Andy Stanley and the problem of preaching

Andy Stanley’s message has once again placed churches into a situation that demands a time of needed self-inspection. Any preacher or public communicator could probably name occasions where his words were ambiguous, if not misleading. The humble preacher will recognize his error and quickly offer a correction.

At this point, it seems evident that Stanley’s silence is purposeful. Christianity Today writes that Andy has “declined repeated requests for comment.” Perhaps Stanley will eventually offer some clarification to his poorly used illustration, but to date, the silence is deafening.

This latest topic of twitter-chatter should be a summons for preachers to consider once again our authority in preaching. In 2009, Stanley was interviewed by Ed Stetzer regarding his practice of topical preaching in opposition to expositional preaching. In part of the interview, Stetzer asked Stanley, “What do you think about preaching verse-by-verse messages through books of the Bible?” Stanley’s answer is enlightening.

“All Scripture is equally inspired, but not all Scripture is equally applicable or relevant to every stage of life. My challenge is to read culture and to read an audience and ask: What is the felt need? Or perhaps what is more important, what is an unfelt need they need to feel that I can address? Because if they don't feel it, then they won't address it.”

Stetzer's question regarded one form of expositional preaching. Yet Stanley's answer was a dismissal of all forms of expositional preaching. 

When the fog is lifted from another ambiguous comment made by a best-selling author and sought after preacher, I believe this comment of Stanley’s may be quite revealing. The authority for the church to speak to certain issues, be they social or theological, is not found in discovering the felt-needs of a crowd and offering a relevant answer. 

Rather, the authority resides in the Word of God. Homosexuality is neither accepted nor rejected because of cultural moorings. It is rejected because the authority of Scripture demands it is to be so. Before the preacher can correctly answer the question “what will we do with the homosexual?" he must correctly answer the question “what will we do with the Bible?” It seems the latter question was ignored in favor of the former. 

If we neglect our authority, we will sacrifice our voice. Our pursuit of a manufactured relevance will seal the fate of our irrelevance. By all appearances, this situation is not a problem of a wandering illustration, it is a problem of neglecting exposition.