|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Preaching without notes
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
Why do Mystery Worshippers (and others) have such a thing about preaching without notes? In my experience it can often suggest the preacher has not really prepared but is making it up as s/he goes along. Preachers without notes also seem to ramble more and lose the point, and when they don't they sometimes come across as making out that the Gospel is their own great idea rather than something they are meant to be proclaiming. You know, I often find preachers who don't use notes a bit creepy.
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
.... it can often suggest the preacher has not really prepared but is making it up as s/he goes along.
You know, I often find preachers who don't use notes a bit creepy.
Well, it's worse if a preacher does have notes but sounds like he/she is making it up as they go along. That happens quite a bit of the time IME - it may be inexperience or laziness but it isn't good whatever it is.
Why do you find them creepy? Could it be that you are secretly envious of those who can speak well without notes?
I always prepare fully - taking some time to put each sermon together. The notes are there in front of me but not a script: my written style of English is very different from my spoken style and I want to put the ideas and themes I've been given into a digestible and accessible form with everyday language. The notes form the stepping stones, my speaking the links.
It seems to work for me and for the churches I've been involved with.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I tend to write my sermons out in full, though I don't always keep rigidly to the script.....
Father Vicar mostly preaches extempore, which is OK up to a point, though he sometimes repeats himself unnecessarily. He also tends to use certain words/phrases ad nauseam, so I amuse myself by counting the number of times he says 'of course', 'and so on', 'wonderful', and 'my lovely/second wife' (delete as applicable).................
My fellow Blue-Scarfed Menace can always be relied on to mention (a) the Orthodox Church (often in respect of Metropolitan Anthony), and (b) the need for us all to be 'filled with the Holy Spirit' and to 'get out and evangelise the parish'. Not sure why he thinks (a) we're not already, and (b) aren't already......but then, he's always off on some conference or other, so isn't really part of everyday parish life!
Ahem. I do apologise.....and I'll get me coat.
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
Yes, ExclamationMark, you're quite right, it does of course depend on the preacher. I suppose I was really a bit bothered about Mystery Worshippers rather taking the line that using notes was always a minus point.
What I find "a bit creepy" is the preacher who seems to have memorised a text and delivers it likes a recitation without really engaging the congregation. 'Creepy' is perhaps the wrong word. I am probably reacting against the rather unnatural perfomances of preachers who know they are not gifted speakers but who have been persuaded that reading is a sign of insincerity or something. I am not getting at the preachers, more the prejudice against using notes.
[ 08. August 2015, 12:54: Message edited by: Corvo ]
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
There's a good story about Archbishop Frederick William Temple,(father of the great William) who had a nasty habit of visiting churches incognito and listening to sermons. After one such visit he asked the hapless vicar 'Tell me, do you preach extempore or use notes?' 'I always used to make notes,' was the reply, 'but one day I left them at the Vicarage and had to preach extempore. And, do you know, people said it was the best sermon I had ever preached. So there and then, I vowed never again to use notes.' 'I, Frederick William Temple, by Divine permission Archbishop of Canterbury, hereby release you from your rash vow!'
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
A few people preach brilliantly without notes, but the majority of preachers need to realise that they are not in that favoured few and would do much better to use notes. Some may manage with just dot points to keep on track, but there are others who are advised to write their sermons out in full. There is no shame in having to do the last as it is much better to read a good sermon tha extemporise a terrible one.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jammy Dodger
Half jam, half biscuit
# 17872
|
Posted
My practice has changed as I've got older / more experienced. I used to write out my notes in full now I have just bullet points or key reminders to keep me on track as by the time I've finished preparing I know my material well enough to not need the notes. I would always have at least some notes with me in the pulpit but I'm finding the need to refer to them less and less (so it might appear to the uninitiated that I'm not using any notes).
However, I should note that it is my common practice to use PowerPoint slides in addition so I have usually put as much preparation into what people are going to see as I have what they are going to hear from me. The slides also therefore act as notes for me too which keeps me on track.
