16 Confessions – Part 4

January 5, 2012January 2, 2012 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Inspired by a helpful post from Ron Edmondson sharing candid confessions of a church leader, I decided to offer a few from a specifically preaching point of view. I’m sure there is much more that could be added, but one thing that has come back to me via conversations around this theme is that preachers definitely need to have some genuine and vulnerable relationships, as listed at number 14 – safe places to be able to confess more than is being confessed here.

For now, let’s get up to the number 16 . . .

13. Most preachers will freely admit that we face the same temptations and seasons of spiritual dryness as everyone else. We need loving accountability and fellowship, but sometimes struggle to ask for it.

14. Most preachers are like everyone else and need some good close friends to be open with and mutually interdependent. Some preachers think they don’t need that kind of friend, but they do too. Actually many preachers feel lonely, both as preachers and as individuals.

15. Many preachers recognize that our spouse can have the toughest position in a church. They feel all the unresponsiveness to our ministry, and any critique of us, even more keenly than we do. And then they have all the dynamics of their own relationships too. Some churches do foster unrealistic expectations of spouses.

16. Many preachers love God and His Word and His people and the lost. Many preachers love the privilege of preparation, poring over His Word in need of God’s work in our hearts and looking to serve Him as He works in theirs; and the short-term roller-coaster of daring to dream and praying for life changing, even eternity changing moments where God breaks in; combined with the long-term adventure of seeing God at work in peoples’ lives as a process as well as a crisis. It is this privilege of participation in the greater work of God’s great church project that drives us on, stirs our hearts and keeps us pressing on, even in the midst of some pettiness or political brokering or perpetual politeness. Being involved in preaching ministry is a privilege, even when it isn’t always a pleasure.

Let Man Not Separate Holy Spirit and Sermon Delivery

December 30, 2011December 28, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday I urged the preacher to not abdicate the role of text explainer, or text applier, but rather to do both in full prayerful reliance on the Holy Spirit. Apart from Christ we can do nothing, but we are not asked to do nothing. Now a third danger of illegitimate separation of Spirit and ministry in preaching, the issue of delivery:

3. The idea that any overt attempt at effective communication is somehow a slight on the Holy Spirit, who would much rather the preacher was completely ineffective so it could be “all of God.” Another strange one, and again, quite inconsistent. While it would be ridiculous to make the presentation all about the preacher’s ability to perform, leaving God out (and we’ve probably all sensed that now and then with some), surely it is equally ridiculous to try to abdicate our role as communicators.

The Holy Spirit is preeminently concerned with effective heart to heart communication (that is the ongoing ingredient in almost all His roles in Scripture, it seems). We don’t honour the Spirit by communicating as poorly as possible. Equally, we are inconsistent if we make any effort to be loud enough to be heard, or if we at least speak with coherent and distinct words – why bother at all? Just mumble quietly. No, in reality the Spirit is the One who is at work in peoples’ hearts and lives, yet for some reason He also works through us as we preach. Preacher, lean fully on God’s strength and pray continually for the Spirit to be at work, and communicate as effectively as you can, that’s part of your role.

Let Man Not Separate Holy Spirit and Preaching Content

December 29, 2011December 28, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday we addressed the issue of preparing to preach, and how that is a part of ministry life that truly and profoundly involves the Holy Spirit (or at least, it should). The danger of divorcing our ministry from the Spirit persists into the preaching event too.

There are a few places where this danger lurks:

1. The notion that explanation is not needed from the preacher, for the Spirit will bring home the truth of God’s Word. I have come across this a few times. It comes across as if something profoundly spiritual is supposed to be happening as the preacher states the Word, but fails to explain it. It may be accompanied by knowing comments and tones that give the impression that those “in the know” have some sort of insight here, and hopefully the rest of us will get that mystery knowledge too. Then maybe the preacher carries on with this statement-without-explanation approach, or perhaps they move into a list of highly relevant personal applications (or anecdotes).

