Criticism and/or negative feedback can also be both good and bad. It's essential for the continuing integrity of sound doctrine and pastoral sensitvity. It can also indicate when people have been stirred up (how much we need that!) - more than one great preacher has spoken of the need for any prophetic message to get under the skin of the hearers. But there's no doubt that criticism can be discouraging.
Then there's the temptation to prepare messages that I feel will produce encouragement rather than criticism or negative responses. My pride craves affirmation.
Then there's the manner of 'encouragement' or 'criticism'. Trite affirmations don't necessarily encourage. Trite criticisms tend to undermine the whole premise of preaching. When the first comment is 'it was too long' (I can't tell you how depressing that is) - it may well have been too long but the important question was 'did it matter?' or 'was it important?'
Some reflections...
- My motivation must come from the desire to be a workman approved by God (2 Tim 2).
- The effectiveness of my (and any) preaching only comes through the work of the Holy Spirit to challenge, rebuke and encourage. Any and all glory goes to God
- The standard by which to measure preaching must be truth.
- Truth is divisive.
- Opposition is not necessarily discouraging. It could be the most encouraging thing whereas affirmation might just be an indication that I've said what peoples itching ears want to hear 2Tim3.
- 'If anyone puts you up on a pedestal... get straight off it' - David Jackman. Glory to God alone.
- Conversations amongst the saints and testimonies resulting from the word preached are amongst the most encouraging things for a preacher to learn of. Glory to God alone.
- The preacher is always under the same word. 'For any issue I feel convicted to address in my ministry, I always check myself on it first' - Tim Hawkins
What do you think?
1 comment:
Hi Graham, I agree with your thoughts on the fine line, both between positive and negative feedback and the extent and manner in which it is given, and also to the weight the preacher attaches to it.
I have seen two models at work as to how preachers view their task and role (which seem to form a continuum), and both of these affect how they receive feedback. The old-school preacher sees his office as a God-given office, and his duty is thus to God alone - to discharge the word faithfully. Therefore, feedback from people is to be dismissed whether good or bad so long as you can say you have faithfully discharged your duty before God.
The other school is the preacher who sees himself as a brother among brothers, no more or less prone to error, no more or less in need of instruction, and that the community of believers can and must interact with the message and the messenger.
In the latter case, the balance seems to be between the preacher's assurance of the validity of the message and adequacy of the delivery versus the understanding of the hearers.
In my view, feedback is constructive as long as it stays task focussed and not person focussed. The minute it becomes person focussed it can puff up or deflate a person, but feedback focussed on the task will serve to strengthen weaknesses and reinforce strengths. Questions and debate about content can only indicate success.
On a personal note, if I was to give feedback on your own preaching, I would say that the exegesis behind the message is very clear, and the grasp of the meaning of each passage is very good. The continuity and biblical theology in your sermon series is something I have not seen done as well before.
The delivery is clear, well articulated, and honest. I think your honesty and self-evaluation gives a much needed credibility to your messages. Similarly your courage to preach the messages that people don't always want to hear shows integrity, and takes the church to a place where they are confronted by God himself.
I have personally been challenged by several of your messages, especially the message about 'living water'. I had come to a point where I tuned out of sermons, because I disagreed with the poor exegesis behind them, and the bad theology. But I have been refreshed since you have been at Margate and have had to train myself once again to pay attention and to let go of my arrogance and sit under the word.
Be encouraged brother.
Post a Comment