This is the fourth essay is a special series by the Rev. Dr. Nathan Jennings, Professor of Liturgics at Seminary of the Southwest. There will be five installments in this series presented in intervals through the winter of 2026. A “round up” with links to all five essays will be available in the spring.
Part IV. Preaching the Scriptures: Connecting our Congregations with Scripture Through the Liturgy
In all acts of interpretation and, therefore, especially with that central Christian act of interpretation called the Sermon (in which we both interpret our sacred canonical texts and our holy congregation), context is vitally important. Context matters in interpretation, as with any human performance. We must keep in mind as many of the contexts as possible within which our preaching falls. One of those contexts is liturgical—the sermon takes place within the shared ritual action of the rite of Holy Eucharist. The liturgical context is not ancillary to the sermon. It is, for us, a liturgical and sacramental Christian tradition, absolutely of the essence of what we are doing when we preach.
This is the fourth essay in this series on a liturgical theology of preaching. We have discussed the Sermon’s ritual and mystagogical context and, in the last essay, developed a liturgical theology of the Sermon as the proclamation of the Good News of Jesus Christ on the Last Day. In this installment, I will turn to a helpful hermeneutical approach to finding the Good News to proclaim in the appointed lectionary texts. I will present a hermeneutic of analogy.
In any interpretation, but especially in preaching, the task is that of building analogies. Whenever we preach the good news, we build analogies between God’s response to us in Scripture so that we can see how God is responding to us today. Mystagogy is a reading of the liturgy as an enactment, by ritual analogue, of scriptural narratives, and, especially, the core narrative of the Christian hope. The Sermon also enacts this ritual, and thus a Christian Sermon is a site of building mystical analogy.
Canon as Ritual Enactment
The canon of Scripture is a ritual reality. The Scriptures were canonized, at least in part, to determine what ancient writings, when read aloud in the assembly, would bring to us the Word of God, and gather us as Christ’s body on earth. The canon is a liturgical rubric. In the divine service of the Holy Eucharist, we bring the good news of God’s grace delivered to us in Scripture. Because even the canon of Scripture is a liturgical reality, its proclamation amid God’s people is already a kind of epiclesis that brings the Holy Spirit down upon the faithful.
The lessons are announced simply, with no congregational response. Then they are concluded with “The Word of the Lord,” the people responding, “Thanks be to God.” The breaking open of Scripture in its holy reading is an opportunity for an act of thanksgiving. The reading of Scripture elicits Eucharist from the gathered body.
The Gospel is the final lesson, the culminating lesson, set apart yet set among the other lessons. The Word of God gathers God’s people; the Gospel makes them Christian. It is also a hermeneutical key. The gospels are not a canon within the canon, per se. The gospels are not more holy or more authoritative than any other writing within the Christian canon. The Gospel, rather, is the center of the Christian canon, exerting a varying centrifugal or centripetal force upon the whole.
The Gospel is read as one of the appointed lessons. It therefore nests within the Word of God as one lesson among many. Only ordained clergy—ideally, a deacon—proclaims the Gospel lesson. The Gospel lesson has both an introduction and a conclusion that involve congregational responses: “The Holy Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ according to …” and the people respond, “Glory to you, Lord Christ.” Afterward, and more succinctly, “The Gospel of the Lord” and “Praise to you, Lord Christ” (BCP p. 357; 358). Proclaiming to the gathered body of Christ from a single gospel transforms it into Christ’s one Gospel.
Liturgy is analogical. The unfolding shape of the ritual action forms an analogue to the kingdom it both points to and manifests. The Scriptures are a part of the liturgy. The proclamation of Scripture within the divine service is a part of the unfolding ritual analogy. Interpretation of the Scripture is therefore also analogical. We preach to connect the people of God with his presence in this day, at this time, at this celebration of the Holy Eucharist. The preacher bridges the gap between ancient writings and the congregation gathered in this place on this day by building analogies.
