Preacher’s Personal Life

Tomorrow Will You Preach, or Just Report?

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

One reason that a lot of preaching in churches seems to fall short is that there is a lack of engagement with the people present.  I’ve heard numerous messages that fall into the category of relatively dispassionate lecturing.  The speaker stands as a reporter of the facts of their research.  They study a text, then that information is presented.  Then maybe there is an attempt at application.  But it falls short.

The preacher is not a reporter of facts found during their research.  The preacher is called to speak to the listeners from God’s Word.  The Bible is not exhibit A.  It is the source of the message for us, today.  The Bible doesn’t sit off to one side and get pointed at during the presentation, it sits in the hand of the preacher as the source and driver of the message for us.

So often the problem is a lack of engagement.  First, a lack of engagement with the life of the preacher during preparation.  If the Word of God does not speak into the life of the preacher, then the Bible will be presented at arms length, as an exhibit.  Second, a lack of deliberate engagement with the lives of the listeners.  Tomorrow, be sure to preach the Word to them, don’t just talk about the Word in their hearing.  Today, make sure you’ve opened yourself up to the text you’re planning to preach.

If you are a preacher, your role is more than merely reporting.

Exegesis Homiletics

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

I am currently preparing a course that I will be teaching at the end of October – Hermeneutics for Preaching.  I came across this very important reminder in Grant Osborne’s Hermeneutical Spiral (p343):

“The hermeneutical process culminates not in the results of exegesis (centering on the original meaning of the text) but in the homiletical process (centering on the significance of the Word for the life of the Christian today).”

To some of us it is obvious that there must be a direct link between exegesis and homiletics, but we all need the reminder.  C.R.Wells, in Interpreting the New Testament (edited by Black and Dockery, pp506-523), writes the final chapter on interpretation and its connection to preaching.  He warns of some critical approaches that will produce “tempting” content for sermons, but content that should not be included.  However, critical methods that deal with the “text-as-is” have great potential as tools of the preacher.  According to Wells, “Every preacher should and must be a critic, but no preacher should ever forget that critical study serves homiletics.”

Accurate interpretation governs expository preaching.  So two simple implications:

1. Don’t allow interpretation and exegesis to be an end in itself. Study in God’s Word must run its course, not only to personal application, but to communication for corporate application.  If you have opportunity and ability to preach the Word, do it.  If you don’t, then find another way to share the truth and its implications with others.

2. If you ever preach, then be an ever-improving interpreter and exegete of God’s Word. Don’t try to preach without the foundation of biblical interpretation under your efforts.  Preaching is more than sharing the fruit of exegetical work out loud, but it cannot be less.  Skill in communication, relevance in content, personal spirituality and prayerful preparation are all important, but without effective biblical interpretation undergirding your messages, don’t call it preaching.

Avenues of Audience Analysis

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In order to preach effectively, we must be at home in the world of the Bible, and in the world of our people.  We need to know them.  Jay Adams, in Preaching with Purpose, suggests three principal ways to analyze the congregation to whom we preach.  Perhaps it’s worth evaluating our own ministry through these categories to see where we might be missing out on helpful understanding of our listeners?

1. Informal contact with people. More than just rubbing shoulders on a Sunday or in church activities (where people tend to act the way they feel they should), this means getting into the normal lives of the people in the church.  Spending time with people at home, at work and at play is time well spent.  Without probing or surveying, plenty of useful insight will emerge in this natural environment.

2. Counseling contact with people. Not surprisingly from Jay Adams, he sees the value of counseling people.  Obviously confidentiality must be respected, but analysis of counseling notes will point to trends, concerns, areas of struggle.  He points out that just as preachers are helped by counseling, so counselors are helped by preaching.  If a counselor does not preach then they are in danger from not doing the deliberate and regular biblical exegesis they need to be biblically solid in their ministry.

3. Formal contact with people. Finally, Adams advocates for doing systematic, deliberate analysis of the congregation.  When first arriving in a church it is important to analyze the congregation and review the diet they have received from the pulpit.  Then regular surveys of key people, probing of elders, and so on, all helps to fill in the picture for the preacher.

Do we take “audience analysis” seriously?  Is there one approach, of these three, that needs more deliberate effort on our part?

When In Doubt, Sound It Out

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Sometimes preparation grinds to a halt.  You feel like you’re drowning in a sea of paper, half-finished thoughts, words and scribbles everywhere.  Even with a good system for organizing your pre-sermon study and message notes, it is still possible to feel stuck.  You’ve gone from a sprint to crawl and the open expanse before you now feels like a brick wall in a cluttered alley.  I don’t think I am alone in experiencing this roadblock in preparation.

