# Sermon Application Rubric



## KMK (Jun 2, 2009)

Sinclair Ferguson, in a lecture about Puritan preaching, pointed out that Puritan preachers did a great deal of counseling from the pulpit by way of application. They would provide various sermon applications that would, over the course of time, be of use to the hearers as if they had been in a private counseling session. He noted that you could take the 'categories of hearers' mentioned in Perkins' "The Art Of Prophesying" and the types of applications mentioned in Perkins and Ames' "Marrow of Theology" and create a rubric. This rubric would allow the preacher to monitor the different types of applications in his sermons over a period of time to see if one type of hearer or one type of application is being neglected.

Well, I actually put said rubric together and am in the process of evaluating my sermon applications. I take each of my sermon applications and analyze to what kind of hearer it is directed, and what type it is, and record the date in the appropriate box. Over the period of a couple of months I hope to see multiple entries in each box. 

This is useful only in situations where you have multiple types of hearers, which I believe I do.

You are welcome to it if you are interested. I would be interested in any feedback.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 2, 2009)

These are also helpful grids from Mark Dever:

http://www.9marks.org/answers/what’s-“sermon-application-grid”-9marks-keeps-talking-about


----------



## KMK (Jun 29, 2009)

Here is what my rubric looks like after one month. You can see that I have been weak in the areas of 'reproof' and 'admonition' and have been weak in applying the message to those who have 'fallen away' (probably because I don't believe we have many of those in our church).

What this process has made me realize is that it is very difficult, perhaps impossible, to bring any kind of application of consolation to the 'ignorant and unteachable'. How could possible console someone like that? You would have to move them at least into the 'teachable yet ignorant' category, wouldn't you?


----------