Preaching uses analogical reasoning because ritual uses analogical reasoning. Preaching is a ritual action, inherent to the central act of Christian ritual: the Holy Eucharist. Analogical reading connects text to congregation in our exegesis. Reading Scripture enacts the Eschaton and, like the Walk to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35) connects those who suffer to Jesus’ presence.
Analogical Hermeneutics
Allow me to say something a little surprising. The things written in Scripture have nothing to do with us, nor with this congregation of these people, on this day. It is impossible that a 2,000 (or more)-year-old text from an entirely different human landscape could have anything to do with any of us today. I exaggerate to make a point. But only a little. It is true that, insofar as the Scriptures were addressed to God’s people, and these people continue to this day, that some things may still hold, such as “love thy neighbor as thyself” (Matt. 22:39) and “thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13). That said, we are not at the foot of Mount Sinai, nor are we sitting at the feet of Jesus. To make even these seemingly obvious Scriptures connect, we are necessarily engaging in an act of interpretation. The Christian “literal sense” includes the assumption not only of human, but also of divine, authorship. Even to discern God’s authorship within and through the human author, we must look for it with the eyes of faith. Preaching, like all Christian biblical interpretation, uses analogical reasoning.
Drawing from Fred Craddock’s Four-Page Sermon approach,[1] here are some questions that help us to prepare an analogical reading for the sake of preaching:
- What is the problem?
What is the problem, difficulty, or suffering confronting God’s people in the text? What is preventing God’s people from enjoying his promises? What is the presenting situation in the text? Some passages of Scripture will be far clearer than others. All require research and exegesis. Even in some seemingly obvious passage, such as the Exodus, there are layers of meaning and connection with our day and our congregations that we only discover through prayerful and thoughtful research and exegesis. To discover the problem presented in the text, we need to avail ourselves of all the excellent exegetical tools available in our day.
2. What is God’s solution?
How does the text describe how the Lord addresses the problem confronting God’s people? As with the discovery of the problem, so too with the discovery of God’s loving solution: Some passages of Scripture will be far clearer than others. Dig to discover the many layers of meaning and connection with our day and our congregations through prayerful exegesis. Use Bible dictionaries, commentaries, concordances, charts, tables, even atlases. And most of this is now available through software that retrieves information for us in an instant. If we do not do the work in this day and age, with so much available, then we are, as the Apostle says, “without excuse” (Rom. 1:20).
3. What is our problem?
What is the problem confronting us today? What is our difficulty, suffering, or injustice? What is preventing us from enjoying God’s promises? This could be global, societal, national, local, universal, diocesan, parochial, even individual within a parish. How is our problem the same as that of God’s people as revealed in Scripture? Answer this question, then build the analogy. This is not necessarily the easy part, just because we happen to live in our own day. Hindsight is 20/20. Insight into our time is in some ways more difficult because we are stuck in it—much as Jesus pressed his disciples about not knowing how to read the signs (Matt. 16:3). We must prayerfully and rigorously research and perform “exegesis” on the situation our congregations find themselves in today.
4. How is God solving our problem today?
Now connect the analogy made between God’s people as revealed in Scripture and the people of God in our day, by showing them how God addresses our problems, our obstacles, our sufferings in our day just as he did of old, just as he always has: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb. 13:8). Let us show those in our care what God is doing to bridge the gap between them and their enjoyment of divine intimacy. When we discern this, we have discovered the kernel of the Word of good news, the word of grace, that God has given us to deliver on this day, in this place, with these appointed Scripture lessons. God’s providence manifests in the “coincidences” we find between the appointed readings and our congregations and recent events when we adhere closely to the lectionary.
Craddock’s approach represents the kind of contemplative and scholarly work we must pursue to interpret the text and our congregations. It does not necessarily represent a sermon outline. As Craddock points out, we can weave these “four steps” in many ways in any sermon. We may let the cat out of the bag right away, or delay it, depending on the rhetorical effect we would like to pursue. One of these parts may need more text in a given sermon than in another. I have found this method successful for the most important thing: building an analogy between the text and those in our care who need God’s hope and grace.
