And this is the seminar on Spurgeon, Learning from the Prince of Preachers, that's the title they gave me. I've done so many seminars and conferences where I've talked about Spurgeon, it was hard for me to come up with something new. But this is one I've never done, at least in America.

I did a lecture like this, similar to this, in London a couple of years ago. But this will be one, if you've heard me speak on Spurgeon, you probably haven't heard this yet. And I decided what I would do is survey his lectures to his students, 'cause it's such a rich source of material.

This idea came to me last summer, popped up on my Twitter feed, an announcement that Spurgeon's College in London had installed Rick Warren as their first honorary chancellor. (audience groaning) That was my response, too. (audience laughing) And in fact, the reaction from evangelicals on Twitter, understandably, included scores of people who expressed consternation about that.

Anyone who knows anything about Rick Warren, I think, understands that he is the anti-Spurgeon. Warren and Spurgeon are just poles apart on practically everything, ranging from their contradictory philosophies of ministry to the virtually opposite theological points of view that undergird what are really antithetical approaches to preaching and church leadership and really everything.

And I was amused by some of the comments that popped up on Twitter. Here are some of the tweets I collected. I'll just read 'em to you. I didn't write these. (audience laughing) So if they sound really snarky, don't blame me for that. I'll read three or four of the tweets.

This is an embarrassment to Spurgeon's name and legacy. I said amen to that one. Another guy writes, "What an absolute kick of dust "in the face of Charles Spurgeon." And then somebody else goes, "Spurgeon would not like this." (audience laughing) That's an understatement. And my favorite, he goes, "Spurgeon would roast this compromiser like a London broil." (audience laughing) And of course, all those comments are exactly right.

If Spurgeon could come back to the college he founded, I'm absolutely certain he would ask them to take his name off of it. Rick Warren is the living embodiment of everything Spurgeon opposed in his philosophy of ministry, in the way he handles biblical texts and deals with doctrine, in the way he deliberately ignores or glosses over all of the potentially offensive aspects of gospel truth, and especially in the way he seeks to befriend and impress the secular world.

And can we be honest? Virtually everything Rick Warren does as a pastor is antithetical to what Spurgeon said pastors should do. He's the anti-Spurgeon. He represents exactly what Spurgeon did not want his own pastoral students to become, and that's not mere guesswork on my part. Spurgeon left us a very clear record of what he taught his college students back when the pastor's college didn't yet have his name on it.

But it reflects his biblical and theological convictions in what was taught there during his lifetime. He lectured to his ministerial students at the college on every Friday, usually on Friday, and about 30 of his lectures have been preserved for us in a volume that, as far as I know, has never been out of print.

It's called Lectures to My Students. And the original version of this collection was published in stages over several years' time in, I said stages, four thin volumes. It's now one thick volume, but you'll find some later editions that included only three of those four volumes because in Spurgeon's own reckoning, commenting and commentaries belonged in this set.

That was actually volume two that he released, his book on commenting and commentaries. And if you include that in the series, then it's four volumes. But it usually, that one is separated out. Commenting and commentaries is an annotated bibliography of commentaries, and it has just two lectures in it, two lectures and then this really important bibliography of the commentaries that Spurgeon read and used.

But the two lectures are titled, one is a chat about commentaries, and the other one is on commenting. And so in chronological terms, that volume, commenting and commentaries, was the second volume published. And as I said, these days it's usually published as a standalone volume separate from Lectures to My Students.

So if you buy the current one volume edition of Lectures to My Students, you've actually got three of the four volumes. And if you want the fourth volume, get Commenting and Commentaries. Volume one was published in 1875, and it contained 13 of Spurgeon's best lectures. Volume two then was Commenting and Commentaries.

It was published exactly a year later. Volume three came out the following year. So it looked like it was gonna be a series of books every year. But after volume three, the series stood at three volumes, literally for 20 years, until the fourth volume, which is also sometimes published as a standalone volume.

It was called The Art of Illustration. And it was published in 1897, that's five years after Spurgeon died. And if you can find the original edition, its title page says Lectures to My Students, and the subtitle is The Art of Illustration. And by the time it was published, Commenting and Commentaries had secured its position as a standalone reference work.

So the series was already being published then as just a three-volume set. So I say all that because it's confusing. You'll find in used bookstores, sometimes a single volume, sometimes the three-volume set, sometimes, you know, just two volumes, and just so you know what you're getting. The Art of Illustration, then, was the final book in the series, and it was the only one of the four volumes that was published posthumously.

It was put together by Spurgeon's private secretary, Joseph Harold, who assembled this final set of lectures around the theme of sermon illustrations. And Harold says that Spurgeon was actually working on that volume before he died, and he was the one who gave it the title, The Art of Illustration.

Lectures to My Students, then, is generally published as a single volume these days, like I said, and you might find, if you compare it with the table of contents that I'm going to talk about, or if you look at the old volumes, the order of the lectures has been rearranged.

But then the question always comes up, how were these lectures recorded? How were these, how do we know what Spurgeon said in a lecture? Because one of the sad facts of Spurgeon's life and career is that although recording technology existed, nobody ever thought to record Spurgeon's voice. So today, there is not a single recording, we don't know what Spurgeon sounded like, other than the descriptions that were written of his voice.

