David Wayne at Jollyblogger comments on expository preaching versus a more experiential model of preaching espoused in an article by Bill Easum. In contrast to Easum’s somewhat fuzzy view of preaching as a “transformational experience,” Wayne states that “Preaching is the authoritative proclamation of the Word of God.” I don’t want to defend Easum against David, because I think Easum goes a bit overboard. I’m interested, however, in the definition of preaching as an “authoritative” proclamation, and in the role of the preacher/pastor in making that proclamation. Read on…
A bit of personal background: I grew up in a Bretheren church, and so did my wife, although she was in a different and less “exclusive” version. My inlaws remain active in the Bretheren church. A key component of the Bretheren church is that the local fellowship is entirely Elder-led. That is, there is no “professional” preacher. In fact, during the primary church service, the “breaking of bread,” there is no “preaching” at all. Rather, individuals (men) offer short (hopefully short) passages of scripture and commentary, and call out hymns, as they feel led, and during the course of the service communion is observed. After the “breaking of bread,” there is a separate teaching service, in which one of the Elders, or a “Laboring Brother” (essentially a missionary who travels from local fellowship to local fellowship) offers the sermon. I believe the Bretheren tradition has its roots in the Anabaptist movement, although I never traced out the roots of my family’s branch of the church, which was ethnically very German.
The Bretheren know their Bibles. Their ecclesiological view comes from the New Testament’s discussion of various church offices. They observe, I think correctly, that the New Testament doesn’t suggest that any one person in a local congregation will be invested with the sole authority to proclaim the Word. Rather, teaching is a function for the
Elders.
My family left the Bretheren church when I was a teenager, and we’ve since belonged to a more typical American independent evangelical church with a professional pastoral staff. There are benefits to this arrangement; in particular, looking back, I think some of the Elders in our prior church were poorly educated, or not educated, in theology or theological methods, and as a result the teaching became boxed into a very narrow set of sometimes inaccurate interpretations and legalistic practices. Yet, I remain uncomfortable with the concept of preaching as an “authoritative” proclamation by an individual uniquely invested with that authority.
I suppose I still cling to some of that Bretheren ecclesiology. I view the preacher as an Elder who has been uniquely called, prepared, and trained, and gifted by the Holy Spirt, to proclaim and exposit the Word. That exposition and proclamation must be received humbly and respectfully. In fact, we expect that the Holy Spirit will be involved in the process. (I say this as a non-Charismatic, not meaning to imply a current gift of “prophecy” as some Charismatics might understand it). However, the exposition isn’t “authoritative” in the sense that the underlying text is authoritative. Even the teaching pastor is subject to the Elders’ oversight and correction. The pastor/preacher isn’t above the Elders; he is one of them.
I’m sure David wouldn’t disagree with my assertion that ultimately only the scriptural text itself is authoritative, at least in the sense of being the final authority of faith and practice. (See Westminster Confession, Ch. I, Sec. VIII-X.) I’m curious, then, what it means for preaching to be “authoritative?” And how does this relate to the debate over expository versus experiential preaching? I have few thoughts on this, but unfortunately need to get back to my paying job, so hopefully some more later…..