Postmodern Preaching
John Caputo draws a distinction between nihilistic and prophetic postmodernism. The latter is concerned for the individual and is positive in its approach to her. It is not necessarily optimistic, but it presents a positive mandate. (I think this is can become a form of the moral argument for God's existence and is the reason religion has made an appearance in some forms of postmodern thought...and is why people like Caputo, Jamie Smith, and John Milbank are read with gratitude by Christians.) Anyway, I have been thinking about deconstruction in preaching, or postmodern preaching.
Postmodern preaching is concerned with presenting the truth of the gospel in a way that gives the majority of responsive space over to the Spirit. The preacher does not describe correct/dogmatic responses to the sermon (except, perhaps, generalities like repentance). S/he leaves the sermon, the word, with the listener, which is an act of entrusting the word to the Spirit. (And, of course, it is the Spirit of the Lord who brings change to be like the Lord.) The preacher leaves the sermon with the people, self-conscious of her/his own bondage to this spoken word, as well. In this way, the preacher has deconstructed his/herself: S/he is not the one to follow, though s/he was the one anointed of God to speak.
I think the error of nihilistic postmodernism is to say there is either no truth to speak or no speaker to speak it.
Postmodern preaching is concerned with presenting the truth of the gospel in a way that gives the majority of responsive space over to the Spirit. The preacher does not describe correct/dogmatic responses to the sermon (except, perhaps, generalities like repentance). S/he leaves the sermon, the word, with the listener, which is an act of entrusting the word to the Spirit. (And, of course, it is the Spirit of the Lord who brings change to be like the Lord.) The preacher leaves the sermon with the people, self-conscious of her/his own bondage to this spoken word, as well. In this way, the preacher has deconstructed his/herself: S/he is not the one to follow, though s/he was the one anointed of God to speak.
I think the error of nihilistic postmodernism is to say there is either no truth to speak or no speaker to speak it.
posted by Aaron Perry at
11:28 AM
3 Comments:
If you are right, AP, postmodernity shows its "creativity" by ripping of John Calvin's understanding of the real presence of Christ in the proclaimed Word.
Ha!
Crusty
I am sure those who are in the know (i.e., not myself) would be more than glad to lean on Calvin. Calvin, of course, appreciates mystery in God, unlike the hyperrational God of modernity... So, Calvin is ok as far as that goes.
I'm not good at commenting on postmodernism b/c I've never cared to read about it. The only time I was forced to was at BBC and I thought it was the most pointless discussion I've ever read and/or participated in. It's not that I think the discussion is dumb, I guess I just have no interest, for better or worse, in using the buzz words. I am sure I have a lot of 'postmodernism' discussion without realizing it b/c I'm coming at it from the lay level.
All that to say, the terminology and distinctions in your post aren't as comfortable in my mind as they should be for me to make a worthwhile comment, but channeling it through my laymen's brain, here are my thoughts :)
I love being non-dogmatic about how congregations should respond to the word of God. I suppose that is b/c i exist in post-modernity. I don't think post-modernism is better or worse than the past. Altar calls and dogmatic directions for response made more sense in a society where people who only a step away (or 20 steps, depending how far back they sat) from the place of dying to self.
But now things have changed. Some of them don't believe in truth and, therefore, are put off by directions. Some of them reject authority and, therefore, are put off by directors. (as you said in your last line).
Nihilistic postmodernists need to be converted. Prophetic postmodernism seems like common sense to me, even though it is ignored by many. The preacher should always move out of the way, so to speak. Once removed, it's possible that the Spirit will provoke an altar call or a dogmatic response I suppose. But, more often than not, I think He will move without dogmatic directors or directions.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home