The Sweetest Agony

September 3, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Since we are in the midst of packing up and leaving the US to return to the UK (we being a family of seven!), I have decided to re-post an expanded piece from almost five years ago. Apologies if you’ve recently read through the whole site, but I suspect most people haven’t joined you in this quest!

Somebody said that preaching is the sweetest agony. It is sweet when lives are changed. And it is agony all the rest of the time!

There is nothing as rewarding as seeing lives changed. Sometimes this can occur through a one-off sermon. Typically it occurs over the long haul. Sometimes it is hard to measure. Sometimes you receive a note that overtly expresses gratitude for the change that has occurred. Often you hear nothing.

Since preaching is often more agony than sweetness, it is a good idea to keep some reminders of the sweetness of lives changed. A drawer where those periodic notes or letters are dropped in, then sit there awaiting a time when you need a reminder of the sweetness of the preaching ministry. A folder in your email entitled “Encouragements” that you can go back to when the inbox is overwhelming and discouraging.

I have written before of how we shouldn’t be overly encouraged by post-sermon politeness, but we should take note of feedback that comes after some time has passed. After a sermon, people will usually be polite, and sometimes their politeness can stretch your confidence in their credibility! I’ve seen genuinely poor preachers pressing on in the face of polite comments, as though these words are the very affirmation of gifting for which they had prayed. But when someone comes to you months later with meaningful follow-up to a message, do take note.

In fact, make a note and stick it in your encouragements drawer. There will be a time when you need it!

Tomorrow I’ll probe some of the other sweetnesses of the preaching ministry.

The Long Term Half Quit

August 17, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

There are ups and downs in ministry, often from week to week and even day to day. But there is another danger too. It is the long term half quit over the years or decades.

Ministry is not automatically rejuvenating. Over the years we can find our motivation and attitudes wearing down. What can cause this? Here are some factors to get us started, a list of seven:

1. Church Battle Scars – Church ministry can be a real battle ground, sometimes out in the open, often under the surface. For some reason people seem to choose the church as their venue for political significance and they can really go after those who have any up-front ministry. Gossip, slander, attack, critique, and so much more. It shouldn’t be, but it too often is.

2. Spiritual Warfare Fatigue – There is a spiritual warfare dimension in ministry. The enemy loves to attack those with any prominence. We should not be unaware of his attacks, and over time we may well feel worn by the experience. There are times when stepping out of the ministry feels genuinely tempting. The half-quit is the more acceptable option that too many fall into.

3. Emotional Drain – Someone said that preaching is the closest thing men come to giving birth. I’ve been at a few births and I wouldn’t want to push the analogy, but there is something to it. We give of ourselves in preaching, and then again, and then again. It can be emotionally draining to pray so intently, hope so absurdly, preach so intensely and then go at it again. Over time the drain can leave us functioning in second gear through the whole process.

I will finish the list tomorrow…

Saturday’s Thought: Preaching for Response

June 30, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

No preacher would admit to preaching in order to fill time, or to fulfill an obligation, or to fill a pulpit. We say we preach for response. After all, what other motivation could we cite? I know, some will quickly rush to language of glorifying God. But God isn’t pleased by time filling or untouched listeners. So what do we mean?

Do we mean that preaching should get more than a polite thank you from the gathered listeners? Sure. Do we mean that preaching should get a positive or exuberant statement of reception from the listeners? I don’t think so. The Lord’s preaching certainly seemed to polarize rather than please all. Some will be stirred and drawn, others will be offended and withdraw.

This is where it gets interesting for me, and here’s the thought for the day. What is the division or polarization created by our preaching? Simplistically we might assume that it is a sorting of sinners and saints. You know, those in sin pushed away by how seriously we address sin and the godly encouraged; the culture upset and absent while the churchy folks pleased and present. But that didn’t seem to be the result of Jesus’ preaching, did it?

What if we realize that the gospel is not about preaching a message of pressuring responsibility? That is, what if we preach the glorious loving grace of God that stirs and warms and draws hearts to Christ? Instead of whipping our listeners with burdens, what if we preach the One who was whipped for them?

This kind of preaching typically offends the religious who feel responsible for their own goodness. These are the people who don’t see their own efforts and diligence and pride and self-centredness as being at all sin-stained. This kind of preaching typically draws the broken and hurting and weak.

When we switch from preaching responsibility to actually preaching for a response we may find that the polarization both switches and increases. When we recognize the difference between responsibility and response, then certainly our preaching will change. It is so easy to preach to pressure people to be good. It takes something more to preach how good Christ is, so that listeners might be drawn to Him. What is the something more?

I suppose it comes down to me on my own with my Bible and my Lord. Is it all about me? Or about Him? Is it about what I must do (responsibility)? Or about what He is like (response)?