From my perspective this lack of explanation tends to come across to some as profound spirituality that inspires or intimidates, and at the same time it can come across to others as indicative that the preacher is incapable of explaining the text and is sort of bluffing. Preacher, lean fully on God’s strength and pray continually for the Spirit to be at work, and explain the text, that’s part of your role.

2. The idea that application is the Spirit’s work, not the preacher’s. I have come across this one more than the other, perhaps at the other end of the ecclesiastical spectrum. It is exemplified in my experience in a sentence that rings alarm bells – “Now may the Spirit apply to our hearts and lives the truths we have seen in His Word. Amen.” This sentence sometimes comes after a lengthy lecture of biblical content devoid of overt application and clarified relevance. Why is that somehow the Spirit’s role, but not at all the role of the preacher? Is this phrase suggesting that the explanation was all of the preacher, and nothing of the Spirit? I hope not.

So why not follow through and not abdicate a key role the preacher is called to – namely to not only lecture biblical content, but rather to communicate the meaning of the text with an emphasis on its relevance to the contemporary and specific listeners? Preacher, lean fully on God’s strength and pray continually for the Spirit to be at work, and apply the text, that’s part of your role.

One more area tomorrow – the whole matter of delivery.

Let Man Not Separate Holy Spirit and Preaching Preparation

December 28, 2011December 28, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday I wrote about the error of separating devotional spirituality from exegetical rigour. Skill in handling the Word should not be divorced from personal spirituality and our walk with the Lord. There is a very direct correlation. I’ll stay with this theme of not creating false separation with three more preaching and Holy Spirit related posts this week.

Today I’d like to address the myth that preparation for preaching somehow reduces the involvement of the Holy Spirit. You may know people who suggest something along these lines – “Oh, I don’t want to get in the way of the Holy Spirit, you know, and lean on my own understanding.”

It is a very real danger that prayerless preparation can cause us to lean fully on our own strength and to dismiss the work of the Spirit.

but

It is a very real danger that failing to prepare can cause us not to lean fully on the Holy Spirit, but rather on the random cocktail of energy stirred within by nervous tension and adrenaline, drawing on reserves of content that are neither fresh, nor suddenly “spiritual” due to our irresponsible and inconsistent view of ministry. (I am not here addressing the situation where preparation was not possible due to sudden need or massively impeded preparation due to unforeseen family/pastoral crisis.)

the right approach must surely be prayerful, Spirit empowered preparation.

1. The Holy Spirit does not guarantee that our interpretations of a passage are infallible. He will work with us as we show our whole-hearted, whole-mind, whole-strength love for the Lord as we study His Word to seek to truly make sense of it.

2. The Holy Spirit inspired the Word of God, and so is not insulted when we try our hardest to handle it well. Surely the insult comes when we brandish it as if it were merely magic words to be thrown at people.

3. The Holy Spirit is also at work in the lives of the people to whom we will preach. Surely it makes more sense to prayerfully prepare to preach to them, than it does to busy ourselves with other things and then suddenly claim Spirit empowerment in the moment of preaching. He is working in them all week, why not let Him work in the preacher too in anticipation of that preaching moment?

4. The Holy Spirit normally works far more consistently and progressively in both the preacher and the listener, rather than the relatively rare “intuitive flash” (which in some cases might very well be explained by other causes, though not always, of course).

5. The Word that the Spirit Himself inspired includes the instruction to a local church based preacher to “make every effort” in teaching the Bible accurately (2Tim.2:15). He hasn’t changed His mind.

Not (just) a method

December 26, 2011December 26, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I am very thankful to Andrea Aresca for his guest post that I share here today. I’ve had the joy of sharing many conversations about preaching with Andrea over the years and I am so encouraged by what he has to offer. If you read Italian, please visit predicalaparola.com, but if not, he has translated today’s post for us here. I agree absolutely with Andrea that preaching is not (just) a method . . .

