Delivery

Some Basic Building Blocks

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

Last month I attended a workshop by Dr Rod Wilson of Regent College.  I appreciated a couple of his introductory comments which I will share with you this morning, “We have a message, but we need a method – the Holy Spirit is not an excuse.”

I’m very hesitant to limit the field of homiletics to methodology, but I agree with what he was saying.  The fact is that we don’t have to come up with some sort of core message, we have that already, and no matter how badly we may preach, the message we have is still awesome.  However, simply having the truth does not make for great teaching or preaching.  And how many people lean on the Holy Spirit as an excuse to not prepare, to not develop in ministry, etc?  I find that homiletics is not pure methodology – in reality it tends to be a field in which many other aspects of biblical, theological, spiritual and ministry-related subjects converge.  Yet I would not deny that methodology is important, and I do get a bit concerned by the apparently popular dismissive tone toward homiletics.

Content and method both matter.  But then there is something else too.  Last week I enjoyed fellowshipping with Chip Kirk from OM in the USA (www.chipkirk.com) and appreciated his comment in conversation: “I know that if my ministry is going to achieve anything, I either need an angle, or I need fire.  I don’t want to find an angle.”  Amen to that.

Content matters.  Method matters.  “Anointing” matters.  Three core and critical building blocks of a preaching ministry.

Things I Wish I Had Known

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I’m scanning through Preach the Word, edited by Greg Haslam.  There is an interesting chapter entitled “Thirteen Things I wished I had known about preaching” by Jeff Lucas.  Let me share a few of the thirteen:

1.    The pulpit is a highly dangerous zone.  By “highly dangerous” Lucas is referring to the complications of microphones that may be off when you think they are on, and on when you think they are off.  He is referring to knowing when you preach in the program of the meeting (ie. What comes before the message – will your opening story work after that moving solo?)  Basically, if something goes wrong, everyone notices.  Not exactly what I’d call “dangerous,” but true nonetheless.

2.    At least 25% of the preparation time should be spent on the first three minutes and the last three minutes of the sermon.  (Note that 97.1% of statistics are made up on the spot.)

4.    The voice is designed for variety.  Shouting is not the same as anointing.  Pace, pitch, punch, pause, etc.  Simple, but important to remember.

13. Where the setting is appropriate, always leave time for questions.  Something to consider, even in a formal traditional church setting – can we create a venue for questions?

If you want to know the rest, you’ll have to buy the book.  What do you wish you had known when you started preaching?  I think I would say this, “I wish I’d known that the goal in preparation is not to get a good message as soon as possible, but to really make the most of the spiritual study journey of preparation.”  You?

Preach to Them, But Be You

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

When we preach, we seek to bring the message of the text to the listeners.  This involves being at home in the world of the Bible and in the world of our listeners.  The latter part of this process does involve knowing the people to whom you preach.  Know their culture, know their life experience, know their struggles, know their vocabulary, know them.  However, don’t fall into the mistake of preaching as them if that is not you.  Where might this occur?

Preaching to youth. If you are preaching to the younger generation, great, preach to them.  Be aware of their subculture, their life issues, their needs.  They will appreciate it if you know what they are talking about, what films they are watching, what issues they are facing.  However, don’t try to be 18 if you are 48.  Be yourself, dude.  Oops.

Preaching across cultures. If you are preaching in another culture, great, preach the Word!  Know as much as you can about that culture, their language, their life experiences.  They will appreciate you not coming in as a foreigner who thinks you know better.  But, don’t overdo the incarnational approaches in your preaching.  Over time you may become more “that culture” than your own.  But don’t pretend.  Don’t preach in their accent when you normally speak in yours (in fact, they will probably listen better if you speak in your own!)  This is not just true in foreign lands, it is true in different church cultures too.  Don’t try to “speak common” if you are from a “linguistically refined” background, and vice versa – make sure you are communicating, but be you.

Preaching across personality types. Huh?  Well, if your personality is gentle and tender, and you are preaching to a church that has a loud and boisterous personality, be you.  Just because someone else can bounce all over the platform and burn 100 calories per minute in their preaching, it doesn’t mean you have to.  And vice versa.  A preacher who is very different from the gathered group of listeners can communicate incredibly effectively – but it takes wisdom to know in what ways to adapt to them, and in what ways to simply be different.

Whenever we preach we need to be as aware of our listeners as possible.  Whenever we preach we need to connect with our listeners.  Yet that does not mean simply pretending to be the same as the listeners when we are not.  Connect.  But be you.

