Our good friend over at Heidelblog, Scott Clark, has some sage words for aspiring preachers. But on one of his points Scott loses me. He writes:
Keep your head up (and leave the manuscript at home). No one in the congregation, except your mother, cares to see the top of your head. If you bring a ms to the pulpit and begin reading it your head will drop. We will not see your eyes but only the top of your head. No one talks to other people while staring at one’s feet. This is a terrible communication strategy. People are trained by television news readers and presidents and pundits to have someone delivering important information by looking them straight in the eye. You have the most important information in the world to deliver! Why would you do it whilst looking down at a piece of paper? Who will listen to the top of your head. Get your head up young man! Look people in the eye. If what you have to say is so complicated that you can’t say paraphrase it clearly whilst looking people in the face, it’s too complicated for a sermon. . . . Simplify your notes. Simplify your sermon. Keep your head up.
Since revivalists preached without manuscripts, I’m surprised that Clark is giving ground to enthusiasts.  I’m also not sure why looking at the preacher’s face is any more attractive than looking at the top of his head. I can think of any number of preachers whose head top I’d rather observe than their homely mug. And for that matter, I can think of any number of sermons that would have benefitted from a manuscript.
If we can hear political speeches and news broadcasts without objecting to the manuscripts on which those forms of discourse rely, why not a sermon? I’m even willing to consider a teleprompter in the church. It’s not an element, it’s a circumstance.
Old Life 
Mr. Hart,
Could you amplify your last sentence? What do you mean by “element” and “circumstance”?
LikeLike
An element of worship is one of the matters God requires — the word, sacraments, prayer, and the offering (never forget that one). Circumstances are things like when to meet, where, whether the pews should have cushions. I put a teleprompter in that category. Muether and I discuss this distinction in With Reverence and Awe (sorry for the shameless plug, but isn’t that the nature of this page?)
LikeLike
Hi Darryl,
I don’t think I’m giving ground to enthusiasts on this. This observation comes from being on both sides of the pulpit at different times. I’ve watched what happens when students (preachers) drop their heads repeatedly or even for whole sermons. It damages communication. You’re the one who gave an inaugural address on the importance of the human in the seminary curriculum. You should appreciate this point.
Human beings communicate face to face, not top-of-head to face. I’m not saying that the efficacy of the sermon is contingent upon the preacher keeping his face toward the congregation, but God uses instruments, means, people, personalities etc. A sermon will, in the ordinary providence of God, communicate better if the preacher doesn’t have his head down reading a MS.
It’s not that he face is better looking than the top of the head (in my case it’s a toss up) but it’s just an observation of how things, in our culture—we do live in a time and place. We don’t live in the 18th century few public communicators speak with their heads down. It may not be fair that the TV presenter has a tele-promp-ter (why do they spell it thus?) and the preacher doesn’t but until the figure out that technology, the preacher has to work harder.
LikeLike
It’s a fundamental mistake for bald guys like Scott and I to show the tops of our heads to congregations. Pointing one’s follically-challenged cranium at the congregation is akin to a fat person sporting a midriff bearing crop-top. Mind you, depending on the strength of the lighting over the pulpit, I suppose the reflected glare could help illustrate the transfiguration?
LikeLike
Amen. While I am an aspiring student of preaching and terribly reliant upon a manuscript, I’m convinced there are times when a manuscript is to be desired. I’ve known several preachers who take manuscripts to the pulpit with them – even reading it – all the while being engaging, dynamic and looking at the people.
LikeLike
I heard John Piper, an electrifying communicator, admit that he preaches word for word from a transcript. He says that the ‘trick’ is to look like you’re not using it.
LikeLike
So much for the Presbyterian virtue of predictability—I’d’ve thought the prescription for smiles would raise a hand (in the Old Life way, not the New Life way). But given the dour Dutch faces around here that convey more pinched toes than glad hearts, I can live with that prescription just fine.
Even so, I vote tele-prompter on this one. It makes everyone happy, and, really, isn’t that what it’s all about? Kidding.
LikeLike
Thanks for the plug. I do have a copy and have started reading the first pages.
LikeLike
Since my chin is often planted on chest while in the pews, I don’t see why pastor should be any different.
LikeLike
I’m with Scott on this one. He is saying something very different from the enthusiasts. The enthusiast says (i) do not use a manuscript, because (ii) a manuscript quenches the Spirit. Scott says: (i) lift your head, because (ii) looking at people improves your communication with them. If I understand him correctly, Scott is not saying, do not use a manuscript; rather he is saying do not let your manuscript stop you looking at people. As a preacher, I might add that to look at the congregation is helpful not only to the hearer but also to the preacher. He can then see whether the people are listening or whether he has lost them, and he can see who might be puzzled or troubled or upset by the sermon and therefore need pastoral follow-up. Well said Scott!
LikeLike