The Spirit of Scriptural Preaching
A THOUGHTFUL study of the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, will afford the best illustrations of this subject. Our Lord’s Ministry furnishes the perfect exemplification, of which the Apostolic Ministry exhibited a close detailed imitation; and therefore as entrusted with the same commission, opposed by the same hindrances, and sustained by the same promises with the first Ministers of the Church, an attentive consideration of their spirit must be replete with most important instruction and support. A few leading particulars will be specified, which may be filled up with advantage, even in the most contracted sphere of the Christian Ministry.
I. — BOLDNESS — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
Our Lord’s pungent addresses to the Scribes and Pharisees’’ exhibit the boldness of a Christian Ministration. The same spirit in the Apostles — unaccountable upon human calculations — confounded their judges to theirface.< ^V itness Paul before Felix — a prisoner
Vaughan’s Life, p. 234. 2 See Matt, xxiii. 3 Acts ii 13.
* Acts iv. 13. See the power that rested upon this spirit; 29 — 33: liv. 3 St. Paul’s on his trial for life — “no man standing by him” — hated even to death by the influential body of his countrymen; yet, mean, and in peril, looking his Judge in the face, with the power of life and death in his hands; and — remembering only the dignity of his office — delivering to this noble sinner and his guilty partner the most personal and olTensive truths. ‘How did this splendid example of Ministerial boldness “magnify his office!” For what can be more degrading to our Divine commission, than that we should fear the face of men? What unmindfulness does it argue of our Master’s presence and authority, and of our high responsibilities, as ‘• set forth for the defence of the Gospel!’”^ The independence, that disregards alike the praise and the censure of man, is indispensable for the integrity of the Christian Ministry.
Luther would have been tolerated on many truths of general application; but his bold statements of justification could not be endured. How different from Erasmus, who, though a layman, delivered his doctrines ex cathedrd, yet with an imworthy carefulness to avoid inconvenient offence! But the question is not, how our people may be pleased; but how they may be warned, instructed, and saved. We would indeed strongly rebuke that modesty, which makes us ashamed of our grand message; or that tremulous timidity, which seems to imply, that we are only half-believers in our grand commission.^ To keep offensive doctrines out of view, or to apologize for the occasional mention of them, or to be over-cautious respecting the rudeness of disquieting the conscience with unwelcome truth; to compromise with the world; to connive at fashionable sins; or to be silent, where the cause of God demands an open confession — this is not the spirit which honours our Master, and which he “delighteth to honour.”*
The reproof of sin is an important part of Ministerial boldness. Even the courtesies of life never restrained our Lord from this office. The Pharisees’ dinners were made the seasons of rebuke, and never used as an excuse for declining it.* The Scriptural rules and exhortations in the Ministerial Epistles show, that it should be when occasion required, public,* as a warning to others — sharp,’’
deep sense of its importance. Eph. vi. 19, 20. Col. iv. 3, 4 — the same spirit characterizing the Jewish prophets, 1 Kings xxi. “20; xxii. 14 — 25. 2 Chron. xvi. 7; xxiv. 20. Isaiah lviii. 1; lxv. 2, with Rom. x. 20. Amosvii. 10 — 13. Micah iii. 8. Matt. iii. 7.
1 Acts xxiv. 24, 25. 2 Phil. i. 17. 3 See Jer. xxiii. 28.
* See some searching views, in a sermon entitled ‘The Gospel Message, by Rev. Dr. Dealtry, pp. 24 — 26. ‘Be afraid of nothing more’ — said a holy Minister — ’ than the detestable cowardice of a selfish and unbelieving heart.’ Correspondence of the late Rev. Henry Venn, p. 248. ‘Lord, turn the fear of men’s faces into a love of their soids’^» was Mr. Walker’s godly prayer. — Life, p. 356.
5 Luke vii. 36 — 16; li. 37 — 54. 1 Tim. v, 20. ‘Titus L 13.
as a means of conviction to the offender — with authority in oui Master’s name — with Zoye,^ in the hope of ultimate restoration. It shovild, however, be always aimed at the sin, not at the sinner. There was no need for the Apostle to make any personal allusion to Felix. Conscience told the trembling criminal — “Thou art the man.”’
Yet it is not every kind of boldness, that commends the glory of our message, and the dignity of our office. It is not an affected faithfulness, that makes a merit of provoking hostility to the truth — (a temper more closely connected with a man’s own spirit than with the Gospel) — not a presumptuous rashness, that utters the holy oracles without premeditation of what is most fitting to be said, or most likely to be effective. But it is a spiritual, holy principle, combined with meekness, humility, and love, and with a deep consciousness of our own weakness and infirmities. This spirit is “a door of utterance” — a door shut, till the Lord opens it — a matter of special difficulty — and therefore a subject of special prayer, both with the Minister and with the people on his account.*
This Ministerial boldness is fenced on either side by warning and encouragement.* Yet many probably know, and even feel, more truth, than they have courage to preach. Want we then a further motive? Think of the despised Saviour in the judgment hall,” before Pontius Pilate, witnessing a good confession’’’’’ — an example of fidelity enough to make a coward bold!
The deficiency of this spirit lowers us in the estimation of our people, as time-servers, whose moral and religious integrity are alike suspected. Many who love the ’ smooth things’ we should ’ prophesy,’ would despise us in their hearts for this accommodation to their sinful indulgences; whilst Christian boldness awes the haters of our message, and secures the confidence of the true flock of Christ, and the approbation of our conscience in the sight of God.
II. — WISDOM — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
“Wisdom” — observes the wise king of Jerusalem, who had known its value in public instruction — “is profitable to direct.”*
1 Titus ii. 15, with 1 Cor. v. 4. 1 Tim. v. 1. 2 Tim. ii. 24, 25.
3 Acts xxiv. 25. See 1 Cor. ii. 3. s See Eph. vi. 19, 20
6 Comp. Jer. i. 17 — 19. Ezek. ii. 6 — 8. 2 Tim. iv. 16. This thought seems to fiave been the last prop of Jeremiah’s sinking spirit, chap. xx. 9 — 11.
7 1 Tim. vi. 13. Eed. i. 10, with lii. 10.
We may be useful without learning, but not without wisdom This was a part of our Master’s furniture for his work ;* to which the multitude, and even his enemies, bore ample testimony.’^ His sermons were fraught with solemn, weighty, unmingled truth, judicious appeals to Scripture, an intimate acquaintance with the heart, and a suitable adaptation of incidental occurrences to the great end of his mission ;^ so that in every view it was the manifestation of the “wisdom of God.” In the same spirit his Apostle bore testimony to his own labours; ‘• teaching every man in all wisdom, that he might present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.”*
The wisdom of our yublic Ministration includes the character of our compositions — that they should be such, that the lowest may understand, and the intelligent may have no cause to complain; that the weak may not be offended, nor the captious gratified. There must be unity of object, that the minds of our hearers may not be distracted; perspicuity of arrangement, that they may enter into every part of the subject; and simplicity of diction, that no part of it may be concealed by artificial language. The j)recise view of the mind of the Spirit in the test itself will naturally give unity of subject. Discernment of its distinct character will facilitate arrangement. The infusion of its spirit (whether of an energetic or tender kind) will of itself kad to suitable ‘plainness of speech’
Thus the judgment arrives at a clear perception of the subject — the will has a ready ground of assent — the affections an intelligent and practical excitement — the memory a stronger habit of retention — the conscience an awakened exercise. And though we would not ascribe innate efficacy to the best disposition of our great subject, yet we must deal with rational man through a rational medium. On the other hand — when the unity is disturbed by the intermixture of different points, and the dissociation of the several parts — when the arra7igem,ent is filled up with general matter, witho it the explication of the main heads of the discussion — when there is but little moulding of the mind into the spirit of the subject — want of clearness, sympathy, and power of application is the result. Yet mechanical uniformity — treating all subjects in the same precise method — greatly fails in eflfect. Sound wisdoni
‘Isaiah li. 2, 3; 1. 4. 2 Luke iv. 22. xxi. 40, with John vii. 46.
3 This particular of the Ministry of Christ, is admirably illustrated by the Bishop of Winchester. — Minister. Char, of Christ, eh. vi. * Col. i. ^.
5 The Writer begs particularly to refer to Mr. Simeon’s short but admirable rules fox •omposition in his edition of Claude’s Essay, 12mo. pp. 30 — 34.
wiiLniake use of the best rules, and the settled principles of composition; at the same time taking care that their influence does not crush the powers of imagination, or weaken the force of free and natural address to the conscience.
“Preaching Christ in wisdom” imphes a just and connected view of truth. ‘•’• A wise master builder” not only lays a right foundation, but “takes heed how he builds thereupon.” He marks the different quahties of his materials;’ placing the doctrine at the foundation, and building duties upon it, as a superstructure of lively stones, growing up into a holy edifice.^ He will guard equally against confounding what God has distinguished, and putting asunder “what God hath joined together;” not halting on the verge of truth in scrupulous timidity, nor yet presumptuously overleaping the sacred barrier. He may often see reason to insist upon some points with more detail than others; but he will carefully bring every part into its Scriptural prominence and connexion; instead of rashly assaulting one part with another — (the fruitful source of heresy) — improving the whole “for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness.”^
This wise exhibition of the Gospel is of the highest moment. Many will patiently listen to its practical enforcements, who cannot endure its doctrinal statements — such as the sovereignty of God — his free election of his people — justification by the righteousness of Christ — the utter insufficiency of works as the ground of trust — the helplessness of man in the act of turning to God — and the indispensable need of heavenly influence to incline his heart. Many on the other hand gladly receive the more mysterious doctrines of the Gospel; while they revolt from its invitations, and stigmatize as legal, inculcations of the law as the rule of life, or of evangelical repentance and holiness. Now both these extremes proceed from the same principle — a proud determination to receive a part only of the counsel of God. Both need the same corrective — a full, well-proportioned, and connected display of truth — opposing the notions of self-sufficiency, without weakening the obligations to duty; enforcing these obligations, without entrenching upon the Sovereignty or the freeness of Divine grace; cutting down self-righteousness by the perfection of the work of Christ, and Antinomianism by the gloiy of his example.
’ 1 Cor. iii. 10 — 15.
2 Mark the statement of justification in the Epistle to the Galatians. The Apostle did not (as some appear to think) conceive that the view of Us simplicUy fch. i. — iv.) was in any wise obscured by the exhibition oi Us fruitfidncss (ch. v, vi.) Th« tree is known by Its fruits while it is distinguished from them. 3 2 Tim. iii. 16.
Great indeed is the wisdom required in setting forth the analogy of faith, and the connected chain of doctrine. And from a deficiency of this just distribution of truth, much and dangerous error has arisen. The foundations of holiness have been weakened, by severing the doctrine of grace from its use and end; by leading men to rest upon its notions, while they neglect its holy influence; or by insinuating a carelessness of the evil and consequences of sin from the misconceived doctrine of forgiveness. The wise Ministration of the Gospel connects the full display of mercy with a deep and humbling sense of sin. A free pardon will be watered with tears; forgiven sin will be detested and crucified; and the Gospel will be clearly seen to be the only principle of holiness both of heart and Hfe.’
The exhibition of a correct standard both in doctrine and imifession belongs to this subject. In doctrine it should be remembered, that every truth is not of equal importance; and that no single truth, imconnected with the rest, constitutes the Gospel. The force even of important truth (such as election, imputed righteousness, or Christian assurance) is much enervated by exclusive inculcation; while the beauty of the whole system is marred by insisting upon unconnected portions. If large integral parts of Scripture (such as the several Epistles to the Churches) be studied in simplicity and prayer, we should at once discover the main subjects, that filled the minds of the inspired writers; and also the precise proportion, which our favourite views bear to the whole “counsel of God” thus laid open before us.^ We should thus mark the difference between Scriptural doctrines and Scriptural statements, and observe that points — Scriptural in their place and proportion — may become unscriptural by their disproportioned and unnatural application. We shall thus learn also to preach cautious, and yet unfettered, truth, reverencing Scriptural guards ;^ but watching against those human fetters, which sometimes restrain the freeness of the Gospel from the undue apprehen-
1 Comp. Rom. v. vi
2 May the Writer venture to suggest the inquiry to some of the ardent investigators of prophecy — What proportion in extent and clearness their schemes (admitting them — ;^/br ike sake of argument only — to be correct) occupy in the systems of Apostolical instruction; and whether the prophetic views and principles there set forth are not clearly subordinated to the display of Christ crucified, as the manifestation of all the love and glory of the Divine perfections 1 Let not this suggestion be supposed to discountenance the study of prophecy (which within its due bounds is equally practical, enlivening, and obligatory) but only the uncontrouled extent, to which it sometimes is pursued; and the exclusive dogmatical view, in which it is too often brought before the Church. The principle of these remarks may bear a qualified reference to some other points, which unhappily divide, instead of uniting, the Church in the present day.
