Editorial
Extracted from Ordained Servant vol. 1, no. 2 (April 1992)
In a recent issue of New Horizons I read an interesting article on preaching.[1] In this editorial I want to respond by giving my own reasons for dissent from its call for a change from expository to topical preaching.
When I began my ministry some 40 years ago I tried the topical method. The result for me was frustration. It was not until I began to expound books of the Bible, seriatim, that I was completely liberated from it. Where, before, it had been a constant vexation to try to decide the next topic, it was now decided for me. I also found myself wrestling with the text, in context, in a way that I had not before. I was forced to consider things I would otherwise not have considered, and to preach about things I would have neglected. I was also driven to the conclusion that the sermons of which we have brief summaries in the Bible are only that—brief summaries! Even these are not really topical in my opinion, but summaries that touch on several ‘topics.’ It is also my conviction that the sermons of the Apostolic age were more like our New Testament Epistles than what are usually called topical sermons today.
I can also say that I have seen nothing to equal expository preaching in terms of the benefits for God’s people. We live in a day of low biblical literacy. Nothing is needed so much today as for the members of the church to grasp—or rather to be gripped by—the whole counsel of God set down in the Bible. And I do not believe there is any method for achieving this end that can compare with careful and systematic exposition of the various books of the Bible.
I would like to add that in my own ministry there have been times when the topical method has seemed to me to be unavoidable. I remember, for example, that I was once asked to speak to a large group of foreign students at the University of Auckland. They wanted to know what in the world we Christians were talking about when we spoke of being ‘in Christ’ etc. So I spoke to them on the biblical concept of union with Christ. I could cite other examples to the same effect. But they all have a common denominator—speaking to people outside the fellowship of the local church. If I was standing on Mars hill, speaking to Greek humanists, I too would be topical. But I would preach in a very different way to my own congregation.
One of the treasured experiences of my ministry was a series of 101 expository sermons on the book of Romans. When I was about half way through the series I asked my session if they did not perhaps want me to break off from the series for a time, giving them—and the people—a rest. The answer, which really did surprise me, was that I was by no means to do such a thing but to faithfully complete what I had begun. And let me say that this is a phenomenon that I have observed in several congregations in two widely separated parts of the world. Preaching which is expository—if it is done with care— provides something that no other method of preaching can equal. It provides a much stronger sense of context. When you expound a particular part of the book of Romans, for instance—in such a series—the faithful hear it with a constantly increasing grasp of the flow of thought essential to understanding.
Expository preaching has, in my view, two things of the greatest weight to commend it. The first is the fact that it sticks to the text, and the second that it does greater justice to context. And in my view these ought, as a rule, to be primary. Every now and then I too sit in the pew and listen to a preacher. As I do this one thing always concerns me above everything else: is this man showing me what the text of the Bible means, and does he show me from the immediate and wider context (of the whole Bible) that there is no question about it? I remember a preacher I used to hear many years ago who had a respite voice—gesture mannerisms reminiscent of a wind up toy soldier—and other rather noticeable deficiencies. Yet I never heard him preach without being powerfully convinced and convicted. And it was his text that always stayed with me. The text was nailed down, as it were, so I never again could escape it.
We, as Orthodox Presbyterians, believe—and teach our congregations—that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). But are we always ready for the consequences of this teaching? I, at least, will have to admit that I was not, because it led to a formidable challenge. Some of the people in my congregation came to me and requested an exposition of the Song of Solomon. I felt so unqualified at the time that I almost wished, for a moment, that I had never spoken as strongly as I did about the profitableness of every part of the Bible. But there was no escape. I had to put up or shut up. So I did it. I expounded this book. And God granted us all a wonderful blessing. I can’t see how anything like this could have happened apart from a commitment to expository preaching.
God has chosen the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. But the power is not in preaching per se, for if that were the case even the apostate preachers of our day would have it. The power is in the preaching of God’s truth as it is revealed to us in the inspired text of the Bible.
For me, at least, it has been through the hard work of expository preaching—this more than anything else— that I have been allowed to at least touch the hem of the garment. garment.
[1] “The End of a Rich and Noble Tradition,” by R. Scott MacLaren, in the January 1992 issue of New Horizons. In this able article Mr. MacLaren argues for topical preaching and, if we understand him correctly, for topical preaching as something that ought to replace the expository method. It is with this contention that we take issue.