used in the Church of England, had become offensive to many, and was no longer necessary. The increase of knowledge and piety, now rendered the reading of prayers in public worship, not only unnecessary but objectionable; it occasioned unnecessary divisions, being contrary to principles of conscience; and as conformity to the practices of the Church of England, was by law required, many zealous and useful ministers could no longer remain in the Church. The manner in which the liturgy of the Church required the communion service to be performed, was also calculated to create unhappy divisions, arising from scruples of conscience. When at the same time, the Papists boasted that the liturgy was a part of their service, and though changed in form, yet in substance, the matter was the

same.

On these, and other accounts, the Westminster Assembly affirm, that they considered a still further reformation in the worship and service of the Church, then warranted and called for. The new Directory, though it was not pretended to be a complete form of devotion, yet it contains many directions taken expressly from the word of God, and also from the principles of sound religious experience. The Directory of the Westminster Assembly, points out and gives instructions respecting a variery of topics, connected with the worship of God-on prayer-preaching-on the administration of the ordinance of the Lord's supper-the sanctification of the Christian Sabbath-on the ministerial visitation of the sick-and on public and solemn days of fasting, &c.-leaving ministers at liberty to perform each of these parts of the service, in a manner suited to their own judgment and abilities. The Directory is certainly well worth the perusal and the close attention of every Christian Minister of the present day; indeed we know of no production which gives so clear and comprehensive a view of the manner in which the duties of a minister ought to be performed. He who would become an able and successful ambassador of the Lord Jesus Christ, let him next to the study of the scripture, on the subject of the pastoral care, also diligently peruse the Directory of the Westminster Assembly.

ART. IV.-MODERN POPULAR PREACHING.

By Rev. RICHARD W. DICKINSON, New-York.

THAT eloquent preachers of the Gospel are few and far between, is a remark not less frequently made with surprise than with regret. Other topics sink in comparison with the theme of the preacher-other interests are absorbed in the momentous end to which the christian ministry is consecrated, and yet, sermons in general, fail even to arrest attention. Surely, it were as reasonable to expect, that there would be as many distinguished orators in the desk, as at the bar.

But, aside from the greater number of members which the latter enrolls, and the regular demands which are hebdomadally made on the former-when we consider how rare the talent of eloquence is, the matter of surprise should be not that we hear so few eloquent sermons, but so many good ones. To give to what is old the grace of novelty; to invest admitted truth with such colors as to affect the imagination and the heart; to confine description to abstract qualities, and yet to influence practical life, is the greatest trial of human skill. It has therefore, been not less strikingly than justly observed, "that it is easier to preach than to plead; but more difficult to preach well, than to plead well."*

Heretofore, opinions have coincided as to the difficulty of executing a discourse which was adapted at once to convince and to persuade--in other words, to "preach well;" but now, nothing is generally deemed so facile a task.Occupying the pulpit, it is only, we had almost said, to energize by voice and manner any thing or nothing, and you are an able and eloquent preacher! According to the style of some, who of late have been regarded by the throng, as the wonders of the ministry, it would seem, that to vociferate, is mental power-to gesture violently, is to preach impressively to talk at random, is to be practical; or never to vary the subject, however various our texts, is singleness of eye and the ne plus ultra of devotedness-that to be vulgar, is to be plain and honest with the souls of men-to be expert at anecdote and dialogue, and fertile in suppositions, is

* La Bruyere, De la Chaire, Tom. 11, p. 217.

to possess a remarkable faculty for illustrating the hidden sense of scripture; and in other instances, to dogmatize, is to be conclusive-to sophisticate with plausibility, is to reason profoundly.

Once, too, it was thought that no man could be an affecting or successful preacher, who was not at once well educated and truly pious; now, little more is necessary in certain quarters than that he came from a particular school; or be, to use the current designation, of the "right stamp."

So, also, in respect to the style of sermons, we were wont to think, that they should be characterized by purity, variety, strength and harmony of composition; that words. should be fitted to their places; that as the ancients regarded ornament as well as use in the architecture, so in discourses, we were always led to believe, that whatever offended the ear, would not readily gain admittance to the heart. But now, from its rarity among sermonizers, that which, according to Rhetoricians, constitutes a good style, would seem to be unsuitable for the purposes of religious instruction. Every grace, and almost every rule of correct speaking, is sometimes sacrificed to the desire of appearing plain and effective. Instead of being proper words in proper places, the style of some might more correctly be defined to be, improper words in improper places; and instead of a sermonizer attempting to say all he should, as he should, and nothing more than he should, the approved rule seems to be now, that he should say what he can, how he can, and as much as he can.

