Homiletics

Application Is Not Always Pragmatic – 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I suggested that preaching with applicational goals is entirely appropriate.  Furthermore, if done appropriately and sensitively (not to mention specifically), application that is very pragmatic certainly has a place in our preaching.  But we have to see the rest of the list too:

2 – Belief (the head) – It is important to recognize that behaviour is driven by belief.  If we only ever seek to fix behaviour, we will be frustrated because of the influence of underlying belief.  If a message calls for thinking a certain way about God, about life, about salvation, about conflict, about ministry, about whatever . . . then don’t feel bad about applying accordingly.  Sometimes a message transforms lives without a call to action, but with a call to respond in belief, in changing perspective, in thinking well about something.

1 – Affection (the heart) – If behaviour and conduct is driven by belief and thought processes, then it is important to recognize what drives our thinking and belief . . . the affections of the heart.  It is the heart that supplies values which function like software in the mind.  It is the hardening of the heart that stood at the root of the wrong thinking and bad behaviour of “the Gentiles” Paul wrote of in Ephesians 4.  And it is a new heart that is so transformative in the new covenant.  How easily we try to live new covenant Christianity as if we still have hearts of stone!  Applicational preaching needs to reach deep into the hearts of listeners and not settle for pragmatics or information transfer alone.

I know it is the work of God’s Spirit to change hearts.  But isn’t it only the Spirit who can truly influence thinking and action too?  Apart from me you can do nothing, Jesus said . . . so we must lean fully on the Lord as we preach His Word, but part of our task is to emphasize the relevance of the preaching text; the relevance to our conduct, to our beliefs, to our affections.

Application Is Not Always Pragmatic

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

There is plenty of teaching around about the need for application in preaching.  If all we do is lecture on biblical truth, but don’t earth it in the lives of the listeners, then can we really claim to be truly preaching?  Having said that, application doesn’t have to be always pragmatic.  It really depends on the text, the listeners and the occasion, but essentially there are three targets for application:

3. Conduct (the hands) – this is the pragmatic application level.  This is where we give tangible and measurable suggestions to respond to the teaching of the text.  Some are quick to decry this, but remember that Jesus emphasised “doing” what he taught, and James makes a similar strong emphasis with his mirror illustration.  Where this often falls short is that it is either left too vague (so listeners agree, but have no plan to follow through), or there is simply so much of it, week after week, that many listeners simply feel burdened by endless “to-do” lists piling up in their Bibles.

But pragmatics is not all there is to say about application.  Tomorrow we’ll finish the list.

Feel the Force: Discourse

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

This is where we sometimes struggle the most.  When preaching the epistles (less so the speeches of Joshua, Jesus, etc.), we can easily fall into logical information transfer and presentation of facts.  But the fact is that all discourse is set in a narrative context.  How do we make sure listeners feel the force of the discourse sections of Scripture, especially the epistles?

1. Be sure to set the scene contextually – the text is a glimpse into a narrative. It is when we treat the epistles as timeless statements or creeds, rather than letters, that we lose sight of the specific situations that sparked their composition in the first place.  Help people to feel the emotion of Paul writing his last letter to Timothy, or his anger at the corrupting of the gospel in Galatia, or his connection with the Philippian church, or his passion for the unity of the churches in Rome.  It takes effort and skill to effectively set a text in its historical context, but it must be done for listeners to really feel the force of the text.

2. Consider how to appropriately target the message to the listeners. If we are facing similar problems today, then perhaps the text can be preached with a sense of directness, rather than held at arms length as an exhibit from the ancient world.  Perhaps the Galatian error hasn’t been introduced in your church (although perhaps contemporary churchgoers are closer to that than we’d like to think!)  So if the original purpose and thrust doesn’t quite fit, would it work to imagine how it might and then preach directly?  Somehow we need to hear what God is saying to us, now.

