Most Sunday sermons we hear involve themes, either on various virtues or on the common challenges of everyday life.
Often, these thematic sermons do not fully explain the Gospel reading of the day.
Sometimes only one or two verses are emphasised, occasionally out of context.
At other times, only part of the reading is explained.
I could not help but think of the Laetare Sunday sermon I heard on March 6, where the vicar explained the Parable of the Prodigal Son without discussing the Prodigal Son’s brother — the faithful one. The Prodigal Son is a difficult parable to understand, and I would posit that it makes former churchgoers hate the Bible, the Church — and very possibly — our Lord. The reason is that these former churchgoers are struggling with family obligations to parents. Said parents are ungrateful or demanding of these sons and daughters, but never of the black sheep in the family who seem to receive all their kindly, compassionate attention. When I find a good explanation of the parable, I’ll write about it. But I digress.
It seems that clergy avoid expository preaching because it will make people uncomfortable. Modern-day thinking — and seminary training — tell us that everyone must leave church happy.
False!
We should leave church comforted as well as convicted of our sin and our lack of faith. Only by understanding the entire reading can we come to understand Christ’s intentions for us.
GotQuestions.org discusses expository preaching versus topical and textual preaching. Expository preaching is (emphases mine):
the exposition, or comprehensive explanation, of the Scripture; that is, expository preaching presents the meaning and intent of a biblical text, providing commentary and examples to make the passage clear and understandable. The word exposition is related to the word expose — the expository preacher’s goal is simply to expose the meaning of the Bible, verse by verse …
In expository sermons, the Bible passage is the topic, and support materials are used to explain and clarify it.
To prepare an expository sermon, the preacher starts with a passage of Scripture and then studies the grammar, the context, and the historical setting of that passage in order to understand the author’s intent. In other words, the expositor is also an exegete—one who analyzes the text carefully and objectively.
Contrast that with topical preaching, which more often than not, involves prooftexting:
To prepare a topical sermon, the preacher starts with a topic and then finds a passage in the Bible that addresses that topic. For example, for the chosen topic of “Laziness,” the preacher might refer to Proverbs 15:19 and 18:9 and touch on Romans 12:11 and 2 Thessalonians 3:10. None of the passages is studied in depth; instead, each is used to support the theme of laziness.
Textual preaching offers little improvement:
the preacher uses a particular text to make a point without examining the original intent of that text. For example, someone could use Isaiah 66:7-13 to preach on motherhood, although motherhood is only peripheral in that text, being merely an illustration of the true theme, which is the restoration of Israel during the Millennial Kingdom.
George Campbell Morgan, an expository preacher, was the pastor at Westminster Chapel of London between 1904-1919 and 1933-1943. During the intervening years, he conducted an itinerant ministry throughout the United States and Canada. By preaching solely on the Bible, he attracted thousands of people, not only on Sundays but also, in London, for his Friday evening Bible classes.
GotQuestions.org mentions this great preacher, the son of a Baptist minister, who was:
known as “the prince of expositors,” taught that a sermon is limited by the text it is covering. Every word from the pulpit should amplify, elaborate on, or illustrate the text at hand, with a view towards clarity. He wrote, “The sermon is the text repeated more fully.” A sermon’s primary function is to present the text.
I couldn’t agree more. It is a pity that not only do most Catholic and Protestant churches follow the Lectionary schedule with all its omitted verses but their congregations have to put up with topical or textual sermons that leave people none the wiser about the actual Bible readings heard just minutes before. All of it, sermon included, goes in one ear and out the other.
By contrast, expository preachers such as G Campbell Morgan and, in our time, John MacArthur, attract thousands of people at every service. This is because they are explaining Holy Scripture one verse at a time.
Although I prefer following readings relevant to the Church calendar, it would be better if clergy adopted the expository method so we walked out of Sunday services or Mass with a proper understanding of Scripture.
preaching verse by verse through books of the Bible is the most reasonable way to teach the whole counsel of God …
Also, the only effective way of seeing the significance of a passage is in its context.
And:
Each [book in the Bible] was designed by the Holy Spirit so that you have the Holy Spirit communicating something powerfully and clearly in the whole letter: you dare not miss a single part!
If I received five letters in the mail one day, it would make no sense to read a sentence or two out of one, skip two, read a few sentences out of another, and go to the next one and read a few out of that, and on and on. If I really want to comprehend the letter—what is going on, the tone, the spirit, the attitude, and the purpose—I must start from the beginning and go to the end of each one. If that is true of personal correspondence, I believe it is even more important when interpreting divine revelation.
Matthew Henry is the other prominent verse-by-verse expositor I know of whose writings are available to the public online. Although he died in the early 18th century, his messages are still valid today.
This is why I use Henry and MacArthur as my go-to men for making Scripture come alive.
My thanks to all readers who have been reading my near-weekly posts on the four gospels. After I complete Matthew’s gospel, I will continue with the New Testament, specifically, the Book of Acts.
