Pagitt has taken a stand against oratory in general. For a book on preaching, it is guaranteed to be lost in the history of the discipline, buried under better works.
Pagitt's contention is that oratory, to which he gives the inane and grammatically painful term, "speaching," exalts an individual to an undeserved position of authority which doesn't honor the community's role in discerning truth. Instead, he recommends the equally painful "dialogical progression" (as though any dialogues don't have an intended progress), which boils down to nothing more than talking with his audience. What Pagitt lacks, and what I'll go to pains to detail, is 1) any biblical foundation, 2) any accurate understandings of history, and 3) any proof that his own methods are fruitful.
Pagitt makes wild claims about dialoging with the audience to be a biblical norm, even stating that speeches in the Bible are a rarity. This is, in a word, nonsense. In nearly every book of the Bible someone makes a speech, and in every case, the Bible exalts their speaking with authority FOR the community, and not merely with the community. Pagitt offers no proof that his assertions about what the Bible says and does are accurate.
Secondly, Pagitt makes the completely unfounded and uncited claim that "speaching," or oratory in general, are a product of the Enlightenment. Anyone with a college education will find this intellectually insulting. From the ancient greco-roman orators, whose methods influenced the biblical writings, history and timelessly and repeatedly proven the effectiveness of oratory (that is, of a speaker in authority moving an audience to an intended purpose).
Thirdly, Solomon's Porch, his popularized church, has proven to have an actually minimal effect in its immediate community. While their event invitation list claims hundreds, actual attendance is small. His "radical" move to church without microphones doesn't forward the priesthood of all believers, it only forwards the cause of having a minimal number of priests in your church. Pagitt speaches widely at conferences in exactly the form he decries, despite the fact that he has no proven track record of his own effectiveness.
All that to say, this book is a waste of time. It is founded on nonsense and it will be lost in history. Perhaps the most telling indicator is that Pagitt dismisses the expository methods of Martin Lloyd-Jones, and tells readers who like him simply to return Pagitt's book to the store. It kind of gives you a sense of how much Pagitt is really interested in dialogue.
James W. Miller is the author of God Scent: A Devotional.