Author: Peter Mead

Precision in Spoken English

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Yesterday we addressed the uncomfortable issue of verbal pauses.  Uncomfortable for us when we discover we use them.  More uncomfortable for listeners when they can’t avoid the fact that we use them!  So what to do?  Diligently stop ourselves from using them every time they start to spring forth?  Perhaps.  Maybe electric shock treatment would help.  But actually, there are other ways to cut down on such imprecision.  For a few examples:

Pre-Script your message. When you’ve worked on the wording of something, it will usually come out more effectively even though you aren’t reading it at the time of delivery.  You may choose to read your script, of course, but I’ve yet to see that done well.  It is often the wording that took some attention that comes out the most effectively when preaching.

Practice preach. What you’ve heard yourself say well will often come out better when under pressure.  I don’t see anything wrong with orally running through a message before preaching it.  Some people think it somehow unspiritual to do this, but I don’t see the logic.  How is working on paper spiritual, but working out loud not?  It’s funny how we put so much time into written work for a spoken form of ministry.  Running through a message can work wonders in unclogging our thinking, sifting out poor or impossible transitions, and undermining the grip of the verbal pause.

Overcome nervousness. The silly old suggestions you sometimes hear about imagining people naked are silly and out of date.  Don’t imagine people naked.  It won’t help anything.  Nervousness in front of a crowd will affect us all at various times.  It is good to know how it influences our delivery (limited vocal range, frozen body movement, facial fixedness, dry mouth, verbal pauses, etc.)  Some of these things can be overcome with work.  At the same time I think it is very important to pray about preaching so that when you preach your gaze is firmly fixed on the Lord, even as you lovingly concern yourself with the listeners.

Develop your vocabulary. A poor vocabulary will always lean into filler words for assistance.  Read widely, learn new words (but be careful not to fall for the ostentatious displays of obscure vocabulary).  Precise and accurate speech does not necessitate the use of jargon or technical terminology that is out of the reach of those listening.

What have you found to be helpful in increasing precision?

Share

I Mean, Just, Really

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

It’s been a while since I mentioned verbal pauses, so why not?  A verbal pause is a space filler.  It isn’t a productive and healthy pause – that requires space and silence.  It is a filler.  It keeps anyone from hearing the silence that scares some public speakers and threatens some domineering monological conversationalists (i.e. the type that don’t want to give you the chance to participate, lest they have to be quiet).  In preaching the verbal pause is typically prompted by nervousness or habit.  It can be controlled, or even eliminated.

The Noise Verbal Pause. This may feel less common, but equally it may be that we are tuning out the disfluencies more.  Gaps are filled with an elongated letter, sometimes determined by the national origin or local accent of the speaker.  Most speakers have moved beyond the child-like “ummmm” but may still deploy the odd “uhhhhhh” or extended “eyyyyy.”

The Out of Context Word Verbal Pause. The big one in recent years has been the “like” used in place of emphasis, introduction of quoted speech, description of emotional reaction, etc.  Some people string together “and” after “and.”  “So” can easily become a bridge word overcoming all full stops in spoken English.  “I mean” can punctuate many a spoken paragraph.  And you don’t have to choose a common one, you may have a unique one that is just you (ask someone honest and you’ll soon find out which word has a disproportionate usage in your vocabulary).

The Under-Vocab’ed Over-Emphasis Verbal Pause. This is where no adjective quite manages to describe and emphasise what is about to be said enough, so the speaker (or pray-er) resorts to repeating with emphasis such bland words as “Just” and “Really” and sometimes, again in prayer, “just really” or even sometimes “just really just” . . . focus and intensity.  Oh, and verbal pausing in a certain respect.

The Connecting With Listener Annoyingly Verbal Pause. In full this might look like a “you know what I mean?” but often will get shortened to a “y’know” punctuating the presentation of propositional statements.  Other variations include “you with me?” or “got it?” or “does that make sense?”

Verbal pauses are distracting in spoken communication. They often make you sound less intelligent or clear. They typically will muddle the message you’re trying to convey. Verbal pauses are really noise, not communication. As speakers committed to handling a very important message well, we must seek to reduce them and be as effective as possible.

Moving Day . . .

