Truth Through Personality

December 4, 2012December 4, 2012 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Phillips Brooks’ was considered one of the great “princes of the pulpit” in the nineteenth century. Perhaps his most lasting legacy were his Yale lectures on preaching in which he defined preaching as the “communication of truth through personality.”

Brooks was no pulpit performer. He was a shy man who spoke rapidly, had a stiff delivery style and poor eye contact. Yet he drew the crowds. He was meticulous in his study of the biblical text. He spoke conversationally and had a distinct sincerity and intensity, despite his evident shyness. He cared about his listeners and developed relational bonds with them.

So he was no pulpit performer. He wasn’t trying to sanctify his own style of preaching with a definition when in reality he simply wanted to affirm his own personality. Rather, he was convinced that preaching is a communication act in which a person is involved.

I do wonder whether we all grasp this simple reality. I am not saying that anyone needs to perform or be something they are not. What I am saying is that if the personality of the preacher does not offer something of the gospel, then maybe they should reconsider their passion to preach. That is, you can be shy or extraverted, humourous or serious, loud or quiet, demonstrative or reserved. Be yourself, however…

However, none of these elements of a preacher’s style are what I am concerned with. It is those preachers who preach as if only their declaration of truth matters. They seem not to care if their manner is bombastic, or arrogant, or sarcastic, or sharp-edged, or ungracious, or dour, or harsh. I believe we should all care. These are not issues of personal style. These are issues of personal character. And if the gospel has not marked our character and personality, why are we stepping into the pulpit to preach the gospel to others?

This week I would like to probe some of these issues of character and personality. I am not suggesting we perform, that would be bordering on deceitful. I am suggesting that we have personal and personality integrity. Where we don’t, we undermine the very message we claim to be called to declare.

Attention! Strategy…

November 28, 2012 / Peter Mead / 6 Comments

If you haven’t got the attention of your listeners, then they aren’t really listeners, and you’re not really preaching to them. I know there are all sorts of factors influencing the preaching event, and we’ll probe some of those later in the week. But to be super simple, here’s a principle we should all take on board:

People listen if they want to, so make them want to . . .

How can we do this?

1. Relevance. I think the preacher needs to prove as early as possible that the preacher, the message and the passage is relevant to the listeners. Introduction is critical here. But then there needs to be a continual re-proving of relevance throughout. Don’t leave “application” until the last few minutes, they probably won’t be with you by then. Demonstrate relevance all the way through. This includes lots of factors, but the content is critical. Historical lecture, theological diatribe, rant against them out there, etc., are all felt to be irrelevant to listeners in the church setting. Speak to us.

2. Interest. When the content is interesting, people are more likely to pay attention. Never bore people with the Bible. Be interesting. Does that mean we rush to our illustration sources? Hang on. The Bible is interesting. Too many preachers preach dull Bible enlivened by interesting anecdotes and stories. This may be less dull preaching, but it is not interesting biblical preaching. Communicate the content well, and use explanations, proofs, applications, when they are genuinely helpful. Make sure the core of the content is interesting.

3. Accessibility. If it is completely over their heads, they won’t listen. If it is patronizing and trite, they will get annoyed and also stop listening. Make it appropriately accessible for the level of those present.

4. Energy. Getting attention has a lot to do with delivery as well as content. Your energy matters. When we stand in front of a crowd, our natural instinct is to become limited. Seek to break out of that monotonous box and be yourself with appropriate energy for the occasion and your personality. This means eye contact, facial expression, vocal variety, movement and gestures. If you are enthused and have an appetite for it, they have a chance of catching it. If you don’t have the disease, you’ll struggle to be contagious.

5. Warmth. Energy in delivery is not about a show or a performance. It is about the real you communicating with them. One key ingredient is your personal warmth. If you come across as cold, they won’t lean in to what you are saying. Simple. Represent the gospel in your manner and tone, as well as in the precision of your content.

6. Spirituality. People can sense when you have the spiritual gravitas that comes from being with Jesus.

More to add, but I’ll leave it there. Tomorrow we’ll consider some of the illegitimate approaches people take to get attention.

Preaching & Application 4

November 15, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Part four of this series on application . . .

13. Be servant-hearted, not the model of perfection. It is so easy to come across as if you have already been mastered by and have already mastered the text. It isn’t about understanding. Be better at that every time you preach. But it is about whether you stand with the listeners as one who is also receiving from God’s Word, or are you just a dispenser of instruction, always? The servant-hearted part comes in when we realize our task is to serve others, not to impress them. Look to equip and enthuse, don’t look to show off so they feel obligated to you.

