Sensational Preaching
From the tenour of the last letter you may possibly infer that I am in favour of what is known as sensational preaching. Before contesting the justness of your inference we must clearly understand what we respectively mean by that ambiguous expression. If you ask whether I am in favour of sensatlonless preaching my answer will be a prompt and emphatic negative but you will not be justified in regarding this negative as committing me to an affirmative upon the question now to be discussed. What do you mean by the term sensational preaching’? I presume that you do not employ the expression abstractly but that you have in your mind certain positive illustrations to which you refer as embodying its meaning. Unless I know what these illustrations are I shall be arguing the question at a disadvantage; at the outset therefore, I must be allowed to cross-examine you a little. By sensational preaching do you mean a kind of pulpit mountebankism in which the iiTCverent mountebanks play all sorts of grotesque and ridicalous tricks, pulling off their coats, swaggering from side to side of the pulpit, setting up what they are pleased to call penitent forms, and treating with contempt all the decencies of public worship? You cannot seriously ask me whether I approve of such monstrous profanity; like yourself, I detest such wicked exliibitions with all my heart. By sensational preaching do you mean a screaming noise, “an idiot’s tale, full of sound and fury signifying nothing “? Then I am sure you will not attempt to degrade my understanding by asking whether I approve of it. By sensational preaching do you mean an incoherent raving about things in general and nothing in particular; a perversion of every text; an insult of common sense; a recital of anecdotes which are untrue, and a use of illustrations which are unmeaning? Is this the sort of thing you describe by the term” sensational preaching “? If so, I need not put my indignant answer into words. I would even say with Lord Bacon,” God forbid that every man who can take unto himself boldness to speak an hour together in a church, upon a text, should be admitted for a preacher, though he mean never so well.’’’ Boldness is not always moral courage; it is sometimes mere impudence, and only thought to be religious because it reaches the point of irreligion. Lord Bacon well says; ‘’ It may be justly thought, that amongst many causes of atheism, which are miserably met in our age; as schisms and controversies, profane scoffings in holy matters, and others; it is not the least that divers do adventure to handle the word of God which are unfit and unworthy.’’ To-day there are undoubtedly many who set themselves up to preach, who ought to become scholars in the infant classes of Sunday-schools, and who could be refused admission into those useful institutions only on the ground of discouraging the scholars by their ignorance and corrupting them by their bad manners. They are wanting in every claim to respect; their emptiness, their vanity, their hilarious
Sensational PreacMng. 63
animalism wliicli mistakes a good digestion for Divine inspiration, their contempt of men whose slioe-latchets they are not worthy to unloose, their vulgarity which, is only rendered harmless by its disgusting and repulsive intensity, must always mark such men as reckless intruders upon holy ground, and condemn them to the censure of all earnest and thoughtful people. I commit myself to this opinion with the full consent of my judgment: at the same time I cannot pause here as if the case were complete; there are other points which must be considered; there are discriminations to be marked; and in the discharge of this remaining duty our views may perhaps come into sharp collision.
If I look at the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, it was undoubtedly, in the highest and best sense, sensational. “The people were astonished at His doctrine, for He taught them as one having authority and not as the scribes.’’’’ Such a ministry must have produced a sensation. “And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying. What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? And immediately His fame spread abroad throughout all the region round about Gralilee.’’^ You cannot regard this as a sensationless ministry.” And all bare Him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth... They were astonished, and said. Whence hath this man this vdsdom, and these mighty works?... Never man spake like this man.... They were astonished at His doctrine, for His word was with power..,. And they were all amazed, and spake among themselves, saying. What a word is this V Can we have any doubt that such a ministry was sensational?
