Over the last couple of days I have written about the preacher’s fear of disengaged listeners.  Yesterday I began to respond to the critique of those who might suggest the responsibility is that of the listener to “do the duty” and “have the discipline” to listen to God’s Word preached.  My first response to that is somewhat pragmatic (“maybe that’s true, but if people struggle to listen, then why not do everything legitimate to help?”) and hopefully very pastoral (“my love for the listeners drives me to be as engaging as possible”).

Let me offer two more thoughts on this matter:

A. While “responsibility” may not be the best word for it, the issue of responsibility is not black and white.  Whose responsibility is it that the sermon be heard?  The listener’s?  The preacher’s?  God’s?  I suppose the answer is … yes.  On the one side, if a listener is disengaged during a sermon, the first place to look for cause may well be the heart of the listener.  (I’m tempted to say that if too many listeners are disengaged during a sermon then maybe we should look at the preacher, but that would distract me from my point here!)  On the other side, if a flock does not exhibit greater maturity over time, then it does not seem inappropriate to look at the shepherding that flock has received over time.  That is to say, the “responsibility” seems to land on both sides.  And at the same time we must know that unless God builds the house, or transforms the lives, then we labour in vain.

B. I don’t see any reason for preachers to abdicate their responsibility, as long as they pursue their ministry in total dependence on God.  That is to say, I am responsible to handle the Bible well.  I can’t preach error from the text and simply state that it is up to God to transform lives.  I am responsible to preach a clear message.  I can’t preach confusion and simply state that it is up to the listeners to sort through it (or point to one or two people who thank me afterward and therefore assert that God’s hand is on my ministry).  I am responsible to preach relevantly.  I can’t simply preach historical and distant content and finish by suggesting that the Spirit will apply to our hearts the truths we have seen in His Word.  I am responsible to speak engagingly.  I can’t simply blame listeners for not listening, or claim divine sanction to be as poor a communicator as possible so that God can get the glory.

Is God at work and am I totally dependent on Him in order for anything good to transpire?  Yes.  “Apart from me you can do nothing.”  Is it the state of the listener’s heart that will influence how they hear?  Yes.  But at the same time do I have a stewardship in this ministry that behooves me to prayerfully and by faith do the best that I can?  I would say so.

I think there is one fear that preachers may have, but may be unwilling to face.  It’s also true of struggling school teachers, or any public speaker.  It is the fear that the listeners may have already left the room, even though their bodies are still sat there.

The signs are obvious – fidgeting, vacant stares, shuffling, unusual levels of coughing or yawning, raised eyebrows, longing looks toward the clock on the wall or the watch on the wrist.  It may be that some people will wish they were somewhere else no matter what you do.  But what if the number grows from the few relatively unreachables to cross the line into an unacceptable range?

Some speakers may, I suspect, have a deep awareness of this reality every time they preach.  But it must be hard to see it for what it is.  Much safer to speak of spiritual warfare, or to critique the congregation, or to have a pithy grabber about Jeremiah and other unloved prophets, or to pretend the problem is not there at all.  But if it is, it is.

Perhaps some preachers would have the courage to take the faith step of calling it what it is.  If you are not engaging the listeners, be honest about that in your prayers.  I don’t recall who said it is a sin to bore people with the Bible, but I’m inclined to agree.

What if you’re not consistently boring, but dip your toe in now and then like most of us?  Then perhaps it is worth thinking about what it takes to engage a gathering of listeners.  It is important to be faithful to the text, but it is something other than that.  It is important to be clear in your content and delivery, but it is more than that.  It is important to be relevant in your message, but it is more than that.  It is the human to human communication characteristic of being engaging.

Possible ingredients to add to faithful, clear and relevant content, in no particular order: energy, smile, humour, confidence, gentleness, humility, authority, sensitivity, warmth, eye contact, vocal variation, naturalness, authenticity, laughter, affection, poise, and you can probably add to the list . . .