ation corresponding to such methods of development. . . . any such system of development of species from species, the system of life, after ages of progress, would have become a blended mass; the temple of nature fused over its surface and throughout its structure. The study of the past has opened to view no such result. Pp. 602, 603.

That species after species, and race after race, both of plants and animals, have in some way been introduced upon this earth, and after flourishing their brief day, again entirely disappeared, leaving only such remains as are preserved in the rocks constituting the crust of our globe, is abundantly manifest; but the method of their introduction is a point man has not yet been able to determine. Science on this point having thus far entirely failed us, the author is willing to leave it, for the present at least, unexplained. It is not the only question pertaining to this study that we are obliged to leave thus.

But geology, while reaching so deeply into the origin of things, leaves wholly unexplained the creation of matter, life, and spirit, and that spiritual element which pervades the whole history like a prophecy, becoming more and more clearly pronounced with the progressing ages, and having its consummation and fulfillment in man. It gives no cause for the arrangement of the continents together in one hemisphere, and mainly in the same temperate zone, or their situation about the narrow Atlantic, with the barrier mountains in the remote west of America and in the remote east of Europe and Asia, thus gathering the civilized world into one vast arena; it does not account for the oceans having that exact relation in extent and depth to the land which, under all the changes, allowed of submergence and emergence through small oscillations of the coast, and have permitted the spreading out of sandstones and shales by the waves and currents, the building up of limestones through animal life, and the accumulation of coal beds through the growth of plants; and all in numberless alternations; nor for the various adaptations of the systems of plants and animals to the wants of the last species in that system. Through the whole history of the globe there was a shaping, provisioning, and exalting the earth, with reference to a being of mind, to be sustained, educated, exalted. This is the spiritual element in geological history, for which attraction, water, and fire have no explanation.-P. 740.

3. There is no discrepancy between the teachings of geology and the teachings of the Bible. This, at least, is the deliberate opinion of the author of this work. After a brief discussion of the "Cosmogony" of the first chapter of the book of Genesis, he says:

The record of the Bible is, therefore, profoundly philosophical in the scheme of creation which it presents. It is both true and divine. It is a declaration of authorship, both of creation and the Bible, on the first page of the sacred volume.

There can be no real conflict between the two books of the GREAT AUTHOR. Both are revelations made by him to man; the earlier telling of God-made harmonies coming up from the deep past, and rising to their height when man appeared; the later teaching man's relations to his Maker, and speaking of loftier harmonies in the eternal future.-P. 746.

Of this great science, geology, the author had previously said with equal beauty and truth :

Geology appears to bring us directly before the Creator, and, while opening to us the methods through which the forces of nature have accomplished his purposes; while proving that there has been a plan glorious in its scheme and perfect in system, progressing through unmeasured ages and looking ever toward Man and a spiritual end; it leads to no other solution of the great problem of creation, whether of kinds of matter or of species of life, than this, DEUS FECIT!

ART. V.-LESSON FROM THE BAR TO THE PULPIT.*

EVERY man who deems himself called by summons of the Most High to stand forth his herald to the sons of men, should know that it is a God of perfections who calls him to the work, "even the Lord of hosts, which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working." His all-seeing eye is ever on his vineyard, and on those who labor therein. Will he then, a God most perfect in his style of action, rest content at beholding ungainly airs and slouching attitudes, or mangled words and boorish genuflections at his sacred altars?

Let us turn our attention to that qualification of the public speaker, eloquence. Is it essential that it be cultivated as a means of aid in the work of the Christian ministry? Is time lost that the servant of God may devote to its acquirement?

In commencing an answer to these interrogatories, we may with much profit go back to very remote periods of the past. It is in our power to recur to a time when the point was raised before Deity himself. Possibly, after that, further pursuit were

*The title to the present article is selected by the Editor.

superfluous. This is the instance we quote: "And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent; but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. And the Lord said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people. And Moses and Aaron went and gathered together all the elders of the children of Israel, and Aaron spake," etc., etc. We but pause to remark, it was not that Moses was incapable of speaking, but that the Levite could speak well.

We purposely avoid dwelling on the labors of Him who, at the seaside, in the highways, on the mount, and in the temple. at Jerusalem, "spake as never man spake," lest the attempt. might induce the charge of presumption. But we do not feel debarred access to the excellences of that chosen vessel of God, who stood forth the able champion of the Cross, whose powers of declamation the haughty representatives of Cæsar trembled to witness; and who, in the midst of Mars' Hill, undaunted by embellishments of glorious Athens, overwhelmed her vaunted schools of stoics and philosophers. What sublime impress did not the public discourses of the great apostle stamp on the time wherein he lived! and what a tale was that the Athenian paterfamilias, in after years, may have related at his family board, who, in early manhood, had listened to a sermon preached by the great missionary to the Gentile world! And what source of regret to us that the son of Tarsus, like the orators of profane history, or the yet living prodigies of the present day, could not likewise have had his biographer!

