A Case For A Big, Central Pulpit
As for the pulpit in particular- it is big, central, and strong, for a reason. It is meant to promote the preaching of God’s inspired, inerrant, sufficient, and authoritative Word as the central activity of the Church. The pulpit is bigger than the preacher. The pulpit requires the person who brings the Word to stand up and step into it. It demands the preacher consider the solemnity of the role he is exercising when preaching the Word, leading the congregation in prayer, or otherwise leading elements of the worship liturgy.
We had the opportunity to build a new sanctuary fifteen years ago and we opted for an Old School style complete with wooden pews, kneelers, choir in the back, digital pipe organ and a big central pulpit. This post is not trying to convince anyone they should do what we did, but rather to offer an explanation for those who wonder and even an encouragement for those who worship in older buildings that have a similar set up. The various features of our church architecture and layout are based on things we see as biblically important. Our building looks a certain way for a specific reason. Our choice of furnishings and the particular layout of the pulpit, baptismal, and communion table are purposeful.
It is not that other types of church buildings or layouts are unbiblical or wrong. For example, it seems the big, central, wooden pulpit is often rare in newer church buildings. Many modern churches opt for a large stage for a worship band and a portable stool or chair in front of a Plexiglas lectern for their casually dressed pastor to sit and teach or “talk with” his congregation. I do something similar on Sunday nights and in other teaching venues. Certainly, the Word of God can be taught or preached in different set ups. Jesus taught in various settings throughout his ministry, as did the Apostle Paul. The Bible doesn’t prescribe the arrangement of furniture in a church worship setting.
The pastor, sitting with small Plexiglas lectern on Sunday morning, definitely communicates casual, informal, personal interaction. It seems such a setup is intended to make the pastor come across as non-threatening, even a bit less authoritative. The pastor in that posture is about to have a conversation or fireside chat with his family and friends, it would seem. I suspect this approach might be a reaction to the yelling, pulpit-pounding, white-suit wearing, hanky in one hand, fire and brimstone preacher. The stool and lectern approach is meant to put people at ease as they listen to a “message” from the Bible. The pastor’s choice of casual dress while teaching or preaching Sunday morning tells the congregation- “Hey, I’m one of you! Let me tell you what I’ve learned this week.” I think much of the trend toward a casual set up for teaching and preaching Sunday morning has come from current generational pressure. Millennials and Gen Zs are characterized as being skeptical or dismissive of authority. The traditional big, central pulpit with the pastor wearing a suit or robe is a bit offsetting to a generation that doesn’t acknowledge levels of authority readily.
Let’s be honest-whatever your set up, something is being communicated. Our intention is to communicate importance and authority by the chancel arrangement we have. The most important activities of the church are signified by the furnishings we have the pulpit, the baptismal, and the communion table. The ministry of Christ’s church is the ministry of the Word and Sacrament. Our furnishings are meant to make a statement about the priorities of the church.
As for the pulpit in particular- it is big, central, and strong, for a reason. It is meant to promote the preaching of God’s inspired, inerrant, sufficient, and authoritative Word as the central activity of the Church. The pulpit is bigger than the preacher. The pulpit requires the person who brings the Word to stand up and step into it. It demands the preacher consider the solemnity of the role he is exercising when preaching the Word, leading the congregation in prayer, or otherwise leading elements of the worship liturgy. Yes, the big, central pulpit is meant to exude authority-the authority of the preached Word primarily. This authority is not based on the preacher, but on the Word that is preached. In our church, the pastors wear robes so the congregation’s attention is not on his clothes, but rather the role he is filling for that hour. Some will say, The robe distracts me…it reminds me of when I was Catholic.” Possibly. But I am guessing a good number might say, “Skinny jeans on Gen Xers, untucked shirts, and preachers in sneakers are distracting too”. The pulpit manned by a minister in a robe communicates reverence and authority. But this article is not really making a case for robe-wearing, so forgive the rabbit trail!