There are lots of tips that people share, but one stands head and shoulders above the others from my perspective. Of course you should pray, it may be wise to do something else, perhaps get some exercise to clear the brain jam or even sleep, the natural thought organizer.  But head and shoulders above them all (or at least one always worth trying in combination with some of the others) – use oral preparation for oral communication.

It’s not surprising that words on paper sometimes feel overwhelming when we are actually preparing for an oral form of communication, not a written one.  So stand up, Bible in hand, and preach it.  It may still feel jumbled and confused, but it is amazing how quickly a flowing and organized message can form when it is formed orally rather than on paper.

Then you can shift into reverse and write your notes and/or manuscript!  It is worth going back to paper for a couple of reasons.  Sometimes you can really nail it orally, but then be unable to do so again.  The discipline of going back to paper helps to cement the preparation.  If you understand that an outline is simply a representation of thought structures, then it should be straightforward to outline a series of thoughts that have formed in the oral presentation.  Furthermore, even if you preach without notes, the discipline of writing the outline or manuscript will provide a focus for further preparation, and a record for future re-preaching of the same passage.

Oral preparation need not replace paper preparation, but it can act as a turbo boost to the preparation process!

The Lesson of the Soils

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

In the synoptics’ parable of the sower, the one variable is the soil.  Same sower, same seed, but different soil.  The variable results therefore point to the state of the soil as a critical consideration.  I don’t intend to do anything like a full exegesis here, more of a pondering on the truth already stated.

There are implications in this for those that listen on a Sunday morning. What can be done to encourage them to come to the sermon with open and expectant hearts?  Surely there needs to be an ethos in the church that the Bible is for the church.  It’s not for academics to dissect in their ivory tower exegesis labs.  It’s for the community of God’s people in the real world, looking for real help, real insight, real spiritual food, real input from God.  This morning I enjoyed listening to a series being introduced at a good church – one of the speakers quoted Karl Barth, “If we expected to hear God’s Word more, we would hear it even in weak and perverted sermons.  The statement that there was nothing in it for me, should read that I was not ready to let anything be said to me.” I don’t share that to spark a debate on neo-orthodox conceptions of God’s Word, but to put a finger on the attitude of the heart in listening to the Bible preached.

There are implications in this for those that listen before Sunday morning. Surely our churches need to be encouraged to listen well, to be good hearers of God’s Word as it is preached to them.  But that same encouragement must also be pointed our way.  We are real people, in a real world, with real challenges and real spiritual needs.  We do not sit in anything even slightly ivory or lab-like as we prepare to preach.  Like others, we too sit under God’s Word as listeners, as hearers.  Let us make sure we have expectant hearts and an eager openness to be shaped by the Bible passages we study.  Right now I am studying Joel and preparing a series in this little power-packed book.  I must prayerfully listen well, before I dare to speak it to others.

The one variable is the soil.  Always.  Theirs on a Sunday morning, the world’s as we witness to them, but ours too as we sit under God’s Word, listening as we prepare to speak.

On Controversy

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The comment made by Doulos is very worthy of our attention.  If we choose to address a theologically controversial issue, we must be fully informed.  This seems so obvious, but it is so often not the case.  It is asy to study any issue either superficially, or only from within one camp.  When your input is coming from one side of a debate, even if they present the other side, you are still one-sided.

This is evident in books. I remember one book published several years ago that created quite a stir.  It was written to critique a theological position differing from that of the author.  Unfortunately it was written with an ad hominum edge, a gross tendency to attack a straw man presentation and a generally ungracious attitude.  I know some from the same camp as the writer, who respected the writer for his work in other areas of theology, that bought into his inadequate presentation of the “other side.”  If the same content and tone came from pulpits as was found in that book, harm was done.

This is evident in schools. By schools I mean Bible schools, colleges, seminaries, universities, etc.  It is by no means guaranteed, but it is certainly possible, that in a school you fail to receive fair presentations of all sides in these matters.  “Liberal” institutions are often critiqued as being restrictive by not encouraging reading from “conservative” writers.  However, “conservative” schools, while often better on encouraging the reading of “liberal” authors, often fall short in encouraging the reading of all other “conservatives!”

This is evident in cultures. I see in one country a general attitude towards certain theological positions that simply associates them with another country and then summarily dismisses them from any discussion.  This occurs in various forms around the world.  You see the danger here?  You can study many books, from various writers, study at various schools, etc., but if your study does not stretch out beyond the borders of your culture, then you are at risk of only being fed one side of certain theological debates.

It takes a lot of work to be well-informed on theological matters.  It is impossible to stay on top of everything.  But before you wade in from the pulpit, you must be fully prepared.  Often it is not necessary to “wade in” at all, but when you do, be very wary.  A preacher wields a dangerous influence, like the oft used illustration of the sharp blade – will it be incisive as in the hands of a surgeon, or devastating as with a mugger?  This will be determined by your diligence in study, your prayerful wisdom in preparation, and your attitude and tone in the pulpit.

