Methods of Delivery Ii

HOMILETICS

LECTURE 30

METHODS OF DELIVERY II

RECITATION

Broadus points out that ‘reciting’ ones already written sermon word for word from memory is a very honorable and effective method of preaching. There have been many a famous preacher who, at least at times, delved into this method. Though, today, there are fewer and fewer who practice it.

Recitation of a sermon has the great advantage of taking the somewhat unreal and unnatural sound of a ‘read sermon’ to the great heights of sounding very real and natural indeed. And it still keeps the advantage of the ‘read sermon’ in that it holds the sermon to the points that have been well conceived and doesn’t allow straying and rabbit trailing (ideally at least). It’s one great, great, great disadvantage is that it is only impressive and effective if one does not ‘forget’ what one has memorized. Reciting perfectly from memory for 10 minutes and then all of a sudden stopping…himm and hawwing… and then a look of despair shows… and then the fumbling for those notes that were tucked away in the pulpit… and then the obvious reaction of the listeners to his obvious misstep…will potentially ruin all that has been built up to that point in the sermon. Thus, it is very advisable to have the sermon laid out plainly on the pulpit, just in case the horror of all horrors does occur, and one loses their place in their mind; but one must be able to quickly find one’s place on that ‘foreign sheet of paper’.

So, it is good to memorize where one is on the written page as you are reciting it; i.e. keep in mind where you are, what page you are on, what paragraph it is you’re on. This doesn’t happen by accident; it will take lots of practice. Only serious recitational orators will probably be motivated enough to practice to the point where they do it with ease and consistancy. Therefore, most dare not try this…

But, oh the effect that would be left on the hearers as a flawless recitation of a well thought out and written sermon would be! But, oh the fear and trepidation leading up to that sermon; the fear and utter paranoia that one might forget a line here or there. And, oh, the amount of time that would be spent memorizing it! However, some are very gifted in this; thus, they are the only ones that probably should venture out on such a dangerous, blind voyage in unchartered waters such as these.

Better, it might be, to generally memorize the sermon and then from time to time glance at one’s notes to refresh the mind, relax the nerves, give ease to those mounting paranoias, and also may even relax the audience too as they are possibly afraid for you…not wanting you to make a mistake… worried for your ‘psyche’…afraid of what might happen if you make a mistake. Read a little, extemporize some here and there, recite from memory a lot, and glance some here, and some there. This might be the best practice of all! But, some might say that that is no practice at all…no method at all…

OPEN-AIR

Spurgeon: Lectures to my Students

(Pastor Warner’s comments are in italics)

It can be argued, with small fear of refutation, that open-air preaching is as old as preaching itself. We are at full liberty to believe that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, when he prophesied, asked for no better pulpit than the hill-side, and that Noah, as a preacher of righteousness, was willing to reason with his contemporaries in the ship-yard wherein his marvellous ark was builded. Certainly, Moses and Joshua found their most convenient place for addressing vast assemblies beneath the unpillared arch of heaven. Samuel closed a sermon in the field at Gilgal amid thunder and rain, by which the Lord rebuked the people and drove them to their knees. Elijah stood on Carmel, and challenged the vacillating nation, with "How long halt ye between two opinions?" Jonah, whose spirit was somewhat similar, lifted up his cry of warning in the streets of Nineveh, and in all her places of concourse gave forth the warning utterance, "Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown!" To hear Ezra and Nehemiah "all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate." Indeed, we find examples of open-air preaching everywhere around us in the records of the Old Testament.

How did they preach back in those ‘Bible times’? Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist, Peter, Jesus Christ, Paul,… they all were open-air preachers! It wasn’t just because they didn’t have electricity and microphones back then; it was because that is where the lost people are ‘en masse’. You will get the most lost hearers in this manner. Preaching indoors in a church’s meeting place will not typically have many lost people present. Thus, open-air preaching is the ideal way to get the gospel out to the most people.

Also, back then they typically met in large open areas in order to speak to the masses; they often did not have real large buildings that would hold more than 100 people or so. They typically used ‘ampitheatres’ to speak to the masses; these are still used some today (boy scout camps; Christian camps…). Back then, Open-air speaking was the norm when speaking to large groups of people. Today, the norm is inside-thermostatically-controlled-comfortable-safe-buildings speaking! Who wants to stand or sit out where all the bugs, dirt, hot sun, cold wind, etc., is at?!

Wesley writes in his journal, "Saturday, 31, March, 1731: In the evening I reached Bristol, and met Mr. Whitefield there. I could scarce reconcile myself at first to this strange way of preaching in the fields, of which he set me an example on Sunday; having been all my life (till very lately) so tenacious of every point relating to decency and order, that I should have thought the saving of souls almost a sin, if had it not been done in a church." Such were the feelings of a man who became one of the greatest open-air preachers that ever lived!

So, is it not decently and in order to preach outdoors? It matters how the people treat the meeting…. If church services are outdoors and the members treat it to be relaxed, casual, getting close to nature, part of the ‘camping experience’, on purposely unorthodox, etc., then it might not be such a good idea. If done outdoors because there is no suitable building for the people (like if you are camping, or are holding a ‘revival’, or for whatever reason need a change of venue, then so be it. Many independent Baptists probably look at ‘street preaching’ the same way that Wesley did open-air preaching back then. It is unorthodox, not orderly, wild, inappropriate, etc., etc.. Well…is it?! I find it quite appropriate, given the right reason.

