Now THAT's What I'm Talking 'Bout! Preaching the "YOU"!!!
Here’s a brief sermon preached by Rev. Dan Torkelson this week past. Marvelous. MH
HOMILY SWD Pastors Conf.
Acts 2:14a,36-41 Appleton, WI
“Preach YOU The Word” May 11, 2011
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. AMEN.
Dear brothers in the ministry and those gathered here at this conference who love them,
I struggle. (pause)
Yes, brothers, I struggle. I struggle because I see what Peter is doing. I get it. I understand. Peter is “preaching you the Word” and what’s more is that he’s “planting it home.” He’s pushing the seeds of Law and Gospel deep into the soil of the hearts of those listening…and he’s punctuating it with the homiletical 2nd person plural. You. Or if Peter was from down south, Y’all.
But make no mistake about it, he’s preaching you the Word and he’s not letting you off the hook.
And this is why I struggle. He’s not letting me off the hook either. This One whom God has made both Lord and Christ, He’s the One YOU crucified.
I struggle to do the same thing, week in and week out. To preach to all the yous out there. But the inclination is to soften the blow. We crucified Him. Somehow, the mutualizing of the Law, we reckon, sounds better to the ears of those in the pew. After all, who are we to punctuate our sermons with yous? Aren’t we pastors sinners too? Isn’t it equally true that we all are guilty of the Son of God’s blood?
It’s almost as if the prophet Nathan had said to David: “We are the men!” Surely Nathan’s eyes had wandered. Surely he had sinned. But that wasn’t the point. Nathan was God’s man at that point and it wasn’t Nathan’s sins that were the main concern. Nathan’s 2nd person singular You was absolutely necessary. David had sinned and this dilly of a sin had called into question his own faith in the promise of a Messiah. Does the forebear of the Messiah behave like this? YOU, Nathan proclaimed at the risk of his own life. No mutualizing, no sympathizing, no reducing. YOU are the man. The one who sinned. The one who besmirched the family name of the Son of God Himself.
And so I struggle. Because I am tasked today to preach this Law to you.
Twice Peter told the crowd, “YOU crucified the Son of God.” What’s funny is that our text ends with 3000 people being baptized! In Waukesha county we have a growing number of non-denominational mega churches which I am quite sure are not preaching the way Peter preaches. They pull in big numbers, but with not quite the same message. And this is why I struggle. I don’t think they are preaching the accusing YOU to all the Yous in the pews. By all rights, I have no reason to think that if I preach like Peter I will have such success. I’m still looking for the sermon which leads me to baptize 3000. And surely I must be crazy to think I’m going to get it by preaching that all those yous had crucified Christ.
Brothers, you hold this same office. Christ has called you, sinners that you are, to broadcast His message, to publish the fact that all the yous to whom you preach are guilty, guilty of crucifying Christ.
The irony here is that you are just as guilty. You are guilty, brother. You are guilty, John. You are guilty, Matt. You are guilty, Dan. You crucified Him. Your sins nailed Him to His tree.
Whatever shall we do? What have we done? How can we go on? Should we struggle through and just preach it anyway, not paying attention to the tremendous credibility problem we have? Should we just live with the feeling at the bottom of our stomachs that we are hypocrites, preaching the damning YOU, knowing full well that we are guilty too?
No. YOU hold this same office and it should not be limited by YOU at all. Indeed, the accusing YOU may be true, but the forgiving YOU is also true. The promise is for YOU and your children. Did you hear that? It is for YOU. It’s a gift for y’all, because it’s marked off as FOR YOU.
We may fear the damning, accusing YOU. We may fail to hold this office firmly and preach it. But ask yourself, which sounds better to you? Christ forgives us? Or Christ forgives you? And which do you think makes a better impression on the YOUs of your congregations? The Law which accuses YOU makes the Gospel which saves YOU so much sweeter. Don’t confuse the 1st and 2nd persons. This isn’t about US or WE. It’s about YOU AND Y’ALL. The Gospel never sounded sweeter than when it’s preached to YOU, or shall I say, FOR YOU precisely because the Law was preached TO YOU. Indeed, AT YOU.
Brothers, you are guilty. Yet for the sake of Him who died, who received God’s accusing YOU, you are declared not guilty. God’s accusing YOU was spoken to Him and the blood required to repay was shed. That blood is FOR YOU. Though your sins be as scarlet, they are white as snow. Christ’s Baptism is FOR YOU. His Body and Blood are FOR YOU. God’s promise to save is FOR YOU, the same YOUs who crucified Him in YOUR sins. Brothers, repent and be saved, all of YOU. In repentance, YOU are made clean again by Christ. Repentance is all about YOU, YOU accused by God’s righteous Law; YOU saved by God’s amazing grace for sinners.
Peter might have looked on his life to that point, all the gaffes, the denials, the contradictions, and he never would have gotten to the YOUs of the Christian message. This message is all about YOU, condemned by the Law, and YOU, saved by the sweet, sweet Gospel.