3 Such as Romans vi. I — 3, compared with v. 20.
lriSDOM. IN THE PREACHING OF THE GOSPEL. 273
siun of consequences. Our work is not to make or to improve the Gospel; but simply and fully to preach it. A distinct standard of truth in its individual application is also of great moment — not merely inculcating certain quahfications (such as regeneration, faith, repentance) as indispensable to salvation: but — like ‘• an interpreter, one among a thousand’^ — explaining their true character and properties, and directing to the attainment and establishmcnS of them.
As to the standard of professioji — the reality and substance of the Gospel mainly consists in its spiritual character, which lays open the secret ways of sin, in forgetfulness of God, neglect of C) list, quenching of the Spirit, and enmity to the law; and inculcates holiness in all its detail in the inward parts. Yet we should here be careful not to set our standard too low, or too high: to insist upon nothing as evidence of the Christian character, meiely because it l)elongs to a decorous, amiable, natural disposition; and on the other hand to bring forth the lowest germ of sincerity as a decisive evidence of the work of God; distinguishing between tlia existence and the degrees of grace; and remembering that there are babes, as well as young men and fathers, in the family of God. 2 By a deviation from the Scriptural standard on either side, we” slay the souls that should not die, and save the souls alive that should not live; we make the heart of the righteous sad, whom the Lord hath not made sad; and strengthen the hands of the wicked, by promising him life.’’^
We remark here also the importance of a correct application of our message — like a faithful and wise steward* — faithful, in “giving the portions;” ^’•ivise,^^ in the seasonable mode, time, and objects of distribution — in the discernment of the particular truth, the argument, the method, the words, and the utterance, best adapted for instruction and edification. How observable is the dilTerence in our Lord’s discourses to the Scribes and Pharisees, to the multitude, and to his disciples; as well as in his more private treat-
‘See Job xxxiii. 23.
2 ‘The line of demarcation is sometimes so strictly drawn, that, it would seem, as if no attainments, which fall short of a prescribed standard, were to be accounted as indicative of the existence of any religious feeling. It would be more consonant to our Lord’s example, if, when appearances on the whole are favourable, those who are yet lacking one thing, were to be brought to a clearer knowledge of the way of salvation by forbearance and seasonable admonition. If the Apostle thought it necessary to exhort believers to add to their faUh virtue, a.nd to virtue knowledge, &c. he must have contemplated the j)0ssibility, that those, who might afterwards become thoroughly furnished unto all good works, had been formerly deficient in some of the Christian graces.’ Bishop of Winchester’s Min. Char. pp. 196 — 198.
3 Ezek. xiii. 19, 22.
* Luke lii. 42. The extreme care, with which the Levitical sacrifices were dissected and distributed, affords an apt illustration of this Ministerial wisdom. 2 Tim. ii. l&i ment of individual cases! How accurately also did the Apostle accommodate the method of his Ministerial application to the temper of his people! ready to “change his voice” to the occasion, and to “come to them,” as their circumstances might require, with a rod, or in love, and in the “‘spirit of meekness.“‘Thus must the Minister not only state his commission, but adapt it to the different temperaments of his people: though (as Dr. Campbell haj well observed) ’ the more mixed the auditory is, the greater is the difficulty of speaking to them with effect.’^ Yet most unskilful would he be, were he to apply to the humbled sinner the corrosives of the Law, instead of the balm of the Gospel; or to spread before the desponding soul a full view of his difficulties; instead of administering the cheering cordials and sustaining encouragements of the Gospel. This would indeed be, unlike his Master, to” break the bruised reed, and quench the smoking flax.” On the other hand, most unfaithful would he be, were he — instead of rousing slumbering sinners by “the terror of the Lord” — to lull them into deeper slumber by an exclusive display of Christian privileges; or to comfort the presumptuous professor with the stability of the Divine engagements, instead of warning him of the fearful danger of self-deception. Perhaps a wise intermingling of the two prominent systems in the Church may be of important service to the disciples of both. The Calvinist from the abuse of his principles may be in danger of security, and may need some wholesome exhortations ta holy fear from the opposite system; while his own system maj furnish to the Arminian some important views of the Sovereignty of God, and the freeness and simplicity of the Gospel, to neutralize the principles of self-dependence and self-sufficiency. Thus ’ it is possible, that the truly Scriptural statement will be found, not in an exclusive adoption of either, nor yet in a confused mixture of both, but in the proper and seasonable application of both; or (to use the language of St. Paul) in “rightly dividing the word of truth.””
In his extended course, the Minister must be skilled in personating a variety of characters; becoming a Boanerges or a Barnabas — having a word for the worldly and the spiritual, for the self-righteous and the contrite, for the wise and for the unwise, for the weak and for the strong, for the presumptuous and for the
I Gal. iv. 20. 1 Cor. iv. 21.
* See his Philosophy of Rhetoric, and some striking remarks in Hall’s Sermon, pp. 25, 26.
3 Preface to Mr. Simeon’s Helps to Composition — to which the Writer gladly reieia, M a fullj clear, and unfettered display of Evangelical truth.
doubting, for the mourner and for the rejoicing. “A word fitly spoken” for each, will be “like apples of gold in pictures” (or frame works) “of silver.“’ ‘• Of some,” that have been beguiled, he must “have compassion; making a difference” between them and obstinate offenders. “Others” he must “save with fear, pulling them out of the flre.”2 It will not indeed be always wise to persevere in the same treatment with the same cases. Spiritual, like medica’, applications, require occasional change to strengthen the system; and thus must the applications be varied to meet the ever-varying exigencies of the several cases.^ And here he will find, that it is not enough to cultivate his own gift — whether for the Church or for the world — (which, however valuable, grasps only half the compass of his sphere) he must set himself in diligent prayer and industry to c«/^iyae the opposite gift. How successful was the Apostle John in this effort! Who would ever have thought that his Epistles had been written by a “Son of Thunder?”* We sometimes indeed hear the peal in the sound of solemn rebuke and warning. But their main characteristic is the endearing enforcement of “a Son of Consolation.” Thus must we endeavour to apply our Ministry upon the broad ground of universal adaptation, maintaining a just equipoise and combination of spiritual gifts, “that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”*
Not less illustrative of the Scriptural wisdom of the pulpit Ministry is the adaptation of instruction to the diffej’ent stages of Christian progress. The gospel is not taught by one or more lessons, so as to render further instructions unnecessary. The Apostle compares the elementary truths to “milk,” the proper and necessary nourishment “for babes;” the deeper and more mysterious doctrines to “strong meat,” adapted to the adult spiritual state, when experience is more exercised, and the judgment more matured.* Our Divine teacher gently led his scholars from the more srimple to the higher truths, “as they were able to bear them.”’
‘Prov. XXV. 11. 2 Jude 22, 23.
3 ‘A preacher must carefully observe the manners, customs, and inclinations of those whom he would persuade, that he may gain an easier admission of the truth into their minds.’ Qucsnel on Acts xvii. 2’A.
Mark iii. 17, with Luke ix. 54. s 2 Tim. iii. 17.
‘“‘Heb. V. 11 — 14. 1 Cor. iii. 1 — 3. Si pro viribus suis alatur infans, fiet, ut crescendo ])lus c.Tpiat; si modum suae capacitatis excedat, deficit antequam crcscat. Aug. de Civit. iJci. Lib. xii. ‘It is a great degree of knowledge to be able to observe and follow the motions of grace, on wnich all depends; and which commonly performs its work by di’<jr(“c«.’ Qucsnel on Matt. ix. 17.
‘Compare Isaiah xl. 11. — as illustrated by the wise and tender condescension of his public Mmistry, Mark ix. 33. How remarkable is the contrast between the elementary eharacler of his sermon on the Mount and his latter discourses, evidently adapted to a
But human teachers too often fail in forbearance to the weakness of young converts. Expecting them to learn and receive every thing at once, contrary to the Apostolical prescription, they offer “strong moat” to the “babes;” and thus seriously injure the spiritual constitution by a course of unsuitable diet. Yet while giving “milk to babes,” we must not forget to distribute meat to adults. The Apostle deemed it necessary to go on from “the doctrine of repentance,” (the subject of his Master’s early Ministry) “to perfection*’ — not indeed giving it up as unnecessary; but “leaving” it, as the builder leaves the foundation, when advancing the building to completion.’ Dr. Owen well observed — ‘It is the duty of Ministers of the Gospel to take care, not only that the doctrine which they preach be true, but also that it be seasonable with respect to the state and condition of their hearers. Herein consists no small part of that wisdom, which is required in the dispensation of the ivord.^
Much wisdom indeed is required for this diversified apphcatiou. In our private Ministrations we can individualize each particular case; but in public addresses to hearers of different capacities and states, when invisible agency is actively diverting the word from its course, the difficulty is painfully felt. Frequently is the tender “reed bruised” by a word of seasonable application to the thoughtless or the backsliding; while the promises, too hastily rejected by the self-condemning penitent, are eagerly seized by the presumptuous, to bind the spirit of slumber more strongly upon their consciences.
This mode is sometimes unjustly exposed to the imputation of unfaithfulness. ‘Some men’ (as Mr. Cecil remarks) ’ seem to think, that in the choice of a wise way there lurks always a trimming disposition. ‘3 There is doubtless considerable danger of adulterating the Gospel, under the cover of prudence, and in the well-intentioned endeavour to commend it to the endless diversity of cases. But there is an important distinction between rational contrivance and Christian accommodation. As Mr. Cecil again remarks — ‘It is a foolish project to avoid giving offence; but it is our duty to avoid giving unnecessary offence.’’ To seek to be
higher stacre of Christian knowledge, and promising a yet more full revelation of the gospel to his Church! Johnxvi. 12, 13. Yet it is important to observe,.that it was the same gospel in all its perfect integrity at first as at last — not modified or stripped of its native offensiveness — only more fully developed.
1 Compare Matt. iv. 17, with Heb. vi. 1, 2.
“Owen on Heb. vi. 1. ‘This work must be carried on prudently, orderly, and by degrees. “Milk” must go before “strong meat.” The foundation must be laid, before we build upon it. Children must not be dealt with as men at age. We must n6t go beyond the capacities of our people, nor teach their |he perfection, that have not learned the principle.’ Baxter’s Reformed Pastor. 3 Cecil’s Remains.
I acceptable is by no means inconsistent with faithfulness. Whyshould not we, after the example of the royal preacher, “seek to find out acceptable words;”• “keeping back nothing that is profitable,” but with •’ the wise man’s heart discerning both time and judgment f avoiding an irritating and repulsive mode of statement; and labouring to distribute unpalatable truths in the sweetness of persuasion, compassion, and sympathy? “In doctrine,” let us “show uncorruptness;”^ in mode, acceptableness; like our heavenly Pattern considering, not so much what we are able to say, as what our people are able to hear.^ The Preacher’s “acceptable words were upright — even words of truth;” so consistent is Ministerial conciliation, loheii it does not lead to compromise, with Christian wisdom.
The state of our people will also influence the tone of our Ministrations. We must deal out ‘■’• yrescnt trutli’’^ — truth (Like the doctrine of justification under the existing circumstances of the Galatian Church) adapted to the present emergency. Again — though truth itself is unalterable, its mode of presentment admits of much variation. It may be brought out in the form of doctrine, precept, warning, encouragement, or privilege. It may be set forth in statement or figure; it may be illustrated by a parable; deduced from a miracle; substantiated in a Scripture character; displayed in type or prophecy; delivered from the mouth of the Lord or of his Apostles — and in all these dilferent modes with equal simplicity and faithfulness. What a diversity of gifts do we observe in the Apostles! Peter acknowledges it in the case of himself, and his “beloved brother Paul.”* The contrast between the Epistles of Paul and James, upon the same doctrine of justification, is even more striking. In the general complexion of his Epistles, James, though less doctrinal than his brother Paul, yet wrote under the same inspiration, and could commend himself by his “manifestation of the truth,” with equal confidence “in the sight of God.” Contrast again Paul with himself — Paul at Antioch, and Paul at Athens — Paul before Felix, and before Agrippa.’ Compare the Epistles to his Gentile churches with each other,^ and with his
‘Eccles. xii. 10. The first nine chapters of the Book of Proverbs Tas Dr. Wardlaw a(hnirably observes) ’ present us with a most interesting specimen of these “acceptable words.” There is in them an inimitable union of admonitory fidelity, and enticing and subduing kindness. Like Paul, he “exhorts, and comforts, and charges, as a father doth his children.” The whole soul of the writer is breathed out in the earnestness of benevolent desire.’ Wardlaw on Eccles. xii. 10.