3. Build on the imagery included in the text. The epistles are not pure logical argumentation.  They regularly refer to people, incidents, imagery, examples, rhetorical devices, etc.  As a preacher we can build on these to make sure our preaching of that text is not mere lecturing on the facts with tacked on application.  Most texts are far richer in imagery or wordplay than we tend to think.  Not only in poetry and narrative, but also in the epistles, the text will often yield plenty of “illustrative” material if we observe carefully!

4. Build a sense of progression into the structure. How easy it is to simply produce a parallel set of points that do not build, do not progress, do not intrigue and do not pack a punch.  A good outline is not only somewhat symmetrical (and not always that), but reflects the progression and punch of the text.

As we preach the text, let’s make it our goal to help listeners to feel the force of the text.  Understand it, yes.  Apply it, yes.  But more than that, feel it (for when the force of the text is felt, understanding and application will increase!)

Feel the Force: Narrative

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday we touched briefly on poetry and noted how easy it is to preach without conveying the force of the text.  Today let’s have a brief reminder regarding narrative.  If the “force” of poetry lies in often emotive imagery, the “force” of narrative rests in the lack of rest, the tension necessary for a story to be a story.

1. We mustn’t sacrifice the tension for other details. It is easy to preach a story in component parts as if it were merely an illustration of propositional truths.  I certainly am not prepared to give up the reality that a single story will be held together by a single sense of purpose, tension and thus, a proposition.  However, preaching story requires telling story and feeling story.  It is not enough to break up the text into segments and describe each as if we were writing a commentary.  For the force of the story to get across, the listeners have to be aware of the tension in the story, more than that, they need to feel the tension.

2. We mustn’t lose the resolution in the rhythm of the message. If the story really becomes a story by the introduction of tension, then the story is rapidly approaching the end once that tension is resolved.  It is in the resolution of the story that we usually have the key to unlocking the purpose and meaning of the whole.  How is the prodigal brought into the family?  (And interestingly, why isn’t the tension resolved for his older brother a few verses later?)  What is God’s evaluation of the two men praying in the temple?  Who demonstrates neighborly love to the injured man by the road?  If our message is not built around telling the story, then it is easy for the resolution to be lost in the detail of our structure.

3. The text is lean, but effective engagement requires the forming of imagery. The Bible does not give much detail in the telling of most of its stories.  Every detail counts and should be studied carefully.  However, the listeners are not studying the text at length, they are listening to you preach it.  So for them to be able to engage with the text, to be able to identify with central characters, to disassociate from others, to wrestle with the tension, they need effective and developed description of the events.  It takes time for the mists to clear on the screen of their hearts so that they can feel the force of the narrative!

Feel the Force: Poetry

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

When we preach poetry, do our listeners really feel the force of it?  Poetry is found in the Psalms and wisdom literature, of course, but also in the historical books and the prophets too.  All too easily we can preach to the head, but not move the listeners with the force of the text.

A couple of thoughts on this:

1. Word images may not carry instant force, so we should build it. For example, when the Psalms speak of the heavens, the stars, the sun and moon, etc., there is a big difference between most listeners today and the original hearers of the text.  They lived under the stars.  Once the sun went down the rhythm of life changed and stargazing was as normal as TV gazing is for some today.  So a brief reference to how amazing it is to look at the stars and feel so small (as in Psalm 8 ) will simply not move contemporary listeners like the original reference would have done.  Today we have to build an awareness of our smallness (thankfully we have NASA and the Hubble telescope to help generate a sense of smallness!)

2. The structure of a poem, the shift in content, may not be apparent to our listeners, so we should clarify and demonstrate it. If the poem was read carefully straight through, the discerning reader would probably pick up on the transition that occurs.  The problem with preaching though is that the extra words may obscure the transitions instead of clarifying them.  There is a major transition at the mid-point of Psalm 73.  Yet if the preacher is droning in their voice, or simply moving methodically through a series of points, that dramatic transition may easily be missed.

3. Emotive language can so easily be made informational. As I’ve probably written elsewhere on this site, it is so easy to dissect a frog to learn how it jumps, but in doing so we stop it doing so.  A dissected poem is not enough for effective preaching.

People listening need to feel the force of poetry so that it can mark their lives deeply, as God intends.

