Monday, August 21, 2006, 07:06 PM
Charles Haddon Spurgeon: How a Life-long Passion for Books Molded the Prince of Preachers.
by Austin B. Tucker
When Charles Spurgeon was a teenager, he was a promising preacher but untrained. A friend arranged for him to meet with Dr. Angus, principal of a theological school, now Regents Park College, Oxford. The meeting was to be in the home of Mr. Macmillan, the publisher. Spurgeon arrived on time. A maid ushered him into the drawing room. After a two-hour wait, he rang the bell for the maid. Then he learned to his dismay that Dr. Angus had waited long in another parlor but left to catch his train back to the city.
Spurgeon was terribly disappointed, but soon accepted the providence as divinely ordered. He never earned a theological degree. But those who would use Spurgeon as an argument against educated clergy have picked the wrong model. Spurgeon may have been largely self-taught, but he was anything but unlearned.
He was born June 19, 1834 to a businessman who was also a lay preacher. He spent his early years in the home of his grandfather, a Puritan pastor. When other children his age were struggling with one-syllable words, young Charles was reading serious works from his grandfather’s theological library. He read the Puritans. He read Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. And especially did he read John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress. This classic he first discovered before he was six years old. And he began a life-long practice of reading that allegory twice each year. He also devoured Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe and other English classics-- Doddridge, Baxter, Allain and James.
Throughout childhood and youth he read and read and read. Most were theological works, but he also rapidly assimilated books on subjects as diverse as botany and history. In a recent history of Preaching, David L.Larson, calls Spurgeon a “compulsive reader.” Once young Spurgeon’s parents found him reading Spanish Bullfights and punished him for it. “Bad books are a terrible thing,” he would later confess and wish that he could forget the half of that one he read! But Spurgeon had a photographic memory. Growing up in the nonconformist tradition of 19th century England, he attended several schools starting with “old Mrs. Burleigh” who held classes in her home. When he was aged 10 and 11 he studied Latin and Greek among other courses in the Stockwell House School. He was attending Mr. Leeding’s school when as a 16-year-old lad he preached his first sermon.
A part of Spurgeon's self education was making sure he heard the outstanding preachers of his day such as John Jay and John Angel James. “The preaching of Christ,” wrote Spurgeon as a boy preacher, “is the thunderbolt, the sound of which makes all hell shake. I must and I will make men listen.”
And they did listen by the thousands and tens of thousands. He was 19 when he moved to London to start as pastor of an old church called the New Park Street Baptist Church. Only about 80 souls heard that first sermon, and these were scattered in a decaying auditorium with 1200 seats. But soon the crowds came. He was forced to move to a rented auditorium of 5,000 seats while the new 6,000 seat Metropolitan Tabernacle went up. He had preached 1,000 sermons by age 21. By age 22, he was the most popular preacher of his day. His printed sermons sold 25,000 copies a week! Vincent Van Gogh, the Dutch artist, began preaching in the London slums using Spurgeon’s sermons.
The preacher who never attended seminary started a Pastor’s College while still a young man of 24 years. And he lectured to the students every Friday evening. He encouraged them to study hard and to learn all they could about as many subjects as possible. “Make the pulpit your first business,” he exhorted them. And it was his first business.
Still he found time to administer a rapidly growing church with many social ministries such as the Stockwell Orphanage he established in 1867. He personally ministered to hundreds of orphans. While the seven-year old Metropolitan Tabernacle underwent renovation and enlargement, he moved his Sunday services to Agriculture Hall where he preached to 20,000 each service. He was known as one who “preached without paper.”
If he was without notes in the pulpit, he was certainly not without time in the study. Throughout his lifetime he was a man of many books. He accumulated a personal library of 30,000 volumes. Most were heavy theological works. Lewis Drummond, his most recent and most extensive biographer noted: “A cursory survey of his library shows how diligently he read and carefully studied virtually every single one.”
