and strong." Since the selection and translation of this, we have seen a discussion of the merits of this great preacher in the last Edinburgh Review. The Reviewer is not disposed to give him all the praise, which is rendered to him by his countrymen. He, however, assigns him a high place among pulpit orators. Massillon, in the article referred to, is spoken of in the highest terms. He doubtless ranks among the greatest men of his age. He wrote with more taste and care, but with less freedom and power than Saurin. The latter in our view was one of the greatest preachers of any country or time. He had a great deal too much of the metaphysical subtlety of the school-men, and of the learning of the Rabbies. But there is a richness and compass in his arguments, an impetuosity and force in his style: an honesty and earnestness in his manner, which few have equalled. "Bourdaloue," says Le Harpe, "was the first who always exhibited in the pulpit the cloquence of reason. He knew how to substitute it for the faults of his contemporaries. He learned of them the proper style for the gravity of a holy minister, and sustained it throughout his numerous sermons. He put aside the show of vain citations from the ancients and the little researches of his wits. Solely penetrated with the spirit of the gospel, he treats a subject deeply, disposes of it with method and searches into it with vigour. He is conclusive in his reasonings, sure in his course, clear and instructive in his results; but he had little of what are called the great parts of an orator, which are oration and elocution. He was an excellent theologian, a learned catechist rather than a powerful preacher. Although carrying conviction with him, he wanted that feeling which renders conviction efficaci Dus. Blair thus speaks of Bourdaloue and Massilon. "It is a subject of dispute among the French critics, to which of these the preference is due. To Bourdaloue, they attribute more solidity and close reasoning; to Massillon a more pleasing and engaging manner. Bour. daloue inculcates his doctrine with much zeal and piety. Massilon has more grace, more sentiment, and in my opinion every way more genius. He discovers much knowl edge both of the world and of the human heart; he is pathetic and persuasive and upon the whole, is perhaps the most eloquent writer of sermons which modern times have produced." Much has been said against the eloquence of the French school as inducing a false test for ornament and declamation, but there is little doubt that ministers are deficient in the help that is borrowed from the resources of worldly rhetoric. We shall now mention some of the English divines whose preaching and writings have produced the deepest impressions on the world. Latimer and Ridley were great and good men, who preached with great power, and sealed their sincerity with their blood. Bishop Jewell, who lived in Elizabeth's time, was a man of no ordinary character. He educated Hooker, the author of "Ecclesiastical Polity." "He had a mind," says a writer in the London Quarterly, "of such strength that it could bear continual tension without losing its elasticity." Archbishop Usher, Bishop Burnet, Archbishop Tillotson, and Jeremy Taylor, were men of rare excellence. Though differing in the character and strain of their preaching, they were among the first of the foremost rank of the ministers of the Established Church. Of a more recent date we might mention Home, and Toplady and Romaine, who were more evangelical and, we think, much more eloquent.* Among the dissenters are many splendid names. Barrow was among the first of English preachers. We admire," says Robert Hall," the rich invention, the masculine sense, the exuberantly copious, yet precise and energetic diction, which distinguish this writer, who, by a rare felicity of genius, united in himself the most distinguishing qualities of the mathematician and the orator. We are astonished at perceiving in the same person, and in the same composition, the close logic of Aristotle combined with the amplifying powers of Plato." Still he was deficient in the peculiar principles of the gospel, and represented Christianity too much as a mere code of morals. Howe was more evangelical, yet more prolix and intricate. Howe had "a noble orb of soul." He was a truly great man, and his preaching was with demonstration of the Spirit and with power. Owen was erudite, deep, and yet spiritual. Though a controvertist, he maintained heavenly frame of mind; and his writings are among the richest treasures of truth. Charnock, with more propriety than Jeremy Taylor, may be called "the Shakspeare of divines." He possessed a bold and vigourous imagination, and a wonderful fertility of genius. His works are rich in thought and evangelical sentiment. Baxter, a flaming preacher of Christ, is second to none of all the British clergy. Though a dying a man all his days, he exerted a powerful influence. He was truly as an angel of God to the churches. Whitfield and Wesley, should not be omitted in the list of eminent ministers of the New Testament. They were instrumental of a second Reformation. Evangelical religion was revived by their preaching and labours. The former was perhaps never excelled in a powerful, spirit-stirring eloquence. God went with him. Like Isaiah his lips were touched with a living coal. The latter was a man of great mind: he was a master-spirit, and laid the foundation of one of the wisest and most efficient agencies that has ever been brought to bear upon our species. Of the Scotch clergy, we have time to do little more than mention the names of some of those great and good men. The history of that pulpit would furnish ample materials for a whole article. Of Knox we have already spoken, nor can we speak too highly. With the simplicity of a child he united the heroism of a martyr. Melville was like him. O what a noble line has been raised up on that consecrated spot. Speak we of the Erskines, they were high souls. They knew, and loved, and preached the truth. Boston and Brown were eminent men; so were Moncreif, and Walker, and Wishart, Macknight, and Davidson, and Blair. Their learning, and talents, and piety, have been matter of praise in all the churches. Nor can we devote as much space to American divines, as we at first intended. The Mathers of Boston were distinguished for their piety, and extensive erudition. In that city of the pilgrims have flourished a race of men, who, for moral power, deep knowledge of the scriptures, and exemplariness of life, have had few equals in the world. Coleman, and Prince, and Cooper, were men of eminent gifts and of distinguished character. Stoddard and Edwards of Northampton, were stars of the first magnitude. Of the latter so much is known in both hemispheres, that little need be said, and yet we could wish to see a clear and full developement of the secret power of his writings. His preaching has never been thoroughly analyzed. No man since Calvin has produced so great an impression upon the Christian world. It appears to us that he brought to the study and to the exhibition of truth a heart and head wholly devoted to God, and sanctified by the Spirit. He saw eternal things and presented them just as they appeared to his mind. He dug down into the unsearchable riches of Christ, and brought up truth so pure and holy that his hearers felt they were listening to a messenger from another world. We have seen those who heard him, and have witnessed in many not very remotely the wonderful effects of his preaching. Bellamy, West, and Strong, were of the same school: they are justly considered as among the fathers of New-England. Their metaphysical turn of mind gave an air of abstractedness to their writings, and lessened their interest. Lathrop and Dwight were prime men. The latter will be known as a scholar, a divine, and an instructor of youth, wherever the English language is spoken. He possessed a mind of such depth and accuracy, of such amplitude and energy, that there were few subjects he did not investigate few fields he did not explore, and "nil tetigit quod non ornavit." Davies of Princeton, who died at the age of thirty-six, has been pronounced by high authority, probably the most eloquent and accomplished pulpit orator that our country has ever produced." While a preacher in Virginia, he exerted an immense influence, simply by his zeal and unquenchable love for 66 souls. Witherspoon was an able divine, and a powerful preacher. Some of his sermons are among the very first in the language. The one on the "Deceitfulness of Sin" evinces a strength of intellect, a knowledge of the heart, and of the world, which will secure a place among the productions of any age. Many others might be mentioned, who, by the light of their example, and the power of their preaching, have been extensively useful in building up the kingdom of the Redeemer. : Of the comparative effect of doctrinal and moral preaching we can say, at this time, but little. The discussion of this subject would have more pertinancy, and would be better understood in England than in this country. By doctrinal preaching, we mean a prominent exhibition of the peculiar truths of the gospel by moral preaching, and enforcement of the ethics of the Bible. There is a way of preaching the doctrines which renders them a dead letter. Every doctrine in the Bible is based upon some important fact, and is designed to produce a moral impression. Where the duties of the gospel are not enforced by considerations drawn from the doctrines, they will be ineffectual. There are some remarks in a late work of Robert Hall very much in point. "There arose at this time" (referring to a period just subsequent to the Reformation) " a set of divines, who, partly in compliance with the popular humour, partly to keep at a distance from the Puritans, and partly to gain the infidels, who then began to make their appearance, introduced a new sort of preaching, in which the doctrines of the Reformation, as they are usually styled, were supported by copious and 'elaborate disquisitions on points of morality. From that time, the idea commonly entertained in England of a perfect sermon, was that re of a discourse upon some moral topic, clear, correct, and argumentative, in the delivery of which the preacher must be free from all suspicion of being moved himself, or of intending to produce emotions in his hearers in a word, as : mote as possible from such a method of reasoning on righteousness, and temperance, and judgment, as should make a Felix tremble. This inimitable apathy in the mode of imparting religious instruction, combined with the utter neglect of whatever is most touching or alarming in the discoveries of the gospel, produced their natural effect of extinguishing devotion in the church." The moral preacher insists on the fitness of things, the excelleney of virtue he addresses himself to the self-love of mankind, and shows that virtue and religion are conducive to personal happiness. The Evangelical preacher goes further he unfolds the plan of redemption; makes a new appeal to the heart; awakens its most generous feelings; constantly presents that into which angels desire to look and beseeches by the merey of God, by the blood of a Saviour. The very principles of philosophy, properly understood, would lead to the conclusion that the latter would be the most successful and powerful preacher. The one may excite admiration, but can never reach the spring of