14. Be accountable to the text, not a red phone to heaven. Sometimes preachers come across as having a unique and Moses-like access to God. They seem to have spent the week face to face with the angel of the presence of the Lord, but it doesn’t stir the heart like Moses might have. Somehow it can instead be a bit intimidating. A bit of a spiritual superiority vibe that leaves others feeling spiritually inadequate. Don’t couch everything in terms of direct revelation if you actually prayerfully considered what to say and this felt right. That is very different than the red phone flashing on your desk and Gabriel passing on a direct message. Let your authority come from the Bible well-handled, rather than from an implied super-spirituality that may over-imply in places.

15. Be willing to describe the application. Don’t just preach truths and then leave them hanging in the air for people to grab and apply personally. They won’t. They will affirm you, but they won’t be touched themselves. Instead seek to spell out the difference this biblical truth might make in a life. They will translate that application to their own situation, but only after they see that you are offering more than just a nice spiritual thought.

16. Be specifically descriptive in applications. As you describe what it might look like to live in light of the passage, be specific. What does the truth of the Incarnation mean when I am struggling with my boss’s attitude tomorrow at work? What does it look like to trust God’s providence when everything seems to be conspiring against my marriage? What would be different if the peace of God gripped the ethos of our church with its grapevines and back-biting festivals?

Preaching & Application 3

November 14, 2012 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

No clever introduction, let the list continue . . .

9. Be mature in your application. The immature preacher will hammer out simplistic advice. The mature preacher knows that Christianity isn’t about self-help advice and tips for better living. There is a place for clear guidelines, the Bible gives us such in certain areas. But a lot of life’s issues are not effectively addressed by simplistic “try harder” exhortations. We are designed to be empowered in responsiveness, not empowered for autonomous success. How does God’s promise and God’s presence change things? How does He change us? Don’t tell me to be a better man, but show me Christ and you’ll soon see a better me.

10. Be consistent with the worship. Too often the heart-stirring devotion of sung worship leads to whiplash when the whipping from the pulpit kicks into gear. The whole package should be consistent. If it doesn’t seem right to sing hymns of good living tips – “Raise up the bar so that we might try harder to be good,” or “Amazing Effort,” or “It’s All About Me, Jesus.” If that doesn’t seem right, then maybe it is the preaching that needs to be more consistent with the worship.

11. Be sermonically fresh. When sermons are predictable they tend to lose their impact. So if you are in a rhythm of explanation followed by three points of application in the final minutes, consider whether this tried and trusted method might well have become stale and predictable. Look for different ways to demonstrate the relevance of passages to your listeners.

12. Be consistently relevant. That is to say, instead of ending with application, consider how to demonstrate relevance and application throughout the message. The opening introductory comments are an ideal place to engage listeners and demonstrate your relevance, as well as the relevance of the message and the passage. Try stating your points in contemporary and applied terms. Use transitions for exploring developing application as the message progresses. Drop in hints of relevance, even if not fully developed applications, during the telling of biblical story (avoid trite applications that mishandle the text, but even hints of contemporary awareness can make a real difference to perception).

Application & Preaching 2

November 13, 2012November 13, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Carrying on with more thoughts on application in preaching…

5. Be aware of the specific people to whom you preach. Just because a church is in a neighbourhood, this doesn’t mean the people in the church are typical of the people in the neighbourhood.

6. Be aware of the people whom the church is trying to reach. Here’s where number 5 becomes tricky. You may be preaching to one group of people but trying to reach a quite different group of people. Application is about targetted preaching – aiming vaguely is never wise when trying to hit a target. So do you preach to those who are present, or to those you’d like them to feel comfortable bringing? Both is a good idea. Neither seems ludicrous.

7. Be applicationally authentic. While it is easy to throw stones at post-modernity with all its relativizing of truth and denial of absolutes, let’s not miss the underarm throw that sits up invitingly before us as if to taunt us. This culture craves authenticity. It doesn’t get excited by authority or formalized religion or establishment stuff. But it does crave authenticity. Where else but in the community of God’s saved people can people go to find authenticity? But will they find it with us? Honesty, vulnerability, transparency, authenticity. We need to find a voice that is personally real, rather than offering application at arms length and so coming across as tipsters from a bygone era.

8. Be courageously bold. Paul told the Ephesian elders how he did not hesitate to proclaim the whole counsel of God. Do we? Do we apply the truth of God’s Word to the quirks and distinctive corporate personality of a local church? This takes boldness. You’ll get praise for critiquing the sins of others, but don’t go touching local sin if you want an easy life! At the same time our culture needs a sensitive, yet bold, propheticc voice to speak out. This is where preaching from personal proof texts doesn’t look good. But preaching through books or sections can allow a greater freedom since the agenda is coming from the text.

