Religion

Factors In Selecting Sermon Form – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I suggested it is best to start with the assumption that the sermon will be shaped according to the shape of the text itself. However, there may be reasons to choose an alternate sermon shape. Why? Because there is not one factor only in this decision, but at least three. Let’s consider factor number 2:

Factor 2 – The nature of the audience. Every sermon is a unique event because while the text may remain the same (i.e. preach the same text twice), the audience changes. Different people, or the same people at a different time. Consequently, they may respond better to one sermon form over another. For example, your Psalm may be chiastic, but what if a chiastic structure is too foreign to your listeners? You can choose to educate them in Hebraic poetic form, but you can also restructure the sermon into a deductive or inductive arrangement. Or maybe the idea is threatening to your listeners, then an inductive sermon would make good sense. Since preaching is about both the text and the listeners, let both be factors in choosing your sermon form.

In my mind these two factors are critical. The shape of the text and the need of the audience. But there is a third that should be kept in mind too. You won’t be surprised by it, but it’s coming tomorrow!

Factors In Selecting Sermon Form – Part 1

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Last week I posted on the subject of sermon form. Now I’d like to expand on the factors that go into selecting a sermon form. Some people are committed to one sermon form. They think that true expository preaching is always done their way. It’s as if the sermon shape came down from the mount along with the two stone tablets and a blueprint for a uniquely special tent. But on this site we hold to the notion that expository preaching is not a form of preaching, but a philosophy of preaching. So, since there is great freedom, why do we choose the sermon form we choose? I see three main factors to take into account, today let’s consider the first:

Factor 1 – The form of the text. Every biblical text has a shape. It may be inductive or deductive. It may be a narrative, or a narrative introduced with a narrator’s statement of the idea or purpose. It may be chiastic. Text’s come in a certain type and a certain shape. For me, this is the starting point.

Not only does the text say something, but it says it in a certain way, and in doing so it does something. We would be wise to consider how our sermon can do what the text was written to do (not in every case, but often). And one way to make the sermon do what the text was written to do is to shape the sermon according to the shape of the text.

This is my default. My starting point is the shape of the text. I start with the shape of the text and then choose to change the shape of the sermon if there is good reason to do so. Why might there be good reason? In part 2, tomorrow, we’ll see!

A Ninth Stage?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I like the eight-stage approach to sermon preparation we use on this site.  It makes sense.  It works.  Sometimes I’m tempted to add a stage, but I think I’ll stick with eight.  Yet if I were to add a stage, what would it be?

It could be something to do with the invitation to preach that comes before the eight-stages.  Perhaps I’ll develop that thought in the days ahead.  I suppose you could make a case for adding delivery as a stage.  After all, delivery of the sermon is critical.  But then again, if these are the stages of preparation, then really it would need to be something about preparing to deliver, rather than the actual delivery.  Perhaps I’ll develop that thought too.

At this point in time, if I were to add a stage, it would come between stages 4 and 5.  After grasping the idea of the passage, before attempting to develop a message, it’s time for audience analysis.  This is critical.  The very definition of expository preaching I teach incorporates the notion of relevance to specific listeners.  How is relevance possible without consideration of the audience?  It may be the first time you preach to them, or the thousandth, but it is worth considering them and the timing of the sermon to them during each preparation.

I haven’t added it as a stage.  I still use and teach eight stages.  But I have added it as a category.  So if you click on Audience Analysis on the menu to the right, you will find previous posts on this important issue.

Don’t Say Too Much

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

My post last Sunday concerned preaching like it is your first message and your last.  I meant something specific under both of these points, and was not referring to the negative elements of each.  In reality your last sermon might be foggy with deteriorated thinking faculties, bitter with built up hurts, disconnected through losing touch, etc.  Your first sermon might have been messy through lack of training, stumbling through excessive nerves, etc.  But one of the comments on last Sunday’s post makes a very worthy point.

Most of us, in our first sermon, tried to say too much.  We tried to cram in all we knew on that subject.  We tried to miss nothing, preached dense and probably missed everyone listening.  Keep that in mind today.  Don’t try and say so much that you end up effectively saying nothing.  Don’t feel the need to prove how many hours of exegetical work you put in, or what exegetical bunny trails you pursued to no avail.  Say one thing, and say it well.  Say it clear.  Say it more than once.  But don’t say too much!

