Bible scholars and students! Since most contemporary preaching is primarily either therapeutic or exegetical, especially during Lent, we offer this little list for your exegetical homilies.

These are principle examples of why the Septuagint Old Testament is the ‘official’ Old Testament of the Orthodox Church (that and the fact that the Masoretic text didn’t even exist until 1,000 a.d.). Enjoy!

Of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which included the so-called ‘deuterocanonical’ books which Protestants, following Martin Luther, later removed. This is additional evidence that Jesus and the apostles viewed the Septuagint Old Testament as the Old Testament. Here are some examples:

Matt. 1:23 / Isaiah 7:14 – behold, a “virgin” shall conceive. Hebrew – behold, a “young woman” shall conceive.

Matt. 3:3; Mark 1:3; John 1:23 / Isaiah 40:3 – make “His paths straight.” Hebrew – make “level in the desert a highway.”

Matt. 9:13; 12:7 / Hosea 6:6 – I desire “mercy” and not sacrifice. Hebrew – I desire “goodness” and not sacrifice.

Matt. 12:21 / Isaiah 42:4 – in His name will the Gentiles hope (or trust). Hebrew – the isles shall wait for his law.

Matt. 13:15 / Isaiah 6:10 – heart grown dull; eyes have closed; to heal. Hebrew - heart is fat; ears are heavy; eyes are shut; be healed.

Matt. 15:9; Mark 7:7 / Isaiah 29:13 – teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Hebrew – a commandment of men (not doctrines).

Matt. 21:16 / Psalm 8:2 – out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has “perfect praise.” Hebrew – thou has “established strength.”

Mark 7:6-8 – Jesus quotes Isaiah 29:13 from the Septuagint – “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.”

Luke 3:5-6 / Isaiah 40:4-5 – crooked be made straight, rough ways smooth, shall see salvation. Hebrew – omits these phrases.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 61:1 – and recovering of sight to the blind. Hebrew – the opening of prison to them that are bound.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 58:6 – to set at liberty those that are oppressed (or bruised). Hebrew – to let the oppressed go free.

John 6:31 / Psalm 78:24 – He gave them “bread” out of heaven to eat. Hebrew – gave them “food” or “grain” from heaven.

John 12:38 / Isaiah 53:1 – who has believed our “report?” Hebrew – who has believed our “message?”

John 12:40 / Isaiah 6:10 – lest they should see with eyes…turn for me to heal them. Hebrew – shut their eyes…and be healed.

Acts 2:19 / Joel 2:30 – blood and fire and “vapor” of smoke. Hebrew – blood and fire and “pillars” or “columns” of smoke.

Acts 2:25-26 / Psalm 16:8 – I saw…tongue rejoiced…dwell in hope.. Hebrew – I have set…glory rejoiced…dwell in safety.

Acts 4:26 / Psalm 2:1 – the rulers “were gathered together.” Hebrew – rulers “take counsel together.”

Acts 7:14 / Gen. 46:27; Deut. 10:22 – Stephen says “seventy-five” souls went down to Egypt. Hebrew – “seventy” people went.

Acts 7:27-28 / Exodus 2:14 – uses “ruler” and judge; killed the Egyptian “yesterday.” Hebrew – uses “prince” and there is no reference to “yesterday.”

Acts 7:43 / Amos 5:26-27 – the tent of “Moloch” and star of god of Rephan. Hebrew – “your king,” shrine, and star of your god.

Acts 8:33 / Isaiah 53:7-8 – in his humiliation justice was denied him. Hebrew – by oppression…he was taken away.

Acts 13:41 / Habakkuk 1:5 – you “scoffers” and wonder and “perish.” Hebrew – you “among the nations,” and “be astounded.”

Acts 15:17 / Amos 9:12 – the rest (or remnant) of “men.” Hebrew – the remnant of “Edom.”

Rom. 2:24 / Isaiah 52:5 – the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles. Hebrew – blasphemed (there is no mention of the Gentiles).

Rom. 3:4 / Psalm 51:4 – thou mayest “prevail” (or overcome) when thou art judged. Hebrew – thou might “be clear” when thou judges.

Rom. 3:12 / Psalm 14:1,3 – they “have gone wrong.” Hebrew – they are “corrupt” or “filthy.”

Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 5:9 – they use their tongues to deceive. Hebrew – they flatter with their tongues. There is no “deceit” language.

Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 140:3 – the venom of “asps” is under their lips. Hebrew – “Adder’s” poison is under their lips.

Rom. 3:14 / Psalm 10:7 – whose mouth is full of curses and “bitterness.” Hebrew - cursing and “deceit and oppression.”

Rom. 9:17 / Exodus 9:16 – my power “in you”; my name may be “proclaimed.” Hebrew – show “thee”; may name might be “declared.”

Rom. 9:25 / Hosea 2:23 – I will call my people; I will call my beloved. Hebrew - I will have mercy (love versus mercy).

Rom. 9:27 / Isaiah 10:22 – only a remnant of them “will be saved.” Hebrew – only a remnant of them “will return.”

Rom. 9:29 / Isaiah 1:9 – had not left us “children.” Hebrew – Jehova had left us a “very small remnant.”

Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6 / Isaiah 28:16 – he who believes will not be “put to shame.” Hebrew – shall not be “in haste.”

Rom. 10:18 / Psalm 19:4 – their “voice” has gone out. Hebrew – their “line” is gone out.

Rom. 10:20 / Isaiah 65:1 – I have “shown myself” to those who did not ask for me. Hebrew – I am “inquired of” by them.

Rom. 10:21 / Isaiah 65:2 – a “disobedient and contrary” people. Hebrew – a “rebellious” people.

Rom. 11:9-10 / Psalm 69:22-23 – “pitfall” and “retribution” and “bend their backs.” Hebrew – “trap” and “make their loins shake.”

Rom. 11:26 / Isaiah 59:20 – will banish “ungodliness.” Hebrew – turn from “transgression.”

Rom. 11:27 / Isaiah 27:9 – when I take away their sins. Hebrew – this is all the fruit of taking away his sin.

Rom. 11:34; 1 Cor. 2:16 / Isaiah 40:13 -the “mind” of the Lord; His “counselor.” Hebrew – “spirit” of the Lord; “taught” Him.

Rom. 12:20 / Prov. 25:21 – feed him and give him to drink. Hebrew – give him “bread” to eat and “water” to drink.

Rom. 15:12 / Isaiah 11:10 – the root of Jesse…”to rule the Gentiles.” Hebrew - stands for an ensign. There is nothing about the Gentiles.

Rom. 15:21 / Isaiah 52:15 – been told “of him”; heard “of him.” Hebrew – does not mention “him” (the object of the prophecy).

