language, he must have committed this injury by making it more subordinate to grammatical rules. Foreigners and future generations will be more capable of understanding it, since he has excluded expressions which are only to be found in colloquial intercourse and vulgar phraseology. From his example, men may learn to give to their style energy, perspicuity, and elegance. They may acquire a habit of close thinking, and become accustomed to express their ideas with force and precision.

His political writings will be read and admired only for the dignity and energy of their style. His compositions are a most valuable addition to the literature of his country, and will confer a lasting reputation on his name. They are replete with "useful instruction, and elegant entertainment," and by perusing them, mankind may advance in knowledge and virtue. The efforts of his mind discover a life of study and meditation. His writings display a genius cultivated with industry, and quickened by exertion. His multifarious productions are an honor to the English nation; and his answer to his sovereign might more fairly be allowed, "that he had written his share," if he had not written so well. His mind has been laid open to the public in his printed works, without "reservation or disguise;" and, with all his faults and failings, he is still the admiration of mankind.

XCVII.

ON THE COMPOSITION OF A SERMON.*

On the Choice of Texts.

There are, in general, five parts of a sermon: the exordium, the con nexion, the division, the discussion, and the application; but as connexion and division are parts which ought to be extremely short, we can properly reckon only three parts: exordium, discussion, and application. However, we will just take notice of connexion and division after we have spoken a little on the choice of texts, and a few general rules of discussing them.

1. Never choose such texts as have not complete sense; for only imper tinent and foolish people will attempt to preach from one or two words which signify nothing.

2. Not only words which have a complete sense of themselves must be taken, but they must also include the complete sense of the writer whose words they are; for it is his language, and they are his sentiments, which you explain, For example, should you take these words of 2 Cor. 1: 3. "Blessed be God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort," and stop here, you will include a complete sense; but it would not be the Apostle's sense. Should you go farther, and add, "who comforteth us in all our tribulation," it would not then be the complete sense of St. Paul, nor would his meaning be wholly taken in, unless you went to the end of the fourth verse. When the complete sense of the sacred writer is taken, you may stop; for there are few texts in Scripture, which do not afford matter sufficient for a sermon, and it is equally inconvenient to take too much text or too little; both extremes must be avoided.

These directions and remarks are taken from Hannam's "Pulpit Assistant." The student will also find much aid from Gresley's "Treatise on Preaching."

General rules of sermons. 1. A sermon should clearly and purely explain a text, make the sense easily to be comprehended, and place things before the people's eyes, so that they may be understood without difficulty. This rule condemns embarrassment and obscurity, the most disagreeable thing in the world in a gospel pulpit. It ought to be remembered, that the greatest part of the hearers are simple people, whose profit, however, must be aimed at in preaching: but it is impossible to edify them, unless you be very clear. Bishop Burnett says, "a preacher is to fancy himself as in the room of the most unlearned man in the whole parish, and must therefore put such parts of his discourses as he would have all understand, in so plain a form of words, that it may not be beyond the meanest of them. This he will certainly study to do, if his desire be to edify them, rather than to make them admire himself as a learned and high spoken man."

2. A sermon must give the entire sense of the whole text, in order to which it must be considered in every view. This rule condemns dry and barren explications, wherein the preacher discovers neither study nor invention, and leaves unsaid a great number of beautiful things with which his text might have furnished him. In matters of religion and piety, not to edify much is to destroy much; and a sermon cold and poor will do more mischief in an hour, than a hundred rich sermons can do good.

3. The preacher must be wise, in opposition to those impertinent people who utter jests, comical comparisons, quirks, and extravagances; sober, in opposition to those rash spirits who would penetrate all, and curiously dive into mysteries beyond the bounds of modesty; chaste, in opposition to those bold and imprudent geniuses who are not ashamed of saying many things which produce unclean ideas in the mind.

4. A preacher must be simple and grave. Simple, speaking things of good natural sense, without metaphysical speculations; grave, because all sorts of vulgar and proverbial sayings ought to be avoided. The pulpit is the seat of good natural sense, and the good sense of good men.

5. The understanding must be informed, but in a manner, however, which affects the heart; either to comfort the hearers, or to excite them to acts of piety, repentance, or holiness.

6. One of the most important precepts for the discussion of a text, and the composition of a sermon, is, above all things, to avoid excess:

1. There must not be too much genius. I mean, not too many brilliant, sparkling, and shining things: for they would produce very bad effects. The auditor will never fail to say, "The man preaches himself, aims to dis play his genius, and is not animated by the spirit of God, but by that of the world."

2. A Sermon must not be overcharged with doctrine, because the hearers' memories cannot retain it all; and by aiming to keep all, they will lose all. Take care, then, not to charge your sermon with too much matter.

3. Care must also be taken never to strain any particular part, either in attempting to exhaust it, or to penetrate too far into it. Frequently in at tempting it, you will distil the subject till it evaporates.

