本論文試圖有系統地瞭解「舊講道學」與「新講道學」的不同。為了更具體的說明新、舊講道學在方法論上及教學內容上的差異，筆者分析並比較二本具代表性的講道學教科書─John Broadus 在1870年出版的《講章的準備及傳講》（A Treatise on the Preparation andDelivery of Sermons），及Fred Craddock 在1985 年出版的《講道》（Preaching）。
倘若如一些學者所言（如：Lucy Rose），二十世紀上半期是Broadus 的時代，他對講道的瞭解是「當代講道學理論所反對並建構的主要背景」的話，那麼1970 年代的「新講道學」所反對的並不是「舊講道學」的「原型」，而是一個被簡化、甚至被曲解的「變型」，即在歷史的進程中Broadus 的講道學理論遭到後人的修改、誤解、或忽
This article discusses speci!cally and systematically the differences between Old and New Homiletics in terms of their method and pedagogical content. In order to do this in a concrete way, The author examines two influential textbooks that represent the methods of Old and New Homiletics – John Broadus’ A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (1870) and Fred Craddock’s Preaching (1985).
According to scholars, such as Lucy Rose, if the first half of twentieth century was designated as the Broadus era and his understanding of preaching is the dominant backdrop against which contemporary traditional Homiletical Theory was formulated, then what New Homiletics in the 1970’s was responding to a productive caricature of Old Homiletics that was simpli!ed or even misrepresented what Old Homiletics actually was. In other words, Broadus’ homiletical theory was misunderstood, altered, or ignored by his successors in the course of time. This has been overlooked by modern homileticians. One reason for this neglect may be that scholars did not investigate Broadus’ textbook directly but relied instead on secondary materials that improperly or even wrongly represented Old Homiletics. Therefore, this article not only provides teachers a concrete material for teaching preaching and corrects a major stereotype held by the contemporary
scholars, but it also demonstrates the necessity of studying primary text
for homiletical research.