Preacher’s Personal Life

The Dangerous Half Quit

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

A post on this theme from five years ago caught my eye, so I thought I’d offer a re-write.

There are always reasons to quit. This is true in anything you might pursue. Sport, music, hobby, fitness, work, ministry, marriage. Anyone who has ever been successful at anything has had to overcome numerous opportunities to quit. How true is that in preaching?

There are few things that can compare with preaching – how important it is, how much people need it, how much you give both in preparation and presentation, how emotionally and physically draining it can be, how open to criticism you become, how relentless the schedule can feel, how exacting the standards are in peoples’ minds for every other area of your life. To give the Lord our best as preachers we must exhibit a tenacious relentlessness.

The temptation to quit may always be lingering in the background, but for various reasons, good and bad, many of us would not simply quit. Perhaps it’s a little like marriage among some Christians a couple of generations back. A marriage could go very sour, but divorce was considered so inappropriate that couples would live out a “Christian divorce” – two separate lives lived under one roof for the sake of appearance. That’s a danger for us as preachers. When the pressures build, as they do so regularly, so do the temptations. Temptations to quit may be rejected. But temptations to half quit are an ever present danger!

When the schedule is tight and you are drained emotionally and physically, pulled in numerous directions, don’t half quit on your preparation. It may seem tempting to not really study the text, to short-circuit all exegesis.

When Sunday is rapidly approaching and your energy is low, don’t half quit on sermon shaping. Don’t just go with your study notes, but try to think through your audience and their needs, think through the best way to communicate this passage to them.

When you go through the post-sermon emotional roller-coaster that many preachers feel so often, don’t half quit.  Don’t make decisions that will undermine your subsequent ministry because of how you feel at that moment.

When you are on the receiving end of unfair criticism or unjustifiable sniping, don’t half quit. Don’t steel your heart against the people you minister to so that by not loving them they can’t hurt you. When you love you get hurt, but love anyway.

I’m not saying anything about rest, responsibilities with family, etc. I’m not saying sacrifice yourself to the point of burnout in an attempt to be spiritual. There are all sorts of appropriate balances to wisely employ in ministry. But those are for another post. All I’m suggesting here is that preaching is no easier than most other things you might pursue in life, and in many ways it is harder. To be the best you can be, to give the best you can give, you must be doggedly relentless. Don’t quit. And maybe more importantly, keep leaning on our good God and don’t half quit.

Watch the Whiplash

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

I have been writing about how preaching is the communication of the revelation of a Person or three. It isn’t something less than that. When the preacher steps up following a time of worship and  communicates only some sort of code for living, or peer pressure, or socialization program, then there is a whiplash effect that is felt by listeners. Let me probe that a little:

1. Whiplash from the worship tone to the message tone. This is common. The worship time focused in on the amazing grace and wonderful person of Christ. Then the preacher gets up and changes the tone completely. This can happen as the reflective, focused and prepared listeners suddenly get hit with an insensitive introductory joke. It can happen with a shift from the worship emphasis on being pleased by Christ to the message tone of pressure in the name of Christ.

2. Whiplash from the worship focus to the message focus. This is similar. The worship time typically will focus hearts and minds toward heaven, fixing the gaze on God in Christ. Then the message too easily shifts that focus in one of three ways. Either it can be the heart-jerking whiplash of focusing on how bad society is, or it can throw us toward focusing on the preacher (with his attention seeking behaviour, or his showing off, or whatever), or it can suddenly shift the gaze onto the navels of the faithful – you got saved by God’s grace, but now let me help you understand the burden you live under!

3. Whiplash from worship content to the message content. Okay, this is slightly repetitive, but unashamedly so. I am not hankering after a three point outline. I am trying hard to hammer the point that our hearts shouldn’t suffer whiplash when the Word is preached. We tend to sing of how wonderful God is, his grace, our love response to His, our hearts captivated, our lives stirred. Then the preaching can so easily swing over to how we must try harder to be better, be good, be disciplined, etc.

This kind of whiplash will always be present when preaching doesn’t preach the Person, but offers a program, a pressure, a commentary on societal ills, etc.

Preaching the Power of the Person

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I’ve been pondering the issue of preaching the person. The person of Christ. The personal Triune God. If we aren’t captivated by the personal God that we know personally, then our preaching can too easily slip into instructional education and moralistic tirades. It is the person that captivates and draws listeners.

