Expository Preaching

The First-Person Exception Clause

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

I just received a really encouraging email from Steve.  Steve has attended a couple of my preaching seminars and also helped to set one up in his own church.  We had talked about the possibility of preaching in first-person, and he followed through on the idea.  Here are the highlights of the email with some added comments from me:

“Whereas I’ve heard another preacher do this with a slight tongue in cheek approach, I did the whole thing totally straight, trying to maintain the idea that I was Abraham telling my story to my grandchildren.” – that’s an important point, it’s so easy to slip into an ongoing humour that distances us from our character in order to connect with our listeners.  This may be appropriate in some settings, but I say if you’re going to go for it, go for it.  Now, was it easy?

“It was really tough going as I had no notes whatsoever and when you realise you’ve missed something it is so hard to think around whether you should go back and make that point you forgot or carry on, whilst still keeping totally in character.” Most people agree that Abraham would not use notes to give his message (I would suggest the same principle might apply as you give “your” message next time too, but that would be taking us off the point of this post).  Preaching without notes in any form provides that kind of challenge.  It does get easier, but never easy.  Here comes the exception clause:

“I think many were impressed with the fact I listed out Abraham’s genealogy from Abraham back to Noah. That was just a memory trick though and very early on in the sermon.” Generally we should avoid anything that smacks of showing off in our preaching.  It can be easy to do after spending hours with our nose in the books, but we are there to serve and communicate, not to show off.  However, Steve has made a comment here that I view as an exception to the rule – in this case such information would obviously be known by Abraham himself.  People may be impressed, but if used judiciously, this type of communication can serve to underline that this is a serious sermon.  But this should be carefully weighed so it is not the big talking point or lasting effect of the message:

“It was so good though as I was taking the story of Abraham sacrificing Isaac and so many people came up afterwards and said that the story had come alive for them like never before and made them think what it really felt like for them both. You could really see people on the edge of their seats.” That’s the power of well-told narrative!

So, last words to a first time first-person preacher: “It was definitely worth doing though even if it was a real challenge.”

The Aim of Preaching Easter

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

What is your aim as you preach this Easter?  In his book, Sacred Rhetoric (p119-120), Michael Pasquarello makes the following comment about Martin Luther:

Luther’s homiletic aim was to demonstrate, by means of the Gospel, that the resurrection is more than an idle tale or a painted picture that evokes admiration and religious sentiment. . . . He hoped that in telling others the Easter story, the presence of the risen Christ might elicit faith’s true confession: “Christ is my Savior and King.”

Let’s not settle for a complacent approach to sermonic purpose as Easter approaches.  Why am I preaching this passage on this date to these people?  Because it’s Easter, of course!  That’s not enough, what do we aim to achieve?

What should the result be for the non-Christian present?  Luther wrote, “Although Christians will identify themselves with Judas, Caiaphas, and Pilate – sinful, condemned actors in the Gospel story – there is another who took the sins of humanity on himself when they were hung around his neck. . . . And today, Easter Sunday, when we see him, they are gone; there is only righteousness and life, the Risen Christ who comes to share his gifts.” (Sermons, 125, cited in Pasquarello, 120)

What should our Easter preaching do for Christians?  Again, same book, “Christians are now free to look away from their sins, from evil and death, and to fix their gaze upon Christ, which is the logic or grammar of faith.”

What is your aim as you preach this Easter?  Be specific.  Target your message.  Don’t waste a glorious occasion.

Surfacing Needs vs Felt Needs vs No Needs

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

Which approach do you take in your introduction?  If you are typical, you probably fall into the third category – no needs.  Most preaching tends to begin with some form of engaging content followed by the text, or even just straight into the text.  Whether or not people want to listen to that text preached is apparently a mute point (unless you could see into the heads of the listeners, then you’d probably never ignore the issue of “need” again!)

Some cling to a “no needs” approach to sermon introduction because they are concerned about a “felt needs” approach to preaching.  After all, we do not really start with the listener and then preach only to that which they feel they need.  We want to do better than that.  So perhaps its better to just get into the text and the message, rather than trying to address the needs of the listener in the introduction?

Thus Haddon Robinson carefully speaks of “surfacing a need” as a preacher.  It is not that the listener’s felt need determines the choice of text or even the meaning assigned to a text.  Nor does the speaker have to create a need for the text.  No, the text speaks to a need inherent in the creature, a need that the self-giving love of the Creator will meet.  So the preacher surfaces the need to which the text speaks.  This approach starts from the text, but the sermon starts with the listener.

So I suggest we don’t start disconnected (“ok, enough irrelevant humor, let’s have a reading” or even “last week we were in Lamentations 3, please turn to Lamentations 4.”)  Nor should we start with “felt needs” (“alright, you’re all asking me on facebook how to make life more comfortable and still be able to afford entertainment during the economic downturn, let’s turn to Judges chapter . . .”)  I strongly suggest trying to start by “surfacing the need” addressed by the text.  In your study it begins with the text.  Then in your message you start by highlighting the need in the listeners life so they are thirsty for the passage and the message.