If you look it up on the internet, you'll find a recording of one of his sons, and always attached to it is a bunch of people saying, well, people said he sounded just like his dad. He might have had the same regional accent as his dad, but his voice can't possibly be like Charles Spurgeon, because it's a soft voice, and Spurgeon actually could project his voice enough that without any kind of amplification, he could speak to a crowd of 20,000 people, and be heard on the outer edges of the crowd.

I don't even know how that's possible, but Spurgeon did it, and George Whitfield did it, and I don't think I've ever heard of anyone else who could do that, but Spurgeon did. Anyway, there was no recording ever made of his lectures, but what happened was there were always stenographers present whenever Spurgeon spoke to audiences of any size, and the lecture hall at the pastor's college was no exception to that, so there are undoubtedly many lectures besides these that did not get transcribed and published.

Some of them occasionally were transcribed and published in his magazine, The Sword and the Trowel, and some of those didn't make it into this collection in the books. I'm gonna talk about one of those at the end, but anyway, I can't imagine that Spurgeon had tons of time to prepare lectures for pastoral students, and I can't find any record of how he did this, whether he spoke from notes when he delivered these lectures or whether it was just all off the top of his head.

I imagine, knowing how Spurgeon worked, that if he used notes at all, they were minimal, because, of course, that's how he preached as well, usually from no more than a bare outline, sometimes that he would record on the back of an old envelope, and the introduction to volume one is a short, well, it's an introduction, but it really is the length of a short chapter titled Introduction and Apology, and although there's no reason, really, for Spurgeon to have to apologize for anything, he explains the reason that the style of these lectures, which he perceives as unusually informal, and he sort of apologizes for that.

They're not as formal as he would be when he preached. In fact, he says it in these words. I'll quote him. He writes, "My college lectures are colloquial, familiar, full of anecdote, often humorous. They are purposely made so to suit the occasion. At the end of the week, I meet the students and find them weary with sterner studies, and I judge it best to be as lively and interesting in my prelections as I well can be," he said.

"I am as much at home with my young brethren as in the bosom of my family, and therefore I speak without restraint," which is what makes these lectures, frankly, the most interesting. It's probably the most interesting material you can read from Spurgeon, and I'm always sorry that it doesn't get read well enough.

I think a lot of people overlook it because you think lectures to my students, that's gonna be academic. I don't need to read that. It's really some of the most fun of Spurgeon's material to read, but in his own assessment, these lectures you might call Spurgeon unplugged. You know, he's speaking here freely without filters, without, you know, the normal restraint that he would use in his public speaking, and that explains, I think, some of the charm of these lectures.

They're very instructive when it comes to understanding Spurgeon's philosophy of ministry and his preaching style and his extraordinary giftedness. In fact, it's, I think, fairly certain that Spurgeon's busy schedule would not have permitted him to do a lot of special research and preparation for these lectures, and yet, as is always true of Spurgeon's speaking, it's full of insight.

He loads these lectures with references to classical literature and history and advanced theological observations, and of course, lots of biblical references. There's a lot more humor, as he says, in these lectures than Spurgeon would use in his sermons. There are funny things in his sermons, too, and he's well-known that he tried to restrain his humor when he spoke.

Once a lady came and scolded him and said, "You shouldn't say funny things like that "when you're preaching. "Preaching is serious business." And he said, "Madam, if you knew all the humorous thoughts "that come into my mind while I'm preaching, "you would congratulate me on my restraint." (audience laughing) But he felt free to be a lot more candid when he's lecturing in these ministerial students, so his criticisms are a little harsher, his humor is a lot more, there's a lot more of it.

Still, I wouldn't say, reading these, that these lectures are colloquial, that was the word he used, or they're not breezy, informal talks. He weaves a lot more literary and historical references than he would use in his sermons. He clearly expected these ministerial students to think and listen at a very high level.

And so I want to run through with you a list of the 13 lectures in that first set of lectures to my student. I wanna kinda summarize 'em for you. I'll give you the titles of all 13 lectures in order, and I'll summarize the main point of each lecture, and if time permits, I'll give you a few salient quotes from each lecture, and I hope this'll be enough to give you the flavor of these lectures, because I want to try to motivate you to read these for yourselves.

They're really edifying and well worth your time, and I hope this'll motivate you for that. So we'll cover the first of these four volumes, and remember, there are two or three more volumes after that, depending on how you count, but I'm pretty sure that a survey of this first volume is gonna give you an appetite for more.

And then at the end, I want to mention this one other lecture that was not included in any of the four volumes that Spurgeon conceived in this set, but first, let's survey volume one. I mentioned that this volume starts with Spurgeon's introduction and apology. It's short, it's just six paragraphs.

Of course, knowing Spurgeon, these are long paragraphs, but it's about two pages in the original, two pages of fine type in the original edition, in which he gives the first ever hint that his book Commenting and Commentaries was in the works. By the way, if you don't have that, you should.

People always ask me, how do you choose the commentaries you use when you study? And I always say, the first place I go is to Spurgeon's Commenting and Commentaries and see what he recommends. And frankly, I'm maybe a little jaded in this, but I think older commentaries are almost always better than the ones that have been published in the 20th century.

