The Easiest and Hardest Feedback

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

In order to improve as a preacher it is important to get feedback.  We need more than the handshake’s and comments after the service in order to grow.  Howard Hendricks has referred to this as the Glorification of the Worm ceremony!  So we need something more constructive.  Probably not after every sermon, but certainly periodically, and from a variety of sources.  Yet there is one source of feedback we can easily overlook.  A source of feedback who is always accessible, always capable and over whose schedule you have significant influence.

The person I am speaking of is yourself.  It would be a good discipline to either listen, or even better, to watch your sermon periodically.  Maybe once a month, or once a quarter.  It is surprising how much we can benefit from self-critique.  A few ideas:

Leave it a few days before reviewing the sermon.  Let the emotions drain away first.  Let the sermon go cold.  Then listen or watch.  You will be able to listen more as a listener this way.

Watching is worth it.  Even if it is a hassle to borrow a camera, set it up, arrange for someone to run it, etc.  It is worth it.  I am convinced that many preachers would improve noticeably if they’d just watch themselves once.  Distracting mannerisms, lack of energy, missing eye contact, etc.  When you watch, you’ll know.

Don’t assume you’ll hate it.   Most people hate hearing their own voice recorded.  Most expect a self-review to be a painful experience.  Sometimes it can be.  Often you’ll be pleasantly surprised.  You’ll pick up on some elements of content, flow or delivery that can be improved.  But you will also realize the sermon wasn’t as bad as it felt, that it had strengths.  You have strengths.  God was at work.  You may find the experience more encouraging than you expected!

Review: The Homiletical Plot, by Eugene Lowry

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

lowry.jpg

Eugene Lowry’s work sits under the broad umbrella of the New Homiletic. His work overlaps considerably with Fred Craddock. Other New Homiletic writers have been criticized for writing well, but failing to provide a clear model of what they are suggesting. This charge cannot be leveled at Lowry. The Homiletic Plot was first released in 1980, then re-released twenty-one years later. The text of the book remains unchanged, with the only significant change being an additional afterword. This addition is very helpful, clarifying elements of the book and providing an overview of the New Homiletic field.

The Homiletical Plot provides a plotline for narrative sermons which suggests the preacher might typically move through five discernible stages in a narrative sermon. Don’t confuse narrative preaching with preaching on narrative texts. The former is an organic approach to preaching that develops sermons using temporal sequencing to develop a sermonic experience, the latter could take any form, but uses a biblical story as its text. In fact, a biblical narrative contains features of plot already, so the resulting sermon might vary from the “Lowry Loop” more than non-narrative texts. However, it is important to note that Lowry is not suggesting the forcing of any text into his 5-stage loop.

Whether or not you have read much from New Homiletic writers, Lowry is well worth reading. It is relatively short (131pp) yet has many strengths. He presents a good case for thinking of sermons as horizontal rather than vertical, an event in time rather than space, progressing rather than static, organically developed rather than constructed. The opening stage of upsetting the equilibrium should be required reading for every preacher. The notion of complications and plumbing the depths of the real issues in life is very thought provoking, whether or not you agree with Lowry’s theology (which he does not push on the reader). The notion of a sudden shift is surely a powerful concept and I appreciated the positive approach to concluding the sermon.

There are three weaknesses worth noting. Even with all the explanation and helpful diagrams, the reader is still left wondering what this actually looks like in a sermon. The danger of example sermons in an appendix is that they will turn off some readers and narrow the potential readership. However, the problem of no sample sermon is that the reader is left pondering exactly how Lowry might “plumb the depths” or perform the sudden shift.

Perhaps the greatest problem with the book for those of us committed to expository preaching relates to explaining the biblical text. Lowry states that he would typically spend more time on stage 2 (analyzing the discrepancy) than the other stages put together. Does this pursuit of deeper issues in the listener leave enough time to actually explain the text itself?

The final concern relates to the “Gospel” that permeates the model. Lowry continually refers to “experiencing the gospel” (stage 4), but which gospel? At times it feels like nothing more than the good news that God has turned things upside down in Jesus. This book will appeal to a broad spectrum of Christendom, and deliberately so, but some of us may feel the need to translate some of its teaching into our paradigm.

On one hand the book is highly refreshing and challenging – it certainly contains much for us to learn. On the other hand it highlights the dividing line between New Homiletic and those of us who would hold back from being counted in that camp. If it is possible to reduce the notion of a sermon to its minimum required features, then perhaps two broad camps can become more clear. The expository preaching camp might be satisfied with Sunukjian’s trio of bare essentials: A Bible text explained + the Big Idea + Relevance = a sermon. The reader of Lowry is left with a different trio: A “Gospel” image derived a Bible text + Plot + Relevance = a sermon.

