Not Even a Hint – Racism in the Pulpit

October 31, 2011October 31, 2011 / Peter Mead / 9 Comments

The last couple of weeks have seen two high profile footballers accused of making racist remarks to opponents. The world is rightly disgusted by this, even in the context of highly competitive and even combative sporting battle. How much more should we in the church avoid all hints of racism?

If you are an overtly racist preacher, this post will not get to the heart of the issue. I am writing more for those who don’t try to support a race discrimination position by twisting Scripture and becoming defensive. I am writing for preachers who may accidentally give a hint of racism without intending to do so.

Here are three ways I have seen preachers fall into hints of racism that might prove helpful.

1. Cut out references to a “black heart” – Maybe in the context of a mimed drama it might be ok, but probably not. Because of the way “black” and “white” are used as race markers, we have to be careful in using them as references to sinfulness and righteousness. The Bible does speak of white robes, but a black heart? Though your sins be as scarlet, sure, but not a black heart. I heard one preacher make reference to “your disgusting black heart.” He did so seemingly oblivious to who was sitting in front of him. And to make things worse, he himself was from a place associated with racism in the past. Probably best to just avoid the use of “black” as a reference to sin. Not even a hint.

2. Generally don’t mimic accents from the pulpit – Again, I haven’t heard this done in a mocking way. But it can feel mocking nonetheless. I have experienced this with US folks faking a British accent, and with British folks faking a US accent (neither are very successful, which can lead to the feeling of implicit mockery). When preaching Bible stories we are preaching about people in the Middle East, or Africa, or Mediterranean Europe. Don’t fake an accent if it could be taken as mockery. Not even a hint.

3. Watch out for easy targets – In the English context there is much talk about racism and wanting to kick it out of sports, TV, etc. Yet there seems to be open season on anti-American comments, or anti-French jokes. I’m fully English and patriotically so, but I find myself reacting inside to anti-US comments from preachers. In the context of the body of Christ united across Jew/Gentile lines, it just doesn’t seem appropriate. Let’s go for a “not even a hint” approach, why not?

Are there other ways preachers inadvertently give a hint of racism in their preaching?

The Memorable Outline Myth – Part 2

October 29, 2011October 29, 2011 / Peter Mead / 9 Comments

So yesterday I did the unthinkable. I pulled the pin from a grenade in the sacred space where the notion of a memorable outline is revered as the chief end of preaching. I suggested that people might not be best helped by a set of textual labels that typically lack applicational relevance. I even suggested that people might not review what we have made so memorable!

As I wrote yesterday, if the text yields a clear and applicational sequence of thoughts, by all means preach that. But I fear that in many cases a pre-commitment to paralleled alliterated points may undermine the following aspects of preaching:

1. Is the text being presented authentically? If you are dissecting and squeezing the text into an outline form, you may well be doing it an injustice. Very few texts are actually written as equal paralleled thoughts. Don’t give people a clever outline at the expense of really opening up the inspired text.

2. Is the listener motivated to return to this text, and the rest of the Bible? If they feel incapable of “finding the three points” in a passage, they are less likely to be opening their Bibles (which is what they really need on Thursday, not just a vague memory of three uninspired descriptive labels from Sunday).

3. Is energy poured into future recall being lost from present impact? Would it be better to have them feel the full force of the text’s impact at the point of preaching, and then be motivated to read more later in the day and the next day, rather than striving to cram in uninspired labels as a memory aid to help them remember a message that may have been only somewhat impactful on Sunday?

4. Is the main idea being undermined by a commitment to a longer list of lower value statements? If you put your energy into one carefully crafted applicational representation of the main idea of the text, that single sentence summary would be more memorable and reach further and make more of a difference than a set of well-stated points that reflect smaller segments within the text. Let the whole strike home to the heart in a single thought.

5. Is the projection of the outline teaching listeners bad listening habits? That is, are we communicating to them that the point of preaching is primarily education, that the goal of listening is recall and that the measure of spirituality is the taking of notes? It’s weird, but when my wife opens her heart to me and speaks, I don’t reach for a pad and a pencil, I open my heart and I listen.

The Memorable Outline Myth

October 28, 2011October 28, 2011 / Peter Mead / 5 Comments

I think this post will tread on some toes. I do it in love.

