The question of preaching extempore naturally presents itself here. Opinions on this point are various. "While there are so many pressing necessities in Christianity," says Fenelon; "while the priest, who ought to be a man of God, prepared to every good work, should hasten to eradicate ignorance and scandals from the field of the Church, I think it is very unworthy of him to be passing his life in his closet in rounding periods, in retouching descriptions, and in inventing divisions; for, when one gets into the way of this kind of preaching, he has time to do nothing else; he can pursue no other study, no other labor; nay, more, to relieve himself he is often obliged to repeat continually the same sermons. What eloquence is that of a man whose hearer knows beforehand all his expressions and all his moving appeals? way, indeed, to surprise, to astonish, to soften, to convince, and to persuade men! a strange method of concealing art and letting nature speak. For my part, I say frankly that all this offends me. What shall a steward of the mysteries of God be an idle declaimer, jealous of his reputation, and ambitious of vain pomp? Shall he not venture to speak of God to his people without having arranged all his words, and learned, like a school-boy, his lesson by heart?"*

A likely

We elsewhere read: "Although it is the custom in some countries to read sermons, or, at least, to write and repeat them, which is necessary in certain places, where the preacher may be obliged to produce his discourse as written after having delivered it; still, generally speaking, such a way of preaching does not seem to produce as much impression on the hearers as free discourse, which induces me to prefer this last method."†

Harms, on the contrary, would have the sermon wholly

* FENELON: Dialogues sur l'Eloquence (Dialogue III.). See also Dialogue II.

+ Praktische Bemerkungen die Führung des evangelischen Predigtamtes betreffend.-HERNHUTT, p. 47.

written out: " If the majority of your hearers do not remark a badly-managed transition, a blank, a vulgar or obscure word, an equivocal or unintelligible proposition; if they do not perceive that your preaching is without profound thought, or that you never cite any other than the most familiar passages of the Bible, or that your expressions are too studied, yet be sure that, in the number of those who hear you, there will be some who will not fail to see all this, and who will think ill of you for not being better prepared."

*

Spener made it a rule, up to 1675, to write and to commit his sermons to memory. Afterward, yielding to the counsels of friends, he preached for a certain time from minute notes; but he soon returned to his first method, and never afterward forsook it. He recommends in all things a serious meditation on the substantive subject-matter, rather than on the form to be given to the sermon, a meditation to be accompanied by fervent prayer; and he advises preachers, particularly those who, having a facility of speaking without preparation, may be more disposed to yield themselves to indolence, to reserve a fixed time for this exercise.t

If we were required to give a general rule, we should say that a preacher should, as far as possible, be carefully prepared. The preparation may be made in different methods. Some say they can not prepare without writing, and can not preach without reciting what they have written; others maintain that they can not prepare in this way, because they are not able to fix in their memory a written sermon. We must discard these two impossibilities: the minister should be able to speak without having written, and every minister should have it in his power to learn a sermon which he has composed. Some, it is true, though a very small number, have so treacherous a memory that we can not oblige them to learn and recite. These have no liberty of choice, and the * Pastoraltheologic, tome i., p. 48, 49.

+ See BURK, Pastoraltheologie, tome i., p. 164.

mode of their preparations is prescribed to them by necessity; but then they are exceptions, which are very rare. Now, all that we can recommend, in general, is preparation. If we do not recite a sermon written and learned beforehand, even this preparation, in order to be complete and sufficient, will require more care and labor, a more intense and vigorous ef fort. Extemporizing can not be authorized, unless when it be such as can hardly take this name. The sermon ought to be well and solidly prepared. Without this, we run the risk of becoming always more careless, and of contenting ourselves with what costs us little. In general, the young preacher should write and recite. Let him take care, however, and seek to acquire the memory of ideas with and before that of words. He will thus prepare himself for a freer way of preaching. As to extemporaneous preaching, properly so called, we absolutely reject this method. Great orators, Bossuet, Fenelon, etc., have fallen by it, not only below themselves, but below ordinary preachers. We may, however, extemporize if it be unavoidable; an occasion may occur, and even frequently, when the preacher may either find himself, after having entered the pulpit, induced to make changes in a sermon which he has written, or be in unforeseen circumstances, which require him to speak without preparation.

ance.

Spiritual meditation before preaching is of great import"He must," says St. Cyran, "labor long at mortification of spirit, seeing that we ought to be more afraid of offending God in the pulpit than elsewhere."*

"The best preparation for preaching," it is said in the practical observations of Hernhutt, "is daily communion with Christ, watching our own heart, and constant reading of the word of God. Thus is secured that precious simplicity which has always been the chief characteristic of all the distinguished witnesses of the grace of Christ."

* ST. CYRAN: Lettres à M. Le Retours. Lettre XXXI.

3. Object of Preaching.

The object of preaching (of every sermon, I mean) should be "Jesus Christ crucified, who of God is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption."-1 Cor., i., 30. In every sermon we must either start from Christ or come to him. The whole of Christianity should be in every sermon, in this sense that sanctification never appear in it independent of faith, nor faith separate from sanctification. Where this combination does not appear of itself, where these two elements are not so incorporated and consubstantial, the one with the other, that it is morally and rationally impossible to speak of one without speaking of the other, there no true Gospel is present, and that which is preached is not the Gospel.

It is according to this sense that we must understand the words of St. Paul: "I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified."-1 Cor., ii., 2. These words signify, first, that St. Paul did not seek and did not publish salvation in any other than Jesus Christ; but they also signify that in whatever he taught he returned to this, came back to this, that this was every where present in his preaching, actually or virtually, as substance or as savor. But these same words do not signify absolutely that St. Paul knew nothing else. On the contrary, he knew, and the true pastor, after his example, should know, a great deal else. It is true, very often, that a preacher who literally knows nothing but Christ crucified, who puts nothing but this in his sermons, may produce excellent effects; so great is the value and the expansive force of the Christian doctrine. But this does not form the rule: The rule rather is to show, to enforce the relation of religion to whatever pertains to man and to human life. So far from having us ignorant of every thing, the rule much rather would have us know, or at least understand, every thing; not in order to

declare, not in order to display in the pulpit an encyclopedia of knowledge, but that nothing may be said which may meet a contradiction, or that will not find confirmation in facts; and also that every thing which we speak may be more direct, more striking, more true. There are a thousand things which we should never speak of in the pulpit, of which, nevertheless, we should not be ignorant; and an experienced hearer will discern in a sermon which speaks only of Jesus Christ and of religion the imprint or the reflection of diversified knowledge, which the orator does not outwardly produce, but which turns within him in succum et sanguinem. Besides, we can not in all cases say beforehand what a Christian orator should or should not speak. Necessarily, he is to speak of human life; and, to be instructive, he must enter into details: Who may say where is the limit. What would be superfluous in certain times or in certain places, in others would be no more than necessary.

In theology, it is very necessary to distinguish between doctrine and morality; but a nice distinction between sermons on doctrine and sermons on morality is of small importance to a Christian preacher. Doctrine and morality, which are interfused, identified in the Christian heart, should be so in Christian preaching. I would have no other rule than this let doctrine abound in moral preaching, and morality abound in doctrinal preaching. But, without doubt, a preacher should oblige himself to give to his parishioners instruction, both moral and doctrinal, as complete as possible.

4. Unity of Preaching.

What we have now said leads us to observe, that preaching in a parish should be regarded as a whole, and not be made up of detached discourses, of each of which chance alone has furnished the subject. It is one continuous action; it is only one and the same sermon formed of many consecutive sermons.