Plainness of preaching involves Perspicuity, and Precision, of language; and, indeed, Purity, and Propriety, also. Our words ought to be English, and to be used as they are customarily used. They ought, also, to express that, and that only, which we intend, and to express it clearly. All this, as you know, is necessary to writing and speaking well, generally. Peculiarly is it necessary, when we address popular assemblies; a great part of whom are accustomed to plain language only; and supremely, when we utter the doctrines and precepts of the Gospel, infinitely important as the means of Eternal life.

Our phraseology ought carefully to be cleared of all ambiguities; the effect of which is only to perplex those who hear. If these are admitted into sermons through carelessness, the preacher is inexcusable: if through doubt in his mind, he is bound to say nothing concerning the subjects of his doubts, unless when compelled to acknowledge them to his audience.

Technical, or scientifical, language is, also, to be excluded from popular sermons. This may sometimes serve to show the learning of the preacher: but will prevent his sermons from being useful to his audience.

A still greater trespass against plainness of speech, and much more common in the desk, is committed in what is called Metaphysical Preaching. The science of Metaphysics, as you well know, is that which is employed about the nature of things. As this subject is peculiarly abstruse, and demands nice and difficult disquisition; all discussions which are nice and difficult, are familiarly termed Metaphysical. Most young preachers are fond of Metaphysical subjects; and, be the subject almost what it may, of the Metaphysical mode of discussion. Nor are young preachers alone in these respects.

All preaching, of this nature, is, however, chiefly useless, and commonly mischievous. No ordinary congregation ever understood, to any valuable purpose, Metaphysical subjects and no congregation, it is believed, was ever much edified by a metaphysical manner of discussion. Whenever distinctions become subtile and nice; they cease to be made by the common mind; and, however clear the preacher's views may be, they will never, in this case, become the views of his audience. After attempting for a while to follow him in his ingenious career, and finding themselves unable, they will give up the attempt in despair and disgust.

Happily, the duty of the preacher, and the interest of his congregation, do not demand this mode of preaching. Few Theological subjects ordinarily require discussions of this nature: and none of them, unless on rare and peculiar occasions, require them in the desk. The obvious investigations of common sense are incomparably better fitted to popular audiences. Common Sense, the most valuable faculty (if I'may call it such) of man, finds all

its premises either in revelation, or in facts; adopts arguments, only of the a posteriori kind; extends its reasonings through a few steps only; derives its illustrations from familiar sources; discriminates, only where there is a real difference; and admits conclusions, only where it can see their connexion with the premises. At theoretical philosophy it laughs. Theoretical divinity it detests. To this faculty the Scriptures are almost universally addressed. The subjects, which they contain, are, to a considerable extent, Metaphysical; and often so abstruse, as to defy human investigation. Yet they are almost always treated in the obvious manner of Common Sense. Even St. Paul, one of the most profound of all Reasoners, never appears to choose abstruse discussion, when the subject will allow of any other; and returns with apparent pleasure to a plainer mode of discourse, as soon as the nature of the case will permit. Our Saviour treats every subject in the direct manner of Common Sense, although he often discourses concerning things of the most profound nature.

There is another evil in the Metaphysical mode of disquisition, which ought, in most instances, to discourage us from attempting it. It is this. The Preacher himself is apt to be bewildered by the abstruse nature of his subject, and by the tenuous, subtile, manner of his reasoning; and is often very far from possessing clear views of either. Men, devoted to literary inquiries, are frequently ambitious of Metaphysical fame. Abstruse reasonings, curious speculations, especially when they are their own, and, still more, discoveries, made in this profound science, by themselves, when they are supposed to be new, are regarded by them with peculiar favouritism and fondness. Attempts of this nature are therefore made by multitudes, both Philosophers and Divines. But of all those, which have been made, few, very few, have been suc cessful. Almost all have, at the best, been only ingenious amusements; and far the greater part have fallen short even of this character. Whatever applause, or credit, they have gained, has usually been momentary. Of utility, almost all have been totally destitute, and have, accordingly, soon vanished from the attention of mankind. Aquinas and Duns-Scotus, men scarcely inferior to any Metaphysicians, and once more celebrated than any writer of the present day, are now known, almost solely by their names. How evident is it, therefore, that men, possessed only of the common talents, such as those of almost all men, and, still more, men of moderate information, were never designed by God to be useful as Metaphysicians. Generally, therefore, Clergymen cannot be wisely employed in often uttering discussions of this nature from the Desk.

At the same time, every subject of preaching ought, so far as the purpose in view requires, to be thoroughly discussed. Sub. jects, indeed, which are plain, and doctrines which are acknowledged, demand often very little discussion. If they are exhibited

with clear arrangement, and with brief and distinct evidence, nothing more will usually be necessary. At times, it will be proper to mark the connexion between the subject in hand, and others intimately related to it, that their harmony may be understood. But whenever doctrines are less clear, or more disputed, greater pains will always be necessary to exhibit their evidence, and evince their truth. If the Preacher has formed clear and comprehensive views of them himself; he cannot be at a loss for useful modes of presenting them to others. That view of them, which is most satisfactory to himself, will almost always best satis fy others. Diligent study, precision of thought, and habitual clearness of arrangement, will regularly qualify him for this part of his business.

2. The Gospel ought to be preached Variously.

By this I intend, that both the manner, and especially the subjects, of preaching should be diversified.

The foundation of preaching in this manner is laid in the nature of man, and in the nature of divine truth. The love of variety is one of the elementary principles of human nature; and seems to have been implanted in the heart, that we might be always, and irresistibly, allured to the study, and the relish, of the infinitely various works of God. These are formed with unceasing variety, that they might display the boundless diversity of his wisdom and goodness. That man may understand them, it is absolutely neces sary, that he study them and to the study of them, the love of their nature, and appearance, is indispensable. Hence this principle in the human constitution: a principle, never to be forgotten by a preacher.

