Break the Routine

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Some who read this blog are pastors/ministers who preach every week, perhaps multiple times per week.  Others are “normal” people who preach regularly as well as holding down “non-preaching” jobs as well.  Either way, it is easy to get into a routine. Perhaps a weekly routine where Monday’s are off, but Tuesday’s are back in the process preparing another message.  Perhaps a routine where the mind has space to think ahead a little and prepare several weeks out, but still always preparing.

As well as having a weekly day-off, consider also the value of a break in the preaching routine.  This may mean a formal sabbatical for three months or longer.  Or it may mean scheduling a couple of Sundays out of the pulpit.  Either way, it will allow space for others to gain experience in the pulpit, or for your congregation to benefit from another voice.  More importantly for this post it will free up your routine enough to enjoy some study of your own choice.  It will allow you to recharge your preaching batteries and refresh your motivation for the ministry.

I’m not saying you should take next Sunday off.  But I think it is healthy to know when the next break will be.  Perhaps it’s time to take a look in the schedule and see what the horizon looks like?

Piper’s Ten Tips from Edwards

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The final chapter of The Supremacy of God in Preaching by John Piper contains ten lessons from the preaching and writing of Jonathan Edwards. I’d like to list all, but highlight a handful for us this morning.

So here’s a list of half of the ten. Preachers should Saturate with Scripture their messages, and employ analogies and images, driving the teaching home with use of threat and warning. They should plead for a response and be intense. It is easy to see where Piper received his greatest preaching influence. Now the other half:

Stir up holy affections – Edwards was right in recognizing that the theological tradition he was such a big part of can easily fall into a mind and will centered anthropology. He was not an advocate for unthinking fervor, for the preacher must also enlighten the mind. However, if all the preacher does is educate the brain and pressure the will, he is missing the driving seat of a person, namely the affections. This is a lesson we would all do well to ponder biblically. Hence we should probe the workings of the heart.

Yield to the Holy Spirit in prayer – the preaching event is such a divine working that we are foolish to lean on our own “professionalism” as communicators. Who among us would say that their ministry has enough or too much prayer in it? For our preaching to reflect the Christlikeness that it should, we must be broken and tender-hearted – a fruit, in part, of much prayer.

Review: The Supremacy of God in Preaching, by John Piper

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

pipersupremacy.jpg

This is neither a how-to manual, nor a full theology of preaching, but it does make a definite contribution to the field.  The book is divided in two parts.  The first part is a series of lectures Piper gave at Gordon-Conwell Seminary on the subject of preaching.  The second part is a series of lectures given at Wheaton College, focused on Jonathan Edwards; his life, theology and preaching.

In his typical style, Piper diagnoses the problem of the church as one which can be remedied by a prescription for the pulpit.  “People are starving for the greatness of God.”  What people need is God, whether or not they want Him as the focus of the preaching.  This kind of “God-entranced preaching” can only flourish in churches where the Bible is esteemed as inspired and inerrant.  Piper calls for preaching that holds in dynamic tension the greatness of God through preaching with gravity, and at the same time a glorious gladness that comes from the gospel.  Such preaching requires that the preacher be diligent in steady, constant and frequent Bible study.

Piper followed advice he was given in seminary, to find one great evangelical theologian and immerse himself in that man’s writings and life.  He chose Jonathan Edwards and so the second part of the book provides a brief summary of that study as it relates to preaching.  After a brief biography and theological review, his final chapter delineates ten principle lessons from Edwards on the subject of preaching.

This book is short and a quick read, but worthwhile.  The main themes of the book are definitely worth taking on board, although if taken to an extreme the reader would feel obliged to throw out every lesson in preaching and communication that has been learned in the centuries since Edwards.  Piper writes as a response to problems he perceives in the contemporary pulpit, so at times his pendulum is swung too far the other way.  However, the basic premise is spot on, people need preaching that is both grave and glad in its presentation of our greatest need, God Himself.

If you have never read Piper, then by all means get a taste here.  If you have read Piper and found each book to be more of the same, then this is still worth reading because of its specific focus on preaching.  Read, enjoy the motivation, accept any rebuke that is deserved and prayerfully consider before God how to integrate this book into your personal philosophy and practice of preaching.

Illustrations of Relevance

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

The whole subject of illustrations in preaching is worthy of consideration.  For some of us, it is a constant struggle.  For others it seems to be an effortless delight.  Here are some points to ponder:

1. Determine the purpose of an illustration.  Instead of placing an illustration in a message just because it has been a while since the last one, try to define the purpose for one at this point.  Is it there to explain and clarify the point?  Or is it intended to support or prove the point?  Or is it moving the listener toward application of the point?  These are the three ways any idea can be developed, so these are the three things that an illustration can do.  There is one other option – an illustration can provide a temporary break allowing for a moment of humor.  This may be legitimate, but choose to do so purposefully.