1 Cor. 1:19 / Isaiah 29:14 – “I will destroy” the wisdom of the wise. Hebrew – wisdom of their wise men “shall perish.”

1 Cor. 5:13 / Deut. 17:7 – remove the “wicked person.” Hebrew – purge the “evil.” This is more generic evil in the MT.

1 Cor. 15:55 / Hosea 13:14 – O death, where is thy “sting?” Hebrew – O death, where are your “plagues?”

2 Cor. 4:13 / Psalm 116:10 – I believed and so I spoke (past tense). Hebrew – I believe, for I will speak (future tense).

2 Cor. 6:2 / Isaiah 49:8 – I have “listened” to you. Hebrew – I have “answered” you.

Gal. 3:10 / Deut. 27:26 – cursed be every one who does not “abide” by all things. Hebrew – does not “confirm” the words.

Gal. 3:13 / Deut. 21:23 – cursed is everyone who hangs on a “tree.” Hebrew – a hanged man is accursed. The word “tree” does not follow.

Gal. 4:27 / Isaiah 54:1 – “rejoice” and “break forth and shout.” Hebrew – “sing” and “break forth into singing.”

2 Tim. 2:19 / Num. 16:5 – The Lord “knows” those who are His. Hebrew – God will “show” who are His.

Heb. 1:6 / Deut. 32:43 – let all the angels of God worship Him. Hebrew – the Masoretic text omits this phrase from Deut. 32:43.

Heb. 1:12 / Psalm 102:25 – like a “mantle” … “roll them”… “will be changed.” Hebrew – “raiment”… “change”…”pass away.”

Heb. 2:7 / Psalm 8:5 – thou has made Him a little “lower than angels.” Hebrew – made Him but a little “lower than God.”

Heb. 2:12 / Psalm 22:22 – I will ” sing” thy praise. Hebrew – I will praise thee. The LXX and most NTs (but not the RSV) have “sing.”

Heb. 2:13 / Isaiah 8:17 – I will “put my trust in Him.” Hebrew – I will “look for Him.”

Heb. 3:15 / Psalm 95:8 – do not harden your hearts as “in the rebellion.” Hebrew – harden not your hearts “as at Meribah.”

Heb. 3:15; 4:7 / Psalm 95:7 – when you hear His voice do not harden not your hearts. Hebrew – oh that you would hear His voice!

Heb. 8:9-10 / Jer. 31:32-33 – (nothing about husband); laws into their mind. Hebrew – I was a husband; law in their inward parts.

Heb. 9:28 / Isaiah 10:22 – “to save those” who are eagerly awaiting for Him. Hebrew – a remnant of them “shall return.”

Heb. 10:5 / Psalm 40:6 – “but a body hast thou prepared for me.” Hebrew – “mine ears hast thou opened.”

Heb. 10:38 / Hab. 2:3-4 – if he shrinks (or draws) back, my soul shall have no pleasure. Hebrew – his soul is puffed up, not upright.

Heb. 11:5 / Gen. 5:24 – Enoch was not “found.” Hebrew – Enoch was “not.”

Heb. 11:21 / Gen. 47:31 – Israel, bowing “over the head of his staff.” Hebrew – there is nothing about bowing over the head of his staff.

Heb. 12:6 / Prov. 3:12 – He chastises every son whom He receives. Hebrew – even as a father the son in whom he delights.

Heb. 13:6 / Psalm 118:6 – the Lord “is my helper.” Hebrew – Jehova “is on my side.” The LXX and the NT are identical.

James 4:6 / Prov. 3:34 – God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew – He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to the lowly.

1 Peter 1:24 / Isaiah 40:6 – all its “glory” like the flower. Hebrew – all the “goodliness” as the flower.

1 Pet. 2:9 / Exodus 19:6 – you are a “royal priesthood.” Hebrew – you shall be to me a “kingdom of priests.”

1 Pet. 2:9 / Isaiah 43:21 – God’s own people…who called you out of darkness. Heb. – which I formed myself. These are different actions.

1 Pet. 2:22 / Isaiah 53:9 – he “committed no sin.” Hebrew – he “had done no violence.”

1 Pet. 4:18 / Prov. 11:31 – if a righteous man “is scarcely saved.” Hebrew – if the righteous “is recompensed.”

1 Pet. 5:5 / Prov. 3:34 – God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew – He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to lowly.

Isaiah 11:2 – this verse describes the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the seventh gift, “piety,” is only found in the Septuagint.

Source

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

Congratulations, Fr. Serge!

Fr. Sergius Halvorsen Joins Faculty, Institutes Homiletics Course and D.Min. Hybrid Program

February 18, 2011 • Deborah (Malacky) Belonick

“Renewing St. Vladimir’s commitment to the formation and continuing education of Orthodox Christian priests, I am pleased to make public the hiring of Fr. Sergius Halvorsen, who will teach homiletics to our student body and who also will develop a D.Min. hybrid program that will provide nourishment to pastors ‘in the trenches,’ ”

announced seminary Dean, Archpriest John Behr.

“I am thrilled that Fr. Sergius is joining our faculty,” continued Fr. John. “We will now be able to offer the finest instruction in homiletics possible, being, in fact, the only Orthodox Christian seminary to have a full-time faculty position in that discipline. We also will be the first Orthodox institution in North America to offer the hybrid D.Min. program. I am really excited about these and all the other educational developments that we will see coming to fruition within the next few years at our school.”

Those “developments” include an intentional pastoral focus to enrich the education of seminarians on campus and priests in parishes who will serve or who now serve churches in North America.

“We are first and foremost concerned about all seminary graduates who are ‘working on the ground,’ and our primary goal at St. Vladimir’s is to offer them the coursework and programs they need to fulfill their pastoral ministries,” Fr. John emphasized.

Father Sergius, a 1996 alumnus of St. Vladimir’s who in 2002 earned his doctorate from Drew University in Liturgical Studies with an emphasis in Homiletics, will be assuming a full-time, tenure-track position at the seminary Fall semester 2011, as “Assistant Professor of Homiletics and Rhetoric.” Initially, he will teach two core courses per semester, Homiletics and Christian Education, and will develop electives in his areas of expertise. Additionally, he will serve as Director of Field Education, overseeing training programs in prison, hospital, and parish ministry. While teaching and directing field education, Fr. Sergius also will begin to prepare a proposal for a new D.Min. program, designed to be a hybrid distance-residential learning program.

Fr. Sergius gained significant expertise in developing distance learning programs while working at Holy Apostles College and Seminary, where he was employed from 2000 to 2011, and where he held the positions of Assistant Professor of Patristics and Rhetoric, and Director of Distance Learning. There, Fr. Sergius oversaw the change from a “correspondence course” model, in which email was used instead of surface mail, to a “second generation” model, in which technology and broadband Internet access were used to create communities of teachers and learners. The program has enjoyed great success; currently, the distance learning program at Holy Apostles has more than three hundred students, with more than one hundred and fifty students enrolling in courses each semester.