Divine truth, which is an account of the works, and character, of God, is possessed, as it necessarily must be, of a corresponding variety. All the parts, of which this truth is composed, are declared to be profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness. The profit of the whole is made up of that, which is furnished by the several parts; and to be either communicated, or gained, must be derived from them all. All, therefore, should, so far as may be, find their proper place in the successive discourses of the preacher.

Besides, a great part of the beauty, excellence, and usefulness, of Evangelical doctrines and precepts, results from their mutual relations, seen only by comparing them with each other. Faith, Justification, and Holiness, for example, have an import, a beauty, a distinction, arising from their connexion with each other, which we should in vain attempt to find by a separate investigation. But unless all these, and many other, doctrines are exhib ited by the preacher, this connexion can never be learned by his hearers.

Of this variety of preaching, in both respects, the Scriptures are an abundant example. In them we find an immense diversi

ty of truths, communicated in a delightful diversity of manner. Here we are furnished witn profound reasonings; short, pruden tial, moral, and religious, maxims; plain and pithy precepts; orations in form; poetry of every species, and every high degree of excellence; familiar letters; private journals; history, both general and biographical; together with most other approved modes of communication. At the same time, each writer has adopted his own peculiar manner, both in prose and poetry; and thus, while furnishing a strong presumption, that the writings are genuine, has added not a little to the beauty of the sacred volume. By these various methods of communication, the understanding is addressed with the highest advantage; the imagination is powerfully allured; and the feelings of the heart are irresistibly engrossed. Hence, the Bible is more bought, and more read, than any other book. Hence, also, man is summoned with peculiar success, to the great business of repentance and reformation. The wisdom and goodness of God, manifested in this interesting structure of the Sacred Volume, can never be sufficiently admired.

By this happy method of communicating Divine truth, the Scrip tures are rendered, also, the most comprehensive of all writings. They are indeed pre-eminently comprehensive by their conciseness. In addition to this, they possess that character in a far higher degree by means of their perpetually diversified manner of communication. From this source the same truths are presented to us in lights unceasingly new; and with connexions, surprising the mind on every successive page. Hence, by an examination, and comparison, of different passages, new truths, not directly declared, are unfolded with absolute clearness, and indubitable certainty. The number of these truths is incomprehensible.

This extraordinary variety of manner cannot, I acknowledge, be adopted by a preacher. Still it arthorizes, and in my view, re quires, him to diversify his discourses in every mode, which is warranted by correct taste, so far as it shall be in his power. Preaching is in its nature an address to a popular assembly; and can, therefore, admit of no other varieties of manner, than those, which are applicable to such an address. But even these may be considerably numerou3. Such an address, from the example of the Apostles, and succeeding Ministers, may be warrantably distributed under two great heads: Preaching, in the proper sense, and Commenting. The former of these is naturally the most interesting; the latter, perhaps, the most instructive. In the course of it, many doctrines may be illustrated, and many parts of Scripture explained, and enforced, which the preacher can never even introduce into sermons. Difficulties, also, which may perplex the common mind, may in this manner be removed; seeming discordances reconciled; connexions and other relations illustrated; and har mony displayed; more advantageously than in any other manner. On all these accounts it will engage, as well as improve; and as a

part of every course of preaching, will render the whole course more interesting than, perhaps, it could be otherwise.

In both modes, the Preacher will increase that variety of com munication, which will be both useful and pleasant, by adopting in variably, his own characteristical manner. Every man is formed to think, speak, and write, in a manner peculiar to himself. This, being contrived by the Divine wisdom, is naturally fitted to be both agreeable and useful; and ought always to be retained. It may, it ought to be, improved, so far as our circumstances will allow; but it cannot be safely exchanged for that of any other individual; nor, without serious disadvantage, for a general mode, established by common consent. It is the tendency of all Criticism to form rules, so narrow, as to limit the natural, proper, and pleasing excursions of the human mind. Men oftener write with vigour and success, when they forget, disregard, or are ignorant of the incumbrance of these rules, than when they are timorously governed by them. I do not deny, that as they are now adopted by enlighten ed men, they are generally just, and will serve well for the purpose of enabling us to judge of what is already written, and to avoid blemishes and absurdities in writing. But they never can teach, and very frequently, prevent, that excellence in writing, of which we are capable. To avoid this evil, and to make the most of his powers, every preacher, after possessing himself of the general manner, should, with so much conformity to it, as to save himself from just censure, adopt his own manner, improved as much as may be, but never relinquished, nor destroyed. This will enable him to differ, usefully and pleasingly only, from other preach ers; and will give to his discourses most of that novelty, of which sermons are now susceptible. At the same time, he will always appear in it with more advantage, than in any other; and will add extensively to that diversity of communication, which I have urg ed, in both these kinds of discourse. Should any person appre hend, that the general mode, in use, must be exactly followed; 1 answer, that very different modes have been acceptable, and useful, in other ages, and other countries; and that human nature furnishes no satisfactory proof, that they may not be useful again.

As to variety of subjects the preacher can never be at a loss; and must be inexcusable, if he does not avail himself of this advantage. The Bible is a world; and all that it contains is proffered to his use. Every thing, which it contains, is also profitable for instruction.

It will be in vain for a preacher to allege, that, in his view, some subjects are sufficiently important to claim the whole attention both of himself and his hearers. As I remarked in the preceding discourse, the comparative importance of doctrines is settled by the Scriptures themselves. Them, be is bound to follow. Should he thep determine, that it is proper for him to preach only on alarm ing themes, that sinners may be compelled to lay hold on eternal