Back to the big central pulpit set up. Preaching is proclaiming the word of truth and exhorting the congregation to believe and obey. The pastor is commanded to “preach the Word” (2 Timothy 4:2) as part of his essential shepherding duties and the central pulpit arrangement can serve to encourage this practice. The central pulpit set up is a reminder to the pastor and the people about God’s authoritative Word. There is a sense in which pastors come and go, but the big, solid pulpit from which the Word is preached, will remain for generations. A preacher “filling the pulpit” is a great way to describe what a faithful pastor should be doing. He should know what the pulpit is meant for (preaching the Word) and do the task. In other words, many important messages can be relayed by architecture and setup.
To be clear, I would rather go to a church that has a modern set up with the stool and Plexiglass lectern where the pastor believes and preaches the Bible faithfully than a church with a traditionally arranged big, central pulpit, but the pastor does not believe or faithfully teach the Bible. The essential priority for a biblical, healthy church, is a right view and teaching of the Bible, which can be done with no pulpit at all. My purpose here is to offer explanation for a big central pulpit set up like ours and possibly provide some ideas to share with your church members if you have a similar arrangement.
Dr. Tony Felich is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and serves as the Pastor of Redeemer PCA in Overland Park, Kansas.
-
Storms or Doldrums: Which Is More Dangerous?
Spiritual “doldrums” can be a place in time or a mental state. If it’s where we are, an important attitude and action is required to survive and see it through. That attitude and action is summed up in perseverance. Perseverance enables us to focus on our destination. Perseverance plays a vital role in discipline that urges us on in Bible reading and prayerfulness. Perseverance promotes fellowship and communion with other believers, elevates public worship, gives direction, and bolsters hope and joy; it undergirds works of charity and compassion.
I’ve never sailed on a sailboat, but I have sailed across the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea on ocean liners. The eight-day voyage across the Atlantic on the Michaelangelo was peaceful; the two-day and one-night voyage across the Mediterranean from France to Tunisia on the L’Avenir was something else. Le Mistral, a strong northern wind, spills over the Alps rushing across France to the Riviera and Marseille, blowing across the Mediterranean, and affecting weather in North Africa.
Working in Marseille, I learned the French call it “le balai” (the broom). It sweeps grime and dirt away. It chose that day to exercise its right. I and many others experienced an indefensible seasickness. It so roiled the waters I can’t imagine what it would have been like to be on a sailboat. Could anything be more dangerous than this?
Attending a memorial service for a friend’s husband, the pastor mentioned that, in conversations with him days before he died, he shared his sailboat experiences. He spoke of the doldrums. He said the “doldrums” could be more dangerous than a storm. That thought piqued my curiosity. I researched this phenomenon and learned: “The ‘doldrums,’ a nautical term, refers to the belt around the Earth near the equator where sailing ships get stuck on windless waters.” Sailboats could get stuck for days or weeks—unable to move. According to how well equipped they are, windless days could outlast supplies and the crew could all die.
I couldn’t resist thinking what a metaphor for spiritual life! Isn’t it true that when buffeted by life’s storms, we tend to pray more fervently, seek God’s face and deliverance more urgently, and rely more faithfully on the Lord? We may intently seek fellowship or communion with other believers. Searching the Scriptures becomes needful for understanding in such times. Isn’t it also true that it’s in the storms of life we grow, become stronger and are stretched in our trust? It’s when our faith is most deepened? Church life becomes a haven—a refuge; we’re not alone or isolated. Storms encourage us to focus on destination—where we’re headed and to keep afloat.
What do “doldrums” reflect in one’s spiritual life? We become stuck in a motionless rut, stagnant, failing to progress or advance, suffering ennui, languishing, becoming spiritually listless, and undisciplined. Perhaps saddest of all, we may allow ourselves to become isolated from other believers. Spiritual inertia, indolence, apathy, disinterest, or lethargy not only set in, they dominate. There is evidence of a Bible never opened, prayers never uttered, corporate worship absented, life directionless, hopeless, joyless, a loss of love for God, and charity toward others. Spiritual engagement decreases, if not disappears.