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Today we are moving two hours west to a new home, new town, new church.  We value your prayers as we make this adjustment after almost six years in our last church situation.  I’ve typed and pre-loaded this message on here to suggest that you take a look at the new post over on the Cor Deo blog.  We’d be blessed if you were willing to offer a brief comment too.  (I suspect some lurkers might be motivated to join in if you would take the lead in offering a thought or two!)  Here’s the link, and hopefully it should work (but if not, please go to www.cordeo.org.uk)  Thanks.

Okay, One More Spurgeon Quote

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Honestly, I’m at Keswick this week, moving on Monday, and a little overwhelmed, so I am resorting to an easy source for quality thought-provoking material.  Spurgeon.  Following on from yesterday and thinking about preaching to save souls, here’s a blast worth receiving:

If we ourselves doubt the power of the gospel, how can we preach it with authority?  Feel that you are a favored man in being allowed to proclaim the good news, and rejoice that your mission is fraught with eternal benefit to those before you.  Let the people see how glad and confident the gospel has made you, and it will go far to make them long to partake in its blessed influences.

Preach very solemnly, for it is a weighty business, but let your matter be lively and pleasing, for this will prevent solemnity from souring into dreariness.  Be so thoroughly solemn that all your faculties are aroused and consecrated, and then a dash of humor will only add intenser gravity to the discourse, even as a flash of lightning makes midnight darkness all the more impressive.  Preach to one point, concentrating all your energies upon the object aimed at.  There must be no riding of hobbies, no introduction of elegancies of speech, no suspicion of personal display, or you will fail.  Sinners are quick-witted people, and soon detect even the smallest effort to glorify self.  Forego everything for the sake of those you long to save.  Be a fool for Christ’s sake if this will win them, or be a scholar, if that will be more likely to impress them.  Spare neither labor in the study, prayer in the closet, nor zeal in the pulpit.  If men do not judge their souls to be worth a thought, compel them to see that their minister is of a very different opinion.

Some things have changed ever so slightly, but the bulk of this quote is well worth pondering in respect to our preaching today.  Perhaps it would be worth spending a season in prayer, asking God to make the souls of those around as important to us as they are to Him.  That might prompt prayer, and preaching, as never before.

(Quote from Thielicke’s Encounter with Spurgeon, pp58-9.)

Share

Preacher, Use Strategy

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I typically teach with reference to the arrow and the target (i.e. the main idea and the message purpose respectively).  In order to deliver the arrow to hit the target, strategy is necessary.  This might mean preaching in the clear and logical manner of a deductive message, or it might choosing the slightly trickier, but when effective, very effective, inductive message.  A preacher needs to think through how to preach the text as effectively as possible.  This is strategy.

It encourages me to see this type of language used by Spurgeon.  Let’s taste a bit of that:

Again, brethren, if you wish to see souls saved, we must be wise as to the times when we address the unconverted.  Very little common sense is spent over this matter.  Under certain e there is a set time for speaking to sinners, and this comes as regularly as the hour of noon. . . . Why should the warning word be alway at the hinder end of the discourse when hearers are most likely to be weary? . . . When their interest is excited, and they are least upon the defensive, then let fly a shaft at the careless, and it will frequently be more effectual than a whole flight of arrows shot against them at a time when they are thoroughly encased in armor of proof.  Surprise is a great element in gaining attention and fixing a remark upon the memory, and times for addressing the careless should be chosen with an eye to that fact.

Spurgeon here raises an interesting thought.  Not only should strategy influence our choice of sermon shape and content, it should also influence our decision about timing and target within the group who are listening.  I know I tend to address the unsaved near the end.  Why?  I’ve been impressed with Andy Stanley’s direct approach in introductions on several occasions.

When will you target the unsaved this Sunday?  What about the saved by lethargic?  The excited and passionate?  The naturally skeptical?  The comfortable?  We often think through messages from all angles of the text, but why not think through all angles of those listening.  There is diversity there, a good military campaign would think through that variety.  So would a sporting gameplan.  Why not in the most important battle of all?

Share

Post-It of Progress?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

One advantage of moving house, as I am next week, is that I get to find my desk from under the piles of accumulated items.  So I’ve found a post-it.  I remember the conversation, but don’t know who it was with.  I don’t think I’ve written this up on the blog yet, but please forgive me if I have!

