Recent research has shown that on the average a message that goes longer than 25 minutes quickly loses a listener's interest.
What are your thoughts about this? Has your preaching (or your pastors) been adjusted to fit into this time frame? Do you believe an impact can still be made upon your listeners in this time frame? Do you think there are exceptions to this?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
The answer to this question really depends on the preacher, IMO. I have heard messages that captured my interest and I completely lost track of time, and in others that felt like 30 years long.
It is hard to 'lock in' a time limit and yet be flexible and free for the Spirit to move. But I might also add that if you can't tell me what you need to say within 25 minutes, you might need to rethink how much of it is absolutely essential to say.
I probably relate to Eutychus the most, except I would have JUMPED out the window if Paul preached to me all night.
Ever since I started preaching shorter messages (under 25 min) my effectiveness has gone way up I think. The more we talk, the more likely we are to say something unnecessary or stupid (Prov 18:21) and then we and our hearers have to live with it. I think that for audiences today, less is more.
I remember attending this church for two years in college and listening to hour long messages week after week and wanting to shoot myself. I don't want to do that to anyone. I will concede that there are people that can preach a length sermon and be highly effective, but I think for most people, somewhere between 20-30 minutes is the best place to be.
When we try to trim down our sermons, it helps us avoid material that is really not that important after all, and the content that we do deliver will be better throughout. 20 minutes of solid stuff is better than 40 minutes of hit and miss. I have found this true from both the pulpit and the pew.
I would be more than happy to sit through a service where the preacher only spoke for 25min.
Can an impact still be made in 25 min. Most certainly! I would have to think the longer the sermon the less of an impact! If on a Sunday you are to take something away to use for daily living and the preaching was painstakingly long, then the only thing you are really going to take away from the sermon is how long it was. The duration of the sermon doesn't dictate if the content was good. So if a minister can effectively deliver the word of God in a time frame that meets within parameters of what the congregation can mentally and physically handle, which happens to be 25 minutes then why not keep the sermon to that time length?
Are there exceptions? As with everything else yes. I guess it all depends on how God moves during the worship service leading up to the preaching and how God moves upon the heart of the one delivering the sermon.
In our culture schedules are important, people are busy doing things all the time even on Sundays. My parents never did anything on Sunday but take me and my brothers to church (which I am grateful for) and if the sermon went long (as it did most Sundays) then that was fine. I remember my parents getting upset at those who didn't like the long sermons or who were concerned with getting home for lunch. If I complained about how long the sermon was I would get earful from my parents. They would say something similar to this: "back in our day we would stay in church for hours...people wanted to hear the Word, they were hungry for God" My response in my head would always be "Yeah, thats because hardly anyone knew how to read and were to lazy to look up scriptures for themselves"..... if God could only speak through long winded preachers then we are all in trouble"
The length of a good message depends on the speaker; however, speakers need to learn to adjust to their audience. A fact of the matter is that adults attention spans aren't as long as what speakers want to preach, which means something has to give, and that should be the lengthy preaching.
A personal rule of thumb is that if I'm not purposefully using the power of repetition to drive a point home and its been 20-25 minutes, I most likely need to shut up and not torture those poor people who are trying to be nice and listen but are really irritated and wondering who invited me to preach!
I recently borrowed season two of The Office andam thoroughly enjoying the show commercial-free. One thing I have noticed is that the show is only about 22 minutes long without interruption. Yet every show offers a main idea, conflict of some sort and resolution (usually Michael further revealing how ridiculous he truly is). After every show, I look forward to the next epidsode because I appreciate so many elements of the show, particularly the time frame.
That says something to me about how I engage in certain types of media/communication. While my history is littered with long sermons, I agree with Nathanael's point that I often filled the sermons with hit or miss filler. The Office maintains a very streamlined approach to their audience, and there is nothing "unspiritual" about appreciating that and applying it to preaching. Less is more works quite well Nathanael, great observation.
I think that generally the 25 minute rule is good. The only times that I am really interested in listening to anything longer is if the preacher is speaking about something theologically interesting or debated (which most people probably don't enjoy), or if the speaker has the ability to tell a good story.
So far, being forced to communicate my thoughts in a shorter amount of time helps me to evaluate what things are really important and hit those things hard. It helps to clarify my thoughts and hopefully make my preaching better understood and more effective.