Preaching for response requires clarity on the distinction between response and responsibility.

The Four Places of Preaching – 3

June 7, 2012June 7, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

So the preaching process starts in the study, then the preacher needs to stop and pray (in an even less distracted place), but then comes the third location.

Place 3 – Starbucks. Huh?

Let me clarify before I start into this that I personally don’t tend to pick Starbucks (or pray in a closet, for that matter), but the principle applies. I have a good friend, and a preacher I highly respect, who does literally go to a coffee shop for this phase of his preparation.

He takes five 3×5 cards and puts names on the cards – the names of individuals in the church, a cross section, essentially. With his five listeners spread out on the table, and surrounded by real life and culture, he is then able to prepare the message. He can ask himself as he goes, “would this communicate to Jim?” or “How would Kerry take that?”

The goal in this place? To prepare a message that will effectively communicate the prayed-through main idea of the passage to the particular listeners as an act of love for them and for the Lord.

The best biblical content will be wasted if it isn’t targeted appropriately. Our task is not to make the Bible relevant. It is. Our task is to emphasize that relevance. And by definition, something can only be relevant to specific people. Relevant to this age. Relevant to this culture. Relevant to this community. Relevant to this church. Relevant to these individuals.

So John Stott was on target when he urged preachers to be at home not only in the world of the Bible, but also the world of the listener. Haddon Robinson took the two worlds notion and expanded it to distinguish contemporary culture from the specific culture of the local church. So we can misfire with traditional presentations in a changing culture, as we can with postmodern engagements in a church that hasn’t gone there.

Whether we sit in Starbucks, or ponder the church’s phone list. Wherever we spend time with church members and people from the community we seek to mark. Somehow we need to make sure our messages are more than great biblical content. They have to be on target, and to be on target, we must know the hearts we aim to reach.

The Four Places of Preaching – 2

June 6, 2012 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

After spending significant time in the study, without company, yet not alone, the preacher needs to move to the second location. What comes out of the study is a deep awareness of the passage, its meaning, its intent, its contours and details, all summed up in a single sentence summary, and all held as a treasure in the heart because of the work of God during the time in the study. Now to the next place:

Place 2 – Stop and Pray (The Prayer Closet)

In his very helpful book, Deep Preaching, J. Kent Edwards urges the preacher to take God’s Big Idea into the closet and allow the Spirit to work there for the sake of deeper preaching. So true.

This place doesn’t need to be a closet (it’s hard to find one humans can fit in in some cultures!) It does need to be a place without study resources and Bible software and shelves of books, not to mention phones and email and satellite whatevers. It might be an extended walk in the woods, or a chair in the lounge, or even, one of my favourites, the empty church where the message will be preached.

What is the goal here? The goal is to spend focused time in fellowship with God concerning the preacher, God, the passage and the listeners, in order to be able to then prepare a targeted message for them from that passage.

Where is the focus? God was certainly involved in the study, at least, He should have been. But it is important to recognize that the preacher is not primarily a purveyor of ancient wisdom. The preacher is, or should be, in fellowship with the Living God. So the step isn’t from commentary to outline, but from study to focused prayer.

1. Preaching should involve enthusiasm for the text and what you have discovered, but it should be driven by who, rather than what. Prayer closet time allows that personal connection and responsiveness to the God who reveals Himself in the Word to develop and drive the preaching.

2. Preaching should involve awareness of the meaning and impact of the text, but it should be sealed on the heart and experience of the preacher, not just held at arms length as new discovery. Time in prayer allows God’s Word to be driven deep into our hearts.

3. Preaching should involve a message carefully crafted to communicate effectively to a specific audience, but for that to be an act of real love, then God’s heart for the people needs to be our heart for the people. Bringing the people before God, alongside the passage, is thus critical to forming and delivering a message as an overflow of God’s love for them.

More could be written, but let’s leave it there. Study. Then stop and pray. Then? Some people will be very excited by the next location!

Jesus, How Should I Preach?

May 25, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I had the joy of leading a morning seminar that overviewed the preaching preparation process. I guided the participants through the 8-stage path that I advocate on this site and find so useful in my own ministry. But I think there is another way to look at the process – in effect a view from a greater height, a helicopter view of the preaching process. Dare I say that this might even reflect Jesus’ approach?

I would love to get the in-depth Jesus preaching seminar. Surely it would involve issues of speaking with authority unlike the scribes, and how to select compelling images, effective storytelling, memorable motifs, etc. But I want to suggest a slightly higher level, helicopter (or should I say more heavenly) view of the preaching process.