That's my personal opinion. Anyway, at the end of this introduction, he writes this, quote, should this publication succeed, I hope very soon to issue in similar form a work on commenting containing a full catalog of commentaries, and also I'd like to print a second set of lectures. So he hints that he doesn't expect his book Commenting and Commentaries to find a very enthusiastic reception.

He says this, persons interested in our subjects are not numerous enough to secure a very large circulation. Now he was wrong, of course. Commenting and Commentaries sold more than 10,000 copies in its first printing in the first year alone, which made it a remarkable success. And I think Spurgeon would probably be amazed to know that it has been reprinted and reprinted more times than I can count in the 20th century.

And like I said, speaking personally, I still use it as the first resource I check when I'm trying to decide what commentaries to buy on whatever new passage I'm going to study. So, lecture one in the first series is called The Minister's Self-Watch. And in some ways, this may be the most important lecture in the whole series.

It is a must read for anyone in church leadership, where Spurgeon urges his students to guard their hearts and their personal habits. He says this, quote, it will be in vain for me to stock my library or organize societies or project schemes if I neglect the culture of myself.

For books and agencies and systems are only remotely the instruments of my holy calling. My own spirit, soul, and body are my nearest machinery for sacred service. My spiritual faculties and my inner life are my battle axe and my weapons of war. And he cautions then about poisoning your life with secret sins or double-mindedness.

And he points out that if you do this, it will inevitably corrupt your preaching. If the channel is full of poison, how can it distribute the water of life? He says this, quote, it's a terrible thing when the healing balm of the gospel loses its efficacy through the blunderer who administers it.

You all know the injurious effects frequently produced on water through flowing through leaden pipes. Even so, the gospel itself in flowing through men who are spiritually unhealthy may be debased until it grows injurious to their hearers. It is to be feared that Calvinistic doctrine becomes most evil teaching when it is set forth by men of ungodly lives and exhibited as if it were a cloak for licentiousness.

And Arminianism, on the other hand, with its wide sweep of the offer of mercy, may do most serious damage to the souls of men if the careless tone of the preacher leads his hearers to believe that they can repent whenever they please and that therefore no urgency surrounds the gospel message.

My favorite sentence in the lecture is a short one. He says, "Beware of being shoddy preachers." It's a convicting lecture about the high calling of being a pastor, and I can't read it without wondering if there might have been a few men in that lecture hall when he delivered this who subsequently withdrew from the pastor's college and decided to pursue a different calling, because he will leave you with a definite understanding that the calling of being a pastor is a high calling, and if you're not worthy of it, you shouldn't do it.

If you're not called to it, you shouldn't pursue that vocation. Here's one more line from that first lecture. Quote, "Many are disqualified for office in the church "who are well enough as simple members." He's saying you don't have to be a pastor or an elder in order to have a fruitful ministry in the local church.

To those who would be pastors, he says this. Quote, "When we say to you, my dear brethren, "take care of your life, we mean be careful "even of the minutia of your character. "Avoid little debts and unpunctuality." I'm convicted 'cause I was almost late here. (audience laughing) "Avoid gossiping and nicknaming and petty quarrels "and all of those other little vices "which fill the ointment with flies." And especially, he says, you should never ever fail to keep your word, keep your commitments.

He says, quote, "We cannot be too careful. "Truth must not only be in us, it must also shine from us." And one more point, by the way, in this lecture, Spurgeon warns strongly against the practice of restoring men to public ministry after they have been disqualified because of moral turpitude.

He says, quote, "I hold very stern opinions "with regard to Christian men "who have fallen into gross sin. "I recognize they may be truly converted "and they may be with mingled hope and caution "received back into the church, "but I question, I gravely question "whether a man who has grossly sinned "should be restored to the pulpit.

"As John Angel James remarks, "when a preacher of righteousness "has stood in the way of sinners, "he should never again open his lips "in the great congregation "until his repentance is as notorious as his sins." Spurgeon says that in such cases, he doubts whether the man was really called to public ministry in the first place.

In his words, quote, "Having been once tried, "they have proved themselves to have too little grace "to stand the crucial test of ministerial life." He comes back to that same theme in lecture two. Lecture two is titled, "The Call to the Ministry," and he's answering the question, how can students know for sure that they are called to full-time ministry?

And he says this, "The first sign of the heavenly call "is an intense, all-absorbing desire for the work." Other qualifications he names are that the man must be able to teach, he must meet the other qualifications for eldership that are given in Scripture, and then third, he says, the man who is truly called to ministry must see a measure of conversion work going on under his efforts.

He's saying, if you're not already clearly winning souls in your capacity as a lay Christian, what makes you think you're called to full-time ministry, or even short-term missions? And then fourth, he says, you should see the signs of a fruitful response to your preaching. And in fact, one other thing about this second lecture, before I move on beyond it, when Rick Warren was appointed Chancellor of Spurgeon's College, a number of people pointed out that Rick Warren's well-known advocacy for ordaining women to pastoral ministry and making women preach, that is seriously at odds with Spurgeon's views on the qualifications for ministry.