2 Acts XX. 20. with Eccl. viii. 5. 3 Titus ii. 7. Mark iv. 33.
5 See 2 Peter i. 12. 2 Peter iii. 15. ‘’ Acts xiii. xvii.. xxiv. xxvi.
* With the Romans, he embraces the whole compass of Christian doctrine; with the Galatians, he is mainly occupied with the single point of justification; with the Corin-Epistle to his own countrymen; not communicating different systems of truth, but the same system in different modes; not abandoning any point of truth, but adapting the mode of its distribution to the circumstances of the respective churches; in all cases ‘^ according to the wisdom given unto him;” and in all his Ministrations with Divine power and success.
We may here also refer to the influence of our Christian teiriper amentupon the character of our Ministrations. It is natural, and under due regulation important, to carry the peculiar bias of our mind into our Ministry. Every man is formed to think, and speak, and write in a manner of his own; and he will be far more useful in preserving his own manner (improved by comparison with others, but never wholly forsaken), than by enslaving himself to some popular mode. But let it be known, watched, balanced. It has its evils as well as its advantages. A speculative mind is apt to speculate in sacred Ministration — to discuss subjects in a train of argumentation, which divests them of their heavenly unction and simplicity. An accomplished mind may be in danger, even in the evangelical field, of furnishing more food for the imagination than for the immortal soul. A doctrinal Preacher mainly confines his Ministration within his favourite chapters and class of subjects. An experimental Preacher, awakened by the terrors of the law, will imbue his preaching more with the character of alarm, than of tenderness. Or if he has been “drawn by the bands of love,” he may be led almost unconsciously to omit the “persuasive” influence of “the terror of the Lord.”^ A practical Preacher, having seen the loose profession resulting from exclusive views of doctrine or experience, perhaps leaves his statements bare, or imperfectly connected with either. An applicatory Preacher may fail in giving clear and connected statements of doctrine. A discriminating Preacher may be in danger of perplexing his hearers with refined distinctions drawn more immediately from his own spiritual exercises, than from the clear system of the word of God. A decided Preacher will need a deep tincture of humility, forbearance, and love; else his “zeal will be without knowledge,” and his labour prove the occasion of almost unqualified offence. It is
thians he largely expounds questions of casuistry, matters of discipline, and general practical duty; but all inculcated upon the foundation, and intermingled with the display, of the doctrine of Christ.
1 See 2 Cor. v. 11. It is well that our experience should furnish materials for our Ministry; but care must be taken that the standard of our preaching be elevated and its character formed, upon the basis of the word of God. Thus only will it be sealed with the warrant of Divine acceptance, and sympathize with all classes of Christians as well as with the wants of the ignorant and unconverted.
therefore an important exercise of Ministerial wisdom, not to frame our preaching to the bias of our own mind, without great self-distrust, much earnest prayer, and a clear persuasion, that it embraces within its range, alike the converted and the unconverted, and is equally calculated to awaken and to establish; to “add to the Church,” and to strengthen in the Church, “such as shall be saved.”
Ill — PLAINNESS — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
The spirit of preaching consists in its adaptation to the subjects of instruction. It may be iScriptural in its statements, experimental in its character, and practical in its enforcement. It may have all the features of discrimination and decision. But if it is not intelligible in its mode of address, it must fail in application to the objects proposed. Philip Henry was deeply sensible of the necessity of plain preaching — ‘We study how to speak’ (said he, at the commencement of his Ministry) ’ that you may understand us; and I never think that I can speak plain enough, when I am speaking about souls and their salvation.’’ Our Lord’s discourses — without any of the artificial pomp of oratory, and with a profusion of imagery — are a perfect model of simplicity. Never was there a more plain and popular Preacher. The most sublime truths are illustrated by the most familiar comparisons from the objects around him. The beautiful figures interspersed in the sermon on the Mount were probably drawn from the objects, which his elevated situation placed before him; ’ such as a city set upon a hill; persons manuring the fields with salt; the sun shining on all the fields without distinction; the fowls flying in the air, and the lilies growing about him.’*^ Most of his parables also were drawn from the same natural sources. Even children’s play was made to minister conviction to his hearers.^ The fields, under his observant eye, were made fruitful in spiritual instruction ;* and wherever he moved, he was the Teacher of the people according to their way and capacity. His Apostles closely followed in his steps. They felt themselves “debtors to the unwise,” as well as
1 Life, p. 26. Thus also Dr. Doddridge in one of his devotional exercises, writes — ‘I fear my discourse to-day was too abstruse for my hearers. I resolve to labour after great plainness and seriousness; and to bring down my preaching to the understanding of the weakest.’ Life, ch. ii.
2 Gerard’s Pastoral Care, p. 127. ‘Can any man imitate’ — asks Bishop Wilson — ‘a greater Master of eloquence, than Jesus Christ was, whose great excellence appears in making great truths under.>tood by the meanest capacity V Sacra Privata.
3 Matt. xL 16 — 19. * Ibid. xiiL “to the wise.’”’ They would neither sink beneath the dignity of their subject, nor soar above the capacities of their people. They “used great plainness of speech.”^ Their mode of teaching, though with considerable difference of style, was brought down to the reach of the lowest intelligence. Paul dealt much in illustration, nev’er remote, and always on subjects with which he knew his people to be conversant. The Grecian games furnished useful and pointed instruction to the churches in the neighbourhood of these pastimes, or who were interested in them.^ James, in the s:ime style of writing, crowded together the most familiar illustrations in the exhibition of a single point. Peter and John were plain and didactic. Jude, so far as we can judge from one short epistle, is energetic and expressive. All of them, however, in their language and turns of sentiment, are distinguished by a remarkable perspicuity, never above the ordinary level — plainness without familiarity. The discourses of the the Christian Fathers were generally of the same character. Augustine’s discourses are remarked to be the most simple of all his works.^ He often interrupted them, to explain what might seem to be beyond the capacity of his hearers; who would, on the other hand, sometimes express their intelligent satisfaction with his meaning. The Homilies of Chrysostom and others of that day were so called, as being delivered in a familiar and conversational mode. The sermons of our Reformers (judging from the book of Homilies and other specimens, and making allowance for the phraseology of the times) are admirable specimens of a style equally simple, forcible, and interesting. Luther tells uSj that when asked by Dr. Albert the best way of preaching before the elector — ‘I said — Let all your preaching be in the most plain manner. Look not to the prince, but to the plain, simple, and unlearned people, of which cloth the prince himself is also made. If I in my preaching should have regard to Philip Melaucthon, or other learned doctors, I should work but little good. I preach in the simplest sort to the unskilful, and the same giveth content to all.’*
1 Rom. i. 14.
2 2 Cor. iii. 1-; Comp. 1 Cor. xi%’. 19. ‘Habent sacrse Scriptarce, sed non ostendunt, eloqupntiam.’ August, de Doctr. Christ. Lib. iv. — especially and most justly recommended by Milner to the studv of Ministers. Hist. ii. pp. 4-11, 442.
“3 1 Cor. ix.; Phil. “iii.
* See especially James iii. 1 — 12. and the ingenious and exquisite exposition of it in Bishop Jebb’s Sacred Literature, pp. 273 — 308.
5 See quotation from his Sermons in patre 281.
* Table Talk. It was one of his sayings — ‘Optimi ad vulffus hi concionatores, qui pueriliter, populariter, et simplissime docent.’ See a beautiful anecdote characteristic of this great reformer, advising; Bucer on this subject. Scott’s Continuation of Milner, vol. i. 216, 217. Adams, in his Life of Luther, has inserted some homely rhymes, which he
One of the ancient prophets was commanded —” Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables that he may run that read’ eth ity That this command may have its due effect, we must pay attention to style subject-matter, and mode of address.
A plain style is most suitable for the expression of plain things. Here probably many of us have much to learn. Education has formed our minds into a mould so different, and given us a language so remote, from familiar usage, that there must be a great, and possibly an uncongenial, change in our llow of thought and composition; and yet without losing that vigour and hveliness, necessary to arrest attention. In fact, we must be learners among our people, before we can hope to succeed as teachers. We must “condescend to men of low estate,”^ to study their minds, habits, and phraseology; never use a hard word, where a plain one can be found; giving proper words in their proper places; short sentences, and specially simple ideas; for many w’ comprehend, or successfully guess at, the meaning of a hard word, who would be baffled by a complex idea. ‘Parenthesis and circumlocution’ (it is justly remarked.) ’ deprive expression of its edge: and the idea, attenuated by frequent tropes and figures, arrives at the mind of the hearer, like an arrow spent in its flight;’^ and rather serves to startle than to impress. Archbishop Seeker judiciously recommends (as a means of winning the attention of our people) ’ to make our sermon? extremely clear. Terms and phrases’ (he remarks) •’ may be fiimiliar to you, which are quite unintelligible to them; and I fear this happens much oftener than we suspect; therefore guard against it. Your expressions may be very common, without being low; yet employ the lowest (provided they are not ridiculous) rather than not be understood.’^ It is a frequent mistake to take too
composed for the common people. And ’ for these beg:iTarly ballads’ (says a shrewd writf r) ‘Luther may receive a jEjreatcr reward at the last day, than for whole shelves of learned folios. Vanity will make a man speak and write learnedly; but piety only can prevail upon a good scholar to simplify his speech for the sake of the vulgar. Such a
E readier, though his worth may be overlooked by the undiscerning now, will one day ave a name above every name, whether it be philosopher, poet, orator, or whatever else is most revered among mankind.’ Rev. R. Robin.son’s Notes on Claude’s Essay — a work, not devoid of information or interest; but painfully distinguished by an unchristian, vituperative spirit. * Hab. ii. 2.
2 A Preacher is to fancy him.self in the room of the most unlearned man in his whole parish; and therefore he must jiut such parts of his discourse as he would have all understand, in so plain a form, that it may not be beyond the meanest of them. This he will certainly study to do, if his desire is to edify them, rather than to make them admire himself as a learned and high-spoken man.’ Burnet’s Pastoral Care, ch. ix.
3 Hudd on Infant Baptism, pp. 493, 494.
Charges, pp. 273, 274. Augustine continually reverts to this subjipct. He did not scruple to say — ‘MeUus est, ut nos reprehendant grammatici, quam ut non intelligant
fopuli.’ In Ps. cxxxix. 15. Thus in one of his sermons to the same purport — ‘Rogoumiliter, ut content.-E sint eruditre aures vestr.Te verba rustica aequanimiter sustinere, duumiodo totus erex Domini simplici, et, ut ita dicani, pedestri sermone, pabulum spin-
3&.
much for granted. Fenelon’s remark is applicable to many Protestant congregations — ’ that there are always three quarters of an ordinary congregation, who do not know those first principles of religion, with which the preacher supposes every one to be fully instructed.’’ We must remember, that our commission extends to the explanation of the words, as well as of the things, of God. The meaning is hid in the word, and cannot be discovered without it. There are many important Scriptural terms, whose meaning is little, if at all, understood by the mass: so that a want of brief verbal explanation is often a great hindrance to edification. We must not judge the extent of the people’s information by our own. ‘Have ye understood these things V^ — would often be a seasonable inquiry; while the expression of a wish to be understood would be attractive and engaging. After all, a popular view of the simplest elementary principles is the best introduction to more extended and accurate views of truth.
Nor is this style of simplicity degrading to the most intellectual mind. We could do no more with “the tongues of angels,” than communicate our ideas intelligibly to one another — an exercise, which many preachers of excellent literary endowments have found to require considerable pains and diligence.^ Not, that, in our latuale possit accipere; et quia imperiti ct simplices ad scholasticorum altitudinem non possunt ascendere, eruditi se dignentur ad illorum ignorantiam se inclinare.’ Quesnel remarks — ‘That a man need not fear stooping too low, when he considers himself as the dispenser of the mysteries of abased wisdom. The gospel is more for the poor and simple than for the refined wits; and yet a minister thereof is sometimes (as one may say) afraid of being understood by the simple, lest he should not he admired by the learned.’ On Mark iv. 33. ‘Affect not fine words, but words which the Holy Ghost teacheth. Enticing words of man’s wisdom debase your matter. Gold needs not to be painted. Scripture expressions are what people are used to, and wdl remember.’ William’s Life of M. Henry, p. 162.
‘Dialogues on Eloquence, iii. 2 Matt. xiii. 51.
