02 - The Progress of Exposition
CHAPTER 2 THE PROGRESS OF EXPOSITION A. FROM PAUL TO PAPACY
THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT that the expositional method of preaching was used almost exclusively in apostolic times. Jesus Christ was, of course, the peer of expositors. However, Paul followed hard in His footsteps, as did the apostles and leaders of the Early Church. There is abundant evidence in the Book of Acts to show that exposition was the accepted method of imparting divine truth; and I am sure that Timothy, Titus, Crescens, Luke, and John Mark, with many others of their contemporaries, followed the example and advice of the apostle whom they loved, and to whom they owed so much in the spiritual realm.
There does not seem to be a great deal of information left to us concerning the method of preaching employed in the first three or four centuries, but the scholars are pretty well agreed that the expositional type of ministry prevailed, with a general adherence to the tenets of evangelical Christianity.
After preaching ceased to be what it was in the mouths of the Apostles, a message, properly so called, it became an exposition of the Word of God, of the apostolic writings, of their doctrine, and an application to the silent and assembled flock, of all which had just been read (Herder). In the early church exposition . . . was the rule, and discourses upon set topics and brief texts were the exceptions (Kidder). The two renowned preachers of the early centuries (Augustine and Chrysostom) left volumes of expository messages on Genesis, Psalms, Matthew, John, the Pauline Epistles, and many other books of the Bible. There can be no doubt that the expository method was predominant for at least twelve centuries.
Textual preaching began in the beginning of the thirteenth century (Dr. J. W. Alexander).
Expository preaching was used almost exclusively until the thirteenth century (Dr. T. Harwood Pattison). In speaking of textual preaching, which has become so increasingly prevalent in the latter centuries, Dr. Austin Phelps says: For the first twelve Christian centuries there seems to have been no such prevailing habit.
Just as the decline of the spiritual life of the Church was gradual so, doubtless, was the departure from the apostolic method of preaching. As the distinction between church and state diminished, and as ritualism, tradition and superstition increased (bringing about the papal system which obtains today), so the distinction between church and the world decreased. As the Bible ceased to be recognized as the final authority in all matters pertaining to religion, and more and more authority was claimed by the Pope and ecclesiasticism, the apostolic polity of the church waned. Instead of following, without hesitation, the Biblical order of preaching, and the precedent set by the apostles, ministers began to adopt methods of their own devising, which would be designed to acceptance by the congregations to which they ministered, but without the authority and power of the Holy Spirit.
It could not have happened overnight, but it is highly significant that the wholesale departure from expository to textual preaching was followed by the spiritual eclipse known as the Dark Ages. To say there was no expository preaching, or other good Biblical preaching, during those years would be utterly unreasonable. Nevertheless, the preponderance of the weaker type of ministry gave no opportunity for the expositional type to prevail. Erasmus seems to have recognized this weakness, as evidenced in his counsel to ministerial students. To get at the real meaning it is not enough to take four or five isolated words; you must look where they came from, what was said, by whom it was said, to whom it was said; at what time, on what occasion, in what words, what preceded, and what follows.
There can be no doubt whatever that the departure from expositional preaching played a very prominent part in promoting the spiritual blindness and darkness of those centuries.
B. FROM LUTHER TO LETHARGY The converse is also true. The chief characteristic of that period, which we call the Reformation, was the return to expositional preaching. When the light of divine truth began to emerge from its long eclipse, at the Reformation, there were few things more remarkable than the universal return of evangelicals to the expository method (Alexander). The topical preaching of Moody moved two continents for Christ; the textual sermons of Spurgeon started movements which are still blessing humanity; but it was the expositions of Luther that redeemed Christendom from the Dark Ages, and instituted the Reformation (Dr. R. B. Jones).
It was a revival of Biblical preaching. Instead of long and often fabulous stories about saints and martyrs, and accounts of miracles, . . . these men preached the Bible. The question was not what the Pope said; and even the Fathers, however highly esteemed, were not decisive authority—it was the Bible. The preacher’s one great task was to set forth the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Word of God. And the greater part of their preaching was expository. Once more, after long centuries, people were reading the Scriptures in their own tongue, and preachers . . . were carefully explaining to the people the connected teachings of passage after passage, and book after book. For example, Zwingli, . . . announced his intention to preach, not simply upon the church lessons, but upon the whole Gospel of Matthew, chapter after chapter. Some friends objected that it would be an innovation, and injurious; but he justly said, “It is the old custom. Call to mind the homilies of Chrysostom on Matthew, and of Augustine on John.” There was also at the basis of this expository preaching by the Reformers a much more strict and reasonable exegesis than had ever been common since the days of Chrysostom.
Such careful and continued exposition of the Bible, based in the main upon sound exegesis, and pursued with loving zeal, could not fail of great results, especially at a time when direct and exact knowledge of Scripture was a most attractive and refreshing novelty (Dr. John A. Broadus).
