I was listening to the radio the other week and there was a panel talking about some social issue and the interviewer asked something about the effectiveness of certain types of rallies and protests which are “preaching to the choir,” since the people who go are generally people who already believe in the cause. One of the panelists responded saying “the choir needs to practice too.” At first I thought it was super profound. Like yea, what a cool new take on the saying. Just because you already believe in a cause doesn’t mean you get a free pass or get to stop fighting for it.
The more I thought about it, the less it made sense to me though. Preaching to the choir refers to the fact that the choir likely hears the sermon a lot. But of course they still need to practice. The sermon is not related to the songs and hymns that they are singing. In other words, there was never any implication that the choir doesn’t need to practice in the first place. It would make sense if he said something like, “the choice still needs to listen to the sermon, because they are also still vulnerable to forgetting the gospel’s teachings.”
That just doesn’t sound as nice.
nANIMOv 