Fr. Sergius, in transitioning from his position at Holy Apostles and to St. Vladimir’s, envisions a distance-residential learning program specifically designed to be accessible to clergy throughout the United States. Especially, he noted that the hybrid program to be designed will address the issue of proximity to the seminary campus, a factor that caused the demise of a once-vibrant D.Min. program in previous decades at St. Vladimir’s.

“It had been difficult to maintain the viability of an on-campus D.Min. program due to the fact that the pool of potential students—Orthodox clergy living within driving distance of the seminary—was relatively small. However, offering the program as a hybrid vastly increases the number of potential students,” Fr. Sergius explained. “As a hybrid distance-residential program, Orthodox clergy can earn a D.Min. without having to relocate to Yonkers, by doing the majority of their study via distance learning. Yet, they will also benefit from spending time among the local SVOTS community during regular on-campus intensives.

“There are a number of preliminary steps required before we can formally begin the D.Min. program,” he further stated. “In the coming months we will be conducting surveys to assess potential interest in the D.Min. as a hybrid program. Part of this survey work will be to determine which ‘majors’ are the most interesting to potential students. D.Min. majors could include, but are not limited to: pastoral counseling, parish revitalization, homiletics, and missiology.  Further, the surveys will help us determine if there are other majors that are of interest to potential students.

“It is absolutely essential for the program that we offer the majors that are most helpful to our clergy and that will most strengthen their ministries,” concluded Fr. Sergius. “Once we identify the best majors, we will work out the specifics of the program and ensure that the new program is in compliance with the American Association of Theological Schools (ATS) and with New York State authorities. We hope that the first class of D.Min. students in this hybrid program will begin their studies in Fall semester 2012, which means that students could begin registering in the spring of 2012.”

Note: Future D.Min. applicants must hold an M.Div. and have five years of pastoral ministry experience. Visit our Website regularly to review the progress of the program.

© 2011, admin. All rights reserved.

Part Four of a Five Part series

A Short History of the Liturgical Location for Preaching: The Ambo, the Pulpit and the Lectern.

The Exterior Pulpit

There is a wonderful history of outdoor, or exterior pulpits, attached to Churches. As stated previously, exterior pulpits were used for funeral orations in the churchyard, for the preaching of pilgrimages, or for the exhibition of relics, and were often built outside of the churches, and many cathedrals.

As you will see, there is a great variety in the design and placement of exterior pulpits, adding to their flexibility of use, ornamentation, and installation.

Examples in the United States

The Exterior Pulpit in Starkenberg, MO

There are even examples of exterior pulpits right here in the United States. One excellent and humble example exists at , in Starkenberg, Missouri, of the Diocese of Jefferson City. The shrine is located in rural Montgomery County, about 87 highway miles west of downtown Saint Louis, Missouri and is a beautiful example of just such a pulpit.

Others include the following (there are more than what I have included here);

Exterior Pulpit at Idlewild Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN

The Exterior Pulpit over the front entrance doors of the Shadyside Cathedral in Pittsburgh, PA

The Exterior Pulpit at Chicago Theological Seminary, Chicago, IL

From Around the World

There are a multitude of exterior pulpits around the world, and particularly in Europe, where preaching has always held a high priority.

Exterior Pulpit by Donatello

Exterior Pulpit at St. Martin's Church in Birmingham, England

Exterior Pulpit on Brixton Rd in London, England

The Exterior Pulpit at St. George Church, Brentwood, Essex, England

Note the similarity in design of the above exterior pulpit to the classic ambo!

The Exterior Pulpit of St. John Capistrano, Germany

This is a particularly ornate exterior pulpit (above), from which St. John Capistrano preached against the Turkish invasion.

An Exterior Pulpit attached to an unidentified Cathedral

A 16th century Exterior Pulpit

The Exterior Pulpit at Duomo Perugia

An exterior pulpit in Hämeenlinna, Finland

Why exterior pulpits?

Now, you may be saying to yourself

“Okay. So what? None of these are Orthodox Churches, so why should I care?”

Truth is, many Orthodox parishes do not just have fellowship halls, but rather have extensive facilities. As more and more is being scheduled at these facilities, and more programs (and, yes, festivals) take place at them, it is a far better opportunity for a preaching festival than having an “Orthodoxy” tent, which ends up being little more than a kind of Ripley’s Believe It or Not for non-members.

Why not bring in several accomplished preachers to give 10 minute sermons, along with seminarians who need to smooth the rough edges from their sermon presentations?

The addition of exterior pulpits to many of the existing churches would provide excellent and unique opportunities for parishes to memorably hear the preaching of deacons, seminary students, and of course, local clergy that the congregation almost never gets to hear (because they are busy at their own parishes).

It would allow festival visitors to hear Orthodox doctrine and theology is an non-threatening setting (i.e., easy to escape), sharpen the homiletic skills of our preachers, and sharpen the listening skills of our flock. There is no down side to the installation of exterior pulpits, and they would provide excellent reminders of the Churches mission to

“preach the Gospel to the whole Creation” (Mark 16:15).

Exterior pulpits comprise a laudable tradition which would make sense in modern Orthodox parishes. They demonstrated in the planning, building and funding of these pulpits that preaching the Gospel of Christ was a priority. Again, in the Orthodox Tradition, the preaching of the Word is the culmination of the entire first half of the Divine Liturgy. It is time for the pulpit to take its place, once again, in Orthodox Church planning, furnishing and architectural planning. The exterior pulpit would practically require more and better preaching from clergy, and may even spawn a new generation of active evangelism and hard-core apologetics among the laity.

Nothing is worse than an idle pulpit.

And there’s no hiding one that is visible on the outside the Church.

Compiled from various sources

Part Five – The Lectern & Analogion will be published tomorrow

© 2010, admin. All rights reserved.

Part Three of a Five Part series

A Short History of the Liturgical Location for Preaching: The Ambo, the Pulpit and the Lectern.

The Pulpit

A Classic Pulpit

The word pulpit comes from the Latin pulpitum, meaning a stage or scaffold. The most popular and consistent architectural ‘solution’ to a highly visible and clearly audible location in a Church has been the pulpit.

The pulpit is the direct descendant of the ambo, as is an elevated stand to preach on, attached to the Church building itself – often to a pillar. To elucidate the meaning of the word, we can refer to Solomon (2 Chronicles 6:13), who prayed from

“a brazen scaffold,”

and to Esdras (Nehemiah 8:4) who

“stood upon a step of wood”

and read the law of God. Their elevated position and public action suggest to some the symbolical meaning of the pulpit: the level of the perfect. It has been also called the analogium, from the preaching of the word of God.

Originally, the bishop often preached from his cathedra; a survival of this is retained in the French and German words for pulpit, chaire and predigtstuhl. The other German word kanzel recalls the position of the ambo at the choir-screen, or chancel screen (cancelli). The pulpit characterized as part of the church furniture by its independent position and use, found itself separated from the choir and pushed forward in the central part of the nave beyond the choir for singers.