I haven't voted in the poll yet. I thought it was interesting the way it was set up. The "As the Holy Spirit leads" point made the whole thing unfair. It's a trump card, and if you don't pick it, you feel unspiritual. The question is not whether you're allowing the Holy Spirit to lead your preaching but what you think about certain time frames.
I for one tend to like class, chapel, the sermon part of church, and I often don't mind a long sermon. But I know I have sat through some long sermons that made me restless, thinking "You've already said this." When length expands content in a way that brings depth, it's splendid. When it's just saying the same thing in a different way, it annoys me.
I wonder if our listener's attention spans being only about 25 minutes is a byproduct of our entertainment industry. Look at TV and Movies, etc. The average good sitcom is only about 20-25 minutes and the average drama is about 40. Are we training ourselves to lose the ability of focused listening as a society?
Either way, when we preach, we need to hit that cultural span no matter what it is. If you're in Africa, preach for three hours and make it interesting and relevant. If you're in America, preach for 20 and leave them wanting to come back next week.
Being able to meet the smaller time frame of 20-25 will increase the preacher's skill and ability to be more concise and poignant. So I'm working hard on not preaching the sermon twice in an hour and preaching it once more effectively in 20 minutes.
hmm...the stats are the stats--im sure that research is done respectfully and accurately in light of this statement--realizing that ministers would take note of this and potentially feel that they need to change how they do what they do like the back of their hand. I agree with the stat of the length bc i actaully look forward to a sermon of 20 min or less. The exception i have of my preference for his length--that is with me preaching--is for the sake of longer narrative passages--allowing more time to tell the story and build to the punch at the end. At the end of the sermon--yes--sermon length does have something to say about "how" you do something is just as important as what you do. Past this, well, im new at this and well agree with the length of the sermon delivery in light of pursuing a ministry and career in the Navy as an active duty chaplain.
I like 25 minutes, mostly because any longer and you have got too much of me, and any shorter and you have been robbed of precious "Beaty-time."
Seriously though, I think that if you are preaching to adults, 25-30 minutes is the best fit because nobody walks away feeling cheated.
Yeah, I am learning this 25 minute thing. It's a challenge, but it pushes preachers to cut to the chase and not ramble. I think the challenge for us as preachers is not so much to agree with the 25 minute thing, but to do it. I hope I can preach well in such a time.
I'll have to agree w/ Shannon--- it really depends on the preacher. Some preachers I could probably listen to over 25 minutes; others, it might need to be shorter.
I found my sermons to be under 25 minutes -- if I go any longer, I might have added a few rambling moments.
For youth, 15-20 mins probably would do it. their attention span wont last too long. For adults (like what beaty said), probably 25 to 30. it really depends.
For me, it is very difficult to preach for 25 minutes or less. Just ask my wife about my longwindedness. I have so much "meat and potatoes" of wisdom to give to my hungry flock! Just kidding.
My real problem is that I love to preach and there is so much to share. I feel like I have to give the whole meal to people at once. I am learning that one portion at a time is enough. Let them digest it and want to come back to the table for more.
Honestly, keeping it interesting, relevant, practical and "to the point" is the task of every preacher...It should be accomplished in 25 minutes or the audience will lose interest.
I think this answer is depends on the congregation, and guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I have listened 40 minutes long sermons at some churches in Japan. The preachers spoke not only Bible but also practical teaching in Christian life to the congregation. I believe most Japanese congregations are generaly tolerant, but in reality,I have seen many people lost their interest to the sermon when they see that the preachers did not speak by the Holy Spirit.
Dr Earl Creps preached three messages for the Day of Renewal at AGTS. The sermons had 33, 38, and 34minutes, and he had a plenty of time for prayer. I felt the sermons were well designed and prepared for leaving prenty time for the prayer. Because I felt the presene of the H.S, in the meetings,I wanted to listen more from the preacher.
If the message is well prepared, and people sense guidance of the Holy Spirit, it must be no problem for messages over 25 minutes.
because of my wonderful job (custodial work) i have the privilege of listening to sermons every night on my ipod. my favorite preachers speak no less than 45 minutes per sermon, with the exception of Earl Creps (I'm a big fan) who averages around 25 min, and they captivate me with the word of God, for one, because i sense that it captivates them too.