But Rick Warren himself, who evidently doesn't know a whole lot about what Spurgeon actually believed, he published a statement on that, and it said this, quote, "The 167-year-old Spurgeon's College in London "inducted me as their chancellor, "telling me that my views on ordination "are identical to Spurgeon's." Well, the person who told him that was the president of Spurgeon's College, who currently is a woman.

So, that's how things are going there, but Spurgeon lays that claim to rest in the very first paragraph of this lecture on the call to ministry. He points out that there are many ways to serve the Lord and serve the church and have a fruitful ministry in the church.

He says, quote, "Our service to Christ "need not take the particular form of preaching. "Certainly, in some cases, it must not. "As, for instance, in the case of females, "whose public teaching is expressly prohibited." That's in the first paragraph. And he cites, of course, 1 Timothy 2.12 and 1 Corinthians 14.34, and if that's not clear enough, and in case anyone is confused by the false claim that Spurgeon was just fine with ordaining women as pastors, listen to what Spurgeon said in a sermon he preached on Sunday morning, April 19th, 1885.

And, trigger warning here, by today's standards, this kind of blunt candor is not politically correct, but Spurgeon said this, not me. So, he said this, quote, "Women are best when they are quiet." (congregation laughing) He said, "I share the Apostle Paul's feelings "when he bade women be silent in the assembly, "yet there is work for holy women." And we read of Peter's wife's mother that she arose and ministered to Christ.

She did what she could and what she should. She arose and ministered to him. Some people can do nothing that they are allowed to do, but they waste their energies in lamenting that they're not called on to do other people's work. Blessed are they who do what they should do.

It's better to be a good housewife or nurse or domestic servant than to be a powerless preacher or a graceless talker. She did not arise and prepare a lecture or preach a sermon, but she arose and prepared a supper, and that's what she was fitted to do. Was she not a housewife?

As a housewife, let her serve the Lord. Again, that doesn't sound very tactful by today's standards, but in fact, you couldn't get by. If you said that on Twitter nowadays, you'd almost certainly get ratioed, but I think that excerpt should be sufficient at least to show that Spurgeon was not singing from the same songbook as Rick Warren.

Lecture three in that first series is The Preacher's Private Prayer, and it's another extremely convicting lecture. I'm warning, you read this, you will feel like Spurgeon has stepped on your toes. Here's just a sample. He says, quote, "Among all the formative influences "which go to make up a man honored of God in the ministry, "I know of none more mighty than his own familiarity "with the mercy seat.

"All that a college course can do for a student "is coarse and external compared with the spiritual "and delicate refinement obtained by communion with God. "Prayer is the tool of the great potter "by which he molds the vessel. "All of our libraries and studies are mere emptiness "compared with our prayer closets." And then in lecture four, he stays with the theme of prayer.

The third lecture was about private prayer, and number four is about public prayer. And Spurgeon opposed the idea of writing out a prayer and reading it. He didn't like that. He believed that a pastoral prayer should be extemporaneous and not just, to use his words, liturgical devotion. And he didn't think that exaggerated eloquence was a plus in praying.

He said this, quote, "Fine prayers are generally "very wicked prayers. "In the presence of the Lord of hosts, "it ill becomes a sinner to parade the feathers "and finery of tawdry speech "with the view of winning applause from his fellow mortals. "Hypocrites who dare to do this have their reward, "but it is a reward to be dreaded." And then there was a particular kind of vain repetition that he deplored as well.

He said this, quote, "Another fault equally to be avoided "in prayer is an unhallowed and sickening superabundance "of endearing words. "When dear Lord and blessed Lord and sweet Lord "come over and over again as vain repetitions, "they are among the worst of blots. "I must confess, I might feel no revulsion in my mind "to the words, dear Jesus, if they fell from the lips "of a true Puritan, but when I hear fond "and familiar expressions hackneyed by persons "not at all remarkable for spirituality, "I'm inclined to wish that they could, "in some way or another, come to a better understanding "of the true relation that exists between man and God.

"The word dear has come from daily use "to be so common and so small, and in some cases, "so silly and affected a monosyllable, "that interlarding one's prayers with it "is not to edification." Now, I heartily agree with all of that, but I have to confess, I don't agree with everything Spurgeon says in this lecture.

I don't think a written prayer, if it's delivered meaningfully, is a bad thing. I think it's actually better to ponder what you want to say and word it very carefully beforehand than to be groping for words and stuttering around when you're trying to be extemporaneous. Nevertheless, in fact, the first Spurgeon sermon I ever read was a sermon titled "Order and Argument in Prayer," which is a phrase he borrows from the book of Job, where Job says he's going to plead his case before God and he's gonna order his thoughts beforehand, and Spurgeon is saying, "Before you go to God in prayer, "you should at least think through "what you're going to say." So, in my mind, it's easier to do that and write it out than to make myself try to extemporaneously come up with the right thing while I'm praying.

Personal preference, I don't think what he's giving here, even Spurgeon would intend to be a legalistic measure, but I definitely agree with the spirit of what he's saying, that sort of formal liturgical devotion is worthless. And I emphatically agree with the part of this lecture where Spurgeon says, "Do not let your prayer be long." And he adds this, "It is not required of you "to prolong your speech until everyone is longing "to hear the word amen." (congregation laughing) Can I get an amen?