Preaching Controversial Theological Issues – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I began this post on how to preach a passage that may tread on some toes.  Sometimes there are informed members of the congregation who hold a particular position theologically.  Often there are relatively uninformed members of the congregation who hold a particular position tenaciously.  What should we do when we have to preach a passage that might stir disunity in the church?  Perhaps a passage touching on predestination, eternal security, eschatology, or a particular branch of Christian theology?  We should evaluate the choice of passage, preach the passage and preach wisely.  Furthermore:

Recognize, but don’t overqualify. It is often appropriate to recognize that there are different opinions on an issue that comes up in the text.  By recognizing it we assure people that we are not preaching unaware.  But don’t overqualify every statement and end up sounding like a politician who is saying a lot, but basically avoiding saying anything bad.

Watch your tone. It is important to choose words wisely, but don’t forget your tone.  Model a gracious spirit, never take cheap shots, demonstrate an attitude of harmony.  Make sure you are not using the opportunity and platform to win some points in a theological sparring match.  Fully pray through the situation ahead of time, not only in reference to the message, but also in reference to your relationship with key individuals in the church.

If appropriate, overtly teach theology. If you have the authority to do so, the situation requires it, you have prayed at length, etc., then it may be appropriate to ignore what I have written here and preach blatant theology (apart from watching your tone – always appropriate!)  Generally I would save this for the genuinely central issues – deity of Christ, salvation by grace/faith alone , the inspiration of the Bible, the trinitarian nature of Christianity.  The issues listed at the start of yesterday’s post are important, but not as central as these.

Buy a Stained Glass Window

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

There is always a danger for preachers preparing to preach.  It is easy to slip into a pragmatic mode of studying a text to find a main idea and develop a message.  All very accurate, very professional, but having lost touch of the reality of what is going on.  As we spend time in God’s Word we are listening to God, preparing to speak of God to a needy group of people.  We are preparing to proclaim God’s truth as an act of love and praise.

Michael Pasquarello III, writes in his book, Christian Preaching: A Trinitarian Theology of Proclamation, that he moved his preaching classes from a seminar room to the seminary chapel.  His goal was to change the ethos in order to change the students’ mindset and approach to the preaching process.  His goal is not just accurate preaching, but “doxological speech from the canon of Holy Scripture that creates the faith, life and witness of the church, which is the work of Christ and the Spirit.”

In the past I have found it very helpful to prepare at least some of the time, in the church where I would preach the message.  This isn’t practical for all of us.  So perhaps it’s time to buy a stained glass window for our study?  What have you found helpful to stimulate the reverence and spirituality of this highly spiritual process?

Preaching Psychologically Prepared

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I don’t want to stir up a reaction against the word psychology.  What I mean is that your emotional state as a preacher can and will color your message.  Before you preach, take time to process any tension in any relationships, any frustrations with how your week has gone, any worries about what lies ahead, anything that might color your ministry.  A bad mood will subtly alter your delivery and energy.  A fearful heart will undermine your presentation.

It can only be a good habit to take time before preaching and pray.  Pray for the message.  Pray for the people.  But pray also for you.  Cast all your cares on Him, because He cares for you.  Cast them one by one specifically.  Express your heart to the One who knows you and loves you.  Process before you preach.  Preach prayerfully prepared.  Your soul/spirit/mind/mood/emotions, etc. will all influence your preaching, so be sure to bring it all under God’s influence first.

And if you have a headache, take a painkiller too!

Always the First Step

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I remember well my first class in hermeneutics at seminary.  Years later I still have the voice of my prof ringing in my ears – “Observation!  The first step in inductive Bible study method!” Influenced as he was by Howard Hendricks, he left his mark in my life as I open the Bible and start by looking.  What is there?  What does it say?  You can’t interpret it until you know what it is.  Observation is the critical first step to success in Bible study, and in preaching too.

You have to observe well to handle the Bible well.  You have to observe well to communicate effectively.  In a discipline like preaching, so built on effective Bible study, we would do well to continually develop our observational faculties.  Let me share this quote from William Wirt (1828), quoted in McDill’s 12 Essential Skills:

Perhaps there is no property in which men are more distinguished from each other, than in the various degrees in which they possess the faculty of observation.  The great herd of mankind pass their lives in listless inattention and indifference to what is going on around them . . . while those who are destined to distinction have a lynx-eyed vigilance that nothing can escape.

Practice observation every day.  Describe the person you just spoke with.  Define the distinctive characteristics of their body language.  Observe the headlines on the newspaper you pass.  Live with a lynx-eyed vigilance so that you never waste your life in listless inattention and indifference!