According to Eusebius, Paul of Samosata (Eusebius, 7, 30) spoke to the people from a high canopied seat in the apse.

There can be no doubt that the pulpit, like the ambo, is a very Orthodox piece of liturgical architecture, and not just in the bygone past, but in today’s parish church as well.

Sample Pulpits

Here is a sampling of pulpits from early Christian/Orthodox Churches – as I could find them.

Leading the way of our list of examples of Orthodox pulpits is this first one from the Patriarchal Cathedral of St. George (Ecumenical Patriarchate). Note that it needs no sounding board over the top – it is placed so high on the pillar that it uses the ceiling for that purpose!

Pulpit of St. George Patriarchal Cathedral (Ecumenical Patriarchate)

An Early Monastery Pulpit

The Pulpit of St. Gabriel Church, Istanbul

The Pulpit at St. George Church, Istanbul

An Ornamented Orthodox Pulpit

A pulpit at a church in Cyprus

Another Orthodox Church Pulpit

The Pulpit of St. Catherine Church, West Palm Beach, Florida

Where the Gospel of Christ is preached in the Orthodox Church, and no ambo is available, there should be a pulpit!

Ornamented Pulpits

Pulpits became a central fixture in Churches in Europe as preaching took its proper place in the liturgical service. Pulpits, like Altars, iconostases, and rails, became more and more ornamented, and were often sponsored by wealthy merchants or royalty, and were appropriately adorned as the location where, again, the most important part of the service of the Word took place.

The Pulpit at Aachen Cathedral today

The stunningly beautiful pulpit in the cathedral at Aachen, Germany was, according to the inscription, a present from Emperor Henry II (d. 1024). The ground-plan consists of three unequal segments of a circle. The wooden core is covered with sheets of copper overlaid with gold. Of the fifteen flat surfaces formed by slightly sunken panels, six contain ivory carvings belonging to an earlier period, and the others, precious stones, cups of rock-crystal, and enamels. There is no explanation as to what this was intended to represent: with large generosity the emperor had given whatever he had that was costly for the house of God.

In many places the pulpit was made a part of the rood-loft, which was a gallery or loft of wood or stone, existing as early as the eleventh century and used, instead of the cancelli, to separate the choir from the nave; it was called the lectorium, or odeum, as the loft where the singers were, and doxale from the singing of the doxologies. Statues of the Savior and His Apostles, representing the Last Judgment and the Passion, frequently ornamented the rood-loft on the side towards the nave.

At Wechselburg in Saxony a Romanesque pulpit from the beginning of the thirteenth century is still in existence; it probably belonged, together with the celebrated altar cross, to the partially preserved rood-loft, which, with a few others of that period, is still to be found. It is ornamented with well-executed reliefs, and rests on arcades and columns. In the central oval panel, or mandorla, there is a relief of Christ as teacher, surrounded by the symbols of the Evangelists; on either side are Mary and John trampling upon allegorical symbols of error. The other reliefs, viz., the sacrifices of Abel and Abraham and the Brazen Serpent, were chosen with reference to the cross and altar in the rood-loft, redemption by Christ’s sacrificial death being a main topic of preaching.

The pulpit at Pisa, completed by Niccola Pisano in 1260, is an unattached structure resting on seven columns, which opened the way to a new development for Italian sculpture. In addition to what is palpably borrowed from antiquity, e.g. the Virgin as Juno, there are figures taken entirely from the life of the time. Instead of the mosaic, six bas-reliefs surround the breastwork: the Annunciation, Nativity, Adoration of the Magi, Presentation in the Temple, Crucifixion, and the Last Judgment; they present the main contents of the doctrine of Salvation.

The first examples of Renaissance pulpits are those of Donatello (fifteenth century). Donatello inserted here into the original round form of the pulpit seven white marble panels, on which in his customary manner he represented in bas-relief little cherubs in an animated dance; the ornamentation of the bronze capital below the pulpit, which rests on a single support, is also purely decorative in character.

At an earlier era the platform of the pulpit was supported by an understructure or by a number of columns, and during the Renaissance pulpits projected from a pillar or wall, like balconies. Both bronze pulpits in San Lorenzo at Florence rest on four Ionic columns, and are decorated with representations of the Passion, over which there is a frieze of cherubs borrowed from the art of antiquity.

The magnificent pulpit made by Master Pilgram for the Cathedral of St. Stephen at Vienna (sixteenth century) is decorated with busts of the Fathers of the Church and figures of other saints.

The ornate decoration of the pulpit of the collegiate church at Aschaffenburg depicts the Church Fathers around the supporting pillar, busts of the same in the upper frieze, scenes from the Bible separated by spirited figures of the Evangelists, and angels in the place of consoles. In the Cathedral at Trier the ascent to the pulpit is covered by a magnificently ornamented archway with a high decoration at the top. On the string-piece of the steps are carved the Sermon on the Mount and the Last Judgment, and on the panels of the parapet the works of mercy are depicted.

The pulpit of Freiberg in Saxony is fantastically developed from the root of a plant and on it in a naturalistic manner the figures of men and animals are formed.

The most striking pulpits of the Baroque period are those of Belgium. The base, stairway, and sounding-board were artistically or fantastically covered according to the taste of the time with luxurious and ornate carving.

In St. Gudule’s at Brussels the banishment of Adam and Eve from Paradise is carved underneath the pulpit, while, in contrast, the Mother of God is represented above the sounding-board as a mighty female warrior and slayer of the dragon.

Underneath the pulpit of the cathedral at Mechlin there is a representation of the Crucifixion on Calvary with the people at Christ’s feet, while below the rock Saul falls from his horse, overcome by the truth; above at the side are carvings of Adam and Eve with the Serpent. All these are rich in suggestions for the sermon.

At the base of the pulpit of the Church of St. Andrew at Antwerp there is a splendid carving of Christ, and the Apostles Peter and John in a little boat. Over the enormous sounding-board angels hold on high the St. Andrew’s cross, and beneath the dove, representing the Holy Spirit, sends rays in all directions. Note the resemblance in structure of the above pulpit with a classic ambo.

The whole structure of a pulpit in Krakow represents a ship, with sails, mast, and rigging, poised over sea monsters.

Recommended:

Click here to see a collection of 41 pulpits in Finnish Churches

Pulpit Ornamentation: General Principles

The ornamentation of the pulpit should never be excessive, but subordinate to that of the altar, whose view it should not obstruct. The latter difficulty is often removed by setting the pulpit slightly towards the side aisle, whereby a troublesome echo from the transept is avoided. Near which pillar of the nave the pulpit should be placed depends upon the acoustics of the church.