The Heidelberg Catechism on Powerpoint

November 10, 2012 / Peter Mead / 8 Comments

Question 130. What does God require of preachers tempted to rely on technology?

Answer: Ok, this was a provocative title, and technically Microsoft programmers were still in the early stages of development and they hadn’t yet released powerpoint in 1563. But the title may not be too far off. I was looking through the Heidelberg Catechism earlier this week in light of a discussion on some historical matters. Along with several other points that I really appreciated, I noticed one particularly relevant to preachers. Question 97 develops the issue of not making images of God with a broader question of the use of images in the church. Then comes question 98 . . .

Question 98. But may not images be tolerated in the churches, as books to the laity?

Answer: No, for we must not pretend to be wiser than God, who will have his people taught, not by dumb images, but by the lively preaching of his word.

Quick thoughts . . .

1. Do we fall into the trap of thinking that we know better than God in our age of sophistication? I wonder if previous generations had all the same comments about, “Well, you know, this generation now is different and so we need to . . . “

2. Do we think people can’t be engaged and drawn in and captivated by the teaching of the Word of God? I won’t get started on attention spans or this will become a long post!

3. Do we do our best to be alive, life-giving and lively in our preaching? No generation has ever thrived under the dull preaching of God’s Word.

Don’t Just Get the Idea!

November 9, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The Big Idea approach to preaching is birthed from an understanding of the nature of communication. That is, when we communicate, we are not just firing words out into nowhere. Rather, we are seeking to have the other party get the idea of what we are saying. Communication is about ideas. We want the other to say, “I see what you are saying.”

Ideas change lives. People give themselves to ideas. Christianity is a content-based faith. Which is why a very high view of Scripture tends to resonate with a commitment to expository preaching. That is, bringing out from the text the meaning that is there and seeking to effectively communicate that truth to others with an emphasis on why it matters to them.

But I don’t just want to extol the virtues of a “big idea” approach to preaching. I also want to highlight a couple of potential misapplications of it. Let’s use a very simple “communications” model:

WRITER > MESSAGE > RECIPIENTS

1. It is not just about the writer to the original recipients. It is possible to be committed to discovering what the writer meant by what he wrote to the original recipients, and then to preach that. Just that. This can come across as textually accurate, but distant and irrelevant. It can lose sight of the present and living nature of God’s Word. We can become lecturers in ancient manuscript interpretation, even if we add on application by extension. It is important to not lose the accuracy of original intent, setting, context, etc., but also to give a very clear sense that this is for us today.

So to tweak the model:

WRITER > MESSAGE > RECIPIENTS

including the message to Us

2. It is not just about the human writer, it is part of God’s self-revelation in the Word. This is where I’ve seen Big Idea preaching misapplied and fall short. Understanding, distilling and effectively communicating the main idea of a passage is not the whole deal. We are not trading in brilliant information transfer, back then or today. We are handling the inspired Word of God, given to us to reveal His heart to us. When the text becomes opaque, when the personal nature of the Trinity grows distant, then all our meticulous accuracy and sermonic craft is wasted. We don’t just preach the written word, we preach Christ. Our preaching must be theocentric, for the Bible is all about God.

Final tweak?

The Revelation of God, who inspired the .

WRITER > MESSAGE > RECIPIENTS

including His message to Us

True preaching happens in the present. As Donald Sunukjian puts it, in his shortened definition of biblical preaching: “Listen to what God is saying . . . to us!” Let’s preach so that our listeners can meet the God who still speaks through His Word today.

Get the Idea!?

November 6, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

As a child I would ask my Dad for help with various projects – fixing the brakes on my bike, getting the scalextric set up, getting the lawnmower to work. Invariably he would show me and then say, “do you get the idea?” I usually did and that was that.

Then I studied preaching at seminary. All of my teachers (thankfully) were proponents of “Big Idea” preaching. So now, as I prepare to preach, I am haunted by the question from years ago – do I get the idea? If I don’t, I’m not ready to preach. However, finding the main idea in a passage is usually not as easy as fixing the brakes on my bike.

It seems like a disproportionate amount of time can be spent trying to formulate a single sentence in the preparation process. But this single sentence is so important that it is always time worth investing. The payout is always sermon-wide. And the fallout should be church-wide and beyond. So let’s spend some days chasing the issue of the main idea, or as Haddon Robinson would put it, the Big Idea.