Then might we have had some account of those peculiar powers which "almost" persuaded Roman aristocracy to embrace the then reviled and unfashionable faith of the humble Christian. But as it is, we can only form an estimate of those performances by the record sent down to us of the effects they produced. The tone, accent, gesture, experience, etc., etc., are lost. It may be well supposed, however, that the student of Gamaliel, who surrounded his epistolary productions with so much that is chaste and precise, was not insensible to the advantages resulting from due care in the cultivation of the oratorical.

Following these cited instances, it were possible to say much of those luminaries of the German, the French the English and

Scottish Churches, whose names and fame are known to all the reading world. Some of them, indeed, are of recent date; it being yet within recollection of the living how their eloquent appeals awakened the admiration and chained the minds. of American audiences. Even the philosophic intellect of Franklin swayed to the tempest of Whitfield's exhortatión.

Sermons are proclaimed from the desk in one or the other of two ways. They are read from manuscript or print, or delivered extemporaneously; those most effectually, in the latter way. To the credit and glory of the Methodist Episcopal Church, her ministers (with few exceptions) adhere to the extemporaneous form of delivery. It could be hoped these exceptions were fewer than they are. No one will pretend to question the fact, that a more systematic and properly plotted sermon can be drawn out at leisure on paper than can be produced impromptu in the desk. But after all, perfect and polished as it may be, it is but a work of skill; and when read, even in good style, may be productive of slight profit. These reading speakers, or speaking readers, may be reminded that they find no warrant for the custom in the labors of St. Paul.

Waiving consideration of the matter of a public discourse, let us proceed to the inspection of manner in presenting it. Those sadly err who think it matter of slight concern how they get through a sermon, provided it is orthodox, and of the approved length; supposing that when the time is filled up and the motions made, the appointed task is done. It is unfortunately true there are such; and the weaker their powers and fewer their graces, the longer, usually, their public displays. An infinite deal, we humbly submit, depends on the manner wherein the speaker presents himself, as well as his subject. How wide the contrast between a personal habit graceful and unconstrained, and one careless, clownish, or awkward!

It is, or should be, the same with a public speaker as with the public performer on an instrument. All will concede that the very poorest player in the world may play for his own edification from morning until night, but must become a master of the instrument before essaying to greet the public ear. Of the many thousands of the professed gentlemen of the bow, the judicious masses endure but the Ole Bulls and the Paul Juliens,

those remarkable instances of proficiency acquired by patience, perseverance, and years of toil.

Those of the ministerial calling who think they have only to do with the ear of the auditor, mistake the matter. A congregation of Christian worshipers are remarkably particular as to the bearing, appearance, and even habiliments of the public servant.

Were the members blind, or if public services were conducted in the dark, the case would be widely different. But as it is, we will look at the preacher; note his dress, his walk, his hair, his hands, his every motion; even his pocket-handkerchief. If all is right, we feel content, and listen to what he may have to say; if anything is wrong, we grow uneasy, if not petulant, and listen or not, as it may chance to happen. In truth, the adoption of an unexceptional bearing in the sacred desk is a matter deeply affecting the interests of community. Looking to the high character of this exalted service, and mindful of the sacred day set apart for its discharge, and the classes of persons, of both sexes, attendant before the altar, it should be the first aim of the clerical functionary to succeed. Every suitable appliance, art, means, and address, pertaining to his calling, should be regarded and practiced. The attention of a promiscuous mass is not always a thing so easily caught, but being caught should be, if possible, retained. Sound argument, or exhibition of superior acquirements, or elegance of composition, may all fail to arrest attention, when mere excellence of manner may. But let us proceed to the consideration of some particular points.

1. In our own youthful days, it was by many thought the ne plus ultra of the public servant of God to declaim at the utmost limit of violence whereof the body and voice are capable. And this tempest of delivery was indiscriminately used in the didactic, descriptive, argumentative; in the denunciatory, the pathetic, the persuasive, in fact, in everything, after full headway was attained. A man for an hour under this high-pressure system naturally became discolored in face, distorted in feature, distressed in body, and would be, the greater part of the time, painfully squeaking with a broken-down voice. Happily this style has measurably gone into disuse. But while this excess is reprobated, it by no means follows that loud speaking is at all times unsuited to the services of the pulpit. It is that continuous thundering, without merit of discrimina