Now we are called to preach the same word and are distinctly promised that our Lord himself shall be with us alway. With such a doctrine and such a fellowship, how can we content ourselves with a spiritless ministry? We may be endued with power from on high and have grace poured into our lips; we have an inspired volume to expound and an inspiring Spirit to open our understanding and teach us the word of wisdom and power; why then should not our hearers say Did not our hearts burn within as he opened unto us the Scriptures V You will remind me of the difference between the disciple and his Lord, and I listen to the suggestion reverently; but let me remind you in return that our Lord thoroughly identifies Himself with His servants: He works in them; He has given them the Holy Ghost for the express purpose of leading them into all truth; all His influence is upon their side; they are the subjects of His intercession; He visits them in their holiest hours, and carries them for ever as the burden of His tenderest love; should they not then be mightier than their enemies, and bring with them into the sanctuary the power of an endless life? We are right in believing that we can never carry the Lord’s omnipotence in our poor dying hands, yet let us try not how unlike our Lord we can be, and yet be His ministers, but rather let us plead with Him until He makes us conquerors and princes in His kingdom. I cannot doubt the largeness of His answer to the prayer of ambitious love. It must touch Him to the heart to see one of His redeemed flock spending day and night in prayer that he, a saved and thankful sinner, may be taught the wisdom of winning souls! Can the Lord withhold His chief blessing from such a suppliant? Will
He not clothe him with power and give him the rod with which rocks may be broken and seas be divided? We have restrained prayer before God; we have not gone to Him as if we would take His kingdom by violence; we have brought the least of our vessels to the fountain of His grace; and it is no wonder that our ministry has been without power and without signs following. May I ask you to beware of the dangerous place, where our feet well-nigh slipped!
If we turn to apostolic history, we find a ministry that was undoubtedly sensational.” These that have turned the world upside down have come hither also.... Long time abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of His grace.... My speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.... Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance.... And now. Lord, behold their threatenings, and grant unto Thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak Thy word, by stretching forth Thine hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of Thy holy Child Jesus. ‘’’ Such a ministry must have been marked by extreme excitement, must have been sensational in an unparalleled degree. Of course it will be answered that the power of working miracles has been withdrawn, and that we address ourselves to a civilization which was unknown to the apostles; let this be granted, and what then? This is not a question as to the particular signs which should follow our ministry, but whether our ministry should produce an appropriate effect upon our hearers; should our
66 Ad Glerum: Advices to a Young Preacher.
words be heard as an idle tale, or as the messages of God? Should our preaching be languid or fervent? Should our ministry lie remote from the common experience of the world, or should it fall closely upon the whole daily life of our people? Should we preach merely as if we had learned a lesson, or as if we had seen God face to face and received a message from His lips? “We give but a poor account of the failure of our ministry when we say that the gift of miracles is withdrawn and that the times have changed. Our complaint conveys the impression, that’ Jesus Christ himself has changed, and that the truth is no longer what it was. If the times have changed our ministry should be adapted to the altered circumstances; upon the indifference which may have lulled the public mind we should pour the terrors and threatenings of the Lord; in the hearing of the luxurious and effeminate we should preach the doctrine of the Cross; and on the attention of the worldling and the scoffer we should force the realities and claims of eternity. The gospel can be adapted to all ages; we believe that to the end of the world it will be the power of God unto salvation; and we are called to be watchmen, taking note of the signs of the times, and changing our voice with the varying aspects of the age. The tokens which accompany the preaching of the gospel, as the seal of God, may not be precisely the same in any two centuries; but the gospel itself is the same for ever, and I cannot but feel that as ministers we should look for the special token of Divine favour which may be adapted to the peculiar circumstances under which we labour. If we are faithful servants God will not withhold His witness, and though that witness may not be given as fire upon Carmel, or as the signs and wonders of the apostolic age, it shall be so obviously accorded in the quickening and spiritual growth of our bearers as to leave no doubt that God himself is our inspiration and strength.