This book would benefit all of us as preachers. Some aspects of it may not fully satisfy all of us. But it gives us all plenty to think about!

A Great Opportunity To Be Missed?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The final moments of a sermon are highly strategic. The last opportunity to emphasize the main idea, drive home the application, stir motivation for response, etc. Then there is one other thing we may be inclined to include – an early advert for next Sunday’s continuation in the series, an early raising of need for what is to follow. I am not saying this should or should not be included, but I’d like to point out a couple of points to ponder before you choose to refer to series sermon today-plus-one:

Finish this sermon. Be sure to resolve the present sermon fully. Your mind may be wandering to the next in the series (or you may want to raise hope that next week will be better than this one), but be sure to preach a complete sermon now. This moment is primarily about today’s sermon, not next Sunday’s. (As you can tell from the site, I don’t recommend preaching through the text until time runs out and then picking up at the same point next time. Preach a complete unit of thought.)

Don’t undermine this sermon. It would be a waste of all that has gone before to end with something along the lines of, “. . . today was alright, but you don’t want to miss next week’s message! That one will really be something!”

Only dangle a carrot with care. Perhaps you are inspired by a well-written TV show that always leaves people at a cliffhanger and longing for next week’s episode. Remember that takes a high level of skill to pull off effectively. It is far easier to leave people disheartened and frustrated by doing this poorly. You may choose to leave some element of the sermon or text hanging in the air, but think it through carefully.

Let the title intrigue. Often all you need to stir interest in next week’s sermon is the title printed in the bulletin. The title is there to stir interest and to intrigue. I wrote a post on titles that may help – Titles: Tricky Little Things.

The end of this sermon may be an opportunity to motivate people to come for the next sermon. But think this through carefully, as it may just be a great way to undo the moment, dissipate focus and lose what you’ve been trying to achieve to this point. What do you think?

The Pre-Sermon Bible Study Journey

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Bible study feels like a journey. Perhaps for others the terrain feels slightly different, but I can often discern three stages I go through in the process of studying a passage. I am not referring to exegetical method here, but rather to a sense of progress in my quest to understand the passage.

1. Apparent Clarity. Not in every text, but often the first reading seems relatively clear. Perhaps I recognize the characters, or note some rich preaching vocabulary or concepts. Whether or not I’m thinking about preaching it, the text seems initially clear. This stage does not last long. Once I start questioning the text, I soon move into the next stage:

2. Complexity and Lack of Clarity. As I seek to plumb the meaning of the passage, hunting for the author’s idea, it often becomes murky. There’s word study, lexical study, contextual analysis, wrestling with the flow of the text, alternating between synthesis and analysis, etc. At this point it is sometimes tempting to quit or go for a shortcut (like preaching multiple distinct ideas from the same text). If I prayerfully push on through, there is often the joy of arriving at the last stage:

3. Informed Clarity. This is where the relationship of the parts and the whole make sense. This is where the section is clear in its relationship to the flow of the book. This is a great place to get to in Bible study. This is the place I like to be before I think about preaching the text.

My fear for myself, and others seeking to be Biblical preachers, is that we will fail to preach out of a “stage 3” informed clarity. I see in myself the temptation to quit in stage two and preach some form of textual confusion (obviously we tend to paper over confusion to give apparent cohesion to the message). At times I hear messages where I wonder if the preacher even entered stage two at all. The presence of some “rich” preaching words seems to be enough to spark a whole message in some preachers! Let’s be sure to be diligent, to study and show ourselves approved, to push through to informed clarity for our own sakes, and for the sake of those who have to listen to our explanation of the text!

The Fine Art of Avoiding Over-Qualification

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

No biblical text says everything.  Each text says something.  So, we have a potential problem.  There is a constant temptation in preaching to over-qualify.  We are tempted to over-qualify the big idea so that it won’t be critiqued as biblically incomplete.  We are tempted to over-qualify the points of application so that we aren’t perceived to be imbalanced.  We are tempted to over-qualify the whole sermon so that we’re seen to be theologically well-rounded.

There is a place for qualifying.  Our big idea should not contradict the teaching of Scripture.  Our application should not be so imbalanced as to lead to harm or confusion.  Our whole sermon should be seen to fit fully in the category of “Biblical” preaching!

But, generally speaking, we are not required to preach the “whole counsel” from every text.  If we try to say everything, we run the risk of effectively saying nothing.  Let us prayerfully and carefully seek to let the force of the specific preaching text get through to our listeners.  Let us allow subsequent preaching to bring total balance.  Let’s not squeeze the sting out of each text and end up with a bland pulpit.

