I wish more people were careful not to carelessly throw around “God told me” vocabulary. When the preacher slips in this statement, what does it communicate? What do people understand? Did the preacher really receive a supernatural revelation, a voice resounding in the study? That is what people hear the preacher say, and they wonder why they never hear God say anything to them. I am sure there are many churches filled with people feeling intimidated by their lack of personal supernatural revelation. There are churches full of people who are learning to use this vocabulary for less dramatic experiences and thereby intimidating other believers. There are churches full of people who could be truly gripped by the wonder of hearing God speaking through His Word, but instead wishing for an experience that others may or may not have in their quiet times. As preachers we must be very careful of the words we use and how they might be taken, we must be very careful of the example we set our listeners.
Homiletics
Review: The Passion Driven Sermon, by Jim Shaddix.
Subtitle – Changing the Way Pastors Preach and Congregations Listen
This is a book with both strengths and weaknesses. To be honest, this is not a classic.
Jim Shaddix is a pastor and teacher of preaching at New Orleans Baptist Seminary. He co-authored Power in the Pulpit, a preaching manual, with Jerry Vines. This book, The Passion Driven Sermon, is not a manual, but a theology of preaching. In this book he wrestles with what preaching is, and what it should be.
The Passion Driven Sermon, according to Shaddix, should be a sermon driven by passion for the glory of God. His passion is evident throughout the book as he addresses issues relating to preaching and the Bible, preaching and the pastor’s role as shepherd, then preaching and the sermon.
There are some real strengths in this book. His style is uncompromising. The recurring idea throughout is that preaching should be filled with “God’s stuff” rather than just “good stuff.” The passion for God, for His glory and for His Word, is commendable. The repeated swipes at non-expository felt needs preaching is certainly needed in certain circles.
However, there are also real weaknesses in this book. Often the swipes taken at non-expository felt needs preaching swipe too broadly. The reader soon has the sense that any specific relevance to the daily life of the listener is a compromise that should be rejected.
Is it not possible to preach Christ and Him crucified, to preach theocentric and Biblical sermons, making clear the claim of Christ on the lives of the listener, but to do so with relevance and application? True expository preaching demands both Bible and relevance.
Pendulums swing far, often too far – but it is important to get the point of the swing. Shaddix’s book is a pendulum swing away from man-centered, unbiblical, rhetorically driven ear-scratching preaching. He swings too far and rejects too much, but we should hear his message anyway.
We do need the message of this book today, but I would be nervous if a preacher followed this book to the letter. After reading this, it would be healthy to read another book that places the importance of relevance in Biblical exposition back in its rightful place.
To be honest, at times it felt like Shaddix was in a bad mood when he wrote the book. Strengths and weaknesses, but not a classic.
Balance Between Caution and Boldness?
In an article titled Considering Hearers, Haddon Robinson writes, “But if we focus too hard on not offending, or if we read too many letters from the offended, we can become paralyzed. We start qualifying every sentence. We end up with weasel sermons that are defensive, cautious, and spineless.”
I must admit, these words were much needed exhortation. Preaching on a regular basis to graduate educated, post-moderns, I have received my share of letters! Some letters are encouraging, some are rightfully corrective, but the vast majority are nitpicky. While we must do everything within our ability to preach sermons that carefully and lovingly consider the words we use, the tone we speak with and the illustrations we tell, we must not become overly careful and cautious. If we do, we risk speaking so broadly and generally, that we end up saying nothing at all.
So, how do we balance necessary caution and the proclamation of truth with boldness? Here is one suggestion: imaginary friends. Yes, you read it right – imaginary friends. Robinson calls this, “taking the listeners’ side.” As you write your sermon, imagine yourself surrounded by three, four, even five diverse people. For example, my five friends are named Chris, Victoria, Jeff, Ken and Elsa. Chris is deeply theological and socially oriented. Victoria is a product of the feminist movement, highly educated and politically savvy. Jeff is simple, homeless and wonderfully pragmatic. He loves to say, “so what.” Ken is white-collar, an MBA gradate, highly motivated and helpfully cynical. Elsa is a single mom, with many needs, endless strength and a passion for Jesus. I sit with these friends in my study every week I preach. I ask them questions and think through their answers. I make statements and ponder their responses. Considering these friends as I write sermons, helps me to be appropriately careful. It keeps me lovingly cautious.