4. Figures must not be overstrained. This is done by stretching meta phor into allegory, or by carrying a parallel too far. A metaphor is changed into an allegory when a number of things are heaped up, which agree to the subject in keeping close to the metaphor. Allegories may sometimes be used very agreeably: but they must not be strained: that is, all that can be said of them must not be said.

5. Reasoning must not be carried too far. This may be done many ways; either by long trains of reasons, composed of a number of proposi tions chained together, or principles and consequences, which way of rea soning is embarrassing and painful to the auditor. The mind of man loves to be conducted in a more smooth and easy way.

Of connexion. The connexion is the relation of your text to the forego ing or following verses. To find this, consider the scope of the discourse and consult commentators; particularly exercise your own good sense

When the coherence will furnish any agreeable considerations for the illustrations of the text, they must be put in the discussion; and they will very often happen. Sometimes, also, you may draw thence an exordium: in such a case, the exordium and connexion will be confounded together.

Of division. Division in general ought to be restrained to a small num ber of parts; they should never exceed four or five at the most; the most admired sermons have only two or three parts.

There are two sorts of divisions which we may very properly make; the first, which is the most common, is the division of the text into its parts. the other is of the discourse, or sermon itself, which is made on the text.

1. This method is proper when a prophecy of the Old Testament is handled; for, generally, the understanding of these prophecies depends or many general considerations, which, by exposing and refuting false senses, open a way to the true explication.

2. This method is also proper on a text taken from a dispute, the under standing of which must depend on the state of the question, the hypothesis of adversaries, and the principles of the inspired writers. All these lights are previously necessary, and they can only be given by general considera tions; for example, Rom. iii. 28. "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." Some general considerations must precede, which clear up the state of the question between St. Paul and the Jews, touching justification, which mark the hypothesis of the Jews upon that subject, and which discover the true principle which St. Paul would establish; so that, in the end, the text may be clearly understood.

3. This method also is proper in a conclusion drawn from a long preced ing discourse; as for example, Rom. v. 1. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ." The dis course must be divided into two parts; the first consisting of some general considerations on the doctrine of justification, which St. Paul establishes in the preceding chapters; and the second of his conclusion, that, being thus justified, we have peace with God, &c.

The same may be said of the first verse of the eighth of Romans, "There is, therefore, now no condemnation," &c., for it is a consequence drawn from what he had been establishing before.

4. The same method is proper for texts which are quoted in the New Testament from the Old. You must prove by general considerations that the text is properly produced, and then you may come clearly to its explication. Of this kind are Hebrews i. 5, 6. "I will be to him a Father," &c. "One in a certain place testified," &c., ii. 6. "Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith," &c., iii. 7. There are many passages of this kind in the New Testament.

5. In this class must be placed divisions into different regards, or differ ent views. These, to speak properly, are not divisions of a text into its parts, but rather different applications which are made of the same texts to divers subjects. Typical texts should be divided thus; and a great num ber of Passages in the Psalms, which relate not only to David, but also te Jesus Christ. Such should be considered, first, literally, as they relate to David; and then, in the mystical sense, as they refer to the Lord Jesus.

There are also typical passages, which, besides their literal sense, have also figurative meanings, relating not only to Jesus Christ, but also to the church in general, and to every believer in particular.

For example, Dan. ix. 7: "O Lord, righteousness belongeth to thee, but unto us confusion of face, as at this day," must not be divided into parts, but considered in different views: 1. In regard to all men in general. 2. In regard to the Jewish Church in Daniel's time. 3. In regard to ourselves at this present day.

So again, Heb. iii. 7, S. "To-day, if ye will hear his voice," which is taken from Psalm xcv., cannot be better divided than by referring it - 1. To David's time. 2. St. Paul's. And lastly, to our cwn.

As to the division of the text itself, sometimes the order of the words is so clear and natural, that no division is necessary, you need only follow simply the order of the words. As for example, Eph. i. 3. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ." It is not necessary to divide this text, because the words divide themselves, and to explain them, we need only to follow them. Here is a grateful acknowledgment. "Bles sed be God." The title under which the Apostle blesses God, "The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." The reason for which he blesses him, because "he hath blessed us." The plenitude of this blessing, "with all blessings." The nature or kind signified by the term spiritual. The place where he hath blessed us," in heavenly places." In whom he hath blessed us, "in Christ."

Most texts, however, ought to be formally divided; for which purpose you must principally have regard to the order of nature, and put that division which naturally precedes, in the first place, and the rest must follow, each in its proper order.

There are two natural orders; one natural in regard to subjects them selves; the other natural in regard to us.