New Testament preaching came into its own once again, with such renowned expositors as Luther and Calvin setting the pace. Nevertheless, the prevalence of expositional preaching was comparatively short-lived. History has been repeating itself. The process has been slow, even as before, but the departure has been just about as widespread as before. Along with it has come a multitude of cults, and other Satanic, subversive influences. The departure has been far more noticeable during the last two centuries, with a terrific slump since the turn of the century in which we are living. This fact, undoubtedly, accounts for the awful anemic condition of the Church universal; the widespread apostasy in territories where the gospel has been preached (i.e., Germany—the homeland of Luther); and the tremendous in-road of cults and false religions in all parts of the world. The absence of expository preaching today is positively alarming.
We come down to our own times; in which, within our immediate knowledge, there are not a dozen ministers who make the expounding of the Scriptures any part of their stated pulpit exercises (Alexander). That statement was made possibly eighty years ago. If that be true then, how much greater is this failure in our present day? In the light of that deplorable fact, Alexander makes a passionate plea, one which is most applicable to our own times.
I would urge that the expository method (understood as that which explains extended passages of Scripture in course) be restored to that equal place which it held in the primitive and reformed churches; for, first, this is obviously the only natural and efficient way to do that which is the sole legitimate end of preaching, to convey the whole message of God to the people.
About ten years ago a statement appeared in a book review which was an appraisal of a book of expository messages.
Expository preaching is one of the most profitable forms of unfolding the truth of God’s Word. It is far too little used by modern preachers.
Dr. A. T. Robertson, affectionately known as Dr. “Bob” by those who knew and loved him, had something to say on the matter.
There is no doubt that teaching received tremendous emphasis in the work of the early Christians. Jesus is the great Teacher of the ages and is usually presented as teaching. In the Jewish “Houses of Learning” (Synagogues) teaching was as prominent an element as worship. The official teachers passed away and the modern Sunday School movement is an effort to restore the teaching function in the churches. The true preacher should be a teacher also, but many preachers are more evangelistic and hortatory than didactic. The best preachers combine all these elements and build up the saints in the faith to which they have been won.
There is no reason why the morning service in public worship should not be a teaching service, and the evening service more evangelistic.
Dr. Bob was not a professor of homiletics, but he saw the weakness of a ministry which gives no place to the expositional treatment of Scripture. A story is told concerning his children. It seems that a son of his had reached that ripe, pre-adolescent age, when he had all the answers. The girl, being a little younger, was of an inquiring nature, naïve, and willing to be enlightened. The fact that her father was both a seminary professor and pastor of a Baptist church caused her some confusion of mind. Finally she asked her brother, “What is the difference between a teacher and a preacher?”
“Pshaw! Don’t you know that?” he asked disdainfully.
“No,” she said, quite honestly, “what is the difference?” Being forced to make an immediate distinction the brother was somewhat nonplussed. Bravely he came up with this: “Well, a teacher is a man who helps you to learn something. A preacher is a man who—ah—a man who gets up and goes Pow! Wow! Boom! Boom!”
Perhaps he said more than he knew.
It must be conceded that expository preaching has been too much neglected of late years, and yet its primary importance must be perceived by everyone who will reflect upon its special design to make the Word of God better understood (Dr. D. P. Kidder).
Written in the last century that appeal is more urgently needed today than in the day that it was uttered. Dr. H. Jeffs is most emphatic about the matter, almost vituperative in his statements, but we believe he speaks with real authority. The Bible is the preacher’s book and the preacher’s glory. Bible exposition is the preacher’s main business. If he cannot or will not expound the Bible, what right has he in any pulpit? He is a cumberer of the ground that might be occupied by a fruit-bearing and soul-nourishing tree. If he does not expound the Bible, what else is there for him to do? He may deliver addresses out of his own head on any subject that occurs to him, and may do it well, but why do it in the pulpit? Is it his own gospel, or has he a gospel that can just as well be preached without the Bible as with it? He is presumably a preacher of a Christian church, but there would have been no Christian church today if there had been no Bible. So long as there remains the triple tragedy of sin, suffering, and death, so long the Bible will speak to the heart of man, and humanity that has once known the Bible, will turn away, after the novelty has worn off, from every flashy substitute for the Bible that our modern Athenians push as the latest thing in the spiritual market.
Finally, this word from a European of a former generation:
It is to be desired that this kind of preaching were more general. We would have a consecutive exposition of the Word of God, and not a tissue of human reasonings to which the text is accommodated. The discourses of the Fathers of the Church were homilies. Homilies made in good taste, and by men capable of making them, would be extremely useful. We take a passage of Scripture and explain it in its connection; we unfold its interior sense; a multitude of ideas enter, and come, as it were, in file; a number of duties are explained in few words. It is a way of preaching more pithy, more scriptural, more Christian. We thus teach the people how to read the Scriptures; we explain it to them; we show the connection between ideas which at first seemed to have little relation to each other. We also adhere more closely to the true Word of God. (Dutoit Membrini). The word “homily” was synonymous with exposition.
Without a doubt we are forced to this necessary conclusion: There has been a wholesale departure from the expository method in this generation which is most deplorable. Certainly the earnest pleas of the well-informed leaders and divines of former generations should come to our ears and hearts with renewed emphasis and appeal, as we view the resultant spiritual decline so evident on every hand in the ranks of Christendom.
Dr. W. Graham Scroggie emphatically declares that “When the pulpit returns to scholarly, passionate, expository preaching, the pews will again be full.” It is at least worth trying.