Im always surprised about how short confessional lutheran sermons in america seems to be. Im used to 30-40 min of preaching as a swedish lutheran (not national church).
LIke you said, part of the issue is that, in evangelicalism, a longer sermon often consists of padding with stories or unnecessary repetition. I've sat through sermons which are easily padded up to a third of their time in length with talk that really doesn't contribute to the content itself (stories, jokes, stating a point ad nauseum and beating a dead horse). While a sermon should not just be a five-minute devotional, it does need to be economic and efficient, getting into the text, extracting doctrine from the text, and giving proper application of law and gospel. Preachers do not need to be clever; they need to be faithful to the Word. We have too many who think that they're Jimmy Fallon or Jimmy Kimmel, or that they're delivering the next TEDx talk, or that their personal, emotionally-manipulative testimony (of themselves or somebody else) is better than proper exposition of the Scriptures. You also hit on the point that preachers (and sometimes congregants) confuse telling a testimony with actual preaching. The two are not the same, and I'm thinking about doing a set of theses on the dangers of personal testimonies. Also, you've probably already figured this out, but "church-hopping" is not a healthy thing for a Christian. We need to be rooted and stable, and it is unwise to keep uprooting every few years for sake of "novelty" (or any other unnecessary reason). The people I've seen do it often do it for sake of the thrill of novelty, or for getting social connections, or (worse yet) they are quick to exit a church over trivial reasons.
Pastor Chris Roseborough just gave the case for doing longer sermons at the Issues etc conference. Highly recommend getting the audio of it cuz it was so great
@@RealityConcurrence Absolutely! My favorite sermon ever was a Martin Chemnitz sermon on Matthew 22. Was phenomenal! But the way evangelicals do long sermons is awful, and their arguments for it are built upon faulty presuppositions.
@@ScholasticLutherans Absolutely! And his audience was confessional Lutherans who could have gotten complacent in the other direction, so he just had a different issue he was fighting. But absolutely, as long as the gospel is preached and law is given, then the sermon can be 15 minutes easy. It’s just when the congregation forgets that they’re there to worship Christ and hear his word that he advises to drive the point home for longer
Who says that sermons are ONLY to proclaim law & gospel? Just as the Scriptures are "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" so should the sermons (read some of Luther's sermons for a change) and you will find that this can't be done in less than 30 minutes if it's going to have some content at all
Off topic, But Catholic Answers just posted another video claiming that Luther removed books from the Bible. Would be great if you would respond to these claims and give clarification.
Lutherans have the same amount of books (73) we just only take doctrine from 66 of them because they are more obviously inspired and point to Christ far more than the apocrypha does.
![The Lutheran Emphasis on the Ordinary [Improviso #37]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CByPy9fOYGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![The Lutheran Emphasis on the Ordinary [Improviso #37]](/img/tr.png)
![Against Wayne Grudem: New Testament Prophets Cannot Err [Scriptum #32]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/oCBuuXP7alA/mqdefault.jpg)
![Marriage - A Golden Chain of Divine Aphorisms - Johann Gerhard - Ch 22 [Narratio #3.22]](/img/n.gif)
Im always surprised about how short confessional lutheran sermons in america seems to be. Im used to 30-40 min of preaching as a swedish lutheran (not national church).
LIke you said, part of the issue is that, in evangelicalism, a longer sermon often consists of padding with stories or unnecessary repetition. I've sat through sermons which are easily padded up to a third of their time in length with talk that really doesn't contribute to the content itself (stories, jokes, stating a point ad nauseum and beating a dead horse). While a sermon should not just be a five-minute devotional, it does need to be economic and efficient, getting into the text, extracting doctrine from the text, and giving proper application of law and gospel. Preachers do not need to be clever; they need to be faithful to the Word. We have too many who think that they're Jimmy Fallon or Jimmy Kimmel, or that they're delivering the next TEDx talk, or that their personal, emotionally-manipulative testimony (of themselves or somebody else) is better than proper exposition of the Scriptures.
You also hit on the point that preachers (and sometimes congregants) confuse telling a testimony with actual preaching. The two are not the same, and I'm thinking about doing a set of theses on the dangers of personal testimonies.
Also, you've probably already figured this out, but "church-hopping" is not a healthy thing for a Christian. We need to be rooted and stable, and it is unwise to keep uprooting every few years for sake of "novelty" (or any other unnecessary reason). The people I've seen do it often do it for sake of the thrill of novelty, or for getting social connections, or (worse yet) they are quick to exit a church over trivial reasons.
Amen
Great video! I would say there does seem to be the opposite problem with some, personally I think 20-30 minutes is a good average length.
Agreed. Get to the point of the text, exegete the point (doctrine, law, gospel), and be done.
interestingly (or perhaps ironically) this video was longer than what good sermon should be. 15min
@@HenryLeslieGraham ha!
Pastor Chris Roseborough just gave the case for doing longer sermons at the Issues etc conference. Highly recommend getting the audio of it cuz it was so great
@@RealityConcurrence Absolutely! My favorite sermon ever was a Martin Chemnitz sermon on Matthew 22. Was phenomenal! But the way evangelicals do long sermons is awful, and their arguments for it are built upon faulty presuppositions.
@@ScholasticLutherans Absolutely! And his audience was confessional Lutherans who could have gotten complacent in the other direction, so he just had a different issue he was fighting. But absolutely, as long as the gospel is preached and law is given, then the sermon can be 15 minutes easy. It’s just when the congregation forgets that they’re there to worship Christ and hear his word that he advises to drive the point home for longer
The chasm between the average person’s understanding of the divine service and the actual purpose of the divine service is huge.
Who says that sermons are ONLY to proclaim law & gospel?
Just as the Scriptures are "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" so should the sermons (read some of Luther's sermons for a change) and you will find that this can't be done in less than 30 minutes if it's going to have some content at all
Off topic,
But Catholic Answers just posted another video claiming that Luther removed books from the Bible. Would be great if you would respond to these claims and give clarification.
Lutherans have the same amount of books (73) we just only take doctrine from 66 of them because they are more obviously inspired and point to Christ far more than the apocrypha does.
Based
So, basically, "The ability to speak does not make you intelligent. "