1. In the past preachers were often respected and influential. An upstanding and significant member of the community, the minister mattered.  That has changed in most places.  Perhaps an increase in education levels in society has undermined the unique place of the preacher.  Perhaps a decrease in the nominal christianity of western culture is to blame.  Perhaps preachers have dropped the ball a bit and allowed our influence to fade unnecessarily.

2. Today, many preachers preach as if on a private picnic. We’ve allowed it all to become about the private blessings for those on the inside.  We’ve started to fear the encroaching influence of a progressive society, preaching to the converted with a fortress mentality that fails to engage or move outward, but simply to resist the inward press from outside.

I suppose the natural progression would be to urge us to move back into an engaged politically aware and socially influential position, something like the prophets of the Old Testament who spoke to the faithful and the unfaithful, to the insiders and the outsiders, with equal power.  But actually, I’m going to stick with my post-it.  Perhaps both the suggestion of this paragraph and the one of the next should go side by side…

3. Tomorrow, our preaching must shift to preparing the people in the pew for the coming battle. Our place has shifted.  Society has shifted.  The church’s role has shifted.  The preacher’s role must likewise shift.  It is not enough to build a fortress mentality and preach as if we’re on a picnic, somehow safe from encroaching but annoying outside forces.  Christians need to be prepared for life in a society that is overtly anti-Christian.  Look back ten or twenty years and see how much things have changed.  What will it be like a decade or two from now?  Will pressures decrease?  Will society suddenly decide to accept an exclusive message?  Will the language of fanaticism, fundamentalism and terrorism stop being used together?  Will persecution remain an issue for other people in other places?  Will martyrdom be alien to our personal spheres of friendship?  I suspect not.  If that is where society is heading in a decade or two, then it must affect how we preach tomorrow, or even today.

Share

Sermon Speaker Service Leader?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Different church traditions handle services differently.  Some have a worship leader (or in some more formal settings, perhaps a chairperson).  Others expect the preacher to lead the service.  If you fall into the latter category, some thoughts:

1. Being a gifted preacher doesn’t mean every public speaking activity is therefore covered in one person. The preacher may not be the best person to introduce and lead songs, or to give weekly announcements (a very tricky thing to do well), or to give a thought for the children (if your tradition includes such a thing), or offer a lengthy pastoral prayer, etc.  I am not a huge fan of getting people up front just to give them the experience, I like to see things done well (especially in a larger church), but why not put in the effort and resources to a team of service leaders / children’s talk givers / announcement makers, etc.?

2. The preacher may be a better preacher if they can focus on that. The time before preaching can be a good time to prayerfully consider the message and the listeners.  The introduction can strike a chord more effectively if that voice hasn’t already been up front for the whole service.

3. The preacher may or may not be a good person to input into the content of the rest of the service. Some preachers love to craft song sets to set up the sermon.  Others just pick their favourite four or five songs whether they fit or not.  One size doesn’t fit all.

Sometimes I lead the service, sometimes I don’t.  There are advantages both ways.  One advantage of having a speaker lead the service in a multi-speaker church is variety (but this might be better achieved through resourcing a service leading team).  One advantage of having a speaker not lead the service in a single-preacher church is variety.  But the greatest goal is not variety, it should be quality . . . honouring the Lord with the best service possible, and engaging the people in the most effective way possible.

Share

Post Preaching Logistics

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

What to do after preaching?  I suppose it is largely influenced by your church tradition, but for the sake of prompting thought, here are a few perspectives to which you can add yours:

The Stand at Door Option. Some churches like the preacher to stand at the door and shake every right hand that passes by.  It guarantees pastoral opportunity to see everyone, but also guarantees a couple of other things too.  For one, it guarantees that people who don’t particularly want to interact with you will feel obliged to say something polite and potentially insincere.  For another, it means that people who really do want to talk to you will be rushed and probably won’t.  Personally I find this option has more negatives than positives.  I would rather stand on the door on weeks when I’m not preaching, and have someone else there when I do preach (but then I have the advantage of a plural leader home church – perhaps every week preachers should consider having a back up for some weeks on the door?).

