Would the other half of the conversation be with God? I guess I would envision my own preaching (or, rather, worship as a whole) as the congregation and/or the minister talking to and about God.

Hmmm…I will have to think about that. Thanks PB! You gave me something to occupy my mind in this infernal heat!

Dying to hear more about this: what’s the other side? I strive to make my sermons dialogiscal, by responding to the needs I see in my congregation as I choose what to say and how to say it, by explicitly and implicitly inviting comment and disagreement about what I’ve said, and by focusing on action. But as no one else in church gets a chance to talk at everyone for 20 minutes a week, it’s hard to keep the sermon from being more of a monologue than one half of a conversation.

The longer I’m in ministry the more aware I am of the power of the position. Smart, articulate, ornery folks are surprisingly-often scared to disagree with me to my face. And I’m not nearly so scary as you, PeaceBang.

Anyway, yes, I think my aversion to “sermon” does arise from the same root as the aversion to “preach”–another word I seriously dislike and tend not to apply to what I do, although I’ve gotten to the point where I will accept both it and “sermon” as ministerial shorthand at the very least and, especially within contexts such as PeaceBang’s lovely explication of its meaning to *her*, as an expression of personal calling at the most.

“Sermon” and “preach” just seem to have gotten a bad rap in society as being admonishing, uptight, holier-than-thou, whatever you want to call it (i.e., closer to anonymous’s definition of the Catholic homily!). That’s my own knee-jerk reaction, and I think it’s a common reaction of those who either have been served ill by religion or just haven’t been inspired by it. I don’t think I was particularly affected by the words until we had a part-time minister I didn’t like, whose work I *did* find holier-than-thou and admonishing; she used “sermon” and “preach” regularly, and then I started getting hackly about them.

Several people in my congregation have started using “commentary” as well, because of similar reactions. I’m usually likely to say that I’m going to “lead the service” or “speak at church” if I am, in fact, preaching.

Anonymous’s comment about the literary form of the sermon interests me; I’d like to think that I *do* try to move to something alive and enlightening (like many, I’m edgy about the fact that UUs are all too often all-talk-and-no-action, so I like to draw commentaries to a close with some sort of call to action, even if it’s small).

I’m also interested in the definition of “text”–what would be defined as such? In typical Christian circles, of course, it would most likely be a Bible verse, but for UUs that’s far less likely. I think I *do* adhere to the classical form somewhat if the inspiring text can be loosely interpreted (e.g., some of my better sermons–oh, see, there I go–have been about “Amazing Grace,” “The Simpsons,” M. Scott Peck’s “People of the Lie” and the work of E. E. Cummings). Doctrine comes easily enough; I generally try to tie the text to one/more of the UU principles or sources. (Within my primarily lay-led congregation, it’s been a regular gripe that folks don’t always clarify *why* their service topics are relevant to UUs, and I’ve suggested the tie-in above as a relatively easy and obvious way to do so.) I’d like to think that also answers PeaceBang’s calling to “minister TO,” because I believe that the audience needs some clarification of why, indeed, they are listening to someone speak in a UU church rather than anywhere else on that particular morning.

All this is IMHO, by the way, and I’m certainly not a professional. I can say without too much puffery that I’m considered one of the strongest service leaders in my little congregation, but that’s got more to do with training as a writer and performer than any kind of theological/pastoral education.

“Sermon” makes me think of the classically structured literary form (text, doctrine, and exemplum/application), and I like this form because it seems to be striving to move beyond mere commentary (doctrine) to something that is alive and enlightening.

Lastly, though I grew up Catholic, I had no idea what a “homily’ is, but I just looked it up. It seems to be “an admonitory or moralising adress to a congregation.” Wow! So it’s just lecturing all those wicked sinners in the pews with admonition, opprobrium, and moralising–sounds perfectly awful!

I think I like sermon.

And I’ve gotten the sense that I would be pretty happy in your church.

SLSW