[ 08. August 2015, 16:23: Message edited by: Jammy Dodger ]
--------------------
Look at my eye twitching - Donkey from Shrek
Posts: 438 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Almost always I type it out word for word (indeed, I should be doing this right now if it were not for this displacement activity), but I try to listen to the voice in my head and write it as a script to be spoken rather than a lecture to be delivered. I usually diverge from it occasionally when preaching, but the text is always there to keep me on track. Perhaps rather like Archbishop Temple's poor priest, I am misguided in thinking this is an effective way to preach, but comeback tends to be positive. I have heard some dire sermons which sound like someone reading a theology textbook, and it's not about content but finding the appropriate register.
Some preachers are able to hold attention and give stimulating sermons apparently without any notes at all. That's not me I'm afraid.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cathscats
Shipmate
# 17827
|
Posted
I do just as Angloid says, and usually the sermon grows with each time I have to preach it - usually twice. Another advantage is that when a member of the congregation says he or she would like a copy I can give them one. I also have the manuscript on the church website for those who were onto able to be there and want to see it - at least one person actually does look it up!!
But if does depend on the preacher and his or her style.
--------------------
"...damp hands and theological doubts - the two always seem to go together..." (O. Douglas, "The Setons")
Posts: 176 | From: Central Highlands | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I prepare a full script, although I don't just read it. I find I need to do this, both to organise my thoughts and to avoid inane repetition of the same few words and phrases. Obviously too one needs a full script if - as I sometimes do - one is quoting someone else.
I think the trick, as someone else has said, is learning to write in spoken speech-form. If you don't, the sermon does indeed sound like a theological lecture. One also needs to build in little phrases which link preacher to congregation ("I think you'll agree", "You may be wondering" and similar sets of words).
Added to this one must never give the impression of merely reading (that might be easier if we had autocues like the TV newsreaders!), also one must be ready to go "off-piste" if it's clear that one has lost contact with the listeners. And one needs to listen for the prompting of the Holy Spirit who, occasionally and mysteriously, leads one in a different direction from one's careful preparation!
Yes, people do sometimes ask for the text, either for themselves or for a friend. I can't imagine why, as the effectiveness of any sermon is as much in the speaking as in the content.
(As an aside, my wife thinks I'm bonkers writing out my sermons in full, as it takes a long to time to do. I often have two or three to do each weeks; the lengths are about 2500, 1500 and 1000 words respectively. On top of that are prayers etc. She is a teacher and says she could never give that amount of time in a classroom situation - but the interplay of teacher and [primary-age students is different to that of preacher and congregation).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
At the very first I wrote notes. It was suggested to me that I should write everything out in full to slow down my delivery; this I did for about 20 years (and it worked!). It also helped me organise my thoughts in French, which is not my native language.
Now, I write notes that fit on one piece of A6 paper.
Exceptions are weddings and funerals, or very occasionally some very significant message (most recently, the one after the Charlie Hebdo attacks), for which I still write everything out in full, and usually stick to the script pretty closely.
[ 09. August 2015, 08:02: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I also write out the sermon in full. But, I don't usually fully stick to the script - the only exception is when preaching in Japan and there is a member of the congregation translating, in that case I stick rigidly to what I wrote. But, a sermon delivered in 1-2 sentence chunks with pauses for translation is never going to be a flowing piece of oratory (not that my sermons ever get close to that anyway!)
That's a very different practice to my more normal public speaking, at scientific meetings, where I have no notes. But, in that case I've got Powerpoint slides which keeps the structure and I can easily ad-lib around. Again, an exception when working with interpreters who have a script in advance that I then stick to much more rigidly.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
And speaking with interpreters imposes its own set of rules: e.g. short pithy sentences rather than dangling subordinate clauses!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
I think the most distracting I have ever experienced from the preaching side was in Ghana: consecutive interpretation into two different tribal languages, simultaneously (one interpreter stationed either side of me), but I can relate to the difficulties from the interpreter's side, too.
anecdote tangent/
I have made it a rule never to interpret another preacher ever since I heard a pastor interpret a visiting speaker. As the sermon progressed it became increasingly clear that the interpreting pastor disagreed profoundly with the content. Having started by interpreting in the first person ("I this, I that...") by the end he was saying "the brother says that..." ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
/anecdote tangent
[ 09. August 2015, 12:29: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I find it very encouraging that I seem to follow the same path as Angloid, Baptist Trainfan, leo, and Alan Cresswell!
