Delivery

Pondering Pace

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Effective preachers can range from plodding to pacey.  Contrary to popular opinion, slow is not always better.  As long as people can hear (volume) clearly (annunciation), their brains can generally cope with pace.  However, it is worth asking whether their hearts can cope?

Recently I had the joy of listening to a friend of mine preach in a setting designed for offering feedback.  The message was very good.  He did what many of us have done, though, and got confused about how long he had left.  Thinking he should be finishing (although he could have preached longer), he increased the pace.  Did we hear, understand and comprehend what he said at the faster pace?  Yes.  But did it have the same impact on our hearts?  Probably not.

At times I have watched a TV show, or a film, at an increased pace.  So for example, a 40-minute episode can be seen in 27-minutes.  This saves time, and you still understand all that happens.  But something is different.  At 1.4x the normal speed it is possible to follow dialogue and action, but it is harder to feel it.  When the moment of tension arrives, the intruder’s in the house, the music generates tension through it’s heartbeat style . . . well, at 1.4x the normal speed you simply don’t feel the tension, or the fear, or the anticipation, or the joy, etc.

We don’t have to preach slow, there is benefit in using a range of pace.  But recognize that rushed delivery undermines the affective impact of the message.  Is it worth trading that in for the benefit of cramming in more information?  I suppose it depends on whether you think humans are purely brain-driven, or if the heart has a role to play.

A Thought Experiment About Dictation Software

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Imagine for a moment that they invented software that would take a recording of your voice and transcribe it word for word into an electronic document.  Or imagine that you had a secretary who would transcribe a recording of your sermon.  (Now, if you have either of these, you are very blessed.  If you have both, you have to wonder what God is expecting from someone so privileged!)

So you have your imaginary document, a word for word transcription of your message.  What would you discover if you were to analyse it carefully?

* Would you find sentences and thoughts left incomplete, or open loops left unclosed?  Some of us struggle to complete our thoughts when speaking out loud and our listeners can be left feeling confused or disoriented (or even just plain bored).

* Would you find inane repetition of non-words?  I gave a presentation recently and as I sat down I felt very aware that I had used a couple of words repeatedly and slightly out of place.  I don’t think this example was a recurring pattern, but I’d like to know if it is so I could deal with this.  Perhaps you like to use, you know, lots of, well, you know, filler words.  Transcribed sermons would make those just really obvious wouldn’t they?

* Would you find absolutely no reference to yourself, such that the message could have come from anybody?  Seems like listeners value the connection to the preacher, as long as he doesn’t come across as an idiot or a hero.  Speaking of which…

* Would you find excessive positive references to yourself?  I did this, I said that, I met so and so, I answered, I shared, I witnessed, I preached, my church, my ministry, my opportunities, my anointing.  Painful though it may be, knowing that you come across as full of yourself is better to know than not know!

* Would you find a loss of momentum in the message?  It was going great until 2/3rds of the way through, then it sort of tread water for a page and a half.  Better to know that.

* Would you discover that actually your message didn’t make sense.  That would be hard to take, but actually, if it didn’t make sense, it was hard to take for the listeners, so better to join the club and know that too!

Ah well, good thing they haven’t invented such dictation software, or personal secretaries, or even tape recorders so that we could listen to our own messages, transcribe and analyse.  Might be painful if we did!

Why Not Use the Main Idea for the Message Title?

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

Just following up on yesterday’s post, I thought I’d clarify why I don’t think it is usually a good idea to simply use the main idea of the message as a title.

1. You don’t want to give away any sermonic tension. Obviously if you are preaching an inductive message, then you need to withhold the main idea until the end of the message.  But if you’re preaching a deductive message, wouldn’t it be okay to advertise the main idea?  Occasionally it could be effective to do so, but I would generally choose not to do so.  Even in a deductive message, you typically will begin with an engaging and interesting introduction that leads to the presentation of the main idea of the message.  Within that short space of time, you may create some tension in the listener as they wonder how you’ll address this message to the need you are surfacing in the introduction.  But there are other factors to consider as well, before you give away your main idea to the advertising committee!