12 comments
March 14, 2016 at 10:11 am
Hannah Vilares
Thank you again for very helpful post.. He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. I find your site very helpful in the midst of terrible wobbles and confusion. Came across the children’s book link which is wonderful resource.. Have passed link on to several friends.. And son for grandsons.. May The Lord Bless you, Hannah Vilares
The article on the prayer of humble Acess was lovely.. As you say could be misconstrued as to wording,but the humble approach is, as you say, a calming quietening approach to the Lord before doing this ‘in remembrance of me’. I love the book of common prayer . Have you any contact with the Anglican Church Continuing? I do not belong but know them from contact with dear very elderly Anglican lady years ago . A fighter for truth! Real old Protestant defender of truth. I was brought up in a church society Anglican Church in Sussex.. It laid seeds for saving faith and deliverance from the new age movement years later , now nearly 30 years ago. How I long for the ancient paths, Jer 6 or8.. Such a struggle to find in today’s man pleasing confusing Christian scene..
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
March 14, 2016 at 10:49 am
churchmouse
Thank you, Hannah, for such a beautiful comment, beginning to end.
How blessed you are to have been brought up in proper Anglicanism and retained its teachings. As you say, ‘saving faith and deliverance’ have kept you from spiritual peril.
I am not in contact with the Anglican Church Continuing. Maybe I’ll look into it.
Re the Prayer of Humble Access, I look forward to saying it at every BCP service I attend. The line ‘We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs from under Thy table’ really hits home every time. Some people find it hard to say and won’t recite it. They should really study what that prayer is communicating to us. You put it nicely: “a calming quietening approach to the Lord before doing this ‘in remembrance of me’”. Thank you!
Have a blessed week.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 14, 2016 at 6:42 pm
underground pewster
I have endured so many topical sermons that when I am treated to a real expository sermon I am educated, surprised, inspired, and filled in a way that a meandering topical sermon cannot possibly create. If I hear one more cute story about the preacher’s grandchildren, I am going to scream and run out the door. What are they teaching in seminary these days?
LikeLike
March 14, 2016 at 9:15 pm
churchmouse
Not a lot, it would seem. The Bible is certainly anathema. One mustn’t encourage the congregation to examine their own consciences, be in awe of miracles or contemplate the sovereignty of God and His Son.
I fully agree with you, expository sermons are a true revelation. Hearing one is like seeing the door to the inner sanctum opened ever so slightly. A small shaft of light appears. One then wishes to hear more so that the light increases to become a great illumination, where, finally, one can see perfectly instead of, as St Paul put it, through a glass darkly (1 Cor. 13:12).
Like you, I have had enough of cute sermons. They’ve had their day. Even my parents (and possibly yours?) despised them, and that was back in the 1970s.
Thank you for your comment. May we come to know Holy Scripture from the pulpit once again.
LikeLike
March 14, 2016 at 8:46 pm
lleweton
I always feel sorry for Martha, as in Mary and Martha.
LikeLike
March 14, 2016 at 9:16 pm
churchmouse
Thanks, Llew, so do I!
As a youngster, I was big on Mary. Now, in late middle age, I’m much more in tune with Martha.
This fits in nicely with the Prodigal Son, as in, if I find a good defence of Martha, I’ll be sure to post on it. Many thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 15, 2016 at 11:15 am
lleweton
Yes. It’s such a human story too, isn’t it, as anyone who has seen the resentments and envy that can grow between sisters – of all ages maybe – would confirm: from who does the washing up to boyfriends. Then there are the professional martyrs, ‘working their fingers to the bone’. And I love The C.S. Lewis quote “She’s the sort of woman who lives for others – you can tell the others by their hunted expression”. On the other hand people who are above ‘all that fuss’ can be infuriating. Someone has to do the cooking while others contemplate. The psychology of it all makes the story very convincing. I think we have to recognise that Jesus knew the inner needs of each sister at that moment.
LikeLike
March 15, 2016 at 11:31 am
churchmouse
Very true, Llew.
You make excellent points, all of which are immediately recognisable. We’ve seen sisters and women like that.
Mary had the edge in spending time with Jesus. He had to remind Martha His time with her was limited.
Martha, ever the pragmatist (John 11:39, KJV):
‘Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days.’
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 15, 2016 at 6:51 pm
lleweton
Maybe a parallel with Peter and John. Peter charged in. John was thoughtful.
LikeLike
March 15, 2016 at 10:19 pm
churchmouse
It took both. Peter was quick to claim his allegiance and for a very short time walked on water. John was the only one at the Crucifixion and only apostle who was not martyred. John was Jesus’s confidant. Peter got the other apostles fired up. A simplistic view, but the varied personalities in the New Testament shows that all types are needed to make the Church great.
In many ways, I can understand Peter’s perspective. It depends on our personality type. The Almighty gives us different gifts. Peter and John illustrate that perfectly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 18, 2016 at 7:21 am
Hannah Vilares
A post which shows some integrity.. Tho we are all complicit in this.. None righteous no not one…
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
May 18, 2016 at 9:05 am
churchmouse
Thank you, Hannah, for reading and commenting!
Enjoy your day.
LikeLike