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
american piskie
Shipmate
# 593
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
'I, Frederick William Temple, by Divine permission Archbishop of Canterbury, hereby release you from your rash vow!'
No, no! "By divine providence" please.
Posts: 356 | From: Oxford, England, UK | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I always write out in full what I'm going to say, I'm aware from my day job that I have a tendency to lose my train of thought and half-finish and then rephrase sentences if I work without a script. Even though I read pretty much verbatim what I've written I'm told it comes across well.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonfruit
Shipmate
# 15818
|
Posted
As a still very baby preacher, I go for the 'full script' approach - I'd be too nervous to have anything less. The vicar of my church has something approaching a full script. One of the other priests in the team ministry will sometimes speak without notes, and these are the occasions when a friend and I are tempted to play 'sermon bingo' - I think that's the problem with being under-prepared as it means you can end up reverting to a few pet themes and phrases. And also, when he prepares well and sticks to what he's prepared, he preaches well, so it's all the more frustrating when he doesn't prepare!
And nothing beats, for making me want to scream, when he stands up and says "Well, I did have a sermon prepared, but I'm not going to use it. Instead..." ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
--------------------
All I know is that you came and made beauty from my mess.
Posts: 180 | From: Just outside the M25 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
My experience formed by a Readers Digest anecdote many moons ago.
Lady came home from service and bemoaned the fact that the preacher virtually read the whole sermon from a full script.
If he cant remember it how on earth does he expect us to?
Since that day 45 years ago I prepare a full mss, take it into pulpit but preach having memorised 95% of it without reference to mss.
Seems to work without anybody realising it.
[ 09. August 2015, 20:32: Message edited by: shamwari ]
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Ah but 1 Cor 1:21 talks (arguably) about the foolishness of preaching.
The reasons I stopped writing out my sermons full-length are multiple and not all may be good ones, but one was actually to prevent them being archived; I came to feel that preaching was something to be experienced in the moment, not pored over later (which is not an excuse not to do good preparation).
I'm not at all sure we're supposed to "remember" a sermon. We might all remember memorable ones, or bits of them, but I doubt many people recall much of what was said last week, notes or otherwise. That's the foolishness of preaching*.
==
*Ironically, however, I got this insight from 1 Corinthians from a sermon by someone else that I can actually remember...
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aravis
Shipmate
# 13824
|
Posted
I write out the whole sermon. I may well deviate from the script, particularly at the beginning if something's just happened that it would be helpful to refer to. About two or three times I've completely changed what I was going to say - but that's over the course of about 10 years.
When I'm due to preach (not every week as I am a "blue scarved menace") I look at the last two or three sermons I preached to that congregation, to make sure I don't bang on about the same theme every time.
In my experience, people who don't use notes at all are capable of preaching eloquently, but they do use the same ideas rather a lot.
Posts: 689 | From: S Wales | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
*Leon*
Shipmate
# 3377
|
Posted
A preacher (who uses notes) needs to write in the style of themselves talking without notes (only without the waffle). This takes a small amount of effort to learn how to do, and many preachers (especially those who didn't train in recent decades) haven't learnt to do that. There's no good reason why people should have to listen to something that sounds like a written essay when they could be listening to the same theological points made just as precisely but with less dreary sentence construction.
Having said that, some people preach brilliant extempore sermons. Some people tend to make clever arguments that really do have to be planned properly in advance. Both groups can preach very good sermons, but both groups will fail badly if they preach with the wrong amount of notes. I guess ideally you'd hear a range of sermons in both styles, but since most churches stick with one style, few people do that.
(And, on average, CofE vicars think they need fewer notes than they actually do)
Posts: 831 | From: london | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
yes.
I like the sting in the tail - but it's not just Anglicans!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
*Leon*
Shipmate
# 3377
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
yes.
I like the sting in the tail - but it's not just Anglicans!