2. Length. Your main idea must needs be a complete sentence.  While it is generally better to be pithy than pedantic, it still may stretch for 10 to 15 words.  To put it simply, this will be too long to be an effective title for the message.

3. Care of Delivery. Hopefully your main idea is a well-crafted piece of precision communication, perhaps and probably taking longer to craft than significantly longer chunks of the message.  This is a precious piece of sentencry (new term, you saw it here first!) that will carry the weight of the message on its shoulders, yet penetrate deep into the hearts and minds of your listeners.  It is strong, yet precious.  Personally, when I have the fruit of significant labour, or something that should be of significance to the recipients, I would rather deliver it myself than just leaving it out in public.  I may be overplaying this since often our main ideas are just good and clear (on a good day), but I think my point stands.  If it is thrown around publically on leaflets, posters, adverts, or even just in the notice sheet, then I am not in control of how it is stated, how it is packaged, how it is heard.  Even just in the notice sheet . . . let’s be honest, do you really trust the guy who is sharing the notices earlier in the service not to mis-emphasise (or worse) your title if he chooses to mention it?

4. Contrasting Goals. I’ve gone over my word limit, so let me be brief for the last two.  The main idea is intended to be, above all, clear.  It should stir a definite nod of the head in recognition that it is exactly what the passage is saying, in summary, to us today.  Not so the title.  The title is intended to intrigue, to interest, to promise more, to suggest relevance and interest will follow for all who choose to attend and listen.

5. When the title is needed. If you’re not convinced already, this should do the job.  When is the title needed?  Probably more than a week in advance.  When is your main idea usually in a fit state for public presentation?  Probably not then.

Share

Does It Make Sense?

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

It seems obvious, but it needs to be said.  When we speak we need to make sure we make sense.  There are various reasons why we may not make sense to our listeners.  Here are a few to be aware of:

1. Obscure Language – If you obfuscate using technical, rare or archaic vocabulary, then you will lose folks.  They will probably still compliment you on your “deep” message, but be alert enough to spot the implication of that encouraging feedback!

2. Unknown Illustrations – Your illustration from the world of online war games, submarine technology, chinese martial arts, Finnish cuisine, Egyptian burial rituals or first world war poetry may make perfect sense to you.  But are you including enough explanation to allow them to get it?  (And if it needs that much explanation, is it really the best illustration to use?)

3. Omitted Connections – The logical connection between what you are currently saying and the larger point you are offering may not be so logical if you forget to mention it.  Actually, you need to state, restate and underline the logical connection, just in case they were drifting in that moment.  So easy to miss bits of messages we know, but are so needed.

4. Rapid Transitions – Maybe you include something of a transition from direct explanation to explanatory illustration, but the transition is so fast your passengers fail to make the turn with you.  Disoriented they look around trying to figure out where they are now, almost oblivious to what you are actually saying.

5. Unclear Speech – If they can’t make it out, they can’t comprehend it.  And there’s no need to get snooty about your accent either, every accent has elements that are unclear, so try to be aware of that and speak clearly.  Watch for facial signals of misfiring speech.  Restate if you suspect some may have missed what you said.  Oh, and be careful of rapid fire sentence finishing, or fading away when the period is in sight.

6. Assumed Knowledge – It is dangerous to assume people know things.  Do they have the biblical awareness necessary for the message?  Do they know the cultural, historical, political, geographical knowledge that you are assuming for your explanation of the text to be vividly received?

7. Written Notes – I’m not having a go at notes.  I’m just pointing out that almost anything can make sense in written outline form, but your listeners are listening.  Sometimes what is written doesn’t make sense when it is heard.  Write your messages for listeners, not for your own eyes.

What’s missing?  Why else do we sometimes fail to make sense?  (Number 8 – Don’t speak out of your depth – If we don’t get it ourselves, they have no chance!)

