Many, if not most, of my readers are in seminary or ministry so I thought I would share a few quotes on preaching – again. This morning I was reading, “Preaching for the Poor,” an amazing sermon by Charles Spurgeon. Later in the week I want to get to his thoughts on preaching the Gospel to the poor specifically, but today I wanted to share what he had to say about preaching itself.
The “Prince of Preachers” argues that when the Gospel is preached it “must be preached attractively…,” and that means following the example of Jesus. He said, “we must preach as Christ did; we must tell anecdotes, and stories, and parables, as he did; we must come down and make the gospel attractive.”
For Spurgeon, what makes the Gospel attractive is a combination of earnestness and comprehensibility. He said,
Christ Jesus was an attractive preacher; he sought above all means to set the pearl in a frame of gold, that it might attract the attention of the people. He was not willing to place himself in a parish church, and preach to a large congregation…, but would preach in such a style that people felt they must go to hear him. Some of them gnashed their teeth in rage and left his presence in wrath, but the multitudes still thronged to him to hear and to be healed. It was no dull work to hear this King of preachers, he was too much in earnest to be dull, and too humane to be incomprehensible.
Of course, when one makes the argument that preaching should be attractive/relevant it is generally well-received or rejected outright. I find little if any middle ground. To many critics it sounds like unhealthy accommodation; an inappropriate desire to be “cool,” or “relevant.” But Spurgeon knew of this kind of reaction and explained,
If we adopt such a style they will call us clownish, vulgar, and so on. Blessed be God, we have long learnt that vulgarity is a very different thing from what some men suppose. We have been so taught, that we are willing to be even clowns for Christ’s sake, and so long as we are seeing souls saved we are not likely to alter our course.
He goes further and says, “Why is it that God has blessed other men to the stirring of the people, to the bringing about of spiritual revivals, to the renewal of the power of godliness? We believe it has always been owing to this — under God’s Spirit — that they have adopted the phraseology of the people, and have not been ashamed to be despised because they talked as common people did.”
This is about relevance and contextualization. Despite what some critics would have us believe, these are good words. I agree with Spurgeon when he said, “Preaching must reach the popular ear; and to get at the people it must be interesting to them, and by the grace of God we hope it shall be.” Of course this is a form of cultural accommodation, but it is not the corruption of the message, nor the abandonment of the Gospel. Yes, in every generation there is the danger, and the present reality of, loosing the Gospel. But it is the Gospel itself that moves us to preach comprehensibly to our culture, because we want the good news to be properly understood and received. So, with Spurgeon, when we call for relevant, or “attractive” preaching, we are simultaneously calling for a preaching of the pure Gospel.
There is such a thing as preaching science and philosophy attractively, but not preaching the gospel. Mark, it is not preaching, but it is preaching the gospel that is the mark of Christ’s dispensation and of his truth. Let us take care to preach fully the depravity of man, let us dwell thoroughly upon his lost and ruined estate under the law, and his restoration under the gospel… Let us take heed, then, for it is a serious matter, that when the people listen to us, it is the gospel that we preach.
You can find an online copy of this sermon at the Spurgeon Archive.
I am the Lead Pastor of Redeemer Fellowship; husband to Jen; Dad to Katherine, Elias, Madeline, and Kilian. If you're in town you can probably find me in the local coffee house or running through the neighborhoods.
{ 6 comments }
Spurgeon was a bit of a pioneer in this area and rightly so. I try to exhort my SWBTS preaching students to hone their communication skills, but not rely on them. We’re humbly reliant on God to use our sacrifice of exegesis, systematic theology, etc. as we realize that apart from God our words fall to the ground.
Sometimes in our Reformed circles we hear the example of Edwards used to try to support poor communication practices (sermon construction & delivery) as he’s portrayed as presenting dry as dust orthodoxy during the reading of a manuscript, never looking up the whole time.
While I think this is a caricature of Edwards, though he was a contrast with my hero George Whitefield, just because God used something don’t always make it good/right/preferred. (e.g., just because Jesus comes from the lineage of David & Bathsheba, adultery was/is not justified; just because God used the actions of Joseph’s evil brothers, doesn’t mean their actions should be emulated).
I don’t say that so much to criticize Edwards, a stud on so many levels, but rather to say that one may be a stud in some areas, but not as strong in other.
Remember, Edwards wasn’t nearly so appreciated in his own day, even getting canned. His primary impact was as theologian and writer.
I said all that to say this … good post, Joe.
Thanks,
Gunny
Luther/the Reformers, and then the Puritans were the real pioneers, always making the argument that one must preach “plainly” (simply) to the hearers. Spurgeon makes note of this in the sermon. I have had fun pointing out to some of my Reformed friends who not only love the Puritans, but love to speak and teach as if they were living in the seventeenth century with them, that the Puritans would have mocked my friends’ archaic language where unnecessary.
Good point on Edwards example as an excuse, and I agree with your assessment.
Good point about the Puritans and “plain style” as well as Luther.
Perhaps you and I have some of the same friends.
; )
The archaic language often gives cause for a smile akin to those who like the KJV because it’s harder to understand. If it’s easy to get, then it’s not very spiritual. Of course, the KJV was an English Bible and one designed for the common man to be able to read (as most were not as well versed with Latin for the Vulgate usage). Akin to that is the Koine Greek of the NT.
Clarity in communication is key, as we see with Joe Thorn.
I’m Gunny Hartman and I approve this blog post.
(Political Ad paid for by the Friends of All Things Holy.)
Can this go to far? For example, is it acceptable for a guy like Matt Chandler to use the word “freakin” or something like it in a sermon? Is it OK for Scotty West to use “sucks” in a sermon? Mark Driscoll has also been criticized on the same front.
In seminary I was told that we must avoid being crude. I have personally been criticized in my own church for being too “common” in my speech. However, no one accuses me of not communicating the message!
I agree with Spurgeon and find his comments very encouraging (maybe I’m just using him to justify myself). But is there a line and who draws it?
“But is there a line and who draws it?”
Great question, Scott.
I guess it’s the audience who draws that line, but it’s so subjective. I was heavily criticized at a former church for using movies for illustrative material, but others loved it.
It’s one of those “in the eye of the beholder” type deals that can be really frustrating with a varied audience.
Personally, I’d shy away from some language in the pulpit that I might feel okay with just hanging out with the lads, just because of my audience’s sensitivity.
Folks like you mention are even more under the microscope because of their popularity and range of audience.
Good question.
Any good books on how the Puritans preached? For example, structure and how they made their sermons plain.
How exactly is a sermon plain? Is it the language you use or the illustrations that make the points clear? Or is it the overall presentation that brings the biblical and theological message into the everyday world of the listener?
Just trying to learn more. (If the answers are in the sermon just say so. I haven’t read the entire sermon yet.)
Comments on this entry are closed.