And though, in general, you may follow which of the two others you please, yet there are some texts that determine the division; as Phil. ii. 13. "It is God who worketh effectually in you, both to will and to do of his own good pleasure." There are, it is plain, three things to be discussed; the action of God's grace upon men, "God worketh effectually in you;" the effect of this grace, "to will and to do;" and the spring or source of the action, according to "his good pleasure." I think the division would not be proper if we were to treat, 1. Of God's good pleasure; 2. Of his grace; and 3. Of the will and works of men.

Above all things, in divisions, take care of putting any thing in the first part which supposes the understanding of the second; or which obliges you to treat of the second to make the first understood; for, by these means, you will throw yourself into great confusion, and be obliged to Make many tedious repetitions. You must endeavour to disengage the one from the other as well as you can; and when your parts are too closely connected with each other, place the most detached first, and endeavour to make that serve for a foundation to the explication of the second, and the second to the third; so that, at the end of your explication, the hearer may at a glance perceive, as it were, a perfect body, a well finished building; for one of the greatest excellences of a sermon is, the harmony of its component parts; that the first leads to the second, the second serves to introduce the third; that they which go before, excite a desire for those which are to follow.

When, in a text, there are several terms which need a particular explan ation, and which cannot be explained without confusion, or without dividing the text into too many parts, then I would not divide the text at all; but I would divide the discourse into two or three parts; and I would propose, first, to explain the terms, and then the subject itself.

There are many texts, in discussing which, it is not necessary to treat of either subject or attribute; but all the discussion depends on the terms, syncategorematica (words which, of themselves, signify nothing, but, in conjunction with others, are very significative). For example, John iii. 16, "God so loved the world." The categorical proposition is, God loved the world; yet, it is neither necessary to insist much upon the term God, nor to speak in a common-place way of the love of God, but, divide the text into two parts; first, the gift which God in his love hath made of his son; secondly, the end for which he gave him, "that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

There are texts of reasoning, which are composed of an objection and an answer, and the division of such is plain; for they naturally divide into the

objection and solution. As, Romans vi. 1, 2, "What shall we say then," &c. There are some texts of reasoning which are extremely difficult to divide, because they cannot be reduced into many propositions without confusion. As, John iv. 10, "If thou knewest the gift of God," &c. I think it might not be improper to divide it into two parts, the first including the general propositions contained in the words; and the second, the particular application of these to the Samaritan woman.

There are some texts which imply many important truths without ex pressing them; and yet it will be necessary to mention and enlarge upon them, either because they are useful on some important occasion, or because they are important of themselves. Then the text may be divided into two parts, one implied, and the other expressed.

In texts of history, divisions are easy; sometimes an action is related in all its circumstances, and then you may consider the action in itself first, and afterward the circumstances of the action.

To render a division agreeable, and easy to be remembered by the hearer, endeavour to reduce it as often as possible to simple terms.

As to subdivisions, it is always necessary to make them, for they very much assist the composition, and 'diffuse perspicuity into a discourse; but it is not always necessary to mention them; on the contrary, they must be very seldom mentioned, because it will load the hearer's mind with a multitude of particulars.

Discussion. There are four methods of discussion. Clear subjects must be discussed by observation, or continued application; difficult and important ones by explication or proposition.

I. By Explication.

ject, or to both.

The difficulty is in regard to the Terms, to the sub

1. Explication of Terms. The difficulties of these arise from three causes; either the terms do not seem to make any sense, or they are equi vocal, forming different senses; or, the sense they seem to make at first appears perplexed, improper, or contradictory: or, the meaning, though elear, may be controverted, and is exposed to cavil.

Propose the ratio dubitandi, which makes the difficulty; then determine It as briefly as you can.

2. Of Things. Difficult things. If the difficulty arise from errors, or false senses, refute and remove them; then establish the truth. If from the intricacy of the subject itself, do not propose difficulties, and raise objections, but enter immediately into the explication of the matter, and take care to arrange your ideas well.

3. Important things, though clear, must be discussed by explication, because they are important.

There are two sorts of explications; the one, simple and plain, needs only to be proposed, and agreeably elucidated; the other must be confirmed, if it speak of fact, by proofs of fact; if of right, by proofs of right; if of both, proofs of both. A great and important subject, consisting of many branches, may be reduced to a certain number of propositions or questions, and discussed one after the other.

N. B. Sometimes what you will have to explain in a text will consist of one or more simple terms; of ways of speaking peculiar to Scripture; of particles called syncategorematica; and sometimes of different propositions. 1. Simple terms are the divine attributes, goodness, &c., man's virtues or vices, faith, hope, &c. Simple terms are either proper or figurative; if figurative, give the meaning of the figure, and, without stopping long, pass on to the thing itself. Some simple terms must only be explained just as they relate to the intention of the sacred author; in a word, explain simple terms as much as possible, in relation to the design of the sacred author. Sometimes the simple terms in a text must be discussed professedly, in order to give a clear and full view of the subject. Sometimes, when there are many, it might be injudicious to treat of them separately, but beauti fully to do it by comparison.