A side benefit to this is that it also helps me to be relevant. Of course, I change my friends around every now and then. I add a young single man here and an elderly woman there… The purpose of this is to strike a balance of caution and boldness in the sermons I preach. I have found this to help.
Other suggestions?
Is one sermon enough?
Dr. Sid Buzzell of Colorado Christian University made a comment worthy of consideration. He has one foot in pastoral preaching and the other in education. He suggested that if preachers started to think of preaching schedules with the mindset of an educator there would be one obvious difference. If preachers were truly concerned with the outcome in mind, what the listeners should become as a result of the preaching, then many sermons would become series of sermons.
Perhaps preachers do have a tendency to cover material once, move on to new material, and expect too much change from such short exposure. So maybe it’s time to ask ourselves, in light of the Biblical passage before us, and as those seeking to see life change that will bring pleasure and glory to God, and knowing our people as we do . . . is one sermon enough?
Like a good plane ride
Norman just added a comment to the post “Focus on the basics” – I read a good quote “A good sermon is like a good plane ride. It must have a smooth take-off and a smooth landing…”
Calvin Miller recently taught the analogy of preaching being like a plane ride at the International Congress on Preaching. He spoke of how passengers have three expectations – to take off, to go somewhere and to land. For take-off and landing he spoke of the critical first three and last three minutes. For going somewhere he spoke of the importance of the flight plan. While going somewhere it is important to consider the length of the flight is not too long, making sure the intellectual weather is not too heavy, and that the in-flight entertainment is not boring. He even got into the physics of flight – the right combination of the downward weight of content with the forward thrust of passion. I wonder how much farther this analogy could be pushed?
Focus on the basics
Great preaching always involves the “effective execution of elementary ideas.” (Attributed to Eugene Emerson Jennings)
It is tempting to give attention in preaching to the clever and intricate subtleties of the art and craft of preaching, but subtleties work best when built on a foundation of good solid basics. A clearly derived and cleanly defined Biblical idea. A definite and specific purpose. A logical and orderly structure. Good pastoral relevance. Effective introduction. A clean finish. Most, if not all preachers would preach their next sermon more effectively if they would focus on the basics.
Sermon Purpose: Is There a Default Goal?
I recently wrote these words, “For an effective sermon, you need a clearly defined purpose – the specific response you prayerfully expect to occur in the life of the listeners.”
Does this mean the response has to be some kind of action? What if your purpose is to stir affection, bolster belief or improve cognition? These can all be very legitimate types of objectives for a sermon. Yet our default should be to preach for a response that includes, but goes beyond the heart and the head. Consider James 1:22 – “Be doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.”
As a preacher we should usually consider how to legitimately apply the Biblical idea to ourselves and our listeners for transformed affection, belief, and conduct. We wouldn’t want to assist anyone in “deceiving” themselves!
Question: Is “creating need” the same as preaching for felt-needs?
Tim asked the following question in reference to “Introductions: The Essential Ingredients” –
I’m interested in this ‘create or surface need’ idea. Is there not a danger that this tends towards sermons being man-centred and self-help focussed? Like ‘what felt need (not even necessarily true need) does this text provide the solution for?’ Does this encourage a sense that God and His Word are merely felt-need-meeters?
I’m not being negative – I like the idea of ‘create or surface need’. It just raises questions in my mind.
Peter Mead responds: This is an important question. When people speak of preaching for “felt needs” the concern is with preaching that is primarily “how to” in nature. For example, how to raise teenagers, how to have a happy marriage, etc. There is a concern that preaching these kinds of messages do please listeners, but fail to address their real needs, fail to be God-centered, and often fail to honor the intention of the Biblical texts. These are important concerns!
The reason that “need” is included in the introduction to a message is not to determine the nature of the whole message (man-centered rather than God-centered), but to create an opportunity for the Word of God to get into good soil. Using the parable of the four soils for a moment, the key issue there is a “listening heart.” I believe it is naive to assume that people are always eagerly listening when they sit through a sermon. Let me quote Haddon Robinson in Biblical Preaching, “When you start, the people listen because they ought to, but before long, you must motivate them to listen because they can’t help but listen.” (p.168)
The core conviction here is this – do we believe the Bible should be applied to life? Or to put it another way, do we believe not only that all Scripture is God-breathed, but also that it is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work? (2Tim.3:16-17) Of course we do, which is why most preachers at least make some effort at application at the end of a message. If application is acceptable at the end of a message, then why would it not be acceptable in some form at the start? The reality is that many listeners may be long gone by the end of a message that shows no clear connection to their lives (maybe they will be asleep, or drifting to thoughts of pressing concerns – their upcoming confrontation at work, resolving the increasing tension in the family, how they can improve their golf swing, etc.) Some concerns and distractions may be frivolous, some are very understandable. So what to do? Serve up some relevance early on in the message, thereby helping hearts to be listening to the Word of God as it is preached.
