IMHO…

compared to most 54 year-old men, i’m a pretty flexible guy.  i’m challenged by innovation and new ideas.  i love change.  i’m way more post-modern in my orientation than a lot of 20 and 30-somethings i know.  i think if the church (our church) continues to do the same things in the same ways, we’re going to continue to lose young people in the same way.  like i said, i’m all for change.

so when i read about this new idea, well…i’m still kind of steamed when i think about it.

tim stevens is a church-leader-blogger that i like to read.  he had an interesting post about outsourcing worship leaders the other this morning at his leadingsmart.com website.  i’m curious what you might think about it…

(thanks to mondaymorninginsight.com for the synopsis)

tim met with a church leader from mississippi that temporarily hired worship leaders to come in to help them out after their worship leader left for another job.  it worked out so well, that the church decided to permanently hire temporary worship leaders.  they have settled on four or five leaders that they bring in on a weekly basis.  according to tim stevens, here are some of the advantages this church leader told him about this approach:

• many worship leaders don’t enjoy building teams, managing budgets or organizing departments. they just love to lead worship. this strategy let’s them stay in their sweet spot.
• this decision saves money for the church.  they are able to pay them really well for a weekend and still save enough money in the church budget to use toward another staff position.
• they love the variety that this brings to their church.   keeping things unpredictable is a plus to keeping people’s attention.
• they have learned so much from these worship leaders that they wouldn’t have learned from one person.

in spite of my sometimes reckless love for change and my willingness to go out to the edge for the sake of reaching people for christ, i gotta tell you that i hate this idea.  i appreciate the outside-the-box thinking, but this church has got some messed up thinking.

the premise is all wrong.  the justifications are all wrong.   the expectations are all wrong.  sorry for being so wishy-washy about my opinion on this one.  the definition of worship leader is wrong.  the motive for doing this is wrong.  what about relationship?  what about family?  i’ll stop now.

agree or disagree?

for the record, you people at north point better not get any wacky ideas about outsourcing the preaching around here…

 

Now it’s getting personal…2

there has been a judgment floating around on blogs, in magazines and books, and in general ministry conversation recently.  it’s not a new discussion.  i was in on the roundtable thirty years ago.  i suppose i never really stepped away.  i’m just hearing it with new ears these days.

the judgment is one that offends me deeply.  it comes from the expository-preaching-is-the-best-kind-of-preaching camp.  it’s not their conclusion that offends me.  i actually agree with them on that one.  it’s some of their assumptions that bug me.

the assumption is that if i preach topically (or textually, as i prefer to see it), i am taking a less than sincere and a less than scholarly approach to my preaching and preparation.  that i am merely giving my opinions.  that i am bringing my own preconceived outline to the study table, rather than just letting the word of god speak for itself…in context.

the assumption is that my sermon content is man-made, rather than god inspired and drawn directly from heart of the text.

the assumption is that my sermon is shallow, because it might be flowing from a topic.  or that i might be too lazy or undisciplined to put the time into studying, in order to preach in an expository framework.

for those that care, let me assure you that i am taking due diligence!  even though my recent sermons (even the majority of my sermons throughout the year) are textual or topical, and not expository preaching through whole books of the bible at a time, my preparation is done with the same attention to detail just the same.

for whatever topic is being addressed, each scripture is studied within the context that it was originally written, so that the meaning is drawn from the text itself…rather than being dictated by the topic.   each of those scriptures are then compared with each other to draw a composite picture of what the whole bible has to say about that topic.  sometimes that can be done in one sermon, but not likely.  that’s why we will often do a “series” on a particular topic.

next time, i’ll give you some other reasons why i often preach through a topical series.  you might be surprised.

Now it’s getting personal…

i’ve been reading a lot lately.  and listening.  and i don’t think i like what’s being said.

back when i was in graduate school, i took classes on preaching.  there was always a lot of discussion about the different kinds of preaching styles and methods.  the big debate was always about the relative values of the three main ways to present the message: topical , textual or expository.

a topical message is when we select a particular topic or issue, research all relevant scripture, and then form the sermon into a logical and comprehesive presentation of the theme or subject matter.  this can be done as single message or a series of messages designed to cover the entire topic.

a textual message is when we select a section of scripture and present the theme or focus of that particular text as a series of points or observations that come directly from the flow or outline within that passage.  this can be done as a single message or as part of ongoing topical series or part of study through an entire book of the bible.

an expository message is similar to a textual message, in that the content of the sermon is formed directly from the text.  the difference in expository preaching is that the content of any particular sermon is set in the larger context of the study of an entire book of the bible.  expository preaching almost always refers to preaching systematically or sequentially through whole books of the bible at a time.

most preachers have strong opinions about the relative value of each of these methods and are not afraid to tell you.  nor are they particularly reluctant to openly judge other preachers for having a different opinion on those values.

i think i’m getting ready to join the party.  more later.