Not only was he a well-read pulpiteer, he also wrote with a powerful pen. Sixty-three volumes of his published sermons are still in print and much in demand. Thirty million copies of his printed sermons and other works are in circulation including a half million of Lectures to My Students.That volume is still recommended reading in theological seminaries. A monthly church magazine, The Sword and the Trowel, reached enormous circulation around the English-speaking world. Also still regarded as a classic commentary on the Psalms is his multi-volume “A Treasury of David”. Over 150,000 copies of this set are in print. In addition to writing his own exposition of each of the 150 Psalms, he gleaned other commentaries for jewels worth quoting. He wrote in the preface: “I have ransacked books by the hundred, often without finding a memorable line as a reward, but at other times with the most satisfactory result.” And he added:“Readers little know how great labour the finding of but one pertinent extract may involve.”
Would Spurgeon have been a better preacher had providence turned him toward formal schooling instead of to his own course of study? That will ever be a question for debate. But without a doubt, anyone who thinks Spurgeon was uneducated is himself uninformed about “The Prince of All the Preachers.”
-30- abt
[ 17 comments ] ( 37 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link
Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 02:18 PM
There are some who strongly object to a preacher using anything that might persuade or convince unless it is the cold logic of a syllogism. Some make exception for the quoting of the Bible as an authoritative text, but they consider a heart-moving story as manipulation. They fear the preacher has sold out to the hucksters of Madison Avenue's "hidden persuaders."
Is there a distinction to be made between shameful manipulation and acceptable persuasion? If so, where do you draw the line? It is a fact of twenty-first century life that western civilization is no longer moved by logical arguments. Instead we make life-shaping decisions based on emotional appeal.
It has become a cliche to critique the pastor's sermon illustrations as "tear-jerking stories." Is it OK for a speaker to move the listener to laughter but not to tears? Tell me where you draw the line. abt
[ 7 comments ] ( 17 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink
Wednesday, July 5, 2006, 05:25 PM
“Why is there so much narrative in the Bible and so little in our sermons?” This is the question of Ralph Lewis and his son Gregg Lewis, co-authors of Inductive Preaching: Helping People Listen. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1983, p. 58. Their very helpful book answers the question saying, “Our sermons follow Greek rhetorical patterns rather than Bible models” (p. 64).
At a recent Thursday morning prayer breakfast, a regular date on my calendar, our host asked what book I am working on at the moment. I told him my main focus at present is a book with the working title; The Preacher as Storyteller. Immediately, a couple of friends in the group, made up of about half laymen and half ministers, expressed frank distaste for the whole concept of a preacher as storyteller. They happen to be laymen in the same church where, it seems, they feel their pastor strings together too many anecdotes in his preaching. I reminded them that Jesus as a preacher and teacher was best known for his parables. Jesus was a storyteller.
I would like to hear the thoughts of you who read this blog. Why do most sermons have so little narrative? Should preachers do more storytelling?
[ 16 comments ] ( 262 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink
Friday, June 23, 2006, 01:41 PM
Tell me something: why is it that less than one preacher in a hundred ever tries a dramatic monologue?
A dramatic monologue presents the truth of the biblical text from the perspective of an eye witness or a participant. For example, with or without costume, the preacher may play the role of Simon Peter and take the congregation back to some New Testament happening with the I-was-there report of a witness.
This way of preaching the gospel works for several reasons: (1) It is a fresh approach that gets attention and sticks in memory. (2) People are interested in other people and not likely to be bored with this approach if done well and not done too often. (3) Personal testimony is convincing. (4) The Bible lends itself to this kind of drama. (5) It also has the advantage of persuasion by indirection. So why have so few preachers ever tried it? abt
[ 14 comments ] ( 131 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink | related link
Wednesday, June 21, 2006, 12:00 AM
There are three personal stories a pastor needs to be ready to tell. The church needs to hear these in your preaching and elsewhere as you lead the flock. First, you need to be able to tell your own conversion experience. Secondly, the church needs to hear the testimony of your on-going spiritual pilgrimage. And third, what is often called "the vision story" is essential for pastors or any spiritual leader. What do you think? [ 8 comments ] ( 26 views ) | [ 0 trackbacks ] | permalink
Next
