Sermon – Pentecost 11 (Parable of the Treasure/Pearl)

Text: Matt 13: 44-52
Exegetical Statement: The hidden Reign of God is a joyful surprise worth decisive, resourceful and risky action.
Focus Statement: God extends his reign in a variety of surprising ways
Function Statement: That my hearers would be open to the joy of God’s reign

I tried something a little different this week. The sermon is largely story telling. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are short and very similar. The differences between a seeking merchant and a yeoman farmer both finding the treasure in the course of their lives seemed important. The immediate juxtaposition also seemed important. The sermon mirrors those portions juxtaposing two stories, C. S. Lewis from Surprised by Joy and a creative writing amalgamation. I did break the pure story by adding an ‘explainer-man’ paragraph at the ends of each major section.

I have less ability to judge the quality of this type. It is just not as direct. It depends on people either listening long enough to get to the explanations (not-likely if they don’t like the story), or being interested enough in the stories and getting the point by impression. I wasn’t lynched after it, and it seems people were paying attention, but that could just be becuase the format was indecipherable.

One other note worth mentioning. This sermon largely takes the ‘traditional’ interpretation of the pearl/treasure – finding the salvation offered through Jesus Christ is the only thing of true worth, worth all you possess. My professor, Dr. Gibbs, has a much different interpretation here. He flips the person and the pearl. Jesus is the person who gives up all for the pearl of the church. He is a very smart man who has spent an entire lifetime studying Matthew (i.e. he is probably right.) Why did I diverge other than ingratitude? The progression of the parables in Chapter 13. Chapter 13 starts with the parable of the Sower which I took to be about the power of the word. It progresses through the wheat and the weeds which grow together which focuses more upon the mixed state of people in this inaugurated eschaton. It ends with the interesting description of the instructed scribe as a householder able to bring out new and old. In Matthew, the householder is always God, except in this verse. The parables have progressed from hard soil through growth, recognizing the pearl, to being able to instruct others. While Dr. Gibbs’ interpretation definitely works, I think it misses that progression. I’m sure that could be demolished in about 30 seconds.

draft-121

Sermon – Pentecost 10

Text: Romans 8:18-27
Exegetical Point: The glory of God is revealed in his time and by his plan both universal scale and in the individual.
Focus Statement: God works through creation and us, even when we don’t understand.
Function Statement: That my hearers would trust that the will of God is for their good.

Comments
I used Long’s four pages of the preacher as a general structure. The general direction of the passage and of the sermon takes us from looking at the entire creation to looking at our lives with the Holy Spirit at intercessor. The law sections can be rough, but I did not think they were out of balance with the Gospel. I also felt that there were enough playful moments interspersed with serious parts to keep balance. I also felt that the Gospel sections were multiple (thus partly breaking Long’s structure) and specific. The day after delivery, I still like this sermon. Usually I dread thinking about them because you then know what could be improved.

draft-11

9th Sunday in Pentecost – Sermon – The Sower

Text: Matt 13:1-9,18-23 (OT lesson Isa 55:9-11)

Exegetical Point: The word, the message of the Kingdom, is received in multiple ways. We don’t know until the harvest (the yield) which is which, but we are guaranteed a crop.

Focus statement: God sends out his Word into all kinds of soil

Function Statement: That my hearers may share the word

The sermon is set up as a simple text-application. When I was finished drafting, I liked the text portion. I set up the reading in the larger context of Matthew’s gospel. My proofreaders liked the application section which I thought might have been a little weak. What do I know? The Children’s sermon I did probably was better. Object lesson, so not really for the kids, but focusing on how water/snow from the OT lesson alters the ground, even hard pack.

Final thoughts. This sermon touched on important points, but in my view too specific on the law, but not specific enough on the gospel. The gospel went warm-fuzzy relying on the hearer to supply their specific definition of grace. It could be better. All that has to be balanced with the fact that the part I’m dumping on is what my proof readers liked best.

daft-11