Though Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s diatribes have been widely condemned, some have sought to dismiss them as episodic rather than chronic; a few isolated statements wrested out of context by those looking for anti-Obama ammunition. Others have tried to defend the Illinois pastor by suggesting that too many Americans don’t understand the black church.

And then there are those who have suggested that Jeremiah Wright is very much like those old Biblical prophets who condemned the sins of ancient Israel. The argument goes something like this:

“Well, Rev. Wright is really more in the mold of the prophetic preacher, called to rebuke the nation. And those Biblical men didn’t pull punches pronouncing their woes on society.”

To this way of thinking, anger is a good thing and indignation is very much part of the sermonic experience.

But does the analogy really work? If some are claiming that the man speaks for God to contemporary America, then it’s only fair that he be held to a Biblical standard. Holy men of God spoke as they were “moved by the Holy Spirit,” and their messages had a “Thus saith the Lord” ring to them.

Is Jeremiah Wright a man who speaks for God – or is he someone so enamored of his own opinions that he has no problem sharing them as from God?

As Holy Week resolves into Easter this year, Christians all around the world are reflecting on the life and work of Jesus Christ, particularly the events surrounding His death, burial, and resurrection. These facts form the essence of the gospel, according to the Apostle Paul, and they are central to the message of the church. They ushered in a new covenant – and a new methodology. The “preaching of the cross” is what the Christian pulpit is supposed to be about.

Paul wrote to the Corinthians that “we do not preach OURSELVES, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as servants for Jesus’ sake.” The Christian pulpit is adulterated and abused when it becomes a vehicle for messages other than those rooted in God’s Word. And, while some of Rev. Jeremiah’s defenders suggest that he uses the Bible and is “faithful to the text,” evidence abounds that he distorts scripture and seeks proof-texts to shore up his bitter and sometimes paranoid arguments.

Israel’s prophets called their nation back to basic principles of faith and holiness, but they were PATRIOTS – they didn’t despise their nation. In a sense their message was quite CONSERVATIVE; they wanted the nation to go BACK to the faith of their fathers. Their agenda was not social change, it was spiritual revival.

The purpose was not to stir up the crowd or incite mass anger, it was to get the hearers to look within to see personal sin - and then to look up to see God in His mercy.

Christians recognize John the Baptist as the last of the Old Testament prophets, the one crying as a “voice in the wilderness” preparing the way of the Lord. He was a very passionate and demonstrative preacher, given to bold denunciations and declamations. But he recognized that he was not the main attraction, and after Jesus began his ministry John would say “He must increase; I must decrease.”

That’s the essence of Christian preaching. The pulpit is not a place for our particular gripes about the state of the world, personal and paranoid conspiracy theories, and contagious anger. It’s a place to talk about Jesus Christ; good preaching makes a bee-line to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. And not just on Easter.

If someone wants to use the Christian pulpit to confront long-standing problems and perceptions in our nation, then the message should be about how commitment to Christ can bring about lasting and constructive change. Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear someone like Rev. Jeremiah Wright preach something like this – and have it go viral on You Tube? : Continued...