Actually I might have made unjustified assumptions in my sting in the tail. Many vicars probably know they're bad at extempore preaching, but occasionally make a decision at 1am on Sunday morning that this is the least worst option (the alternative involving a risk that the vicar would fall asleep during their own sermon). And I'm sure that the very important things that disrupted the vicar's planned sermon prep time really did seem like unavoidable rare emergencies at the time.
But more seriously, sermons benefit from time spent on preparation (and this is true even for extempore preachers). If people complain about the quality of sermons in a church, they're arguably complaining that other activities were preventing the preacher from preparing well enough. That may or may not be a reasonable complaint.
Posts: 831 | From: london | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Small tangent- but for the next 25 days you can enjoy a delightful vintage BBC version of Wodehouse's wonderful Great Sermon Handicap. (I think it is assumed that most of the participants would have been using notes ![[Smile]](smile.gif) .)
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
There is NO excuse for poor and shoddy preparation (certainly in the non-conformist tradition).
Prepare with your congregation in mind. Imagine delivering the sermon. Read the commentaries, put the text in context and write it out to ensure that the right word is used when half a dozen others are available. Anticipate objections and phrase things so to meet them in advance.
Then speak as never sure to preach again and as a dying man to dying men.
The greatest privilege of all.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
There's perhaps a question about what a sermon's suppose to be...
As a Quaker (at least in the British variant), turning up with notes, or even with a planned sermon, would be regarded with suspicion. But generally we're not expecting more than a Cole of minutes contribution. It's the worship as a whole that matters.
In the days when I served as a college chaplain, I ranged from full script, through bullet points, to "Oh shit, the celebrant hasn't turned up so I'd better take over".
I'm guessing that if the sermon is seen more as a lecture then we move more in the direction of "presenting a paper", while if it's seen more as a prayer, you lose the notes.
Incidentally, I've got a feeling that there's a general cultural move towards speaking extemporaneously. Or, at least appearing to do so. That encompasses academic conferences and political rallies.
Transparent note screens appeared a considerable time back for politicians.
Is it time for the churches to abandon the sermon as an unavoidably corrupted mode of discourse?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I've been following this with interest, as someone who thought that speaking without notes was to aim for, but now I'm not so sure. Yes, there is a tendency to repeat, to use short 'crutches', and to ramble a bit, in those I know who preach without notes.
And yet they always get the most admiration from the audience.
I know someone in a speaker's club which is often called upon to supply someone to speak to groups and clubs. I don't think that the sermon should be abandoned, as people do want to listen to an interesting speaker who is good at delivery.
Perhaps more use might be made of lay preachers if there is no time to prepare for sermons?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Where does the belief come from that there's something mysteriously more virtuous about being either spontaneous or ill-prepared?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
Exactly Enoch.
Luther once went unprepared into the pulpit on the basis that "it will be given to you in that hour what you should say".
Somebody asked him afterward. " Did the Lord speak?"
Yes said Luther. He said " Martin you have been a very lazy man".
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
Exactly Enoch.
Luther once went unprepared into the pulpit on the basis that "it will be given to you in that hour what you should say".
Somebody asked him afterward. " Did the Lord speak?"
Yes said Luther. He said " Martin you have been a very lazy man".
That gets a
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Where does the belief come from that there's something mysteriously more virtuous about being either spontaneous or ill-prepared?
I think the delivery of written sermons used to be very dry and boring back in bygone times; I'm sure I read something similar about the Calvinists. Perhaps their ministers thought they had to show how much better educated they were than the RC priests of the time, and reading from copious notes helped give that impression. The offshoot would be breakaway movements that wanted less stultifying and cerebral but more spiritual preaching....
I must say, though, coming from another tradition I find that CofE sermons are normally very short, so the need to write them down doesn't appear to be great. A lot of the time, actually, I don't think they are, are they? They're obviously well-prepared, with the main points and illustrations memorised, but there's little spontaneous about them.
Anyway, it's usually the Pentecostal sermon that's often characterised as being unscripted. I'm not sure that represents the whole truth today, though. Like all religious movements many of Pentecostal groups have become more formal, and their clergy better educated. The 'spontaneous and ill-prepared' sermon is less appealing in that context.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rowen
Shipmate
# 1194
|
Posted
Sermon-script writer too.
