I was just prompted by a question to re-read John Piper’s first chapter in Brothers, We Are Not Professionals. Here’s a taste of Piper’s prayer at the end of the chapter:
Banish professionalism from our midst, Oh God, and in its place put passionate prayer, poverty of spirit, hunger for God, rigorous study of holy things, white-hot devotion to Jesus Christ, utter indifference to all material gain, and unremitting labor to rescue the perishing, perfect the saints, and glorify our sovereign Lord.
I suppose one question to ask is this, does the kind of “prophetic” ministry that Piper calls us to somehow stand in contrast to “expository preaching?” To put it another way, is expository preaching a form of “professionalism?” I would say not, although definitions are critical. If by “expository preaching” we mean some kind of insipid, weak, fear-filled, irrelevant but technically satisfactory ministry, then of course there is a contrast. By “professional” does Piper mean “effective expository preaching” or something else?
I think Piper is going after the pastor pursuing the comfortable, dignified role in society, respected like a medical doctor, kind of professionalism – a profession. If only our churches were led by men who were radically committed to uncomfortable spirituality, to sacrificial response-to-God kind of living. I suspect that while such leadership would make some uncomfortable, it would give many of us more excitement and willingness to “follow” spiritual leaders, rather than just “fill” the pews kept in order by good and godly managers.
Can a “prophetic” ministry avoid professionalism, but still communicate well, as encouraged on this site? I don’t think anyone would suggest the OT prophets were poor communicators? They were master preachers, but they weren’t comfortable preachers. They weren’t the socially respectable acceptable. They weren’t nice, or insipid, or predictable, or fearful. They spoke the Word of God with power and pointedness and precision and pluck (courage didn’t begin with a “p”). I don’t read Piper ch.1 and think, ‘oh no, there’s no room for expository preaching anymore.’ Actually, I read it and say, “Amen! If only we had more men of God preaching in our churches!” What’s missing in contemporary preaching? There’s a vibrancy, an urgency, a spirituality that is generally missing. Piper is calling for the kind of radical sold-outness that often drains away in the professionalization of ministry.
We don’t want to sacrifice the authority of the text for the passion of the presenter, nor vice versa. I suppose most of us preachers should hold our hands up and say “too much too safe too adequate preaching – my bad!” Time for radical brokenness in our approach to ministry and our view of our own preaching.
Thank you Piper for the prod. Let’s ponder. Let’s pray.
Biblical Preaching 
I gather someone used Piper’s first chapter as an argument against thorough expository preaching? I couldn’t agree with you assessment more. Ironically, the impassioned follower of Jesus turned shepherd, out of his radical devotion and love for Jesus, should have a natural desire to be as deeply faithful to the Word of God as possible. It might not mean eloquence, but it will usually include biblical exposition, among other things.
As with most things, professionalism would be in the heart. It seems the question should not be in which way to preach, but whether to preach at all. If the heart in preaching is for esteem and a dignified position in people’s minds, then I would say most assuredly no.
The question I was asked was not as strong as that, more of a query as to how the two (“prophetic” preaching and “effective communication”) fit together. In many ways I think it is a great question. If being well trained in expository preaching makes us professional, respectable, spiritually “un-radical” and so on, then it is a real concern. Thanks for your comment William, very helpful.
I think the idea of “professional” has to do with attitude toward ministry. Or motive?
At some point I’m not sure expository preaching has an angle because it’s word based. Homiletics on the other hand can become professional. Just thinking out loud here. I’ve seen abuse the other way though. Preachers who use just enough Bible or use it to say what they want to say. Then the preacher uses professional ministry approaches for everything else discipleship.
If I were to take Piper’s list in his prayer, then I would need to up my game in making changes to that list at some point.
Expository preaching is safe. It ensures we say what the Lord’s word says. I think the prophetic is found in the application, the tone, of addressing issues.
For example, in America, you rarely hear preachers address race. African-Americans address it from their angle. Anglos are scared to address it because they have checked out on race. So, a “professional” preacher is not going to take a risk. He’s a professional.
Or to preach against over extending yourself in a home. What preacher is going to say, “You should not have purchased a home you couldn’t afford.” Then say, “and it’s wrong for the gov to bail you out.” The preacher can’t say anything (or won’t) on some issues. It’s too risky. He’s a professional.
Just two examples. I’m going to be thinking about this because we need to be prophetic in our preaching, not professional. WELL, don’t get me wrong. I will still apply all I learned in homiletics from Haddon Robinson at Gordon-Conwell.