What is Preaching? by Editor

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Apr 3, 1879

What is Preaching?

By Editor

Philip expounded the prophecy of Isaiah to the eunuch, and the historian says he "preached unto him Jesus." Every sermon given in the New Testament is an exposition of the Scriptures. When Paul preached at Thessalonica he "reasoned with them out of the Scriptures."

But what is that which is called "preaching" at the present day? For years the sermon, so-called, has been degenerating into a moral essay, but it has now become a discussion of passing events, local history, or political issues. A San Francisco correspondent of the Mendocino Beacon truthfully represents the case; we extract from the letter:—

"The ministers of our city in order to draw audiences take their text from Jules Verne or some other author. It is because of this evil, that we have come to be a city that cares less for sermons or lectures than any other in the land. The pulpit in stepping out from its rightful path has taken away the zest of the lecture field, and weakened its own hold on the general public. Each Sunday evening our ministers offer from their desks a variety of topics, choosing generally some secular subject in which prayer and song is mixed in a most curious way. As a consequence, the ranks are thinned and divided. Those who would like to listen to theology, don't care for the lecture, so stay at home. While those who enjoy the lecture fields prefer it on other nights and without any side issues. Each Sunday our papers have a long list of church services, and the subject of the discourse. They range over 25,000 miles in circumference, and embrace almost every conceivable thing outside from the Bible. Sometimes when Dr. A. gets a chance to answer Bro. B., there is some variety with a little pepper sauce mixed in, and the audience seem as nonplussed as if reading a mixed editorial written by Pickering and De Young jointly. I do not wish to narrow religion down to a Puritanical level; but I do not wish an adulterated article. It is impossible for any lecturer to obtain a fair audience here, for we are surfeited with them weekly. Ingersoll would draw a crowd. So Victoria Woodhull, or any one who is sensational. Set up any figure-head like a savory calf and the masses will rush pellmell to do homage. I contend that when the pulpit seeks to become a rostrum of the lecture, everything else should correspond. And when it does so lower its influence on Sunday, it only adds, to the world at large, confusion regarding the dividing line which should mark where the lines of God's sanctuary begin and end."

The reference to the "editorial" will be better appreciated when it is known that the persons named are editors of two rival papers, who treat each other with unusual bitterness. But such is the medley. The Chinese, and the New Constitution, are the texts for many eloquent "sermons" from "orthodox" pulpits. The early history of California was quite recently a pulpit theme, while her prospects, and the duties of her citizens, give variety to "the gospel of the period!"

We have for years insisted that, as a denomination, we are somewhat at fault for giving "aid and comfort" to those who maintain this false standard of "preaching." Our ministers preach a series of good expository and practical sermons, and both advertise and report them as "lectures." The distinction between the lecture and the sermon, which is made by the world at large, is, that the lecture is of a secular, and the sermon of a sacred, nature. But, surely, an exposition of a Bible subject in the enforcement of Christian duty, is not secular; nor is an essay on a political subject, or on "The Early Literature of Virginia," entitled to the name of sacred; but this latter was the subject of a recent "sermon."

We lately received a letter from one who is preaching the doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventists with some success, who writes:—

"Cannot you write something to induce our people to stop talking and writing about their 'lecturing?' I can see the bad effect of it wherever I go. I cannot see the propriety of calling a mass of words, embodying somebody's own ideas without Scripture proof, preaching, and the exposition of Bible truth, lecturing. It causes people to look slightingly on our work; and our ministers, by making the same distinction, lessen their own influence."

With this we fully agree. We ought to have all the influence for good to which we are justly entitled. We have made it a practice to remove the word, lectures, from all reports of labors which we publish. But this does not go very far while our ministers (lecturers ?) advertise and speak as they do. We believe this subject is worthy of their attention.