Most of the preachers i listen to such as, Paul Washer, John Piper, Leonard Ravenhill, Richard Wurmbrand, etc., would probably fail my homiletical courses: too long, no three to five points, too "serious" (sometimes never funny), and not preoccupied about approval and being winsome. But under their preaching, sometimes i am so overcome with the presence of God that i stop working and weep in repentance because they exposed my sins or weep in unspeakable joy because i saw a glimpse of the beauty of Jesus i had never seen before.
oh, and when i say that sometimes i stop working, it's in a warehouse by myself. but as i listen to sermons and suddenly there's a moment when i'm heavy-laden with contrition or touched by a newfound or reborn intimacy, sometimes it happens midstream of an hour long sermon.
i agree with Christy that the options for the poll is inadequate. the 'as the Holy Spirit leads' option is an unfair of longer sermons and a misrepresentation of sermons in general. when it comes to composing any sermon of any respective lenght we do so by the grace of God and, hopefully, by the inspiration of the holy spirit. there should have been a 'or longer' option, otherwise people of my taste are discriminated. :(
I am from a business degree persuation and I think we need to stick to the basic rules of communication--keep it brief. If the pastors incorporated some interaction with the parishioners, then length would be required but like the Word says, "the more the words the less the meaning," ecc 6;11. Shoot for meaning, not for words. Peace out.
I really don't feel like this question is fair. Like many others who have responded to this poll I have sat in church services that just seemed to drag on and on, but I have also been in services where an hour seems like just a few minutes. While 25 to 30 minutes for a sermon may work best in most churches, their are definitely more than a few congregations where a 45min to an hour sermon is more effective. I certainly believe preachers should do their best to focus their attention on communicating the main points of their message and eliminate anything that would distract the audience from hearing and understanding the main points of the text. I also believe that if the sermon is relevant to the audience and addresses Biblical truth that the attention span of the audience can outlast 25min. The majority of the time my sermons are somewhere around the 25 min mark. However, there have been times when I have gone over and have been just as effective.
this is a tough one. I tend to agree with most of what everyone else has said. :) I will say this- as a youth pastor, when i started to get to the 20 mins, that is when they started getting distracted. I would see this going on, and instead of "pointing out" students (yes, I have seen this done before..) and embarrassing them, I would begin to wind my sermon down. However, there were times I made those little punks listen to me anyways. Just Kidding!
I didn't read all the previous postings so if I'm repeating something....(tough) I mean forgive me. ;)
I listen to a couple sermons a week on average. Usually a Rob Bell sermon and an Andy Stanley then if I have time I’ll catch up with listening to a few of my friends from around the country.
All of them are over 30 min. Bell is consistently over 40 less than 50 min. Stanley comes in at less than 40 but more than 30.
But here’s the deal: I think if you are good, you can go 40. If you're not, you need to stop at 25. When I’m listening to a podcast and a preacher is over 20 and hasn’t made a point that speaks to me, I’m done. .. They’ve lost me. The challenge then for us is to know if we’re good or not. In my opinion, that knowledge will not come, primarily, from self evaluation. It comes from honest, sometimes even brutal feedback from people who will tell you the truth. Developing those relationships requires a level of humility and openness few preachers or religious leaders ever attain. So they become somewhat deluded in their effectiveness. I think people like Bell and Stanley have been in the greater public eye long enough to develop a thick skin for criticism. They recognize their preaching as a product that is offered and consumed by a group of consumers. From what I know about their organizational structures, they seek and encourage a constant feedback loop with their congregations and their leadership. They are also not afraid to face the facts they find. Even if that feedback directly effects them personally.
So, if you are good, deliver the goods. However, I think if you can’t deliver the goods in 40 min or so then either the passage is too big for one sermon or…. You just aren’t very good and more is not going to be better.
I appreciate the research Dr. Oss has given in class about retention after 25 min. But I wonder if those studies are done under conditions where consistently bad preaching is the norm. I wonder if there are other attention retention studies done in the entertainment industry where the motive is purely to capture and maintain an audience’s attention. How long can that last? A movie goes 90 to 120+ minutes. 90 seems to be the limit for a comedy, 120 for action an adventure and for an epic less than 180. How do they capture and maintain attention? A bad movie losses me pretty quickly (ie Napoleon Dynamite!) But an epic movie like Dances with Wolves (3 hours in the cinema, 3:44 directors cut) The Godfather series, one- 2:51, two- 3:20, three 3:05) All those movies left me wanting more.
Gary Black
I didn't think that anyone who thought Napoleon Dynamite was a bad movie even knew what a blog was!
dude, your toast! When you say stuff like that you should use a synonym! ;)
GB
Well, I agree with Shannon, it depends on the person - Gordon Fee can just open a passage and go and everyone forgets it's been an hour - where as when John Hagee preaches we all wonder when it will be over it's just so horrible (how does he have 18,000 people in his church?!