Share

Points of Pride

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I suspect that if we’re honest, we’d all admit that preaching leads to numerous battles with pride.  Perhaps not every time, perhaps not in the same way as each other, but there is an inherent danger that points of pride will peek through when we preach.  Much of this may be an internal battle unseen by others except the Lord.  But sometimes in our preaching we do things that can reveal, or be perceived to be, pride peeking through.  A few examples:

1. References to “scholastic matters” – You know what I mean, the extra reference to a dispute among commentators, an unnecessary quotation from the Greek/Hebrew, a technical term (punctiliar aorist, genitive absolute, etc.), an unnecessary excursus into matters of textual criticism, unnecessary citation details showing how much you’ve read, etc.

2. Allusions to “hidden stores of knowledge” – This is more subtle, but some of us fall into it.  It’s where you open the door to a subject, only to immediately close it with some passing reference to “that is for another time” or “so much we could say about that…”  Sometimes it helps to let people know you’re aware that more could be said about a matter, but sometimes it can come across as prideful parading of unrevealed knowledge.

3. Demonstrations of “foreign language competence” – I remember reading a theology book and getting very annoyed by the author quoting in Dutch and Norwegian (as well as Latin, French, German, Spanish, etc.), all without English translation.  Ostentatious to say the least.  But actually in our preaching it can be tempting to throw in a foreign phrase or quote.  Depending on the audience this may connect very effectively, or it may just look prideful.

4. Narratives of “personal illustration” – Haddon Robinson always said that an illustration shouldn’t make you look like a jerk or a hero.  Tempting though.  A story in which you gave a stunning response in the moment, or where others acclaimed your skill, or yet another reference to your prize winning exploits in the county fair vegetable competition, or “when I met Billy Graham…”  Maybe it is a good illustration, maybe it does help the message, but think carefully how it comes across, because if it smacks of pride, it will leave a sour taste.

So I readily hold my hands up as guilty of all four charges.  Perhaps you do too.  Let’s think through the next message and try to eradicate any hint of pride so that nothing will detract from the God of whom we preach, who is worthy of all honour!

Share

10 Ways to Make Your Listeners Uncomfortable

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Someone said preaching should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable.  Here are ten ways to make your listeners feel uncomfortable as you preach, but not in the right sense of the term:

1. Give off non-verbal signals of nervousness. Wring your hands, pace uncontrollably, fidget as you preach, breath shallow, avoid eye contact, flit from one ceiling corner to another, etc.  If you convey nerves, they are contagious and soon the whole room will be infected.

2. Appear to be dependent on your notes. If they get the impression that you might lose your place, or somehow get stuck, then they will start watching in the “eyes up” time for when your eyes will go down again.  If you need notes for personal testimony, something isn’t working well.

3. Appear to be uncertain or hesitant. This doesn’t mean you need to rush or preach at 100mph.  But there is a vast difference between a purposeful pause with poise and a hesitant gap that generates anxiety in all present.

4. Apologise for lack of preparation and you are set. This never fails.  If you can give a good apology for your lack of preparation, or for your inability to communicate, or whatever, you’ll have almost guaranteed an uncomfortable experience for your listeners.

5. Expect people to tune in to ineffective description. Describing a narrative scene or an illustration situation is not easy.  A poor description will leave the imagination projection screen blank inside the listeners.  But that is not a disaster, they will usually be tracking conceptually, even if they can’t “see” what you’re saying.  But to make them uncomfortable, verbally express the expectation that they can imagine what you’re describing.  “Can you imagine being there?  What would it have felt like?”  If the description isn’t vivid, then the questions will pressure listeners into an uncomfortable corner.

I’ll finish the list tomorrow.

Share

Why Did the Coughs Spread?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Yesterday I shared about the contrast between the attention of the crowd one night and the significant distraction the next night – same venue, same weather, same chairs, different speaker.  Perhaps something here might be helpful to you.  Why were they distracted?