Preaching Means Picking Words – Part 4

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Alright, I think this will be the last in the series.  Yesterday I made mention of sensory details and sufficient time for images to form on the screens of the hearts and imaginations of the listeners.  This is all true and important, well worth pondering, but here’s another piece of the puzzle.  Listeners won’t remain listeners unless they are engaged and interested:

Pick words which energize the message! It’s almost a given that most preachers are imbalanced in their reading.  We tend to read books on biblical studies, theology, commentaries, etc.  These books are precise, but rarely energizing or invigorating to read.  But if we preach like a dry and precise commentary, listeners will miss out on the gems in our content.  We need to practice the skill of energizing our descriptive vocabulary.  Did Saul hide?  No, he cowered.  Did Goliath call out?  Or did he bellow?  What about fog, does it come, or does it creep?  Was that a crowd gathered around Stephen, or was it a mob?

Series Conclusion – It would do us all good to do a stock check on our preaching vocabulary.  Is it accurate, or sloppy?  Does it communicate, or try to show off?  Is it lofty, or natural?  Is it vivid, or bland?  Does it engage and energize, or fall flat?  Perhaps there’s one area to work on. Perhaps more than one.  It’s worth the effort though, after all, at some very basic and fundamental level, preaching means picking words!

Preaching Means Picking Words – Part 3

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Precision is good, pride is not.  Pomposity is slightly different than lofty language.  But there’s still more to write on this issue.  When we preach, we pick words.

Develop your descriptive vocabulary. The Bible text is usually quite lean and sparse when it comes to descriptive details.  It certainly doesn’t paint the pictures like contemporary fiction writers do – “It was her long, flowing, mahogany-brown hair that first caught his attention.  Her confident gait held in tension by the reserved expression on her face.  Was it reserved, or was it demure?  He wondered as she approached the ticket desk, lifting her black leather purse onto the high grey surface and leaning forward on her elbows…” I could go on, I know you’re intrigued (she wanted non-smoking tickets).

So if the Bible is lean and sparse, surely we shouldn’t preach like we’re writing contemporary fiction (where it can take 10 pages of description to get to the conversation)?  It’s true, we shouldn’t trivialize the text, or over-describe and assign inspiration to that which is merely sanctified imagination.  On the other hand, our listeners are listening.  They can’t go back over the text and read it again, engaging their imaginations (as they might at home in their quiet times).  As listeners they need sensory details and sufficient time for the story to form in their hearts and minds.

I try to imagine a blank screen in the minds of my listeners.  As I explain the text, tell the story, etc., I am trying to give enough information, using effective word choices, and taking enough time for an image to form on those blank screens.  It is tempting and too easy to preach the Bible at such pace that listeners never get beyond the fog on the screens.  They won’t remember a set of propositions in the same way as they’d remember the mark left by a clear idea imprinted through the experience of the text well preached, effectively forming on the screens of their minds.

Preaching Means Picking Words – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday we considered the challenge of picking the right words to convey the message when we preach.  We need to be precise rather than slack, but strive to communicate rather than to demonstrate our verbal or intellectual prowess.  Here’s another factor to throw into the mix:

Lofty language languishes. Is lofty language the same thing as pulpit pomposity?  Yes and no.  Pompous words are chosen to show off our intellect (or are used carelessly without intent to show off).  Lofty language may be used to show off our spirituality (or simply be used without thinking because we are used to it in our church circles, or because we mistake it for some sort of spiritual humility and genuinely motivated demonstration of sanctification).  The fact is that in almost every setting, listeners find lofty language and tone to be distant, unengaging and even off-putting.  While it may have been acceptable in a previous generation, it seems that in most places the tolerance for inauthentic communication forms has diminished drastically.  In the western cultures, at least, the majority of listeners now esteem authenticity and natural communication.  Having a pulpit voice or a pulpit vocabulary is not worth it, even if it once was (which is a very questionable “if”).

Lofty language languishes, it doesn’t stand up tall and demand that listeners engage with it and its message. Ok, that paragraph was a long one, so I’ll leave it there and add a part three to this series of posts.

Preaching Means Picking Words

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

It almost goes without saying, but let’s say it anyway: preaching involves choosing words.  Sometimes the words are chosen agonizingly poring over a manuscript.  Other times words are chosen at an essentially sub-conscious level during delivery.  Whether it takes an age to get the right word, or a split-second to get any word, what word should be chosen?  A couple of thoughts:

Precise words – we really are to carefully choose the best words we can.  One aspect of that choice should be precision.  If we mean something specific, we should say that, and not something else.  Was it Mark Twain who said (probably was, it was usually him) – “Choose the right word – and not it’s second cousin.”  How easy it is to preach in vague words and achieve vague results.

