Recently, in relation to preaching in Korean churches, people have become engaged in serious discussion concerning the notion of "preaching which cannot be heard." Why is preaching not communicated effectively? If we only think of contemporary communi...
Recently, in relation to preaching in Korean churches, people have become engaged in serious discussion concerning the notion of "preaching which cannot be heard." Why is preaching not communicated effectively? If we only think of contemporary communication skills in a superficial sense, we have the best function at our disposal which has been effective, since the dawn of history. The preacher is also equipped with better abilities compared with the past. Nevertheless, the fact that preaching cannot be heard is a serious phenomenon which unveils the serious problems facing preachers today.
From this viewpoint, for preaching to be heard, what should we try to do? First, we have to study ancient rhetoric and relate this study with preaching. Consequently, we have to present a new paradigm for preaching to be heard clearly in Korean churches. This attempt to relate between preaching and rhetoric was always a common premise of preaching, and rhetoric has been an essential component in effective preaching since ancient times. This applies in particular to the preaching of Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul, as well as to church Fathers such as Augustine and Chrysostom. Even today, the necessity for such a relationship of two areas has been proposed continuously.
For a long time, however, the irrelevance of rhetoric in relation to preaching was assumed. Therefore, in the 20th century, homiletics and rhetoric became estranged from each other, but the homiletical skills which were based on rhetoric continued to thrive. As a result, preaching has changed into a form that cannot clearly be heard by worshippers. Moreover, theology became inclined toward philosophy, and the Holy Bible was subjected to literary criticism. Therefore, in preaching today, there is an active attempt to rekindle the relationship with rhetoric again, and this is quite understandable.
According to this change in homiletics, for preaching to be heard, we shall deal with the nature of rhetoric again and shall apply this to modern preaching. But the form of preaching which can be heard properly is absolutely not only found in rhetorical expressions that are equipped with a linguistic function. Already this “splendid rhetoric of linguistic skills” has made many problems in the past, and this was also one reason why rhetoric disappeared for a long time and gave credence to the opinion that rhetoric was useless. For these reasons, the essential points which shall be applied invariably in contemporary preaching are Aristotle's three requisites for persuasion. These include ethos, which means the 'speechmaker’s personality,' pathos, which means the 'favorable reaction of audience,' and logos, which means 'logical and rational speech are well-mixed.' All of these factors ensure real and effective communication. These Aristotelian principles are essential for modern preachers, because they need to reach various audience types, and they require more complicated personalities and forms of logics. Consequently, attempts to supplement ethos and pathos in the awakening aspect are becoming more frequent. This phenomenon is confirmed by the fact that textual preaching, expository preaching, and narrative preaching are mainstream practices these days. Through these attempts, conversely, we are losing the aspect of pathos as a subject of communication. This inevitably leads to preaching which cannot be heard. This conclusion has been suggested in many theseis, books, and questionnaires.
Secondly, awareness of the necessity of pathos preaching on the pulpits of Korea should be raised. From this point of view, we have to identify the flow of past preaching in Korean churches, and study how these forms of preaching communicated with Korean believers. Subsequently, we have to discuss how to communicate to Korean audiences through pathos methods. The methods have a traditional way of thinking, effect a conventional faith and possess a post modern mindset.
Thirdly, the study suggests concrete and practical methods for effective communication of pathos preaching on the pulpits of Korea. There should be a deep analysis and a practical application for the Korean language, the vernacular language, for language transferring methods via media, for non-linguistic factors, and for the creation of a pathetic preaching manuscript, etc. Furthermore, there needs to be a study of how to make preaching which can be heard well through studying broadcasting facilities and the assistant equipments of many churches in Korea.
Fourthly, this study exists to analyze preachers in Korean churches by focusing on the communication methods employed in their rhetoric. For example, after analyzing modern pastors; Ju Ki-Chul and Han Gyung-Jik, who are skillful in the use of ethos, and contemporary pastor; Gwak Sun-Hee, who is skillful in using pathos, I will outline a preaching model for the contemporary church by discussing the strong and weak points of preaching.
Finally, the study suggests the uppermost limit based on findings from the results. However, everything is incomplete, and nothing is perfect, because the preaching which can be heard these days might not be heard tomorrow. At this point, I want to demonstrate the limits of this study. Additionally, I hope that a more active study will be conducted in the future based on the results of this study.
，韩语论文，韩语毕业论文 |
