that a sermon written in such a style would be absurd and improper. Is there not a similar absurdity and impropriety in the use of highly poetic or too popular language? Besides the inherent impropriety of such language, it has the additional fault that every one perceives it to proceed from affectation.

It must not, however, be supposed that the style of sermons should be of one uniform tenor throughout. The topics of preaching are of such infinite variety, and the feelings and faculties which the preacher addresses so diverse, that he must be continually changing his tone and style: for it is obvious that the same would not be suitable to instruction, correction, and persuasion. "Is erit eloquens" (says St. Augustine, quoting from Cicero,) "qui poterit parva submissè, modica temperatè, magna granditer dicere.” You will find abundant instances of these different styles in the Epistles'.

It should be observed, also, that there is scarcely any language or topic so sublime, nor any so familiar, that it may not be introduced into a sermon, if it be done judiciously. A noble sentiment, or quotation from Scripture, will sometimes burst in suddenly with impressive effect: but a familiar illustration must not be introduced abruptly. I remember a splendid perora

1 See Augustini Opera: De Doct. Christ. lib. iv. cap. 22. For the "submissa dictio," he refers to Gal. iv. 21. and iii. 15; for the “ temperata,” to 1 Tim. v. 1, Rom. xii. 1, and xiii. 12; for the “grandis,” to Rom. viii. 28, and Gal. iv. 10. See also Arist. Rhet. lib. iii. ch. 6.

tion in a charity sermon being spoiled by the preacher saying abruptly, when all eyes were fixed on him, in mute attention, "For my part, whenever a beggar comes to me in the street, I always send him to Mr. —, the beadle of the Mendicity-office." Generally speaking, therefore, when you desire to introduce some magnificent quotation from Scripture, or, on the other hand, some familiar but apposite topic, you should so manage that the tenor of your style should lead to it, and blend with it, that it may not appear abrupt and unsuitable; or you may bring it in by some such observation as the following:-"To use the magnificent language of the inspired teacher,” or, “to use an illustration which, though somewhat homely, will explain exactly what I mean."

I have only to add, that in large churches, where you are obliged to preach at the top of your voice, will find it necessary to adopt a more sustained and grandiloquent style, than when you address a small congregation in your ordinary tone of speaking.

you

LETTER XIV.

ON STYLE-PERSPICUITY, FORCE, AND ELEGANCE.

THE first thing to be considered with regard to the formation of a proper style for a sermon, is the character of the persons to whom it is to be addressed; and in this consists the main difficulty. For, of all assemblies a Church congregation is the most promiscuous. The greater part of them are commonly illiterate persons—(illiterate, observe, not fools—"they want learning, not understanding 1;")—but there are generally a few educated persons amongst them. Your object, therefore, must be to make your style intelligible and impressive to the many, but not distasteful to the few; you are a "debtor equally to the wise and to the unwise." Your style should be clear and forcible, but not inelegant.

I have set down the excellences of style in their order of merit clearness, or perspicuity, must certainly

1 Whately.

"What

be acknowledged to be the first requisite. ever be the ultimate intention of the orator, whether to inform or convince, to please, to move, or to persuade, still he must speak so as to be understood, or he speaks to no purpose1;" and surely, of all speakers, a preacher of the Gospel has the most need to be careful that his language is clear. It is not possible, perhaps, that every word shall be reduced to the level of the lowest understanding, still the main body of the discourse should be in such language as they can readily follow. If your sermon will not bear to be expressed in plain language, you may be sure the matter of it is not very valuable.

I must, however, here suggest one or two cautions. Plainness of speech is very different from familiarity or vulgarity, nor does it necessarily imply even homeliness. Such language as the following errs in the excess of homeliness. Mr. Hare is speaking of the Lord's day and of His house: "He has set them apart for his own service; He has fenced them off, as it were, from the waste of the world. Hence there is the same sort of difference between them and all merely worldly and common things, as there is between a garden and Salisbury plain. No one who knows how to behave himself, would bring a horse into a garden, or walk over the strawberry-beds, or trample down the flowers. But in riding from here to Salisbury every body would feel

himself at liberty, while crossing the downs, to gallop over the turf." Such passages as these abound in Mr. Hare's otherwise admirable sermons. The great evil of this sort of style is, that the congregation must have supposed that he was joking with them, instead of speaking seriously.

Allied to this, and equally to be avoided, is a tone of affected condescension, and avowed adaptation of your style to the ignorance of your hearers. Deeply ignorant as too many of the lower classes still remain "in things belonging to their peace," yet the partial education which they have received has filled them with the pride of knowledge. Give them a tract addressed to persons "of the meanest capacity,” and they will throw it to their children, if not into the fire. You must adapt your language to their circumstances; and, while you are careful that your style is plain, do not let its plainness be too prominent.

When it is said that the language of a sermon must be perspicuous, it is not meant that it should be such only as may be understood if the congregation give their whole mind to it, but such as will be understood with ordinary attention; in short, such as cannot be easily misunderstood 1. In order to effect this, it should be, not only clear and intelligible, but also forcible, under which term I mean to include energy, vivacity, keenness, vigour, and spirit. It should be

1 See Claude's Essay, and Whately's Rhetoric. Part iii. ch. i.

sect. 2.