Remember the Main Thing

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

It’s easy to be overwhelmed as a preacher.  So many things to keep in mind.  The different aspects of delivery, built on the different elements of a sermon, not to mention the multiple facets of biblical study.  You pour in whatever hours you can find in order to try to understand the passage, then to shape a sermon that will accurately and effectively communicate the meaning of that passage to your listeners with some degree of relevance to their lives.  And maybe the many details feel overwhelming.

It’s easy to get caught up in the introduction, the conclusion, the illustrations, the support materials, the elements of style, effective delivery and so on.  These all matter.  These are all important, but they are all details.  The best delivery you can conjure is hypocrisy without a solid message to preach.  The best message flesh in the world doesn’t look good unless it is on a well-formed skeleton.  And the best bones in the world only make sense as an outline when there is a master design involved.  And that master notion needs to be worthy of all the work.

Delivery makes the most of a good sermon.  The flesh of the sermon makes a skeleton of an outline into an attractive and compelling being. But the skeleton only makes sense if it is serving the main idea of the message – each bone supporting the unity of the message, each detail moving the message forward toward a goal.

I’m not undermining the importance of any sermonic detail.  Details of the sermon and details of delivery, are important, but they are details.  Unless there is a core concept, a big idea, a central proposition, whatever you want to call it.  Unless there is that main idea derived from effective study of the passage to the best of your ability, all pursued in dependence on the Spirit of God.  Unless there is that, there are only details.  Random details.  Remember the main thing.  The main idea is your goal in Bible study.  Then that main idea is boss of the message.  The main idea is the main thing.  Let’s remember that.

Selecting Sermon Form: The Preacher’s Strategy – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I noted that if you find a good sermon form, you should not become a rigid adherent to that one form.  If sermon form is a matter of strategy (how to best accomplish the sermon goal), then there are two more implications to consider.

2. Better strategists have a varied arsenal. Again, it seems obvious, but it’s true.  The best generals, the best coaches, the best business strategists, all have a varied arsenal (play-book, if you prefer).  So try to accumulate options for how to shape a sermon.  Be flexible and willing to try new things.  Maybe something suggested by a preaching book.  Maybe something that develops organically as you study the text.

3. The best strategists select wisely based on the variables of the occasion.  Variation is not a virtue in itself.  If the same form as last week works best for this text, these people, on this occasion from this preacher – use it.  But over time if you only ever use one form, you are probably defaulting, rather than strategizing.  No matter how big your arsenal may be, you can only preach one way in the next sermon, so select well.

Grow your arsenal of options.  Read and listen as widely as you can.  Then choose each time the strategy that you believe will work best.  Deliver that arrow accurately to the intended target.  Your choice of sermon shape is your strategy to accurately deliver your main idea to its target, to achieve the goal of the sermon.  Choose well.  It matters.

Selecting Sermon Form: The Preacher’s Strategy – Part 1

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Over the next days I will re-assert a basic commitment of expository preaching on this site – there is great flexibility on form.  You can preach a text deductively or inductively, or a combination, or using some variation on these basic shapes.  You can choose three points, or two, or one, or four.  You can go verse-by-verse, chunk-by-chunk, logical thought by thought.  You can preach in first-person, second-voice, etc.  You can follow the Stanley 5-Step (me-we-God-you-we), the “Lowry Loop,” or the “Clowney Construct,” or Chappell’s variation, or Keller’s.  Whatever.  You have freedom to choose your form.  So why do we choose the form we choose?  It’s simple really.  It’s about strategy.  As Robinson puts it, the sermon idea is the arrow, your sermon purpose is the target, and your sermon form is how you think you can best deliver that arrow to its intended target.

Since there are numerous possible variations on sermon form, which should you choose?  It’s simple really.  Whatever will work best.  If you have a goal, then you will choose your strategy in order to achieve your purpose.  I see at least three implications here:

1. Resolute commitment to a good strategy may be foolhardy. Seems obvious, but circumstances change.  It’s true in war.  It’s true in sport.  It’s true in preaching.  If you preach in first person (in character) and you get great feedback, don’t automatically commit to always preaching in first person.  It will become old and lose some of its effectiveness.  Each sermon is an opportunity to choose your strategy according to the factors uniquely present on that occasion.

