I'm concerned that buying sermons for Lent will become a habit so that the pastor can simply avoid extra work year in and year out. The "extra work" benefits both pastor and flock, and I think the idea of making Lent *easier* flies in the face of what Lent is all about - kind of like our tendency in New Orleans to see Lent as a time to gorge on seafood. Well, somebody has to make the "sacrifice." ;-)
Larry,
Thanks for the response. I feel a lot better now, cause I can't find any disagreement with your latest post. Pshew! :)
Your healthcare analogy is quite well stated and offers good food for thought. And, your reminder of what Lent is all about is much appreciated, your concern being well justified in my book.
The only thing I would add to our conversation is that I think it is a tremendous blessing to be able to consult the sermons of faithful pastors, like you, as I go about my own sermon preparation. This was especially helpful to me when I switched to the one-year lectionary a few years back. To be able to see how pastors I know and trust have approached the texts has been a valuable resource of which I am most thankful. Far from serving to enhance my own desire to be lazy, consulting these sermons has proven, at least for me, to be further catechesis in homiletics which I have sorely needed. And, I say that having earned "A"s in every hom class I took at the sem. And, in saying that, I'm not denigrating the fine instruction I received from my hom professors in any way, shape, or form. I, personally, just needed more - still do and always will. And, I find that "more" in learning from my brothers (and from Luther and other fathers in the faith of yesteryear) how to be a better preacher. I hope all of that makes sense.
Nevertheless, your caution to not fall into the temptation of simply "mooching" off of the work of others is something we (or, at least, I) need to hear. And, certainly, there have been times when I've been guilty of doing that very thing, even though, for the most part, I would suspect that I probably spend more hours in sermon preparation than most, which is not a pat on my back, but a confession of my own weakness, in that I need to learn to become more efficient in this regard. I'm getting better, but it's a slow process for me. :)
But, enough rambling. Thanks again for the response.
PAX,
Tom
Post a Comment