But prepared extensively, and I sometimes depart/amend...
I don't look down very often, but I try and keep my finger at the right place, in case I need extra help.
One lovely, deaf family request a copy of my sermon, ahead of time. They. Ring it to church and follow it. They know when I depart from the script. At first it threw them, now they grin and start looking through the papers... Recently, I even begged the congregation's pardon, and told them what page to go to..... Everyone giggled!
But folk seem to appreciate my sermons, thanks be to God.
--------------------
"May I live this day… compassionate of heart" (John O’Donoghue)...
Posts: 4897 | From: Somewhere cold in Victoria, Australia | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lothlorien
Ship's Grandma
# 4927
|
Posted
I have been bored through both types and very happy with both types.
The best preacher I have heard was very experienced. He loved preaching and it showed in his sermons. Apparently he had once been a write it all down preacher but he moved to not using notes at all.
He had introduction, developments with other references and illustrations. Then he would return to his introduction, tie everything up with a neat little bow and finish. A pleasure to listen to for both manner and content.
--------------------
Buy a bale. Help our Aussie rural communities and farmers. Another great cause needing support The High Country Patrol.
Posts: 9745 | From: girt by sea | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Where does the belief come from that there's something mysteriously more virtuous about being either spontaneous or ill-prepared?
Which seems to be the view of many Mystery Worshippers.
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Spontaneous doesn't need to be ill-prepared. The presence of notes doesn't indicate preparation either.
As I only preach very occasionally (rarely more than once a month at the moment) I usually have 2-3 weeks to prepare, which clearly wouldn't be the situation for ministers who preach every week, but my preparation starts with reading the texts a couple of times and then basically think about them while driving to work, cooking dinner or whatever. With occasional re-reading or dipping into commentaries/online resources which needs to be done with books & computer. These days I usually have a file on my phone that I jot down thoughts during that time. By the time I write the sermon I've done a lot of preparation and I'm familiar with the text and have a message to present.
If I turn up at church and find I've forgotten my notes I could probably give the sermon quite well, but it would probably be presented without the connecting sections that join the different points - a spoken version of a set of bullet points rather than a paragraph of text. Some people have the skills to remember what they plan to say (actors, of course, do that all the time) and could probably write a sermon and deliver it without notes. Other will be able to use all that thinking and reading and just deliver a sermon, rather like the way I shape it in my head and the written version is just a polishing of it with the words typed out to help me deliver it. It will be extempore, but prepared.
Conversely, there are sites out there which provide sermon ideas, even entire sermons. You could print out one of those, and read it to the congregation. And, it will be totally unprepared.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Re. Alan's final comments:
There is an alleged story of a prospective Baptist minister who went to "preach with a view" in a church. He preached a terrific sermon and, on the strength of it, the church called him to be their minister.
Six months into his ministry, the Deacons spoke to him. "We're very pleased to have you", they said, "and we enjoy your sermons. But they're not as good as that first one. Just one other thing, too: we notice you don't do that strange twiddling with your fingers at the beginning and the end of the sermon that you did then".
"Ah", said the Minister, "I can explain. I actually preached one of Spurgeon's sermons that day. And the twiddling gestures were quotation marks".
[ 11. August 2015, 08:16: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Where does the belief come from that there's something mysteriously more virtuous about being either spontaneous or ill-prepared?
Which seems to be the view of many Mystery Worshippers.
Surely much of this issue boils down to two things.
1. Was the sermon - with our without notes - coherent; and did it inform, stimulate thinking and feed the soul?
2. Did the notes - or the lack of them - drive a wedge between preacher and people?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Almost always I type it out word for word (indeed, I should be doing this right now if it were not for this displacement activity), but I try to listen to the voice in my head and write it as a script to be spoken rather than a lecture to be delivered. I usually diverge from it occasionally when preaching, but the text is always there to keep me on track.
Like others, this is my practice as well.
As has already been mentioned, the key is to write the sermon as you would speak it. Hear yourself saying it.