The stay at front to pray with folks option. This obviously has advantages that the last option didn’t.  It does make getting to you a known quantity, but also slightly intimidating for any that don’t want to swim upstream through the aisle to get to you.  Also, if it is overplayed in terms of “prayer ministry” then when nobody comes to you, it may communicate that the message didn’t touch lives, which may or may not be true!

The mill about option. This has the advantage of not being either overwhelmed with right hands rushing away, or loneliness when people don’t swim upstream for a heart-to-heart in a public setting.  But those that do want to talk may find it hard to approach if you look intent on getting to someone else, or thoroughly engaged with someone else.  It takes sensitivity and approachability to pull this off to its maximum potential.

The run and hide option. Probably many preachers can relate to this frequent desire to interact with nobody after pouring out heart and soul in the sermon.  While this may be tempting for several reasons, it usually isn’t the best approach.  Vulnerable and drained as you may feel, prayerfully engage with folks and remember to bring praise, criticism and heavy loads to the Lord . . . they’ll probably feel like too much for you to carry!

Other options?  What do you typically do?  Advantages?  Disadvantages?

Share

Sermon and Song – Second Segment

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday I offered a few thoughts on the relationship between the message and musical element of the service.  Here are some more thoughts:

Whiplash can be painful.  My friend Ron speaks of the whiplash effect in some church services.  The singing is filled with emotive love of God content, then the sermon harshly snaps listeners back to the other extreme with a brutal blend of duty and pressure.  From delight to duty, from presence to pressure.  We do not cover the full spectrum of Christianity with this whiplash blend, we contradict ourselves.

Songs don’t have to tie in completely, but they shouldn’t be radically out of place either. Sometimes I’ll select a song that complements the message by majoring on a fact that is not central, or even present, in the message.  The complete package of the service can do a work in peoples’ lives, it doesn’t just have to be a preview of the preaching.

Song leaders should be careful not to give away tensions in the sermon. An overzealous leader can sometimes give away aspects of a coming message that would be better left for the preacher to communicate at the right time.  A good relationship between preacher and song leader (pick your own title of preference), is worth its weight in gold in that respect.

(While mentioning song leaders, think through introductions of speakers too.) Too often the transition from song leader to speaker is undermined by excessive introductory comments (sometimes bordering on idolatry in some circles), or by lack of sensitivity from the speaker.  Sometimes that great compelling and captivating opening silly salvo simply doesn’t fit and the speaker would do well to pause, to pray, to reflect further on what has been going on.  Sensitivity both ways really matters.

What else could be added . . . more, I’m sure.  Remember that to be committed to the Word and to expository preaching does not mean we have to therefore disparage the musical elements of church life.  Both are very important.  Thought put in will usually bear fruit.

Share

Sermon and Song

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

How does the sermon relate to the singing elements of the service?  Here are a few thoughts:

Singing is not the warm-up. In some circles the singing elements of the service seem to function essentially as a warm-up before the main event, which is the preaching.  While I don’t deny the centrality of the Word in the protestant faith, I don’t think the musical element of church life needs to be disparaged either.  The Christian faith is a revelation based faith, and it is a singing faith.  Churches do well to give their best musically, as well as in preaching, and in reality this requires different parts of the body to be functioning in their respective areas of gifting and passion.

Singing doesn’t have to just come first. In some settings it is traditional to have a period of singing, interspersed with prayer and sometimes notices (how to not overdo notices or kill the atmosphere is worthy of a blog in its own right!).  This is then typically followed by the sermon at the end, perhaps with a song to finish.  Some messages seem to set up the opportunity to respond in song, so sometimes it may be good to bring the message earlier and have musical response.

Singing isn’t always a good idea at the end. Sometimes the sermon ends, there’s a prayer, a sense of quiet, and then the leader flicks the switch and introduces a song.  The closing song can be so powerful, or so counterproductive.  If the song switches people out of Bible and faith mode into normal world again, then perhaps it would be better to omit it.  The message of God’s Word, the stirring of faith, the gaze on Christ, etc., should all continue on into the week ahead, not stop abruptly with the singing of a closing song.

Tomorrow I’ll offer a few more thoughts on sermon and song . . .

Share