____________________________________

Reading some of the articles on my blog or Peter’s blog (especially those that describe the stages of sermon preparation), it may seem that the method is the most important issue in preaching.

I am absolutely convinced of the usefulness of knowing the fundamental principles of the text’s interpretation and communication and a lot of them can actually be applied to non-Bible texts, as well. Many of those “rules” help us not to say what the text doesn’t say and to communicate the biblical truth in an understandable way. Furthermore, having a method is very useful in the first years of our experience as preachers, because it helps us to consolidate those habits that allow us to be really “faithful” to the Scriptures.

Nevertheless, the method is not the primary issue in preaching, nor its description the main goal of this blog.

What I want to promote is, indeed, a vision.

A vision of God who loves us and wants to have a relationship with us.
A vision of the Bible as the revelation of God, through which we can know His heart and what He desires for us.
A vision of preaching that really puts at the centre God and His Word, that communicates the Word’s meaning without preconceptions, that promotes the Word’s application in contemporary life, that considers the personality and the needs of people who listen.

All that I write (including the posts that can be defined as more “technical”) has the goal of showing this biblical vision of preaching.

The preaching of the Bible has been used this way by many men about whom we read in the Scriptures and in church history, through which God brought about extraordinary renewal. Certainly we too can tell how God spoke to use in a special way through the message of those who preached, both with heart and led by the Spirit, the truth of the Bible.

My prayer and the goal of this blog is that all this can be realized more and more, every time the Bible is opened and preached.

Saturday Short Thought – The Power of the Word

December 17, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

This week I have been thinking about the power of words. Actually, even the power of few words. I’ve been blogging about Proverbs – those powerful little dynamos of biblical wisdom. I’ve been preparing to preach at two carol services where message length has to be kept tighter. I’ve also been thinking too about the death of a man whose life was known for the absence of small talk, Christopher Hitchens. I’ve blogged about his death and a strong lesson that I feel we need to learn as Christians, and especially as preachers, over on the Cor Deo site – please click here to go there.

So on one extreme there are those that seek to wax eloquent to show their own so-called wisdom. At the other extreme we have Biblical wisdom, such as that in Proverbs. Then in the middle are preachers trying to share a word in season, especially in this season when so many make their annual pilgrimage to a place of worship. And in the midst of it all, I can’t help but wonder at the Word of God who became flesh and pitched his tent among us. Even before he learned to speak words on Mary and Joseph’s laps, he was the Word incarnate – so small, so tiny, yet the most powerful message the world has ever known.

Allow me to repeat the words of Richard Sibbes that I shared here a few weeks ago:

“We cannot too often meditate of these things. It is the life and soul of a Christian. It is the marrow of the gospel. It is the wonder of wonders. We need not wonder at anything after this.” (Sibbes, Works 5:485)

______________________________

Next Week –

Survey Results: Missing Ingredients in Effective Preaching

Preaching Proverbs 5: Random Thoughts

December 16, 2011December 9, 2011 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

To finish off this series of posts on preaching Proverbs, here is a randomly organized collection of brief thoughts. See what I did there?

1. Preaching topically may be fine. I’ve avoided the more obvious approach of addressing a subject that Proverbs addresses with multiple references, but it’s fine to do that. And it would be fine to not be exhaustive, why not just focus more on two or three proverbs and aim for effectiveness over exhaustiveness?

2. Preaching a shorter sermon will be appreciated. I’ve shared how a full-length sermon may be possible from a two line truth, but why not preach short? Finish ten minutes early and your listeners may talk about the message for years!

3. Preaching a section may be effective. You can check out Bruce Waltke and discover structure that you’ve never seen before. Or you can go where my Hebrew prof suggested . . . preach a series of apparently random proverbs since that is how life is experienced from our perspective.

4. Remember that Proverbs is primarily observation, not promise. Don’t turn an observation of life lived under the covenant of Deuteronomy 28-30 into a promise for all people of God in every age.