The sounding-board should, above all, make the voice of the preacher perfectly distinct; by giving it, the form of a shell the waves of sound are often sent in a definite direction. In order that the speaker may be readily understood, the pulpit should not stand too high. Its ornamentation should be appropriate: representations of the Evangelists or Church Fathers, scenes from the Bible, as the Sermon on the Mount, the dove as a symbol of the Holy Spirit on the underside of the sounding-board, and perhaps an angel over it. A simple pillar skillfully developed into the platform of the pulpit, is satisfactory, when its decoration and that of the stairway and string-piece is subordinate to that of the central main part. The lack of a vertical support makes an unpleasant impression; a reading-desk or crucifix is apt to produce an overloaded effect.

A well-arranged pulpit-cloth varied in color to suit the various feasts and periods of the year would not be improper.

Does the Pulpit have a place in Orthodoxy Today?

I think the answer to this is rather simple: Obviously yes, but only where preaching the Gospel is important. What is worse than an idle pulpit? That would be rather like having an idle altar – God forbid!

The glaring omission of pulpits in Orthodox Church architecture is not simply a reliance on the Eucharistic portion of the Liturgy, which is always primary in Orthodox architectural planning, but an abandonment of it as a necessary part of the Liturgy of the Word. Preaching in many places has atrophied to the point that sermons are no longer expected, and no longer given. Christian instruction, discipleship and education have been considered a private matter, not a parish one.

The reintroduction of the pulpit to contemporary Orthodox parish churches would be a small expense, and provide a serious challenge to the Church, a challenge to clergy in their sermon preparation and presentation, and a serious challenge to the laity who must, likewise, improve their listening skills in some places – which have atrophied as well.

At the end of this series of articles, I will offer some links to companies that offer ‘ambones’, pulpits, lecterns and analogia which are appropriate for Orthodox Churches.

Compiled from various sources

Part Four: Exterior Pulpits will be published tomorrow.

© 2010, admin. All rights reserved.

We are republishing this article from our good friend, Fr. Barnabas, who is the priest of Ss. Raphael, Nicholas and Irene Church in Cumming, GA  and blogger at Sober Joy, co-teaches the course PAST 7201 – Preaching: Proclaiming The Kindgom, with Fr. Nick Triantifilou, the president of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology. Fr. Nick  was the main professor, and Fr.  Barnabas was the co-instructor. In this preaching lesson, which was given earlier this year, we are given an excellent example of a three-step process to preparing an effective sermon on the Gospel.

Tonight we are going to look at one way to organize a homily to insure that your homily has a clear purpose and a clear structure to encourage effective preaching.

The outline I use is as follows:

Introduction

D.S. – (Declarative Statement)

T.S. – (Transitional Statement)

I. (1st Main Point)

1. (Sub points)

2.

Ill. – (Illustration)

Appl. – (Application)

T.S. – (Transitional Statement)

II. (2nd Main Point)

1. (Sub points)

2.

Ill. – (Illustration)

Appl. – (Application)

T.S. – (Transitional Statement)

Conclusion

Step One

The First step after having studied the passage or subject for the homily is to develop the most important part of the above outline – the Declarative Statement. The D.S. is your homily’s main idea and purpose written in one sentence. For example:

“Today’s Gospel passage reveals two (2) powerful principles to assist us in becoming mature disciples of Jesus Christ.”

This declarative statement now becomes the controlling thought for the rest of the homily. It reveals your two main points and it governs your purpose i.e. to assist your parishioners in becoming mature disciples of Jesus Christ.

Step Two

The Second step in developing the homily using the above outline is the Main Points. Your Declarative Statement has already revealed how many main points you should have and now you state them clearly.

“The First Powerful Principle is…”

then the sub points open up the main point with specific insights into the point itself such as the power of a particular Greek verb in the text or a context for the particular teaching Jesus is making here. The Second Main Point is developed in a similar manner.

Within both Main Points are two other components that are indispensable for the effectiveness of the homily. They are:

Illustration – the illustration should paint a vivid picture of the Main Point it is trying to reinforce. It could be a story, or a quote from the Fathers, or an item from the contemporary news of the day. Regardless, it must allow the hearer to “see” the Main Point.

Application – Here is where you are to “preach.” Each Main Point should have an application section where you help the hearer understand and apply the Main Point to his/her daily life. It is inherently frustrating to be told that I should become a mature disciple of Jesus Christ and then not get the steps to make this a reality in my life. The hearer should leave the service with a clear way to apply what he/she has heard in that morning’s homily. Every homily is incomplete and ineffective without this vital element.

The Transitional Statement is as simple as it seems. It is a short and simple statement that moves you from your previous Main Point to your next Main Point.

Step Three

After having completed the Main Points, the Third step is to write your Conclusion and Introduction, in that order. While you are developing these two sections, you will usually find that they inform one another.

The Conclusion should be not only a recap of the Main Points and important elements from each Application section, but also a clear call for the hearer to apply what he/she has heard that morning to his/her life. The Conclusion is the place to ask the hearer to step up to the principles of the Gospel lesson preached.

The Introduction should be able to “set the table” for the homily as a whole. It should be timely and it should connect with the hearers to where they are in their lives. It can begin with a story, a personal story, or even a contextual background for the passage itself. Regardless, the Introduction is the place to help the hearer begin to become a doer of the Word.

An old preacher friend once told me that in a sermon, you should

“tell them what you are going to tell them; then tell them; then tell them what you told them. “

The important task is to leave as many memory possibilities within the homily as possible to assist the hearer in remembering the insight from the Gospel lesson that day.

With time and practice this system can become a way for you to move away from a manuscript toward noteless preaching. This takes time, practice, and serious attention to preparation.

As above, this is just one way to organize a homily.

As you develop your own style, keep in mind that the homily is just as much a part of the work of the Divine Liturgy as any other part of the service. It is the time when you have a powerful opportunity to set the tone for your community in their spiritual lives and in their daily lives. It is a time when exposing them to the Scriptures is also a way for them to see the Scriptures as intimately applicable to their daily lives.

The task of the Preacher is to take the Scriptures and give them to the people in such a way that they value the Word as much as you do.

© 2010, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

The Survey Says…

Friends of Preachers Institute, thank you for participating in our online poll regarding a Doctor of Ministry degree in Orthodox Homiletics. During April and May, we asked you, our readers, what you would like to see in an advanced professional degree in Orthodox homiletics.

The specific question was:

What would you like to see in a Doctoral program in Orthodox Homiletics?

All in all, there were 194 respondents. Each could vote for as many selections as they wished.

Here are the results:

119 votes             Affordability: $50-100 (USD)/ month

115 votes             A Study of the Sermons of the Patristic Fathers

102 votes             Training in the Orthodox Tradition of communication, from classical rhetoric to new media

100 votes             A program that will bring my skill in preaching to a level approaching ‘expert’ in knowledge of preaching, communication, and its history

93 votes               I’d prefer a Ph.D. program – an academic degree, not a professional one

78 votes               Something I can do while working in my parish, with occasional seminars

62 votes               A practical program, honing sermon prep and deliver skills in many venues

58 votes               A program which offers a variety of venues; street preaching and evangelism, liturgical preaching, writing, posting on social media, blogging, etc.

