Audience Analysis

First-Person Dangers – Part 3

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

One more post in this series.  Again, I affirm first-person preaching as a powerful tool in the preacher’s repertoire, but I don’t affirm poor first-person preaching!  Hence this list of dangers to be aware of when venturing into this realm of preaching.

Danger 6 – Excessive humor or frivolity.  First-person preaching provides many more opportunities than regular preaching for humorous and even frivolous comments.  Sometimes humor is helpful.  Sometimes humor can help to cover a potentially distracting moment.  Sometimes it can provide relief from tension.  Sometimes it helps, but only if it is sometimes.  I don’t see any court jesters in the Bible, so there’s no need to preach like one.  First-person preaching inherently carries the risk of being seen as more entertainment than preaching.  Don’t exacerbate that through excessive humor or frivolity.

Danger 7 – Inadequate or strained relevance. This form has inherent strengths in terms of being engaging and disarming.  It also has the inherent weakness of struggling to be relevant.  If the audience are invited to listen “back then,” applications can only be timelessly conceptual, i.e. vague.  If the character has traveled through time then they have to portray a convincing understanding of contemporary culture and issues if they are to make any attempt at relevance.  While it is certainly possible to preach the entire sermon in character, it is also possible to step out of character for specific and concrete application.  Whenever you preach in first-person, pay careful attention to the need for relevant application.

Danger 8 – Not being appropriate to your audience.  This covers a lot of what has been stated already.  But I would go further.  Analyze the congregation to decide how much first-person preaching they will truly value.  Some congregations love it and beg for more. Others can gain a lot from it once in a while.  Some are so rigid they cannot hear the message because the form is a potentially offensive distraction.  As always in good preaching, we have to know not only the text, but also the listeners.

Please preach first-person when it is the best strategy available, but please always do it with as much excellence as you can muster!

First-Person Dangers – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In part 1 we saw three potential dangers in first-person preaching. Today I share some more. I share them not to warn you away from first-person preaching, but to encourage excellent first-person preaching!

Danger 4 – Distractingly amateurish dramatics. Even people who enjoy the amateur dramatic scene do not appreciate amateurish dramatics. Unless it’s someone you love, you probably wouldn’t want to spend the time cringing at a poor dramatic production. How much less poor dramatic preaching? This means that if costume is used, it should reflect the same quality as the sermon (leave the curtains and towels to children’s nativity plays, then maybe eliminate them there too!) It means striving for real consistency in content (Would the character know that? Is the speaker’s personal culture shaping content too much?)

Danger 5 – Losing sight of natural delivery. This may seem strange, since first-person by definition is about preaching as someone other than yourself. But this one actually follows from the previous danger. The goal in delivery is to be both effective and natural. (Isn’t it true that the best actors seem to be natural?) The natural element here is often lost due to dramatic excess. Sometimes the problem is “too much.” For instance, thirty minutes of excessive shouting and gesturing simply because the biblical character is seen as somewhat feisty is probably too much! Even feisty, strong-willed people don’t shout and gesture incessantly! While larger audiences require larger gestures, the goal is to communicate naturally!

Tomorrow I’ll finish the list, although feel free to add more!

First-Person Dangers

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

When you have an idea and a purpose for your sermon, you then choose the strategy that will best allow the idea to hit home.  Once you realize the potential in first-person sermons, this form will regularly suggest itself.  First-person preaching done well can be immensely powerful and profoundly effective.  But there are also a few dangers.  I’ll gently share a few, perhaps you can suggest others.  This is not to dissuade preaching in the first-person, but to encourage careful planning so that it is maximally effective.

Danger 1 – Don’t leaning on the form to do the work. Just because first person preaching has an inherent interest factor, you cannot rely on that to carry you through.  The form is a strategy chosen to serve the main idea, not a master that defines your content.  It is easy to pour energy into the “first-person” part of the sermon and fail to put the effort into the “sermon” part of the first-person.  The form may help, or it may utterly hinder your task of preaching the Word!

Danger 2 – Preaching event rather than text. It is enlightening to bring good first-person perspective to a Bible story or message, but remember that it is the text that was inspired, not the event itself. Don’t just bounce off the text to preach an event, but rather study the text and be sure to preach its message. 