3 Quintilian excellently observes, that our meaning, ’ like the light of the sun, should obtrude itself upon the eyes of the ignorant, not only without any pains to search for it. but, as it were, whether he will or not.’ Institut. Lib. viii. cap. 2. Rollin has the same illustration. Belles Letters, vii. Luther used to say — ‘To preach plainly and simply is a great art.’ Table Talk. Arch’oishop Usher observed — ‘It requires all our learning to make things plain. — It is not difficult to make easij things appear hard; but to render hard thiiis’s easy, is the hardest part of a good orator and preacher.” He is the powerfullest preacher, and the best orator’ — said Dr. South — ’ who can make himself best understood.’ Bishop Wilkins observes — ’ the greatest learning is to be seen in the greatest plainness. The more clearly we understand any thing ourselves, the more easily can we expound it to others.’ Eccles. p. 1G8. (The character that Photius gave of the preaching of Athanasius will confirm this point. ‘In sermonibus ubique in locutione clarus est, et brevis, et simplex, acutns tamen et alius.’) Bishop Hurd charged his clergy to the same purport — ‘Your sermons cannot well be too plain: and I need not say unto you who hear me — that to frame a discourse in this way, as it is the usefullest way of preaching, so it will afford full scope and exercise for all the talents, which the ablest of us may possess.’ Charges. Archbishop Tillotson is said to have been ‘in the habit of reading his sermons to an illiterate old wouKin of jilain sense who lived with him, and of altering his words and expressions, till he had brought the style down to her level.’ If the story be true, ‘it is’ (as Professor Campbell observes) ‘much to the prelate’s honour; for, however incompetent such judges might be of the composition, the doctrine, or hour for “plainness of speech,” we would strip the Gospel of its dignified terseness, beautiful figures, and heavenly elevation. Nor would we recommend a style of naked simplicity in our addresses. Our Lord’s example, as that of the simplest Preachers, seems to recommend an infusion of the illustrative style into our discourses. And indeed natural images furnish most useful elucidation of spiritual things, by their palpable exhibition to the senses. The study of the Scripture metaphors will give a correct mode of illustration, in marking their exquisite adaptation to the subjects of reference. Remote images (from which no clear light can be obtained) should be avoided. Every thing bordering upon the ridiculous, light, or trifling, must be discountenanced, as being utterly inconsistent with the dignity and holiness of the Sacred Volume, and ’ with that Divine and powerful delivery, which becometh him, that speaks the oracles of God.’’ Only that which is serious has a tendency to permanent edification.
The vanity of learned preaching is proved by its unproductiveness. The plainest preachers in a Christian spirit, are commonly the most successful.* We might as well think of adding clearness to light, as hope to embellish the simplicity of the Gospel by rhetorical expression.^ Such embellishments, if allowed at all, should be sparingly used.* King James aptly compared them in public discourses ‘to the red and blue flowers, that pester the corn, when it stands in the fields; more noisome to the growing crop, than beautiful to the beholding eye.’^ The Apostle laid much stress upon “words easy to be understood.” How would he then have rebuked as contemptible and most responsible trifling, the affectation of dethe arguments, they are certainly the most competent judffes of what terms and phrases fall within the apprehension of the vulgar, the class to which they belong.’ On Pulpit Eloquence, Lect. iii. Compare Fenelon on Eloquence, ut supra. Perhaps however the poet’s rule — ‘Non fumum ex fulgore, sed ex fumo dare lucem’ — expresses the whole in the fewest words.
1 Ward’s Coal from the Altar. Compare Bowles’ Past. Evang. Lib. ii. c. 10.
2 Archbishop Leiirhton, after hearing a plain and homely sermon with entire satisfaction, observed — ‘This good man seems in earnest to catch souls.” The measure of speech’ (he remarked) ’ ought to be the character of the audience, which is made up for the most part of illiterate persons.’ Pearson’s Life, p. lix.
3 What has been said of commentators, may apply to preachers of this character — that their subjects were plain, until they expounded them.
* Augustine’s animadversion was — ‘Numquid hie ornamenta, et non documenta, quffininturl’ De Docfr. Christ. Lib. iv. 11), ut supra. Not that he was wholly averse to ornament. His idea of the style of discourses was most just — ‘Nee Lnornata rclinquitur, nee indecenter ornatur.’ lb. iv. 26.
5 Preface to his Remonstrance — ‘Preachers’ (remarks Bishop Taylor) ‘are to feed the people, not with gaj- tulips and useless daffodils, but with the bread of life and medicinal plants, springing from the margin of the fountain of salvation.” Verj’ fine, Sir,’ (said Robert Hall, when asked bis opinion of a sermon) ’ but men can’t eat flowers.” Lord,’ (said a pious old writer) ’ let me never be guilty, by painting the windows, of hindering the light of thy glorious Gospel from shining powerf illy into the hearts!’ livering common truths in an uncommon manner, of modernizing the language of the sacred volume, or exchanging it for classical phraseology; often “speaking in an unknown tongue,” and “shutting up the kingdom of heaven against men.’” Such terms (as Professor Campbell remarks) ’ give a learned dress to religion; but it is a dress, that very ill befits an institution intended for the comfort and direction of all, even of the lowest ranks.’^ ‘Nothing indeed (as Jerome long since observed) ‘is so easy, as to impose upon an illiterate audience, whose habit is to admire what they do not understand.’^ But the garb used for this purpose ’ is often no other than a clcak for ignorance. And of all kinds of ignorance, learned ignorance is undoubtedly the most contemptible.’* Indeed the influence of this unevangelical system, would sink the true glory and dignity of the pulpit into a stage exhibition of self-display. ‘The sword of the Spirit’ (to use a terse illustration of an old Divine) is ’ put into a velvet scabbard, that it cannot prick and wound the heart.’*
Plainness in the choice of our subjects marks also the spirit of Scriptural preaching. We may here attend to the excellent advice of the primitive Bishop AVilson — ‘Avoid’ (says he) •’ such discourses a,nd subjects, as would divert the mind without instructing it. Never consult your own fancy in the choice of subjects, but the necessities of the flock. I would rather send away the hearers smiting their breasts than please the most learned audience with a fine sermon against any vice. With what truth can it be said, that “the sheep hear your voice,” when you speak matters above their capacities, or in language and terms which they do not understand? It is too often, that preachers perplex those whom they should instruct. There is a great deal of difference between people admiring the preacher, and being edified by his sermons.’*
’ 1 Cor. xiv. 11 — 19. Matt, xxiii. 13.
2 On Systematic Theology, Lect. iii. See the sensible advice that Mr. Richmond received from his College Tutor on this subject. Life, p. 152.
3 Hieron. ad Nepot.
* Campbell, ut supra. ‘An affected obscurity of style’ (Baxter remarks) ‘makes a fool admire the preacher’s learning; but it will make a wise man wonder at his hypocrisy or folly.’ Kirke White justly remarked of a preacher whom he had lately heard — ‘I think in particular he has one great fault, that is, elegance. He is not sufficiently plain. Remember (adds he) we do not mount the pulpit to say fine things or eloquent things. We have there to proclaim the good tidings of salvation to fallen man, to point out the way to eternal life, to exhort, to cheer, to support, the suffering sinner: these are the glorious topics upon which we have to enlarge: and will these permit the tricks of oratory or the studied beauties of eloquence 1 Shall truths and counsels like these be couched in terms, which the poor and ignorant cannot comprehend 1’ — See his Remains.
5 Ward’s Coal from the Altar.
6 Sacra Privata. ‘Let your performances’ (said the excellent Matthew Henry) ‘be plain and Scriptural. Choose for your pulpit subjects the plainest and most needful truths, and endeavour to make them plainer.’ Willieuns’ Life, ut supra.
Metaphysical preachings woukl come under these animadversions. Ty. Dwiglit (a man of a strong natural bias of this character) admirably observes — ‘Ail preaching of this kind is 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.’’ We would not encourage a superficial trectment of more elaborate subjects; but let all reasoning be grounded upon the simple principles of Scripture, rather than upon inductive or excursive philosophy. All “intrusions into things which we have not seen’”^ — all questions not directly tending to edification (such as the Apostle denominates “old wives’ fables,” “vain babblings,” “foolish questions”’) are to be avoided. To the weeping complaint — “Thy prophets have seen vain and foolish things for thee”^ — every serious Christian must respond, when he sees Ministers ‘picking straws in Divinity;’* substituting husks for the bread of life; scholastic or metaphysical distinctions, curious researches into antiquity, ingenious dissertations upon the fitness of things, abstract proofs of the evidences of Christianity, elucidations merely critical of the sacred text, for the simple exhibition of the truth. ‘The hungry sheep look up, and are not fed.’ It is not “stones turned into bread;” but rather bread turned into stones. There is more nourishment in a single plain discourse on Christ crucified, than in these shadowy discussions, misnamed sermons, or preaching the Gospel.
We might refer to the plausible ground of dissent arising from this preaching, as a minor consideration for Ministers of the Establishment,* (for our people will soon be tired of hearing what they do not understand); but a far higher responsibility is contracted
1 Dwiffht’s Theology, v. 209, 210. ‘That which metaphysical preachincr teaches’ (as he elsewhere remarks) ‘may be true, and the arguments used to support it may be sound; but the distinctions are so subtle, and the reasoning so abstruse and difficult, that the hearer’s attention to the truth is lost in his attention to the preacher’s injienuity, his mind prevented from feelint; what is intended, by the absorption of his thoughts in the difficulties of the argument; and his heart chilled by the cold manner, in which all such discussions are conducted. The metaphysician, wlicther aware of it or not, is employed in displaying his own ingenuity, and not in disclosing and confirming the truth of God.’ Sermons, vol. ii. 4^1. Compare Burnet’s Pa.storal Care, c. ix. Col, ii. 18.
3 1 Tim. iv. 7. vi. 20. Tit. iii. 9. Lam. ii. 14. 5 Bishop Hall.
s Dr. Johnson (see Boswell’s Life) with much truth ascribes the success of the Methodists, in drawing away the members of the establishment, to their plain mode of address. King James in a curious document, entitled — ‘The Reason of the King’s Direction for Preaching and Preachers’ — traces the many defections to Popery, and Anabaptism, or other points of separation, to the ’ lightness, affectcdness, and unprofitableness,’ of the preachers in his day, ‘mustering up of much reading, or displaying of their wits,’ leaving the people’s mind, ’ for all this airy nourishment, no better than mere table-books, reatly to be filled up with the catechism of ‘he Popish priests, or the pamphlets of the Anabaptists.’ than dissetit. It may be that the grammarian, the critic, the theologian, approve our discourses. But to an illiterate congregation of perishing sinners, should we not use, as the grand vehicle of our communication — “words easy to be understood?” If they do not understand their preacher, they “are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” For how can they be saved by the preaching of the Gospel in an unknown tongue? And of how little account will be the reputation of an accurate logician, deep theologian, or orthodox Divine, under the weight of this awful charge!’
A plain mode of address is also included in the spirit of preaching. A want of plain dealing with our people will inevitably betray their souls, and ours with them. We are engaged with them on subjects connected with eternity, on which mistakes are so various and so fatal. It is of far higher moment, that we should be useful than eloquent, that the watchman should blow the trumpet intelligibly than musically. Nothing is done, until we bring them into immediate contact with their imminent, unseen, unsuspected danger. Let this plainness embrace all the variety of illustration, argumentation, appeal, and entreaty. Let it include the enforcement of every motive of terror and of love, of warning and of encouragement. But let there be a careful separation from meretricious embellishments,^ a freedom from a false scrupulosity of tenderness, and an unreserved devotedness to the grand object of the Ministry; applying always the message of the Gospel in clear and uncompromising terms; and pursuing sin and Satan in a course of unwearied warfare, until they are dispossessed of all their strong holds, and “every thought is brought into captivity unto the obedience of Christ.”
IV. — FERVENCY — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
To enlighten the mind, and affect the heart, are the two main ends of the Christian Ministry. The first demands wisdom and plainness — the seconds fervency — as the spirit of Scriptural preaching. This combination exhibits the Minister as “a burning and shining light” — ’ the sun in his sphere’ (as Pavilion, the celebrated Bishop of Alet, describes him); ’ imparting the spiritual light of
* ‘I had rather’ (said Dr. John Edwards) ‘be fully understood by ten, than be admired by ten thousand. If our words be not understood, it is of no consequence in what language they are spoken, and we cannot expect that the Holy Spirit will give a blessing on uniatelliTiblc language — I mean — unintelligible to the many, though a few of superior attainments or refinements may admire them.’