Don’t Disregard Distractions

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Don’t ignore the power of distractions.  I’m not referring to the things that distract you, but the things you do that distract your listeners.  Don’t just shrug and say, “that’s just me.”  It’s not.  If you know about a distraction and don’t do something about it, then really you are saying, “that’s just me being too lazy or proud to address the issue.”  If you don’t know about your distracting mannerisms and habits, perhaps it’s time to ask someone who will be honest with you?  What might they point out?

Distracting Gestures – These tend to be the first thing people will mention because their power to distract is so great.  Basically any gesture you use too frequently will distract.  Especially any gesture you use rhythmically.

Distracting Gaze – It is distracting to listen to a speaker who won’t look at you, but instead seems to be looking over your head, or at some apparition only he can see on the wall over by the clock.  Eye contact matters to people, whether they know it or not.

Distracting Words or Non-Words – Hmmm, you know, like, I mean, just really, uhhhh, and what not.  Non-words, filler words, mispronounced words and repeatedly tacked on words are all distractions.  Find out what you use and graciously assassinate it.

Distracting Attire – Do most people really appreciate that loud shirt you were given on the ministry trip to wherever-land, or only the one or two ebullient people who react with joy to anything that breaks the monotony of normal life?  Equally, do the right clothes fit wrong, or the patterns create hallucinations for people watching your image projected on the screen (most of us don’t have this problem).

Your goal in communicating is to communicate.  It makes no sense to tolerate distractions.  Funnily enough, distracted listeners are, well, distracted.  Find out if you are causing distraction in any way, the don’t disregard what you discover.

John Stott’s Paradoxes of Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

I’ve seen this list in various forms, but just in case you haven’t seen it before, here’s John Stott’s list of the five paradoxes of preaching:

1.    Authentic Christian preaching is both biblical and contemporary
2.    Authentic Christian preaching is both authoritative and tentative
3.    Authentic Christian preaching is both prophetic and pastoral
4.    Authentic Christian preaching is both gifted and studied
5.    Authentic Christian preaching is both thoughtful and passionate

Stott concludes his article with this important observation:

Our adversary, the devil, is the enemy of moderation and balance.  One of his favourite hobbies, I’m persuaded, is tipping evangelical Christians off balance.  If he cannot get us to dny Christ, then he will be happy if we distort Christ.  Instead I want to encourage the read to develop what I call B.B.C. – Balanced Biblical Christianity.  Let us seek to combine these truths that complement one another, and let’s not separate what God has united.  For it is in these paradoxes that authentic Christian preaching is to be found.

As we look over these five paradoxes, where do we see the balance missing today?  Too much tentative preaching?  Too much reliance on gifting alone?  Too thoughtful without passion, or too passionate without thought?  I suppose it is different in each culture, each denomination, each church.  But it is worth the effort to think through where we might be becoming unbalanced.

Easter Laughter

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Helmut Thielicke described Spurgeon’s humour as “Easter laughter,” that which comes as a “mode of redemption because it is sanctified – because it grows out of an overcoming of the world.”  (See Mohler, He is Not Silent, p165.)

We recently enjoyed a CD of Chuck Swindoll funny stories.  Some were funnier than others, but his laughter was a real blessing to us all.  As he stated on that CD, one person wrote in and told him, “Chuck, you can stop preaching, but never stop laughing.  Your’s is the only laughter that ever comes into our home.”

A leader that frets and stresses under pressure is not a leader that followers will find reassuring.  There is a need for a certain calmness that comes from confident faith in God’s purposes.  Likewise, there is a benefit in a certain laughter.  Not drunken laughter.  Not distracting myself from reality laughter.  Not immature laughter.  But confident in God, all is in control, Easter laughter.

Don’t force it, but don’t be afraid of it either.  Appropriate humor and laughter in a message may be more than therapy for listeners – it may be the conveying of a deep personal faith conviction.

The Difference Two Feet Make

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I am not referring to how much better it is to preach with both legs still intact, nor a cunning reference to the beautiful feet of those who bring good news.  I mean distance.  Two feet.  60cm.  That makes a world of difference.

Beginning preachers, and some that have preached for years, tend to preach their message at arms length. They study and prepare, but it is all about the notes.  From the Bible to the notes to the people.  Arms length. Somehow there is a nervousness about this thing out there called the message.  The preacher is anxious about saying the right words and that anxiety sometimes shows.  Even without showing overtly, it does leave the message somewhat flat, somewhat all about the words.

But two feet make such a difference.  If the Bible study, the message preparation and the delivery can all be brought two feet closer, the preaching is very different.  Instead of something the preacher is straining to not forget, now the message comes from the heart.  Instead of preaching being truth preached by a personality (often stilted in the effort to remember the message), now the message can be truth through personality.  Instead of a message being handled at arms length from the Bible text to the listeners, via the notes of the preacher, now the message comes through the preacher with the force of the life transforming power of the Word clear and unhindered.

