of form than of thought, points of view, methods of conceiving the subject of discourse. They exist in the subjects themselves, and in the human mind anterior to all tradition.

There is the same difference between the conventional and the spontaneous form as there is between the two physiological systems, one of which makes the prominences of the skull to depend on the internal developments of the brain, and the other these same developments to depend on the prominences of the skull; one expressing the internal by the external, the other, by the external compressing and determining the internal; one subordinating the external to the internal, the other the internal to the external. We ourselves prefer that the external should spring from the internal, and, in respect to form, we give no rule but this.

But this rule we do give; and, in order to follow it, we must resolve upon doing this with a positive and determined will; for the arbitrary forms will be incessantly besetting us with their importunity; or, rather, being born in the midst of them, we shall have trouble to withdraw ourselves from their dominion. Now let it be observed that the most natural forms constantly tend, by servile and blind imitation, to become conventional types; they are a liquid always on the point of coagulation; so that we must constantly, by warmth and by spontaneity, keep them in a fluid state, or restore them to it, that we may, as far as possible, exclude formalism from our subject, our end, and our mind.*

I understand by the form of preaching not only the frame or the architecture of the discourse, but the tone, the language, and even the topics, for to introduce new topics into it will somewhat change the form of the preaching these are nothing more than the form of an act, which is more particular or more special only as it is a discourse on divine things. Thus, in making a sermon on the life of a godly man, after the manner of Catholics in preaching on the lives

* See HERDER'S Briefe das Studium der Theologie betreffend, tome i.

of their saints, we only change the form, not the object of preaching, since a life may as well serve for the text of a sermon as a passage of Scripture. On this subject a new question respecting form remains to be considered, but it is one of inferior and subordinate importance.

Now, whatever extension may be given to the idea of form, I think we are in a strait, and that we have no excuse for remaining in it.

There is a uniformity, or a too constant return of the same form-of one discourse after another, and one preacher after another.*

In the structure of our sermons, taken separately, there is something stiff and scholastic: While all things are in the process of renovation, and when, as the result of a general revision, we have effaced whatever separates unduly the means from the end, the sermon retains a costume somewhat superannuated.

Language itself has taken a costume. We are far from not liking and recommending biblical language. Religion has a language, terms which it has introduced for the expression of new or renovated things, for Christianity "makes all things new," and there must, of course, be a change in words. But we should not think ourselves obliged to express things in no other terms than those which the Bible has consecrated. That we may better reproduce the spirit of the sacred authors, we must less imitate than be inspired by them. They used a liberty which we refuse them. We need not debar ourselves from spheres which they appear not to have permitted themselves to occupy, merely because they had no occasion to enter them. According to the old scrupulosity of the pulpit in the use of language, Paul was not justifiable in citing Aratus and Epimenides. Most certainly

* On individuality in the form of the sermon, which is very rare, see THEREMIN, Die Beredsamkeit eine Tugend, deuxième edition. Berlin, 1837, p. xxiif., de l'Introduction.

K

we ought not to make the temple a rendezvous for all those worldly recollections which our hearers should leave at the door; but it may be very useful to call certain things by the names which are given to them in common parlance.*

The rule is a good one of preaching from a text; I like it, provided place be left for exceptions. We ought to be allowed to preach without a text, or from two texts united.

So far as respect for our ministry and our flock will permit, we must avail ourselves of all our advantages. · All things are ours."-1 Cor., iii., 21. But let us beware of the spirit of innovation, which changes for the pleasure of changing, or for the sake of appearing independent.

The homily, a species of preaching deserving great attention, has this among other advantages, that it almost necessarily breaks certain traditional forms of the sermon-those at least which respect the structure of the discourse.

As to delivery, which is the eloquence of the body, the most important rules are negative ones.† Let us remember how much the multitude is influenced by what is external, and endeavor, if possible, not to preach, but speak. Bad habits, bad traditions, perpetuate themselves; the good becomes bad by an unintelligent imitation. Let us avoid a theatrical, very familiar, excessively free manner.

§ 8. Festival and occasional Sermons.

We have said that the fundamental ideas of Christianity, and the chief conclusions from them, should reappear, and be felt in every sermon: How much more should they be amplified in the entire course of preaching. But it does not hence follow that sermons on festivals, and the Sundays preceding them (weeks of Advent and Lent), should not have a distinct character of their own. These observances are rep* See Reflections of BURK on the Simplicitas Catechetica. + For the details, see l'Homilétique.

utable and useful, and, if the evangelic year is of the same tenor, still it may have more emphatic moments. These seasons are good and acceptable to all, and the sad but too evident fact is to be taken into consideration, that these with us are the only occasions which bring certain members of the flock into the Church. We may be serious and solemn on every subject, even of Christian morality, as was M. Manuel, who preached on a communion day on the fifth commandment; but, in general, the festival itself must be our theme.

I would not distinguish a fast-day only by more vivid and more accumulated censures, but would be popular and natural in my manner; the people now, as a people, come to humble themselves before God.

Sermons, preparatory to the Lord's Supper, present a delicate point. There should be much of tact in them, and of sound and precise instruction on the nature and the duty of communion.

We are scarcely required to preach on particular circumstances, but circumstances, by judicious use, may become excellent texts for our sermons. In every case we have a double task, to make the eternal actual, and the actual, so to speak, eternal. If it is unfortunate to regard a circumstance only as a theme for oratorical display, it will be unhappy also not to take advantage of it largely and freely, for the purpose of edification. The best of all guides, on these occasions, is the simplicity of a Christian heart, and the true point of view is secured by prayer. Every one has not the secret of making exquisite allusions and delicate turns; but every one finds in the seriousness of the Gospel a true measure, true concord, and just caution.

§ 9. Several Questions relative to Preaching. Length of the Sermon.-Length and brevity are relative qualities. A sermon which bears one along seems shorter,

220

LENGTH AND REPETITION OF SERMONS.

while a sermon in which the development of the idea does not advance always appears long. We must not, then, dwell much on details, but give the discourse a progressive movement.*

But the question may be taken absolutely.

"Believe me, I speak from experience, and long experience: The more you say, the less will be retained. The less you say, the more the hearers will be profited. By overcharging their memory you destroy it, as we put out lamps by overfilling them with oil, and drown plants by immoderately watering them. When a discourse is too long, the end obliterates the middle and the beginning. Ordinary preachers are acceptable if they be short, and excellent ones weary us when they are too long."+

We must not, in a word, expect too much from the auditory. In a country congregation, especially, close attention. can not be sustained for a long time; but even to them a sermon too short is an offense. Men have an impression that matters of great importance ought not to be merely glanced upon.

Repetition of Sermons; that is to say, the habit of reproducing, after a certain time, sermons which have been preached. This is the point of view in which this matter should be placed: In two ways a sermon may be true-when it expresses the truth, and when it expresses the preacher himself. A preacher may have nothing to change or retrench in a sermon; he may admit its power, and yet not be able to put himself into his sermon a second time, or his sermon into himself. I would by no means forbid the repetition of a good sermon, which the preacher may perhaps modify, so as to accommodate it, in spirit, to his own actual state, or the

* Compare here the sermon of BOURDALOUE on La Passion, with that of MASSILLON on Consummatum est.

+ Guide de ceux qui annoncent la Parole de Dieu, contenant la Doctrine de Saint François de Sales, etc. Lyon, 1829, p. 8.