Consider how Peter began his sermon on Pentecost – by promising to clarify the concern of the listeners regarding what was taking place before them. In fact, consider also Acts 3 and 17 for two more examples. The truth of God’s Word does not need to be watered down or changed in response to itching ears. The Word of God is highly relevant to life, our preaching should reflect that early on as well as at the end (and throughout).
I am not advocating God-less or Bible-weak self-help motivational speeches with seven steps to successful living. I am suggesting we preach theocentric, God-honoring, Biblical messages that by His grace, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, can change lives and conform people to the image of Christ in all areas of life. Being Biblical and relevant are not mutually exclusive options in preaching, they are both vital. It just helps listeners to listen if some of that relevance is strategically placed at the beginning, instead of all at the end.
More thoughts on this?
Introductions: Introducing What?
Tim, you ask a very God-honoring question when it comes to homiletical introduction. Creating or surfacing need is certainly part of what an introduction must do. In fact, as Peter states in his 5/11/2007 entry, an introduction must do four things. It must get attention, create rapport, establish authority and create or surface need. Yet, for these four components to be God-honoring and not man-honoring (which I believe gets at the heart of your question), David Buttrick, in Homiletic Moves and Structures makes a very important point. He states that an introduction must do two things. First, it must give focus to consciousness. Second, it must provide some sort of hermeneutical orientation.
Buttrick is not contradicting the points that Peter makes. In fact, within his chapter on introductions, he makes some of the very same points. Rather, Buttrick establishes an overarching principle that is to contour and influence the direction of the points that Peter makes. In other words, while doing all that Peter has encouraged us to do in an introduction, focus and orientation to the text must occur. This can be difficult. It is much easier get attention, create rapport, establish authority and surface need autonomous from the text that is supposed to be introduced. This happens all the time in preaching and it is a colossal error.
It is all too easy to imagine isn’t it? The preacher stands, opens his Bible, takes out his notes and begins. He starts by catching attention and building rapport through funny or shocking stories. The audience laughs or gasps – sometimes both simultaneously (it is a weird sort of convulsion). The room emits an ethos of warmth and openness and then, the preacher begins to preach. The problem is that the first five minutes had nothing to do with the sermon. The congregation is now enthralled with the preacher not the passage. So, after “warming-up” and “catching the attention” of the congregation, the preacher has to spend another five minutes on a second introduction – this time, focusing on the Word of God. This is a terrible waste of time.
To be clear, the four points that Peter makes need to happen in an introduction. However, they must happen in a way that focuses consciousness and provides some sort of hermeneutical orientation to the passage that is going to be preached. This will take more preparation time, and a lot more effort, but it is worth it. We must capture the attention of our audience while concurrently directing them toward God and His Word. Any other result is not an introduction.
When reading a text during the sermon
Donald Sunukjian, professor of preaching at Talbot School of Theology, writes and teaches concerning “oral clarity.” One of the things he teaches relates to the reading of a text during a sermon. Many preachers will introduce a text with a question, perhaps asking people to find the answer as the text is read. Sunukjian feels that this practice is not helpful. For many listeners this leads to a struggle to spot the thing the preacher expects them to see, then when they fail, they are discouraged at their inability to glean such things from the text. Once the text has been read, the preacher will then highlight the point he was looking for and the listeners will have one fact underlined in their minds – they missed it. So the solution? Sunukjian encourages preachers to introduce a passage by telling people the point that the writer is making, clearly stating and restating the truth that will be noticed as the passage is read. Then as the passage is read, the listeners hear the point, it is reinforced as being truly biblical, and they feel more confident in their ability to read the Bible for themselves!
Sunukjian’s new book, Invitation to Biblical Preaching: Proclaiming Truth with Clarity and Relevance, will be reviewed on this site soon. If you have read it, feel free to submit your feedback in response to this post.
