November 13, 2009 by Peter Mead
Actually there are several subjects that preachers are not supposed to talk about, but I’d like to mention one. Briefly. Actually I’d rather not mention it, so I’ll quote somebody else. It’s the issue of “expenses,” aka “petrol money” in some churches, aka “speaking fees,” aka “honoraria.” It’s right that we hesitate to mention this issue since money should not be the motivation of a preacher, but at the same time very few are in a position to totally ignore the issue of finances.
I was just enjoying Richard Bewes’ book Speaking in Public Effectively. In his last chapter he focuses on the travelling speaker. He addresses the unique challenges of travelling to speak, the things you learn to pack, the flexibility that’s needed, the fact that some apparently petty and trivial things can become profoundly significant in the dead of night in an obscure place. Finally, the preaching is done and it’s time to get going on your return journey,
Someone comes up to you wearing specs, and holding a pen and pad. “Could you tell me if you had any expenses?”
In general it’s right to put in a claim, if for no other reason than that the organizers ought to know what the actual costs of their meeting came to. They make an annual budget. They need to know, and so do their successors.
Accept whatever you are given. At times I have been paid with book tokens. You wonder, as you drive away, what the reaction would be at the petrol station, if you leant out of the car window and chirped, “Do you take book tokens here?” But it is all part of the fascinating experience of service, and we learn to take the rough and the smooth together, with equanimity, “not greedy for money, but eager to serve” (1Peter 5:2)
This attitude should govern us all, including those who depend on their speaking for a living. Speakers who become money-conscious should either reform their priorities or leave off speaking. The people who ought to be giving attention to the question of expenses, fees and salaries are the organizing elders. They are the leaders responsible for these matters, and they should, if possible, have business people among them. It is not the concern of the speakers. Never.
I wonder what difference including business people in the discussions of speakers “expenses” might make? Anyway, enough of me quoting someone else, any comments on this issue (feel free to comment “anonymously” on this issue!)
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Itinerant Ministry, Richard Bewes, Speaking in Public Effectively, Travelling Speaker | 6 Comments »
November 12, 2009 by Peter Mead
Yesterday I quoted at length from Mike Reeves’ message on Justification (available on theologynetwork.org). Mike was addressing the intriguing question, “Why is it that Luther started the Reformation and Erasmus didn’t?” The first part of his answer focused on the contrast between their views of Scripture. For Erasmus the Scripture was to be revered, but could be squeezed to fit his own vision of Christianity. For Luther the Scriptures were the only sure foundation for belief, the supreme authority allowed to contradict all other claims. Now for the second part of Mike’s answer to the question:
But it wasn’t just the authority of the Bible that made the difference, it was also what they saw as the content of the Bible. For Erasmus the Bible was little more than a collection of moral exhortations. The Bible is all about urging believers to be more like Christ the example. Luther said, that’s just turning the Gospel on its head. Our issue is sinners first and foremost don’t need to copy someone, sinners need a Saviour! Sinners need, first and foremost, a message of salvation! . . . Without the message of Christ’s free gift of righteousness, his free gift of himself and all that he has, there would be no Reformation. Justification by faith alone was what made the Reformation the Reformation. . . . It was this gracious message of a sweet Saviour’s free gift of righteousness that made life changing ministries life changing.
Reformation is not a moral spring clean. It’s not a revolution against the old ways, anything old fashioned and ritualistic. It’s not just about opening the Bible, but not finding the message fully. This is a profound challenge for the church today – what message do people hear?
Our attitude to Scripture is the foundational issue for our preaching. The message we preach from the Scripture is the more visible issue in our preaching. Do we stand, no matter how much contemporary culture, even church culture, not to mention the attacks of the enemy himself, are arrayed against us? Do we stand and preach the message of Scripture, because we are absolutely committed to Scripture, because we are absolutely committed to the God who gave us the Scripture? Do we preach in light of these simple yet profound lessons from history?
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Erasmus, Gospel Preaching, Martin Luther, Michael Reeves, Reformation, theologynetwork.org | Leave a Comment »
November 11, 2009 by Peter Mead
There could be no end to posts dealing with lessons for preachers from the Reformation. I’d like to focus in on one today, then another tomorrow. Both of them were brought out very clearly in a series of messages by Michael Reeves on Justification (available, and well worth listening to, on theologynetwork.org). In the final session of a great series of talks, Mike asks “Why is it that Luther started the Reformation and Erasmus didn’t?” Let me quote the first part of Mike’s two-part answer to this question:
Why is it that Luther started the Reformation and Erasmus didn’t? Because Erasmus is the one who unleashed the Greek New Testament onto Europe. He was getting the Bible out there, so why didn’t he start the Reformation? Well, even though Erasmus was a constant and deep student of the Scriptures, the Scriptures didn’t actually do a lot for him because of how he treated them. Erasmus kept banging on about how vague the Scriptures are (which is very convenient for his own theology), and so he gave them very little practical, let alone overruling, authority. So although he looked at Scripture, the message of Scripture could be tailored, squeezed, adjusted to fit his own vision of what Christianity is.
The only way to break out of that suffocating scheme and achieve any substantial reformation and change in the world – well, it took Luther’s attitude, that Scripture is the only sure foundation for belief. The Bible had to be acknowledged as the supreme authority. It had to be allowed to contradict and overrule all other claims, because if it couldn’t do that, it itself would be overruled and hijacked by another message, as it was with Erasmus. In other words a simple reverence for the Bible was never going to change the world, even quite a high view of the Bible was never going to do much. Sola Scriptura. Scripture alone was the indispensable key for change. Without acknowledging that the Bible has that supreme and foundational authority there would be no Reformation. No Reformation in peoples’ hearts, no Reformation in the world.
That final emboldened text is well worth a “selah” for preachers. On this matter are we an Erasmus, or a Luther?
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Erasmus, Martin Luther, Michael Reeves, Mike Reeves, Reformation, theologynetwork.org | Leave a Comment »
November 10, 2009 by Peter Mead
Yesterday I began to respond to Anthony’s question about preaching longer narratives:
How do you handle the tension of wanting to tell the story as it was intended to be told and not wanting to overload the hearers?
We saw that how a story is told is critical (more critical than the amount of information included). We saw that not every detail requires equal focus. This leads on to another thought that is sometimes hard for some people to accept:
4. True expository preaching does not always require every verse to be read out. With a long text, tell the whole story, but read selected highlights. The readers can look down and check what you are telling is accurate, but you don’t have to read every verse in the preaching of the text. If you preach a narrative in first person, you probably won’t read any of the text, but still you need to preach the text!
5. Remember the three ingredients in a sermon. A sermon consists, according to Don Sunukjian, in the combination of three elements. A biblical text plus the big idea plus a preaching purpose. Often sermons are lacking one or two or even all three of these ingredients! The biblical text ingredient means that the message is the text’s message, not a superimposed preacher’s message. Usually this means the text will be opened and read before or during the sermon. However, in a longer message, the text may only be read in part. For instance a single sermon on Romans as a whole will not read the whole thing, but probably will include the reading of 1:16-17 and a few other key highlights. The same is true with a long narrative.
What is always important is not that every word be read, but that the listener is confident that this message is the true and exact message of this text. They can look down while you’re preaching and see it there, they can pull a Berean attitude and check it out later for themselves. Usually the best way to build confidence in the biblical textual nature of the message is to read the whole text and let the exposition show clearly there, but that is a typical strategy, rather than an absolute requirement. With a long narrative the sense of purpose and a clear statement of the main idea are critical, but the biblical source of the message can be conveyed without full detailed exegetical explanation of every verse, or even the reading of every verse.
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Genre, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 6 - Message Idea, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Tagged Biblical Narrative, Expository Preaching, Preaching narrative | 2 Comments »
November 9, 2009 by Peter Mead
Anthony asked the following after one of the posts last week:
I preach only occasionally, and have tackled a couple of narrative passages recently. I like to respect the narrative chunks in the text, which often have a clear beginning, middle and end. But last time I ended up preaching two whole chapters (75 verses), which was probably a bit much!
I’d be interested to hear what you think about this. How do you handle the tension of wanting to tell the story as it was intended to be told and not wanting to overload the hearers?
This is an important question. After all, not every biblical narrative is contained within a few verses like some of the parables, there are some substantial narratives in the Bible. The David and Bathsheba narrative lasts for nearly 60 verses if you include Nathan’s visit. Anthony is referring to one lasting for 75 verses. A few points to bear in mind:
1. Listeners are more overwhelmed by how something is told than what is told. Especially with narratives, if they are told well, listeners will be glued. Tell children a good story in a compelling way and they won’t be asking you to stop so they can go to sleep. Let’s assume the narratives are good ones since God inspired them, that just leaves the storyteller to do their job well. I’ve sat through the most compelling stories told painfully, but it shouldn’t be that way. Let the story live, tell it well.