2. Remember that experience is better than mere knowledge.  People will connect more effectively with something they have experience of than something they only know about.  Thus an illustration taken from common experience (such as choosing the shortest line of people and then seeing every other line go faster) is usually more effective than known but not experienced (such as an astronaut walking on the moon).

3.  Their experience is worth more than yours.  Ideally you will find illustrations that both you and they have experienced (then you can visualize and describe effectively, and they can see what you describe).  But if you can’t get both, try to find illustrations from their experience rather than yours.  Obviously this is not always possible, but worth it when you can pull it off.

4. There is a weakest form of illustration.  This is one that is outside both your and your listeners’ experience and knowledge.  This will often take the form of an obscure story from times gone by and distant lands.  These are usually found in books of “5 Million Preaching Illustrations.”  Sometimes these will fit and work relatively well.  Usually not.  

Don’t give a steady diet of illustrations lacking in clear purpose or audience relevance.  Let us try our hardest to come up with the best we can, then when Sunday comes, go with what we’ve got!

Evaluating Outlines

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The outline of a sermon is important.  Even though it may not always show clearly to the listeners, it must be clear to you the preacher.  So when you have an outline, how can you evaluate it to make sure it is a good one?

1. Look for the unity of the sermon.  When all pieces (points or movements) in an outline are considered, the whole idea should be adequately covered and supported.  At the same time, the whole biblical text should be adequately covered.  This should be saying the same thing since both the outline and the idea should take into account the entire text.

2. Look for the order of the sermon.  The elements of an outline should move forward in an order that makes sense, and often in the order of the text (although this is not a requirement).

3. Look for proportion in the sermon.  This does not mean that every point has to cover the same number of verses, but the points should be proportional to their relative weight in the sermon.  Often the points will be roughly equal in importance and length.  At other times you may have two or three briefer points  and one more major point.  In this case a briefer point should be clearly briefer in the outline.  Is briefer a word?

4. Look for progress in the sermon.  Each point or movement should convey the message forward.  Listeners do not enjoy the feeling of standing still or moving backwards in a message.  This is similar to point 2 above, but also different.  Order has to make sense.  Progress has to be felt.

Outlining is not about jumping through a homiletical hoop.  It is about accurately reflecting your thought, the structure of the message, in a visible form.  With the outline in hand, you can then evaluate not only an outline, but the message itself.

A Purposeful Change

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I just returned from the campus of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. During the weekend I was able to spend some good time with Mike (the less frequent co-author of this site). He is enjoying a three-month well deserved sabbatical from local church ministry. In one of our many discussions, we decided to make a change to the stages presented on this site (and in preaching instruction I give). We have added a stage and adjusted the order slightly.

The Change – The central stages were previously three; passage idea, passage/message purpose, message idea. Now the central stages in the model are four; passage purpose, passage idea, message purpose, message idea. You’ll see them on the right menu bar.

The Reason – The new order makes sense. Purpose precedes and informs idea. This was true before for the message idea, but not the passage idea. Now the stages are more consistent. The details of the passage are studied for content and structure (stage 2), which helps to reveal purpose (stage 3), that all informs the goal of passage study – the passage idea (stage 4). Then the message development phase begins with sermonic purpose (stage 5), which influences the statement of idea (stage 6), that leads in to the shape of the message (stage 7). Since this is only a website and not published material, we can easily make this change.

As preachers we must be aware not only of the “what” in a text (content), but also the “why” (intent) and the “how” (genre/form). I believe that recognizing the influence of purpose as well as content in the forming of an idea is a step in the right direction.

Preaching Lessons from TJ Hooker – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I certainly don’t want to push this illustrative analogy, but just one more post from the world of 1980’s television drama.  The title is wrong.  These two posts are really preaching theory “illustrations” rather than “lessons.”  Obviously I can’t use the term “illustrations” because it would mislead on a preaching website, but I’m also not saying we learn our preaching from Aaron Spelling TV productions.  The fact is that as times change, so does the presentation style used by the media.  They are driven to be as effective as possible, so they tend to evolve their approach.  Some aspects are negative (more and more shocking content to stir results in numbed viewers), but others are simply neutral (such as the phenomena noted in the last post and this one).

So just one more “lesson.”   A quarter of a century ago, the episode I was watching followed a clear plot line.  A situation thrown into tension by a problem, with the tension then increasing until the moment of resolution, followed by several minutes of denouement – tying together loose ends and returning the viewers to a state of relaxed contentment.  Those last few minutes were intriguing to me.  The program almost landed twice, but still dragged on.  After the satisfying capture of the felons, there were two more scenes.  One in which the arresting officer made a tricky play on words in reference to the length of jail term one would receive.  Then another showing the officers joking together as they headed out of the door. Corny?  Yes.  Necessary?  No.