Friday is “Top Five Day”

here’s my list of the top five things i would be doing if i wasn’t actually listening to the sermon on sunday (assuming i wasn’t preaching it…)

5.  working on my schedule for the next week.  back when i used to use a day-timer (anybody remember those?), i used to love  messing with my calendar and planning stuff during this time.

4.  counting how many times the guy preaching says “uh”.

3.   sending text messages to people who were sleeping in

2.  see if a yawn is really contagious.

1.  close my eyes and re-live the basset hound day…in detail.

so what about you?  what are some of your tricks for making the time pass quickly.  go ahead.  my skin is pretty thick these days!

Another preaching thought…

i’ve been thinking more about my post earlier this morning.  here’s an observation:

as i look at the modern preacher, especially the high profile, media-driven, mega-church, big guys…i see men who are incredibly gifted communicators who have worked hard to refine their craft to be as effective as possible at communicating the gospel.  they are dramatic…emotive…entertaining…surprising…powerful…attention grabbing…outgoing…

they make use of creative vocabulary.  they work diligently to make the right combination of eye contact, hand gestures, stage movement, dress, and tone of voice.  

they are fully aware of the personality and mood of the audience.  they are flexible and responsive.  they are completely connected to the power of the spoken word to move people, change people, inspire people.  their goal is to fully engage the listener and get them to hang on every word…and ultimately respond to what is being said.

it seems to me that the only other people in our culture that have these kinds of communication goals and characteristics are football coaches giving the pre-game pep talks…and stand up comedians.

mmmm….

Am i weird?

not really sure how to title this post, so i’ll do it after i write…

last night i went to a christmas celebration/fund raising banquet for a well-known ministry here in the metroplex.  the founder and namesake of the ministry is a high profile pastor, author, preacher, executive, and church leader.  his ministry is world wide and his influence for the gospel and the cause of christ is profound.  

although i know little of his church background, theology, or personal life history, i find him to be engaging and his ministry, at least from the view i have, to be one of integrity.  but that’s not what i’m writing about this morning.

after the catered meal and special music (that’s another story for another time), this pastor got up to address the two-three thousand of us that were seated in the grand ballroom of the convention center.  it was his opportunity to thank all of his regular supporters and future donors to the special ministry project they were highlighting.

as he began to speak, it was obvious he had the crowd in the palm of his hand.  he is folksy, home-spun, and very “good-ole boy”.  his face is animated.  his hand and facial gestures were sincere and fully integrated into what he was saying.  he was incredibly funny.  his “down home” one-liners never seemed rehearsed.  he was self-deprecating in a hilarious way.

the first 20 minutes of his presentation was obviously the warm up for the main show.  when it was time to get serious, he rolled up his speaking sleeves and went to work.  he spoke passionately.  he was a wordsmith.  he wove stories with theology.  he spoke boldly and with conviction.  he cried.  he yelled (not in anger).  his voice inflection changed with a pace that was no accident, but didn’t seem contrived.  people were glued to the jumbotrons on either side of the massive room.

his presentation was full of drama.  it was emotive.  he never looked at a note.  he never seemed at a loss for words.  even though parts of the message seemed like he was just talking with friends, other parts seemed like a presidential address.  he spoke with absolute authority.  he is a deeply gifted communicator.  he is skilled in the art of preaching.

here’s what i was thinking, tho…  it seems like a lot of christians like this style of preaching.  loud.  dramatic.  authoritative.  emotive.  i don’t.  i never have.

i tend to watch guys that preach with drama and animation (hands, voice and body) and get sidetracked from the content of what they are speaking about.  on top of that, i really wonder how people who are skeptical of the gospel respond to this kind of presentation?  

where did we get this model of preaching?  is it biblical?  is is cultural?  is it a tradition that has been passed down from church leader to church leader through the ages?  even our greatest public communicators don’t speak like these preachers do.

how about you?  what do you think of preaching?  what do you connect with?  more importantly, what do you think your skeptic friends would connect with?

just thinking…

A balanced church – two

there is no question that the foundation of a healthy church comes from its commitment to the word of god.  to begin with, the word is where we get our understanding of what the church is in the first place.  i realize that every church studies the bible.  some study it a lot.  some study it very little.  some take every page literally, others have a more generous interpretation.  some stress the gaining of knowledge, while others place emphasis on application.  most every church believes they have a special corner on the truth.

other than the home church movement, and a few other fringe groups, orthodox churches have pastors that carry the primary responsibility for preaching the word and being sort of the voice of spiritual authority for that church.  some of those pastor-teachers have authority and influence that extends far beyond their church walls.

here’s a question for this morning.  does having a pastor-teacher-preacher inspire you to take responsibility for your own study of the word?  or do the weekly sermons and bible studies provide the bulk of your time and insight into god’s word?

be careful how you answer.  i’m not soliciting a compliment…nor am i looking for sermon criticism (go to the other blog if you want to do that).  i just want to know about your personal study of the word and if what we do in our church program helps or hinders…