Passing from apostolic times, and looking into the lives of men who have done most to establish the character and power of the Christian pulpit, it will be found that they have been what may be justly called sensational p’eacliers. Look, for example, at the case of Whitefield; ‘^1 hardly ever knew him,^^ says Cornelius Winter, ‘finish a discourse without weeping more or less; his voice was often interrupted by his affections, and such was the scope he gave to his feelings sometimes, that he exceedingly wept, stamped loudly and passionately, and was frequently so overcome that for a few seconds you would suspect he never could recover; as soon as he was seated in his chair, nature demanded relief, and gained it by a vast discharge from the stomach usually, with a considerable quantity of blood, before he was at liberty to speak/^ I am not to be supposed to regard this as a model which young ministers should adopt; each man must of course work according to his temperament, yet he should in my opinion earnestly try the effect of discipline upon a temperament which is likely to make his ministry gloomy and frigid. Take away the element of joy from the gospel, and what is left? The gospel itself is then destroyed. Whitefields spirit was stirred within him; the cold message never could have come from his tongue of fire;” in Europe, in America, on board ship, in the workhouse, in the jail, in the hall of nobility, in the parish church or dissenting chapel, in the street, the mai’ket place, or bowling green, pressing the gospel on
f2 the attention of soldiers, mariners,, emigrants, outcasts, culprits, lords, and wits, and mixed multitudes, the man was the same, and his object was one — to save souls,” When he returned to Bristol after a short absence, the people blessed him as he passed along the streets; though preaching five times a week he could not appease the eager crowds. It was difficult for him to make his waythrough them to the pulpit. Some climbed upon the roof of the church, others hung upon the rails of the organ loft.... When he preached his farewell sermon, the irrepressible feelings of his hearers broke out into sobs and tears all over the house. They followed him weeping into the street. They kept him busy the next day from early morning till midnight, in comforting or counselling them, and he had to escape from their importunities secretly, during the night, for London.“‘^ And when he reached London,” constables were stationed at the door to restrain the multitude of hearers; churches were crowded on week days, an-d on the autumnal Sundaymornings the streets were thronged before dawn with people lighting their way by lanterns to hear him.“‘’* Or take the case of Joseph Alleine, the celebrated author of an ‘’ Alarm to the Unconverted.-” His biographer, the Rev. Charles Stanford, says: ‘^ ‘The king’s business requireth haste,’ was his constant feeling, and he could not stay to study the structure of sentences while dying men were waiting for the word of life. Had the young preacher of St. Mary’s been advised to think more of verbal refinement, he would probably have replied in language like that of John Owen, Know
♦Stevens’s History of Methodism, vol. i., pp. 89, 90.
Sensational PreacJiing. (59
that you have to do with a person, who, provided his words do but express the sentiments of his mind, entertains a fixed and absolute disregard for all elegance and ornaments of speech, His addresses had far higher elements of excellence. They all breathed a winning tenderness, and all revealed an amazing power of rapid, homely, shattering appeal. The thoughts were all impetuous with a rush of fresh and glowing life; and though there was the prophet s rough mantle there was also his chariot of fire. Every meaning was clear, every stroke told, every gesture seemed to speak, — vividus vultus, vividi oculi, vividoe manus, denique omnia vivida-. One of his hearers tells us that he never preached without a long expostulation with the impenitent, vehemently urging them to come to some good resolve before he and they parted, and to make their choice for life or death, expressing his great unwillingness to leave the subject till he could have some assurance that he had not fought against sin as one that beateth the air, and that much of his power arose from the point and seasonableness of his words, spoken as they were with an intimate knowledge of the individual cases of those who formed his auditory.^ There was piercing directness; the shafts of living Scripture flew straight to their intended mark, and each swift sentence had an aim clear as had the arrow found on the ancient battle-field, bearing the motto, *” For Philip’s eye.-’... With shouting voice, flashing eye, and a soul on fire with love, he proclaimed a completed and gratuitous salvation to all who were willing to accept it. The Spirit of God gave his message great eff’ect, and multitudes, through all the days of heaven, will remember Taunton Magdalene as the place where they first beheld that great sight — * the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world! ’ ‘^ Was this sensationless preaching? Take another illustration. Of William Barns, the missionary to China, it is said: “While preaching for his father, and very solemnly pressing upon his auditors the immediate acceptance of Christ, the whole of the vast assembly were overpowered; the Holy Spirit seemed to come down as a mighty rushing sound, and to fill the place: very many were that day struck to the heart; the sanctuary was filled with distressed and inquiring souls.’’^ Frederick William Eobertson cannot have been a sensationless preacher:” It was always as great a mental exertion to recall as to think out a sermon; and he was frequently unable, if he waited till Monday, to write out the notes of what he had delivered on Sunday, unless it had been partially written beforehand. After some of his most earnest and passionate utterances he has said to a friend, ‘Have I made a fool of myself ?^ ^’ We ought to be very sure, in condemning sensational preaching, that we do not condemn such men as these, for while they are not by any means to be classed with the grotesque pretenders described at. the beginning of this letter, they certainly cannot be classed with the heartless formalists who have turned the gospel into a metaphysical enigma, or a lofty speculation which has little or nothing to do with the sin and sorrow of the world.