Let’s ponder a simple scale of personal encounter:

1. The moment of meeting – The truth is that as humans made in the image of a relational God, we are well attuned to each encounter we have with other persons. Within seconds we will determine subconsciously whether we like somebody. They might be a waitress, an airline check-in clerk, a salesman. It really doesn’t take long to determine our feelings about someone we meet. And those initial feelings can take a while to be reversed by further interaction. (Incidentally, as preachers we need to understand the power of our opening moments, those first seconds of encounter and introduction. But that is to get side-tracked.)

2. The power of love – Then there is the ongoing relational encounter. After the first impressions come the ongoing interaction, communication, sharing of life experiences and so on, all building a relationship so that we go beyond liking or disliking to deeply trusting (or distrusting), to loving (or the opposite). The follow-up relational interaction can be so powerful.

(Again, to get sidetracked for a second, we mustn’t be naive about the power of inappropriate interaction with members of the opposite sex – the magnetic power of interpersonal attraction has led many to compromise everything and discover the regret of the stealing power of sin. Preachers, we are susceptible!)

Getting back on track, what am I saying with all this? Well, I can, if I’m honest, express whether I like someone after moments of meeting. And those that I’ve known and developed a relationship with, mutually loving and caring and sharing life together . . . these are people I can talk about at some length, with my heart showing for them.

What does all this have to do with preaching? The second level of enthused personal connection is missing with some. Even the initial encounter response is apparently absent in some preaching. It is hard to tell with some preachers if they really like God at all. What are we to say to this?

If the God in our sights is benign, our preaching will be the same.

Rather than putting this in the negative, let me state this positively. Read God’s Word and get to know our personal and wonderful God. Then preach His Word. What a privilege.

And when we preach the Person, our preaching won’t feel like a pressure project, but will have a captivating and gripping power beyond words!

Preach the Person

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

It seems obvious, but it clearly isn’t. Paul wrote, I preach Christ, and him crucified. Yet there are too many sermons that contain little more than a tip of the hat to the person of Christ.

It would probably come as a shock to many preachers to discover that their preaching seems to skirt around the personal nature of our God, but listeners pick up on it once their antennae are tuned to the difference.

The sermon may be engaging, illustrated, perhaps personal in terms of the preacher’s own life and personality. The message may encourage, exhort, rebuke, educate, etc. The preaching may be lively, energetic, enthusiastic, humorous or whatever. But somehow, if the preaching doesn’t offer the personal God of the Bible, then it will always feel inadequate.

Somehow preaching that misses the person ends up targeting elsewhere, and with a different tone. It becomes educational and exhortational, focusing on us and our responsibility to implement some biblical advice or instruction. The difference when the person is preached, is that the focus shifts to response rather than responsibility, an invitation rather than imposition.

It is so easy to pressure people to perform, or to offer a gospel of private benefits, but to fail to mention the person who is at the heart of the gospel both offered and applied.

I was reading a book looking at a time in history when two streams of preaching could be traced. Those deaf to the difference seem to deny the distinction, but just reading the different ways in which Christ was described was so telling. One side offered a few cold truths, the other side were overflowing with description of a compelling and captivating Christ, and then only seemed to scratch the surface. I can tell you facts about lots of people, but I will talk about my wife differently. It was almost as if one side had barely met Christ, or if they had, hadn’t found him particularly gripping.

What if we could invent a double thermometer? One part to measure the warmth of the preacher toward Christ, and the other part to measure the heat of the pressure on the listeners to perform? I suspect that if the thermometer were measuring the temperature from the preacher in pressuring the listeners, then there might be a sense in which the two measures are almost mutually exclusive.

Let’s pour our energy into effectively speaking of the God who reveals Himself in the Word. Let’s trust that to draw and stir and motivate and captivate and challenge and convict people who are listening.

We need to preach Him. He changes lives.

Saturday Short Thought: One Best Way

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

This week I’ve been pondering the grains that run through all biblical literature.  Recurring themes in the poetic books, traceable motifs in narrative books and unifying melodies in the discourse sections.  Some of these are limited to a section, others to a particular writer, and in a broader sense they can be traced across the canon as a whole.

So here’s the point for today.  How do we get to know these themes, motifs and melodies?  Some commentaries and books will prove helpful.  Seminary notes might be worth looking at again.  But the bottom line is kind of simple – we need to be reading the Bible.