I agree also with Nathaniel that in todays world, less is more - it forces us to be concise and to the point and forget all the other dribble. But then again, even for some preachers, 25 min is too long! ;)
I struggle to stay in the 25 minute range because as a seminary graduate I see so much going on in the text I get all fired up - but I have to remember that most often the typical audience isn't always as excited as the preacher is!
It depends on your audience. Most people who are not Christian have the short attention span to listen to a Sunday morning sermon. Probably equal to the length of time of a commercial break or maybe even the capacity to watch an info-mercial on a set of stake knives (the ones for $19.99). I think that it is also the canndid Christian who stands up and says that shorter is better. Yes, time is a commodity, however, if you have something to say tell me. But do not waste my time.
“The research shows…” What research? Are we talking about a sample that included Unitarian Universalists, Mormons and United Church of Christ as the basis? Or is this a sample of 13 year old ADHD kids with bipolar disorder, suffering from PTSD with raging anger who have been locked in a 10 by 6 cell for 3 days in a detention center?
The criteria for the sample must be included for an intelligent response. In addition, not only must the study include facts about the population, but about the subject being studied.
If there is a “25 minute rule” then why on earth did AGTS torture students with 90 minute classes in accelerated semesters? It would seem to me that if there were any veracity to the rule, it would be a rule that would apply across the board, including the AGTS classroom. After all, if the principle is that the human being cannot maintain attention for more than 25 minutes, what is the purpose of requiring seminary students to remain seated for lectures from profs for 50 minute classes? Are seminary students an especially separate class of people that are uniquely focused for longer periods, and able to do twice what non-seminarians can? Me thinks not.
Most academic institutions routinely require students to have multiple sessions per day that last double the “25 minute rule.” Some public schools have even discovered that going to “block sessions” lasting 2 hours per class has resulted in increased retention.
What is so different about a preacher and a congregation? Is it that “God things” are especially wearying on the attention center of a man, and he cannot tolerate but a few minutes discussion per week?
If a preacher has nothing to say but to dawdle upon his own imaginings, then 3 minutes is too long.
However, if a man has been on his face before God, has indeed heard from On High and has a message to deliver, then the issue is to deliver the message. Sadly, too often, the pulpit has been reduced to a lectern, and the preacher to a lecturer. Could that be the reason critics of the modern church describe it as a “half-mile wide, and a half-inch deep?”
What has happened to the office of prophet? Did that office somehow vanish with the miracles, signs and wonders? Where is the man who thunders, “Where is the Lord God of Elijah?” Did God fail to respond, because Elijah and the prophets of Ba’al had gone over the “25 minute rule”? Can you see Jesus, at the feeding of the 4,000 or the 5,000, the Sermon on the Mount, or the Olivet Discourse stopping because of the “25 minute rule”? What about Peter on the Day of Pentecost? Did he check the sun dial at 25 minutes?
Where has the power of God gone? Is the issue really the length of time, or is it rather the nature of the interaction? Are we talking about delivering a speech or preaching the Gospel? Is it about entertaining a few curiosity seekers, or is it about storming the gates of Hell? Is it about fulfilling the allotted time so as to entertain without boredom, or about bringing the people into the Presence?
Could it be that what we are doing is more important than the time it takes to do it?
I think the answer does depend on both the speaker and the audience. Not trying to take the conversation in a different direction, but I once heard the length of church services paralleled the average length of a movie.
I personally think that as a norm, 25 minutes is pretty good, but at my church, the sermons usually go over 30 mins (sometimes over 35 mins) and people seem to enjoy them.
I also think that sermon length is a cultural thing. In many non-Anglo churches, if you preached for 25-30 minutes, you probably wouldn't be asked to preach there again. I would just say to get all of your most meaningful stuff in within the first 25 minutes. Also, in many older churches, people don't have issues with longer sermons, but I can see the potential of losing a younger demographic without shorter sermons.
I think that length is relative to what people are used to. It seems that people who are saved with a 40 minute sermon expect a 40 minute sermon and people who are saved with 30 expect thirty. The priority for me is to be true and relevant because those things trump time. I watch an hour of
"24" straight through because it captures my attention, but block out boring speakers in the first 5 minutes. Some people are gifted in such a way to speak long and feel short and others like myself probably tend to go the otherway. We have to work with the gifts God has given us with the ultimate goal of being most effective in the context which we find ourselves. Popular culture in our generation says 25-30 minutes but who really knows what the future will hold. This generation could start a rebirth of longer sermons.