Compare that with equivalent police or military dramas today.  Often the show ends just before you expect it to end, not three minutes after it should have ended.  Often the show ends with some tension remaining, a thought-provoking scene, or a cliff-hanger.  These two approaches illustrate a preaching lesson that homiletics writers also affirm:

When you come to the end of your message, don’t add three minutes of nothing and a corny freeze frame moment that leaves listeners comfortably returned to a state of relaxed levity.  Instead carefully craft your conclusion to both resolve the message, yet also to leave an unresolved state of heart and mind, a slight disequilibrium that gives some momentum into the application or further consideration of the message.  Oh, and try to do all that and finish a couple of sentences earlier than they expect.

Preaching Lessons from TJ Hooker

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Compare and contrast.  Sounds like an exam question.  I’ve been comparing and contrasting two TV shows.  I’m away from home so I’ve watched a couple of TV shows to unwind at night.  One is a classic police show from the early 80’s.  The other a quality mini-series from last year.  One is compelling viewing, the other is hilarious.  Apart from great clothes, old cars that roll in every chase, shallow plots and pathetic one-liners, what else has changed in 25 years of TV production?

The introduction.  A quarter of a century ago people would gladly sit through three minutes of canned music, watching several action shots and freeze frames of central characters with yellow lettering across the screen, “Starring – William Shatner.”  I can just imagine people making themselves comfortable and saying to themselves, “I’ll watch it if he’s in it!”  After the opening credits there are then a few more minutes of tedious scene setting, relaxed police officers enjoying a few empty jokes.  Finally things start when a crime takes place (unrealistic, utterly ridiculous, but at least it is some action).

Today the opening credits last 45 seconds and don’t come until 8 minutes into the show.  The very first frame of the broadcast is action, tension, intrigue, interest.  Producers know that unless you grab people in the first seconds, you’ll lose them to one of the several hundred other options under their right thumb.

We are not preaching 25 years ago.  People don’t make themselves comfortable and say to themselves, “a sermon about Moses, great!  I’ll listen to it if he’s in it!”  Life is faster, people are ready to move on quicker (not physically, but in their minds).  What can you do in the first three or four sentences to arrest their interest and lock their focus?

I hope your clothes have changed in 25 years, and if the Lord has blessed you at all then hopefully your car has changed too.  Let’s not go retro on the intro.  

Biblical Preaching Must Be Biblical

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Of course biblical preaching has to be biblical.  However, just because preaching is biblical it does not mean it is the best it can be.  John Piper notes that just because the Bible is believed to be inerrant, it does not guarantee that preaching will therefore flourish.  He notes three ways in which evangelicals undercut the power and authority of biblical preaching:

1.”Subjectivist epistemologies that belittle propositional revelation.”  In a day when truth is considered relative and subjective, we preach the Word because God has given revelation to us by means of objective proposition.  Preach the idea of the text, and you preach the Word of God.

2. “Linguistic theories that cultivate an exegetical atmosphere of ambiguity.”  Sometimes diligent study using all tools available can lead us to a point of textual confusion and paralysis.  We have to evaluate whether that is a genuinely difficult passage and admit that, or find a way past exegetical paralysis to effective preaching.

3. “Cultural relativism that enables people to dispense flippantly with uncomfortable biblical teaching.”  So easy to try to please the people by avoiding the tough stuff.  We must preach the whole counsel to help the people and ultimately please our audience of One.  (Quotes taken from Piper, The Supremacy of God in Preaching, 40.)

It would be good to take stock of this list and check our own ministries to make sure we are not undercutting the power and authority of biblical preaching.  (We should also make sure we don’t use some of this terminology that would render us incomprehensible to most listeners!)

Preaching’s Core Vision

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

“We shall never have great preachers until we have great divines.” That was C.H.Spurgeon’s opinion. In the busy world we now inhabit, a world of phone calls, emergencies, emails, travel, financial complexities, family responsibilities and ministerial intricacies, we need to freshly recommit ourselves to the core vision of the preacher. Our core vision is not a philosophy of ministry, a theological stance or sense of calling. Our core vision is God Himself.

We have the privilege of being so captivated by the greatness and grace of our Lord that every moment of our lives is lived in the shadow, no the glory, of that vision. A deep awareness of who God is will continue to drive us back to His Word, diligently pursuing more of Him so that we might respond further. This is not about discipline and effort, this is about delight and response. We dive into His Word so that we might see Him more clearly, be captured more fully, and be stirred more deeply. Then we will preach more effectively.

Our preaching should flow from a personal intimacy with God and a personal commitment to His Word. That is what our people need.