CREEDE HINSHAW: ‘Originality’ shouldn’t be sermon’s goal

There’s nothing new beneath the sun, observes Qoheleth at Ecclesiastes 1:11. True and very true, particularly when it comes to preaching. How many ways can one address the great biblical themes of love, mercy, justice, judgment, salvation and forgiveness? The good lines have been taken; the themes mined for thousands of years.

Preachers and rabbis aren’t the only ones trying to balance originality with tradition. Lyricists and composers are particularly susceptible to lawsuits for ripping off somebody else’s song or phrase from a song. The floodgates opened a few decades ago when George Harrison was successfully sued over a tune the lawyers argued he filched subconsciously.

How many new things remain unsaid about the Prodigal Son (Luke 15)? Any preacher or rabbi who fancies him or herself original each week is vain, deluded and to be shunned. Preaching, to channel Katherine Hankey (I am avoiding plagiarism!), is a combination of telling the old, old, story while pointing to the new, new song. Preaching and teaching build on the foundation of scholars and saints who have thought deeply and nobly. Particularly in the rabbinic tradition, reverence for and dialogue with past teaching is expected and highly valued.

Most congregations want their pastor/rabbi/imam to be honest about sources and traditions. If a pastor preaches a sermon from the internet he or she could at least declare, “Today’s sermon is modeled after the work of _______, who preaches at _____________.” This honors the original source without leaving the impression that the person delivering the sermon developed these ideas him or herself.

My college days included three years on the debate team at Ball State University. One of the first rules of debate was to document sources assiduously. Failure to do so ensured losing the debate. Debaters were expected to construct logical cases; creativity was fine as long as the debater buttressed his/her case with clearly cited and respected sources. Hearsay and unattributed opinion were worthless.

Preaching, of course, is not the same as debating, although some treat it that way. The faith community values and builds on tradition, though, and those who preach and teach are expected to know and cite Moses, Jesus and Paul. Many faith traditions expect their leaders to be familiar with ancients and moderns as diverse as Maimonides, St. Augustine, C.S. Lewis, Marcus Borg and other sacred and secular sources. Preachers or teachers whose weekly offerings deteriorate into so-called original off-the-cuff riffs should be avoided.

Preachers, faced with overwhelming and often unpredictable schedules, cannot and should not be “original” weekly. Jesus observed, “Every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.” (Matthew 13:52) It’s this mix of old and new and how the ingredients are stirred that makes a sermon or lesson compelling.

Finally, columnists fall into this same category. The idea for this column came after reading Ben Sisario’s interesting article “Better Not to Risk It” in the Business Section of the April 1, 2019, New York Times. Thanks, Mr. Sisario, for prompting this column.

Email Creede Hinshaw at hinnie@cox. net.