1. Ideas are the building blocks of communication. We communicate in ideas. Not words. Ideas. It is possible to get across a message without speaking a word – just think of advertising on the television or a billboard that uses imagery rather than words, just think of your mother when you came up with a creative activity as a guest in somebody else’s home. Words matter, but ideas communicate. So with any biblical passage – it consists of a set of ideas, some bigger, some smaller, all interrelated, and ultimately, all serving the main idea that drives the whole passage. Our job as communicators is not to parrot words, but to grasp and give out the main idea of a passage.

2. Ideas are made up of two parts. I tend to call it the single sentence summary. Somehow that feels easier to grasp than the full explanation of an idea. But let’s go to the full explanation, it isn’t that bad. What is the passage about? This is the subject. What is the passage saying about that? That is the complement. Put them together and you have the idea. Sounds easy. Sometimes it helps to ask, “what question is this passage answering?” (subject-question), and “what answer does it give?” (complement-answer). Or just summarize the whole passage in a single sentence.

Whatever it takes, let’s be sure we get the idea!

Faint Not: The Discouraged Preacher

October 30, 2012 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Charles Spurgeon wrote about the minister’s “fainting fits” in his first series of lectures to his students. He wrote, “Good men are promised tribulation in this world, and ministers may expect a larger share than others, that they may learn sympathy with the Lord’s suffering people, and so may be fitting shepherds for an ailing flock.”

The ministry of preaching seems to be fertile ground for discouragement. It is so easy to feel deterred, disheartened or hindered in some way. Sometimes it is only a feeling, but this doesn’t change its influence on us.

The New Testament has a lot to say about not fainting, growing weary or losing heart. Paul writes of the perishing state of our outward man, while at the same time the inward man is being renewed. But what about times when that doesn’t feel like the reality we are living in?

Tomorrow I’d like to ponder several factors that may be leading to discouragement. Then by the end of the week we’ll ponder some pathways forward.

According to John Stott, “Discouragement is the occupational hazard of Christian ministry.”

Let’s throw in a bit of Luther too, who apparently stated, “If I should write of the heavy burden of a godly preacher, which he must carry and endure, as I know from my own experience, I would scare every man from the office of preaching.”

Our experience agrees that these great preachers knew what they were talking about. Let’s ponder together what the contributing factors may be, and what might be done about it.

And let’s pray for others too. Perhaps you know a preacher who is facing discouragement in some form. Maybe one who is unwell, or who’s context is particularly challenging. Why not pray for their hearts to be encouraged this week? Maybe link to this post and tell them you prayed for them? The battle we are in is too much for any of us to go on alone.

Interactive Bible Observation Preaching

October 4, 2012 / Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Last month I decided to try something a little different in our church. I used the Sunday evening service (we have two services on a Sunday), for a study through the book of Ruth. Each person attending was given a handout with the plain text of the passage for the evening with headings removed, but plenty of margin space allowed. At various points I had them marking the text and then interacted with them as we observed the passage together. I still preached, but it wasn’t a tightly controlled sermon. I determined when there would be interaction, and overall I think it worked well.

Upon reflection, here are some of the advantages of this approach (not saying it should replace normal preaching, but I think it has a place).

1. It shows people that they can read and think about the passage, they don’t need to be spoon fed. It is easy to get into the habit of only getting Bible input from “experts” – either at church, or for some, on MP3 downloads during the week. But this approach subtly reminds people that they can look at and think about the text themselves.

2. It shows some people that they don’t automatically know everything. This is in contrast to number 1, I suppose. Some people are over confident in their view on everything. This approach allows them to discover that they missed something and should look closer. “I never saw that before” isn’t such a scary phrase from the preacher’s perspective, when they are actually observing the text with other people and it is plainly before them (rather than a homiletical invention).

3. It gives people experience of observing, then interpreting, then applying. Some never really observe, some skip straight to application, etc. This is a good group exposure to inductive Bible study.

4. It slows the pace of experiencing the text. In this instance, it was Ruth, a narrative. Good preaching can also slow the pace of experiencing the text, but this approach certainly did. People felt the tension and it built nicely, both during the message and over the weeks.

5. The preaching element is proven. That is, if done well, the preaching element should not get the “I wouldn’t have seen that in the text” kind of response. They are seeing it, the preacher is just building and reinforcing what has already come through. I found the more traditional preaching element in this series felt very gritty and real: it was the explanation and reinforcement of the main theme in each passage, tied into the bigger picture of the book.

There are other advantages, so feel free to add by comment…