24 votes               A historical study – primarily

22 votes               Something different – to get me out of my comfort zone

These are telling results, and we appreciate your input.

Sadly, not all Orthodox clergy are interested in improving their skill or advancing their education in homiletics, but for those of you who are, the Preachers Institute is preparing to serve your needs, and offer more for you, the preacher in the trenches of parish work, laboring prayerfully to rightly define the word of Truth, and proclaim the Gospel of Christ.

© 2010, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

TAKE THE POLL!

When we were in the early stages of discussing the mission and goals of the Preachers Institute, one that stuck out was the opportunity for advanced, intensive study of homiletics among Orthodox clergy.

We decided early on that the professional degree (D. Min.), not an academic degree (such as a Ph.D. or a Th. D) would best fulfill our vision, as it was the  preacher on-the-ground, in the parish preaching that wanted more opportunities to advance his study and practice of homiletics where it counted most – in the local Church.

And indeed, a year since we launched Preachers Institute, we have over 10,000 unique visitors to our site monthly. Material is copied from PI daily!

In order to better facilitate the planning and implementation of such a degree, we’re asking each of you to take the poll in the sidebar. Choose as many as you like to answer, just be as honest as you can.

The poll will end on May 15th at midnight.

Please do not hesitate to

Share your opinions via the online poll;
Share your ideas and needs, if they don’t fit into the options listed;
Pass this to others, who can likewise, take this poll and help us.

Thanks for helping us out by registering your opinion on this poll.

We have much more coming this year from Preachers Institute. Stay tuned, as they say.

And, as always, pray for us.

© 2010, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

Today is the 40th day! Your marathon journey has come to an end! Axios!

I want to thank everyone for participating. I’ve been reading your blogs, and I must say, I’m impressed with your work and the incredible labor that went into it. We will repeat this exercise next year, starting (once again) on Nov. 15th.

In the meantime, I want to especially congratulation some especially distinguished and new bloggers:

Fr. Matthew Thurman, of St. Luke’s Mission in Solon, OH, and his blog “30 Days.”

Fr. David Eynon of Annunciation Church in Decatur, IL, and his blog “Shine Within Our Hearts.”

Fr. Seraphim Holland of St. Nicholas Church in McKinney, TX, and his blog “Redeeming the Time.”

Finally, Fr. Athanasios Haros, of  Transfiguration Church, Florence, SC, who is the author of the “Be Transfigured” blog. He blogged every single day of our 40 Day Challenge. Fr. Athanasios also blogged on the New Testament Challenge, not an easy thing to do with a full pastoral schedule, let alone to blog on. Frankly, it was a herculean feat!

I want to thank our most experienced bloggers, Fr. James Coles and Fr. Peter Michael Preble, who are very experienced and outstanding bloggers. You added some great inspiration, not only to blogging, but to preaching. More than once I have ‘borrowed’ material from your blogs for my sermons.

In fact, I’ve done that with all our bloggers. Thank you for helping me preach with more excellence.

Most of all, congratulations to all! See you next Nativity Fast!

© 2009, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

Sermons can always be better, that is, more effective. Improvement does not happen by accident, but by the deliberate process of understanding key elements of sermon effectiveness and constantly evaluating one’s performance based on these criteria.

Three key elements, or criteria, are suggested by the ancient writer Plutarch’s likening of public speaking to the successful exercise of playing catch (On Listening, 3). One, something worthwhile is thrown, or related (i.e., the content). Two, what is thrown must be aimed with proper trajectory (i.e., delivery). Finally, what is aimed and thrown must be caught (i.e., the receptivity of the audience).

The effectiveness of a sermon can thus be surmised by answering the question: How well are the preacher and hearers playing catch with the Word of God? We will consider the three elements above in reverse order to arrive at an answer in a constructive way.

Evaluation One: Audience Receptivity

While the preacher cannot control how the hearers will receive the sermon, he must be acutely responsive to the audience’s receptivity to have any hope of effectiveness. To small children, you lob a softer ball underhand at close range. To older children, you graduate to faster velocity a little farther away. To mature adults, you hurl a hardball at different angles to challenge their abilities.

No matter how logically constructed and theologically sound, or how perfectly enunciated with appropriate gestures, if the hearers cannot, or are not prepared to, receive the sermon, then positive results will be few. After all, the hearers’ progress in the Kingdom of God is the ultimate intended result of any sermon!

All master orators down through the ages have taken the state of the audience as first concern. Are the hearers older, younger, or a mixed crowd? Are they sympathetic, hostile, or apathetic to the speaker and/or message? Have they attentively prepared to listen through prayer and the reading of Scripture and the Fathers, or have they arrived at Liturgy by habit after a long night of partying, drinking, or worse? The Roman Cicero states that the first task of an effective speaker is to prepare the mind of the hearers to receive his words, either by waking them up, putting them at ease, or engaging them as persons in need of what he’s giving, adjusting the introduction to the state of the hearers.

The careful preacher will evaluate his sermons based on audience receptivity before, during, and after the actual delivery of the sermon. Experience teaches the Parish Priest who the recipients are from week to week, their intellectual abilities, their emotional perceptions, their pet peeves, and their willingness to listen. Preachers have to adjust their sermon(s) on the spot based on whether people are sleeping in the pew, yawning, fidgeting, nodding in agreement, sitting meditatively, gazing in rapt attention, etc. If the preacher doesn’t care about the audience and develops no real-time visible or oral empathy with the hearers, then the people will tune him out. All these factors must be the focus of reflection when evaluating sermons for effectiveness, especially when preparing for the next encounter.

Evaluation Two: Preacher Delivery

The sermon is a multi-sensory, interactive event involving sight, sound, touch, memory, and emotional and intellectual awareness. The delivery of an effective sermon takes advantage of all these means. Consider the Orthodox platform of the sermon: spoken by a vested clergyman, surrounded by icons, candles, and incense smoke, and encased in hymns, prayers, and the readings from Holy Scripture. The sermon is delivered in an atmosphere of the holiness of the age to come as exemplified by the assembly of the Body of Christ in the Orthodox Temple.

Cognizant of the physical setting (whatever it is), the sermon must still be delivered, and the primary delivery system is the preacher. Certain aspects of delivery are absolutely essential: words must be pronounced clearly and audibly with understandable grammar, and the speaker preferably needs to see, and be seen by, those listening – this enables eye contact and gestures to be used. Preaching in a foreign language (including unfamiliar theological jargon), whispering, not projecting in consideration of the space (is there a sound system?), and reading the sermon in a monotone represent extremes to be avoided at all costs.