The gospels don’t give us the answer to how should we preach. But as well as His example, there is also the consistent pattern of Jesus’ theology. How should we pray? He answered with a variation on the theme of what is the greatest commandment? Since the pattern was so common in his teaching, allow me to speculate on an overview of the preaching preparation process from Jesus’ perspective. Jesus, how should we preach?

1. Love God. The first phase of the process is to be loving God by sitting at Christ’s feet. Stop being manic and busy for God, but instead sit at His feet and allow Him to minister to you. Don’t search the Scriptures and miss the person that is there, but seek the Lord in His Word and you will find Him. Treat the Bible as if God is a good communicator and so diligently study and wrestle with the text, allowing it to do a work in you before you even think about offering it to others. Love God in response to His self-revelation in His Word.

2. Love your neighbour (congregant, listener, audience, etc.). That is, pray for the people who you will speak to. Really spend time with God concerning them. Then as you start planning your message, plan it prayerfully with a deep concern for them to understand, to stay engaged, to be able to follow, to feel the import and impact of the message of the text. And as you preach it, preach with the winsomeness and grace of God permeating your demeanour, because God is passionately excited about incarnating His grace and truth!

I could be wrong, but I wonder if Jesus might give an answer along those lines.

I Don’t Feel Like Reading My Bible

May 21, 2012May 18, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

What advice would you give someone who says they don’t feel like reading their Bible? What advice would you give yourself? Just do it anyway? Today’s post is hosted on the Cor Deo site . . . click here to go there.

Saturday Short Thought: Reinforcing Every Time

April 21, 2012April 21, 2012 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

This week I have been pondering how to preach with a more developed set of motivational tools than just the pressure of guilt. I’m convinced this is an important issue, and not just a homiletical detail. It gets to the heart of our faith.

Is Christianity really and primarily about our responsibility to function in our own strength? Is Christianity about how, thanks to Christ, I can now become a good person? Is Christianity about creating good independent citizens, or is there the hiss of Genesis 3 in this version of the faith?

What if Christianity is much more about our response to Christ and His work in our lives? What if Christianity is about transformation from the inside out, born of a family relationship that changes our hearts and consequently, our behaviour? What if Christianity is not at all about independence, but dependence and inter-dependence?

The tension of duty versus delight is present in every sermon. Do I pressure people to perform, or do I offer the vision of Him who transforms?

Responsibility preaching throttles the life out of the gospel. Response preaching offers true life. Our preaching subtly reinforces one view of the gospel or the other, every time.

Beyond Guilt – Part 4

April 19, 2012April 19, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Some preachers rely exclusively on the pressure tactic of guilt in their preaching. Surely there must be a more biblically rounded approach? This week I’ve suggested we need to consider our stance, our tone and yesterday, our strategy. Let me offer the fourth factor today:

4. The Preacher’s Vision. Essentially, when we boil it down, what are we offering when we preach? Ok, the message of the text. So there will be an individuality to each message since every text is unique. But what does the Bible offer – even allowing for each text to be its own unique entity in the tapestry of the whole?

If you think the Bible offers instructions for living, your preaching will reflect that. If you think the Bible offers engaging ancient stories with helpful morals, then your preaching will reflect that. But if you think the Bible offers a vision of the heart and character and grace and personality of God, then your preaching will reflect that.

To put this another way, what is the good news offered in the Word? Is it the good news of a way in which a sinful humanity can now be empowered to live a more righteous life – that is, a gospel that somehow misses God out? Or is it the good news of who God is, offering a sinful humanity the privilege of relationship with Him who to know is life, and who to know will transform a life?

I wish this were so obvious that I didn’t see the need to write the post, but I have heard sermons where God is essentially, or even actually, omitted and absent. These are the kind of messages I might see as party political speeches, or “if only people would be good society would be better” messages, etc. There are many types of speeches in the world today, but the ones where God is at most a bit-part player are not the kind of speeches we need in the church.

If the vision captivating the preacher’s heart is the Law, then the message will likely be a guilt focused message. If the vision captivating the preacher’s heart is the grace and love of a loving God, then the message is likely to be more compelling, more transformative. After all, the gospel involves the transformation of lives from the inside out, not by the pressure of responsibility, but by the attractive invitation to respond to the goodness of our so very good God.

The vision captivating you will show in your preaching, and if it is the vision of the God who reveals Himself throughout His Word, then I suspect you will offer that same vision in your preaching – a vision that alone can truly transform lives.

Easter Musings

April 2, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Today I have posted some reflections from yesterday’s sermon. Naturally with this week being Easter it is even more appropriate to focus on Christ crucified. So today I’ll link to the Cor Deo post, then the rest of the week I am going to re-work some Easter posts from previous years. What are your particular thoughts concerning Easter this year?