another." This opinion is maintained by most writers on the subject; "Every person," says Bishop Sprat, "who undertakes this great employment, should make it a matter of religion and conscience to preach nothing but what is the product of his own study, and of his own composing.'

66

There are not wanting, however, those who are of the contrary opinion. Addison says', that Sir Roger de Coverly presented the clergyman of his parish with all the good sermons which had been published in English, and only begged of him that every Sunday he would pronounce one of them. And that this is not, as one might imagine, merely a humour of the worthy knight's, would appear from Addison's own concluding observations :-" I could heartily wish that more of our country clergy would follow his example, and instead of wasting their spirits in laborious composition, would endeavour after a handsome elocution, and all those other talents, to enforce what has been penned by greater masters. This would not only be more easy to themselves, but more edifying to the people." He is partly right: more easy to the preacher unquestionably it would be, inasmuch as it would require neither talent, nor learning, nor experience, nor knowledge of divinity, nor ability to compose; but that it would be more edifying to the people does not so plainly appear; and that is the

1 See Spectator, No. 106.

point on which the question must be decided. Addison's opinion has been adopted by many. I have myself heard serious persons declare, that there is no excuse now a days for a Clergyman preaching a bad sermon, because there are so many good ones published1.

A little consideration will, I think, dispose us to deny both the premiss and the conclusion. First, are there many good sermons published? I should say decidedly, No,—not many that are well adapted for the pulpit. Sermons are published to be read, not to be preached. Mr. Fox used to ask of a printed speech, "Does it read well?" and being answered in the affirmative, said, "Then it was a bad speech." There should, in truth, always be a difference in style between what is to be read and what is to be spoken. "A report verbatim of any effective speech must always appear diffused and ungraceful in the perusal ; the very repetitions and redundancy, the accumulation of epithets which gave force and momentum to the career of delivery, but weaken and encumber the march of style when read." This may not apply quite so much to sermons, because the style of the pulpit is commonly less oratorical than that of other speeches. Still it is true of them, though in a less degree: for, when a Clergyman prepares his sermon

1 See some excellent remarks in the Christian Observer, vol. v. p. 465.

2 Moore's Life of Sheridan.

for the press, he will generally correct the style in order to adapt it to reading. Some of the best essays in our language appear in the shape of printed sermons; but if these were to be preached as they are published, they would be unimpressive sermons, precisely because they are good essays 1.

But suppose that sermons are published as they are preached, and that many good ones are so published; still I am not prepared to admit, that you would do well to preach them. It is a fallacy to suppose that the utility of preaching depends solely or chiefly on the goodness of the sermon. The truth is, that, in an effective sermon, there are many concurrent causes, besides its merit as a composition, to which we must look for its efficiency.

In the first place, it is essential to the force of all public addresses, and of sermons at least as much as any, that they should be specially adapted to the character, capacity, circumstances, habits, prejudices, mode of thinking, and degree of knowledge of the hearers. Now, how is it likely that these requisites should be attended to by a preacher who delivers a sermon composed a hundred years ago, or written for a congregation at a distant part of the kingdom? It is possible he may select one generally suited to his congregation, accordingly as the majority may be rich or poor, agricultural or commercial, educated or illiterate; but

1 See a Letter in the British Magazine for Sept. 1834, by W. F. H.

still it must of necessity want that minute and pointed adaptation to the hearers' circumstances, which constitutes a primary excellence in every address. And if it be difficult to select even one sermon, which has this charm, how much more hopeless must it be to adapt the compositions of other people to your own congregation, during a long course of parochial preaching.

Another requisite for a sermon is, that it should be the genuine language of your own heart. "A sermon ought to be a delineation of the workings of the preacher's own mind." There will be a degree of earnestness and sincerity when you deliver your own thoughts and sentiments, which cannot be attained by those, who use language which is not their own. "There is an authority in the simplest things which can be said, when they carry visible characters of genuineness with them :" and a man can never be eloquent but when he is speaking his own thoughts, and delivering his own sentiments. Although you may be perfectly convinced of the truth of what you take from another preacher's sermon, and sincerely anxious to impress it on your hearers, yet it is not possible (except, indeed, for an accomplished actor, which, I suppose, it is not your wish to be,) to enter into the feelings and tone of the original composer, and deliver with warmth and energy sentiments which you have borrowed: for there is something peculiar in each man's way of thinking and expressing himself, of which it is not in the power of another to give a just notion.

r

And if it be difficult to preach the composition of another with propriety and force, even when the greatest pains are taken, it may be expected, that when proper pains are not bestowed, grievous blunders will sometimes occur. The study necessary for the composition of sermons is one of the principal means by which the preacher forms his opinions, and increases his stock of knowledge. A preacher of printed sermons is not in general of a very studious turn; hence it is not unlikely that his doctrine will be found somewhat inconsistent. He may be an Arminian one Sunday, a high Calvinist the next. have known such mistakes occur: nay, I have heard of a preacher veering about to opposite points of the compass even in one discourse. Such a sermon reminds us of Horace's monster,

"Desinit in piscem mulier formosa supernè."

which has been wittily translated "The head of John Calvin clapped on the shoulders of Wesley.” The worst thing you can do, is to make a patch-work of your sermon, by taking part from one place, and part from another. If you must steal, steal it all, and all from the same place; but the better way is not to steal.

Besides, whatever may have been the public opinion in the time of Addison, it is certain that there is now a very general prejudice against a Clergyman who is too idle to compose his own sermons: it is con