I think there is a myth among preachers and among listeners, a myth that may be distracting energy from and dissipating the potential impact of the preaching event. It is the myth of the importance of conveying a memorable outline. It goes something like this:

Everybody knows that good preaching will offer a memorable outline of the points of the message, a set of “hooks to hang your thoughts on,” as it were. With this memorability, listeners will be able to go away and recall the message later in the week, thereby being changed by an encounter with God’s Word throughout the week. In fact, this is so important, why not project the outline on the screen – it seems silly not to.

A couple of quick challenges, then I’ll suggest what may be lost in this pursuit of memorability.

A. How often do those who actually write down the outline go on to review and benefit from it, let alone those who walk out of church with just their memories to rely on?

B. How often do preachers actually make their points applicational so that remembering the outline will be life changing, rather than offering labels or titles for content that functions essentially as a set of poor commentary headings?

Now I know that this post is throwing a couple of grenades into a pretty sacred space for many preachers. Let me offer a token caveat – if a text yields a clear, memorable and applicational sequence of points, praise the Lord and preach it!

I do believe every sermon should have an outline. I am not promoting confused preaching. But I think the outline is really the servant of the preacher. The outline is for my sake, not theirs. There are other things that are much more important for them to feel the impact of and walk away with.

Next time I will finish the post by suggesting various aspects of preaching that may be being undermined by this memorable outline myth. And I won’t wait until Monday, I’ll post it tomorrow.

Tweaking Ingredients in Preaching

October 26, 2011October 23, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I spent my first few years in Italy. One enduring result on this is a long-term liking for Nutella. The original and best chocolate hazelnut spread! Australians might love their vegemite and the Americans their peanut butter, but this European can’t get away from Nutella. Except for when I see it in American shops, that is.

In recent years I have seen it appearing in the grocery store during my visits to the US, and have bought a jar or two. Same jar, same wrapping, same colour, but not same taste. One ingredient is different – just the oil. One ingredient on a long list, but it makes a difference.

The same is true with preaching. One ingredient modified slightly and the whole product can taste wrong. Here are some examples of tweaks that might ruin preaching:

1. Tweaking the tone from good news. Same passage, same illustrations, same length of sermon, but if you replace the good news aspect of the message with pressure to conform, guilt for failure or legalistic righteousness, I guarantee the message won’t taste the same!

2. Tweaking “of” to “from.” This is a common one. Instead of passionately pursuing the preaching of the message of the text, many preachers choose instead to preach their message from the text. That is, they use the biblical text as a starting point, but at the end the listeners don’t feel they know the text any better than at the beginning. Don’t preach from a text, preach the text. (I think this is the hardest one to spot in a mirror – every preacher thinks they are explaining the text. Perhaps you should ask someone who knows the Bible well and be ready to listen to what they tell you!)

3. Tweaking the text to fit an outline. Some preachers don’t go near this neighbourhood, but some seem to live there. Its where the text is twisted slightly to help it fit in a certain outline. Perhaps a three-point alliterated outline. Is that really what the writer was doing in the text? Was that his intended outline? If not, you may leave a sour taste for listeners who sense that you’ve done a bit of a number on the text!

These feel like relatively small adjustments, but they leave a very different impression.

Eternal Preaching – Part 2

October 24, 2011October 21, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Last time I listed and rebutted five reasons that the future has been squeezed out of much of the preaching in our generation (not in every church, but in many). One accusation is that preaching about the future isn’t worth it because it doesn’t offer any contemporary relevance. You know the idea – “pie in the sky when you die” kind of talk, “too heavenly minded to be of any earthly use” and all that. (Support that idea biblically!)

Here’s an application shotgun blast:

Biblical teaching on the future gives us encouragement in trials (John 14:1); comfort in griefs (1Thess.4:13-18); motivation for purification (1John 2:28-3:3); it moves us toward morality (Col.3:1-5ff); it drives us to diligent spotlessness (2Peter 3:14); it leads us to lay aside lusts (Rom.13:11-14); encourages exemplary living (1Thess.5:1-11); fires our faith (Heb.10:35-39); spurs us to strengthen our hearts (James 5:7-8); produces perseverance in our service (1Cor.15:58); fires us to finish well (2Tim.4:7-8); focuses our passion for preaching (2Tim.4:1-2); stirs worship as we see the sovereign plan of God (Rom.11:25-32); and offers blessing for both reading and heeding (Rev.1:3).

I could have added more, but you get the point. (1) There is a lot of biblical content that points our thinking to future things and eternity. I didn’t touch on the gospels, or the Old Testament, in that blast. Two more mega rounds of applicational value. If we are going to preach the Bible, we can’t help but point our listeners to the future.

