HOMILETICS LECTURE 3 ON (Sermon Delivery And Sermon Critique)

MODESOF DELIVERY

Having considered the sermon and its structure, it may be well to inquire as to the best mode of
delivering the sermon. We shall examine three methods and see the advantages and
disadvantages of each. The three methods are: first, reading; second, reciting; third,
extemporaneous.

I. READING

Probably all will agree that a good sermon read from manuscript is better than a poor sermon
preached extemporaneously. Doubt less all will also agree that a good sermon preached is
better than a good sermon read, or recited.

The advantages
(1) It necessitates the writing out of the entire sermon: This is a splendid preparation for two
reasons. First it disciplines the mind and compels the preacher to express him/her self clearly
and fully on the subject matter. Second, it develops the ability of a writer, which is a great
accomplishment. Such a preacher certainly cannot be accused of laziness, for it requires
considerable physical and mental effort to write down the amount of words that a thirty-minute
sermon requires
(2)There are occasions when the reading of a sermon is essential:
(a)It is particularly useful when giving a radio address: such an address is best read providing
it is well read. The reasons for this are:
First, the necessary time limit, which must be meticulously observed, and often this is a
matter of seconds. Second, the great need to make this precious time count to the best
advantage. A discriminating audience, unseen by the speaker is ready, at a moment’s notice,
to switch off if he/she fails to gain its interest. Third, the absence of a visible audience
eliminates a great deal of the inspiration that a seen audience supplies. A microphone, in a
broadcasting studio, has poor inspirational properties! It doesn’t lean forward, look interested
or otherwise respond to the message given.
In preparing the manuscript to be read for a radio address, several things should be observed.
It should be typed, double spaced, with a wide margin for comments and the words in the
script underlined that should be emphasized in the address. Needless to say, this should be
read and re-read several times before it is given and the exact time of its reading carefully
noted.
(b) Writing is especially needful when giving some particular definition, or of clarifying
Some controversial question which calls for an exact statement; or of making some fine
distinction on which a great deal depends. Careful writing will tend to eliminate any
ambiguity of speech, which might easily create misunderstanding in the minds of the hearers.
To be able, when challenged, to show to the challenger the exact words which were uttered,
will do much to settle a controversy.
 (c) It would be a good thing for every preacher to write out their sermon, for it would enable
them to sympathize with the audience that will have to listen to it. An old parishioner once
observed, “There is one advantage at least of a written sermon. The audience will know that
the preacher will end when his paper ends!”

(3) Many famous preachers have adopted this method with both excellence and inspiration

The disadvantages
(1) Artificiality: It tends to make preaching a mechanical process. True, it is accomplished
smoothly and efficiently, but it lacks that element of naturalness, so essential to any sermon.
(2) Limitation:
The reading of a sermon makes no provision for the fresh light that often comes at the
moment of speaking. No allowance is made for the mental quickening that an audience will
often aid in producing. Then again, the Holy Spirit, who guides into all truth, may impress the
speaker to emphasize a certain line of truth to meet the needs of someone in the audience. A
read sermon lacks this possibility of alteration to suit the needs of the moment.
The story is told of a preacher who wrote out his sermon very carefully, but forgot to take his
manuscript with him to the meeting. Much disturbed because of his loss, he apologized to his
audience and said, “In as much as I have forgotten my manuscript, I shall have to rely on the
Lord for the delivery of my sermon this morning; but this evening, I can assure you, I shall
come better prepared!” ( pause and think through that for a moment!)
(3)Failure to look at the audience:
Then again, the reading of a sermon keeps the preacher’s eyes on the manuscript and not on
the hearers, and this is a serious defecting any address. Many preachers try, but with little
success, to hide the fact that they are reading; but the audience is not so easily deceived and
soon becomes aware of the fact. If a sermon is read, there should be no attempt at deception in
the matter. Above all, if the sermon is read, it should be well read and, more important still, it
should be worth reading!
On being asked his opinion of a sermon to which he had listened, a person replied:“I didn’t
like it for three reasons: first, because it was read; second, because it was poorly read; third,
because it wasn’t worth reading!” There is nothing like speaking to an audience, eye to eye
and heart to heart.