1. It felt like a commentary with added anecdotes. It was like a commentary explanation of a text, but with the added anecdotes of the speaker’s illustrations, and with a little something of his personality.

2. It felt like a written document was being preached. There is a massive difference between spoken speech and written language.  We must learn to write in “spoken” English if we are to be preachers that prepare with literary approaches (which is only one approach).

3. The message moved between the text and third-party illustrations and back again. I felt untouched.  It seems like it should be obvious that preaching should land in the lives of the listeners, which is not the same thing as sharing personal experiences, or saying things in contemporary language.  In fact, when personal experiences seem aloof or “I’m an important person” they really don’t help the connection at all.  Where, specifically, does your next message touch the lives of those present?

4. It was hard to tell if the speaker was passionate about the passage and message or not. Something believed but not really owned will probably be offered in an “at arms length” manner which will leave the listeners holding it “at arms length.”

5. I wondered what would happen if we all left, would the speaker just carry on anyway? It kind of felt like it tonight.  Which leads to a nice closing question.  What if the speaker sensed that we’d all left mentally?  What if you sense that?  Then what?

Share

When the Coughs Drop

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

As a speaker you should be able to sense the level of focus of your listeners.  Before you say they always listen well, I would encourage you to follow this advice.  Try being in the crowd and listening, observing, sensing what is going on around you among the listeners.  If you have the privilege of attending a conference or large Christian event, you should have the privilege of experiencing the crowd from within the crowd with different speakers.

Large crowd events are helpful because the large numbers both multiply and muffle.  That is, in a small group there may be an individual who never listens – proportionately they are more of a small group than they’d be in a big group.  Equally, it is quite the effect to sense distraction spread through a large crowd.  What happens?

Fidget levels increase. It’s amazing how still listeners can be when the preacher captures the crowd.  But when he hasn’t, fidgeting is rife.  Chairs move, people change position, people check their watches, the clock, the window, the people in peripheral vision, etc.

Infectious coughing spreads. I sat in a large crowd tonight (I wrote this a few weeks before it was put on the site), and I listened as the coughing spread across the crowd.  Like dogs barking in a neighborhood, like children crying in a nursery, like coughs among a crowd ready to be done already.  Last night I sat in the same crowd.  You could hear a pin drop.  Did a mass distribution of cough drops make the coughs drop last night?  No, different speaker.

At the first appropriate moment, people flee to the exits. It can be painful to feel trapped in a meeting too long.  How long is too long?  After all, these folks knew when the service would last until.  It was too long when the preacher didn’t connect for too long.

Experience the distraction of the crowd, experience the impressive focus possible.  Then go back to your own preaching.  Try to be accurately aware of the level of attention you hold, and then try to improve it.  Tomorrow I’ll share some reflections on why the distraction levels were so high among the listeners in the meeting I sat in tonight.

Share

Simply Good Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Someone has said that you know it was a good sermon when you find yourself asking how the preacher knew all about you.  That’s a nice sentiment that points to the importance of applicational relevance in preaching.

Now allow me to give you my statement.  This is not a complete statement, or a forever statement.  It’s a today statement.  I heard a great sermon this morning.  (This post was written a couple of weeks back at Keswick, in case you’re wondering!)  So I heard a great sermon.  Here’s my statement, “you know it was a good sermon when twelve hours later you find yourself still pondering the powerful but simple take home truth, reminiscing over the clear images used to drive home the main points, reflecting on how engaged you felt by the message and the messenger, how excited you were, and still are, to look at the text, to pray through all that hit home, to take stock of your life in light of the text, to respond and be transformed by the message.”

That’s my sentiment tonight that points to the importance of so knowing your text that you can take listeners by the hand and enter into it fully, of so thinking through your presentation that you have clear and concise main thoughts, an overwhelming master idea, an engaging manner of delivery, a contagious energy in presentation, a reliance on the Lord to move in peoples’ lives, and a targeted relevance to the listeners before you.

Simple really, pull those things together and you’ll probably preach a decent message!

Share

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