2. Good storytelling involves both detailed description and pace change. When you’re telling a Bible story, there are times when you need to add detail to the description to help the images form on the screen of the listener’s heart. There are other times when the story can move ahead in leaps and bounds. The text does this, so can you.
3. True expository preaching does not require equal attention to every detail. The traditional read a verse, explain a verse approach to preaching can become burdensome with a 75 verse narrative. Tell the whole story, but focus in on the details at key points in order to convey the true message of the passage. This requires absolute attention to every detail in preparation, but selective focus in delivery.
A couple more thoughts tomorrow on this . . .
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Genre, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Tagged Biblical Narrative, Expository Preaching, Preaching narrative | 2 Comments »
November 6, 2009 by Peter Mead
Do you ever wonder what someone’s motivation might be? For example, I was thinking about a man I once knew who never read anything except the Bible. His preaching bore the fruit. Some might say that his preaching was biblically saturated and uncluttered. Others might suggest his preaching was unengaging and borderline heretical. Not that the Bible is unengaging, but somehow there was, at times, a lack of connection happening. So I ponder . . . what was the motivation?
1. Was it pure devotion to Christ? Perhaps. Certainly there are many who would do well to stop reading everything but and spend some serious time in God’s Word, like a lifetime. Perhaps this is fruit of the example and we would all do well to heed it.
2. Was it mixed up with insecurity? Perhaps. After all, it’s a lot easier to stay on familiar territory and not be stretched or challenged or confronted or corrected. It can be intimidating to consider the vast array of biblical and theological scholarship out there. What if that held only fear for him? Perhaps the fruit of this example is to encourage us to not fear, but to be stretched and grow, and perhaps have the odd corrective to point out where our own thinking might be distorting the message of Scripture.
3. Was it thinly veiled arrogance? Perhaps. After all, while it might be portrayed as devotion to Christ, it is at the same time a reliance on one’s own ability to piece together the complex canon of Scripture. There is always a tension between separation from corrupting influences and interdependence with the body of Christ. Is it not arrogant to state by word or action, “I don’t need you” to a fellow saint in the local church, or a sibling in Christ who offers conversation through the pages of a book? Perhaps the fruit of this example is to recognize that distinctive devotion can sometimes smack of blatant arrogance and walk more carefully?
I honestly don’t know what to think of this particular man. I’d like to believe the best. Obviously only the Lord can judge his motives. But perhaps I can learn from all the possibilities I mentioned. More in the Word. Unafraid of engaging with scholars. Humble enough to enjoy conversation with a giant of the past, or a “nobody” in the church. I don’t know what his motivations were. But God knows yours and mine. What does our distinctiveness say about us?
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study | 2 Comments »
November 5, 2009 by Peter Mead
Perhaps preaching could be defined as a work of forging connections. In a world of increasingly independent and disconnected individuals relating often on a level of billiard balls (bouncing and bumping, but not connecting), the preacher’s task involves connecting with the listener, connecting the listener with the text, more than that, via the text forging a communicative connection between God and the listener, and potentially, connecting the listeners with one another.
I’m not sure I like this as a definition of preaching, but there are some truths to ponder here. How often do we view preaching preparation, even inadvertently, as preparation to present information that will sit in the air for others to grab hold of if they so choose? How often do we preach as though speaking into thin air, largely unconcerned who is sitting in front of us or whether they are with us in the communication act? How often do we simplify the complexity of forging connections, with all the implied awareness of the complex beings involved, into a simple act of giving information out? Out where? Nowhere, just out.
It is relatively easy to formulate a message and deliver it. But it is much more complex to prayerfully and pastorally consider the listeners, to prayerfully and devotionally consider the God whose Word we present, to prayerfully and purposefully consider how we can forge genuine communication between us and the listeners, etc. What does this involve? Study? Yes. Preparation? Yes. Perhaps prayerfully considering every aspect of delivery, demeanour, interpersonal conversation and intercession in anticipation.
This is not a complete thought or a well crafted unit of prose. It’s a thinking out loud about the difference between just speaking information and actually forging connections between hearts – human and divine. What a privileged calling!
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 8 - Message Detail | 1 Comment »
November 4, 2009 by Peter Mead
Each text in the Bible has a tone. We are often oblivious to it. Our training in Bible school tends to focus on analysis of content. Most sermons tend to train listeners to look at content (or perhaps to largely ignore the text and just bounce off it, but that’s another matter!)
I often find myself trying to figure out the tone of an email. Was this writer annoyed, or discouraged, or aggressive, or manipulative, or did it come out wrong? Is this email an encouragement out of empathy, or is it a patronizing exhortation? We learn with our contemporaries that written language doesn’t always communicate tone overtly, yet tone is so significant to the intended communication.
With Bible texts we can’t meet up with Paul or Moses to double check their intent. So we do well to wrestle with the tone of the text. Let’s be diligent in this:
1. Deduce the tone. Don’t settle for simple cold analysis of content. Wrestle with grasping the tone of the passage. Allow that to be a factor in your understanding the passage and then in your preparation of the message.
2. Demonstrate the tone. Too often preachers preach every sermon in monotone. Not necessarily their own vocal range, but rather the tonal range of the whole collection of sermons. Some preachers turn every encouraging passage into a guilt-driven rebuke. Others neutralize every passage they touch to make it a sterile set of philosophical musings. Our preaching will be enriched by demonstrating the tone of the passage . . . as I seem to add a lot . . . appropriately.
3. Declare the tone. People may be so trained in tone-less preaching that simply improving your delivery may not be enough. Sometimes overtly declare the tone of the passage. I preached on Luke 11:1-13 recently . . . all about prayer. A subject that most believers feel very inadequate in, and pressured by, is prayer. Yet the tone of the passage is overtly encouraging. I tried to demonstrate that tone. I also chose to declare it overtly – this passage is not pressuring us, it’s overtly encouraging in its tone! People need to become sensitized to the tone of Scripture. They need to feel the emotion, the anger, the encouragement, the grace.
Let’s be sensitive to the text, and let’s help to sensitize others too.
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Tagged Expository Preaching | 2 Comments »
November 3, 2009 by Peter Mead
A story is a story. It should be studied as a story and understood as a story. But what about when you are preaching part of a story? For instance, take the book of Ruth. I had to preach just part of that story on Sunday. It’s not easy to break into a story and preach part of it, but leave the rest for the following weeks. Some thoughts:
1. You have to study the whole story. A narrative is incomplete until it has been completed. Profound, but a necessary comment. Even if you are only preaching one part of a longer story, you need to be significantly aware of the whole in order to handle your part well.
2. Build on previous elements, but don’t give away the tensions of subsequent development. If I am preaching from Ruth 1, then I need to preach Ruth 1 without preaching Ruth 2-4. This means that although I really like Boaz and want to preach about Boaz, he’s not in my text yet. If someone else is preaching in subsequent weeks and I have given away all the tension, that is unfair (even if people know the story, build the tension of the whole story and allow each scene to have its day).
3. If you only have one scene in a longer narrative, preach the plot of that scene. Recognize the mini-play nature of a single scene. Look for the tension. See how it resolves, even if only partially. Preach the scene you are preaching. Often readers and listeners think they know a story but really only know certain elements. How many people really understand Jonah 2 or even Jonah 4? How many people have really soaked in Ruth 1? While it may be difficult to preach only part of a narrative, there are advantages too.
4. Make sure you preach a message, not just an introduction. It may be tempting to simply set up the following weeks where the greater tension is resolved, but don’t fail to preach a message this week. Simply setting up what follows is not enough. People have come to church this week and should be fed this week.
Much more could be said . . . you say it.
Posted in Christianity, Genre, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Old Testament, Preaching, Religion, Specific text, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 6 - Message Idea | 3 Comments »
November 2, 2009 by Peter Mead
Last time I suggested one approach, simply asking what the passage is about. But what if that approach isn’t causing fruit to drop from the branches. Are there other tacks to take that might help a preacher grasp the essential unity of idea in a single passage? Here are some angles of approach that I use. Perhaps you might add others. Remember, this is not about studying a passage per se, it builds on that with the goal of defining the united single main idea of the passage – a vital prerequisite to preaching any passage.
5. Try the question answered approach. A passage might yield it’s idea better to a question like this, “Which question does this passage answer?” Is it answering a “why?” question, or a “what?” or a “who?” or a “when?” etc.? This approach can be very fruitful. Discovering an implicit question answered by the overt evidence of the text can work in some cases where asking what the passage is about has become a dead end.
6. Don’t neglect the importance of intent. As well as wrestling with the author’s content, it can also be helpful to come at the passage from the perspective of intent – what did the author intend to happen in light of this passage being communicated?
