Preaching

Absent Illustrations Perceived Present

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The term “illustration” is very broad, but I’m referring to those moments in a sermon when the thinking work of explanation, support or application of the text is interrupted by the color and life of something apparently more relevant to the listener. For example, when the preacher begins to tell a story, listeners tend to lock in their attention and fully engage. But it is also possible to get this same attention and engagement without using any “illustration” from outside the passage. How?

The wise preacher does not present the text itself in the form of dry analysis of “the long ago and far away.” With careful preparation and thought, most texts can be preached in such a way as to engage the listener here and now. Tell biblical narratives compellingly, present textual imagery vividly, and give explanation relevantly. Allow enough time in an explanation for listeners to enter into it and feel it for themselves. It is possible for listeners, after a sermon is complete, to feel that there were lots of illustrations used, even when technically there were none. Maybe the listener feels as if they were there (in the world of the text), or they delight in how the preacher made the text “come alive” (their words, not ours). This is possible through careful and effective description and explanation of the text. If the preacher is able to handle the text in a thoroughly engaging, descriptive and vivid manner – then that preacher will be considered a masterful communicator (even without using numerous external or modern illustrations).

So, we should work on our ability to effectively and compellingly describe scenes in a biblical story, or images in a passage. We should also be sure to use appropriate variety – some texts and messages lend themselves to vivid, engaging, and compelling description, while other messages thirst for external and contemporary “illustrations” to add to their efficacy. Wise is the preacher who neglects neither and knows when to use both.

Keeping the Main Thing the Main Thing

/ Mike Roth / Leave a comment

Have you ever found in the middle of writing a sermon that you have ten minutes of preaching material that has nothing to do with your main idea? This is easy to do. Some possible factors…an unclear main idea, too much time on one point, an illustration that is over the top in length and detail or too much time explaining what the text is not saying. These are just a few reasons that the main thing ceases to be the main thing in our sermons.

Lately, our church has been working its way through Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. A recent sermon covered Matthew 6:1-21. In this section, Jesus makes the point that our piety is to be sheltered from the sight of others. The world is to notice our gentle words (5:21-22); that we pursue reconciliation (5:23-26); that our relationships and vows are marked by fidelity (5:27-37); that we are charitable – even toward our enemies (5:38-48). According to Jesus, this is the kind of salt and light the world should taste and see (5:13-16). However, God alone is to taste and see our piety (6:1-21).

To preach this sermon, it could be very easy to slip into preaching what this passage isn’t saying instead of what it is saying. For example, it is not saying don’t pray corporately. It is not saying don’t tithe at church. It is not saying don’t pray with others. The list of what this passage is not saying could go on and on!

While it is important to address questions our congregations are asking when we preach, we must be careful not to lose sight of the main thing. So what do we do? I suggest speaking to the questions we know our listeners are asking. Otherwise, we will lose them as we continue forward while they sit in their questions. However, in our preparation, we must carefully monitor the time we allot to such caveats in our sermons. Otherwise, by the time and emphasis we give, we communicate a thing we do not intend to communicate. In this case, multiple points about what Jesus is not saying. This would be a tragedy.

Jesus is saying so much in this passage (6:1-21)! How are we known by the world? Are we known to go to church, pray at meal-time and tithe but unknown as kind speaking, reconciling acting, fidelity keeping kingdom participants? It is easier to do piety publicly than it is to live out chapter 5. Why… What motivates our hearts to piety? Is it the applause of others? Is it a spiritual checklist? Is it to worship and love our Lord? All of this and more (related to the main idea) is missed when we lose sight of communicating the main thing.

What do they remember?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

In my previous post I questioned the emphasis on having people remember the sermon’s outline. It is much more important that lives are transformed in the preaching of the sermon, than that listeners remember content (although sermonic content is critical). If we want them to remember anything, it should be the big idea of the message and its application to their lives.

In reality, what do people remember most easily? What do people come back later and remind us of, sometimes years later? It is not the outline. Usually it is the illustrations we use, the images we portray, the stories we tell. This leads to two simple, but important implications:

1 – Use illustrations. Seems obvious, but to leave a lasting impression in our listeners, we should probably consider using illustrations!

2 – Use illustrations that reinforce the sermon’s idea or purpose. Since a story or example is likely to lodge in the thinking and emotions of our listeners longer than most of what we say, it is critical that we choose those illustrations very carefully. What is the value in people remembering a cute or moving story that had only a tenuous link to the idea itself? This underscores the danger of finding a text and a message to fit an illustration. If the outline is a servant that should usually stay out of sight, then the illustration is a prominent and memorably dressed servant, but still a servant of the text’s idea and purpose.

What do you want them to remember – the outline?