(congregation laughing) Anyway, lecture five, then, is titled, "Sermons," with then a colon, "Sermons, Their Matter." And I love this lecture. Spurgeon didn't model the kind of expository preaching that we here at Grace Church recommend and encourage. He wasn't the sort of expositor that we teach pastors to be, but he acknowledged that expository preaching is superior to any other approach.

And nevertheless, he followed a style of preaching that was more common and more conventional in his generation. But this lecture is really full of good advice for biblical expositors, starting with his opening words. Here's the very first sentence of this lecture, quote, "Sermons should have real teaching in them, "and their doctrine should be solid, "substantial, and abundant." It's the opposite, again, of not only Rick Warren, but most preaching gurus these days, who say, you know, don't load it with too much doctrine or teaching.

Tell stories, make it interesting, meet people's felt needs. None of that in Spurgeon. He says it should be full of doctrine. And he hammers the storytelling, sort of moralistic, motivational, super-contextualized approach that most megachurch pastors today would recommend and practice. In fact, here's an interesting contrast, not to keep picking on Rick Warren, but he's fun to pick on.

(audience laughing) In The Purpose-Driven Church, Rick Warren says this, quote, "The ground we have in common with unbelievers "is not the Bible, but our common needs, "hurts, and interests as human beings. "You cannot start with a text, "expecting the unchurched to be fascinated by it. "You must first capture their attention, "and then move them slowly to the truth of God's word." So Warren is far more concerned with style than he is with content.

He wrote an entire book on ministry philosophy, and in it, he has very little to say about the content of your message. But what he does say is loaded with warnings not to be too biblical, or too doctrinal, or too challenging to the interests or preferences of unsaved people in the audience.

That's his view. Here's Spurgeon's view by contrast. He says, quote, "The sermon should spring out of the text, "and the more evidently that it does so, the better." He says, "Take care that your deliverances "are always weighty, and full of really important teaching. "Don't build with wood, hay, and stubble, "but with gold, silver, and precious stones." And he went on to condemn the notion that the pulpit is like a theater stage for the entertainment and amusement of unchurched people.

And in fact, in that connection, he references an infamous 18th century preacher who actually he's introducing me to. I'd never heard of this guy, but apparently he attained some fame in his time. John Henley, from the 1700s, who literally moved his church to a theater in Lincoln Inn's fields in London, and Henley became well-known for the sort of clownishness and buffoonery that he did from the pulpit.

One critic said of John Henley, "Fluent nonsense trickles from his tongue." And the poet, the famous poet Alexander Pope called John Henley a zany, a zany, he says. So I looked that up in the Oxford English Dictionary, and zany, when it's used as a noun like that, it refers to a comic performer attending on a clown.

Not a clown, but the sidekick of a clown, okay? Who he says, this is from the Oxford English Dictionary, he's a comic performer attending on a clown who imitates his master's acts in a ludicrously awkward way. So as a preacher, you don't wanna be a zany, you don't wanna come across as a zany, okay?

But this guy Henley, although ostensibly he was a pastor, was a clown's clown, sort of the very worst kind of living, breathing farce. In fact, look him up, John Henley, you'll be amazed that stuff like that went on even in the 1700s. I think there may be a Wikipedia page about the guy.

And if someone suggested to me that Rick Warren resembles John Henley more than he resembles Charles Spurgeon, I wouldn't argue with you. Don't be like that, Spurgeon says. He says, quote, "We are on peril of our souls "bound to deal with the solemnities of eternity "with no earth-born topics." And again, this is a great lecture and it's filled with sound advice on preaching.

This is the antidote to most of the books on preaching and pastoral philosophy that you may have read in the 20th and 21st centuries. Great lecture, but I gotta move on. Lecture six is titled, "On the Choice of a Text." Now, it's well known, I think, that Spurgeon usually didn't even decide what text he would preach on each week until Saturday evening before Sunday morning.

Yeah, I emphatically do not recommend that approach. (audience laughing) But here's what Spurgeon says about it. "What is the right text? "How do you know it?" He says, "We know it by the signs of a friend. "When a verse gives your mind a hardy grip "from which you cannot release yourself, "you will need no further direction "as to your proper theme.

"Like the fish, you nibble at many baits, "but when the hook has fairly pierced you, "you will wander no more." Now, in my judgment, this is not Spurgeon's finest lecture, but even so, it's worth reading and it is filled with some helpful tidbits. I don't need to say any more about it.

Again, I don't think it's the best lecture in the book and since we recommend expository preaching where you follow through a passage week after week, it's kind of a moot point, but whatever. Lecture seven is titled "On Spiritualizing." That's the title, and here Spurgeon talks about spiritualizing the meaning of scripture.

It may shock you to learn that he didn't think it was always a bad thing to find a spiritual meaning through allegory or symbolism in a biblical text, but nevertheless, he was emphatic in saying this should not be the rule in hermeneutics. He would stress that the meaning of scripture is not a coded message where the true sense is a hidden spiritual meaning that's deeper and richer than what the human author actually had in mind.