I frequently go off-script, though. Mainly because, as I am preaching I realise that what I want to say could be put better than how I had written it. Also, there is the important point about learning to assess the response of the congregation. Sometimes, you get the sense that one point has really gone home and perhaps needs to be emphasised or expanded. Or maybe you realise that the congregation is bored and you need to move on quickly and drop parts of what you are going to say.
When I first started preaching, I had done a lot of public speaking training at work, where they tried to get you to work without any notes at all. But I quickly realised that preaching is different from this kind of public speaking. There ARE lessons to be learned, to be sure, but the two are not the same types of speaking.
One reason I have for writing my sermon out is that it helps me to hone my thoughts. In the early days, I would have a bullet point where I knew (or thought I knew) what I wanted to say. But when I came to it, I realised that my thinking was fuzzy and what came out of my mouth were just rather trite platitudes. Writing something out forces me to be clear in my own head about what I am trying to say.
A second reason for writing the sermon out is that it helps me to fine-tune a few rhetorical flourishes. You know - things like alliteration, or repetition and stuff like that. That's the kind of thing that very few people can do "off the cuff" - and yet it can be really effective. I frequently find that in writing my sermon, I gradually develop something that pulls it all together. Perhaps some key questions which build upon one another, or a refrain that I come back to a few times. I can't do that "off the cuff", though.
I am also aware that some of the best comedians - and the ones who seem to be always able to improvise a joke - usually are the ones who have honed and polished their "spontaneous" jokes until they are just right. Morecambe and Wise were a case in point. Nothing they did was "spontaneous". Every joke, every throw away line, was rehearsed and examined until they thought it would get the biggest laugh.
Groucho Marx (one of my all time heros) was the same. He was known to argue endlessly with directors about a single word, if he thought that including it would give what he said the right flow and result in a bigger pay off at the end.
Having said all that, I do make a point of being pretty spontaneous at our 8:00 service. I usually preach from a different text to our main service and only have a vague idea of where I am going when I start to preach. I find that this helps me to not be too rigid and to find a little flexibility in what I say. Just last Sunday, I found that my sermon went in a completely different direction half way through.
The bottom line, though, is that we all have our own preaching styles. We should hone and refine these styles, for sure. but we shouldn't let other people try and force us to change to fit THEIR style.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Where does the belief come from that there's something mysteriously more virtuous about being either spontaneous or ill-prepared?
It is linked to the whole idea that "Spirit-led" means "unprepared" - an idea that is widely perpetuated in some circles. Which, of course, is complete nonsense. The Spirit leads when we sit and prepare, just as much as when we fly by the seat of our pants.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
As has already been mentioned, the key is to write the sermon as you would speak it. Hear yourself saying it.
[Big snip]
The bottom line, though, is that we all have our own preaching styles. We should hone and refine these styles, for sure. but we shouldn't let other people try and force us to change to fit THEIR style.
Yes. (Except for the bit about the 8am service, which doesn't apply in my case).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
From my point of view, I see it potentially as a sign of being well-prepared. Just a sign, mind you, not necessarily a definitive one.
I've seen preachers just stand a read a script, seemingly for the first time, so you've really got no idea if they've even researched and written it. I tend to find such sermons to lack engagement and tend to be done just 'to get it over and done with' rather than to impart any kind of wisdom, inspiration or challenge to the listener.
You can get some who get sidetracked without notes and who probably could do with some lessons in public speaking. The prime offenders being those who engage in street preaching. Though I have reservations about more than just their technique.
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Again, I think context comes into it too - in a High Church setting - and I visited an Anglo-Catholic church in South Wales this last Sunday - I'd expect a short homily and probably reading from notes.
In a Baptist setting I'd expect something more along the lines that ExclamationMark and Baptist Trainfan have described ... and I'm completely comfortable with that.
I agree with SvitlanaV2 that even in full-on Pentecostal settings it's rare to find unprepared sermons these days - even if the style gives the impression that it's somehow more spontaneous ...
I've heard good, bad and indifferent sermons in all these settings.
At best, some of the short homilies you get in more formally liturgical and sacramental settings can be masterpieces of concision and economy. At worst they can be pretty dry and hardly worth listening to at all - which was the case of the sermon in the Welsh parish on Sunday ... read out from prepared notes and not actually saying very much ...