5. Preach a pugilistic match-up of contemporary wisdom with Proverbial sagacity. That is, take a saying from our culture and watch it lose in a fight with one of God’s inspired sayings.

6. Preach Proverbs with humour and with poetry. Help people see what life is like and what it could be like with a healthy dose of sanctified wit and biblically saturated poetic presentation. Certainly the main idea should be proverbial, poetic, memorable, pithy, precise.

7. Preach Proverbs for living with godly wisdom, don’t preach godly wisdom to fuel the fires of self-centred success.

8. Provoke further thought, don’t bore listeners into submission as if your extensive knowledge is the focus. Their further thought, in the fear of Lord, worked into their hearts and lives: that is the focus.

And if you don’t have it yet, get hold of a copy of Jeff Arthurs book, Preaching with Variety – his chapter on Proverbs alone is worth the price of the book. Actually, the rest is good too . . . and I will be giving a copy away on the facebook page promotion later this month – click here to go to the promo information.

Preaching Proverbs 4: Sayings and Sermons

December 15, 2011December 9, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I described two masterpieces of the art of preaching Proverbs (click here to see post). Both the explanatory emphasis of the first and the applicational emphasis of the second affirmed the possibility of a full-length single saying sermon from the Proverbs. What were some of the key features of these sermons?

1. Repetition. In both cases the preachers repeated the main idea (the proverb) multiple times. It never felt forced or tedious, but it did tattoo the truths on the hearts of those listening. Proverbs are designed to be memorable. While we don’t have the memorability of the original language to aid us, repetition certainly helped.

2. Memorability. We don’t have sound-play in the wording like the Hebrew, but memorability can be achieved in other ways. In the first example Haddon Robinson achieved memorability by pursuing visualization. That is, through vivid description, the listeners could see what he described, and having seen it on the screen of their hearts, they wouldn’t forget. In the second example, Gene Curtis achieved memorability by a different type of sound-play. Not the sounds of the words, but the clever use of a repeated first line of a song. Actually, this musical marker was so effective in flagging up the need for the proverb because he ended the mini-rendition by tweaking the tune into a melancholic minor key each time – a refrain introducing the main idea each time.

3. Non-linearity. Neither sermon imposed what felt like a foreign sermon structure on the text. There was no overt three point with sub-point presentation involved. Both felt relaxed and slightly circular, yet on paper could have been defined using standard outlining, of course. There wasn’t the urgency of a narrative, or the driving progression in logic of an epistle. The structure seemed to fit the genre.

4. Application. Both sermons were marked by specific, tangible, relevant and vivid application. While the one placed greater emphasis on explanation, both felt absolutely preached to the listener, to mark the listener and to bring about transformation. I’m sure many of us could manage it, but surely it must be wrong to turn a practical, vivid, life truth, into an academic curio. It takes great intellect to make something simple and clear, but a lesser preacher can impress and confuse the listener. Hey, was that a contemporary antithetical distich? Nice.

Tomorrow I’ll finish the series . . .

Preaching Proverbs 3: Full-Length Single Saying Sermons

December 14, 2011December 9, 2011 / Peter Mead / 3 Comments

Jon provoked this series of posts by asking if it is possible to preach longer than five minutes on a proverb (particularly the two-line kind), without preaching topically through a whole subject. I believe it is. Not just in theory, but based on my experience as a listener. Two, perhaps three messages stand out to me, that have been on a single two-line saying, and have warranted the full sermon length they were given. So, two ways to pursue fully orbed Proverb preaching:

The Every Angle Jewel Explanation Approach. The message I have in mind is one I head a few years back from Dr Haddon Robinson. Seemed like a simple saying, until he started probing it. Like a connoisseur of fine jewels, Robinson took up that little saying and methodically turned it in every direction, probing each facet to gradually determine the richness of the meaning of the proverb. Technically he used carefully developed paragraphs of thought. Experientially it was like sitting at the feet of a wise sage giving a guided tour of a fascinating thought. In the process of explanation I learned about metallurgy, about Hebrew culture, about the language used, and most importantly, about myself as the light reflecting from that jewel shone into corners of my life. There was no bony structure sticking out, or jerky transition into time for an application. It was relaxed, it was measured, it was well-crafted, it was a message that marked me.

