LEARNING IN THE PULPIT by Robert H. Williams

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Tuesday, November 18, 1884

FromAdvent Review and Sabbath Herald, Vol. 61, No. 46

LEARNING IN THE PULPIT.

By Robert H. Williams

DOES THE PULPIT NEED IGNORANCE—OR CULTURE?

A GOOD many who cried out against learning in the pulpit never stopped to consider whether ignorance was any more acceptable to God. Fifty years ago, Dr. Archibald Alexander wrote as follows: “I know it to be a fact that multitudes would walk ten miles to hear a black man who could not read a word, in preference to going to hear the best sermons within a few miles.” Others want the learning, although it is beyond them, and have but little respect for the plain preaching of the gospel.

The gifted Romaine was asked to display a little more learning in the pulpit. The first text after this request, he read in Hebrew, remarking: “I suppose scarcely any one in this congregation understood that.” He then read it in Greek, and said, “There may be one or two that understand me now.” He then read it in Latin, and said, “Possibly a few more may comprehend me, but the number is still very limited.” Then he read it in English, and remarked: “There, now, you all understand me; which do you think is best? I hope always so to preach that the most ignorant person in the congregation may understand me.” Even Robert Hall, the famous English divine, was once accosted in the following manner: “Mr. Hall, this preaching won’t do for us; it will only suit a congregation of old women.”

It is related of Dr. Archibald Alexander after he had reached the period of ripe scholarship and great power over his audience, that a man arose and left the church where he was preaching, because he delivered his message in such a plain, simple manner. George Herbert, knowing this desire on the part of some of his congregation, preached a very learned sermon, and at its conclusion remarked: “I shall not often preach so learnedly, but shall henceforth strive to save your souls.”

In dismissing a minister, it was put upon the record of the ecclesiastical body having jurisdiction in the case, “Rev. Mr. A., in our judgment, has given to this church and congregation meat fully equal to their digestive powers”! Said a distinguished bishop of the English Church, “It takes all our learning to make things plain.” Plainness and simplicity are the fruit of learning. Faraday, when lecturing, said that he kept his eye on the dullest student in the class, and when his face lighted up, he knew that the whole class understood, and that he could proceed. Those who stand highest in any departments of learning are those who can tell in the plainest, simplest language what theories they hold. Fullness, variety, plainness, are the result of learning, and are wonderfully attractive to the multitude. The learning that furnishes these will give freshness and authority to pulpit utterance, and make the preacher a power in the community.

When the minister does his best to fill his pulpit, people will come and fill the pews. Guthrie says: “Alas for the day when pulpits are proverbial for dullness, and the greatest of all professions has the smallest men to fill it.” And Baxter bears this testimony: “He is the able, skillful minister that is best skilled in the art of instructing, convincing, persuading, and, consequently, of winning, souls; and that is the best sermon that is best in these.” These utterances are equally worthy the consideration of the pulpit and the pews.—Rev. Robert H. Williams.