That wasn't his view, but on the other hand, he didn't believe that it was safe to assume that there's never any symbolic meaning in the text, so he wouldn't rule out types and metaphors and allegorical symbolism like Paul uses in the book of Galatians. He saw that as an unwarranted wooden literalism to rule that out completely, and in fact, he called that a rule that is more fastidious than correct.

And again, I think I understand what he's driving at, but he isn't as clear as I wish he would be on where the boundaries lie. But if you read this chapter, you can decide for yourself whether he's making a valid point. He gives several humorous examples of over-spiritualizing, and he also then suggests some examples of types and metaphors that, in his judgment, legitimize the occasional spiritualizing of a biblical text, and he does give this rule as a sound and necessary qualifier.

He says this, that the meaning of Scripture is never merely spiritual, that Scripture is not, in other words, a secret message, and therefore, he says, quote, "Never allow your audience to forget "that the narratives which you spiritualize are facts. "They are not mere myths or parables. "The first sense of the passage must never be drowned out "in the outflow of your imagination." And then he delivers this line, quote, "It will be an ill day for the church "if the pulpit should ever appear to endorse "the skeptical hypothesis that Holy Scripture "is but the record of a refined mythology "in which globules of truth are dissolved "in seas of poetic and imaginary detail." He says that very poetically, but I hope you get the sense of what he's saying.

Now, moving on to lecture eight, the title is On the Voice, and here he has some valuable things to say about what was, at the time, a huge tendency. It was the foolish practice of some preachers, and it, in fact, I would say the besetting sin of all preachers in, almost all preachers in Victorian times in the Anglican Church, where they would use an affected pulpit voice.

They would deliver the sermon in a voice that's nasally and pedantic and atonal and even effeminate. He despised that kind of artificially, obviously artificial style. He says this, quote, "Take care not to fall "into the habitual and common affectations "of the present day. "Scarcely one man in a dozen in the pulpit "talks like a man." And there's some funny things in this lecture, by the way.

In the published edition, the book editor actually inserts some comments along the way, apologizing for not being able to convey in print how Spurgeon imitated the vocal style that he was criticizing, you know. Spurgeon hated, for example, lisping and effeminate preachers. He says this, quote, "There is another style "at which I beseech you not to laugh." And then I assume he slipped into the lisping style.

He said, "It's a method of enunciation "to be very ladylike and mincing "and delicate, servant-girlified." (audience laughing) I'll leave the accent behind there. He says, "It's a style that's dawdling and dundrearish." I don't know how else to describe it, he says. "We have, most of us, had the felicity "of hearing these or some others "of the extensive genus of falsettos "and high stilts and affectations." High stilts, that would be high-heeled shoes.

So he's caricaturing this effeminate style as if it's coming from preachers who, you know, cross-dressers and stuff. And in fact, he wasn't the only one that did that. Some of the cartoons in the newspapers compared Spurgeon with his more manly style to the typical Anglican preacher who they portrayed as usually an old woman.

But he says, "I've heard very many "different varieties of this, "from the fullness of the johnsonian "to the thinness of the little genteel whisper, "from the roaring bulls of Bashan "up to the chip, chip, chip of a chaffinch." I don't know what that is, some kind of bird. He says, "I've been able to trace "some of our brethren to their forefathers, "I mean their ministerial forefathers, "from whom they first of all gathered "these heavenly, melodious, sanctified, "in every way beautiful, but I must honestly add, "detestable modes of speech.

"The undoubted order of their oratorical pedigree "is as follows. "Chip, which was the son of Lisp, "which was the son of Simper, "which was the son of Dandy, "which was the son of Affectation, or Wobbler, "which was the son of Grandios, "which was the son of Pomposity, "the same as the father of many sons." And he says, "Understand that where even "these horrors of sound are natural, "I do not condemn them.

"Let every creature speak in its own tongue, "but the fact is that in nine cases out of 10, "these sacred brogues, which I hope "will soon be dead languages, "are unnatural and strained." He says, "I am persuaded that these tones "and semitones and monotones are Babylonian. "They are not at all the Jerusalem dialect, "for the Jerusalem dialect has this one "distinguishing mark, that it is a man's own "mode of speech, and it is the same "out of the pulpit as it is in it." I love that, and in fact, I have to say, the thing that first struck me, more than, almost 50 years ago, when I first heard John MacArthur preach, was the fact that he didn't put on some, you know, typical preacher style, which was popular even then.

That was back in the early 1970s. I'd never really heard anyone preach just with a natural voice the way John MacArthur did, and it made it so much easier to understand, and as Spurgeon points out, there's something manly about that, that I think we should cultivate. Now I need to speed up, or I won't finish on time.

Lecture nine is titled Attention, and Spurgeon, as he explains in the opening remarks here, the topic of this lecture is how to obtain and retain the attention of our hearers, and he says this is an inexplicably overlooked subject in most books on homiletics. He probably wouldn't say that today if he saw a lineup of 21st century books on church growth.

You know, books for preachers today don't talk about much else than how to hold the audience's attendant, but to these days, most of the suggestions you get are bad. Spurgeon wouldn't be in favor, obviously, of those who think playing secular music or putting on a carnival is a good way to attract people's attention.