From an effectiveness perspective, it is better to preach extemporaneously while looking the hearers in the eye, even if somewhat less prepared, than to read a sermon word-for-word thus having, basically, no interaction with anyone else present. The preacher needs to demonstrate confidence with the subject matter, honesty of conviction, and care for those listening. These are accomplished during a sermon by relating conversationally with people, sometimes asking questions, raising and lowering the voice for emphasis, and utilizing movements of gesture and changing location to draw attention to salient points.

The delivery of the sermon needs to be natural, not forced. So the preacher must resist all temptations to trivialize the opportunity, for instance, by excessive joke-telling or bizarre actions. Sermons are not occasions for entertainment and histrionics lest the message be overshadowed by the performance and a cult of personality develop. Likewise, preachers learn to overcome nervousness to be effective. Refer to a note card to remember key ideas! The majority of people there to hear are there because they want to learn and be fed by their spiritual father placed there to feed them. A genuine pastoral relationship between Priest and Parish generates ease when preaching.

Evaluation Three: Content

“Every teacher, in order to edify all in the one virtue of charity, must touch the hearts of his hearers by using one and the same doctrine, but not giving to all one and the same exhortation” (St. Gregory the Great; Pastoral Care III, Prologue).

The preacher throws, and the hearer catches. What is being thrown? – charity (i.e., love) with doctrine in the form of exhortation suited to the hearers. To state things a different way, content contains the so what (love), the what (doctrine), and the how (form of exhortation).

Public speaking transfers ideas using an oral medium, and the medium (the how) becomes part of the message. An understanding of oral quality leads to more effective strategies of how the sermon is crafted. The preacher can implant ideas in the memory by the use of repetition of key words and phrases, building on them during the course of the sermon in a spiral pattern of presentation, introduction of a new idea, and return to a previous notion now with additional implications. Concepts which evoke concrete images, word pictures, and illustrations from common life are superior to abstract vocables (cf. the parables of Christ). Certain words and gestures (e.g., a smile, or frown) convey emotion, compassion, or haughtiness regardless of intent, so they must be placed deliberately within the framework of the discourse, or not used at all.

The sermon provides the crucial teachable moment in the life of a parish. The people are “captive” for 15 to 20 minutes, present to be edified. They need to learn, and the preacher is the teacher of what they need to know for life and salvation. Sermons usually employ two methods of instruction, the expository and the topical. An expository sermon explains one of the Scripture readings of the day verse by verse, or unit by unit, weaving doctrinal themes from and into the outline of the text itself. Topical preaching expounds a chosen theme by arranging it into related points connected to the three chief doctrines of the Church: the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Church, the Body of Christ. Preaching in the Orthodox Church always has a liturgical context, so references to the hymns, prayers, and actions of the Church services unite every sermon to its ongoing matrix of truth and knowledge.

Effective preaching progresses from week to week in planned series drawing the audience deeper and deeper into the mysteries of God and the Church. The preacher has the task of imparting not just the rudiments of the Faith – often done with a simplistic, patronizing, and platitudinous tone – but the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). Ongoing personal theological study and weekly conversations with parish members concerning doctrinal topics keep the what of sermons fresh and relevant.

Finally and ultimately, the so what of preaching drives the what and how, shaping the sermon from being a dry lecture or oratorical show into an edifying, life-changing, transformative event. Does what is heard enable the hearer to better love God and their neighbor? Does what is heard help the hearer lead a genuine Christian life of faith, hope, and love amid the trials and temptations of this world? Ultimately, truly effective preaching moves the hearer away from a sentimental, legal, or intellectual understanding of their religion toward an all-pervasive experience of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ. Toward this end, effective preaching doesn’t just talk about the desired spiritual goal; sermon content actually provides the tools for attaining it: how to give, how to fast, how to pray, how to overcome passions and sins, how to defend the Faith, etc.

+ + +

Anyone who wants to grow in a discipline must seek evaluation. Preachers should always seek critique to become more effective in their craft. They need to engage in self-criticism (automatic feedback and self-evaluation). The preacher should ask his hearers what they heard and what they think it means, and not just the people who say, “Good sermon, Pastor.” Rather, ask in return, “What was good about it?” – you may be surprised what they caught with their ears. Particularly helpful are the comments of other preachers. Hopefully with these three things in mind – content, delivery, and receptivity, you can begin to evaluate your own efforts in homiletics in a structured way and become a more effective preacher.

The Rev. Jonathan H. Cholcher is a priest of the Orthodox Church in America.He is pastor of the St. John the Baptist Church in Warren, OH, and is the former Headmaster of the St. Nicholas Orthodox Classical School in Mogadore, OH, the first of the Orthodox Christian Schools of Northeast Ohio.

© 2009, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.

by Fr. John A. Peck

Having returned from the “Art of Speaking” Workshop, I find myself happily surprised.

In the two decades I’ve been listening to Orthodox homilies, in many parishes in many states, I’m quite confident in saying that (in my experience) most Orthodox preaching is generally poor.  By most I mean a good 90%, and by poor I mean it’s just plain weak. I’m sorry to say it, but this is my experience, and my opinion, of course, and you are free to disagree, but by and large this is because homiletic training for clergy is abysmal. The lack of care, thought and preparation in most sermons which I have heard (and some I have myself delivered – ouch) betrays a poor priestly formation. This is best remedied in three ways:

1. By teaching, preaching and example by our bishops;
2. A massively heightened requirement for homiletics training in Seminary;
3. A devoted cadre of clergy committed to improving their own preaching and raising the bar of Orthodox preaching through the roof.

The necessity for an Orthodox preaching workshop seems, therefore, plain and evident to me. This is precisely why we launched the Preachers Institute website earlier this year. Also, I’m happy to report that I met many clergymen intensely interested in their preaching, and how to improve it. This was invigorating – to be in the midst of men, priests of God, who have a strong commitment to raising their skill level in preaching. So here is the breakdown of what we experienced.

Introductions & Kickoff

Fr. Stephen Tsichlis, president of the GOA Archdiocesan Presbyters Council, and Fr. Chris Metropoulos of the Orthodox Christian Network welcomed and introduced the program. They were both very busy, but the workshop went off well. Fr. Nicholas Triantafilou, the always-busy president of Holy Cross Seminary, then welcomed everyone warmly. We counted 57 total participants, almost all HCHC graduates who were happy to return to their alma mater. Most were from the east coast, but west coast participants (including yours truly) were well represented.

Though he could not attend the entire workshop, Archbishop Demetrius gave the primary address/first presentation. He spoke on the importance of communicating, and the significance of the workshop.

The Presentations

The second presentation was offered by Fr. Stanley Harakas, well known and well beloved speaker and teacher. The topic of his talk was “Making Sermons Interesting.” I was very well pleased to see that the very first point he made in his presentation was “Always preach the Gospel.” Such things should go unsaid – and, sadly, often do.   His talk was exceptionally practical, set an excellent tone for the workshop, and in the style typical of a concerned teacher, he provided all participants with a handout covering the important points of his talk.