Brothers, YOU hold this office, this shepherding, guiding office. And I would submit that you have not really preached to the sheep until you have preached to the YOUS. ☺
Brothers, the promise is for you and your children and all the YOUs to whom you preach. God strengthen you to preach to the YOUs as ones set free by the Gospel for YOU. AMEN.
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. AMEN.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Matthew Harrison on May 13, 2011 at 12:26 pm, and is filed under Uncategorized. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed. |
Comments are closed.

about 2 years ago
Thank you to Pastor Torkelson for preaching this sermon, it does strengthen me to do exactly as he says. Thank you also President Harrison for posting this sermon and sharing allowing the rest of us to hear it also.
We are praying for you.
Rev. Benjamin Pollock
Odessa, MN
about 2 years ago
The irony is that on the previous day Pres. H. was talking about the same text in exactly the same way. I guess that means that neither of us is all that original.
It was great to see, you, President Harrison. You remain steadfast in my prayers as you seek to build our witness, mercy, and life together.
Dan
North Prairie, WI
about 2 years ago
Pr. Torkleson,
Much thanks for your preaching this homily and thanks to Pr. Harrison for posting it. As a layman, I also need the accusation of the lLaw to declar me, specifically, guilty of crucifying Christ by my sins. And, yet, I also need to hear the saving Gospel that I, even undeserving I, freely receive Jesus’ mercy–sins forgiven without any merit or worthiness in me.
As I often tell others at work and to whom I speak in doing outreach to our lcal blindness community, there is no sweeter response to confessing sins than to hear “You (singular) are forgiven.”
Your homjily also gives a great reason for both corporate and private confession. In each, I hear unequivocally my pastor–in the stead and by the command of Jesus Christ–declare to me and to those worshipping with me, “You are forgiven.” That’s more than just, “It’s okay,” opr “I accept your apology.” It puts the full sufficiency on Jesus shed blood and righteousness for my salvation.
about 2 years ago
First, let me say that I appreciate Pastor Torkleson’s fine homily abd hs clear proclamation of Law and Gospel. At the same time, I ask, as fraternally as possible, if we are not being reductionistic in insisting on the Law accusing only when it is proclaimed in the 2nd person plural and the Gospel comforting only when it is proclaimed in the 2 person plural. For example, if we assume that Isaiah 52:13-53:12 was proclaimed by Isaiah, which strikes me as a fair assumption, should we not find it interesting, instructive, and worthy of imitation that Isaiah uses the 1st person plural? In the same way, should we not find it interesting, instructive, and worthy of imitation that Paul uses the 1st person plural in Romans 5:1-11? Also, should we not find it interesting, instructive, and worthy of imitation that 1 John 1:5-10 proclaimed in the 1st person plural? My point is this: Scripture goes back and forth between 1st, 2nd, and even 3rd prson, both singular and plural, when proclaiming Law and Gospel. To suggest that only the 2nd person plural, as important as it is, is the only proper way of proclaiming Law and Gospel is to ignore the variety of how Law and Gospel is proclaimed in Scripture. As Pastor Torkleson rightly says, we, as holders of the Pastoral Office, should not limit it. It strikes me that this recent emphasis that, somehow, only the 2nd person plural is the way to properly preach Law and Gospel is coming close to setting up a limit that Scripture itself does not follow. it strikes me as more appropriate to make full use of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person references as
the text use them. I raise this in the hope that there can be individual and fraternal reflection and discussion about this aspect of preaching.
Christ be with all of you and bless your proclamation of Him.
about 2 years ago
Dear David,
I have been thinking much about the same questions you asked for most of the 14 years I have been in the ministry. Let me take a stab at answering your concerns in a fraternal way.
First of all, the “to/at you” of the Law and the “for you” of the Gospel is clearly the pattern established in apostolic preaching in the book of Acts with the exception of Paul’s sermon at the Areopagus in Acts 17.
Part of the recent argument over our understanding of the Law is over a discomfort with “lex semper accusat.” Some have argued, probably rightly, that this is not all there is to say about the Law. Perhaps the best way to clarify this is by arguing that the Law does always accuse, but that is not all it does (other uses). Nevertheless, the accusing task of the Law is probably best heard in the 2nd person, both singular and plural.
While there may be appropriate ways to preach the Law in the 1st and 3rd persons, my concern is that I rarely hear it appropriately done, if ever. It is not the pastor’s task to mutualize the Law and include himself in that preaching. I would contend that this possibly demeans his office, to which he is called quite in spite of his sins. Too much 1st person Law preaching demeans the office. Too much 3rd person Law preaching probably plays to the hearer’s vanity and gives them the suggestion that the problem is always with somebody else, not themselves.
The 2nd person reduces all doubt as to whom the Law really speaks. It speaks to you. Moreover, Christ is very clear that His Gospel is best heard in the 2nd person (Then neither do I condemn you. This is my Body/Blood for you). We’re never going to preach the 1st and 3rd persons well if we do not understand the “to/for you”-nature of Law/Gospel.
Hopefully helpfully,
Dan