And how will they hear without a preacher?
Romans 10:14

There seems to be an open debate now being waged over the character and centrality of preaching in the church. There is a perception of two competing events: preaching and worship.  The church today seems to be moving the line between the two towards the experiential worship side. Sermons are no longer something to be excited about and yearned for by the congregant but seen as taking second place to worship.

How did this happen? Given the central place of preaching in the New Testament church, you would think there would be no debate. No other religion has made the regular and frequent assembling of groups of people, to hear religious instruction and exhortation.  The very act of proclamation or preaching is an integral part of Christian worship.

Yet, numerous influential voices within evangelicalism suggest that the age of the expository sermon is over. In its place, some contemporary preachers now substitute messages intentionally designed to reach secular or superficial congregations–messages which avoid preaching a biblical text and thus avoid a potentially embarrassing confrontation with biblical truth.

The shift from expository preaching to more topical and human-centered approaches has grown into a debate over the place of Scripture in preaching, and the nature of preaching itself.

Two statements about preaching illustrate this growing divide. Richard Baxter once remarked, “I preach as never sure to preach again, and as a dying man to dying men.” With vivid expression and a sense of gospel gravity, Baxter understood that preaching is literally a life or death affair. Eternity hangs in the balance as the preacher proclaims the Word.  The other is by Harry Emerson Fosdick pastor of the Riverside Church in New York City, “Preaching is personal counseling on a group basis.”

The current debate over preaching is most commonly explained as an argument about the focus and shape of the sermon. Should the preacher seek to preach a biblical text through an expository sermon? Or, should the preacher direct the sermon to the “felt needs” and perceived concerns of the hearers?

Clearly, many evangelicals now favor the second approach. Urged on by devotees of “needs-based preaching,” many evangelicals have abandoned the text without recognizing that they have done so. These preachers may eventually get to the text somewhere in the course of the sermon, but the text does not set the agenda or establish the shape of the message. It becomes a conclusion in search of a text.

Shockingly, this is now the approach evident in many evangelical pulpits. The sacred desk has become an advice center and the pew has become the therapist’s couch. Psychological and practical concerns have displaced theological exegesis and the preacher directs his sermon to the congregation’s perceived needs.

This mode of preaching denigrates its place to less than the Word of God and, consequently the need of something else for the church to find God.  And this other something easily becomes more and more emphasis on experiential worship.

The current debate over preaching may well shake congregations, denominations, and the evangelical movement. But know this: The recovery and renewal of the church in this generation will come only when from pulpit to pulpit the herald preaches as never sure to preach again, and as a dying man to dying men.

Comments?