That seems like too obvious a thought to be worthy of a post, doesn’t it?  Well, sadly I suspect there are many preachers who may study slices to preach them, but don’t have an appetite for the Word as a whole.  Everyone is impoverished as a result.

Personal spirituality becomes ritualistic or moralistic, study becomes burdensome, ministry becomes draining, sermons become shallow and often anthropocentric (person focused – what to do, how to live, instructions, commands, guilt…)

Our preaching should come from the overflow of a personal delight in the God who reveals Himself in His Word.  It may be a bit simplistic, but I’ll stand by the statement – unless we get into the Word the church will be gasping for “divines,” people who know God and speak out of the overflow of a heart filled.  A church wanting for true spirituality will ultimately be shrivelled to the core, no matter how many programs, no matter how practical the teaching may be.

Let me invite you back into God’s Word.

Speech: More Than Pragmatic

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

I wonder if some of us are missing something deeply significant?  Preaching involves spoken communication, but what is that spoken communication?  Is it a tool we use to transfer the information that we need to get across?  Or is it profoundly more than that?

I’ve heard preachers who preach as if their speaking is about the information transfer, but little more.  So that sense of personal detachment, or coldness, or distance . . . is that just a matter of poor delivery, or is there something more going on?

What I want to scratch the surface of is the nature of speech itself.  Here are some quick thoughts on why speech itself is more than a pragmatic tool:

1. The Bible doesn’t treat human speech as just a tool.  There is a massive emphasis on hearing God’s Word.  Our response to what we hear defines us.  Our integrity of action to what we confess is critical.  The tongue is a powerful organ in the body.

2. The Bible is a story of “did God say?”  The serpent offered humanity an autonomous alternative to trusting dependence on God.  We can be our own gods.  Why would we want that?  Because of a distrust in God’s spoken word, which is a distrust of His gracious character.  Ever since then the hiss of the lie has been an ever-present.  And the question has always been, who will trust the word of God’s promise?

3. The Bible presents us with a God who speaks.  Why don’t we see more from heaven?  We can’t fathom that perhaps our eyes are not the senior sense.  We fell by distrust of speech, we are invited to trust based on God’s Word (and He even made His Word visible to us in a Person!)  But this isn’t some pragmatic condescension of God for our sake, He is eternally a speaking God.  What constitutes the reality of the Trinity?  We would do well to let go a little of a metaphysical conversation of substance, and ponder more the biblical revelation of a God in eternal communion.

4. The Bible seems to see speech as central to what it is to be a person.  Now we’re probing a bit more.  For centuries we’ve been caught up in the idea of personhood as being about rationality, will-power and individualism.  We’ve seen it as an issue of separation, of hierarchy, of a will to power.  What if what we are is not best defined by our CV/resume (skills, capacities, education, even references from the most impressive people we know)?  What if what we are is defined by who we have true relationship with?  We inherently sense that reality, but our world denies it.  And what if relationship is, at its core, a matter of speaking and hearing, of a mutual indwelling through communication?

Okay, enough for today, but here’s the thought I’m nudging us toward.  What if preaching is profoundly more about speech than we’ve ever realised?  Our God is a God who speaks.  A God who has spoken.  And at the centre of Christianity is our heart response to what He says?

Preacher, Be Amateur!

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Never a fan of amateurishness in anything related to church ministry, I think we have to be amateur when it comes to preaching.  What am I saying?  Simple – if preaching is not done for the right love, it will be done for the wrong love, but love will drive our preaching.

Love for me is never good.  That is to say, preaching for the love of position, love of status, love of kudos, love of attention, love of affirmation, love of power, love of paycheck, love of significance, etc…all of this is sanctified incurvedness – which is not sanctified at all, it is sin.

Love for God is the right kind of love.  We love because He first loved us.  Our preaching should spring from the response of our hearts and lives to God.  Our love for Him should stir us to give of our best in order to please Him.  What the pulpit desperately needs is not skilled orators, no matter how great the content.  What it needs is true divines – those who know God personally, closely, intimately.

Love for listeners is entirely appropriate.  We become like whoever we love and worship.  So our love for Him should result in an increasing sharing of His values, including a love for the listeners.  That love should drive us not only to study His Word, but to seek to offer it to others for their good.  And we will do so not in a cold and detached professionalism, but in a warm-hearted, God-representing loving approach to ministry.