7. Back up and remind yourself of the genre you are dealing with. Awareness of genre should be an early element in the study of a passage, but sometimes it helps to remind ourselves at this stage in the process. For instance, in an epistle you probably should go back and see the previous unit of thought then wrestle with why this follows that, what question was left implied previously, etc. In a narrative you probably should back away from apparently incidental elements of the story and look again at the points of tension and resolution (then see the apparently incidental elements in light of the plot . . . they aren’t incidental).
8. Talk it through. When stuck it can really break the log-jam to talk it through. Ideally you can call a friend who knows what finding the main idea is all about and talk it through together. Sometimes a ten-minute chat can undo hours of apparent non-progress. If you don’t have someone to talk to, try talking it through out loud to yourself. Your goal is to preach, after all, so there are multiple benefits to this approach. (And remember, of course, that every element of sermon preparation should be constantly talked through with God too . . . prayer saturated expository preparation is what I affirm, but if I don’t say it . . .)
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 3 - Passage Purpose, Stage 4 - Passage Idea | Leave a Comment »
October 30, 2009 by Peter Mead
When you are confident that you are dealing with a legitimate unit of text, then you can be confident that there is unity to the idea contained in that text. You will often need that confidence. Usually a passage doesn’t offer its unity on the lowest branch. It can take work and real wrestling in order to determine the united single main idea of a passage.
Here’s one approach:
1. Read the passage multiple times. Early on you probably need to make a note of questions you have on the first run through since these will be the questions listeners have as they hear it on Sunday. However, you can’t prepare a message after one read through. Soak in the passage. Study it. Revisit it. And again.
2. Answer the question – “what’s this passage about?” Not the easiest question, but an important one. It’s asking not for specific detail (such as “what stood out?” or “what’s your favourite bit?”) but for general overview observation – “what’s it about?” You may have two or three things that the passage is dealing with. For instance, a friend of mine is looking at Isaiah 6. Early thoughts are that it is about God’s majesty and holiness, but it’s also about Isaiah’s call into ministry, plus there’s the often neglected last part of the chapter too.
3. Consider whether the answers you have are roughly equal in weight, according to the measure of the passage. It may be that one part has made it onto your list because you’ve heard about it before, it’s familiar, you like it, etc. But is it really a fair answer to the question “what’s the passage about?” If it is really a subordinate issue, tentatively drop it. If not, if each element is genuinely weighty in the passage, then . . .
4. Consider how the elements might be combined, rather than viewed exclusively. Perhaps Isaiah 6 is not about God’s majestic holiness or Isaiah’s call into ministry, but rather a combination of the two? After all, isn’t Isaiah’s call in the context of an encounter with God? How about the message he’s given . . . how does that fit? Is there a contrast between Isaiah’s responsiveness and the rest of the people of unclean lips? Keep wrestling.
Next time I’ll suggest a few other approaches if this one isn’t working.
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 1 - Passage Selection, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 3 - Passage Purpose, Stage 4 - Passage Idea | Tagged Expository Preaching | Leave a Comment »
October 29, 2009 by Peter Mead
Urgency used to be one of the preeminent distinctives of the preacher. Times change, listeners change, cultures change, preachers change. People no longer expect an urgent edge to every sermon, listeners often resist any hint of hype or overly effected preaching styles. Natural communication styles are the most effective styles in our day. Yet while much may change, the needs of our listeners have not changed.
There is no less need for a clear presentation of the gospel and a compelling call for response today than in any previous era. People are lost, the enemy is roaming, death is lurking, judgment is waiting, and the preacher has the opportunity to address the situation. With all the appropriate and effective naturalness in our preaching styles, let us also make sure there is urgency mixed in too.
If you say that the work is God’s, and he may do it by the weakest means, I answer, It is true, he may do so; but yet his ordinary way is to work by means, and to make not only the matter that is preached, but also the manner of preaching instrumental to the work.
If it weren’t for the run-on sentence, would you know when that was written? It could be speaking to preachers today. How easy it is to hide behind the fact that preaching is God’s work. Oh yes, this is a profound and humbling truth that should be seared through every cell of our being. At the same time it can be an excuse, can’t it? An excuse to cover for lack of improvement in our preaching, for lack of urgency, for lack of focused preparation. God does work using very weak instruments. Even if you pursue training and studies and feedback and improvement, you and I will still be very weak instruments. Good stewards, weak instruments . . . but a great God addressing a great need!
I’m with Richard Baxter on this matter. God’s ordinary means of working in preaching is by the content and the delivery, not despite either. So, will there be a fitting urgency about the next message?
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Reformed Pastor, Richard Baxter | 1 Comment »
October 28, 2009 by Peter Mead
We are starting to hear about the 2011 edition of the NIV Bible, timed to coincide with the 400th anniversary of the original King James Version. King James may not have really “authorised” the often called Authorised Version, but he was motivated to have a Bible that had no notes attached to the text (other than Hebrew/Greek notes). Interestingly, it is 100 years since the first publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. C.I.Scofield, whatever your view of his theology, was motivated to see serious students of the Bible studying it more systematically. Later came the New Scofield Reference Bible and the Ryrie Study Bible, not to mention a plethora of other reference and annotated Bibles from various theological streams. The popularity of the NIV Study Bible seemed insurmountable, although recently we saw the launch of the highly lauded ESV Study Bible.
I’ve already mentioned seven Bibles that could all spark significant criticism (we are very quick to attack Bible versions and Study Bibles aren’t we?) Obviously Study Bibles and annotated Bibles all have a particular theological agenda or leaning, that goes without saying. But let’s make a simple observation. Lots of “special” Bibles are published and sold because a lot of Christians feel both some motivation and some level of inadequacy for Bible Study. A good Study Bible is a great resource for many people!
So the question then arises for us as preachers – how do we encourage our listeners to be effective Bible students? Here are some questions to chew on – do we encourage them to use helpful study aids like Study Bibles and other resources? Do we undermine the text they are looking at by critiquing the translation too freely? Do we offer training in basic Bible study approaches – such as an inductive Bible study class? Do we preach in such a way that listeners get the sense that the Bible is understandable and that Bible study would actually help them?
We may not place ourselves in the camp of the NIV translators, the Scofield notes, the Ryrie theology, the ESV Study Bible notes, or whatever. But let’s consider how we can follow in this tradition of looking for ways to help people be serious students of the Word.
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | Tagged AV, C I Scofield, Charles Ryrie, ESV Study Bible, KJV, New Scofield Reference Bible, Ryrie Study Bible, Scofield Reference Bible | 1 Comment »
October 27, 2009 by Peter Mead
Most things can be described on a continuum. Consider the tone of your presentation to others. At one end of the scale, it is possible to fawn, to flatter, to pander to those listening. At the other end of the scale, a preacher can condescend and patronize. Neither is helpful.
A preacher who overdoes the flattery and pandering will convey very little in the way of integrity and respectability. A preacher who overdoes condescension and patronizing will achieve little in making listeners want to hear what is being said. Both extremes will undermine communication very rapidly and deeply annoy the listeners.
We might assume that younger speakers are the flatterers and older speakers are the patronizers. We would be wrong. Any speaker can have a tendency to offer either, or both. I’ve heard some extremely patronizing speakers in their twenties, and some ridiculously fawning speakers in their sixties. The problem is that most are probably deeply unaware of how they come across.
Yet there is another challenge here. These two extremes are on a continuum, so it is not as simple as just avoiding them. In fact, isn’t low level flattery sometimes called politeness? Isn’t low level patronizing sometimes called being simple and clear? Both of these are very important. It doesn’t help to avoid flattery and pandering by being obnoxious and objectionable. It doesn’t help to avoid condescension by being obfuscatory and lacking in perspicuity.
To be accurate, I wouldn’t say that politeness and flattery are actually on the same continuum, nor clarity and condescension. The distinction is probably at the level of motive. As preachers it would do us good to check our motives regularly – what is our motive in regard to these listeners? Do we love them? Do we genuinely respect them? Are we wanting to serve, or to show off? Are we serving for their benefit, or for our own?
One more thought. Even right motives don’t guarantee effective communication. After all, communication has a lot to do with how the listeners perceive your preaching. Do they find you condescending? Do they find you overly flattering? Perhaps it would be worth a periodic spot check from someone you trust . . . “Do I come across as one speaking naturally to equals, or is there any hint of pandering or patronizing in my delivery – please tell me?”
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Leave a Comment »
October 26, 2009 by Peter Mead
There is a phenomenon, actually not uncommon, that we might call the feel-good sermon. In it the preacher begins with the text and then shares several points that are somehow linked to the text. The points will be put in terms that are comfortable and reassuring to the listener. The listeners may well walk away feeling vaguely blessed and certainly positive in their view of the speaker.