The manner of preaching has ever been subject to change, according as some strongly marked preacher has set the example. Hence, there has been the poetic, and the philosophical-the argumentative, and the hortatory-the pathetic and the illustrative. The desire of distinction, rather than the diversity of natural talents, will serve to explain these different modes of presenting the truth. A compliance with popular tastes, or the transient humours of the people, is attended with less difficulty than to rise to eminence in the pulpit by founding one's style of preaching on the general and uniform taste of mankind. Where many may excel, few can be distinguished, and the natural recourse, therefore, of weak but ambitious minds, is found in eccentricity.

But it admits of doubt, whether the style of preaching

which of late years has been so much in demand throughout the limits of the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches, was ever previously in vogue. Though it repelled the intelligent, shocked the serious, and grieved the thoughtful, yet the apparent success with which it was attended-the celerity with which it professed to break the slumbers of the churches, and the ease with which it effected seeming conversions, soon resolved all disapprobation into religious apathy, or hatred of the truth. The distinction, too, which the author of this mode of preaching-an individual of strong but uncultivated powers, so speedily attained, in connexion with the facility of acquiring his theological vocabulary, his system of rhetoric, and his panacea for moral evil, soon allured other adventurers into the fallow grounds of the Church. Thus, imitators increased, the many longe sequuntur; but a few, not indistinctly reminding us of their great oracle, except in candor and talent. No one can look back for ten years without perceiving that Mr. Finney has exerted a wide spread influence over both the matter and manner of the sacred desk. Not confined to the ordinary, or to the lower order of intellect in the Ministry, some of our ablest preachers have not escaped the contagion of his example.

In many respects the style of preaching which he introduced, and which is still current in many sections of the Church, strikingly differs from that which previously obtained. If the former had too remote a bearing on the conscience, this is directly calculated to inflame the passions. If the former were too vague, this is too pointed. If the former feared to offend, this courts opposition. The one, perhaps, was too cautious, the other flatters itself on its effrontery. The one might have been in general too elevated, the other is always too low. The one explained Scripture by itself, the other illustrates it by incidents and events. The one assumed the free agency of man as well as the sovereignty of God, the other argues the sinner's responsibility and establishes it at the expense of the divine attributes. The one in many instances, might not have rendered the law sufficiently prominent, the other, in its anxiety to convince of sin, almost always loses sight of the doctrines of grace. The former expected success from God, the latter virtually relies on the speciality of its effort; and if the good old preacher erred in supposing that there were

seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal, our modern zealot is surely hardly right in believing that no one but he serves the Lord.

Lest our description of modern popular preaching, should not be immediately recognized, we shall be more explicit; though it may be doubted whether some will prize their portraits however well they may be executed; while their admirers, we fear, may lack the courtesy to thank us for our pains. Such is human nature, that "men suck in opinions as wild asses do the wind, without distinguishing the wholesome from the corrupted air, and then, live upon it at a venture and when all their confidence is built upon zeal and mistake, yet, therefore, because they are zealous and mistaken, they are impatient of contradiction;"* at once reluctant to acknowledge their faults and forward to impugn the piety of those who dissent from their course.

The preaching to which we allude is dogmatical. As if he were endowed with the certainty of universal knowledge, nothing is more common than for the preacher to affirm either what the sinner can do, or what Almighty God cannot do; either the specific form of sin which withholds God's blessing on the Church, or the very sin which has brought his frown on the community; either the reason why the millenium has not already dawned, or the obstacles which must be removed, before the Gospel-"the power of God"— can advance. Are there things in the Scriptures heard to be understood? But this is an age of light! Are there gordian knots in theology? We shall save time by cutting them! As if he were invested with supreme authority, and his word were alone sufficient, "you must come up to the work, as I tell you, or you'll never get to heaven"—“ you must not go away from this house to night without submitting to God, or you'll go to hell." Instead of speaking as one who must himself give account, he stands like one whose prerogative it is to pass sentence. Instead of attempting to make "persuasion do the work of fear," he employs whatever truth and reason he may have at his command, as mere instruments of violence. As if none of his hearers had a right to think for himself; or no christian could for a moment hesitate; as if to doubt the truth of his positions, or the propriety of his course were to expose one's self to just damnation, all is to be received from his lips as positive

*Taylor's Epist. Ded. to the Liberty of Prophesying.