Preach with Clarity and Passion
Michael Kruger's article on whether to preach from a full manuscript or not has provoked quite a bit of discussion. I think that's because the question of "communicating" in preaching has become quite a big deal in the last few years. Anglicans maybe aren't renowned for their dynamic preaching and communication - although I believe George Whitefield wasn't too shabby! But it is a thing even among the Anglicans. At my training college we had sessions in communication training. I remember after one year's sessions, everyone started preaching almost note free and standing to the side of the lectern. I never did quite find out why, as I wasn't in that session!
Now I've been going to church my whole life whether teaching and preaching myself or listening to others teach and preach. I've also spent a reasonable amount time being taught and teaching in higher education establishments. I think it's interesting and useful that the questions about communication have come up. In a world saturated with people trying to communicate with us, if we do a bad job communicating the Bible and the gospel message then it won't be surprising if the message falls on stoney ground more often than not.
And yet...The more I listen to sermons and teaching, the more I think the questions of technique and notes and illustration miss the basic point. Now this isn't simply a blog that is going to remind us that content is king (Kruger did that!). Let's assume for the moment that in your preaching you have studied appropriately and are teaching the truth faithfully. Given that, I think the more basic issues around communication come down to clarity and passion.
Let me try and explain. First, on clarity. Genuinely most preaching I've listened to over the years lacks clarity. People can be very gifted in getting and holding my attention. They can maintain eye-contact. They can phrase things beautifully and memorably. They can give me powerful application. But if I can't follow what it's about, then it has largely failed as an act of communication. I might even come away feeling convicted or encouraged. I might tell you what a wonderful sermon it was. But at root, I haven't got it because I didn't understand it, because it wasn't clear and so any impact won't last - because it's not really built on anything.
I think clarity is one of those areas that there has been a swing against in the last few years. No-one wants points in sermons, especially if there are 3 of them and they all begin with 'P'. I suppose it's become too much of a cliche. The move toward story rather than being too didactic has emphasized it. The (rather odd) dichotomy that people want to make between preaching and explaining the Bible has exacerbated it. Now I get that. We are rightly worried about sermons being dry and passionless. We worry that we only reach the head and not the heart. But for all that, I really would like to hear some more sermons that I could actually follow what it was about.
Now that takes real effort on the preacher's behalf. Not only do they have to be crystal clear on the Bible passage or doctrine they are teaching, they have to work really hard to put together a sermon that is crystal clear. That isn't something that is solved by a technique, it's solved by graft and practice and feedback (sometimes you can think you were crystal clear and you really weren't). For what it's worth, my experience suggests that this is the number one thing most preachers need to work harder on. Without it your sermon will fail, however good your (other) communication skills. In fact I would even go so far as to say that I would rather you read your script in a monotone and I could follow what it was about than you engaged me brilliantly, but I couldn't follow.
So my first plea to preachers would be to double down on the clarity issue. Make sure you get it clearly. Make sure you teach it clearly.
Second, on passion. I think the reason that a lot of the debates around different techniques (e.g. what notes to use and where to stand) happen, is that for different people it's different - that's what everyone said in the debates on Twitter. More fundamental to whether you hold someone's attention is your passion. In general, you know that real enthusiasts grab our attention. Again, my experience of listening to preachers and preaching is that they don't grab me with their enthusiasm. If they are enthusiastic about the passage or the topic, I can't see it. I think this is actually related to the previous point. Passionless preaching is often due to not getting things crystal clear. If you've got it you're much more likely to want to teach it and teach it well. But sometimes it's also related to other things, like prayerlessness, or tiredness, or the having become too functional about our preaching role. It may be a time issue - you've not really had the time to get beyond a functional understanding (although for what it's worth I think you haven't got to clarity either if that's the case). But dry preaching is more often about lack of passion than lack of technique.
So my second plea is more difficult. You need to be passionate about what you're preaching. It's more difficult because that's not something you can just work up - like you do some stuff to get pumped up before preaching. I think it reaches into you prayer life especially. But if you listen to yourself and you can't hear the passion. If you talk to people and their feedback is that there's not much passion, then it's time to do some diagnosis on yourself as to why.
