A postscript on being boring: a relatively simple matter
A postscript on being boring: a relatively simple matter
August 9, 2011
As a brief follow-up to yesterday's post on boring preachers, I have been asked whether or not I think 'boring' is too subjective a category to be useful and certainly to use as a basis for firing someone.
I disagree with those who think the category too much a matter of personal taste to be useful. Boringness, like pornography or art, certainly involves a subjective element of judgment and is very difficult to define in the abstract; but I would be confident that 99% of people know what it is when they encounter it and most examples will enjoy massive consensus. Yes, there may be the odd example where opinion is hopelessly divided, as is the case with the other two things mentioned; but the difficult cases should not distract us from the relatively straightforward nature of most examples of what is self-evidently dull, tedious and uninteresting. Were it not so, the concept of being boring could not be used in popular comedies. `Entertaining Father Stone,' a classic episode of Father Ted, is funny because it is patently and immediately obvious to everyone watching that Father Stone is utterly, mind-numbingly boring. His actions and his speech are instantly recognizable as such, without further explanation.
Thus, my suspicion is that claims about the complexity and subjectivity of what constitutes boringness are too often cover for not addressing the problem of obviously boring preachers and teachers.
Of course, the first reaction of any of us on hearing a sermon that sends us to sleep must always be self-examination: `Is the problem really with me as a listener rather than with the Rev. X as a preacher?'; but if the honest answer to that is 'No,' and the experience of tedium is widespread in a congregation, then the chances are you are not dealing with widespread indifference to the gospel but with a boring preacher. At this point, the elders must act to help the preacher to improve or, in worst case scenarios, to come to an understanding that public gospel ministry is not his calling.
One correspondent asked to whom he should be interesting. Unbelievers? Teenagers? As to the former, I would not be too worried about being interesting but I hope they would rather be offended or intrigued by what I preached, rather than simply bored. As to the latter, boredom is a studied and cultivated way of life for most of them. And never, ever forget: they made Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus rich and famous. Do you really trust them to assess your preaching gifts?
I disagree with those who think the category too much a matter of personal taste to be useful. Boringness, like pornography or art, certainly involves a subjective element of judgment and is very difficult to define in the abstract; but I would be confident that 99% of people know what it is when they encounter it and most examples will enjoy massive consensus. Yes, there may be the odd example where opinion is hopelessly divided, as is the case with the other two things mentioned; but the difficult cases should not distract us from the relatively straightforward nature of most examples of what is self-evidently dull, tedious and uninteresting. Were it not so, the concept of being boring could not be used in popular comedies. `Entertaining Father Stone,' a classic episode of Father Ted, is funny because it is patently and immediately obvious to everyone watching that Father Stone is utterly, mind-numbingly boring. His actions and his speech are instantly recognizable as such, without further explanation.
Thus, my suspicion is that claims about the complexity and subjectivity of what constitutes boringness are too often cover for not addressing the problem of obviously boring preachers and teachers.
Of course, the first reaction of any of us on hearing a sermon that sends us to sleep must always be self-examination: `Is the problem really with me as a listener rather than with the Rev. X as a preacher?'; but if the honest answer to that is 'No,' and the experience of tedium is widespread in a congregation, then the chances are you are not dealing with widespread indifference to the gospel but with a boring preacher. At this point, the elders must act to help the preacher to improve or, in worst case scenarios, to come to an understanding that public gospel ministry is not his calling.
One correspondent asked to whom he should be interesting. Unbelievers? Teenagers? As to the former, I would not be too worried about being interesting but I hope they would rather be offended or intrigued by what I preached, rather than simply bored. As to the latter, boredom is a studied and cultivated way of life for most of them. And never, ever forget: they made Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus rich and famous. Do you really trust them to assess your preaching gifts?