In looking at seemingly effective churches there is really quite a lot of variety in sermon length. One thing I see impacting this is the use of media in sermons. For churches that focus more on using audio and video to connect during the sermons those mediums eat up a good amount of time and so the overall service time goes up but the level of effective communication still remains high. For instance, Tim Lucas at lifechurch.com seems to average about 50 minutes but his sermons are captivating. They are sort of topical expositon, but he engages the audience in a variety of formats and so goes long but seems short. I think if Paul had the technology we have today Eutychus would have made it further into the night. We have the tools to engage people for as long as we need, it just takes that much more work on our part to engage them on multiple fronts. I think while length can vary it is important to stay within expectations. If you are in a church that expects 40 minutes go forty, if less then go less. In looking at preparing for my own future I think it will probably be more beneficial to set a slightly longer norm, and let people out early than to go long and let them out late.
Mark Drisoll is another example, that cat preaches for like an hour and in his context it works. Anyway...
This is my first semester at AGTS and therefore my first class with Dr. Oss. Up to this point I had never heard anyone explain the importance of a time limit to your message and I am on board 100%. The rate at which we loose our audience based on the munite hand should sober everyone who communicates the Word of God. Tightening up our message from 20 to 25 minutes will make us better preachers without taking away the power or the punch. I heard an old minster say, "The heart cannot recieve what the seat cannot endure." It is ironic that when we try to fill "our hour" we have more clock watchers in the pew but when we preach with brevity the minutes seem to fly to the trained listener and the pre-Chrsitian. Now, since I have become indoctrinated by this truth (thank you Dr. Oss), where are the 20 - 25 minute preachers in Springfield? The task before me?...find a seat with much padding!
hmm, i'm not a preacher, an audience member. tried to read everyone's responses, but took a lot of time. I say... 25 minutes is too short for me. If we keep continuing to do shorter and shorter services, then we're gonna end up have even shorter sermons later. I personally love sermons... and 25 minutes just isn't enough for me to grasp the reality of it. That just feels like a regular sunday school elementary sermon.. maybe for like elementary-junior high students, 25 minutes is nice... but for high school students and up.. .this is not. In high school, I was always kind of sad how the sermons were only 20 minutes long. Now that i'm in college, I LOVE sermons that are longer... UNLESS it goes on crazy tangents that have nothing to do with whats being preached. But otherwise... break the 25 minute rule. If i were a pastor, dude... speak on
Look, the only thing I'm going to sit down and listen to for more than 45 minutes is "24". So, unless Jack Bauer is preaching, I have no intention of listening to anyone over 45 minutes. Jesus didn't preach the whole book of Matthew in one sitting, and when Paul preached too long, somebody almost died. Personally, I like about 25-30 minutes. This usually gives me enough time to dig deep in the text and make an appeal for change to the audience. I think most people should lean towards a shorter sermon than a longer. The ten commandments, The sermon on the mount, The Gettysburg Address, and pretty much most of the incredible speeches in history...were tremendously shorter than the masters of bloviation (i.e. pastors from bible colleges).
A Time Limit? Our (American) society seems to be heavily structured around how cheap and easy they can be to gain from this world or the next without having to invest personally. If they could, they would send somebody else to do their biding. And now because people do not want to invest their time to God in church, they are able to go through the drive-thru window and order their sermon prepackaged. This is an excellent technique if you definitely do not want to see any movement of the Holy Spirit. Hey, Hey…we did not call for you at this time, the whole program is one hour and we don’t have time for you!
I understand what is being said…“Make sure that what you preach is spot-on and don’t waste the precious time of the people.” But I do have to interject, “When will we put God first in all we do?” Not just as a preacher, but also as a people? When will we learn as a people to give God our best?
I know we have to do something to reach the people of today, but quick and easy? Herd them in, herd them out, herd them in, herd them out, etc. If we change up the preaching to twenty-five minutes, then we need to do something more in other areas that are lacking. Like being real to people, building disciples, mentoring, etc. People need to be exposed more to God’s Word, not less.
I grew up with an hour of preaching in the hispanic church. Now that I'm older I think much of what most people needs to say can be said in 25 mins. 25mins of preaching plus whatever time a person might need in the altar time and ministering in the Spirit.
Post a Comment