However, this kind of sermon typically does not engage fully with the text. Often issues like sin or judgment will be skirted around or offered merely in non-specific euphemisms. Thus the tension in the text is not really engaged, nor resolved. This probably means that the same tensions in the lives of the listeners are neither engaged, nor resolved.
Let’s beware of preaching feel-good sermons rather than biblical sermons. It is possible to preach the Bible in a very engaging, encouraging and even positive way. It is possible to preach the passage properly, even in a “seeker-friendly” setting. In fact, if our main concern was the listener, wouldn’t we feel obliged to really engage fully with both text and listener? The feel-good sermon seems to be a short-cut to happy handshakes, but it falls short of engaging both the text and the listener. So perhaps the motivation is more fear and the preacher’s personal comfort than it is the motivation of a true minister?
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | 1 Comment »
October 23, 2009 by Peter Mead
When you are preparing to preach a passage of Scripture there are always decisions to be made. Some of them are relatively easy to make. Others are harder to make, but the result is definite and clear. Others are not easy to make, neither are they critical to orthdoxy. So do you share the options with your listeners, or do you go for one option and present it (either strongly, if it is clear; or tentatively, if it is not clear)?
Some thoughts, although more could be added:
1. Don’t allow an academic discussion to overwhelm the main purpose and content of the message. If sharing the options with listeners would draw them away from the clear and central teaching of the passage, then think very very carefully before presenting the options.
2. Remember who you are preaching to – some groups just can’t handle options, others love them. As in all preaching, who you are preaching to is very significant. Some groups would be confused and distracted by any apparent ambiguity in your presentation, but others love to get their teeth into such things (and appreciate the vulnerability of a preacher who doesn’t act like they have all the answers).
3. Don’t over-explain, sometimes interpretive options can be offered quite subtly. It is important to recognize the varied amount of explanation needed in such details of a message. Sometimes we can make something bigger than it is, where it could be covered in two or three very brief sentences. Even this might be effective sometimes: “Some people think he meant A, while others understand it to mean B. Actually, either way doesn’t change the message of the whole passage…”
4. Recognize the opportunity to teach some Bible study skill. At the right time, with the right people, in the right passage, with the right words, this can be an opportunity to do some hermeneutics training within a message.
More thoughts . . . ?
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 8 - Message Detail | 3 Comments »
October 22, 2009 by Peter Mead
I just read through a course guide for a preaching course. I won’t name it. It left me feeling dry and concerned. Why? To put it basically, because of what was and what wasn’t included.
Included - The different types of sermon that can be used (exegetical and topical given as the main two options, with two others noted). The key role of the hymnbook in sermon preparation (double the content of the exegetical sermon preparation guidelines). A session on effective delivery. Then some guidelines on how to give feedback to a preacher (including the line, “don’t try to correct their theology.”)
Missing - Anything more than a cursory reference to studying the Bible. Anything about how to get from a passage to a message so that the message has any biblical authority, accuracy or relevance. Anything about the personal spirituality of the preacher.
I won’t go on, but surely an introducing to preaching course has to build on Biblical study as a key feature. While it is best to get training in all areas, the fact is that communication and delivery training occurs in daily life, but most Christians are significantly unaware of what it means to really study and understand, let alone preach, a passage of Scripture.
My point is not to criticize this particular book (I suppose what I paid for it was worth it to remind me of the training offered in some venues). My point is for us to look back on the training we received – what was strong, what was weak, what was missing? Are there gaps that could be filled now with some carefully chosen study, course or mentoring?
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study | Leave a Comment »
October 21, 2009 by Peter Mead
Have you ever had to preach at short-notice? What do you do if you only have two days to prepare? Two hours? Two minutes? In some ways I hope it doesn’t happen to any of us. On the other hand, maybe it would be good if it did. Why?
1. A short-notice sermon shows quickly whether your spiritual tank is full or empty. There are times when our spiritual reserves are bursting to open a Bible and share from the heart. At other times a short-notice sermon might feel very dry and simply the reworking of an old message. Interestingly, the listeners may not know the difference, but you would. How is your tank today?
2. A short-notice sermon pushes you onto your knees. In the panicky moments of pulling thoughts together for a message without enough time to prepare, it should eventually dawn on us that this is not an exercise in memory or even fast-preparation. Preaching is as much a prayerful endeavor as it is anything else.
3. A short-notice sermon might restore a fading excitement at the privilege of preaching. Perhaps you see God working very much despite your own feelings of inadequacy. Perhaps you see God working despite you not being able to fully craft and script and hone and learn the message. Perhaps you see God working in a fresh way and your heart will be rekindled with a passion for the adventure of preaching. Perhaps you don’t need this to achieve that . . . perhaps?
Plenty more could be said on numerous levels about short-notice preaching. But maybe we could all benefit just from imagining what a one hour or one day warning might do for us as preachers!
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Leave a Comment »
October 20, 2009 by Peter Mead
A modified form of an article I wrote a while back has now been posted on theologynetwork.org . . . here’s a taste:
True exposition should not be boring, for we would not want to give the impression that God gives of Himself in self-revelation in a way that is boring. True exposition should not be disconnected from real life, for in the incarnation we see God giving of Himself, His ultimate self-revelation, in the most relevant manner imaginable. Perhaps if more preachers would truly grasp the need for effective hermeneutics in their sermon preparation, perhaps then we would not have so much occasion to point the finger at others and complain of dumbed-down diet sermonettes abounding in our generation.
But is improved hermeneutics enough? The article makes a further move that I believe is critical and often overlooked. To read the article, and then look around at the excellent resources, click here – www.theologynetwork.org
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study | Tagged Expository Preaching, Hermeneutics, theologynetwork.org | Leave a Comment »
October 19, 2009 by Peter Mead
Some churches, especially larger ones, never allow anyone to participate from the front unless they are thoroughly vetted first. At the other extreme there are churches that really have little choice who is up front – whoever is willing! But for the rest, in between the extremes, there is a tension.
On the one hand, it is good to involve people and give them opportunity to grow, as well as giving the church opportunity to hear different voices. On the other hand, it can be a challenge to maintain appropriate standards from the front. Actually, perhaps the real challenge is to find the right balance.
Here are three ways people get “involved” and some comments on the tensions faced:
1. Bible Readings – Often this is seen as an ideal place for people to overcome “public speaking fear” because all they have to do is read the passage in front of them.
The balance needs to be found. After all, the public reading of God’s Word is actually a critical event. It is easy to read into a microphone . . . dispassionately, monotonously, haltingly, without clarity, etc There are times when it might be worth hunting for the best public reader, rather than settling for participation alone. On the other hand, listeners will sometimes concentrate more for someone obviously uncomfortable than they would for an overly polished “performer.” The balance needs to be found.
2. Personal Testimony – Everybody expects the usual participants to have a certain testimony, but it can be very effective to hear from “normal” people during the service. It can make a real impression to hear somebody’s personal experience of God’s grace in their lives.
The balance needs to be found. Testimonies do make a real lasting impression, so it is worth trying to make sure that impression isn’t heretical or misleading. How many times have well-meaning testimonies stated, “Of course I can’t prove any of this is true, but that’s what faith is, isn’t it, a leap in the dark!” Include testimony, but pre-screen or coach appropriately. The balance needs to be found.
3. Special Event Preaching – It seems the obvious place, as far as some churches are concerned. For someone to “cut their teeth” as a preacher, it seems set up: a shorter message, freedom to choose the passage, longer time for preparation, no expectation of fitting in to a series running at that time.
The balance needs to be found. All the positives are agreed, but what about the other side of the coin … it is hard to speak at Christmas since it feels like it’s all so familiar. It is hard to speak on Mother’s Day, just because it is. What’s more, special occasions are prime time for guests to visit … what experience do you want them to have of the preaching at your church? The balance needs to be found.
Involving people is a great idea, but enter into it with eyes open and make sure it is the right occasion, the right role, the right timing.
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion, Stage 1 - Passage Selection, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | Tagged Bible Reading, Christian Testimony, Public Reading | 1 Comment »
October 17, 2009 by Peter Mead
I’d like to answer a question offered in a comment a few days ago by Peter D:
“I have heard a couple times that people tune out after about 20 mins in hearing a speech or sermon. With that being said do you think that there are times we can force a text to be longer than it needs to be? It seems like most sermons I hear are bewteen the 45-and hour long mark. That being said do you feel that sometimes they might be more effective if they were shorter (still keeping the context in full view) or is there something internal that tells us they need to be so and so long?”
