Year: 1869

and highly gifted man, selected a text which
set forth leading doctrine of the Christian
faith. From the nature of the occasion, we
| hoped that the sermon would consist of a
luminous exposition of the great truth, and
an application of it to the consciences and
hearts of the hearers. Instead of that, the
time was almost entirely occupied with an
elaborate defence of the doctrine against its
skeptical adversaries, though probably not
one of them was present to be confounded
or convinced by the preachers arguments.
The discourse, though an able and eloquent
one, disappointed US. But it led us to ask
whether, in some quarters, the same style
of preaching was not practiced to an un-
wise extent. st. Paul said that he was set
for the defence of the gospel, and in some
measure all Christian ministers have the
same vocation. 1t is very desirable, when
occasion requires, that they should be able
to repel the attacks of unbelief. But there
are some men who seem to think that they
ought to do nothing else. They imagine
themselves to be always preaching to a con-
gregation of skeptics, to have continually
before them representatives of all the here
sizes of the times. Every sermon is Bamp.
ton Lecture on small scale. They appear
to get their inspiration not so much from
their subject, as from the doubts which have
been expressed with reference to it. AS if
their only interest in truth was to fight for
| it! The city of God is, to their mind, in a
state of perpetual siege, and the noise of
war always raging around her walls. They
seldom lead their hearers forth for a peace
full walk, bidding them to mark well her
bulwarks, and consider her palaces, that,
enamored with the sight, they may exult in
citizenship, or desire to share in its privileges.
In most congregations, the majority con-
sists of persons who are never reached by
the skepticism of the age, and feel no inter-
est in it. They need reproof for their faults,
comfort for their sorrows, strength for their
conflict with temptation, and for the per.
formance of the everyday duties of life, or
to be aroused from their indifference to the
whole subject of religion. For their minis
ter to be ever bringing before them, for re-
futation, the infdelity which he, perhaps, has
met with in the course of his own reading
and study, is very much like feeding them
with stones when they need bread.


Then, again, to be always speaking of
truth in an apologetic tone, is calculated to
weaken its influence. If every doctrine of
the faith is treated as an open question, it
gives to religious teaching an air of uncer-
tainty, which ought to be carefully avoided.
1t was formerly the practice of Scotch min
listers to preach from the same text for many
Sundays together. One day young man
stole into Church during the sermon, and
the first words he heard were, "We now
come to the thirty-second objection to this
doctrine" He instantly thought to himself,
"What an Objectionable doctrine it must
be-" Are there not many sermons which
have similar effect? Do they not often
shake the confidence of those who already
believe, and create doubt in minds where it
never existed before? 1t may be fairly
questioned whether it is wise to drag people
through all the mazes of modern infdelity,
merely for the pleasure of showing them the
way out, and especially when there is dan
ger that some of them may be left behind.
The very apostle who was himself so great
controversialist, said: "Iwould have you
wise unto that which is good, and simple
concerning evil"


Another fact, which weighs against the
constant adoption of this style of preaching
is, that the class for whom it is intended are
seldom convinced or satisfied with it. When
the preacher supposes himself to be in con-
Aict with askeptical adversary, he generally
imagines one who is weaker than himself.
He puts into the mouth of his opponent
only those objections and arguments which
he knows he can refute. He makes him
speak or be silent, just as it suits his pur-
pose, and, as matter of course, gains an
easy and complete victory over him. By
this means he may obtain some applause
from the less thoughtful portion of his au-
dience, but if there should happen to be a
real living unbeliever present, he thinks
himself treated unfairly. He only wishes
that the proprieties of the time and place
permitted him to speak out in answer to the
preacher, mounted upon "coward's CASTLE"
who has it all his own way, and attacks a
man when his hands are tied.


Even when every punctilio of controver-
sial chiyalry is observed, and such questions
are treated with the utmost fairness, they
can very seldom be treated exhaustively in
the short space of time allotted to a sermon.
To be successful apologist requires logi-
cal mind and great dialectic skill, qualifca-
tions which many useful ministers do not
possess. A man may be good ploughman,
or a good mason, and yet not be good
soldier. There are many who are eminently