The Every Direction Intersection Application Approach. Ok, so my label is almost as long as a proverb, but I’m not Solomon. The message I have in mind is one I heard in seminary chapel over a decade ago. Dr Gene Curtis preached a masterpiece of a sermon that still influences my ministry today. A typical two liner. A full length sermon. A lot of marked listeners. How did he do it? He explained the proverb, which didn’t take long, but then he applied it. Then he applied it again. Then he applied it again. Multiple situational applications, all driving home the same point, the main point of the proverb. In this particular case he also used the first line of a children’s Sunday school song to reinforce the point and offer a musical memory marker along the way. If you can imagine a busy intersection in the centre of a large city, a roundabout/rotary with multiple roads leading off it, that was his sermon. He left the world of the Hebrew sage and entered the office of the pastor, the conversation of the spouse, the lap of the parent, the phone call of the friend, etc. Each time showing the relevance of the proverb, each time reinforcing the same point, each time returning to the text and then heading off on a different exit point. I would love to have preached a sermon so effective.

I was impressed recently with a sermon by Andy Stanley on a single proverb, which was excellent, but despite the impressive feats, perhaps it didn’t quite attain to the two I’ve described. (Or perhaps it had the strengths of both!)

Can I Tread on Some Special Toes?

December 9, 2011December 9, 2011 / Peter Mead / 32 Comments

It is coming up to the time of year when people are making resolutions. One of the big ones in churches is to read the Bible through in a year. So perhaps you are thinking of encouraging people to do this by suggesting a reading plan. Here’s where I am going to tread on some special toes.

“I don’t think the Robert Murray M’Cheyne reading plan

is a good idea.”

There, I said it.

His plan, which is still widely promoted by various big names, essentially involves reading four chapters per day. This takes people through the whole Bible plus a bit of repeating (NT & Psalms, I think) in a year. I think it is great to help people get into the Bible, and I know many have been helped by it, but I don’t think this is the best way to go.

Essentially the problem with the plan, and others like it, is that the reading is segregated. So readers start in Genesis, Ezra, Matthew and Acts all on day one. I don’t want to stir up a sanctified riot, but I don’t think this is a good idea. Why not?

1. It treats the Bible chapters as vitamin pills rather than the feast that they are. That is, it creates a sense of “balance” without encouraging readers to really savour the taste of the text as it flows.

2. It hinders the reader from reading the text in context. In a busy life it is hard enough to keep track of one flow of thought, let alone four.

3. It doesn’t encourage the reader to get “in the zone.” I don’t know anyone that would advocate reading four novels at a time, a page from each, each day. How much better to invite people beyond the first few minutes of distracted reading and into the zone where they get gripped by the narrative and don’t want to put it down?

4. It promotes a tick-box approach to Bible reading as a discipline, rather than an overt opportunity to engage with God’s heart as revealed in the epic revelation. So many people view Bible reading as a laborious discipline that they must force themselves to do. But the people I know who delight in the Bible tend to be people who devour it, rather than dipping into it.

Suggestion? Why not encourage and invite people to read the Bible aggressively and relationally, as if God has a personality and is personal. That is, by reading His Word with a passion to know Him, readers/listeners might get to know His personality and grow in their personal relationship with Him.

Perhaps it is worth pondering how to encourage people by enthusiastic invitation, rather than by affirming the “difficulty” and “trudgery” of “getting through the Bible” in a year or three. Here is a link to my friend Ron’s article on Bible reading – as “Bible presenters” lets be sure to be genuine Bible enthusiasts that do more than try to fire up the so-called disciplined wills of our listeners!