A Note on Criticism
Biblical scholars and scholars of preaching will rightly point out that Scripture means many things other than what I’ve outlined. They may want to warn that shoehorning a text is misleading and an example of eisegesis. This is a danger. We can only build sound analogies after we have done the work to understand the literal sense of a passage to the best of our ability.
The interpretation of any text nevertheless requires an awareness of its performative context. Any liturgical Christian who believes in the sacramental reality expressed through ritual must consider liturgical context. Context matters. The context of the Sermon is liturgical and pastoral. There is a place for the scholarly, the academic, and even the critical. A scholarly commentary on a text that assumes a historical, literary, or rhetorical-critical reconstruction of a hypothetical context is not, however, the same thing as the Christian sensus literalis, or “literal” sense. The Christian sensus literalis is faith-based. It assumes the incarnation of the living God and the death and resurrection of a living Christ.
The Sermon is not an academic or scholarly exercise and assumes no attempt at critical “neutrality.” In the divine service of the Holy Eucharist, the ritual reading of Scripture extends the incarnation of the Word of God to us. The ritual reading of a text from one of the canonical gospels extends the proclamation of the good news of Jesus Christ on the Last Day into the very day upon which the Sermon is delivered. Again, we must watch out for category errors. In this series, I am not describing the best approach to writing a critical exegetical paper. I am describing how to prepare a Christian sermon for suffering parishioners looking for their redemption in the crucified and risen God. Context matters. Ritual context is an exegetical context.
Spiritual Ramifications on the Preacher: Love of Scripture
I must sadly report that I have encountered preaching that deliberately denigrated a text of Scripture. I have encountered preaching that deliberately denigrated a biblical author. In these cases, there seems to be an assumption of moral or intellectual superiority over the text or biblical author. Even if it were true, such preaching does not help the congregation. Why not rather lead parishioners into the paradox of finding the loving God in the most perplexing and troubling of Scripture passages?
We fail our congregations when we do not preach the Scriptures. We do not preach the Scriptures not so much because we do not know them, although that is sometimes the case, but because we do not love them. If we cannot find God’s love in a text, we can find help in resources, contemporary theologians, and biblical scholars. Not making recourse to these resources is a professional and pastoral failure.
Friends in Christ, if we do not hear the pull of God in an appointed lectionary reading, if we cannot find an overwhelming encounter of divine revelation of a relentlessly pursuing God of love who is reaching out to meet us through the reading of Scripture, then may I suggest that we do not preach that passage. We can note that it is a tough one and respectfully flag that for our congregations. That certainly may be helpful to a congregation from time to time.
That said, preaching colleagues, if we cannot love a Scripture passage, then let us please simply not preach it. Let us focus on the passage that inspires us with love; love of the congregation, love of the Scriptures, love of the human biblical author, love of its ultimate author, God. That love will convey God’s love to the people in our congregations. A sermon is not prepared until the preacher hears God speaking to a congregation through the text.
A hermeneutic of analogy requires a foundation in a hermeneutic of charity. We read the Scriptures giving the benefit of the doubt to the biblical authors as those God chose to pass his Word on and proclaim his Holy Gospel to us. We read the Scriptures understanding that in God’s “non-competitive”[2] and sovereign transcendence, through his providence, and through his inspiration of the human biblical authors, God is the ultimate author. We know that God is love, so we listen to hear his loving message to us in each passage of Scripture, even the most difficult. In the next post in this series, we can turn to those exercises that predispose us to Christian charity: love of God and neighbor in Christ.
—
[1] Fred Craddock, Preaching (Abingdon Press, 2010). I’m thankful for helpful conversation with the Rev. Dr. Dominique Robinson for my summary of Craddock’s approach in this liturgical context.
[2]Burrell, David B. Burrell, “Creatio Ex Nihilo Recovered,” Modern Theology 29, no. 2 (March 2013): 5–21.
The Rev. Nathan Jennings, PhD is the J. Milton Richardson Professor of Liturgics and Anglican Studies and Director of Community Worship at Seminary of the Southwest, Austin, TX.