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

Before preaching, it is important to have the end in sight. Is our goal really to have people remember the details of the sermon? It seems that both preachers and listeners alike assume that the listener is supposed to remember the outline of the message. So preachers lament the lack of note-taking, or actively encourage it, perhaps by giving “fill in the blank” outlines. Another approach is to use powerpoint projection with the outline visually presented to the listener. And, of course, there’s the common approach of preaching with memorable, sometimes alliterated, points that function as “hooks to hang thoughts on.” None of these things are wrong (or right), but they all point toward the goal of having listeners remember the outline of the sermon (or at least have a written record of it for future consultation).

Perhaps it is time to question the value of remembering or recording a sermon’s outline. Of course, the listener can think through the message later using the outline the preacher used (if a paper record of the sermon’s content is necessary, perhaps give out a handout after the service is over?) Would it not be a better goal for people to think through the text later, rather than through the preacher’s outline?

The real goal of preaching is lives transformed by God’s Word. Any transformation should come from the biblical passage’s main idea relevantly applied to the listener’s life. The goal is not memorization, but transformation. Yet if something should be remembered, surely it should be the main idea, clearly derived from the passage and relevantly applied. The outline of a message is there to order thought, to ensure progress and to serve the big idea and its purpose. The outline is not king. It is merely a discreet servant, usually serving behind the scenes.

Don’t short change the conclusion

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

One element of sermon preparation that tends to get less attention than it deserves is the conclusion. One preacher said, “My sermons are like chickens with their heads cut off – once you think the sermon is done, it just jumps back up and runs in another direction!”

A couple of suggestions to avoid short-changing the sermon:

1 – Write a rough conclusion early. Obviously, you have to study the passage and start work on the sermon before you can write any conclusion. However, once you are considering the purpose of the sermon, write a rough conclusion to reflect that purpose. This will help your sermon preparation, as you will know where you are heading. This will also help your conclusion since it will have time to percolate in your heart and mind.

2 – Write your conclusion out in full. I advocate writing a full manuscript, but I don’t always achieve it. The pressures of time and ministry may not allow it. Nevertheless, it is worth writing out the conclusion, and editing it, and reading it aloud, and praying though it. Put in some effort on the specific wording of the conclusion. Give it some good attention, otherwise it is likely to rise up and run some more when it should have been laid to rest!

Sermon Titles: Tricky Little Things

/ Peter Mead / 9 Comments

I don’t find it easy to write a title for a sermon. Actually, I do . . . a bad one! I don’t find it easy to write a good title for a sermon. So what makes a title tick?

A bad title illicits a yawn, an expectation that the message will be boring, irrelevant or distant. “Joseph’s Journey to Egypt.” Can’t imagine people purring with anticipation for that one. There have been times when I’ve sat through an introduction in which the preacher posed a question, “So what must be present in your ministry if it is to count for anything?” But I sat there unmoved by the “tension” because the bulletin had already told me the title – “Love – 1Cor.13:1-3.” I like the title Alexander Strauch used for an article on that text (and I believe, a message), “5-1=0.”

A good title stirs interest and piques curiosity. A good title gets the listener on your side. They already want to hear what you have to say before you start your introduction – what a bonus! So the big idea in a deductive sermon might make a good title, as long as it is going to be stated in the introduction and it leaves people wanting to know more. “I wonder what that is supposed to mean? The preacher will need to explain that!” But if the sermon is inductive, then don’t give away any tension in your title. That would be like your uncle who always gives away the punch line in the introduction to a joke, “Did you hear the one that ends with her saying, ‘no, but that’s a really nice ski mask!’… ?”

Be great to hear some creative sermon titles . . .

I believe in manuscripts! No notes – part 3.

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Stephen commented on part 1 of the “no notes” post.  Please read his comment there.  He referred to the fact that some famous speakers carry a manuscript into the pulpit. “The defense of using a manuscript I have been told is to ensure every thought is well developed and theologically sound.” Thoughts on the issue of the manuscript:

1. If possible, fully manuscript your message.  I totally agree with these reasons for writing a manuscript – every thought should be fully developed and theologically sound.  There is no excuse for preaching undeveloped thought or unsound concepts.  This is why I avoid the phrase “extemporaneous” preaching, since people understand that to mean “spontaneous” preaching rather than “prepared, but without notes” (the dictionary gives both meanings).  This is also why I encourage the writing of a full manuscript.  It allows for both developed thought and doctrinal soundness.  It also allows for attention to the details of style, precision in the choice of individual words, use of rhetorical devices, avoidance of unhelpful reduncancy, injection of deliberate aids to oral clarity and so on.

2.  Don’t take your manuscript into the pulpit.  I would guess that some of the big name speakers who advocate manuscript preaching do not actually read their manuscript verbatim.  I’ve yet to hear someone preach from a manuscript effectively – although some who have a manuscript treat it as notes rather than a script.  I find when I type a full manuscript that a lot of the extra work will show during delivery (the work of manuscripting internalizes the message, even specific wording).  I prefer the connection I feel with the listeners now I preach without notes, but the real issue is the listeners, what is the most effective way to communicate with them?

