LETTER XXVI.

ON DISCUSSION-TEXT-SERMONS.

HAVING considered the simpler kinds of pulpit discourses under the title of lectures, we come now to the more complex. These we will divide into two great classes-text-sermons and subject-sermons. By the former we understand those which consist mainly in the discussion of a text-by the latter those of which the text is little more than a motto. In textsermons you confine yourself, as much as possible, to the ideas which the text suggests, and take the framework and division of your sermon from it. In subjectsermons you derive the matter and form of your discourse from some external source, deeming it sufficient if it be fairly connected with the text. It is not easy to distinguish always very precisely between these two divisions, because many sermons partake of the nature of both; yet, as classes, they have many distinctive features.

Text-sermons are those on which Claude, and Simeon, and other writers, have laid the principal stress: indeed, almost the whole of Claude's Essay is devoted to them. They were more in vogue amongst the French than in this country. Yet even here they constitute a large portion of the sermons ordinarily preached.

The two principal modes of discussing texts are, according to Claude, by explication and observation. Which of the two modes you should adopt will depend on the nature of the text. Difficult texts should be discussed in the former way, easy ones in the latter. It would be absurd to set about explaining or unfolding a text which is obvious and simple, such as a mere passage of history; and equally so to remark only upon one which is intricate and difficult. Sometimes, indeed, when the matter is very weighty and important, a text, however easy, may be discussed by way of explication. Many texts, perhaps most, will contain matter for explication, as well as observation, in which case you must explain first, and make your observations afterwards.

If you require more particular rules concerning the theory of the discussion of texts, I must refer you to Claude's Essay, as published by Mr. Simeon. The observations of the latter writer are by far the most valuable part of the work. But in truth I am not sure as to the advantage of rules on this subject. Claude himself allows that, "as the texts of Scripture

M.

I

are infinite, it is impossible to give perfect rules thereupon it depends," he says, "on good sense." would rather trust to your good sense for the manner of discussing a given text, than recommend you to refer it to any precise rule; which would probably serve rather to cramp than assist your genius. Since, however, you would, perhaps, at first, for want of practice, be at a loss how to employ your good sense in the treatment of a text, I think you will find the following the readiest and most practical way of acquiring a due proficiency in this point; and at the same time will be adding greatly to your stock of knowledge. Make a practice every day (that is, so long as you consider yourself a student) of analyzing two or three good sermons of some standard author. Observe carefully how he has managed his text; endeavour to discover the process of thought by which he was guided; and mark well how his ideas are arranged. You may, if you please, first take the text on which he has written, and draw up from it a scheme yourself, and afterwards see how far the writer's plan coincides with your own. This appears to me an interesting and very easy mode of accustoming yourself to the discussion of texts. You will learn the principle and the practice at once.

In the best writers there is a very great diversity as to their mode of treating texts. Some make a practice of carefully discussing every part of the text, and exercise all their ingenuity to bring in every

minute particular. Others, again, seem to be carried away by their subject, and to take little care whether they stick very closely to their text or not. One of the neatest textuary preachers is Mr. Cooper; for country preaching his sermons would be admirable models of style, if there were but a little more imagination and facility of illustration: as models of handling texts they are the best I know. Read one of them cursorily, and you would think it the simplest and easiest thing in the world; analyze it, and you will find it composed according to the strictest rules of art.

Let us take the first sermon in volume ii. from

1 Thes. ii. 13, "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but (as it is in truth), the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” At first sight you will perceive that there is a good deal of instructive matter in the text, but the way of working it all up cleverly does. not so plainly appear. Let us see how Cooper has managed it. He has divided his sermon into two heads; first, description here given of the word of God-secondly, the manner in which it ought to be received." All that could not be reduced under these two heads- -as the relation between St. Paul and the Thessalonians, his praise of them, and his thankfulness on their behalf, he has judiciously put into the exordium ;

"The

which, it is probable, he composed after the rest of his sermon. Having disposed of these parts of the text, he goes on to his first division, the description of the word-first its author, God, ("not the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God ;") secondly, its effects, ("it effectually worketh in them that believe.") The next division is-how we ought to receive it. We ought to receive it "as the word of God," with attention, reverence, teachableness, humility; and believing it to be God's appointed instrument. Now, in this sermon, every word in the text is thoroughly discussed; nothing is introduced which is not plainly connected with it, and the whole is worked up so that strict unity is preserved.

Some preachers are fond of choosing texts even more extensive than their precise subject, with a view to have more materials to work up. There is no objection to this mode. Suppose you wished to preach on Christian courtesy: you might either take for your text the simple precept, "Be courteous;" or you might take in some of the context; "Be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another; be pitiful, be courteous; not rendering evil for evil, nor railing for railing, but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are hereunto called, that ye might inherit a blessing." You might begin by eulogizing the benevolent principles of the Gospel, contained in the first part of the text; descend to your particular subject, courtesy; illustrate by the instances, "not rendering evil for evil, nor railing for