Narrative Preaching

Exposition, Narrative and a Pot of Soup

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

There is a common misunderstanding of expositional preaching in relation to Bible stories.  I’ve heard the analogy used of a pot of soup.  A narrative sermon is like a pot of soup prepared carefully to be enjoyed by the guests – an experience to be savoured.  An expositional sermon is like an explanation of the recipe of the pot of soup.  Recognizing the difference between narrative preaching and preaching narratives, let’s engage with this analogy briefly.

With some preachers this negative recipe description may be fitting, but that doesn’t make the analogy accurate.  An expository preacher is concerned about communicating the point of the passage, rather than seeking to explain the point of every detail.  A good expository preacher knows that a story has its own way of carrying and conveying its point.  Thus a good expositor preacher, preaching a story, will not dissect it into a lifeless and experience-free recipe, but will communicate the story as effectively and accurately as possible.

What needs to be added to the telling of the story?  Any necessary explanation to make sense of it.  An underlining of the point, exposed for clarity, but appropriately timed so as not to undermine the impact.  If not inherently implicit, some form of emphasis on the contemporary relevance of the story.

What isn’t needed is endless detailed explanation, or numerous unnecessary and disconnected illustrations, or ill-timed statements of the proposition, or commentary-style titles for each segment of the message, or a manner which robs the story of its emotion, tension or energy.

When you preach a story, be sure to be expository . . . but not the wrong kind that feels like the explanation of a recipe!

Connecting With Story

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

There are many stories in the Bible, and this is one season in the year when most of us are preaching stories.  In some ways Bible stories give the preacher an advantage.  For example, stories offer a flow, a plot, a progression, that can be replicated in the message (although it amazes me how many preachers try to preach a story without telling the story!)  Also, stories offer vivid images and allow for effective description.  But how do we forge the connection between “back then” and “today”?  A few thoughts, I’m sure you could add more:

Don’t just historically lecture, but preach to today. It is easy to fall into the trap of presenting what happened back then, but not recognizing the enduring theological significance for today.  People appreciate hearing about what happened, but they deeply appreciate it when the preacher can emphasize the relevance of that happening to us today.

Don’t caricature characters, but encourage identification with their humanness. Again, it is easy to pick on one aspect of a character’s action in a story, but miss the other side of the coin.  For example, Zechariah doubted the message of the angel, but he was also a faithful pray-er over the long-term.  Don’t beat up your listeners with a sense of identification with the negative only – “How often do we doubt God’s goodness to us?  How easily we resist what God is doing!” Stories function through resolution of tension in a plot and through identification with characters . . . be careful not to mis-emphasize a character portrayal if the biblical account is more balanced.

Don’t identify without theocentrizing.  It is also possible to present the characters effectively so that listeners can identify with them, but miss the point that God is at the center of biblical narrative.  It’s not just Joseph’s kindness and personal character quality that is significant in Matthew 1, it is also very much focused on God’s revelation of His plan to both save His people from their sins and His presence with His people.  Joseph is a great example of a “fine, young man.”  But the passage presents this fine, young man responding to the revelation of God’s purposes.  Jesus, Immanuel.  That is the information that Joseph acted upon.  The amazing thing about Christmas narratives is that the theocentric truth is bundled up in a tiny human infant.

Christmas preached as just peace and happiness and quaint idyllic scenes is a travesty – Christmas is set up for theocentric preaching (but don’t lose the humanness of the other characters too).

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 Trends

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

We need to be aware of preaching trends.  Like all trends, they come and go over time, influencing some while leaving others untouched.  Trends can be overt and in your face, or subtle shifts that sweep people along unawares.  For instance, D.A. Carson writes concerning the current focus on preaching narrative:

The current focus on narrative preaching has rightly broadened the older emphasis on discourse passages from the Bible.  If it helps us better handle all the genres of Scripture faithfully and responsibly, it will be to the good.  If it merely tips us from one cultural preference (viz., discourse) to another (viz., narrative), we have not gained anything.  Indeed, because narrative is intrinsically more hermeneutically “open” than discourse, the move may merely contribute toward moving us away from truth.  How much better to remain faithful to biblical truth yet simultaneously focused on Scripture’s existential bite. (Preach the Word, 185.)

This quote helpfully points out several truths about “trends.”  (1) A trend is neither good nor bad in itself, it should be evaluated as part of the broader picture of church ministry.  (2) A trend may be justifiable on one level, but may bring with it side effects or net results that are more sinister. (3) Potentially sinister net results do not automatically disqualify a trend as worthy of our consideration.

Let’s be neither shallow homileto-fashionistas, jumping from one pulpit bandwagon to the next, nor stubborn traditionalists unwilling to learn, thinking we know all we need to know, and committed to increasing irrelevance.  We need to be aware of preaching trends.  We need to be discerning.

3 Words of Wisdom on Preaching Narratives

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Personally, I enjoy every opportunity to preach a biblical narrative. This is not only because of the preaching itself, but also because of the study. I always feel stretched when I study a narrative, and blessed when I stick with it.

In his excellent book, Preaching with Variety, Jeffrey Arthurs offers three reasons to be cautious when it comes to preaching narratives (and like me, he is very much in favor of it!)

1. Pastoral Reason. Many may consider narrative sermons as mere entertainment. While they may be wrong, the best convincing tactic is not to force-feed them! There are ways to preach a narrative passage that feels like a traditional sermon (without dissecting the story to death). Think very carefully about the timing of a first 1st-person sermon (Arthurs suggests Christmas and Easter).

2. Exegetical Reason. Particularly in reference to 1st-person sermons, many narratives are written in 3rd-person. We shouldn’t cavalierly jettison the form of the text, but recognize that often a move to 1st-person is a move, rather than a starting point.

3. Epistemological Reason. While narrative is the most used genre in the Bible, it is not the only genre. While our culture may be becoming increasingly a story culture again, humans are not limited to one approach to communication. Narratives and propositions belong together. People need to hear direct communication from the Bible, not just indirect. They need to hear directly stated truths from us too.