Now, let me be clear, learning different approaches and techniques that will help communication is a great thing. Actually, the value of these things is that when the clarity and passion are in place, you don't want silly stuff getting in the way of that (you really don't need to be reading a script in a monotone!). So ideally this isn't an either/or situation, although one has to accept that time-limited ministers are rarely working in ideal situations! My concern is that we seem to be losing focus on the key priorities of clarity and passion.
Now I've been going to church my whole life whether teaching and preaching myself or listening to others teach and preach. I've also spent a reasonable amount time being taught and teaching in higher education establishments. I think it's interesting and useful that the questions about communication have come up. In a world saturated with people trying to communicate with us, if we do a bad job communicating the Bible and the gospel message then it won't be surprising if the message falls on stoney ground more often than not.
And yet...The more I listen to sermons and teaching, the more I think the questions of technique and notes and illustration miss the basic point. Now this isn't simply a blog that is going to remind us that content is king (Kruger did that!). Let's assume for the moment that in your preaching you have studied appropriately and are teaching the truth faithfully. Given that, I think the more basic issues around communication come down to clarity and passion.
Let me try and explain. First, on clarity. Genuinely most preaching I've listened to over the years lacks clarity. People can be very gifted in getting and holding my attention. They can maintain eye-contact. They can phrase things beautifully and memorably. They can give me powerful application. But if I can't follow what it's about, then it has largely failed as an act of communication. I might even come away feeling convicted or encouraged. I might tell you what a wonderful sermon it was. But at root, I haven't got it because I didn't understand it, because it wasn't clear and so any impact won't last - because it's not really built on anything.
I think clarity is one of those areas that there has been a swing against in the last few years. No-one wants points in sermons, especially if there are 3 of them and they all begin with 'P'. I suppose it's become too much of a cliche. The move toward story rather than being too didactic has emphasized it. The (rather odd) dichotomy that people want to make between preaching and explaining the Bible has exacerbated it. Now I get that. We are rightly worried about sermons being dry and passionless. We worry that we only reach the head and not the heart. But for all that, I really would like to hear some more sermons that I could actually follow what it was about.
Now that takes real effort on the preacher's behalf. Not only do they have to be crystal clear on the Bible passage or doctrine they are teaching, they have to work really hard to put together a sermon that is crystal clear. That isn't something that is solved by a technique, it's solved by graft and practice and feedback (sometimes you can think you were crystal clear and you really weren't). For what it's worth, my experience suggests that this is the number one thing most preachers need to work harder on. Without it your sermon will fail, however good your (other) communication skills. In fact I would even go so far as to say that I would rather you read your script in a monotone and I could follow what it was about than you engaged me brilliantly, but I couldn't follow.
So my first plea to preachers would be to double down on the clarity issue. Make sure you get it clearly. Make sure you teach it clearly.
Second, on passion. I think the reason that a lot of the debates around different techniques (e.g. what notes to use and where to stand) happen, is that for different people it's different - that's what everyone said in the debates on Twitter. More fundamental to whether you hold someone's attention is your passion. In general, you know that real enthusiasts grab our attention. Again, my experience of listening to preachers and preaching is that they don't grab me with their enthusiasm. If they are enthusiastic about the passage or the topic, I can't see it. I think this is actually related to the previous point. Passionless preaching is often due to not getting things crystal clear. If you've got it you're much more likely to want to teach it and teach it well. But sometimes it's also related to other things, like prayerlessness, or tiredness, or the having become too functional about our preaching role. It may be a time issue - you've not really had the time to get beyond a functional understanding (although for what it's worth I think you haven't got to clarity either if that's the case). But dry preaching is more often about lack of passion than lack of technique.
So my second plea is more difficult. You need to be passionate about what you're preaching. It's more difficult because that's not something you can just work up - like you do some stuff to get pumped up before preaching. I think it reaches into you prayer life especially. But if you listen to yourself and you can't hear the passion. If you talk to people and their feedback is that there's not much passion, then it's time to do some diagnosis on yourself as to why.
Now, let me be clear, learning different approaches and techniques that will help communication is a great thing. Actually, the value of these things is that when the clarity and passion are in place, you don't want silly stuff getting in the way of that (you really don't need to be reading a script in a monotone!). So ideally this isn't an either/or situation, although one has to accept that time-limited ministers are rarely working in ideal situations! My concern is that we seem to be losing focus on the key priorities of clarity and passion.
Comments
Post a Comment