Philip Arthur Bence PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

163
preaching in academic institutions, it is relevant to
note the correlations between their broad theologies of
preaching and their specific writings (or lack of the
same) on preaching practice.
For example, Lloyd-Jones's theology places him
furthest to the right on the 'subjectivity'-'objectivity'
continuum. He believed strongly that man possesses
knowledge of objective theological truth. He stated
strongly a preaching theology which supported the
authoritative preaching of revealed truth. Interestingly
enough, it is also Lloyd-Jones, who, more than the other
six, wrote specifically and directively on the practice
of preach1ng. 3 Although he did not assume his
o p inions on preaching had been revealed by God, he
asserted them vehemently (as if they had).
The other theologians follow suit: their specific
writing on preaching bears remarkable similarity (in
content, structure. and mood) to their broader thought on
preaching theology. For example:
Stewart's preaching and his writing on preaching
both share the same inspired, positive manner.'4
Tillich and Fosdick fall on the 'subjective' side of
the spectrum. Their theologies are much more hesitant to
assert specific theological facts. Similarly, neither
wrote books instructing others how to preach. Tillich
Illustrates this well. He wrote that an adequate
theology must be an "answering theology," and. likewise,
that preaching must respond to man's current