See theme

This is part one in a two-part series.

Textual preaching dominated the homiletical landscape in the latter half of the 1800s and the first half of the 1900s, and remains popular in some circles today. The list of preachers who have employed textual preaching effectively, though not exclusively, includes Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Frederick W. Robertson, and Rick Warren.

At the dawn of the 21st century, when topical preaching and expository preaching get most of the press in America, what is the role of textual preaching? That question can be answered only after defining what textual preaching is.

A definition of textual preaching

The question about what constitutes textual preaching resembles the question about who killed John F. Kennedy. Even the experts disagree. Some homileticians distinguish it from expository preaching, while some view it as a type of expository preaching or even equate it with expository preaching. Others argue that the length of the passage to be preached determines whether the sermon is textual or not. Others disagree and claim that the relation of the divisions of the sermon to the divisions of the text is what classifies a sermon as textual or places it in another category.

So what is textual preaching? A good place to begin a quest for definition is the classic homiletics text by John Broadus, On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (first published in 1870). Broadus, a premier Southern Baptist preacher and seminary president, classified sermons in three forms: (1) subject-sermons (what most contemporary homileticians describe as topical), (2) text-sermons (what this article refers to as textual), and (3) expository sermons.

According to Broadus, a subject—or topical—sermon is structured according to the nature of the subject rather than the biblical text(s) on which it is based. He notes that the Bible does "not present truth in a succession of logical propositions," so when the preacher needs to present a doctrine or moral issue, the topical form works well. While the sermon must of course be faithful to Scripture, its structure does not take its cue from the biblical text(s) on which it is based.

In both text—or textual—and expository sermons, the sermon's structure takes its cue from the biblical text. The preacher draws the "topic and the heads"—that is, the subject and its divisions—from the passage. What, then, is the difference between a text-sermon and an expository sermon? Broadus sees a gradation from textual to expository sermons. The difference lies not so much in the length of the sermon text as in its details. He explains: "If we simply take the topic and the heads which the passage affords and proceed to discuss them in our own way, that is not an expository sermon but a text-sermon."

Broadus distinguished between two types of text-sermons: those that present a single subject and those that discuss several subjects. In a single-subject text sermon, the details relate to one definite and comprehensive subject. However, in a text-sermon with several topics, the points or topics of the sermon are much more diverse, although Broadus argues that they should have some kind of "internal connection."

While the length of a passage to be preached does not define the form of the sermon, it appears that text-sermons are generally based on shorter passages. Broadus gives examples of text-sermon outlines for Acts 9:4, Jude 24, Luke 23:43, Ezekiel 11:19–20, Psalm 73:24, 26, and Romans 5:1–2. Still, he observes that an expository sermon may be devoted to a long passage, a short one, or even part of a sentence. Likewise, in theory, a textual sermon could be based on a long passage. The bottom line is how the details develop. An expository sermon will explain and concentrate on the details of a given biblical text. A textual sermon will take its leading ideas from the text but then look elsewhere in Scripture for much of its development. In a sense, then, a textual sermon is a hybrid of a topical and an expository sermon. As Broadus' two categories for text sermons suggest, a textual sermon may lean more in one direction than another.

Here are some examples cited by Broadus. In the following sermon on Luke 23:43, the preacher will take the successive words or clauses of the text and enlarge on them.
I. Thou shalt be in paradise
II. Thou shalt be with me in paradise
III. Today thou shalt be with me in paradise

The following sermon on Romans 5:1–2 describes the believer's happy estate:
I. He may have peace with God
II. He may stand in the grace of God
III. He may exult in hope of the glory of God

Still another sermon from Ezekiel 11:19–20 attempts to explain the particulars of genuine religions. Notice that these points are not characteristics as in the sermon on Romans 5:1–2. Rather, they are labels or categories for analyzing what the text says about genuine religion.
I. Its author
II. The disposition it produces
III. The obedience it demands
IV. The blessedness it assures

How have other homileticians understood textual preaching? In 1881, Austin Phelps defined a textual sermon as "one in which the text is the theme, and the parts of the text are the divisions of the discourse, and are used as a line of suggestion." His last phrase—"used as a line of suggestion"—aligns his understanding of a textual sermon with John Broadus. In 1955, Merrill Unger suggested that the only difference between a textual sermon and an expository sermon is found in the length of the text. A textual sermon expounds a passage of shorter length. H. Grady Davis mentions textual preaching only twice in his classic work, Design for Preaching, published in 1958. In the first discussion, he seems to link textual preaching and expository preaching. In the second discussion, he cites a sermon by Karl Barth on Matthew 11:28 as an example of a textual sermon that "draws not only its idea but also its structural elements from the text." In 1990, Sidney Greidanus proposed that all textual preaching be understood as expository preaching since "textual preaching is preaching on a biblical text and expounds the message of that text." Al Fasol contributed a fine essay in 1992 on textual preaching in which he seemed to concur with Greidanus in arguing that a textual sermon is not defined by the length of its text but rather by its practice of drawing both its topic and divisions from the biblical text. In 1994, Bryan Chappell published Christ-Centered Preaching: Redeeming the Expository Sermon, now a standard textbook in many evangelical seminaries. His taxonomy of sermon forms, which resembles the understanding of John Broadus, is helpful for grasping the uniqueness of textual preaching. Here is a summary of his distinctions:

• A topical sermon takes its topic from the passage and gets its organization from the
nature of the subject rather than from the text's distinctions.
• A textual sermon takes its topic and main points from ideas in the text, but the
development of those main ideas comes from sources outside the immediate text.
• An expository sermon takes its topic, main points, and subpoints from the immediate
text.

The following definition attempts to describe the textual sermon as it has been defined and practiced over the past 150 years. A textual sermon derives its topic and main ideas from a biblical text—usually a verse or two—and then develops these ideas theologically from other biblical texts.

It seems helpful, then, to maintain Broadus's distinction between and gradation from topical to textual to expository sermons. At the very least, a textual sermon should be viewed as a specific type of expository sermon, if not a category by itself.

Next week: The value of textual preaching today

Steve Mathewson is senior pastor of CrossLife Evangelical Free Church in Libertyville, lllinois. He is also director of the doctor of ministry program at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon.