Quoting Annie Lamott who was quoting somebody else: "You can safely assume that you have created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people that you do."

If all people hear when you talk about the Love of God is how certain people are going to hell, then you're doing it wrong. We know what love it is. We even know what tough love is. And when everyone reacts to your "love" as if you are hating them, then you need to pause for a moment and consider if you really are being as loving as you think you are.

If your method of being "serious about sin" is preaching condemnation of a sin that, statistically, less than 2% of your congregation commits, then you're doing it wrong. It's easy to point at the sin that disgusts your congregation. They love it, it lets them feel righteous and holy at the same time. If you were to preach about something they actually did, they might have to look inward, and all that belly-button staring sure makes it hard to find the pocketbook when the offering plate goes around. But its your job to point out their own sins, even as you remain aware of your own. Which reminds me...

If you preach to sinners as if you were not one yourself, you're doing it wrong. It's not enough to simply call yourself a sinner in general terms, either. Are you proud? Then preach against sinful pride. Are obsessed with collecting wealth? Then preach against greed. This makes it hard as people need examples, and they have been led to believe that this requires sinless people to grant them. They have one... and that is enough. Your job is to be among them, a sinner like them. Place yourself above them and they'll follow you gladly all the way to the cliff you'll fall off when they find out you're not.

If following your preaching requires that people isolate themselves from contrary teachings, you're doing it wrong. If the power you follow can be toppled by a freshman philosophy major from the local community college, then you really need to find a more secure source of your faith. There are many lessons that can be learned by studying ones detractors. All isolationism proves is that you are incapable of sustaining any adversity.

If your "literal interpretation of the Word" falls apart if one reads the entire Bible, you're doing it wrong. Anyone can cherry pick Bible verses to prove their point, if you are inclined to believe Scripture, then Satan himself did it. On a similar note...

If your interpretation of the Scripture demands continued use of an increasingly archaic translation, you're doing it wrong. We've already done this once, when the western church finally broke from the Vulgate. The King James Bible was a great accomplishment not only in Biblical Scholarship but in English literature. But its time has passed, and those holding to it are merely trying to establish a new Vulgate. If the only way you can make your point is to make sure you are one of the few who can understand it, your point is highly suspect.

So, if your love is not loving, if your anger is only for scapegoats, if your arguments cannot stand up to critique, if your word is only literal if removed from context, or if your authority is based on the ignorance of your audience, then you're doing it WRONG.

Instead, preach love so that the loved know it for what it is. Preach against the sin your flock commits, turning their righteous indignation inward rather than outward. Preach the Bible as the complicated document it is, rather than the simple list of yes and noes we sometimes wish it was. (Don't put a period where the originals failed to use punctuation.) And open the scriptures so that everyone can read them and participate, rather than requiring them to learn the archaic translations of the past.

All of these things making preaching a lot harder than it could be. But if you find preaching to be easy, then you are probably doing it wrong.