The Challenge of Rest

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The theme of work and rest is woven throughout the warp and woof of Scripture.  While there may or may not be some progression in the revelation concerning sabbath (no need to get into that here), the theme of rest persists from creation to Hebrews (again, not getting into an exegetical discussion on that either, tempting though it is!)

I sometimes look at others slightly enviously in this respect.  I used to have a job that began when I left for work and finished when I chose to pack up and come home.  I see people with employment that they can forget about when they leave and genuinely have a free weekend.  Perhaps one day is busy with church, and the other is busy with other activities (a change is as good a rest, so some say).  The issue faced by someone taking rest seriously is how to get that in the midst of weekend projects and commitments.

Somehow that seems like a slightly easier challenge than many others face.

For many, and I presume to include people heavily involved in church ministry, the challenge of rest is slightly different.  Putting to one side the busy nature of Sundays and acknowledging that for many the day of rest has to come somewhere else in the weekly calendar.  But that’s the problem.  For many of us our work, whatever that is, is always there and always hanging over us.  It’s not easy to leave the desk and forget about the message you’re preparing for this Sunday, or the series coming up in a few weeks, or the ministry schedule and necessary early research for next year’s preaching calendar, etc.

So there’s the challenge – how to be sure to get the rest that we need physically, emotionally, mentally and, of course, spiritually, when the demands continue to hang over us?  One day off every week.  One genuine vacation/break every year.  One sabbatical every X years.  Sorry to add another thing to think about, but God has made it’s importance clear, so how do we meet the challenge of rest?

Mentoring Preachers

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

On Friday I suggested that mentoring is an ideal approach to training preachers, while in no way diminishing the value of formal training or personal improvement approaches like reading, attending seminars, etc.  On Saturday I offered the concept of mentoring to a small group of church leaders and suggested that biblically mentoring is at the heart of ministry, and especially the core ingredient in leadership development.  Instead of viewing church life as seasons of stability interrupted by periodic crisis when transition needs to occur, we would be better off viewing leadership development and even transition as a continual process.

So regarding mentoring, I’d like to offer a couple of clarification comments:

1. Mentoring by definition implies a purposeful relationship for building up another person.  Stanley and Clinton define mentoring as “a relational process in which one person empowers another by sharing God-given resources.”

2. Mentoring is not imitation. The person being mentored is invested in by the mentor, who shares resources and helps the “mentee” to be who God made them to be, not to be who the mentor is.

3. The mentor is not in control of the mentee’s life. Mentoring can easily be abused when the agenda becomes the mentor’s agenda and the mentee becomes a person somehow “owned” by the mentor.  The agenda is really the mentee’s, even though the mentor may sometimes know what would benefit them more than they do.

4. There is no reason why the mentor should not be surpassed by the mentee in some way. The mentor is not an absolute limit beyond which the mentee may not pass.  A good mentor will look to leverage their own resources for the sake of the mentee, as well as the resources of others that either may be able to access, always leaning on the Lord since He is the giver of all resources, and looking to launch the mentee into greater fruitfulness, growth and maturity.

So much more could be said, but perhaps that can come via comments or in future posts.  The question is, are we being mentored and are we mentoring others in the realm of preaching?

Plan A, Plan B

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

At a recent preacher training event I was asked if I thought all preachers should have had formal training in homiletics.  Seems like a simple question, but as with all these things, there are complexities.  For instance, a lot of colleges and seminaries seem to relegate homiletics to a level of luxury to which many cannot afford to give attention.  So you’ll often find a teacher of another subject “covering” the preaching courses.  Or you’ll find a local preacher teaching the course, even though they haven’t been trained to teach preaching.  Either of these solutions could work really well, or could be very weak.

So it seems to me that while I think homiletics training in a formal setting has great value and I would encourage all preachers to take advantage of whatever training is available to them . . . I would see another model of training as a higher priority.

Plan A – mentoring. Biblically and practically I think mentoring has to be considered plan A.  Having a preacher or a full church leadership deliberately investing in a new preacher and helping them develop has to be the ideal.  It may not be enough, so supplement it, but if it is omitted, then the best we can hope for is plan B.