Stopping Matters

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Last week I wrote about the importance of stopping when you get to your sermonic destination.  I just want to add an important principle.  After an ideal landing is missed, extra minutes are not neutral, they are negative.  Once listeners sense that you are circling and extending the sermon, good work done will begin to be undone.

I hesitate to use a sales analogy, but it’s hard to avoid.  Before I get criticized for profaning the noble art of preaching with a business story, please just hear me out.  Preaching is certainly not sales, but there are certain similarities.

I worked in sales for several years.  I worked in retail sales, then in direct sales.  I was taught in training to never over-sell.  I learned in practice to never over-sell.  Once the deal can be closed, it should be closed.  Extra words, extra effort, extra attempts to justify the purchase are all counter-productive.  When someone is ready to close a deal, close it.  I still remember one sale in the freezing cold city center of Bristol, England.  Actually, it wasn’t a sale.  The lady had her credit card out and was ready to sign the contract, but I chose to say one more thing to reinforce her decision.  She walked away, I lost that chunk of income.  I over-sold.

Preaching is more complex than sales and involves a larger audience, has higher stakes and I would consider it a greater privilege.  But the same truth applies.  Preach the sermon, get to the destination and then stop.  Don’t over-preach.  Those extra minutes are not helpful, not even neutral, they are negative.  Stopping matters.

A Plea to the MC: Careful of Careless Closure

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Perhaps an MC will read this post.  Perhaps a worship leader.  Perhaps one Sunday you will not preach, but will “chair” the service (as they say in England), for a visiting speaker.  I have a plea.  Please, please, please be careful what you say after the sermon.  Most of the time, it might be best to say nothing.  There’s nothing worse than a good sermon well preached, then the moment trashed by a jovial comment or mood-breaking notice.  Actually, there is something worse.

It’s worse when someone stands up after a sermon and tries to add a helpful comment.  Perhaps a summary of what the speaker has said.  Perhaps even an attempted exhortation in light of what the speaker has said.  As someone involved in missions work I am afraid only one example is spinning in my head, but it is the example par excellence for missions speakers down through the years.  Let me quote from an email I received last week:

One of my early attempts to share my passion for unreached nations took place in a small country church some years ago. I gave them my best . . . The pastor then felt it necessary to mitigate my remarks and blunt my passion for the unreached by assuring his flock, “We’re all missionaries to our neighborhoods and workplaces!” I was thoroughly deflated.

I have experienced it and I have seen it.  A preacher makes a strong case for missions to the unreached from God’s Word, then all that work is undermined by a well-intentioned, but horribly misplaced comment in closing.

I’ve learned that, whenever possible, if I see a way my message could be undermined, I make plans to avoid it.  If possible I will ask if I can close the service.  Sometimes I’d rather not be the one to pray and wrap things up.  I’m certainly not the best at it.  But at least I won’t undermine the whole thing.

This happens regularly to missions messages.  What other kind of message have you seen undermined by careless closure?

Mythbusting – Experience Is Key?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Howard Hendricks has a habit of getting at the heart of an issue. I was just reading a book he co-authored on teaching and he nails a key issue for us as preachers. How are we to know that we are being as effective as possible in our ministry?

Experience is not the key! People automatically assume that the longer they are doing something, the better they get at it. So the longer a person teaches, the better the teacher they become. The longer the person preaches, the better the preacher they become. Wrong. Hendricks calls this idea nonsense. He points out that ripping through wood dulls the teeth of a carpenter’s saw, and so also experience tends to wear away any edge in a person’s skill.

Evaluated experience is key! Over time poor methods and poor practice become ingrained poor habits. Complacency easily sets in. It is possible to lose touch with the listeners. And time will generally exaggerate personal idiosyncrasies. In short, over time we easily get sloppy.

So what does Hendricks advise? He advises pastors as well as teachers to follow his example. To evaluate every session you teach. To invite others to critique in various ways. Be like a carpenter who painstakingly files each tooth on his crosscut saw.

Experience alone does not make you better, only evaluated experience does that. In the same way as experience alone does not make you mature, but only experience evaluated and handled with the right attitude. Let us all have the attitude of the master carpenter, painstakingly sharpening each tooth on the saw of our ministry. Perhaps it would be good to carefully evaluate your last sermon, and make specific plans to get feedback on your next.