The third presentation was by Dr. Juan Carlos Ortiz, pastor emeritus of the Crystal Cathedral. Though being 74 years old, his vigor and energy were contagious and he delivered his message, entitled “You can preach, you can preach well, or you can Preach with Excellence!”with the same vigor, in spite of the long day, his advanced age, and struggling with illness. He then proceeded to preach with excellence and verve. His methodology was wonderful and I was particularly happy to hear of his own preparations for preaching, which include a day of prayer pretty much alone (ala my article the Preaching Pyramid).

The fourth presentation was by Barnabas Powell, senior at Holy Cross Seminary, and member of our PI Forum! His message was “I came not to be served but to serve: Servant Leadership in the Church.” You might know him as Chuck Powell, formerly of Family Life Radio and OCN. I had to leave early on Thursday, so I missed what I know was an excellent presentation. I first began my association with Barnabas after my Incarnation Broadcast Network days (before Ancient Faith Radio or OCN were broadcasting online). He’s a southern gentleman with a fire in his belly for the Gospel, and a clear vision of the future of the Orthodox Church in the USA.

The Work of Preaching

Between the daily presentations, we broke into smaller working groups to preach, and have our preaching recorded, and evaluated.

Our group was lead by Fr. Stanley Harakas and his influence was exciting and comforting for our group. The workshop brought some excellent professors from nearby Emerson College to evaluate our work as well. This was exceptionally valuable. We were given instructions to preach a 6-8 minute adult sermon, and the next day a children’s sermon. The priests in our group would evaluate our work, and make comments when we reviewed our messages. We watched the first two minutes and the final minute of each sermon. What I found valuable about it was this; things are often interpreted differently by speakers and listeners.

In my own case, for the children’s sermon, I watched my first two minutes noticing that I looked like I was wearing a body cast. My feet didn’t move, my legs didn’t shift, and I stood like a stump throughout the entire thing. I found it terribly distracting to myself, and found it awful. When I readily offered my critique of my stiff presentation, I was sharply corrected! Several of the brothers said that far from looking stiff, it looked authoritative during the presentation, and this sentiment was supported by other viewers as well. (Thanks for that, guys) I didn’t perceive it that way at all, but they did.

All in All

I can only speak for the group I was a part of, but I must confess what I said publicly at the end of the workshop: I was happily surprised by the quality, tone, voice and delivery of the participants in my group. Far from being unprepared, dull, repetitive or dispensing ‘Peter Pan’ advice, they were thoughtful, thought provoking, complete and well delivered. Each very different in delivery and voice, but each effective. Some of the brothers even told us that they had no formal speaking or homiletics training at all. However, their devotion to raising the quality of their work was evident, both in the sermons they preached, and in their presence at this workshop.

In fact, when we were watching the playbacks of the sermons, I was drawn into each sermon quickly, and couldn’t believe how abruptly the replay ended. Two minutes was never so short!

The Wrap-Up

The schedule was pretty intense, and by the third day, many of the clergy attending did not show up early. They were just worn down. Future such workshops should probably include quiet time and free time as a part of the experience. (We’ll do this at our winter 2009 Preachers Retreat in December).

I also had the chance to meet up with a few folks I’ve corresponded with online, such as Bishop Savas, a Facebook friend.  I think my conversations with him, and Fr. Nick, made me feel most welcome (especially as a non-HCHC grad!). His iPhone photo of the two of us was better than my Blackberry snapshot. When it was all done, there was some feedback and discussion of the workshop itself. Participants wanted to know if this would be repeated annually. The answer, though not stated directly, clearly was ‘not likely.’ This was disappointing.

It was at that time that I had the opportunity to announce that the Preachers Institute would be hosting a Preaching Retreat this December, picking up where this conference left off.

What I would like to have seen

I would like to have seen a few things we didn’t get. First, I would like to have  seen and heard from some our outstanding Orthodox homiletics teachers, like our own Fr. Sergius Halvorsen (who has a Ph.D. in homiletics and teaches it full time), or Fr. Wilbur Ellsworth (whose book we have in our bookstore, and himself is an accomplished preacher and teacher of homiletics).

Second, I would have liked some recommended reading; books, articles, websites, sources, possible subscription services. There are many good works out there on contemporary preaching, and it would have made a good follow up for the workshop. We have many recommended texts in our Preachers Institute Bookstore.

Third, a way to follow up with each other, perhaps online. An “Art of Speaking” forum or listserv. Since one was not offered, we will create one on our Forums page. Check the link at the bottom of this page.

Finally, I would like to have had a formal survey for immediate evaluation and feedback, quantifiable for the hosts of this workshop, so that those who put it together could have accurate feedback while things were still fresh in participants’ minds and hearts. I think this would have been very valuable to those who labored to put on this workshop.

Would I go again? Yes, absolutely.

If you missed it, or could not attend because of distance (you were on the West Coast), join us for our December Preachers Retreat in Arizona.

What I learned

Don’t take a cab. No one in Boston, or in Brookline for that matter, seems to know where the Seminary is. I was told later (not surprisingly) that all the pizza places deliver there, but when you fly in early in the morning, pizza places aren’t answering their phones. One thing is certain, cab drivers do not know where Holy Cross Seminary is. Get a ride from the Seminary, unless you can afford an hour in a cab that doesn’t know where it is going.

The Chapel at Holy Cross was beautiful. Though I had been told that about 30% of the service was in Greek, in reality, 80-90% of the services were in 4^th century Greek, which made me feel sad for all present, but especially for visitors like Dr. Ortiz, who loves the Scriptures, and would have benefited mightily from hearing them prayed, chanted and sung in the Chapel by very capable readers and chanters. He closely watched every service, following along in the book, and I can only wonder at what it would have been like for him to hear the theology of our faith being gloriously sung so he could perceive it.

Hearing is active. As I mentioned in the above example, things which I thought bothered me didn’t bother everyone else. Also, things I hoped to convey were not always conveyed in the way I intended. The value of signposting, for example, made much more sense to me when I saw it clearly in action by other successful preachers. Their methods brought new insights into how to expand my own repertoire.

I learned more than that, of course, but why spoil it? Check with one of the brothers who did attend. They will certainly fill you in.

What next? Preachers Retreat 2009

If you are interested in joining the next Orthodox Preaching workshop, we will soon be launching our Preaching Retreat page. Sign up for our 2009 Winter Preaching Retreat.

We are limiting it to 12 individuals, so sign up early.

I believe that good preaching by Orthodox clergy will get better and better, and soon training for future preachers will take on a new and powerful part of priestly and diaconal formation in the Orthodox Church here in America.

As it should be.

Fr. John A. Peck is the priest of St. George Orthodox Church in Prescott, AZ, and the Director of the Preachers Institute.

© 2009, Fr. John A. Peck. All rights reserved.