2 Bishop .Stillingfleet compares this mode of treatment to ’ stroking the consciences of people with feathers dipped in oil.’ Duties and Rights of Parochial Clergy, p. 30.
Divine truth, as well as the spiritual heat of Divine fervour.’ As to fervency — if it be natural to express ourselves with earnestness upon subjects of deep and acknowledged interest — much more in the delivery of our great comniission. ‘Nothing’ (says Baxter) ’ is more indecent, than a dead preacher speaking to dead sinners the living truth of the living God.’ It were surely better to subject ourselves to the misapprehension of being “beside ourselves,”’ than not to deliver our message with some evidence of personal impression. As a matter of life and death — of eternal life and eternal death — it is connected with the most powerful motives, and acts upon the most influential principles of the heart. Charles V. remarked of one of the German Reformers — ‘He preached with such spirit and devotion, as might almost serve to make the very stones weep.’ Such was the spirit of our Great Master,^ and of his chosen Apostle.^ The same spirit constituted the main power of Whitfield’s Ministry. There have been men of like unction, faith, and prayer — men whose views of the gospel have been equally comprehensive, and whose love for souls has been equally fervent; but it was the picture of his whole soul pourtrayed in his countenance ;* his expressions cast into the most awakening and penetrating forms; the solemnity of his address; the deep feeling from within, bursting forth in every word, streaming in his eyes, and breathing an energy of love throughout the effusions of his overflowing heart — this it was that convinced the listening throngs, that he was not trifling with them. They caught sympathy with his natural eloquence, and in thousands of instances, “the flint was turned into a fountain of waters;” and his Ministry was life from the dead “to his fellow-sinners.” ‘This faculty of moving hearers thus’ (Archbishop Seeker remarks) ’ is a most valuable blessing. And such as have but little of it, may considerably improve it, by labouring to affect themselves more deeply with what they would say, and thinking what methods of saying it would be most persuasive.’
’ 2 Cor. V. 13. Compare Acts ii. 12, 13. ‘So long as our zeal takes not its colour from human infirmities and numan passions, but is regulated by the word of God; so long as we tread in the steps of those, “who did all things decently and iji order;” far from having to apologize for our zeal, we should think that we act unworthily of our cause, if we possessed it not.’ The Gospel Message, by Rev. Dr. Dealtry, p. 21.
2 John ii. 17. ‘Acts xvii. 16.
* The description given of an old foreign preacher would give an accurate sketch of Whitfield in the pulpit — ‘Vivida in eo omnia fuerunt; vivida vox, vividi ocUli, vividi manus, gestus omnes vividi.’ His ingeninis confessions at the close of life, of a tincture of enthusiasm, and an occasional admixture of his own spirit with his Ministry, eminently displayed Christian humility. As Fuller memorialized the celebrated WicklifT in his characteristic style — ‘I intend neither to deny, dissemble, defend, or excuse any of his faults. “We have this treasure” (says the Apo.stle) “in tarthni vessels;” and he that shall endeavour to prove a pitcher of clay to be a pot of gold, will take great pains to small purpose. Yea, should I be over-officious to retain myself to plead for Wickliff’s faults, that glorious saint would sooner chide than thank me.’ Chuicn History, Book iv.
But (as he elsewhere observes) ’ smooth discourses’ to our people, ‘coritahiing little that awakens their drowsy attention, Uttle that eaforcesi on them plainly and home “what they must do to be saved,” leave them as ignorant and unreformed as ever, and only lull them into a fatal security.’’ Even Bishop Warburton decides, that ’ a pathetic address to the passions and affections of penitent hearers, is perhaps the most operative of all the various speeches of instruction.’^ George Herbert’s Parson, ‘when he preacheth, procures attention by all possible art: — by earnestness of speech: it being natural to men to think, that where there is much earnestness, there is something worth hearing.’^ Visible impression upon ourselves gives inexpressible weight to our subject. The Minister, that does not manifestly put his heart into his sermon, will never put his sermon into the hearts of his people. Pompous elocution, attempts at theatrical display, or affected emotions, are indeed most repugnant to the simple dignity of our office. A painted fire may glare, but will not warm. Violent agitations, without correspondent tenderness of feeling, will disgust instead of arresting the mind. Preaching is not (as some appear to think it) the work of the lungs, or the mimickry of gesture, or the impulse of uncontrolable feeling; but the spiritual energy of a heart constrained by tlje love of Christ, and devoted to the care of those immortal soul, for whom Christ died. Yet surely the habit of realizing our Master’s presence, and the awful responsibihty vested in us. will find expression in something beyond the tone of tame seriousness, and the general accuracy of pulpit decorum.* The Country Parson finds the people ’ thick and heavy, and hard to raise to a point of zeal and fervency, and needing a mountain of fire to kindle them.’ He recommends therefore most beautifully, the ’ dipping and seasoning all oiu” words and sentences in our hearts, before they come into our mouths; truly affecting, and cordially expressing all that we can say, so that our auditors may plainly perceive, that every word is heart-deep.’^ A lively impression of interest seems the natural result of a cordial belief of the Gospel; and therefore a want of expression of this interest conveys a plausible suspicion of the credibility of our message. For who could bring-a true report of a 2 Directions to Students of Theology. 3 Chapter vii.
* ‘While I have any reverence for Scripture, or any knowledge of human nature, I shall never affect to speak of the glories of Christ, and of the eternal interests of man, as coldly, as if I were reading a lecture of mathematics, or relating an experiment in natural philosophy.’ Dr. Doddridge — Orton’s Life, chap. v. Kin James remarked of one of his chaplains — ‘This man preaches before me, just as if death was seated at his elbow.’
s Chap. vii.
fire, or of any extraordinary news, with a calm tone, gentle voice, or eleiant expression? And can we wonder, that a cold correctness in the delivery of our instructions should weaken in our people a belief of their truth, or at least of their importance; that they should consider it to be a work of othce, for which we are paid, rather than as a matter of personal concern to themselves and that, with such impressions, they should want the disposition necessary to give to preaching its due effect — a desire to hear? liv deed, so vinnatural is it thus to speak of weighty subjects, that they would rather attach importance to a slight matter expressed with vehemence, than to a weighty truth conveyed in a hfeless manner.^ It has been well remarked — that ‘the really useful man in winning souls to Christ is he, who is so penetrated with the value of the doctrines of the Gospel, as to [)ersuade by the zeal and sincerity of his manners, when a less earnest mode of teaching would have failed to convince. ‘’^ Some Ministers indeed of phlegmatic constitutions may manifest less of warmth and animation than others of far lower faith and Christian sensibility. All of us are orators when we feel. No eloquence can reach the energy and emotion of the language of the heart. Increased solemnity, and energy in the’ delivery of the message, should supply the want of sensible excitement; and fervent prayer should be employed to overcome constitutional languor, to quicken heavenly affections, and to bring them warm into immediate exercise for the enlivening of our people.
A want of fervency in our Ministrations is a serious hindrance to their elBciency. For though it is the same word, however preached; yet an earnest delivery adds to the naked truth the sensible exhibition of Divine love, and moves one of the most enlivening springs of conviction.’ On the other hand (as a sensible writer has observed) ’ the monotonous wearisome sound of a single bell may be almost as soon expected to excite moral impressions, as the general tenor of public discourses, drowsily composed and drowsily delivered.’* Our people want their hearts, as well as their understandings, to be addressed. They want words flowing from the
1 See Sir R. Blackmorc’s Accomplished Preacher, Sect. viii. May we not learn a lesson of conviction from Garrick’s reply to a preacher, who asked — ‘How is it, that y.m who deal in nothing but fiction, can so aflVct your audience, as to throw them into tears, while we, who deliver the most awful and interesting truths, can scarcely produce any effect whatever V Here lies the secret: you deliver your truths as if they uere fictions; bid tee deliver our fictions as if they verc truth.
‘Cicero (De Orat.) calls this lively representation evidence (evidentia) — the orator not •eeming so much to speak, as to show the very thinjrs themselves, as if they were before the eyes. Quintilian’s term is vision. Instit. Lib. viii.
Jemingham’s Essay on the Eloquence of the English Pulpit, prefixed to a Tnnsia* tion of Select Sermons from Bossuct.
heart., giving power to argument by their piercing heat and penetrating force, and compassionate entreaty. However this fervour may be mistaken for the false fire of enthusiasm or vain glory, it is only the expression of a heart deeply impressed with the conviction, that religion is a matter of primary, immediate and universal concern.’ But which of us does not exhibit the inconsistency of apparent earnestness in the pulpit, with the general habit of cold and hfeless affections? To ascend the pulpit with a heart full of life, zeal, and love, is not a matter of course: yet when “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh,” what unction seeuis to pervade the word! what a power of sympathy affects our people!
Baxter’s impassioned pleadings show what our addresses ought to be, in order to give full effect to our message. ‘How thin’ (exclaims lie) ’ are those Ministers, that are serious in this work! Nay, how mightily do the best fail in this! Do we cry out of men’s disobedience to the Gospel ‘• in the demonstration of the Spirit;” and deal with sin as the destroying fire in our towns, and by force pull men out of it? Do we persuade our people, as those should, -who “know the terror of the Lord?” Do we press Christ and regeneration and faith and holiness, — believing that without these, men can never have life? Do oin- bowels yearn over the ignorant, careless, and obstinate multitude? When we look them in the face, do our hearts melt over them, lest we should never see their faces in rest? Do we, as St. Paul, “tell them weeping,” of their fleshly and earthly disposition? and “teach them publicly, and from house to house,” at all seasons and with many tears? And do we entreat them, as for their soul’s salvation I Or rather, do we not study to gain the approbation of critical hearers; as if a Minister’s business were of no more weight, but to tell a smooth tale for an hour, and look no more after the people till the next sermon? Does not carnal prudence control our fervour, and make our discourses lifeless on subjects the most piercing? How gently we handle those sins, which will so cruelly handle our people’s souls! In a word — our want of seriousness about the things of
‘This is well borne out and illustrated by an eminent writer, who has never been suspected of giving encouragement to enthusiasm — ‘The chief characteristics of the eloquence suited to the pulpit, as distinguished from the other kinds of public speaking, appear to me to be thest, two — gravity and varmth. The serious nature of the subjects belonging to the pulpit requires gravity — their importance to mankind requires warmth.’ Dr. Blair s Lectures, Lect. xxix. — On the Eloquence of the Pulpit. Again he remarks — ‘Gravity and warmth united, form that character of preaching which the French call unction — the affecting, penetrating, interestinf manner, flowing from a strong sensibility of heart in the Preacher to the importance of those truths which he delivers, and on earnest d isire, that they make a full impression on the hearts of his hearers,’ heaven, charms the souls of men into formahty, and brings them into this customary careless hearing which undoes them’ — ‘I know not what others think,’ (says he in another place) ’ but for my own part, I am ashamed of my stupidity, and wonder at myself, that I deal not with my own and others’ souls, as one that looks for the great day of the Lord; and that I can have room for almost any other thoughts or words, and that such astonishing matters do not wholly absorb my mind. I nmrvel, how I can preach of them slightly and coldly; and how 1 can let men alone in their sins; and that I do not go to them, and beseech them for the Lord’s sake to repent, however they take it, or whatever pains or trouble it should cost me. I seldom come out of the pulpit, but my conscience smites me, that I have been no more serious and fervent in such a case. It accuses me, not so much for want of human ornaments or elegancy — but it asketh me — ‘How couldst thou speak of life and death with such a heart?’ The God of mercy pardon me, and awaken me with the rest of his servants, that have been thus sinfully negligent! O Lord, save us from the plague of infidelity and hard-heartedness ourselves; or else how shall we be fit instruments of saving others from it?’
v. — DILIGENCE — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
How instructive is the constant eyeing of our Divine Pattern, consecrating his whole heart, his whole time, in his Father’s work! His greatest diligence, however, was concentrated in his public Ministry. “He taught,” when at Jerusalem, “daily in the temple;”2 and, wherever else a concourse was gathered, he was ready to open his mouth for hortatory, didactic, or illustrative instructio 1.^ Tie first labourers of the Gospel, and the Fathers of the early church, closely followed their Master’s example.*
The Apostle contemplated far greater danger from sloth, than from excessive activity in “preaching the word.” He adjures therefore his beloved Timothy by the solenn view and anticipations of the day of account — to “be instant in season and oit of season /”^ not only regular in the routine of preaching seasons; but under the guidance of an enlightened conscience, embracing every
‘Reformed Pastor. How did the fervour of this holy man exemplify his own lines — I’ll preach as though I ne’er shall preach again; And as a dying man to dying men!
* Luke xix. 47; xxi. 37; xxii. 53. 3 John vii. 37; Matt. v. xiii.
* Acta V. 42; lix. 9; xx. 18 — 21. xxviii. 23, and notices in the Homiletical writings of the Fathers. Comp. Jer. xxvi. 5; Hag. ii. 10. 20. 5 2 Tim. iv. 1, 2.
unlooked-for, and seeminsly unseasonable, call to service. And what is there in the present day, that renders this diligence less neces* sary, less binding, or less effectual? Is not the mass of unconverted hearers as large with us as in the primitive church? And how can Christ’s sheep among them “hear his voice” without a Preacher?’ No other medium will supersede this appointed channel of Divine communications.’’
The frequency of Sabbath-preaching must depend upon physical strength, and other circumstances, over which there can be no control. The wilhngness of the devoted spirit will be in general only restrained by the weakness of the flesh. A double exercise of our duty begins to be called for by the concurrent voices of our Diocesans. A familiar repetition of one of these exercises would profitably and popularly furnish a third service, should this addition be found either desirable or practicable. Few minds could long support the labour and excitement of bringing forth three successive subjects. Nor indeed could the digestive powers of our people healthfully receive so large a quantity of food; whereas the system of repetition assists instead of loading the digestion.
Much more is implied in this diligence, than the formal routine of a Sabbath address. Such a mechanical exhibition ill represents the parental obligations subsisting between a pastor and his flock. Would a father be satisfied with this feeble periodical admonition, when his beloved son was in continual and most imminent danger?
Our Church annals furnish exciting examples of preaching diligence. Hooper was not one of the ’ unpreaching prelates.’ who excited honest Latimer’s indignation and remonstrance. He would say, ‘that no Bishop ought to complain of one sermon a-day.’’ Probably his own custom exceeded these bounds. Foxe informs us, that, ’ being Bishop of two dioceses (Gloucester and Worcester), he yet so ruled and guided either of them and both together, as though he had in charge but one family. No father in his household, no gardener in his garden, no husbandman in his vineyard, was more or better occupied, than he in his diocese among his flock,
1 John X. 16, 27; with Rom. x. 14.
2 The apostle, though keeping up intercourse with the Thessalonians by his pen, still desired to see their face, for their better advantages of Christian instruction. 1 Thess. ill. 10.
3 ‘Fifteen masses a day did not suffice for the priests of Baal; and yet one sermon a day seems more than a good Bishop or Evangelical Pastor can bear.’ Hooper’s Confession delivered to the King and Parliament, 1550. Daily preaching was Chrysostom’s rule for a Bishop (doubtless with application to subordinate Ministers.) De Sacer. Lib. vi. 4. If the letter of the rule be impracticable, let us at least endeavour to approximate to iU standard and spirit. See Burnet’s Pastoral Care, Ch. vi.
goin about his towns and villages in teaching and preaching to the people there.’ Bishop Jewell’s saying — ‘A Bishop ought to die preaching’ — was strikingly confirmed in his own death, which appears t( have been hastened, if not to have been caused, by the ardour of his Episcopal zeal.’ Of Abp. Matthew it was said, that ‘it 1 was easy to trace his jouinies by the churches he preached at.” The most inveterate haters of prelacy were silenced by the example of this Apostolic Bishop.^ Preaching he used to call ’ his be- i loved work,’ from which the government of the province of York ’ did not discharge him; — so that a challenge was thrown out to Popery — ‘That Tobias Matthew, the Archbishop of York, though almost eighty years of age, preached more sermons in a year, than you (the Popish party) can prove have been preached by all your Popes from Gregory the Great’s days.’’ /
The examples of Grimshaw and Wesley, nearer to our own time, may stimulate to greater devotedness to our public employ. Twelve or fourteen preaching engagements were included in Mr. Grimshaw’s idle week.* Wesley is calculated to have preached upwards of forty thousand sermons (exclusive of a large number of exhortations) during an ilinerantcy of nearly fifty years, and an average annual ratio of travelling four thousand five hundred miles. Whatever irregularity or enthusiasm belonged to these unprecedented labours, the large success with which they were honoured, displayed the main-spring of their exertion — “the love of Christ constraining them.”* Let not our censure of their undis- i cipHned system hinder us from transferring an impulse of their i zeal, self-denial, and self-devotedness, to a more chastised course ‘• of Ministration.
But preaching diligence includes not only frequency of employ, but constant repetition of truth. The workman is more anxious to fasten one nail by reiterated blows, than slightly to fix many upon the outward surface. To preach “the same things is not grievous” to the Christian Minister; and for his people it is often “safe.”* The fruitfulness of the earth arises from its “drinking in the rain that cometh oft upon it.” The constant repetition, — not the weight — of the heavenly showers, makes impressions on the
1 The motto at the bottom of a curious portrait of Jewell preserved in Salisbury Palace! is — ‘Vse mihi, si non evangclizavero!’ This was also tjie motto of Usher’s own selec- i tion for his Archiepiscopal seal — illustrated by his increasing constancy in preaching, sub- sequent to his elevation. Augustine’s views of the Episcopal office were Scriptural — i ‘Episcopatus nomen est operis, non honoris — Intelligat se. non esse Episcopum, qui praeesse dilexerit, non prodesse.’ Aug. de Civit. Dei. Lib. xix. c. 19. ’
2 No mention of Archbishop Jlatthew occurs in Piynnc’s cclcbnited work of invective against prelates. Granger’s Bioir. Hist. Vol. i. p. 343.
* Newton’s Life of Grimshaw, p. b. j 2 Cor. v. 14. * Phil. iii..
hardest substances. That our ‘• doctrine” therefore may “drop aa the rain,”’ it must fall not only in the gentleness of love, but in the frequency of diligence.^ The constant enforcement of fundamental truths is necessary for their deeper and more practical influence. Truths that have been marked out by gainsayers or seducers, must form prominent topics of our Ministry. Truths also of daily use and practice, will be sound doctrine to preach to the end of our course; not however in the slothful repetition of our former discourses, but in waiting at our Master’s feet for fresh instruction; always learning, and teaching what we have learned.^
VI. — SINGLENESS — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
* The Ministerial work must be managed purely for God and the salvation of the people, and not for any private ends of our own. This is our sincerity in it. A wrong end makes all the work bad from us, however good in itself Self-denial is of absolute necessity in every Christian; but of a double necessity in a Minister, as he hath a double sanctification and dedication to God. And without self-denial he cannot do God an hour’s faithful service. Hard studies, much knowledge, and excellent preaching, is but more glorious hypocritical sinning, if the ends be not right.’* The main end of the Ministry is the glory of God. It is ’ the single eyeing” of this end, that ’ makes all things sweet and holy.’^ This was the purpose, that filled the heart, and directed the course, of our Great Exemplar.* This was also the spirit of the Apostle ]’ the true spirit of the Minister — the result of serious self-scrutiny, and often of severe spiritual conflict. Experience (for it must plainly be more a matter of experience than of observation) assures us of the extreme diflSculty of preaching with singleness of heart. How much of our study in the very coniposition of our sermons, flows from a selfish principle, and rolls on in the same corrupt channel! Even while
‘Deut. xxxii. 2. with Heb. vi. 7. 2 isa. xx’iii. 10.
3 The apostle exhorts to pulpit diligence by a most foreboding anticipation. 2 Tim. iv. 2, 3. Owen enumerates the following constraining motives to preaching diligence — ‘The command of God — the love and care of Christ towards his Church — the ends of God’s patience and long-suffering — the future manifestation of his glory in the salvation of believers, and the condemnation of the disobedient — the necessities of the souls of men — the way by which God <iives spiritual supplies by the Ministry of the word — the weakness of the natural faculties in receiving, and of the memory in retaining, spiritual things — the weakness of grace requiring continual refreshment — the frequency and variety of temptations — the design of Christ to bring us gradually to perfection.’ He adds — ‘But the law of this duty is in some measure written on the hearts of all faithful Ministers; and those who are otherwise must bear their own burdens.’ On Heb. li. 7, 8.
* Baxter’s Reformed Pastor s Leighton. John viii. 50. v. 41. 1 Thess. ii. 6
Christ is the text, self may be the spirit and substance of our sermon, as if we were lifting up the cross of Christ, to hang our own glory upon it. In the pulpit itself — in our Master’s inunediate presence — what is it, that sometimes gives animation to our delivery, tone to our voice, and emphasis to our words? Are we never “preaching ourselves*’ in the very form and act of preaching “Christ Jesus the Lord?” If in the impulse of the moment, any forcible matter falls from m; how seldom is it unaccompanied with Belf-complacency, expectation of present effect, or disappointment in its failure! How hard is it to preach without undue regard to the approbation of the Christian or intelligent part of our congregation! What a struggle often lo repress the fear of being considered common-place, or the desire to be original and powerful! How difficult thus to smk our gifts in the grace of humility, and to suppress what might reconunend us to men of taste and talent, in order to clothe the same sentiment in a less imposing, but more useful garb! How natural the desire rather to know whether the sermon has been approved, than whether it has been profitably applied! And when we feel that we have made but an indifferent figure, it is as if we had missed the prize of the day. Thus is the desire of usefulness selfishly connected with the honour of our own name; when we cannot bear that “our God should humble us among” our flock, and that they should think of us as vessels of inferior value — of “wood and earth” — rather than “of gold and of silver.’”*
Baxter’s serious remarks are equally applicable to our own day, as to his — ‘Consider, I beseech you, brethren, what baits there are in the work of the Ministry to entice a man to be selfish, that is, to be carnal and impious, even in the highest works of piety. The fame of a godly man is as great a snare as the fame of a learned man. And woe to him that takes up with the fame of gg llhiess instead of godliness! “Verily I say unto you, they have iheir reward.” When the times were all for learning and empty formal-
‘See Solomon’s wise aphorism, Prov. xxv. 27. It is said of one of the ancient Fathers, that he would weep at the applause that was frequently :|iven to his sermons. ‘Would
to God,’ (said he) ’ they had rather fjone away silent and thoughtful!” Docente le in,
Ecclesia, non clamor populi, .sed gemitus suscitatur. Lachrynice auditoruin laudes tuae i
Bunt.’ — Hieron. ad Xepot. ‘Lihenter voceiu audio, non qui sibi plausuni, sed qui luihi (
planctum movet.’ Bern. Serm. 59. Cantic. ‘I love a serious preacher, who speaks for my sake, and not for his own, who seeks my salvation, and not his own vain-glory.’
Fcnelon’s Letter to the French Academy, Sect. 4, p. ‘230. ‘Surely’ (exclaims Dr. Chal-
mers) ’ it were a sight to make angels weep, when a weak and vapouring mortal, sur-:
rounded by his fellow-sinners, and hastening to the grave and the judsiment along with 1
them — finds it a dearer object to his bosom, to regale his hearers by the e.vhibition of 1
himself, than to do in plain earnest the work of his Master, and urge on the bmincsa of
repentance and faith by the impressive simplicities of the Gospell’ Sermons, ut supra. p. 25.
ities, then the temptation of the pioud did lie that way. But now, through the unspeakable mercy of God, the most lively practical preaching is in credit, and godliness itself is in credit: and now the temptation to proud men is here, even to pretend to be zealous preachers and godly men. O what a fine thing doth it seem, to have the people crowd to hear us, and to be affected with what we say, and that we can command their judgments and affections! To have the people call you” the chariots and horsemen of Israel’ — to have them depend upon you, and be ruled by you, though this may be no more than their duty, yet a little grace ma serve to make you seem zealous men for them. Nay pride may do it without any special grace.’’