This is an important question for us all to think about. Some sermons would be more effective if they were shorter, while some would always feel too long no matter how quickly they finished! We have a tendency to simply preach to the standard length for our own context and personal comfort (our own more than the listener’s). But it is not a bad idea to consider what would be most effective.
1. There is no “right length” of message, but there is an appropriate length for any specific context. Tomorrow I am preaching in my home church and I know it will need to be slightly shorter than usual. If I go ten minutes longer, on this occasion, it would not be appropriate. Not only does the specific church influence this, but so does the culture in which that church exists.
2. Listeners do not have shorter attention spans, but listeners struggle to concentrate beyond a very few minutes. Is that not contradictory? Sort of. So many harp on about today’s listener being unable to concentrate beyond 15 or 20 minutes – yet the movies of this generation are considerably longer than most were twenty or thirty years ago. Actually though, listeners struggle to concentrate beyond 3-5 minutes at a time, so even a 15 or 20 minute sermon can easily be 10-15 minutes too long, unless . . .
3. The preacher needs to engage and re-engage the listener regularly in the message. Some speakers are engaging in content, manner, delivery, energy, empathy, etc. and listeners who regularly declare they simply aren’t able to concentrate beyond fifteen minutes, will listen fully engaged for an hour and then act surprised at how much time has passed! Other speakers can make the briefest of devotional thoughts feel like the most tedious of hours.
4. Thus we can’t “blame” the listeners if the concensus is that our preaching is too long! Every speaker should do a self-evaluation, and then get some honest input from others, to determine areas of strength and weakness in respect to their ability to engage the focus and attention of the listeners. These are weaknesses worth addressing, for without attention, there is no communication – at least not the kind you are trying to achieve. Disinterested listeners are receiving a message, often one reinforcing negative associations between the Bible and words like “boring” and “irrelevant.” What a tragedy that some who preach are, somewhat inadvertently, communicating the very opposite of what they intend!
5. Finally, I appreciate Don Sunukjian’s point about explanation and application ratios. If a passage requires lots of explanation, thus only leaving a short time for application, so be it. But if a passage is relatively easy to understand, don’t pad the time with unnecessary explanation, instead use the time for lots and lots of application. It is often the lack of application that undermines the effectiveness of our preaching. More qualifiers are needed, but this post has gone on too long now!
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 7 - Message Outline, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Tagged Donald Sunukjian, Expository Preaching, Sermon Length | 1 Comment »
October 16, 2009 by Peter Mead
I suppose it is obvious, but some preachers have lost sight of the obvious. When we preach, we should preach the Bible (for the alternatives offered by contemporary culture, sophisticated philosophy or personal insights will always fall short). Yet when we preach, our goal is not really to present the Bible itself. The Bible itself is not the end, it is not the goal, it is not the god. We preach the Bible not because of what it is in itself, but because it is God’s Word.
This distinction in no way undermines our view of the Bible. In fact, it should only strengthen it. What does God’s character and intimate involvement suggest about the quality of the revelation He has given? But we must not forget that it is just that – a revelation from and of Him.
Preaching that presents the Bible, but somehow loses God, really loses the Bible too. It is easy to turn the Bible into a set of historical data, stories with morals attached, illustrations for our own thought processes. But our goal is not to turn the Bible into anything. Our goal is to preach the Bible well, so that the giver of the revelation is presented. Biblical preaching is about presenting God himself.
Evaluate your next message before you preach it. Where does God fit in the message? Is He the main character? Is He the real hero of the story? Is the message pointing us to respond to Him?
It is easy to leave God as a background assumption as we preach a human level story with human level applications – be good, be better, be like so and so. May God never be a background assumption as we preach the self-offering and self-giving revelation He gave to us!
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preaching, Religion, Stage 2 - Passage Study, Stage 3 - Passage Purpose, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 6 - Message Idea, Stage 7 - Message Outline, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Tagged Expository Preaching, Theocentric Preaching | 1 Comment »
October 15, 2009 by Peter Mead
There seems to be an epidemic of copycat mentality in church ministry today. I’m not referring primarily to pulpit plagiarism, although that is a real issue (only exacerbated by the availability of online sermons from the very good to the very poor – all of which are readily copied by some). I’m thinking more generally. If a church is successful (measure that however you choose), then methodology is deemed worthy of mass representation for the benefit of others who in some way seek to reproduce something of that methodology or vision in their own local context.
By the way, please don’t think of this simply as a feature of one brand of Christianity. I have heard the sneers and comments at the expense of Willow Creek or Saddleback, but some who sneer in that direction would affirm and delight in, for example, Redeemer Presbyterian’s Church Planting Center, just to cite one example.
While some are quick to mock some of this, it is certainly not bad. Many churches have been helped and strengthened (not just in numbers) by learning from other church leaders in respect to methodology and ministry vision. Some of the contemporary attacks on Christian consumerism have an element of irony about them inasmuch as there seems to be a band-wagon of consumerism-bashing. Nevertheless, we should ask ourselves after the next seminar we attend, or “this-is-how-we-did-it” book we read . . . am I copying the right thing?
I’m not condemning all the seminars and books on methodology. We can, if we are discerning and aware of our own context, learn from what others are doing in theirs. We should certainly think carefully about that if we are inclined to use methodology as a short-cut, a cut and paste approach to doing church, a photocopied church program from another place, another culture, another context. Learn from others, but recognize their context, and implement prayerfully in recognition of your own context.
But the greater focus, the one so often missing today, is the one Jethani points to at one point in his book, The Divine Commodity, an engagement with the pervasive consumerist distortion of Christianity. “Rather than reproducing a leader’s ministry methodology, we ought to focus on reproducing his or her devotion to God.” (p98)
Why don’t we give more attention to that? Why do we look at “successful” church leaders and copy their method, but not yearn to reproduce their spiritual devotion? If they don’t have that, then what is the method really worth? If they do have that, what is it about us that fails to be stirred by it? Look around for a great Christian leader, one with a deep devotion to God. Don’t cut and paste. You can’t fake that, although you may be tempted to try. Don’t fake. Don’t ignore. Don’t methodologize. In the right sense: Copy.
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Christian Consumerism, Church Growth, Redeemer Presbyterian, Saddleback Church, Skye Jethani, The Divine Commodity, Willow Creek | 1 Comment »
October 14, 2009 by Peter Mead
Some preachers focus their attention on the world of the Bible. Others focus their attention on the world of the listener. These are the two worlds of a preacher, right? Faithfulness to the text: biblical accuracy. Connection with the listener: contemporary relevance. Both matter, but don’t forget the one who is linking the two worlds together so that the Bible speaks powerfully to the listeners – the preacher. As well as being biblical and relevant, make sure you are clear.
Where does clarity come from? Here are ten quick hints or reminders for us to consider as we prepare our next message.
1. Clarity comes from preaching the one big idea of the text, not several ideas. Preach one idea and preach it well. Don’t preach multiple ideas and confuse everybody.
2. Clarity comes from well-structured thought. Well-structured does not mean infinitely complex, but rather a clear, simple, logical progression of thought that remembers itself. If they know that you know where you are going, there’s more chance listeners will travel with you.
3. Clarity comes from expulsion of unnecessary content. Every message needs some time in the cutting room. Remove anything that is extraneous or unnecessary for the goal of communicating the main idea effectively and clearly. Good content will be omitted!
4. Clarity comes from choosing words that communicate. Your goal is not to impress with your erudite, sophisticated and learned vocabulary. Your goal is to communicate.
5. Clarity comes from repeating and raining down words to unify the message. Give listeners the repetition and consistent wording that provides unity to the ear.
6. Clarity comes from restatement of important sentences. When you have a key sentence, restate it so they have another chance to get it. For those important statements in a message, run it by them again in different words so they don’t miss it.
7. Clarity comes from carefully planned and executed transitions. As has been said before (Mathewson?) – we tend to lose people in the turns, so drive slowly. Make transitions obvious and clear, pause, re-engage, get people with you before you move on.
8. Clarity comes from effective use of variation in delivery. Vary the vocal elements of delivery – the pace at which you speak, the pitch at which you speak, the punch with which you speak. Practice adding emphasis through various vocal means.
9. Clarity comes from effective use of physical movement. I didn’t mention variation in non-verbals, although that is important (don’t distract with monotonous or bizarre gestures). But especially consider using your movement to clarify the content or progression of the message.
10. Clarity comes from effective engagement with the listener (energy, enthusiasm, etc.) All the best “technique” won’t communicate clearly if listeners are bored or disinterested. An often overlooked key to clarity is simply to make sure listeners are engaged and with you as you speak!