II. RECITATION

By this is meant the memorization of one’s written manuscript and the reciting of it word for
word, before an audience. This method is adopted by quite a few preachers.

The advantages
(1) It aids greatly in developing the memory. This certainly is a splendid thing. All preachers
could do with considerable improvement along this line. However, the strain of such a task on
the mind and nervous system must be tremendous.
 (2) Recitation is a most useful thing when making an exact statement regarding some
misunderstood doctrine, or truth, before a discriminating audience. It is necessary also for
defining the great words of Scripture and for the clear setting forth of the great fundamental
doctrines ofthe Christian faith.
(3) It is needed for the correct quotation of Verses from the Bible. It is impossible to
overestimate the value of being able to quote correctly the words of Holy Scripture. This
should and, indeed, must be done during the course of an address. It is hardly necessary to
say that such Scriptures cannot be recited from memory until they have been memorized. The
speaker should inform the audience when he/she is quoting from the Scriptures, otherwise
many will not be aware of that fact.
(4) Recitation is essential for the repeating of the lines of a hymn, or a whole poem. The
benefit of being able, at will, to recite appropriate verses of hymns or poems can easily be
appreciated. Thus recitation can serve a very useful purpose in preaching.

The disadvantages
As in the read sermon, the same two serious defects are evident.
(1)Artificiality: This impression of artificiality communicates itself, in some fine way, to the
audience. True, as in the case of the read sermon, the audience is treated to a polished address,
in perfect language, but somehow there is an appreciable lack that only spontaneity of thought
and expression can give. One cannot imagine a lawyer pleading for the life of his client, or an
ambassador presenting the claims of his country on this principle.
(2)Limitation: It leaves no room for the inspiration of the moment, or the Spirit’s leading for
that particular audience. The preacher thus becomes the slave of his sermon, and this naturally
imposes a tremendous strain on him/her lest they forget what had been memorized. Thus
memory rules the sermon like a dictator. The imagination and the emotions are not permitted
to have free play, and memory alone is allowed to have its own way.

III. EXTEMPORANEOUS
The primary meaning of the wordis to speak without preparation, but it also includes the
expression of thoughts that have been the subject of much careful preparation. In fact, all
things being equal, the more careful the preparation, the better the speech will be. It is good
to write out the sermon, but not to read it; to memorize the sermon, as an exercise for the
memory, but not to recite it. Even though one wrote out their sermon and then reproduced it,
without an effort torepeat the language of the manuscript, it could still be termed an
extemporaneous sermon.

The advantages
(1) The speaker can accustom himself to think more rapidly and with less dependence on
external helps. They can turn to advantage any fresh ideas that occur as one preaches, as led
by the Holy Spirit of God. This will sometimes lift him/her into an exaltation of mind that
almost amounts to rapture, until they wonder where the words are coming from. Such an
experience is better experienced than described.
 (2) The preacher can look at the audience: They can then watch the effect of the sermon on
the faces of the hearers. Thus the audience itself will aid him in his preaching. He can see the
dawn of conviction upon this one, or that one. Sometimes one may actually be able to see
conversion taking place, as a person grasps the soul-emancipating truth of the finished work
of Christ. The preacher’s humble, but careful and prayerful preparation of the sermon is now
rewarded, as they sees the interest shown and the blessing resulting from the message.

The disadvantages
(1) The temptation to neglect prayerful and careful preparation: This snare is ever present
and should be resolutely and consistently resisted. The preacher should continually remind
himself that God does not encourage spiritual indolence. The Holy Spirit does not supply the
lazy preacher with thoughts and words that were within his own power to provide through
diligent study, but which he failed to do because of the effort involved. The person who relies
only on the inspiration of the moment is suitable to be left with nothing to say when that
moment arrives.
(2) It tends to prevent the excellent habit of writing: Each speaker must cultivate this art if
they would widen their horizons, learn to express them self intelligently and clearly, and
discipline oneself to think carefully and logically.

SERMON CRITIQUE

Though we do not go to hear a sermon in order to analyze it, yet unconsciously, as we hear it, we
form our own opinion of its worth or otherwise, and this is critique. The Scriptural injunction is,
“Let the prophets speak…and let the other judge” (1 Cor. 14:29). Therefore it is perfectly right
and proper to critique a sermon. Several things will impress us during the delivery of the sermon,
either favorably or unfavorably. It has been pointed out that there is only one way by which a
person can avoid criticism: and that is by his saying, doing and being nothing! Let us imagine we
are sitting in the audience, listening to an address. During the course of this address
several things will impress us concerning both “the preacher and his preaching.

