Evaluating your preaching

[KMK]

For those who preach, what do you do to accurately evaluate your sermons?

I currently record my sermons and do my best to see where I think I am deficient, but am thinking there has to be other ways as well.

Here is a Sermon Application Rubric that I use to make sure I am covering all the bases from month to month.

Ken, I like your rubric. Thanks.

Sent using my most excellent Android device.

No problem, Bill. It isn't exactly my rubric. I got the idea from Sinclair Ferguson and combined parts of William Perkins with William Ames and put it together.

I realize now that I attached a version with some of my own notes on it. Here is a blank copy.

 

[Herald]

For those who preach, what do you do to accurately evaluate your sermons?

I currently record my sermons and do my best to see where I think I am deficient, but am thinking there has to be other ways as well.

Here is a Sermon Application Rubric that I use to make sure I am covering all the bases from month to month.

Ken, I like your rubric. Thanks.

Sent using my most excellent Android device.

No problem, Bill. It isn't exactly my rubric. I got the idea from Sinclair Ferguson and combined parts of William Perkins with William Ames and put it together.

I realize now that I attached a version with some of my own notes on it. Here is a blank copy.

Thanks.

 

[Pergamum]

For delivery:

I prefer sincere and simple, extemporanous preaching that does not look angry (no Billly Sunday poses with the bible over the head like a club) and uses plain language and deals much with application.

Anything overly-dramatic often looks unnatural and turns me away, but a sincere pleading is okay.

If an OT verse is being used to point to Christ...just say so at the beginning to save the audience from the dramatic build-up to reveal Christ in the last 10 minutes. Say your main points all upfront and then explain them further in the message. Also, anything that sounds overly jugmental or negative is a turn-off to a great many people (strident or arrogant or dogmatic plattitudes don't sit well, neither does sarcasm or smugness). Any lilt of voice or dramatic raising or lowering can only be pulled off by a few preachers and most of the time is too predictable ('''okay, here it comes...he is now going to raise his voice dramatically to emphasize that last point...YAWN). Although, the preacher should be animated and engaging and look his audience in the eye (and not always on his notes). Involving the audience through the use of well-placed questions and many word pictures and concrete examples also seems to be ways to keep the audiences attention.

---------- Post added at 02:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:05 AM ----------

More thoughts:

I have seen youtubes or sermonaudios of my delivery and I wince at times. OUCH.

But I find when I have seen myself engage with the audience in Q and A (about my work here) I am more relaxed and things come out more naturally and there is a lot of interaction between myself and the congregants.. Also I find that the simpler and more direct I am, the more engagement and eye contact the audience gives me. Also, when I move from the abstract to the concrete and give a well placed story or word picture of visual illlustration, then the audience seems to come alive again.

I do not speak well and I have tried to practice in a mirror, but I usually just end up laughing at myself or feeling REALLY immobilized due to self-consciousness.

 

[mvdm]

Our consistory evaluates every sermon preached. We developed an evaluation form, and different elders are assigned to evaluate at a given worship service. At our monthly meeting, we go over every sermon preached in the last month. The minister remains in the room so that he can hear our discussion, receive immediate feedback, provide us answers where necessary, and then he is given the form for his further reading and study. We usually devote about 1 hour per consistory meeting for this task. Both elders and minister have found this to be a very edifying process.

 

[Bookmeister]

Three part sermon diagnostic

1. Is Christ mentioned?
2. Is He the subject of the verbs?(is He doing the action or being acted on?)
3. What are those verbs?(is He making you happy, healthy, wealthy etc.? Or is He suffering and dying on the cross to pay for your sins? Is He rising again on the third day? Etc.)

 

[Romans922]

If you preach through the entirety of the Scriptures, not every sermon is going to have Christ as the central figure. Now in the big scheme of your preaching sure He is. Like one was saying above,

One of the dangers of the redemptive-historical method is that the forest is emphasized at the expense of the trees

. If every sermon, even from the middle of Esther or some other book, is specifically about Jesus (sure in the large picture everything is about or points to Him) then the forest is emphasized at the expense of the trees and over time your congregation will suffer. Both have to be emphasized in their proper places. There are indicatives and imperatives in the Gospel message. Some texts will lend more towards indicative: this is what has happened, this is who you are; but don't forget also the imperatives that stand on the shoulders of the indicative: this is what must be done now, worship, holiness/obedience.

So asking, "Is He the subject of the verbs?" Not all the time, No and for good reason. I'm preaching here coming up 2 sermons on Rev. 12, and one sermon is focused on Satan. My sermon's subject is Satan not Jesus. Who is Satan and what does that mean for us.

Does the words Jesus or Christ have to be mentioned in every sermon, "Is Christ mentioned?" No, sometimes, especially in the OT you are talking about the Lord or God, so yes and no. If the text doesn't say Jesus or Christ, then I am not necessarily going to mention Jesus, but perhaps in an evangelistic way. If in Esther, perhaps you are going to preach on how to live as a Christian or Ruth, the focus isn't on Jesus and you don't necessarily have to mention Him, ESPECIALLY if you are preaching through a book to the same congregation.

Not every sermon is specifically about Jesus Christ. Not every sermon is about the forest (in other words), sometimes it has to be about the trees. Not all the time, but sometime.

 

[Reepicheep]

I know an elder, in fact, who claims to know right away whether a guy is a Covenant grad or not on the basis of his preaching.

Well, I know a few elders who know right away whether a guy is a Westminster or Greenville grad on the basis of his preaching...most of the congregation will be sleeping in 10 minutes.

Sorry, but that's about as legit as your statement.

 

[N. Eshelman]

OP answers:
1. My wife will me feedback that is always helpful. She represents the "single mom in the pew" balancing worship with 4 kids under 7.
2. My session gives feedback. This is part of the job of ruling elders, in my opinion. Older elders keeping younger pastors in line.
3. I have a friend that listens and we talk about them. I talk to him about his as well.
4. The presbytery should have a listen on occasion and give feedback.

 

[KMK]

I know I am part of the problem here but let's not allow this thread degenerate into mud slinging over the RH issue. Let us stick to the OP and discuss how a preacher can best evaluate his sermons.