This view of the subject permits a natural reference to what may be termed emotional preaching. I have a strong conviction that our sermons should be more and more marked by deep Christian feeling. The subject is one of extreme delicacy, without question; for nothing is more odious than an affectation of pathos and nothing more likely to be resented than an artificial attempt upon the emotions of our hearers; you will not however understand me as advocating anything so hypocritical and abominable so I need not waste your time in fencing my position. I wish to draw your attention to the suggestion that the emotion of our sermons is not equal to their information. At this moment, for example, there is lying before me a volume of really able sermons, in which I have not found one touch of natural pathos. The sentences have been carefully constructed; there is no appearance of any word having been hastily adopted; the logic is good; the theology is sound: yet it would almost appear that either the preacher had no heart, or he preached to hearers who had none. Throughout the whole production there is a cold scholastic air; and in the effort after scientific precision the emotions have been quite overlooked. Surely this is not Christian preaching; it is vigorous and even eloquent talk ahoitt Christianity, but the spirit of sympathy, tenderness, and anxious importunity is not in it -, the anatomy is good, but where is the loving and earnest life? There is too in these sermons a decidedly controversial tone; the preacher is always on the defensive: an evil spirit seems to be looking at him, and constantly threatening an assault; consequently the spirit of criticism is excited in the hearers, and one feels tempted to say, “well, if he is going to be so desperately logical as all this we must watch for his tripping ;^^ the hearer is never allowed to rest; his anxieties are stimulated; and even when the preacher ventures to assure him that the ground is safe he gives the assurance in a tone which suggests that after all there is a little reason for uneasiness. In this way the gospel ceases to be good tidings, and becomes an unprofitable controversy. Is this right? Should not logic lead to something better than itself? If we fall short of love, do we not fail of the chief end of our ministry? Let us think of Jesus Christ, who, when He came near the city, wept over it; and let us be mindful of Paul, whose argumentative power has never been denied, who said,” many walk, of whom I have told you often, and tell you now even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ,^^ and who ceased not to warn his hearers day and night with tears. The gospel is adapted to the heart of the world; it seeks to bind up the broken-hearted and comfort all that mourn, and therefore should be preached in a spirit kindred with its own.^ A harsh controversial statement of its doctrines may gain the preacher a reputation as a skilful debater, but it will never give him the high position of an apostle of Jesus Christ.
Perhaps I shall not have a better opportunity than in this connection of referring to a fallacious analogy which is sometimes attempted by the supporters of a very questionable sensationalism. It has been complained that the minister does not often compare favourably with the barrister; the appeals of the former are said to be inferior to those of the latter, and the effect is considered to suffer proportionately. Without going into the argument which might be justly founded upon the difference of subjects which engage the attention of the respective speakers, it may be enough to refer to two or three points which destroy the tenableness of the analogy. Are our hearers bound upon oath to listen to us, and to give
Sensational Preaching, 73
their verdict before leaving the church? Set a barrister to expound an act of parliament eighteen hundred years old; let him address the jury upon it twice every week in the year; let each juror pay five shillings a quarter for a seat in the jury box; let the barrister call upon the jury for a monthly collection to enable other barristers to expound the same act of parliament to other juries; when the court room falls out of repair let the jury be called upon to pay for its restoration; and when the barrister has thus put himself upon an outside equality with the minister let him have five years’ work, then five more, let him double the ten and add five and then we shall see how he compares for freshness, variety, and power with a painstaking minister of Jesus Christ.