Danger 3 – Not doing the extra work necessary. There are no two-ways about it, first-person preaching is extra work.  You have to do all the same work as any other sermon in terms of studying the text and the audience, formulating main idea and so on.  Plus you have to study extra historical, geographical, social, and cultural background.  Furthermore you are adding a dramatic element that takes extra work (just as a powerpoint is extra work and can easily suck away preparation time if you don’t recognize that!)

In part 2 I’ll add some more dangers to be aware of, but feel free to add any you like by commenting at any time.

Factors In Selecting Sermon Form – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I suggested it is best to start with the assumption that the sermon will be shaped according to the shape of the text itself. However, there may be reasons to choose an alternate sermon shape. Why? Because there is not one factor only in this decision, but at least three. Let’s consider factor number 2:

Factor 2 – The nature of the audience. Every sermon is a unique event because while the text may remain the same (i.e. preach the same text twice), the audience changes. Different people, or the same people at a different time. Consequently, they may respond better to one sermon form over another. For example, your Psalm may be chiastic, but what if a chiastic structure is too foreign to your listeners? You can choose to educate them in Hebraic poetic form, but you can also restructure the sermon into a deductive or inductive arrangement. Or maybe the idea is threatening to your listeners, then an inductive sermon would make good sense. Since preaching is about both the text and the listeners, let both be factors in choosing your sermon form.

In my mind these two factors are critical. The shape of the text and the need of the audience. But there is a third that should be kept in mind too. You won’t be surprised by it, but it’s coming tomorrow!

A Ninth Stage?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I like the eight-stage approach to sermon preparation we use on this site.  It makes sense.  It works.  Sometimes I’m tempted to add a stage, but I think I’ll stick with eight.  Yet if I were to add a stage, what would it be?

It could be something to do with the invitation to preach that comes before the eight-stages.  Perhaps I’ll develop that thought in the days ahead.  I suppose you could make a case for adding delivery as a stage.  After all, delivery of the sermon is critical.  But then again, if these are the stages of preparation, then really it would need to be something about preparing to deliver, rather than the actual delivery.  Perhaps I’ll develop that thought too.

At this point in time, if I were to add a stage, it would come between stages 4 and 5.  After grasping the idea of the passage, before attempting to develop a message, it’s time for audience analysis.  This is critical.  The very definition of expository preaching I teach incorporates the notion of relevance to specific listeners.  How is relevance possible without consideration of the audience?  It may be the first time you preach to them, or the thousandth, but it is worth considering them and the timing of the sermon to them during each preparation.

I haven’t added it as a stage.  I still use and teach eight stages.  But I have added it as a category.  So if you click on Audience Analysis on the menu to the right, you will find previous posts on this important issue.

For Improvement Just Do This

/ Peter Mead / 5 Comments

It is easy to feel pressure to preach better. We put the pressure on ourselves. Others put the pressure on us, often unwittingly. Perhaps a lack of apparent response in recent months. Perhaps comments about other preachers. Perhaps the big shots on the radio. Perhaps a renewed passion to preach well that has stirred within.

When the pressure to improve is felt, things can often seem overwhelming. After all, there are so many books, so many ideas, so many aspects of effective preaching to consider, indeed, so many preaching traditions to learn from. Maybe you skim through previous posts on this site, or other sites, or magazines, or podcasts, etc. Perhaps you let your mind go back to seminary and you recall all the instructions you received there. It can all be so overwhelming.

This may sound overly simplistic, but just do this: prayerfully endeavor to do the basics well. Try to study the passage effectively so that you are clear on the structure, the author’s main idea and purpose in writing. Try to think through your sermon purpose in light of both the passage and the congregation. Try to determine a clear main idea (doesn’t have to be an all-time great one), a clear and simple structure, a way to start that will make listeners want to hear the rest of the sermon and a way to finish so that the impact of the text will be felt in a specific area of their life. Do the basics well. You’ll probably find the pressure lifts because your preaching is much closer to what you want it to be!

Read Widely, Disclose Wisely

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

I recently heard of someone who made a mistake in his ministry. His mistake was to write down the title of a book for someone he was discipling to go and read. The book was written by an author from a very different stream of christianity. The content of the book was solid, nonetheless, he was run out of the church essentially as a false teacher.