The “doldrums” appear at different times in one’s life. They may appear when we’re our busiest in careers or focused on family responsibilities. The expression, “The barrenness of busyness” is paradoxically closely akin to the “doldrums.” “Doldrums” can appear in the midst of ministry or following a grand spiritual achievement. Vulnerability to the “doldrums” can occur in the aging process when one begins to slow down, stamina decreases, mobility becomes more limited, and when many loved ones are no longer present to challenge, cheer or encourage us on in spiritual pursuit.
Spiritual “doldrums” can be a place in time or a mental state. If it’s where we are, an important attitude and action is required to survive and see it through. That attitude and action is summed up in perseverance. Perseverance enables us to focus on our destination. Perseverance plays a vital role in discipline that urges us on in Bible reading and prayerfulness. Perseverance promotes fellowship and communion with other believers, elevates public worship, gives direction, and bolsters hope and joy; it undergirds works of charity and compassion.
Perseverance is the Holy Spirit’s enablement to face a Mistral or the “doldrums.” I’ve experienced both, and perhaps you have, too. The Apostle James tells us what we need to know in any situation: “Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything” (James 1: 2-4).
In Hebrews 11: 4, God testifies of Abel, “. . . though he is dead, he still speaks.” Likewise, though my friend’s husband is dead, “He still speaks.” He did to me. Storms can be dangerous, but the doldrums can be just as dangerous. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. Beware of the “doldrums.”
Helen Louise Herndon is a member of Central Presbyterian Church (EPC) in St. Louis, Missouri. She is freelance writer and served as a missionary to the Arab/Muslim world in France and North Africa.
Related Posts: -
A Single Woman’s Response to Greg Johnson
Christians ever identified themselves by inner desires? Don’t we all experience a multitude of desires we deal with besides sexual ones? As a single female Christian, it never occurred to me to identify myself related to any sexual desires. I am not alone. Among Christians, there are life-long single men and women, widowed men and women, divorced men and women, who have obeyed God’s commandments while remaining celibate during periods of their lives. Furthermore, they never identified themselves by any desires they experienced during those same periods of their lives.
Dear Dr. Johnson:
I read your USA Today article, “I’m a gay, celibate pastor of a conservative church.” Here’s a trick for de-scalation.” My first thought was why would a Christian–—and a pastor at that–—take an issue controversially engaged and involving believers of a specific church and denomination out to the world–—a world that generally mocks Christianity and Christians? A second thought came immediately–— that this is not “de-escalation,” is it? If anything, it’s a bold escalation bringing an unbelieving world into the church’s business.
Perhaps it’s time someone other than a married man or woman address you due to our mutually-deprived lives in accordance with God’s righteous laws–—deprived but not unfulfilled or unfruitful. To begin with, you state you’ve been investigated by church authorities . . . because of your sexual orientation.” As this issue is long-standing and quite public, you appear to miss the focus, that is, your promotion of “gay Christian identity” more so than your inner conflict. You appear to insist on identifying yourself by desires. Since when in Christianity’s history have Christians ever identified themselves by inner desires? Don’t we all experience a multitude of desires we deal with besides sexual ones? As a single female Christian at 80 years of age, it never occurred to me to identify myself related to any sexual desires. I am not alone. Among Christians, there are life-long single men and women, widowed men and women, divorced men and women, who have obeyed God’s commandments while remaining celibate during periods of their lives. Furthermore, they never identified themselves by any desires they experienced during those same periods of their lives.
Specifically, why would any believer choose to self-identify oneself with a biblically-communicated deviant desire? Both Plato and Aquinas taught: “It is sexual vice, among all vices, that has the greatest tendency to destroy rationality. Sexual desire can seriously cloud the intellect even in the best of circumstances, but when its objects are contra naturam, indulgence makes the very idea of an objective, natural order of things hateful.”