He does have a few practical suggestions, and he opens with them. He talks, for example, about just opening the windows to the room and letting the foul air out of the building, and then after thus clearing the air, he says this, and this sums up his main point in this lecture.

Quote, "In order to get attention, "the first golden rule is "always say something worth hearing." Seems like a simple point, doesn't it? But I know from personal experience, a lot of preachers don't get that. And he further expounds on that point with several others. He says, "Let your sermon be well-organized.

"Let the points be clearly arranged. "Speak plainly. "Don't make the introduction too long." That steps on my toes a little. "Avoid speaking too long," and he goes on like that. You can read the chapter. There's lots of good advice for preachers here. Lecture 10 is titled "The Faculty of Impromptu Speech," and it may sound from the title like he's going to defend extemporaneous preaching rather than preaching from a full manuscript, but he dispels that expectation in the opening sentence.

He writes, "We are not about to discuss the question "as to whether sermons should be written and read, "or written, committed to memory, and repeated, "or whether copious notes should be employed "or no notes at all. "Neither of these is a subject now under consideration, "although we may incidentally allude to each of them, "but we are now to speak of extemporaneous speech "in its truest and most thorough form, "speech impromptu, without special preparation, "without notes, without immediate forethought." And he starts by warning that no one should ever preach without adequate preparation.

He says this, "Unstudied thoughts coming from the mind "without previous research, without the subjects in hand "having been investigated at all, "these must be of a very inferior quality, "even from the most superior men, "and as none of us would have the effrontery "to glorify ourselves as men of genius "or wonders of erudition," he says, "I fear that our unpremeditated thoughts on most subjects "would not be remarkably worthy of attention.

"Churches are not to be held together "except by an instructive ministry. "A mere filling up of time with oratory will not suffice." And so at one point he says, "Do not attempt to be impromptu "unless you have well studied the theme." And so even though I like never to speak without a manuscript, I heartily agree with most of his advice in this lecture.

He does manage to take a backhanded slap at those of us who use a manuscript, but then he makes a kind of concession to us manuscript users at the same time. He says this, quote, "Very strongly do I warn all of you "against reading your sermons, "but I recommend as a most helpful exercise, "as a great aid towards attaining extemporizing power, "I recommend the frequent writing of them." And speaking personally, after I read what Spurgeon has to say about the pitfalls and the negative potential of careless extemporaneous speaking, I'm actually more committed than ever to the use of a manuscript.

I'm a pretty good writer, but I'm a lousy preacher. So I just don't have the fluidity of mind and the speedy recall that is required to speak without having in front of me a written reminder of what I want to say. But nevertheless, this is a good chapter. It's full of advice that even us manuscript users will benefit from.

Lecture 11 is titled The Minister's Fainting Fits, and this is a famous one because this is one of the rare firsthand resources that gives us insight into Spurgeon's struggle with depression. I did a lecture on this last year here at Grace Church on Spurgeon's chronic depression. He struggled with depression more than you would ever know from reading his sermons or even reading his biographies, but he was constantly beset with emotional depression and discouragement and physical weariness, and he discusses several of the causes of ministerial melancholy, and he notes that downheartedness actually has some benefits too.

So it's an encouraging lecture to read. He says, for example, quote, "By all the castings down of his servants, "God is glorified, for they are led to magnify him "when he sets them on their feet, "and even while they are prostrate "in the dust of their faith, it yields him praise.

"They speak all the more sweetly of his faithfulness, "and they are all the more firmly established in his love." And then here's the point he closes the lecture with, quote, "The lesson of wisdom is, "don't be dismayed by soul trouble. "Count it no strange thing, "but a part of ordinary ministerial experience.

"Should the power of depression be more than ordinary, "think not that all is over with your usefulness." In other words, if you fall into a deep depression, don't assume your ministry's over. "Cast not away your confidence, "for it has great recompense of reward. "Even if the enemy's foot is on your neck, "expect to rise and overthrow him.

"Cast the burden of the present, "along with the sin of the past and the fear of the future, "cast it upon the Lord, who does not forsake his saints." And he includes in that paragraph an amazing string of reminders of biblical truth, showing why impediments and disappointments in the ministry shouldn't defeat or discourage us.

And in here then are his final words in that lecture, quote, "When we cannot see the face of our God, "we learn to trust under the shadow of his wings." That's become kind of a famous quote of Spurgeon's. When I can't see his face, I'm still comfortable under the shadow of his wings.

Lecture 12, I'm almost getting to the end of the book. Good, 'cause we're running short. Lecture 12, "The Minister's Ordinary Conversation." And here his point is to encourage his students not to try to project an air of piety or superiority when they mingle with the flock. He says, quote, "First and foremost, let me say, "the pastor should give himself no ministerial airs, "but avoid everything which is stilted or official "or fussy or pretentious." He tells the students, quote, "If you're characterized by too much ministerial starch, "I would earnestly advise you to go and wash in Jordan "seven times and get the starch out of you, "every particle of it." He says, "I'm persuaded that one reason why our working men "so universally keep clear of ministers," he's talking about blue collar people and why they don't like to hang around pastors, "is because they abhor their artificial and unmanly ways.