I remember reading an article several years ago about the concept of a liberal education. At one level the concept of “liberal” refers to the wide and free reading across the spectrum. It’s ironic that today many of the liberal seminaries will never include “conservative” books on reading lists, yet conservative seminaries recommend and even require the reading of “liberal” scholars. Which is truly liberal? I went to two liberal seminaries, that is, ones which encouraged reading from all over the spectrum (please don’t misquote this sentence – I really went to two very solid and conservative seminaries, for which I am genuinely grateful!)

So let us read widely. Others may not appreciate the value of this practice, but they don’t have to know about it. It is not possible to have genuine conviction without the testing of our ideas. We can only test our thinking by reading outside of our own theological camps, whatever they might be. So read widely, but disclose wisely. Let the spectrum broaden as maturity increases. And if power-figures in your church are not mature enough to read beyond a narrow selection, then be discerning in your disclosure.

Alternatively, we could just read authors from our particular stream of Christianity, I know many who do this, but I suspect his would be a real mistake in ministry!

Preaching to Real Ordinary People

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Remember that you are not preaching to some kind of super-saintly collection of elite spiritual warriors. You are preaching to ordinary people. Ordinary people have doubts that they don’t think they’re supposed to have. Ordinary people generally feel tired and short on motivation. Ordinary people often have fears that may be unfounded but still feel ever so real when they lie awake at night. Ordinary people think they struggle, but everyone else has it all together in life. Ordinary people sin. Ordinary people, even after responding to the gospel of grace, still feel that their standing before God depends on their own effort and spiritual “success.” Ordinary people already feel guilty about several things, not least their lack of proactive witnessing. Ordinary people are very ordinary. This has implications in how you present yourself, how you present the message, and how it is supposed to intersect with their lives. We preach to very real and very ordinary people.

The Connection Counts

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Preaching to the same people all the time is quite different to preaching to different people. I have the privilege of regular preaching in our home church, but also regular preaching to different churches and groups of people in my role with OM. I had an interesting experience recently that highlighted the importance of a preacher’s relational connection with the congregation.

Last year we spent a month on one of the OM ships while it was in the UK. This year I visited another of the ships for a quick four-day visit. I gave the same presentation on the subject of guidance that I did last year. It was almost identical. In fact, it was probably better since I took onboard a fair critique I received last year and adjusted that element this time. However, the response was very different. Last year I had numerous conversations after the presentation, and there was an openness toward the presentation and thankfulness for the session. This year there were some positive responses, but a noticeably higher level of negative reaction and outright rejection of the teaching. What was the cause?

Perhaps the people were different. No two groups of listeners are the same, and it is possible that the different situation onboard meant the listeners responded differently. Equally, it is possible that although content was the same, my manner of delivery was different. While there may be elements of both of these, I think the main issue was something else.

Timing. Last year I was onboard three weeks before I addressed this potentially controversial subject. People had heard me speak, connections had occurred, relationships were forming. This year it was scheduled as the first session. No history, no connection, no relationships . . . and a much more negative response.

If you preach to the same people every week, recognize the importance your connections and relationships have in regard to your preaching. If you are preaching to people who don’t know you, be aware of the risks that come when connection can only come from the delivery itself. Empathy and connection count whether people know you or not, and we are wise to think through the implications of this in our preaching.

The Added Challenges of Being a Visiting Speaker – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

More things to think about when you are a visiting speaker. The few minutes between arriving and the service starting can be quite busy!

Program awareness both pre and post message – What will go on before you step up to speak? It’s no good having an icebreaker moment of hilarity if they’ve had heart stirring worship for twenty minutes. However, sometimes you can tell that after what is coming before they will need some help to settle and focus. Also, what comes after you? Should you close in prayer, announce a song, simply sit down? It’s best to know! And there may be ways to make subtle connections to what comes before and after, thereby helping the whole service to sit together well.

Personal introduction, by whom? – Will they be introducing you so that people know who you are (and what will they say – see previous post Speaker Introductions!) Or do they expect a brief personal intro at the start of the message? (Or do they like an informal interview intro – I would not suggest this idea, but some places seem to choose it!)

Final audience analysis – As a visitor I always use the last few minutes before the service to get to know the people, either by observation or by probing a local about the kind of people present. It’s amazing what you can learn in just a couple of minutes that can help to tailor the message.

(If you didn’t see it then, also check out the post from December 9th – The Time Before You Speak)