Perhaps indeed the character of the present age is peculiarly adverse to this singleness of spirit. The love of novelty, and the idolatry of intellect, are besetting snares, by which the subtle enemy “corrupts” the church “from the simplicity that is in Christ. “2 It is difficult for ministers to preserve the tone of their instructions wholly uninfluenced by these temptations. There is great danger, lest we provide more food for the understanding than for the heart; and lest the important opportunities of close application to the conscience be frittered away in prurient fancies, ingenious theories, and elaborate compositions; than which nothing is more hurtful to the spirituality of our Ministration, in occupying our secret retirement with men-pleasing contrivances, rather than with diligent waiting upon God, for an enlarged spiritual unction upon our work. This danger of making our office a stepping-stone to selfish indulgence, is acknowledged by the most eminent Ministers. The following exercises from the diary of a late excellent Minister, strike a chord of sympathy with many of us — ‘I have to observe in my mind a sinful anxiety to preach well, rather than a holy anxiety to preach usefully. I fear I rather seek my own honour than God’s. I confess this sin; I trust I repent of it from my heart: I hope for its forgiveness, and its removal from my breast.’ Again — ‘The evening spoiled with wretched pride and self-complacency — a mischievous weed, deep-rooted, which all my winter seasons have not yet killed. O may it at length be rooted
‘Reformed Pasfor. ‘That which many times causes uneasiness in Pastors, is a principle of self-love, which prompts us to seek a private unwarranted delight in that change of men’s minds, which we have effected. The spirit of man pleases itself with the success of its own travail; and when we seem to propose no other aim but God’s glory, the deceitfulness of self-love is less capable of discovery.’ Bishop Godeau’s Past. Instruc- ‘; tions, pp. 44, 45. ‘See here the perfect pattern of an Evangelical preacher — to make his i reputation and the confidence of the people subservient — not to his own interest — but to the good of souls, and to the establishing of the kingdom of God.’ Quesnel on Matt ‘,. iv. 23 — 25. 2 2 Cor. xL 3 out!’• It was therefore seasonable advice of Bishop Taylor to his Clergy — ‘Let no man preach for the praise of men. But if you meet it, instantly watch and stand upon your guard, and pray against your own vanity; and by an express act of acknowledgment and adoration return the praise to God. Remember, that Herod was. for the omission of this, smitten by an angel; and do thou tremble, fearing lest the judgment of God be otherwise than the sentence of the people.’^
The most pernicious and debasing evil of all is, a converting our sacred office into a medium for setting forth our own excellence — prostituting the glories of the cross for the indulgence of our own pride — drawing a veil over the glories of our adorable Master — and committing a robbery against him, even in the professed business to exalt him. This is to lose sight of the great end of the Ministry — commending ourselves, instead of our Master, to the regard of our people; rather conciliating ourselves to their good-will, than our message to their consciences. This lays the foundation for a gradual departure from the truth, and proportionally deteriorates the power of our work. ‘Our business is to make men think, not of our eloquence, but of their own souls; to attend, not to our fine language, but to their own everlasting interest.^ Our duty is, ’ not to please but to feel;’ (as one of the old writers expressed it) ’ not to stroke the ear, but to strike the heart.’* Mr. Richmond well said
‘• Biographical Portraiture of Rev. J. Hinton, p. IIG. ‘I know I ought to fit myself in the licst manner I can for public service; but this is my misery — I study and prepare, that I may consume it upon my own pride and self-confidence.’ Brainerd.
2 Clergyman’s Instructor, p. 108. ‘Let all eloquent preachers beware, lest they fill any man’s ears with sounding words, when they should be feeding his soul with the bread of everlasting life. Let them fear, lest, instead of honouring God, thx’y honour themselves. // anxj man ascend the pulpit witk the interdion of uttering a fine thing, he is committing a deadly sin.’ H. K. White.
3 Smith on the Sacred OHice, Lect. xviii. It was a subject of bitter regret to Augus- ( tine, that his early Ministry had been distinguished by this character — ’ ut placeret, non! Ut doceret.’ Jerome complained of many in ids time — ‘Id habent cures, non quomodo 1 scripturarum medullas ebibant, sed quomodo aures populi declamatorum flosculis mul- I ceant.” Do not say within yourself — How much or how elegantly I can talk upon such a text: but what can I say more usefully to those who hear me, for the instruction of j their minds, for the conviction of their consciences, and for the persuasion of their hearts? j Let not your chief design be to work out a sheet, or to hold out an hour, but to save a ’ soul.’ Watts’ Humble Attempt, pp. 19, ’20.
* ‘Pungere, non palpare’ — was Jerome’s direction for the Preacher’s words. One I among the evils of this selfish spirit, is the encouragement of a critical spirit among our ’ hearers — a chief bane of the Ministry. Besides, ’ this desire of appearing a fine s[ieaker’ (as Dr. Macgill tells his young friend) ’ unfits you for attaining even that kind of excellence, which you desire. Your style, instead of presenting the just expression of thoughts and feelings suited to your objects, presents an exhibition of artificial beauties, unsuitably introduced, laboriously and afl’ectedly pourtrayed, while the higher order of beauties in thought and language are neglected, or lost in the gaudy colouring, which surrounds »hem.’ (Considerations to a Young Clergyman.) In thus spending our strength in the eloquence of words, we lose the eloquence of thought. We shall not become truly elo
—‘I have no wish to be a popular preacher in any sense but one viz., a preacher to the hearts of the people’’^ Indeed the Gospel was never meant as an occasion of display, but as a treasure to dispense for the benefit of the world. And as far as we are imbued with the spirit of our office, we shall esteem the enriching of one soul with the unsearchable riches of Christ a more durable recompense, than an investiture with the dignity and honour of an earthly crown.
Without this singleness of spirit there is no warranted expectation of success. The matter indeed is from God; but the manner and the dress, the principle and the exhibition, may be but ’ incense thrown upon the altar of vanity. ‘^ We may preach clearly in statement, and forcibly in matter; but habitual defect in •’ doing all” with a single eye “to the glory of God,” brings upon us the awful “woe to the idol-shepherd’’ (his own idol, and wishing to be the idol of his people), whose ministry is blasted, and his judgment blinded.^ However diligently we may be employed in hig service, yet nothing is really done, done to any purpose, or with any acceptance, that is done for self- — not for God. So that a pains-taking Minister, who has been engaged in the service of God for selfish ends, may at last sink into the grave with Grotius’s affecting lamentation — ‘Alas! I have lost my life in laboriously doing nothing.’ Or should he be used as an instrument in the work of God, it will be only as the servant, who never tastes the provision which he dispenses to his Master’s guests; or as the ph3’sician, who heals others, but is unhealed himself.* Godly simplicity is the alchemy that converts every thing it touches into gold. The paramount desire that Christ” in all things may have the pre-eminence;” and the corresponding expression of the heart — “He must increase, but I must decrease“* — will compensate for a deficiency in talent and judgment. This is the true character of the friends of the bridegroom;”• to woo for him, not for ourselves; to seek his honour, not our own; and to adopt an earnest tone of preaching, not as gaining more regard to ourselves, but as bringing sinners to him. Our privilege is to wait upon the gospel, and to reflect our Master’s glory through the transparent medium of Christian simplicity. This usefulness is quite distinct from popuquent, until we have lost the desire to be so, and gain our elevation by rising with our tubjoct, and giving up ourselves to it.
‘Richmond’s Life, p. 50. 2 Hall’s Senlion, p. 45. 3 Zeeh. xi. 17.
I * It is a solemn remark of Massillon, that God sometimes, in saving his elect, makes I use of instruments which he afterwards casts away.’ A thougl t, that may well call to ( mind, 1 Cor. ix. 27, with deep and serious personal application! 5 John iii. 30. 6 Ibid. 29.
larity. But how poor a thing is the admiration of man, compared with this success in winning souls to Christ!’
‘He that intends truly to preach the Gospel, and not himself; ’ he that is more concerned to do good to others, than to raise his own fame, or to procure a following to himself; and that makes this the measure of all his meditations and s-ermons, that he may put things in the best light, and recommend them with the most advantage to his people — this man so made and so moulded, can- ) not miscarry in his work: — he will certainly succeed to some degree. The word spoken by him shall not return again. He shall have his crown, and his reward from his labours. And to say all that can be said, in one word with St. Paul; he “shall both save himself, and them that hear him.” ‘”
VII. — LOVE — THE SPIRIT OF SCRIPTURAL PREACHING.
Love is the grand distinctive mark of our office. It exhibits salvation flowing from the bosom of Divine mercy. It sets forth a most tender Father, a bleeding Saviour, and a faithful Comforter; so that the spirit of every discourse should be — “God is love.” Thus therefore should we so cast ourselves into the mould of our commission, that we may infuse its very life and character throughout our Ministry.^
“Speaking- the truth in love’^* is perhaps in few words the most complete description of our office. Some, from a false charity, would keep back offensive truth. Some again speak it in fear, from the apprehension of inconvenient consequences to themselves. Some also speak in faithfulness only, as if their responsi-
1 Mr. Cotton preached an university sermon at Cambridtjo, much approved by those ‘who relished the wisdom of words more than the words of wisdom;’ which however, upon a clear understanding of the true principles of the Ministry, he committed to the flames. Subsequently preachinij in the same pulpit in a more Scriptural tone, his sermon was attended with the Divine blessintr to one of the most eminent divines of that day — Dr. Preston. Mather’s New England, Book iii. pp. 15, IG. This was according to an old writer’s rule, ‘that the Preacher expound the sermon in a plain and common speech; not having any respect to his own conijiii-ndation for his eloqu(pnce, Imt rather to advance the glory of God.’ — IV. Heinminge’s Mcthode of preaching. l”2mo. 1571.
2 Burnet’s Pastoral Care, ch. ix.
3 ‘If a man has great and crood news to tell me, he will not do it angrily, and in much heat and discomposure of spirit. It is not tlierrfore easy to conceive, on what ground a scolding Minister can justify a conduct, which oidy proves, that he does not understand his errand.’ Cowper’s Letters. Paley has admirably illustrated the Epistle to the Romans, as characterized by an exquisite address of Christian love; mixing itself with the most unpalatable statements of truth, and conciliating a kind attention, as the most eflectual avenue to conviction. See his Horn? Paulinrr. This, as an old writer observes — ’ doth not only serve the affections, but also (if I may so term it) makelh the oration more sharp and witty, to the end it may altogether pierce into the minds of the hearers, and so possess the whole heart itself Hemminge, ut supra, p. 54. bilit)’^ was siinply to deliver their own souls, and not rather to win souls to Christ.
Love should pervaa ) the whole tone of our Ministry. The cause of truth may be weakened by an inaccurate exhibition of its spirit. The Scripture marks the temper as well as the subject-matter of our Ministry. An Apostle assures us in his own case, that if he “were to speak with the tongues of men and of angels,” yet without love; he would be no better than “soundino- brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”’ How delightful is it in the tone of endearing and animated instruction, to look down from the pulpit, and regard the Christian part of our congregation in the light of “mother, and sister, and brother!” Even with the unconverted, our most fruitful seasons of conversion are, when we are most yearning over lost sinners. This was the spirit of our Divine Pattern ;2 and therefore, that which he most “delighteth to honour.” Besides — who does not feel the force of such a Ministry? What power does that affecting declaration carry with it — “Of whom I tell you even weeping!”^ The testimony that is borne on this particular respecting Mr. Brown of Haddington, is far more important than that of eloquence or originality. Though able to endure bodily or domestic afflictions without a tear (we mention this unenviable exercise of self-control, only for the sake of the contrast); yet, when warning sinners of their danger, and “beseeching them to be reconciled unto God,” he is said to have been often unable to restrain his emotions.*
It would add considerably to effect, if this spirit be suffered to express itself in corresponding tenderness of appellation. The Apostles were used to address their people with language, expres-
1 1 Cor. xiii. 1.
2 Matt. ix. 36. Luke xix. 41, 42, with Deut. v. 29. Psalm lxxxi. 13. Ezekiel xviii. 31. Hosea xi. 7 — 9. Compare Bowles, Lib. i. c. 21.
3 Phil. iii. 18. ‘Oh! how deep into the heart go those periods, that are sown in the unforced, uninvited tears of the preacher!’ Robinson on Claude. — Calvin writes excellently on this point — ‘Sunt multi clamosi reprehensores, qui in vitia declamitando, vel potius fulminando, mirum zeli ardorem prse se fcrunt; interea secure sunt animo, ut videantur per lusum guttur et latera excrcere velle. At pii pastoris est, flere secum, prius- •^uam alios ad fletum provocet; tacita cogitatione discruciari, priusquam indignationis signa edat; et plus retinere apud se doloris, quam aliis faciat.’ In 2 Cor. ii. 4.
(I. Brown’s Life, p. 22. Mr. VVinter tells us of his friend M^-. Whitfield — ‘I hardly W knew him to go through his sermon without weeping more or less; and I truly believe J his were the tears of sincerity. I have heard him say in the pulpit — ‘You blame me for.’ weeping; but how can I help it, when you will not weep for yourselves, though your ;/ immortal souls are upon the verge of destruction; and for aught you know, you are hear- (( ing your last sermon, and may never more have an opportunity to have Christ offered to you.’ Jay’s Life of Winter, pp. 27, 28. Constitutional causes will greatly vary the outward expression of love; nor WDuld we insist upon tears, as a necessary evidence of a tender heart. But the spirit her? was fully warranted to be genuine and fervent love to souls, and is well worthy of our imitation.
give of the earnest endearment.’ The extant Epistles of the Primitive Fathers, the most earnest discourses of Cyprian and Augustine, and the Honiihes of Chrysostom, are strongly imbued with this character. The amiable Fenelon observes — ‘I would hare every Minister of the Gospel address his audience with the zeal of a friend, with the generous energy of a father, ayid with the exuberant affection of a mother.^ This language obviously requires a chaste control; but the sober expression of heartfelt tenderness would strike many a chord of sympathy, interest, and reciprocal feeling, such as would bring us into affectionate contact with our people. We might also bring before them from time to time, our remembrance of them in our prayers and thanksgivings,’^ our tender interest in their welfare,’ our devotedness to their service,* our ardent longing for their Christian advancement,^ and the strong connection of their prosperity with our own happiness.* Such a spirit will contribute most beneficially to cement the bond between us.