There are many tools that can be employed to critique a sermon and we shall present two
models whereby you shall analyze what stands out in the two models.

A: In model 1, We shall think of seven things regarding the speaker and the message, and
ask quite a number of questions.

I.THE PHYSICAL APPEARANCE OF THE PREACHER

1. His/her posture. Careless? Slouching? Leaning on the pulpit? Hands in pockets?

2. His/her clothing. Neat? Extravagant? Untidy?

3. His/her manner. Arrogant? Nervous? Indifferent? Humble?

5. His/her habit. Any? Did they detract from his/her message?

6. His/her attitude. Was he earnest? superficial? Cold and distant? Warm and
friendly? Proud? Sincere? Artificial?

II.THE DELIVERY OF THE SERMON

A. The reading of the Scriptures

(I) The portion, clearly and well announced?

(II) Reverently read?

(III) Pronunciation, good or bad?

(IV) Clearlyheard by all?

(V) Read with expression?

B. The introduction

(I) Gain your attention?

(II) Appropriate to the subject?

(III) Put you at ease?

(IV) Pertinent to the theme?

C. The language used

(I) Suitable to the audience?

(II) Any poor expressions? Ambiguous? jargon? rude? heretical?

(III) Any grammatical errors?

(IV) Any mispronunciations?

D. The order maintained

(I) Were the divisions well arranged andstated?

(II) Did they show signs of careful preparation?

III. THE TEACHING THAT WAS GIVEN

I. Were the terms clearly defined?

II. Was the teaching Scriptural?

III. Was the text interpreted in the light of its context, orwrested from its context?

IV . THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT WERE USED

1. Were there any?

2. Were they to the point?

3. Were they too long, or involved?

4. Were they original, or stale?

5. Were they well told?

6. Did they clarify the point the preacher was seeking to make?

V . THE APPLICATION MADE

1. Was it pointed, or vague?

2. Did it search, or challenge you?

3. Did it carry conviction?

4. Did it impress you as being from the Lord?

VI. THE CONCLUSION

1. Did it sum up the points made?

2. Was it suitable?

3. Did it apply the theme?

VII. THE SERMON AS A WHOLE

2. Was it too confused, dull? Or was it well put, pointed and interesting?

3. Was it a message from the Lord?

4. How would you gradeit: good, bad, or somewhere there?

B. in model 2, we shall raise twelve issues and questions that should be a guide to critique
the sermon

1. Introduction: Did it engage the people? Was it relatable?

2. Specific law: Was I convicted of my sin and shown my inability to save myself? Was I shown
that I deserve eternal punishment for my sins? Were the examples relevant to my personal life?

3. Specific gospel: Was I convinced of the forgiveness of my sins? Did I see how Jesus lived,
died and rose again for me? Was I offered the personal assurance of eternal life?

4. Applications: Were they relevant and practical for my personal life?

5. Illustrations and personal examples: Did they fit life in the 21st century? Does the preacher
understand what life is really like in the real world today?

6. Mechanics—voice inflection, movement and animation: Was the sermon presented in a lively
manner that held my interest? Did I find my mind wandering? Was the delivery energetic and
enthusiastic? What was the style -- conversational, preachy, instructional, etc.? Was there any
humor in the sermon and was it appropriate?

7. Length: Did the sermon move along or did it drag? Exactly how long was the sermon?

8. Crafting of the sermon: Did it flow? Was the thought process logical and easy to follow?

9. Visitor/ unchurched friendly: Could persons without previous Biblical knowledge gain
something from this sermon for their daily life? Did the pastor give the impression that this
Word of God had impacted his life that week?

10. Relevant: Did the sermon offer something for the youth, young adults, older adults, elderly?

11. Special references: Were there references to the resurrection of Jesus Christ and its power in
our daily lives? Were there references to the means of grace; to the gospel in Word and
sacraments?

12. Conclusion: Did the preacher give me something to take home and use in my daily life?