Good homiletics does not always lead to good preaching
in his excellent book Preaching for Revitalization, Michael F. Ross describes a shift in literature on preaching. Prior to the twentieth century, books did not indicate that preaching was in decline or a question in people’s minds. “Rather their emphasis is on the spiritual aspects of preaching: the minister’s life and heart, prayer, Spirit-led preparation, the hope of the gospel, and so forth.”
In the 1930s and 1940s, books began to describe a decline in preaching.
Ross describes how the emphasis has shifted in response to this crisis in modern literature:
Overall, the current works focus most on communication theory and practice - style, SAIs (stories, analogies and illustrations), voice methods and time usage - while the earlier works dwell and content, theology, spiritual motivations and the character of the minister.
Ross argues that we need to look beyond communication skills if we want to see a revival of biblical preaching:
The crisis of the American pulpit is not one of communication theory, but rather one of content, conviction, and consistency of theology and life…This is not to say that communication theory and practice are not important, but rather to keep two concepts separate: homiletics and preaching. Good homiletics does not necessarily result in good preaching. Homiletics does not transform the soul; true preaching does!
August 21st, 2007 at 6:11 pm
I wonder if this is similar to the situation Stephen Covey describes in his book 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. He claims that when he studied success literature in America he discovered that the first 150 years success literature focused on character and heart. The last 50 years the focus has been on technique. However, it is also possible that the homiletic techniques of late have been the product of better research. It is true that we are discovering new and exciting things these days. That said, it still doesn’t take away from the fact that Paul told the Corinthians that he didn’t come with persuasive words of wisdom but with the Spirit and power so that their faith would rest in God and not man (1Cor.2:1-5).
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:46 am
Thanks. Very insightful.
August 25th, 2007 at 11:15 am
[...] Good Preaching? August 25th, 2007 Whilst I’m mentioning links worth reading: Good Homilitics Doesn’t Always Lead to Good Preaching. “The crisis of the… pulpit is not one of communication theory, but rather one of [...]
August 29th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
This is my first visit to the site. i appreciate your thoughts, but would like to offer a critique. I have both a bachelors and Master’s in theology/pastoral ministry. In my experience, we have such poor homileticians in the pulpits (and I have visited a wide swath of churches over the last 2-3 years). I would say we need better ones. My critique is that maybe the content of homiletics courses needs to be tweeked, not the courses discarded.
I would be interested to find out (not having read this book), what the correlation is between the authority of scripture/the church in culture with the decline in preaching. If my history is correct, the 30’s and 40’s saw the precursors to the psychological revolution in the post-war era that caused much questioning of the institution of the church. Mix the erosion of the Church’s authority with the introduction of psychology/psychiatry and then we start teaching pastors to relate to the people and our preaching becomes man-centered. I would propose (as in the age-old chicken vs egg question), that homiletics changed to address new cultural trends, not the opposite. I would advocate for a call back to a homiletic that is rooted in orthodox heurmanutics. Ultimately, I would question the definition of “good homiletics” without this.
August 30th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
John, i think you are correct in your assessment. We preachers have given way too much ground to those who study human psychology and behavior. Willimon says something along the lines that preaching today tries to make the Bible relevant to people when we should be making people relevant to the Bible. Instead of trying to fit God and his kingdom into my life, I should be fitting my life into God’s kingdom.