Wrestling with Flow

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

There are shortcuts in preaching.  Perhaps some are legitimate, although none spring to mind.  But there is one major shortcut that is very common, but that undermines the whole preaching event.  Failing to wrestle with flow.

It is easy to break a passage into its chunks and preach a sermon from each chunk.  Be sure to wrestle with how the text flows together.  If it is a true unit of thought, then there is unity, but it may take work to be able to understand and communicate it.  How do Proverbs 3:11-12 relate to 3:1-10?  How do the small parts of James 1:2-18 fit together?  Why does Luke 18:7-8 come attached to verses 1-6?  It’s easy to preach two or three sermons welded at the seams, but this is a shortcut that is not worth taking.  Be sure to wrestle with the text more and preach one message – of course it may have 2 parts, 3 movements, or whatever . . . but it needs to be one message.  

So, this week, as we prepare our sermons, let us put on our wrestling gear, enter the arena and give our all to pin down the flow!

The Big One: Glory!

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I’m sure we all would concur that we want to preach to the glory of God!  It is a motivation that should drive everything we do.  But let’s make sure this is not an ambiguous concept.

God is glorified when we magnify Him in our preaching.  When His Word is preached, He should be the central character, the hero, the one elevated as a result.  This means our preaching is not about us as preachers, or merely about our listeners, or even about Bible characters, it is first and foremost about God.  Theocentric preaching, absolutely.

However, it is important to remember that bringing “glory” to God is not merely saying big things about Him or saying those things in a certain voice.  Glory is the fruit of love.  Consider John’s presentation of glory in his gospel, in chapter 17, for instance.  So as we preach God’s Word out of love for Him, and stir in others a greater love for God, He is glorified.

Furthermore, genuine love for God will show in the lives of our listeners.  Whatever we do, whether in word or deed, it should all be to the glory of God.  We should glorify Him in our bodies.  There are numerous references like these that point out the need for appropriate practical emphases in our preaching.  It is not enough to always stir worship, but not life change.  As I listened to Joe Stowell recently, I was reminded again that preaching for transformed lives means a practical righteousness in the lives of our listeners that is the greatest apologetic of our age – which all brings glory to God!

Let us preach to the glory of God, but not hide behind that motivation as an excuse for irrelevant or application free sermons.

The Biggest Challenge in Ministry

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

What would you say is your biggest challenge in ministry?  The people you work with, the people you preach to, the people who don’t come, the enemy of our souls?  I appreciate and concur with Dr Joe Stowell, former president of Moody Bible Institute.  His answer is simple, but profound.  “My biggest challenge in ministry is me.”  Mine too.  And perhaps yours?

If we are able, by God’s grace, to get “me” disciplined, in control, responsive to God, etc. then there is the possibility, by God’s grace, of handling everything else too.  If we don’t get “me” in control, everything and everyone else is a secondary issue.

Stowell’s 4 Power Dynamics

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Joe Stowell, in a session on preaching, listed four power dynamics that are critical for preaching transformationally, that is, preaching for changed lives.  Nothing new here, but a helpful reminder for us all:

1. The Preacher’s Life – This is number one for a reason.  Consider the true value of our integrity, our walk with Christ, our willingness to apologize when necessary (and periodically it is for we all fail).

2. The Text – Do we need any comment here?  After all, this site is about Biblical preaching!

3. The Context – Not the hermeneutical overarching principle for Bible study, but the context in which you preach.  Stowell pointed out that no church would continue to finance a missionary who refused to consider issues of culture, language, etc.  Yet many preachers allow themselves the same nonsensical freedom when it comes to the ministry in the pulpit!

4. Clarity – If the feedback stated is “Wow, that was deep!” then the message should be translated as “I didn’t get what you were talking about!”  Be clear.

Simple stuff, but I’m sure I’m not the only one who needs these reminders.

Some Sermons Need More Time

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

Another Stowell comment that I appreciated last week as I drove in the middle of the night down that deserted highway called the M1.  “A sermon prepared in the mind of the preacher only reaches the mind of the listeners.  But one prepared in the mind, and in the heart and life of the preacher reaches the heart and life of the listener too.”  How true is that?

We must allow time for sermons to soak long enough in our lives that we are changed, rather than merely informed.  Perhaps this means starting preparation a few days ahead of a normal, but rushed schedule.  I wrote before about preparing using a 10-day rather than a 5-day preparation schedule.  But sometimes this is not enough.

The example Stowell shared illustrates this well.  Let’s say that you are going to preach on prayer, but you know yourself and know you are not a pray-er.  What to do?  Postpone the sermon for a year and learn, with God’s help, to pray.  Then preach it!

All sermons need more time than a day or two before delivery.  Some sermons need much more time.  The time it takes for a learned truth to become a lived reality.