Preaching as performance

"The second misconception is that performance [in preaching] is mere playacting. It's easy to assume that theatrics is about manipulating people for mere entertainment, that is, entertainment for entertainment's sake. When this is done with preaching, the delivery is embellished and actually impedes the communication of the message. Bad performances in the pulpit are as obvious as bad acting on the stage or screen. The only time we usually notice actors acting is when their craft is poor. It's the same with preaching. When it's done masterfully, the preacher almost disappears.

Good preaching comes alive and speaks to the heart precisely because it is well presented, with proper gesture, vocal technique, and bodily presence. People in the performing arts call this "stage presence." We might call it liturgical presence, or pulpit presence. All effective communicators realize that they must master numerous techniques in order to impact their audience."

From Preaching is Performance Art, by Clayton Schmit

Digital transformation of mission

Tony Whittaker, the Coordinator of the online magazine, Internet Evangelism Day has written an Open Letter to Mission Agency Leaders.   He begins in this way:

Digital communication is transforming our world in ways that we are only beginning to discern. There are now over 3 billion mobile phone owners and 2 billion web users, and the majority are outside the West. Facebook has 500 million users in nearly 100 languages, making it (in terms of ‘population’) the third largest ‘country’ in the world.

This new ‘digital communication culture’ is superseding the West’s ‘print communication culture’. And remarkably, it has much more in common with the ‘oral communication cultures’ that many of us are so familiar with. Its strengths include two-way interaction and relationship building, visual storying rather than left-brain abstract analytic thinking, and the ability to offer information and help anonymously. 

Tony goes on to discuss ways in which Mission Organisations are still needing to catch up with the digital revolution.   There's something of a mindset that the digital age is only affecting the West.   This may (in part) be the case with the Internet, but in terms of mobile phones, the revolution is huge, enormous, increasingly global.  

Read the rest of his letter and see just how remarkable the potential is for far-reaching changes in global mission.  

Communicating Leadership

John Maxwell's site has had a face-lift, and now appears to be called, Giant Impact. There are two short articles on leadership on the site, one of which focuses on communicating expectations to those you're leading, and the other on communicating vision.

Each article contains six points which can serve as a reminder to anyone in leadership that just telling people what to do doesn't quite cut the mustard.

Regarding the first point of communicating expectations, Maxwell writes: A primary responsibility of leadership is to communicate expectations, both with words and actions. When leaders carefully and consistently set expectations, they engineer a flourishing work environment. However, when leaders abdicate their duty to communication expectations, chaos ensues. Here are six rules of thumb to follow as you set expectations in your organization.

And in relation to the second he has this to say: Nothing motivates an organization like a clear and compelling vision. But it can be tricky to paint a picture of what's in your mind so that others can see exactly what you're seeing. As a leader, how do you enable others to glimpse your vision and how do you inspire them to adopt it?

What happens when new forms of communication arise?

Whenever there's a change in communication, whether it be as far back as the British postal system or the telephone, or as recent as Web 2.0 and social media, there's a resistance, not just on the part of businesses, which this article refers to primarily, but on the part of those involved in any sort of organization or institution.

In the article referred to, Tammy Erickson notes several predictable results that occur whenever there is a reduction in the cost of communications, as there have been in each instance of improvement. These were proposed by Harold Adams Innis, as far back as 1951.

• Redistributing knowledge and, in doing so, shifting power
• Making it easier for "amateurs" to compete with "professionals," because access to knowledge substitutes for mastery of complexity
• Allowing individuals and minorities to voice ideas
• Reducing the advantages of speed that formerly accrued because some had knowledge before others
• Reducing the advantages of size that are based on the ability to afford high costs.

How do these 'predictions' line up with the way the institutional church works?

Face to Face

We spend a lot of time on here talking about new technology and how we can use it as God's people, but it's still good to be reminded of the need for face-to-face communication....

A video chat will never suffice as a substitute for sitting down around a table together. There is something about being in the presence of a human being -- with the potential for physical embrace, the communication of eyes and expressions beyond words -- that serves to help us remember the significance of the incarnation. Thank God Jesus didn't just "phone it in" when it came to the ultimate symbol of self-sacrifice -- that would have been the poorer story, to be sure.

Kirstin Vander Giessen-Reitsma
"Actualizing the virtual"

Technology and the Generation Gap

"Technology is fast becoming the latest driving force behind what is often called the 'generation gap,'" reports The Barna Group in its latest update. "Technology is shaping different experiences and expectations among generations."

My comment: I think when Barna talks about generations here, he isn't meaning parents and children, but successive groups of young people who may not be far apart in age. (My comments continue in italics below.)

While all generations benefit from the advances in technology, Barna found that "each successive generation is adopting and using technology at a significantly greater pace than their predecessors." The reliance on digital tools is exponentially greater among those under age 25. Another characteristic of the younger generations is what Barna calls "gadget lust" — 22 percent say they consider owning the latest technology to be a very high priority in life, compared to 9 percent of those over the age of 25.

Amongst the conclusions the researchers made are:

• Every age segment is becoming dependent on the Internet. (And that presumably includes seniors - over 60s)
  
• The nation's youngest adults (called Mosaics) are light-years ahead in their personal integration of these technologies. Supposedly the Barna group coined the term Mosaics; I'm not sure that it's used widely outside their perspective.
  
• All Americans (we could replace 'Americans' with 'New Zealanders') are increasingly dependent on new digital technologies to acquire entertainment, products, content, information and stimulation. All might be rather overstating the case; there are presumably a lot of people who don't have access to all technology.
  
• Churches have to work hard to keep pace with the way people access and use content, while also instructing churchgoers on the potency of electronic tools and techniques. Only a minority of churchgoing Mosaics and Busters are accessing their congregation's podcasts and Web sites. The reasons for this will be many and various: check out Lynne Baab's book, Reaching Out in a Networked World for more on this subject.
  
• Many of the same age-old questions about human development and human flourishing are taking on a new dimension. How does technology help or hinder communication and relationships between generations? How does it impact social skills, reading skills, writing skills, etc.? How will it affect tomorrow's workforce? [Barna] - And we might ask, how will affect the way people preach, or don't preach, in the future?

Thanks to the Pastors' Weekly Briefing for the original material.