Pomposity & pride are problematic – while it is important to be precise in our word choices, we should watch carefully for the insidious creeping of intellectual arrogance.  It is tempting to show that you know that term, but your goal is to preach the Bible so that the listeners can understand and respond to it, not so that they can praise you for such heady fare.  So beware of “jargon” known only to theologians, literary analysts or even trendy-Christian-fashionistas.  (This isn’t just a simple rule that says, “don’t do it!”  You also need to think through the choices you make.  For instance, avoiding reference to ‘biblical narrative’ by using the term ‘Bible story’ is certainly less technical, but it might imply ‘piece of old fiction’ if your supporting comments aren’t also carefully chosen.  It is vital to know your listeners and choose words accordingly – ‘biblical narrative’ would be considered highly technical by some, not at all by others.)

So let’s be precise rather than haphazard as we choose our words.  At the same time our deliberate approach to word choices should generally tend toward the clear and plain, rather than highly technical and “showy-offy” (technical term).  Poring over a manuscript for precision is one thing, it’s the sub-conscious choices that are the real challenge. Surely that requires us to make a deep-down, heart-level, fundamental, core-value, gut-level commitment to eliminating pride from our preaching.

Thou Shalt Not Bore Through Preaching

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I can’t claim this as an inspired eleventh commandment.  But there have been times when I wished it were there in the text!  In reality I tend to hear myself preaching more than others now, so I need to be careful what I say here . . . but a lot of preaching is just really kind of, well, boring.

We could get into all sorts of reasons for that.  There are numerous ways to de-bore elements of preaching.  But I just want to raise the fundamental issue.  Let’s beware that we don’t bore.  Is it the content?  Sometimes.  Is it the delivery? Sometimes.  Is it the lack of “illustrations” (a common quick-fix diagnosis)?  Sometimes.  Is it the presence of predictable illustrations?  Sometimes.  Is it the attitude of the preacher?  Sometimes.  Is it the personality of the preacher?  Sometimes.  Is it the personal spiritual walk of  the preacher?  Sometimes.  Is it the reality about God?  Never.

There are many reasons why preachers commit the horrifying sin of boring listeners.  But lest I elongate this post and dilute the point unnecessarily, let’s just stop here with two comments.  Let us commit to never boring people with the Word of God.  Let us commit to genuinely responding to God convicting us on this issue (when He does), rather than simply sticking on a band-aid quick fix.

Not Every Passage is Easy

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I suppose many of us preachers have a desire to make every passage understandable.  This is good and right on many levels.  Yet some passages, and some details in passages, are tough.  I was leading a Bible study on Isaiah 49-50 the other night . . . there was a tough detail.  Should I force my understanding on people?  What if my understanding of it rests on a broader background than some of those present can draw on?  I’m intrigued by Piper’s point in chapter 14 of Brothers We Are Not Professionals – we should show people why God inspired hard texts.

It is amazing that so much of Christianity rests on the shoulders of a “book,” and some parts of that “book” (technically 66 of them I suppose) are hard to understand.  Why did God do this?  Piper offers four reasons.  1. To stir in us a sense of desperation (utter dependence on God’s enablement).  2. To move us to supplication (prayer to God for help).  3. To prompt real cogitation (thinking hard about Biblical texts – which is no alternative to praying for help!)  4. To stimulate genuine education (the training of young people and adults to pray earnestly, read well and think hard.)

As preachers we must wrestle with hard texts and not simply skirt around them in our preaching, nor avoid them in our scheduling.  On the one hand it is up to us to help make the message of the text clear.  At the same time, we may do our listeners a disservice if we don’t point out when a passage is tough, and look for ways to let that be a motivation for study, rather than a hindrance.

Don’t Dilute By Distraction – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

In the closing stages of a message, the last leg of the journey, it is easy to lose the focus and momentum of a message.  Yesterday I raised the issue of introducing other texts, which can (not always, but often) dilute the force of the ending of a message.  Here’s another:

Don’t dilute by adding unnecessary new images. After twenty or thirty minutes where the overarching image has been the tender care of a mother for her child, the preacher decides to throw another image into the mix in the closing moments – perhaps the care of a shepherd for the lambs, or a coach for his team, or whatever.  Often a new image, a new illustration, a new set of vocabulary, when introduced in the final leg of a sermon will undermine the strength of what has gone before, or totally overwhelm the message (such as a moving story that is so powerful it makes every other element of the message, including the Bible, mere introduction).  Again, it is not always true.  Sometimes a pithy anecdote, a moving illustration, a well turned phrase, may serve to close a message well…but only sometimes…and not a very big sometimes either.

The final thrust of a message is a critical leg of the journey.  It’s the time to consolidate, not dilute.  A time to pull elements together and drive them home, not add new information that shatters the unity of the whole.