How to Preach Like a Liberal

James W. Thompson in Preaching Like Paul: Homiletical Wisdom for Today on Harry Emerson Fosdick’s approach to preaching and what’s wrong with it:

Harry Emerson Fosdick, who became a model for many preachers earlier in this century, described his method of preaching as the “project method.” Fosdick began with the questions of people in his congregation and attempted to provide answers from scripture. In his famous article “What’s the Matter with Preaching?” Fosdick wrote: “Start with a life issue, a real problem, personal or social, perplexing the mind or disturbing the conscience; face the problem fairly, deal with it honestly, and throw such light on it from the spirit of Christ, that people will be able to think more clearly and live more nobly because of that sermon.” Preaching was largely addressed to individuals and their questions and problems. It closely approximated personal counseling. The test of a good sermon, according to Fosdick, was the extent to which people wished to see the preacher for personal counseling.

The influence of Fosdick’s view of preaching has been considerable in our culture. Thus we have seen a long tradition of preaching that is addressed to “felt needs.” Such preaching has the advantage of being relevant, for it is based on a sensitive reading of the audience. In our therapeutic age, such preaching is likely to be well received. Through Fosdick’s influence, pastoral preaching has since been identified with problem solving. A sermon of this type moves from a vexing personal problem to a psychologically sound “Christian” answer. It has been “problem oriented,” tending toward comforting truths instead of the comfort that includes demand as well as succor. The literature of the past thirty years has been influenced by an understanding of “preaching as counseling on a group scale” and pastoring or shepherding as “tender and solicitous concern.”

This understanding of pastoral preaching is problematic for several reasons. In the first place, it owes more to modern therapeutic understanding than to the roots of its image in the life of a shepherd, whose responsibilities involved far more than comfort and support for those in his charge. The shepherd’s task was not only to comfort and support but also to guide, protect, and ensure the general welfare of those in his charge. In the second place, this view of pastoral preaching, with its emphasis on acceptance, never confronts the listeners with a word of judgment; nor does it offer guidance on the concrete demands of the Christian life. In the third place, the image in understood in almost exclusively individualistic terms; that is, “How can I be happy?” or “How can I have a happy marriage?” In the fourth place, this form of pastoral preaching has difficulty distinguishing between the legitimate needs of the listeners and the wants that have been created in our own society. In the fifth place, the pastoral image is only one of many images that the Bible employs to express the concern of leaders for the welfare of their people.

The New Testament offers a variety of images for the task of the preacher’s active concern for the welfare of the people. But we employ the pastoral image as the umbrella term. Paul uses imagery from the family life (see 1 Cor. 4:14-21) and the construction (see 1 Cor. 3:16-17) to describe preaching as the active involvement in ensuring the well-being of the community. In all of these terms, the underlying assumption about the purpose of preaching is the same. This preaching seeks to effect some beneficial change in the hearers and strives to be a catalyst for more responsible living on the part of those who hear. ( p. 87-88)

UPDATE

A couple of the comments have wondered if Fosdick’s method explained above is really that bad. That’s a fair question. I certainly am not against preaching to real problems or for preaching to be a form of counseling and shepherding. Perhaps it would have been helpful to include more of the context to Thompson’s quotation so we can see more clearly what he is reacting against. Two paragraphs earlier he writes:

What is pastoral preaching? Although the ideal of pastoral preaching is held in high regard, precisely what we mean by pastoral preaching is a matter of debate, especially in a therapeutic culture. The term “pastoral” has taken on a new meaning in contemporary speech. In ordinary usage, the word “pastoral” has come to be associated with support, acceptance, care, affirmation, healing, even unconditional positive regard, given to individuals. Pastoral care is regarded as individualized care given by the shepherd of the sheep.

Thompson goes on to say in the next paragraph:

Consequently, books of pastoral sermons and books about pastoral preaching tend to identify these needs with problems of the individual and the family, for example, loneliness, family conflict, the midlife crisis, unfulfilled potential, the search for happiness, or self-esteem. In the sermon, the preacher identifies the problem and offers a solution. Therefore pastoral preaching comes to be identified with “counseling on a group scale.”

The reason I chose the provocative title “How to Preach Like a Liberal” is to demonstrate that much of what passes for evangelical preaching is the same stuff Thompson sees (and critiques) in the 20th century’s quintessential liberal preacher.