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 6 - Message Idea, Stage 7 - Message Outline, Stage 8 - Message Detail | 5 Comments »
October 13, 2009 by Peter Mead
Following my post yesterday, I’d like to share some thoughts from Austin Tucker (Liberty Seminary). It is his conviction that homiletical history is ignored, in part, because homiletics professors are appointed by seminaries based on skewed criteria. According to Tucker, seminaries will choose somebody based on the model of dynamic delivery they provide, secondarily based on academic criteria and only then any sense of homiletical training or background. Personally I suspect that any “skewing” also relates to budgets: after all, many Bible schools are limited once the main positions are in place – New Testament, Old Testament, Languages, Theology, History, etc. – so surely someone can just “cover” homiletics, or perhaps a local pastor can teach his personal approach? Either way, homiletics background is often lacking in formal training.
So what does Tucker suggest? He mentions a friend who picks a preacher each year to read a biography and read available sermons. The benefits are four-fold:
1. It adds homiletical variety to our preaching, keeping us from becoming Brother Obvious.
2. It allows us who preach to others to sit at the feet of those who can preach to us for our spiritual enrichment.
3. It provides a golden vein of possibilities to enrich our own preaching. He quotes Grady Davis’ caution regarding the hijacking of illustrations from others. Such illustrations are like “‘brightly colored kites pulled from the wind of somebody else’s thought’ and entangled in the branches of our sermons.”
4. Diligence in this pursuit restores the perspective that preaching really is a pastor’s priority in the midst of the numerous demands.
Please don’t read this post as being advice from me. I can’t speak with authority on this since I have not diligently studied preachers of yesteryear. But perhaps I’m convincing myself by these posts!
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Austin Tucker, Expository Preaching, Grady Davis | 1 Comment »
October 12, 2009 by Peter Mead
As those who preach, we have a whole raft of subject areas worthy of our study. Central, in my estimation, is the ongoing engaged and dynamic personal study of Scripture. We also must be studying the people to whom they preach, what they struggle with, their life experiences, how they think, etc. Then there are numerous other areas of study, some of which might motivate you to buy books and read, others of which might only serve to cure insomnia. But what about the subject of the history of preaching?
I know some reading this are avid readers of biography, church history and even preaching history. I am also sure that some are definitely not. Here’s a brief quote on the subject from David Larsen, writing in the Journal of the Evangelical Homiletics Society:
The history of preaching can encourage our hearts (as in the providential appearance of significant Biblical preaching in the most unlikely places and at the most unexpected times) as well as warn us about the perils and pitfalls which surround the practitioner of the craft at all times. Our times call for the wise and judicious balance which attention to history provides.
So for those less inclined to the history of preaching, where to start? There are several (often multi-volume) series of books that address the subject directly. Yet in many cases they, like most historical writing, tend to focus in one area, but remain blind to another. Perhaps the best place to start is with biography of a preacher you find intriguing or encouraging – a Spurgeon, Sibbes, Luther or Edwards. Perhaps it would be worth getting David Larsen’s A Company of Preachers and starting there.
One thing seems clear though, to ignore the past would be naive and might condemn us to repeating errors unnecessarily, or perhaps to leave our hearts weakened by missing the blessing offered by some of these great preachers.
(Here is an accessible starting point – take a look at this introductory article to Richard Sibbes that was just posted over on theologynetwork.org – click here)
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Company of Preachers, David Larsen, JEHS, Richard Sibbes, Ron Frost, Sibbes, TEDS, theologynetwork.org | Leave a Comment »
October 9, 2009 by Peter Mead
In our zeal to do our best, sometimes we might over deliver in a sermon. For example, we might over deliver on the content of the passage so that listeners get the sense that they have no exhausted that passage and so have no need to return to it. We might over deliver on the application of the passage so that listeners get the sense that the work of the passage has been done and they have no need to ponder further how they might live in light of it. We might over deliver on the “experience” of the passage so that listeners get the sense taht heir encounter with God in that passage is now done and they have no real invitation for further engagement with Him.
Let’s be sure to prepare and preach a passage to the best of our ability. The process may be exhausting at times, as well as a delightful privilege. However, the sermon must not exhaust the listener’s sense of invitation. Let’s present the passage in such a way that we invite people into the passage and the Scriptures more. Let’s present the message in such a way that we invite people into the delight of relationship with Christ more.
One example. This Sunday I am preaching the Mary and Martha incident in Luke 10. What a tragedy it would be if I thoroughly satisfied listeners with the key distinction of the priority of relationship with Christ and service for Christ. If people left that sermon happy that they had seen the difference and know what the passage is saying, but do not feel the implicit invitation to join Mary at Jesus’ feet and enjoy that relationship for themselves . . . if that happens, then I may have over-preached.
Preaching is an invitation into the text, more than that, an invitation into the delighted relationship offered to us as God offers His heart in the Word by His Spirit.
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, New Testament, Preaching, Religion, Specific text | Leave a Comment »
October 8, 2009 by Peter Mead
Allow me to quote from Arturo Azurdia’s Spirit Empowered Preaching (p126):
_________________________________
In a manner of speaking, [the preacher] can say, a la Eric Liddel, “When I preach I feel His pleasure.” However, it is also importrant to acknowledge that there are occasions when, to the preacher, the presence and power of the Spirit of God seem absent in any sensible way. Distraction rules his mind. Words come slugglishly. Passion seems forced. It is not uncommon for the gospel preacher to feel as though he has failed miserably in his attempt to deliver the word of God. On not a few Sunday afternoons I have been filled with such deep personal disappointment I have declared to my wife that I will never preach again. One seasoned preacher has said aptly:
The pulpit calls those anointed to it as the sea calls its sailors, and like the sea it batters and bruises and does not rest. To preach, to really preach, is to die naked a little at a time, and to know each time you do it that you must do it again.
To be sure, there will be Sundays when the man of God will have no sense of the operation of the Holy Spirit in his preaching. Nevertheless, he must learn that any lack of the Spirt’s ‘felt presence’ on his part is not the infallible barometer of divine work among the congregation.
_________________________________
How true this is. We must learn not to measure the work of the Spirit by the feelings we have after going through the experience of preaching. Nevertheless, let’s not swing to the other extreme and neglect all awareness of feelings. It is easy to become mechanical in an attempt to avoid being driven by emotionalism. Surely the God who made us as heart-driven creatures in His own image longs for us to know the fullness of every life experience, including preaching, with feelings engaged rather than disengaged. Don’t trust the feelings in judging the work of the Spirit through your preaching. Equally don’t neglect the feelings, part of which are designed to function in our personal engagement with a loving God who pours out His love into our hearts by the Spirit whom He has given to us.
Some preachers are too easily swayed by battered and confused feelings. Others act like robots, dutifully resisting all things affectionate. Let’s be truly engaged with God at the heart level, pouring out our ministry as a fragrant offering to Him, experiencing the rollercoaster times and the calm times, loving God with all our hearts, and mind, and bodies, and loving others fully too.
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Arturo Azurdia, Spirit Empowered Preaching | Leave a Comment »
October 7, 2009 by Peter Mead
I would never claim to be an expert in prayer. I wish I was. In fact, I repeatedly feel the urge to become one. However, personal inadequacies in prayer do not mean that I dismiss it as unimportant in ministry. I really appreciate this brief quote from Calvin Miller:
Preaching, in one sense, merely discharges the firearm that God has loaded in the silent place.
Yesterday I wrote about the concept of seeking prayer support and prayer cover for the ministry that we are involved in. As vital as that is, it can never be a substitute for personal, private prayer. I am a little sad at the changing of the season, because this summer I have grown to love an outdoor location nearby where I can go and pray, and dream, and think, and pray some more. Perhaps it will still work without leaves and with rain, we’ll see.
It is important to find a way, a place, a time, for regular uninterrupted communing with the Lord. A time to dream together about the future, to think together about the present, to weep together, to worship together, to be together with Him. I remember the comment of one faculty member at the seminary I attended concerning another – he is a real man of prayer. I’m not sure how that could be known, but actually it does show, doesn’t it?
In three or four decades time I hope people might say that about me . . . but for that to happen I need to be a man of prayer now. What can we give up to free up time for prayer? What else has the same sense of weightiness as fellowship with our Lord? Personal, private prayer. Nothing else comes close.
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Prayer | Leave a Comment »
October 6, 2009 by Peter Mead
“It is no marvel that the pulpit is so powerless and ministers so often disheartened when there are so few who hold up their hands …. O, you blood bought churches, your ministers need your prayers!” (Gardiner Spring)
Is there any inconsistency between what we say and what we practice in regard to prayer and preaching? If we, as preachers, genuinely believe that our preaching is dependent for its power not on technique, ability, skill, etc., but rather on the power of God Himself. If we, as preachers, are aware of the spiritual battle that rages among believers and not-yet-believers during the weekly routine of church life. If we, as preachers, are aware of our own struggles and weaknesses in the complex experience of life and ministry. Well . . . shouldn’t the pursuit of prayer for the ministry be paramount in our many lists of priorities?