Love for the Word of God surely fits.  Just to reinforce what has already been said, let us never study the Word out of a requirement to prepare a message, but with hearts stirred to hear God there.  Hearing our God who has spoken and speaks in His Word is not some ministerial pragmatic issue – it is at the very centre of who He is and what we are called to.  We are made in the image of a communicating-relational God.  So we should passionately pursue His Word, inscribed and incarnate, for our hearts should long to know God.

And if that is what is meant by amateur – love-driven preaching… then I want to be an amateur for as long as I live!

Amateur: Not All Good

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

To put it simply, the term amateur can be used in reference to something being done out of a love for it (rather than as a paid job).  Or it can refer to something  being done in a way that shows lack of skill, being done not very well.  Let’s ponder the latter today and finish positively tomorrow.

Amateurishness can be seen in various aspects of preaching:

* Lack of preparation, inadequate study and research, use of poor sources, surface-only work with the text, etc.

* Scattered (dis)organisation of content, poor logical ordering of content, lack of effort with word choices, etc.

* Poor delivery, excessive verbal pauses, um, any self-presentation that appears to be hiding the self out of nervousness (acting like a clown, for instance), etc.

I’m sure we could all list plenty of ways to preach in an amateurish fashion.  There is also the bigger picture of the whole service.  What people will enjoy in a group of 50 will be intolerable in a group of 250.  But there are two further points to ponder here:

1. Critiquing amateurishness is not to say there is no place for weakness.  We all have weakness and should preach in a state of weakness rather than prideful self-reliance.  What we might critique as amateurishness is more an issue of not preparing properly, or not growing into effective homiletical skill or delivery skill.  It is an issue of poor stewardship, not something that we should justify in some sort of reverse sanctification by extension process.  By all means let’s appear as fools and as weak to a world that is arrogant in its upside-down state.  But let’s let the gospel message itself be the “foolishness” and the “weakness” – not our own lack of good stewardship of the ministry we have the privilege of participating in.

2. Recognize who suffers from unnecessary amateurishness.  Here’s the strange thing.  When a preacher is genuinely very limited in skill, ability, knowledge, resources, time, etc., then the same perceived weaknesses are often unperceived.  But when we simply show a lack of commitment or passion for preaching, then we can’t rely on some loophole that guarantees God’s intervention.

Unbelievers will judge the gospel based not on the gospel, but on our demonstration of its value to us.  Believers will be frustrated and distracted so that the focus will be on the poor preacher rather than the wonderful biblical truth.  Amateurishness that flows from lack of effort both in the preparation of a specific sermon, and in the longer-term failure to grow in the ministry of preaching, is ultimately an issue of love – a lack of love for the lost, the believers we are supposed to shepherd, and for the Lord who gave everything for us.

Tomorrow we’ll think about the good side of amateur!

Perils of Professionalism in Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Yesterday I urged us all to pursue a “professional” preaching ministry in the sense of being well trained, well informed and well skilled. But there are negative associations with professionalism that I think we would do well to ponder:

1. Don’t be contractually defined. It is hard to stomach professional sports-persons haggling over how many tens of thousands they should be paid each week, and refusing to play until they get what they want. Surely it is worse to sense similar issues with preachers. Obviously the sums involved are considerably smaller, but the idea that a preacher will tell of the glorious grace of God with a smile as long as his own contractual terms are in place is simply wrong. It is difficult when there are employment contracts involved, but surely we preach because of something other than money (and hopefully others will recognize their role in making sure the preachers are provided for appropriately)?

2. Don’t be selfishly driven. There is nothing wrong with receiving finance in association with preaching. Whether it is a regular stipend, or a loving palm gift, we thank God for any funding given in association with preaching. However, the moment a mercenary attitude creeps in, something is broken. A preacher should be giving of themselves, giving themselves away in ministry. While they shouldn’t starve to death in the process, surely it should be others that are concerned to make sure that doesn’t happen. And when it isn’t a matter of starving, but moving to higher levels of luxury, a preacher concerned with what is received seems to be a preacher who has lost their true focus.

3. Don’t be self-reliant. Another aspect of professionalism that we must be wary of is the idea of self-reliance. That is, the loss of prayerful dependence on God and the loss of humility and perceived weakness. Even the most skilled and capable and gifted individual is still stepping out beyond their own strengths when they open God’s Word before a gathering of people. Let’s be sure never to lose that sense of utter inadequacy as we preach.

What else would you add, either positively or negatively in association with professionalism?