"If they saw us in the pulpit and out of it, "acting like real men and speaking naturally "like honest men, they would come around us." He says, quote, "We must have humanity "along with our divinity if we would win the masses. "Everybody can see through affectations "and people are not likely to be taken in by them.

"Fling away your stilts, brethren, and walk on your feet. "Doff your ecclesiasticism and array yourselves in truth." And at the same time, he reminds us that a minister should be aware that he is always on duty. Even when you're in those mingling in social circles and you're still a pastor, you're still on duty.

He says, "A policeman or a soldier may be off duty, "but a minister never is. "Even in our recreations, we should still pursue "the great object of our lives, for we are called "to be diligent in season and out of season." And he also says that, and I like this statement, "The doormat in front of your study should say welcome "and not beware the dog." (audience laughing) I mean, I'd say I like that.

Actually, I think there's a doormat in front of my office that says beware the dog. (audience laughing) But he tells his students, "Be cheerful. "Be a participant in conversations with your people." But he says, "Don't monopolize the conversation. "Turn every conversation to profitable use. "Don't court friendship with people "because of their wealth or status." He says these are the kinds of practical advice that he gives in this lecture.

And then in the last lecture of the book, Lecture 13, it's titled, "To Workers with Slender Apparatus." And what does that mean, you ask? Well, Spurgeon explains in his opening sentence. He says, "What are ministers "who do have a slender apparatus?" I thought he was gonna talk about men whose voices don't project well or whatever, but here's how he defines it.

"By a slender apparatus, I mean they have few books "and little or no means wherewith to purchase more." So he's talking about the tools pastors use to prepare their sermons, the commentaries, and books of biblical history, resource books, and Bible encyclopedias, and other vital Bible study aids. Spurgeon says the idea of a pastor who can't afford to buy books, Spurgeon says, is abominable.

You'll love this lecture. (audience laughing) He says, quote, "This is a state of things "which ought not to exist in any case. "The churches ought to take care "that it should be rendered impossible "for a pastor not to be able to afford to buy books. "Up to the highest measure of their ability, "they should furnish their minister "not only with the food which is needful "to sustain the life of his body, "but with mental nutriment "so that his soul may not be starved.

"A good library should be looked upon "as an indispensable part of church furniture, "and the deacons, whose business it is to serve tables, "will be wise if, without neglecting the table of the Lord "or of the poor, and without diminishing the supplies "of the minister's dinner table, "they give an eye to his study table "and keep it supplied with new works "and standard books in fair abundance.

"It would be money well laid out, "and it would be productive far beyond expectation. "Instead of waxing eloquent "upon the declining power of the pulpit, "leading men in the church should use the legitimate means "for improving its power by supplying the preacher "with food for thought. "Put the whip into the manger, "is my advice to all grumblers." And if you're a minister in a small church environment, you will cheer him for saying that.

This is one of the most winsome of these 13 lectures, because it shows Spurgeon's tender heart for, and his care for young pastors who had few resources. And he encouraged his students by pointing out that you can actually do a whole lot with very little. He cited Thomas Chalmers, who wrote a commentary on the entire Bible, and Spurgeon says this about him, "Dr.

Chalmers used only the Concordance, "the Pictorial Bible, Poole's Synopsis, "Matthew Henry's Commentary, "and Robinson's Researches in Palestine." Five books, he says, "Those are the books I use," he said to a friend, "All that is biblical is there. "I have to do nothing besides that in my biblical study." And Spurgeon says, "This shows that those "who have unlimited stores at their command "yet find a few standard books to be sufficient." If Dr.

Chalmers were now alive, he would probably take Thomson's Land and the Book instead of Robinson's Researches, and he might give up the Pictorial Bible for Kiddo's Daily Bible and Illustrations. At least, I should recommend the alteration to most men, Spurgeon says, "This is clear evidence "that some eminent preachers have found "that they could do better with a few books "than with many when they're studying the scriptures." And I concur with that, I find the more commentaries I read through, sometimes the more muddled my thoughts are when I come to prepare the sermon.

I wanna get a good idea of the passage, I wanna have a clear outline before I start to write my own notes, but sometimes that's easier to do with a few resources. I've been in situations where I'm traveling or whatever, and the only thing I have are the few resources I can carry on my iPad, and I've found sometimes less is more.

By the way, this lecture, this last lecture is where Spurgeon made his famous comment about Matthew Henry's commentary, which I think is one of the most underrated commentaries of all, I think it's always very helpful. Spurgeon said about Matthew Henry, "No better investment can be made by any minister "than that peerless exposition." Get it, if you sell your coat to buy it.

And he tells him, I like this part too, if they have to borrow books, he says, "Be sure you return them quickly and in good condition "to their rightful owners," which is wise counsel. I wish some people who had borrowed my books had heeded that advice. But anyway, that's a speedy overview of, are we out of time already?

Okay, so I'm not gonna get into the coda of this. I have five more pages of notes, which out of respect to you guys, I'm gonna skip. But that's a speedy overview of my series one in Spurgeon's lecture to my student. And I'll quit at that point, okay? Thank you for coming.

Appreciate you giving me that much time. And I'll see you next year.