Do we diligently seek out prayer partners and ask them to stand with us? Not because we are somehow special individuals, but because the ministry we are involved in is itself a special task for which we are inadequate? Do we express to our listeners our need for prayer, or do we give the impression, even inadvertently, that we have it all together?
And finally, what about intercessory prayer meetings before and during and after the preaching of the Word? In some circles this is standard practice. In others it is unheard of. Why? If it is a spiritual battle, if it is by God’s strength alone, if it is a task too great for us to handle in our strength, then why not? As I look back on last Sunday’s ministry, perhaps my greatest regret is that I didn’t request a simultaneous prayer gathering – even just two or three people praying for those listening, for the one speaking, for God’s power in it all.
(And just to be consistent with what I have written, here’s a link to our last couple of mini-updates . . . if you can spare a couple of minutes, I’d really value your prayers – http://pouredout.org/?page_id=580 – let me know if you’d like to receive our prayer letter regularly.)
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | Tagged Gardiner Spring, Intercessory Prayer, Prayer, Prayer Shield | Leave a Comment »
October 5, 2009 by Peter Mead
I can’t get away from the fact that Mondays are strange days for people who preach. Whether you earn your living through preaching/pastoral ministry, or whether you earn your living in another line of work, Mondays are strange.
It’s not that Mondays are particularly unique in themselves, it’s just that they come after Sundays. Profound, I know. After all the giving out on a Sunday, Monday comes with its strange mix of physical weariness, emotional vulnerability, spiritual mixed-feelings, and yet also a sense of subdued excitement about the week ahead, the opportunities to come, the adventure of knowing Christ and serving Him continues. I’m very excited for this week and all that it holds, but tired too, probably not super productive in some respects today.
Whatever your approach to Mondays, it’s good to be aware of all that is going on. Some people just rest, others do mindless admin tasks, others jump into new and exciting projects, others have no choice but to lift themselves for work. Whatever your approach, recognize the complexity of the person God made you to be. Recognize the physical needs for rest, relaxation, exercise. Recognize the emotional needs for refreshment, fellowship, alone-time, laughter, or whatever else. Recognize the spiritual needs for time with the Lord, alertness to temptation, renewed vision. Recognize the mental needs for down-time, for reading, for something different, something stimulating. Recognize the complexity of you, and prayerfully handle today well.
A Monday well-handled seems to make for a productive and energized week. Somehow it’s not possible to rush headlong from a busy Sunday into Tuesday – we need a Monday first!
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | 4 Comments »
October 2, 2009 by Peter Mead
I have been enjoying listening to Howard Hendricks lately. I’d like to intersperse some of his comments with my own. It’s almost like an interview, except that I’ve never met him and it doesn’t quite work as a pseudo-interview. Nevertheless, his words are in “quotes.”
“My great concern for my students is that they don’t have enough time to process what they’re getting at seminary . . . the firehose.”
This is a good point, for any seminary students reading this site, be sure to carve out some half-days or full-days during the year to reflect, to journal, to process, to pray, to think. I’m not saying all of this can be done on a few days spread out through the year, but I am saying it cannot be done simply through daily devotions and journaling when the pressure is on, when the hose is blasting!
But what about the preacher? Do we have preachers preaching when the well is dry? What would Prof.Hendricks like to do for preachers and pastors?
“After every seven years, I would invest to have you come back to seminary for one year. We’ll pay all the costs, transportation, food, etc. You don’t have to pass anything, you just have to process. I think we could transform the ministry!”
I tend to agree, although I haven’t found the seminary offering this form of sabbatical program yet.
“Because we’re not doing it, and that’s why we’re suffering. We’re dumbing down the gospel, we’re dumbing down the Word of God. Every year the basic knowledge drops. Our churches are not teaching Bible.”
That’s a bit of a generalization, how do you support that?
“Their product is demonstrating that they’re not teaching the Bible. Because people need time to process what’s going on, and what are you planning to do about it.”
Ok, good point. This means we have gone from seminary students, to pastors, to people in the pew. Are they getting time to process what they receive? Is there space to process during the service? Is there space to process during the church week? Do we jump from one message to another, from one passage in preaching to another in home groups? Where’s the time to process?
Perhaps we should consider the processing space in our own lives, and in the lives of others in the church.
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Tagged Dallas Theological Seminary, DTS, Howard Hendricks | Leave a Comment »
October 1, 2009 by Peter Mead
Just one more quote from James Stewart’s, Heralds of God (p220-1):
When all is said and done, the supreme need of the Church is the same in the twentieth century as in the first: it is men on fire for Christ.
I beg you not to commit the fearful blunder of damping down that flame. It is, of course, understandable and right that you who are going out into the ministry should distrust, and set your faces against, the spurious fervour which notoriously brings discredit on the faith. But the pity is that there are preachers so frightened of this taint that they have actually done violence to the flame Christ has kindled within them, choosing deliberately an attitude of cool and imperturbable detachment, and perhaps even confounding frigidity with philosophic depth and logical precision with spiritual power. Let us have precision of utterance and clarity of exposition by all means: but even precision and logic are bought too dear if they stifle the living flame. The radical mistake, of course, is in supposing that precision and the heart on fire are somehow exclusive of each other.
I have thoroughly enjoyed these classic quotes. Tomorrow I’ll move on to some other thoughts. However, let’s recognize the value of these quotes, and let’s make sure we are not ignoring all that needs to be learned from writers who are no longer with us, but are waiting for us . . .
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 8 - Message Detail | 1 Comment »
September 30, 2009 by Peter Mead
I suppose this is the week of old quotes . . . lots from James Stewart (published in the 1940’s). But today I am going older still. This time Stewart, in Heralds of God (p207), quotes from the 17th century:
There is a great sermon of John Donne’s, delivered in the year 1624, in which he sets forth his conception of the awful burden on the preacher’s heart. “What Sea,” cries Donne, “could furnish mine eyes with teares enough to poure out, if I should think, that of all this congregation, which lookes me in the face now, I should not meet one at the Resurrection, at the right hand of God! When at any midnight I hear a bell toll from this steeple, must not I say to my self, what have I done at any time for the instructing or rectifying of that man’s Conscience, who lieth there now ready to deliver up his own account and my account to Almighty God?” Is it to be wondered at that many a man of God besides Elijah and Jeremiah has tried to run away from a commission so crushing and intolerable? Nothing but the grace of God can hold you to it. The magnitude of the task is the first element in evangelical humility.
This is what Stewart calls the appalling responsibility of the minister of the Gospel. Perhaps we would do well to ponder the burden of our calling. We live in an age when many take the heavy things of ministry very lightly. Yet some things have not changed. Not least the impending reality of the judgment facing humanity after death. It’s hard to justify levity in light of that.
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | Tagged evangelistic preaching, Heralds of God, James Stewart | Leave a Comment »
September 29, 2009 by Peter Mead
Permit me to persist in quoting from James Stewart’s, Heralds of God, although only briefly this time (p190):
“Preaching,” inquires Bishop Quayle, “is the art of making a sermon and delivering it?” – and he answers his own question: “Why, no, that is not preaching. Preaching is the art of making a preacher and delivering that. It is no trouble to preach, but a vast trouble to construct a preacher.”
I suspect this is a tension every homiletics instructor feels deeply. It is possible to instruct the method of passage exegesis, sermon formation and effective delivery. But what does it take to form a preacher? Surely that is a lifetime work of God Himself. A couple of comments to ponder:
Are you a preacher, or do you just preach? That is to say, does your life live up to the ministry you give from the pulpit? Are you continuing to grow, to be shaped, to pursue maturity while resting in God’s work to shape you into the image of His Son? Have you been so committed to studying preaching and ministry and hermeneutics and theology, but lost direction in your personal spirituality?
Are you pouring into the lives of other potential preachers, even long before they ever preach? Again I raise the issue of mentoring. How can we claim to be involved in biblical ministry if we do not actively pursue opportunity to mentor others? A preacher is not made in the course of a training course, although I affirm the value of good training as a good steward seeking to fan into flame the opportunity and gifting God has given. A preacher is made in the course of a lifetime. Let’s look with a long-term, strategic view . . . how can we invest ourselves into others? It’s not ultimately about skill formation, but character formation, spiritual formation, life.
Let me encourage all of us to look for ways to help others develop in the necessary skills required for preaching. But let’s also look with a greater goal, for ways to help shape the lives of those who can then minister (in whatever form) to others. This is the vaster trouble, but surely the greater goal.