action; the other may fail to gratify a fastidious taste, but will awaken a deep and heart-felt interest. To the Editor of the Christian Spectator. THE orderly and decent performances of all the public offices of religion is enjoined by the Scriptures. It is necessary also to the highest satisfaction and profit of the devout worshipper, and helps to conciliate the respect and win the attention of others. Churches furnished with the fullest suit of forms and directions for the celebration of public worship, find it difficult, however, to secure to all their religious assemblies, the full benefit intended by their liturgies and rubricks. It is not strange then that churches, without any such established and obligatory forms, should, along with the manifold and great benefits of this freedom from restraint, sometimes suffer from the want of judgment, or taste, or experience in their ministers, left so much as they are to themselves in these particulars. To these general reflections I have been led by witnessing, frequently, in the celebration of the Lord's Supper, one or two things not entirely suitable-I would rath er say not entirely to my liking; for I would not speak strongly against that which is done by so many of more experience than myself. One thing I would gladly see omitted is the pretty common practice of addressing the communicants while the officers of the church are distributing the bread and the wine. This is always a great interruption to me. I want those few moments to myself. I think every communicant must want them. During every other part of the exercises he is called upon to follow the train of another's thoughts-the train of ideas presented in the prayer, the exhortation, the thanksgiving, the presentation, and the hymn. But on such an occasion every man wants to be left a little while to himself. He wants to dwell on some particular views that happen to interest him particularly. He has private matters of his own to think about; his own particular faults to confess and deplore, and pray against; his own matters of thanksgiving to mention ; his own petitions to offer; his own friends, his parents, perhaps, or his child, or his partner, to intercede for. There are few, I am persuaded, who would not gladly, very gladly, have at their own disposal the few minutes taken up in the distribution of the symbols. It would seem as if these little pauses must be very desirable to the minister also who officiates. And let him not deny himself these short opportunities for attending to his own private devotions, and for collecting his thoughts, the better to go on with his official duties, from a mistaken opinion that these moments are peculiarly favourable to the production of religious impressions, and too valuable to be left unfilled by some solemn monition, or some cheering reflection. Nothing can be so impressive at this moment as silence. Nothing else can so much favour each man's own endeavour to rise up to the proper state of devout and happy contemplation; and, if any are so dull as to have nothing of their own to occupy them, nothing else can be so likely to prove useful to them, as the sight of what is doing around them. For a minister of the gospel to undertake to help out the designed effect of this remarkable celebration, by any thing he can say, while we are actually eating and drinking the body and blood of our crucified aviour, is a piece of presumption that ought to surprise us. It is often exceedingly painful to me. I now always attempt to stop my ears to what he says; and my own minister I have besought not to continue the practice-I beseech all others not to continue it without carefully considering anew its propriety and utility. In the tone of feeling that runs through the remarks and exhortations heard on this occasion, I have often found myself ready to desire some change. That tone is too apt to be severe. There is too exclusive an endeavour sometimes to excite ideas of the solemn and awful kind. The occasion is, to be sure, serious and solemn ; and serious and solemn language and thoughts become it. But the rite was instituted in commemoration of an event, which, however mel. ancholy, and gloomy, and awful in itself, is the foundation of all our hopes; and is most intimately connected with all that is most satisfactory and joyful in our condition. There are doubtless hypocrites in the church, deceivers and deceived. There are real Christians that need warning more than consolation. But some ministers confine themselves too much, on such occasions, to such members of the church; and, perhaps, even such might be more profited, certainly the more serious and exemplary members would be more comforted and benefited, if more space was given to the more cheerful topics connect. ed with the general subject. Too much attention, it seems to me, is sometimes given to the spectators. It is becoming very much the practice in many places, for a part of the congregation to remain in the house during this celebration; and this practice is studiously promoted by many ministers and others. Of the propriety of this I do not now speak. But there is danger, I have thought, that the minister may have them too much in his thoughts. They often compose a very respectable and influential portion of the congregation. He may well feel the most lively interest in their spiritual welfare; and the danger is that he will suffer his thoughts, and perhaps his prayers and addresses to have more reference to them than he ought. For, it should be remembered, the celebration is a celebration by the church; one of its most peculiar and exclusive religious acts. The undivided attention of all should be given to it. Yet I have heard a long and direct address to the |