I am not saying anything about notes in this post, in favor or against.  I am saying everything about Bible study that is personal rather than professional (for the sake of others), about message preparation that is unique to you rather than following someone else’s prescribed formula, about delivery that comes from the heart (whether or not you need notes to nudge that) rather than merely transferring information from notes to listeners.

It’s hard to pin down exactly how one message can be preached at arms length, while another comes through the heart of the preacher.  Yet as a listener it is usually not hard to tell the difference.

Problems with Plagiarism

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I’m just reading an article by Dr David Lose.  He describes his experience of hearing a sermon preached that he had just read in a book by another author.  A good sermon…plagiarised.  What’s the problem? After all, nobody lost any royalties and God still uses His word.

It’s about integrity.  It’s about the lying to your congregation and misrepresentation of yourself.  The trust of the people in you as the pastor and in preaching in general, is eroded.  This is true of whole sermons, as well as illustrations and other sermon content.  Any time we pass something off in the first person as our own, we lie.

He goes on to offer counsel in response to defense statements that may be offered.  What if I’m not a good preacher?  What if I’m really bad?  He suggests getting training, working at it, attending his seminary (fair enough, he wrote the article).  And if you’re really bad, he suggests finding another line of work (or getting help – which would be my first suggestion since the pastoral office is never intended to be a one man for all roles concept).

Do we have to cite every source when we preach?  Not at all.  The issue is not naming every commentator we have read, but letting others know when a thought is not our own – “As one preacher put it…” or “One commentator writes…”

We need to be aware of this issue.  Some of us may not undermine our integrity as preachers at all in this way, but some preachers constantly do.  It wouldn’t do us any harm to do a quick self-check.  Do I adapt illustrations from others and make them sound like my own experience when they were not?  Do I import chunks of sermons from online or from books without telling listeners what I am doing?  Do I allow a pithy statement to appear as my own when I have read it somewhere?

It’s a useful article, if you want to read it, click here.

Cliches, Soundbites and Pithy Grabbers – Beware

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Even for the vast majority of us who are not “broadcast” when we preach, there is still a temptation to achieve good soundbites. On one hand, this is not too far from the goal of having a single sentence summary statement, a big idea, a main idea, a proposition, a take-home truth or whatever you call it. The condensed nature of a single sentence aids the unity of the message, the effectiveness of communication and the memorability of the important core of the message. On the other hand, too many soundbites, cliches or pithy grabbers can be very detrimental.

Have you ever had a conversation with someone who only seems to speak in cliches? I’ve had the privilege a couple of times. It doesn’t take long before you don’t feel that they are actually in a conversation with you. It soon feels like they are looking for the next opportunity to role out one of their catchphrases. Despite your best efforts, you can’t help but suspect a lack of authenticity.

The effect created in a couple of minutes of conversation with a “soundbiter” is just a rapid version of listening to a “soundbiter” preaching. After the positive effects wear off, it doesn’t feel like they’re talking to you. It feels pre-packaged, inauthentic, fake.

It’s good to have principles that you live by and lead by, it’s good to be a clear communicator who is memorable, catchy, pithy and precise. However, you can have too much of a good thing. Don’t put your listeners through endless concatenations of cliches when you’re preaching. Even when you’re not preaching, in other leadership communication, don’t rely too heavily on soundbites. Listeners and followers would rather know you are authentic (communicated via natural style), than the king of cliche.

Contemporary Sermons – Ironside

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Wiersbe’s brief five-page biography of H.A.Ironside is an enjoyable read.  He writes of the man’s passion for the Word, passion for souls, personal spirituality, and deeply valued ministry.  I like this brief section:

Some have criticized Ironside for preaching through Bible books instead of preaching “more contemporary messages” in such a strategic pulpit.  But time, I think, has vindicated his ministry.  His expositions are as fresh and meaningful today as when they were preached.  I have many books of “contemporary sermons” in my library, and they read like old newspapers in comparison.

It is easy to pit one against the other, but surely our goal should be expository preaching of the Word of God.  By definition this should include a sense of contemporary application since we preach to specific people at a certain time.  Yet too often we fall into one or the other approaches.  If you can’t figure out how to combine both effectively with the Bible pre-eminent, then just preach the Bible, I suppose!

Let me just quote Wiersbe again, his final comments on Ironside:

Ironside was not a dazzling preacher; he did not aim to be sensational.  He stepped into the pulpit with exclamation points, not question marks.  A generation of preachers that has tried every gimmick available to get people’s attention would do well to become acquainted with Harry Ironside and to learn afresh the meaning of living by faith and preaching the Word of God in simplicity and love.