Leadership Journal

Preaching without notes is currently getting lots of attention. But it's not a new topic. Most issues that seem revolutionary in a given historical moment most likely surfaced in previous ages as well. Recent books written or reprinted on the issue include Preaching Without Notes by Clarence Macartney (Wipf & Stock, 2008); Without a Net: Preaching in the Paperless Pulpit by William Shepherd (CSS, 2004); Preaching on Your Feet by Fred Lybrand (Baker, 2008); and How to Preach Without Notes by Charles Koller (Baker, 2007).

It has been the subject of papers at the annual meetings of the Evangelical Homiletics Society. Since I presented one of those papers, and since I've virtually abandoned using notes in my own weekly preaching, it would seem safe to assume that I favor the practice. But as I thought about it, preaching without notes isn't really the point.

First, some background. In 1855 Cardinal Newman weighed in on the issue. He called it preaching "with book" or "without book." Though this esteemed theologian in Victorian England prized the highest standards of scholarship, he also concluded "that a very inferior sermon, delivered without book, answers the purposes for which all sermons are delivered more perfectly than one of great merit, if it be written and read."

Newman understood the value of precision that comes with writing something well. But for preaching he concludes that polish and precision are not the best criteria, and that preaching "without book," while messier, nevertheless produces a better result.

Since Newman's time and before, we have argued the merits of becoming note-free.

For some, the effort required to speak well without notes is time well-wasted, since many audiences are not at all offended or distracted by an occasional downward glance. Better to devote that time to solid research and clear construction, and let the notes provide their silent coaching as necessary. Some would even say that recourse to notes or manuscript lends an appropriate sense of preparation and subtle credibility. After all, preaching is serious business, not something that should seem off the cuff.

On the other hand, proponents of note-free preaching argue that breaking free from the crutch of a manuscript or outline gives the preacher unrivaled eye contact and force of expression. People do not tend to rely on written prompts when they speak of things closest and most important to them. No one reads a marriage proposal or attempts to read their way through a presidential debate. Things nearest and dearest to us to us happen "live," so should not the sermon?

The world of preachers can be divided up between those who for good reasons preach without notes, and those who for other good reasons don't.

But what if preaching without notes is really the byproduct rather than the goal? If it becomes the goal, we can resemble the 10-year-old kid who, learning to ride his bike proficiently, calls out, "Look, ma. No hands!" (For preachers it becomes, "Look, folks, no notes.")

PAGE 1 of 5