No sort of defence is needed for preaching out of doors; but it would need very potent arguments to prove that a man had done his duty who has never preached beyond the walls of his meeting-house. A defence is required rather for services within buildings than for worship outside of them. Apologies are certainly wanted for architects who pile up brick and stone into the skies when there is so much need for preaching rooms among poor sinners down below.

Powerfully stated! How scriptural are ‘church buildings’?.... How scriptural is ‘open-air preaching’?....

As far as preaching the gospel is concerned, the main (and potentially, only) method proscribed by the New Testament is ‘open-air preaching’! Yet, today, where is the vast majority of preaching of the gospel in America done at??! In ‘church buildings’ where the majority of the people gathered are already saved!!!....

Tents are bad--unutterably bad: far worse than the worst buildings. I think a tent is the most objectionable covering for a preaching place that was ever invented. I am glad to see tents used in London, for the very worst place is better than none, and because they can easily be moved from place to place, and are not very expensive; but still if I had my choice between having nothing at all and having a tent I should prefer the open air by far. Under canvas the voice is deadened and the labour of speaking greatly increased. The material acts as a wet blanket to the voice, kills its resonance, and prevents its travelling. With fearful exertion, in the sweltering air generated in a tent, you will be more likely to be killed than to be heard.

We, today, use tents for ‘revivals’ and some ‘youth camps’, but otherwise, they aren’t too commonly used. And, yes, they are quite warm and stuffy and difficult to get good sound amplification. I feel that lost people, who are in love with the world, will not be too likely to show up at one of these events. It is mostly area church folks that go, and the ‘few’ lost friends or relatives that they have been able to coerce in to coming (I speak somewhat exaggerated here, for effect).

If I had my choice of a pitch for preaching, I should prefer to front a rising ground, or an open spot bounded at some little distance by a wall. Of course there must be sufficient space to allow of the congregation assembling between the pulpit and the bounding object in front, but I like to see an end, and not to shout into boundless space. I do not know a prettier site for a sermon than that which I occupied in my friend Mr. Duncan's grounds at Benmore. It was a level sweep of lawn, backed by rising terraces covered with fir-trees. The people could either occupy the seats below, or drop down upon the grassy banks, as best comported with their comfort, and thus I had part of my congregation in rising galleries above me, and the rest in the area around me. My voice readily ascended, and I conceive that if the people had been seated up the hill for half-a-mile they would have been able to hear me with ease. I should suppose that Wesley's favourite spot at Gwennap Pit must be somewhat after the same order. Amphitheatres and hillsides are always favourite spots with preachers in the fields, and their advantages will be at once evident to you.

Do not try to preach against the wind, for it is an idle attempt. You may hurl your voice a short distance by an amazing effort, but you cannot be well heard even by the few. I do not often advise you to consider which way the wind blows, but on this occasion I urge you to do it, or you will labour in vain. Preach so that the wind carries your voice towards the people, and does not blow it down your throat, or you will have to eat your own words. There is no telling how far a man may be heard with the wind. Whitefield is reported to have been heard a mile away.

It is good ‘voice practice’ to preach into the wind with some hearers maybe 30 feet beyond; and have them keep raising their thumbs until the proper volume is reached; and then it must be consistantly maintained for, oh, maybe, 5 minutes or longer. This will help strengthen ones voice for ‘open-air’ preaching (and any type of preaching, for that matter).

It will be very desirable to speak so as to be heard, but there is no use in incessant bawling. The best street preaching is not that which is done at the top of your voice, for it must be impossible to lay the proper emphasis upon telling passages when all along you are shouting with all your might. When there are no hearers near you, and yet people stand upon the other side of the road and listen, would it not be as well to cross over and so save a little of the strength which is now wasted? A quiet, penetrating, conversational style would seem to be the most telling. Men do not bawl and halloa when they are pleading in deepest earnestness; they have generally at such times less wind and a little more rain: less rant and a few more tears. On, on, on with one monotonous shout and you will weary everybody and wear out yourself.

When shall the modern-day preacher employ ‘open-air’ preaching?

If we get banished to the wilderness; If we go out street preaching; If we decide to rise at a non-religious gathering and preach the truth; If we have a teen event outdoors; At a Family camp; At a Tent-Revival type meeting; As an Evangelist preaching the gospel where ere he goes; As a Missionary Pastor in a very poor country that has no electricity or significant walls of a building…

OUTLINE

One of the most popular, if not the most popular, method of delivering a sermon is the ‘outline format’. Typically the sermon has been well prepared, and then it is reduced to more of an outline with maybe some key words or ‘bullets’ left to help ‘jog’ the memory and keep the preacher on track. It’s much different than simply roughing together an outline and then kind of ‘extemporizing’ the ‘holes’. No, it is nothing like this; it involves a fully prepared sermon that is then shrunk down to just key words or phrases; there’s no extemporizing really with this method. It’s advantages are that it frees the preacher up from being ‘bound’ to the notes, and following them in a basic ‘word for word read’ sermon format; the preacher can even leave the pulpit for a time! It doesn’t require a complete memorization of the sermon…just a good familiarity with it. The only disadvantage I can think of is that if one’s memory is not too good, the associated statements with the ‘bulleted’ words might be forgotten here and there…and thus some of what God had given you is never said.