This spirit of love must deeply imbue the language of reproof. We must “exhort,” but “with all long-suffering;”^ bearing with the frowardness, that will often resist the most affectionate pleading. Meekness, gentleness, and patience must stamp our instruction of the opponents of the Gospel.* We must wound their consciences as sinners, not their feelings as men; carefully avoiding unnecessary excitement of enmity; and showing the faithfulness that lays open their sins, to be “the wounds of a friend,”’ the chastening to be that of a father. “‘The recollection of our own former state (not to speak of our present sympathy with them as their fellow-sinners,) wall give a considerate tenderness to our reproof,” which, without weakening its application, will powerfully soften the heart to receive it: so that it falls, “as a wise reprover upon an obedient car.’”^ Indeed it is when we most deeply feel our own
1 Comp. Phil. iv. 1 — and the ApostoUc greetings of the several Epistles.
2 Compare Rom. i. 9. 1 Cor. i. 4. Kph. i. 6. Phil. i. 3, 4, &c.
3 1 Thess. ii. 7, 8. *2 Cor. xii. 15. s Phil. i. 8 — 11.
6 1 Thess. iii. 8. 2 John 4. 3 John 4. t 2 Tim. iv. 2
8 2 Tim. ii. 21, 25. Circumliniatur modo poculum coelcstis sapientite mclle, ut possint ab imprudentibus amara rcmcdia sine offensione potari; dum illiciens prima dulccdo acerbitatcm soporis asperi sub pra-tcxtu suavitatis occultat. Lactant. Cowper’s remarks and illustration arc singularly terse — ‘No man was ever yet scolded out of his sins. His heart, because it is corrupt, grows angry, if not treated with some management and good manners. A surly mastilT will bear perhaps to be stroked (though he will growl even under this operation); but if you touch him roughly he will bite.’ Letters, ut supra. See our Lord’s Ministry beautifully illustrated in detail. Bishop of Winchester’s Min. Char. oh. viii.
9 prov. xxvii. 6. ‘° See 2 Cor. ii. 4. xii. 11 — 21.
‘1 See Titus iii. 2, 3. ‘I never seemed fit to say a word to a sinner, except when I had a broken heart myself; when I was subdued and melted into penitence, and felt as though I had just received a pardon to my own soul, and when my heart was full of tenderness and pity.’ Payson’s Life. ‘* Prov. xxv. 12.
sinfulness, that we speak most closely and poweifuUy to the consciences of our people.
But especially must this spirit be cultivated, in the solemn delivery of the burden of the Lord; lest we. mingle strange fire with the flame from the holy altar. Some Ministers seem to combine human passions with their zeal; as if, in speaking of the wrath of God, they were giving vent to their own indignation. How diflerent this spijit from the persiiasiveiiess of the Apostolic Ministry,’ and from the tenderness of our Divine Master, who breaks off from his most awful strain of denunciation, as if unable any lonjer to suppress the yearnings of his compassion — “O Jerusalem! Jerusalem!”=^
The idea of a judge compelled to pronounce the sentence of condemnation upon his own beloved son, might illustrate the combined solemnity and affection, with which the Minister of Christ ought ever to speak of “that place, where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” To forbear to speak of it from a scrupulous sensitiveness of feeling, is an act of positive unfaithfulness to God, to our own conscience, and to our people.^ To make it the prominent characteristic of our Ministry, is to disguise the Gospel of love “with a covering not of God’s Spirit.” To point the thunder-bolts of heaven in a light and careless spirit is to expose ourselves to our Master’s rebuke — “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of”* To attempt to gain effect by vehemence of manner, or unnatural elevation of voice — is to look for the Lord in the wind and in the earthquake, rather than in ‘■ the still small voice.’’* Tender seriousness commends our office as Ambassadors of a God of love. TrembUng, faltering, lips — the index of a heart touched with the melting sympathies of Christ — best become us, as guilty sinners speaking to our fellow-men, not more guilty than ourselves.* A bold fidelity — setting at defiance the best feelings of our nature — is most uncongenial with our Master’s spirit, clothes our message in a most repulsive garb, and brings us under suspicion of ill-temper or resentment; whereas a meek and affectionate addi-ess — having terror in the thought rather than in the language — awakens, and commands the aviakened anjtiety to a deep and serious consideration.
We are not arguing, however, for that sensitive delicacy, which refrains to wovmd, when the patient shrinks. But we know not,
1 2 Cor. V. ] 1. Comp. Deut. xxxii. 2. 2 Matt, xxiii. 23 — 37.
3 Is not the latter clause in Mark xvi. 16, as component a part of the Ministeiial ISHsion as the former 1 * Luke ix. 55.
* See 1 Kings xix. 11, 12. * See Jer. xvii. 16.
why the most energetic tone of faithfulness should not be blended with that considerate treatment, which unquestionably, is best adapted to the exigency of the case. The brute creation may be driven: but rational creatures require to be drawn. The compulsion of love is the mighty lever of operation.’ Even the heathen sophists insisted upon kindness in an orator as indispensable to his success ;- and doubtless none will open their hearts to the Christian orator except the tone of his instructions has impressed them with a sincere conviction of his love to their best interests.’ Love is the life, power, soul, and spirit of pulpit eloquence; entreating rather than denouncing the character of our office ;* and it is the delivery of our Master’s message with the looks and language of his own manifested tenderness, that attracts and triumphs over the hearts of a willing people. We wonder not at the Apostle’s success, when we read, that at Ephesus (which doubtless was an instance of his general course of Ministry) he “ceased not for three years to warn every owe of them iiiglit and day with tears!’’^ The most honoured Ministers have been men, distinguished, not for the bri?,litest talents, but for an humble and affectionate spirit. Some eminent servants of God, from the want of this spirit, alarm rather than persuade; confirm prejudice rather than remove it; and con- j sequently the ellectiveness of their labours falls below many of ’ their l)rethren, of far inferior gifts. ‘The Christian Pastor, of all men in the world, should have an affectionate heart. “When he / preaches, it is the Shepherd in search of the strayed sheep; the /
* ‘I have always been afraid’ (said a late excellent young Minister’) ’ of driving my people away from the Saviour. I would rather err on the side of drawing them.’ Memoirs of the Rev. John Escreet, by Rev. T. Webster, p. 50. This i§ in accordance with the highest pattern. Hos. xi. 4.
- The fubk’d tradition of Amphion by his music drawing stones after him for the walls ( of Thebes, and of Orpheus taming vnld beasts by his harp, alluded probably to their extraordinary power over insensible and unyielding hearts. Ennnn. Arist. Rhet. Lib. ii. Homer introduces his hoary Nestor pleading in this insinuating spirit — trfiiii’fwj/. Iliad. Lib. ii. 78.
3 ‘Qui dieendo nititur pcrsuaderc quo<l bonum est, nihil horum trium spernat, ut scilicet doceat, delectet, flectat; ita enim audietur intelligcnter, libentcr, obedientcr.’ — Augustine De Doctr. Christian, iv. I’J, 17, 2G. ‘These three steps in this progress are intimately connected. We should speak so, as in the lirst place, to instruct, and be understood; in the second, to please, so far at least as to attract, and fix attention; in the third, to gain and conquer.’ Campbell on Past. Char. p. 87.
* See iJ Cor. v. 20.
5 Acts XX. ‘M. George Herbert’s description of the love of St. Paul’s Ministry is exquisitely beautiful. How did he put the Romans into his prayers (i., 4.)! He ceased not to give thanks for the Ephesians, (i. Iti.) for the Corinthians, (1 Cor. i. 4.); for the Philippians, (i. 4.) He is in contention for Xlwm. whether to live or die — to be with them or Christ; which, setting aside the care of his flock, it were madness to doubt. What an admirable Epistle is the “ind to the Corinthians! How full of affection. He joys and he sorrows; he grieves and he glories. Never was such care of a flock expressed, ■avc in the Great Shepherd of the fold, who first shed tears over Jerusalem and afterwards, blood. Therefore let this care be naturally learnt, and then woven unto our sermons, which will make them appear exceeding reverend and holy.’ Ch. vii.
father in pursuit of his lost child. Is it possible for a statue to perform this part of necessary duty? As well might a marble parent supply the place of a real one.’* Though, however, every pastor may not be equally successful in gaining upon the affections of his people, yet “the love of Christ will constrain us” all to some clear evidence of our tender love to his flock. Menelaus was pronounced to ’ bring nothing worthy of the priesthood, because he had the fury of a cruel tyrant, and the rage of a savage beast;’* thus illustrating by the force of contrast, gentleness and love to be the spirit of the priesthood, and the paralyzing influence of the contrary spirit upon the efficiency of our Ministrations. Fletcher remarked despondingly with regard to himself, but most truly with regard to the office, that ’ love, continual, universal, ardent love was the soul of all the labour of a Minister.^ The tenderness of Ministerial earnestness is best calculated to win upon repulsive minds, and ’ to bring our people to God, and to keep them continually near to him.’ This Dr. Doddridge judged to be the grand purpose of our work; but found, as he complained, ’ that it was, to him at least, a very hard thing.’*
In concluding this division of our subject we advert to Bishop Sumner’s admirable remarks — ‘The Scriptures contain two classes of directions, which may be considered as referring more particularly to those who are entrusted with Ministerial functions. The first class includes all that relates to the discharge of thefundamen tal duty of their office — the message they have to deliver, and the faithful and right division of the word; while all such as are of secondary importance — the manner of communicating instruction and reproof, prudential admonitions calculated to rectify the judgment, the discretion requisite for the due management of a delicate mission — may be properly referred to the second class. With these passages of scripture for a daily manual, with our Lord’s own example as a commentary upon them, and with his blessing upon their study and application, it may reasonably be expected that the members of the priesthood” may wax riper and stronger in their Ministry, and that they may so endeavour themselves from time to time to sanctify the lives of them and theirs, and to fashion them after the rule and doctrine of Christ, that they may be
‘Simeon’s Preface to Claude. 2 2 Maccab. iv. ’25. See the contraet Heb. v. 2
Cox’s Life of Fletcher, p. 21. Orton’s Life of Doddridge, ch. v.
wholesome and godly examples and patterns for the people to follow.” ‘>
In pondering therefore the deep responsibility of this department of our work — the importance of due preparation for it — the vast momentum of its substance — the wisdom needed for selecting the best mode of its presentment* — the efficiency of its Scriptural Spirit” — all this linked with our office as the “Ministers”^ of God — “Ambassadors for Christ’’* —” separated by the Holy Ghost’“’ — bearing the word of life — the cup of salvation — in our hands. Oh! can we forbear the question of anxious weakness —” Who is sufficient for these things?“” Can we conceive of an effective preacher, if lie be not a man of prayer? Was not the secret of Apostolic success hidden (as we have before hinted) in the resolution — “We will give ourselves continually unto prayer, and to the Ministry of the word?”’” The man of prayer will shine forth in the pulpit with a full reflection of his Divine Master’s likeness — “grace poured upon his lips.“‘2 Gifted with a wise and understanding heart’”^ — he will produce clear and luminous masses of truth — putting into his sernions all that he finds in his bible in its correct harmony and proportion; while his own spirit will be suitably moulded into the spirit of his message — bold — wise — simple — fervent — diligent — single-minded — full of love. May every Minister of the Gospel listen with profound reverence and self-abasement to the solemn charge of the Apostle, speaking from the mouth of his great Master — J charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; preach the word, be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffel ing and doctrine. 2 Tim. iv. 1, 2.
‘Win. Ch. pp. 48, 49. Ordination Service. 2 Ch. i. 3 Ch. ii.
Ch. iii. iv. 5 Ch. v. Ch. vi. i 2 Cor. v. 18, 19. s jb. v. 20.
9 Acts XX. 28. 10 2 Cor. li. 16. Acts vi. 4 — 7. See p. 138, 139.
>2 Ps. xlv. 2. 13 1 Kings iii. 12. with 2 Tim. i. 6, 7.