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | Tagged Heralds of God, James Stewart, Mentoring | 4 Comments »
September 28, 2009 by Peter Mead
I’d like to quote from James Stewart’s classic, Heralds of God (p20). After this quote, I will only have the briefest of comments to share:
If you as preachers would speak a bracing, reinforcing word to the need of the age, there must be no place for the disillusioned mood in your own life. Like your Master, you will have meat to eat that the world knows not of; and that spiritual sustenance, in so far as you partake of it daily, will strengthen your powers of resistance to the dangerous infection. Surely there are few figures so pitiable as the disillusioned minister of the Gospel. High hopes once cheered him on his way: but now the indifference and the recalcitrance of the world, the lack of striking visible results, the discovery of the appalling pettiness and spite and touchiness and complacency which can lodge in narrow hearts, the feeling of personal futility – all these have seared his soul. No longer does the zeal of God’s House devour him. No longer does he mount the pulpit steps in thrilled expectancy that Jesus Christ will come amongst His folk that day, travelling in the greatness of His strength, mighty to save. Dully and drearily he speaks now about what once seemed to him the most dramatic tidings in the world. the edge and verve and passion of the message of divine forgiveness, the exultant, lyrical assurance of the presence of the risen Lord, the amazement of supernatural grace, the urge to cry “Woe is me if I preach not the Gospel” – all have gone. The man has lost heart. He is disillusioned. And that, for an ambassador of Christ, is tragedy.
Amen.
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | Tagged Expository Preaching, Gospel Preaching, Heralds of God, James Stewart | 1 Comment »
September 26, 2009 by Peter Mead
I’ve really been encouraged by reading James Stewart’s classic book, Heralds of God, again. Here’s a quote that might be relevant before tomorrow’s message:
If you are wise, you will not in your preaching mask or minimize the overwhelming, absolute nature of Christ’s demand. Men are ready for a Leader who will unhesitatingly claim the last ounce of His followers’ courage and fidelity. Field-Marshal Wavell has told, in his notable lectures entitled Generals and Generalship, the story of how Napoleon, when an artillery officer at the siege of Toulon, built a battery in such an exposed position that he was told he would never find men to man it. But Napoleon had a sure instinct for what was required. He put up a placard – “The battery of men without fear”: and it was always manned. This is no time to be offering a reduced, milk-and-water religion. Far too often the world has been presented with a mild and undemanding half-Christianity. The Gospel has been emasculated long enough. Preach Christ today in the total challenge of His high, imperious claim. Some will be scared, and some offended: but some, and they the most worth winning, will kneel in homage at His feet.
In the 63 years since this was published it is not just the length of sentence and complexity of punctuation that has changed. I suppose it is almost impossible to write something like that today without being vilified from various sides. Still, does he not have a point here? From one side we hear that Christian preaching is too full of male dominated illustrations. From the other side we hear that church is lacking in anything to attract men. But actually, the calling on a life implicit in the gospel and biblical teaching is not a male versus female issue. It is a captivated passionate pursuit of God versus a comfortably self-obsessed issue. Whatever the terminology, let’s not preach a milk-and-water religion.
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 3 - Passage Purpose, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | Tagged Expository Preaching, Gospel Preaching, Heralds of God, James Stewart | 1 Comment »
September 25, 2009 by Peter Mead
Is it possible to have a generic sermon? That is, a sermon that is applicable to all people, to any church? A sermon that is essentially lacking in specific character? A sermon that is essentially untargeted? The question should not be, is it possible, but rather, is it beneficial?
A sermon that is generically targeted toward all Christians, or all possible audiences, does have some advantages. It allows for repetition in multiple settings without consideration of the listeners this time. It allows for a pastor to reuse a set of sermons from an old church in the new church. It allows for time to be freed up from preparation for other exciting ministry pursuits.
However…and it’s a big however…generic preaching is essentially guaranteed to be inadequate preaching, incomplete preaching. A generic sermon is in some ways a disabled sermon. Why? Because a genuine biblical sermon is not only made up of biblical truth presented through the words and life of a preacher. It is also targeted at a specific group of listeners both in delivery and prayerful preparation. A generic sermon may be complete in respect to the Bible element and the preacher element, but it will be lacking or completely shrivelled in respect to the listener element and the Holy Spirit element.
Next time you’re tempted to preach a generic, untargeted, audience non-specific, sermon . . . don’t. That doesn’t mean you can’t preach that sermon again. It does mean that we need to put in the time in prayerful consideration of the particular listeners in order to make sure the sermon is not generic, but is targeted.
Generic may be possible, and in certain circumstances maybe even permissible, but it is not beneficial. If real estate is location, location, location . . . then for this post at least, preaching is target, target, target.
Posted in Audience Analysis, Christianity, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 5 - Message Purpose | 1 Comment »
September 24, 2009 by Peter Mead
There’s a tool in preparation that should not be overlooked. Of course there are many aspects of preparation that matter, not least the preparation of the life of the preacher, plus the various aspects of Bible study skills, pastoral awareness and involvement, etc. But there is one tool that many preachers neglect far too much.
Most of us were trained to prepare our messages on paper – study notes, outlines, manuscripts, preaching notes, etc. All of this is good, but don’t miss the obvious. The goal in preaching is not to write a good outline, or write a good manuscript. The goal is to speak a message. So don’t neglect the value of talking through the message.
There is nothing unspiritual about good preparation. But there is something very sensible about it. When you speak through a message you will find that some parts don’t flow as they seemed to on paper. You’ll find that some transitions are clunky, while others are practically absent to the half-listening ear. You’ll find that some sentences are too long, some thoughts are too convoluted, some thought processes are unclear. Every negative discovered in pre-preaching speaking is a good thing for you can strengthen your message.
But then there’ll be positives too. A different way of stating a key point, or phrasing a transition, or even a helpful image or support material that comes to mind as you are listening to yourself speak through the message. Speaking through a message is a great way to break a log jam. Recently I was wrestling with a passage, or actually, with a message. I understood the passage to a certain extent, but was struggling to form the message in any way other than straight information (i.e. tedious sermon alert!) I decided to preach it through, and in doing so was able to reformulate the main idea to be more engaging and memorable. I also came up with another illustrative image that conveyed the sense of the passage much better than what I’d written in my outline.
It may sound simple, but sometimes the best thing you can do is leave your desk and preach through the message as it stands. It will usually improve your message and motivate you to press on in your preparation. Simple? Yes. But definitely a tool of inestimable value.
Posted in Christianity, Delivery, Homiletics, How to . . . ?, Preaching, Religion, Stage 4 - Passage Idea, Stage 6 - Message Idea, Stage 7 - Message Outline, Stage 8 - Message Detail | Leave a Comment »
September 23, 2009 by Peter Mead
Yesterday I began a response to Peter’s comment regarding low times in ministry. It is not at all uncommon for those giving out to get into situations where they are empty themselves. Yesterday I wrote about the prevention that can be done via good spiritual relational habits. I wrote briefly about curing a situation where the coldness has come in. Much more could be said, but here are three further factors to consider:
Spiritual Warfare. The enemy targets specific people at specific times. There is a spiritual warfare dynamic that we must not ignore. It could be that there is a spiritual warfare component in a time of discouragement or “coldness.” This is not always the primary issue, so directly addressing it and focusing on it cannot always be the primary cure. However, it is no coincidence that those seeking to build up other believers and see people saved from the kingdom of darkness face a whole variety of temptations and difficulties in life and ministry.
Divine Distance. I don’t like that title, but I can’t think of a better one right now. It seems that there are times when God is very clearly active and overt in His dealings with us. There seem to be other times when He may allow us to go through some form of dryness . . . perhaps because of the positive benefits of trials of various kinds in respect to our spiritual growth and maturity (Rom.5, James 1, etc.) I’m not going to develop this theologically here, but simply recognize that negative situations could be spiritual warfare related (solution? Look to God in prayer). Or they could be God trying to get our attention (solution? Look to God in prayer). Seems safe to me to allow any circumstance, whatever the cause, even cause unknown, to allow that to push us back up close to Him. May be we need greater sensitivity to let any prod push our eyes upward?
Mundane Matters. Times of spiritual dryness may be attacks, or God trying to get our attention, or personal drifting in our relationship with God. However, they could be indicative of other issues too, often quite mundane. Getting enough rest? Sleep? Weekly break? Exercise? How’s the diet? Any stresses in other areas of life manifesting in this one? Worried about something else? I remember Bill Hybels talking about his own struggle at one point and trying to fix it by spiritual disciplines, but then discovering that it wasn’t at root a spiritual issue, but an emotional and physical one. As he put it, there are several dials on the dashboard, we need to be aware of all of them.
Other factors and suggestions?
spiritual warfare
divine distance
physical complexity
Posted in Christianity, Homiletics, Preacher's Personal Life, Preaching, Religion | 1 Comment »
Older Posts »