If we are going to seek biblical transformation in the lives of our listeners, we can’t help but speak of the future. As we see in the blast above, (2) the Bible assumes that our values are shaped by the future. Where you treasure is, there your heart will be also. Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven. Can a follower of Christ really represent Christ in this world without having eternally shaped values?

We live in a world marked by hopelessness. Whether it is the forlorn agony of poverty, or the vain emptiness of wealth, we are surrounded by the hopeless. (3) Of all people, followers of Christ should be marked by hope, which is a biblical fruit of future focus. If we preach a Christianity bereft of future reference, we snap a leg from the stool of truth on which we sit. Sadly too many believers are trying balance on faith and love, but hope is strangely absent.

Let’s be sure to preach the Bible, shaping values and stirring hope.

Where Are The Signs of Life? Part 2

October 19, 2011October 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

We are daring to dream. Preachers discouraged by an apparent lack of response to the Word, imagining together what could happen, what should happen as the Word is preached in our churches. Yesterday we thought about gradual climate change and breakthrough moments in church life. Here are a couple more prompts for pondering and prayer. Imagine if . . .

3. The life injection. I have sat through prayer meetings in struggling churches where people have prayed that the Lord might “bring in a young couple to help us…” Certainly many churches have been helped by the arrival of a keen and helpful new couple or family. Imagine the difference salvation can make to a church! While it is great to receive ready-made church servants who move into the area, how much more exciting to receive newborn believers fresh from their spiritual delivery! When people get saved, they bring mess with them, baggage, issues, interesting perspectives, and lots and lots of joy for a church. Imagine what might happen in your church if God were to suddenly save some local folks. Perhaps people resistant to change might become advocates for change because they care about the nurture of these new believers. Perhaps people apparently dead in their pew might become invigorated by the thrill of seeing people coming to faith in Christ and start to share their faith in Christ. Just as a new baby transforms a home, so a new believer might transform your church. Preach the gospel, preach the Word, God continues to rescue the dead and bring them into the kingdom of the Son whom He loves!

4. The spreading ministry. One of the frustrations many preachers face is the feeling that they are alone. A bit of the Elijah syndrome in a local context. There may be the couple who put out the chairs and the lady who does the flowers, and even a Sunday school teacher or two, but somehow it feels like the burden is all yours. Now imagine if, through your preaching, and your example, and God’s Spirit stirring hearts, you discovered that several of the people in the church are becoming proactive in pastoral care, in counseling, in mentoring, in encouraging, in caring. Maybe nobody wants to preach (who would volunteer for public speaking unless they’re a bit weird anyway?), but imagine the difference it would make if the church had a band of on-fire ministers seeking out others to warm their hearts with the relational grace of the gospel. Imagine that spreading as your preaching fans the flames and the whole church community becoming a community of love and concern and trust and support and care . . . and by this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another . . . and imagine the community overcoming their preconceived ideas and media driven stereotypes and discovering that the church is a place where people really love each other!

Preach the Word, serve the church, look to Christ, don’t give up.

Where Are The Signs of Life?

October 18, 2011October 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

I often speak to preachers who are discouraged by the apparent lack of response to the Word in the congregation. For today’s post I’d like us to dream together about what may happen in the next months. After all, we have a God who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or even imagine. So let’s dare to dream together and pray for each other to see one or more of these scenarios working out in the church where you serve . . .

1. The climate change. You have probably heard this before, but most preachers overestimate what can be achieved in one sermon, but massively underestimate what can be achieved through consistent biblical preaching over the months and years. We hear a lot about climate change, but imagine if the whole ethos of your church were to gradually change. What if people in your church had their hearts warmed by the sunshine of the gospel? What if they became enlivened by the freshness of God’s grace and the Narnian winter of legalism began to thaw? What if people gradually started to see God for who He is and began to delight in Him, starting to move beyond a dutiful Christianity to a delightful responsiveness to Him? Keep preaching the Word and making much of the Lord and pray for climate change in the church!

2. The breakthrough moment. I suppose this is the one we hope for on a weekly basis! What if there is a long running conflict simmering under the surface in a key relationship and you don’t even know about it? And what if this Sunday one party went to the other in tears of repentance and brokenness? What if there is a deep seated sin issue in the church, and this Sunday hearts are broken in repentance and turning to the Lord and stepping into the light? What if one individual is a power broker and this Sunday they decide to finally let go of the reins and trust God with His church? Lots of what ifs, and if any Sunday can be the Sunday, then it might be this Sunday, or the next . . . so keep preaching the Word!

