A few weeks ago I attended a local church. Tanya and I really enjoyed the service. It was good yp be in a somewhat familiar place with some familiar faces. For months now we have been in a different church almost every week. It has really reinforced in my mind how deeply we need community.
The thing that really grabbed my attention was the "multi-message" feel. During the music, the leader paused to talk in between songs. There was a definite message or mini-sermon communicated during the music. When the next speaker came to the microphone, they delivered a compelling mini-sermon leading into their prayer. This second message was good, although completely unrelated to the first. Finally, the pastor speaking that day came to the microphone for the third, and full length (believe me, this was full length) message which was completely unrelated to messages #1 and #2.
I walked away applying my experience to my own situation. What are we trying to say? Are there things that need to be said but should be said at a different time? I definitely believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to us and directs us. So in no way am I advocating a framework which negates any divine inspiration and direction. I am, however, advocating that we prepare well and communicate effectively. How much can you say effectively and how much can people hear on a deep level?
In process. Always in process.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You have a good point. Often times variety of messages can give a scatterbrained, flying-by-the-seat-of-our-freshly-ironed-church-pants impression. Yet, at the same time, I'm one who appreciates the spontaneity of the "mini-message" - they offer a chance to see where God is working in the different ministries and leadership within a church.
When mini-messages #1 and #2 match up and relate perfectly with full length #3, I start smelling whiffs of choreographed agenda (a turn-off), or perhaps even a boxing up of God (though that's never in the intention of those planning the particular service, it happens). I'm at church to be challenged... to hear the fullness of the gospel wherever and however the gospel happens to be working at the particular time and place.
Also, people are incredible. God gave us good brains. I believe people are hearing more than we credit them on that deeper level, regardless of the mucho-miced-bag delivery. Even if I don't retain all mini-messages and sermons though, I value being treated like an incredible person with a good brain.
In short, I don't see different messages throughout a service and thorough preperation/effective communication as being mutually exclusive.
Like you, in process... always in process.
A couple of things (and of course I have my bias associated with the sort of church I lead)
Spontaneous HS leading and inspiration isn't necessarily better than the way the HS leads and inspires during planning.
Our work with God doesn't work with addition... it seems to me that God is more of a multiplier. We err when we think that more of our planning means less of God's work, as if 50% of me means that it only allows for 50% of God. To get 100% of something good in ministry, it takes 100% of what I have multiplied by 100% of what God brings.
So many times the disjointed multiple-mini-messages just comes off as a result of our laziness and poor planning. We know it, and so do the people that show up for worship. It is crummy stewardship.
Thanks guys, both good comments.
I have been in services where the matching mini-messages came off as "choreographed" but I have also been in others where a central truth was effectively delivered through #1 Music #2 Prayer #3 teching.
When I am leading a service, I will do whatever God tells me too, and if that means abandoning the plan for a new direction than I am happy too.
I agree, people are smart. I think they get it that a lot of the mini-sermons are not inspired, but merely ritual.
Post a Comment