One thing I've noticed as I've worked at training preachers is that there's an assumption that just 'telling people' stuff is all we need to do. As long as it's "right stuff", we've done the job. Not so! ‘Assertions’ are just ‘bald statements’ that come right out at people. It’s just you saying “THIS IS HOW IT IS.” It feels like a fast flow of facts. Instead of winning your way in to peoples’ thoughts, or having yourself ‘invited in’, you are just banging away with information, information, information. Listening feels very much like being sprayed with a firehose.
One friend is in the habit of delivering multi-clause ‘definitional sentences.’ Multi clause sentences might be good for completeness or for the sake of dictionary definitions, but that’s not the game we are playing. Pick off ONE IDEA AT A TIME and sell it. If there are TOO MANY IDEAS going on, isolate, develop, persuade with the BIG ONES and leave the little ones out. Here's an example of 'assertionism' from my friend's talk, which he has kindly agreed to share...
Most new people will leave fairly quickly at the close of the service. It’s fairly natural to not want to hang around if you don’t know too many people. Church growth studies have suggested that new people will only stay up until the 6 month mark in a church if they’ve met at least 6-7 people who KNOW them. (That means 36 people here will be needed if we want to welcome and integrate 6 new people in the next 6 months).
Can you think back to the last time you were NEW at church? Maybe NEW HERE? Maybe on holidays. I remember last time we were on holidays we went to a church as strangers, and after the service we stood around outside and NOBODY TALKED TO US. Nobody TOLD US WHERE TO GO FOR COFFEE. They all kind of disappeared up to the hall at the back and NOBODY TOLD US.But I want to take your mind one step further than that. What if you’re new to a church, and the first week goes okay, and then you come back. You’ve DECIDED TO MAKE IT YOUR CHURCH. What’s it going to take for someone to STICK.The problem is, and you might have felt this yourself, the problem is, if you’re new to a church you’ll probably get the SIX MONTH ITCH. People say marriages get the SEVEN YEAR ITCH with a lot of divorces after seven years. Well, with CHURCH, it’s the SIX MONTH ITCH. And there have been studies done on this, with STATISTICS. And the studies show, if you’ve been in a church SIX MONTHS, you’ll PROBABLY LEAVE… unless… and this is the big one… not UNLESS THE MUSIC IS TERRIFIC. The MUSIC WON’T KEEP YOU. And not UNLESS THE MINISTER IS TERRIFIC. The ONLY THING THAT’S GOING TO HOLD YOU… is if AT LEAST SIX PEOPLE HAVE GOT TO KNOW YOU. And YOU’VE GOT TO KNOW THEM.Now think about that. And maybe if you’ve been here at latechurch about six months you’re starting to count up in your head. How many people KNOW ME. How many people DO I KNOW. How many people have CALLED ME and asked me what I’m doing FRIDAY NIGHT?If you haven’t made AT LEAST SIX CONNECTIONS, the SAD NEWS IS, you’re probably not feeling PART OF IT. And you’re starting to think about trying church SOMEWHERE ELSE.Which is a HUGE CHALLENGE for those of us who call this OUR CHURCH HOME. And want to actually GROW OUR CHURCH and INCORPORATE NEWCOMERS. And if we’ve got even ONE NEW PERSON A MONTH COMING ALONG, they’re going to need SIX NEW CONNECTIONS to keep them here. Which means by the end of six months, that’s THIRTY SIX REGULARS involved in MAKING NEW FRIENDSHIPS.
It's a whole lot more words, and a whole lot more work... but that's what it takes to communicate your way into people's consciousness. Because it's more words, and it takes longer, that means you'll be able to cover less territory in your talk. But at least the crowd will come with you.
Class - time to make some comments!
I need to learn this. I need to learn how to say one thing well instead of saying to much. I feel like I've got so much to share with people. But I've gotta be reminded of this. Say one thing better. Not more stuff that misses the mark.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. For an adult to 'own' an application they generally need to have become convinced of its necessity themselves.
ReplyDeleteI think, though, that I've not really applied this principle to my applications. I'm trying to work out what my formula is. Will let you know when I've understood my own style and see if everyone wants to point out its +'s and -'s.
I agree the second take goes down better. Couple of questions. 1. How does one maximise conversational style during the prep stage when one is just sitting in one's study? 2. How does one stop oneself getting carried away and having too much sermon bloat? The first take is 82 words, the second 384.
ReplyDeleteMatt, Good observation! What it means is you've got to have about ONE QUARTER of the number of ASSERTIONS that you would have had before. It's all about dishing up new information and propositions at the speed people can engage with them and absorb them.
ReplyDelete@ Matt: I think what gives the example above its conversational style is that it really tries to draw the listener/hearer into feeling and owning the problem. Casting them into the situation makes them part of the problem and then gives the motivation/exhortation/solution to follow much greater strength and appeal. Maybe it creates that inner dialogue because they feel a part of it. Then, even when you're talking about stuff like church growth studies it still feels conversational without coming across as a boring, bald assertion.
ReplyDeleteObviously there's more to it than just that but do you think if you concentrate on getting people into the problem, or the solution, or whatever, then the conversational nature will naturally flow onto the computer screen somehow?
Also, I've heard talking to your computer works too.
In response to Matt's point #1, I just go into trance state, stare off into the distance and imagine myself preaching the words to a congregation. I generally know it's working if my hands start moving involuntarily.
ReplyDeleteAs regards the original post, I'm wondering if Phil's friend is perhaps making assumptions of the congregation. (1) the congregation is motivated to enfold new people into its circles (2) is willing to do whatever it takes to do it and (3) is simply waiting on the preacher to tell them how.
If these are all true, then the assertions are fine. So the problem is contextual. He's not talking (most likely) to the audience of those assumptions. He's talking to an audience who will need to be reminded of how difficult it is to integrate into a new church, who might not be already thinking about how to help newcomers do so and thus aren't yet waiting to hear how they can be the solution to the problem.
What Phil did was to create the scenario where the congregation themselves felt the need to think about how to enfold newcomers before giving them the solution to the problem he's created. That's good adult education technique.
Oh, I should just qualify that I don't necessarily think that the writer of the first section actually believes those things that I've listed as assumptions, it's just that they are, in effect, taken for granted by the lack of addressing them in the construction of the talk.
ReplyDelete