Plan B – formal institutional training. This allows time to develop, full observation, critique and feedback, access to quality instruction (not in every case), and the full range of necessary disciplines alongside homiletics.  I affirm and esteem formal training and am thankful I have been able to receive it.

Plan C – Personal deliberate, but ad hoc training. Taking advantage of seminars, workshops, books, etc.  This should be the case for all preachers, but if Plan A and B are missing, then it is probably inferior as a stand alone option.

Plan D – No training, just practice. Practice doesn’t make perfect.  Practice can make stubborn.  Repeating what has been seen in others can create a driven down stubbornness, or a mere unawareness that the individual’s preaching could be so much more effective.  Hence I urge all preachers at least to read something about preaching and take any training opportunities that present themselves.

Plan A, B and C combined make the best sense to me . . . what are your thoughts on the best training for a preacher?  Obviously “Plan Of Course” has to be prayer and dependence on the Lord whatever the other elements!

Aim for Simple

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Last night I led a Bible study in the Psalms.  This study series is deliberately designed to include some more challenging “academic” content, making participants aware of the possibilities in terms of formal study of the Psalms, hermeneutical principles, etc.  But the bulk of the time is spent not talking about the Psalms, but looking at a Psalm or two.  Actually, last night we looked at three.

Most people found the reading ahead of the study a little overwhelming.  It was.  A relatively lengthy explanation of how the book was formed and how the shape evolved during that process.  Then we looked at a section of Psalms to see the evidence of deliberate shaping .  Then we spent the bulk of the time observing, interpreting, reflecting on, applying, enjoying, responding to the three Psalms.

That was a Bible study, and not a normal Bible study.  It was not a sermon.  When I preach I have to avoid the temptation to prove my study efforts, to demonstrate my level of exegtical ability, to convince listeners of some academic point or to present material at a level above the heads of the listeners.  When I preach I want the message of the text itself to be clear and to be clearly applied.  Simple is better than complicated.  Clear is better than opaque.

I would rather hear “I understood that” over “that was so deep” (i.e. I didn’t understand it).  Let’s be profound in preparation, profound in impact, but simple in clear content, vocabulary and presentation.

Natural Born Series

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

Some preachers plan series in a relatively simple manner.  They select a book of the Bible and then preach, unit by unit, through the book, or through a section.  Others select a topic and select appropriate passages to organize a topical series.  I am not critiquing either approach, but want to offer another option too.

Just as we are in danger of reading the Bible to look for a message, so we can fall into reading the Bible to look for a series.  One way this manifests itself is in the sections we dismiss, as much as those we select.  For instance, what if we were looking in the Psalms and were drawn to a section like the Psalms of Ascent?  Well, fifteen weeks might be too long for a series, so we are tempted to look elsewhere.

As often as possible we should simply soak in the text.  Like taking a leisurely bath rather than a quick shower, we should take every opportunity to be saturated by a section.  Something happens once it gets into you.  Let’s push the analogy and say that the skin of our soul becomes wrinkly . . . even when you step out the evidence remains.

So for example, I was preparing a synopsis of a longer study on Psalms 107-118 (the section before the Ascent Psalms).  A dozen psalms that present a unified and powerful message.  If I had been looking for a series, I would have gone elsewhere because 12 weeks is probably too long.  (Or settled for the more obvious Egyptian Hallel of 113-118, missing the blessing of the first part of the sequence.)  But after soaking in this text for a while, I can’t help but find myself thinking of creative ways to present the message of this section.  Combining psalms, summarizing a block of three with a focus on one, perhaps even preaching a message that traces the flow through all twelve.

I soaked and now the wrinkly skin of my soul is looking for an opportunity to preach the section . . . in one message, in three, in five.  I suppose, like a leisurely bath, there is probably a fragrance that lingers from this kind of study, too.

Sometimes we have to plan very pragmatically.  Let’s be sure we also create space for soaking, slow, text-saturated, natural born series.