Tomorrow I’ll add a couple more. Let’s dream together and pray for each other. There are a lot of discouraged preachers out there. Preachers placed very strategically, by God, in situations where His Word, His Spirit, His preacher can make the world of difference!

Is Godliness Goodliness?

October 17, 2011October 17, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

As we preach, we both reflect God’s character and we target God’s character in our listeners. The question we have to ask is this – what is God’s character? Some seem to subsume every facet of character under holiness and piety, prioritising the presentation of and pursuit of a personal piety of pursed lips. Today’s post, as is the case every other Monday, is hosted on www.cordeo.org.uk – please click here to go there, thanks!

Strategic Application Saving

October 14, 2011October 14, 2011 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Yesterday I met with a good friend to talk through a passage he is going to preach soon. I love conversations like that! As usual, within a few minutes I was starting to wish I were also preaching that passage. Just a side comment, but pre-preaching conversations about a passage with another preacher can be so fruitful! Anyway, onto the point of today’s post…

I think application is generally best incorporated throughout a message. So instead of lengthy explanation followed by a block of application at the end, we can demonstrate the relevance of the message from the introduction onwards, and at every transition, within every movement of the message, etc. But with the passage we were looking at yesterday, I felt that this was an opportunity for strategic application saving.

His passage has two foci of potential application. One relates to the kind of people we will encounter as we go out into the world to share the gospel. The second relates to the kind of people we are within the church. My suggestion was to make the whole focus on the former, and save the latter until the very end. Why?

My sense was that if he hinted at, or overtly referred to, the possibility that there might be people with false motives in the church, then subconsciously the listeners would have their guard up. Instead, better to focus the application of the passage on “the big world out there and what we will encounter as we share the gospel” for the bulk of the message, allow the listeners to become engrossed in the narrative from Acts, and then at the end introduce the “but what about us in here” target.

Withholding an aspect of application can be very strategic when listeners drop their guard and are therefore more open to be struck by its relevance. Our tendency as preachers is to give away too much early on in the message. Even a little comment like, “this passage speaks to what we will meet out there, and also what kind of people we are…” – that mini comment early on could change the reception of the entire message.

If part of the relevance of a message might be resisted, pay special attention to when you introduce the thought. One option is to avoid early references to it, get the guard to drop, and then perhaps it will hit home more strategically.

Is Everything In Church Life a Preaching Issue?

October 13, 2011October 13, 2011 / Peter Mead / 5 Comments

Church life seems to be a complicated mixture of many issues. There is the biblical/theological, the worshipful, the devotional, the instructional, the personal, the interpersonal, the contemporary, the cultural, the cross-cultural, the politics (in-house), the financial, the counselling, the development of leadership, the infrastructure of programming, the discipleship, the discipline, the pre-marital, the marital, the building issues and on it goes. So is everything a preaching issue?

Yes and no.

No first. I think some have taken well-meaning comments by famous preachers of the past and pushed them to an extreme. More effective preaching from the pulpit should result in less personal crises in the pew (and hence, less time in counselling). In theory there is truth here, but it would be naive to think that sermons alone will do the pastoral care of a church ministry.

Preaching cannot replace the life-on-life ministries of discipleship, mentoring, pre-marital counselling, interpersonal conflict resolution and on the list goes.

The preacher must be very wise and sensitive about levels of specificity in preaching. A specific issue in the church should not automatically be presented from the pulpit, even in cloaked form. So if Mr and Mrs XYZ are facing significant marital issues, that isn’t a preaching issue.

However…

Yes. Preaching is not one distinct category of church ministry to be listed alongside others as a mutually exclusive function in church life. There is good reason for preaching preparation to take a potentially disproportionate amount of time in our weekly schedule. We may do five or ten things in ministry, but if preaching should not be one fifth or one tenth of our focus. Why? Because preaching is a central ministry of the church that can and should influence every other area.

I cannot simply preach to solve the problem of marital conflict in the church, or address the issue of programme overload, or stir a desire for training and growth within the leaders, etc. But my preaching can influence every one of those areas, and more.

How people view the building, each other, the programme, music, training, missions, relationships, and so on can all be influenced by preaching. We mustn’t fall into the trap of seeing preaching ministry as the weekly Bible bit that speaks detached truths to maintain tradition. Rather the preaching is the primary opportunity to shape a biblical ethos in the character of the church. It is the occasion for marking the very DNA of church life with biblical values. It is the foundation on which all aspects of church ministry can flourish.

Is everything a preaching issue? No. But yes.