I've heard very inspiring expository sermons with lots of meat on the bones - I've heard dull as ditch-water ones with an inordinate amount of time spent line by line, verse by verse, getting nowhere in particular ...
I've heard sermons which sound inspiring - lots of 'hwyl' - but which don't 'stay by you' as my mum-in-law would say.
I've heard quiet and sober ones that suddenly catch you by surprise ...
Good preaching does seem rare these days but for my money - despite my inclination for more liturgical forms of worship these days, the league table I'd draw up would go as follows:
1. Baptists. I've heard better sermons from Baptists than anyone else. I'm talking BU ones here in the UK. All have had notes but don't always refer to them ... and at best they have been engaging but without being overly rhetorical and dramatic.
2. Methodists. Not quite so engaging but evidence of scholarship there at times - worn lightly ...
3. At their best - some of the restorationist guys - they might have preached some odd stuff at times but they had some good preachers. No doubt about that.
4. Anglicans. Mixed ... I've heard some good Anglican sermons but not many. Some lay-readers are better than vicars. Some nuggets in and amongst.
5/6 Brethren and Pentecostals - although in each case I'd wince at the content ... by and large.
7. RCs, Orthodox - preaching ain't really their thing -- although there's no reason why it shouldn't be. I've heard some very good talks from monks, Orthodox bishops and others in conference or study-group contexts rather than Sunday worship.
Thinking about it ... the Orthodox priests I've heard preach during Liturgies have tended not to have notes - they've got too many other bits and pieces to carry so goodness knows how they'd manage pieces of paper ... - although I've heard one Orthodox Sunday sermon read out from notes.
At the Easter Vigil, though, they read out St John Chrysostom's Easter Sermon - which is terrific.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
What about the Reformed people (URC or Church of Scotland)? Perhaps you haven't had much experience of them.
At their best they can be superb; at their worst they can turn into dry-and-dust didacticism or even become so rationalistic that God doesn't seem to get much of a look in!
One of the best preachers I have "sat under" consistently was a Scottish Charismatic Baptist who brought together the virtues of all three traditions: scholarly, eloquent, engaging and infused with a quiet intensity of the Spirit.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433
|
Posted
I can preach extempore with the best of them (modest, too), but in the acoustic context of my pad and most I am strictly a notes person - so that the text is available pretty much word for word to those who struggle to hear. I have found most extempore preaching, my own included, to be a lazy option.
That said the art of preaching (which is a specialist form of oratory) is to deliver the notes with a warmth, intimacy and sometimes even crafted spontaneity that draws the listener (I used to be a radio broadcaster) in rather than repels them. I work incessantly at keeping myself somewhere near that goal and pray fervently that it sometimes carries the breath of God to someone somewhere.
Though I blog my sermons (see below: tag line) I do not like them as written word.
--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/
Posts: 18917 | From: "Central" is all they call it | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I've only heard one Kirk sermon and about 3 URC ones - one if the URC ones was particularly memorable due to the circumstances - she'd lost her son in the Asian tsunami ...
I'm sure she could preach very well normally too ... but that one knocked me out.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
Though I blog my sermons (see below: tag line) I do not like them as written word.
I know what you mean.
I have always been very wary about letting others have a copy of my sermon. The text is not to be read, but heard. But I have now been forcefully requested to make my sermons available on the church website. I know that there are a few people who cannot make it to church who like to read the sermons (and gently berate me when I fail to post them on the website). So I do it, but I hate doing it.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
The text is not to be read, but heard. But I have now been forcefully requested to make my sermons available on the church website. I know that there are a few people who cannot make it to church who like to read the sermons (and gently berate me when I fail to post them on the website). So I do it, but I hate doing it.
Agreed - but to satisfy those who want them - my notes (usually in powerpoint form) are on the website. The sound is streamed too
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
... I have always been very wary about letting others have a copy of my sermon. The text is not to be read, but heard. But I have now been forcefully requested to make my sermons available on the church website. I know that there are a few people who cannot make it to church who like to read the sermons (and gently berate me when I fail to post them on the website). So I do it, but I hate doing it.
Can you get someone to record the sermons and make them available that way?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