3. Write your manuscript for the ear.  If you are going to write a manuscript, it is important to write as you will speak.  We have all learned to write for the eye.  We place high value on succinct, clear and varied content.  But we need to write for the ear.  This means using restatement, sometimes repetition, short sentences, consistent terminology, very deliberate transitions, and so on.  A thoroughly effective sermon, when transcribed, requires editing before it reads well.  When going in the other direction, we need to pay careful attention to our style.  The question is not does it look good on paper, but does it communicate when people can’t see it?  Listeners cannot look back and reread a sentence, nor hear the underlining of a section title, so we must not speak in written English! Is it written for the ear?

4. Preaching requires a commitment both to the Bible and to the listener.  As a preacher you must give yourself to diligent study of the text and thoroughly biblical content.  At the same time, preaching involves maximum connection and effective communication with the listener.  Write a manuscript, but preach without notes – in my mind this approach achieves both!

Old Testament Stories – part 2: Good Illustrations?

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

It is often tempting to use Old Testament stories as illustrations in a sermon, but before doing so, here are five questions to consider:

1 – Do they know the story? Many listeners do not know the stories of the Bible. This means we have to explain our illustration. Does it make sense to have to make something clear, that is given in order to make something else clear? If your listeners need to get to know these stories, why not preach on them?

2 – Is there a better illustration? This may sound heretical, but in a hierarchy of illustrations, most biblical stories actually sit low on the ladder – experienced by none, learned by few. Biblical stories should be preached, but that doesn’t mean they must be our primary pool of illustrations for other biblical texts.

3 – What’s the main idea of the text? A different biblical text will have a different central idea than the one you’re preaching. There is the ever-present danger of misrepresenting a biblical text.

4 – Are you going in the right direction? If people don’t accept your point from one biblical text, offering them another often won’t help. However, if they do accept what you are saying, then why move backwards to the Old Testament instead of forward into their lives with a relevant illustration of personal application?

5 – What example are you giving? To listen to some preachers, some might get the impression that all they need to live the Christian life is the New Testament, and a passing acquaintance with the Old. If the preacher does not model the highest respect for the whole canon, who will?

There may be good reason to use a biblical illustration, but before doing so, consider these questions first.

Old Testament Stories – part 1: Preaching Texts?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Some people take the view that the texts for preaching should come primarily, or even exclusively, from the New Testament. In order to preach “the whole counsel,” many use the Old Testament as illustrations in their sermons. Should Old Testament stories be illustrations, or preaching texts in their own right?

There are some reasons to hesitate before using an Old Testament story as an illustration in a sermon. Part 2 of this post will give five questions for the preacher to consider before using the Old Testament for an illustration.

Steve Mathewson (The Art of Preaching Old Testament Narrative – review coming soon) lists four reasons many preachers struggle with preaching Old Testament narratives.

  1. Tendency to view stories as fluff.
  2. Minimizing of the role of Old Testament stories in the canon.
  3. Intimidating features of Old Testament language and literature.
  4. Enslavement to a particular style of exposition. That is to say, Old Testament stories usually feel forced when preached using analytical outlines and “impaled on the frame of Aristotelian logic” (to use Fred Craddock’s phrase, As One Without Authority, p45).

It is not easy to preach Old Testament stories well, but “all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful . . .” All of it. Preach it all.

Notes or no notes? – part 2

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

In part 1 of this post I presented the “why” of no notes preaching from my perspective. The relational connection through increased eye contact is the biggest reason for me. Also the side effects of less complicated messages, more text-related messages, and staying-put-in-your-text messages, these are all positives as well.

So, how? Well, it is not by memorization. Trying to memorize 30-45 minutes of material is a sure way to achieve the following negative results: performing like an actor, freezing like an amateur actor, and failing to have any relational connection because you seem aloof (trying to remember the next “line”). It is probably worth memorizing the big idea, perhaps the statements of each move or point if you are going to state them explicitly, the opening few lines and the concluding few lines. Beyond that, it’s all about internalization.

Having studied the text as fully as possible, you then prepare a message that fits closely to that text and makes good sense. If possible, it is worth typing out a full word-for-word manuscript. This manuscript allows you to work carefully on specific word choices and phrasing. The work of giving close attention to the manuscript is surprisingly effective at internalizing the wording so that it comes out again when you practice the message and/or deliver it.

In the busy schedule of ministry life, typing a full manuscript is not always possible. So writing out a full outline and then preaching through the message out loud also serves to internalize the message.

Preaching without notes is not about special memory skills. It is about full preparation that leads to the preacher being very at home in the preaching text. It is about prayerful preparation that allows the message to soak into the very fiber of the preacher’s life.

For many preachers the fear of forgetting where they are, or freezing during delivery, hinders them from trying no notes preaching. I thank the Lord for my preaching professor that took away all other options when I had to preach in class. Maybe you should find someone to require no notes preaching of you?