Further on in the article, you confess: “I’ve found myself at times curled up in a ball on my office floor weeping.” You do not define or describe exactly on what basis you wept. Was it because you struggle with your desires? Was it because you feel persecuted? Was it perhaps a combination of both? What it reveals is that you weren’t “gay.” You were, in fact, “miserable.” I haven’t curled up in a ball, but I know what it is to weep before the Lord. They were times of recognizing sinfulness in diverse areas of my life and God’s many, many mercies and acts of grace in my life for which I knew I didn’t deserve. We all need to humbly weep over any sinful desires, e.g., lust for power, lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, pride of life, and more.
Now permit me to specifically address your insistence on identifying yourself as “gay.” The word “gay” is essentially a euphemism, isn’t it? It’s “a mild or pleasant word used instead of one that is unpleasant or offensive,” according to the dictionary. In other words, it’s a cover-up word. It’s used instead of “deviancy,” “homosexual,” “lesbian,” or even “sodomite.” It softens something that is biblically very offensive to God. I can’t remember anyone being willing to call himself/herself a “deviant Christian,” a “homosexual Christian,” a “lesbian Christian,” or “a sodomite Christian.” Would you be more honest to use any one of the genuine words for what you are claiming? If you chose the actual word for the sin and sinful temptation you struggle with, would you choose to so identify yourself then as such a believer first, and secondly as a minister of the Gospel? Those terms sound terrible, don’t they? Well, truth reveals the awfulness of sin and temptation.
I’m sorry if someone or others have hurt you unkindly and unnecessarily. Many of us have been hurt by fellow believers. At the same time, we have to do some soul-searching in order to ensure we did not do or say anything that deserved honest, loving, rebuke. As a pastor, you must be aware that there are many diverse sexually immoral desires even believers struggle against. So far, none of those are employed to identify one’s Christian faith. Do you really want that door opened? If alleged “gay” Christians insist on being so identified, wouldn’t the rest of us feel the need to identify ourselves otherwise? Do Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican priests need to outwardly identify their sexuality? Wouldn’t that become a quagmire for the church?
For millennia, there have been single or bachelor pastors/priests. It did not provoke unwarranted curiosity. Hopefully, the majority practiced celibacy, not as a sacrifice but as an act of obedience and love for God’s holy law. The same is true for non-clerical men and women who devoted themselves to God’s holy and righteous moral standards.
Back to bringing the world into this ecclesiastical issue: Wasn’t it unwise to do so? Would the Holy Spirit lead you to put fellow believers and your fellow elders into a position to be further mocked and scorned by the world? Was love the driving force or a desire for affirmation and sympathy by the many unbelieving “gays” and others who will take your article and run with it to hurt Christians who humbly seek to follow God’s commands?
A shepherd’s vocation is to protect the sheep—not to expose them to danger or derision. It’s not too late for you to rethink and relinquish identifying your faith by an immoral and sinful desire.
I’m just a single Christian woman who has lived a long life accepting all the limitations and proscriptions our most compassionate God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—communicated to the unmarried knowing they represent His love. But I’ve never felt any need to identify my faith by any desires, especially any morally sinful desires.
Sincerely in Christ,Helen Louise Herndon
Helen Louise Herndon is a member of Central Presbyterian Church (EPC) in St. Louis, Missouri. She is freelance writer and served as a missionary to the Arab/Muslim world in France and North Africa. -
Functional Faith
We don’t want to get the idea that justification (our standing as righteous in the sight of God) is by works, or by faith plus works. But we do want to get the idea that while we are saved by faith alone it is not by faith that is alone. Genuine, saving faith carries in it the seeds of new life in Christ, and they will bear fruit.
For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. (James 2:26, ESV)
Like all good preachers, James provides his audience with examples to drive home his point. His point is “faith apart from works is dead” (v. 20). He brings to bear two figures of Old Testament history to illustrate.
“Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?” (James 2:21–25)
In these two figures, James wants us to see a functional faith, a faith that shows itself in practical ways.
Read More
