05 - Chapter 5
LECTURE V THE THEORY OF PREACHING AS AFFECTED BY THE REFORMATION IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY
WE considered in the last lecture the influence of the Revival of Learning on the theory and practice of preaching. The close connection of that great movement with the Reformation is matter of common knowledge. Coming a little later than the Renaissance of Art and the Revival of Letters, the Reformation owed something to both of those mighty forces in accomplishing its own purposes and working out its own results. These purposes and results covered the whole sphere of Christian thought, worship and action, of course including preaching in all its aspects. For preaching is an essential part of worship, is profoundly conversant with religious thought, and proposes as one of its chief ends the effective and practical guidance of Christian character and conduct. Modern preaching, both in practice and theory, received its most powerful and salutary influence from the Protestant Reformation. We are to consider in this lecture how that influence exerted itself in a general way, was revealed in the example and practice of some of the leaders, and expressed itself in a few treatises on preaching which were produced during the era of the Eef or-mation.
General Influence on Preaching and Its Theory
One of the immediate and lasting effects of the Reformation was that it induced and confirmed a greater respect for preaching as a divinely appointed means of instruction in Christian doctrine and conduct. The relative importance of preaching to the other elements of worship was greatly enhanced. This heightened respect naturally produced a demand for a higher type of pulpit work and this reacted powerfully and favorably on the art and labor of making sermons. In any art aim affects method. In preaching, the higher the aim is conceived to be the better the method must be come, and for a better method there must be better training as well as practice. It is true that the Reformation impulse was felt more in the contents than in the form of sermons, but contents also reacted upon form and back of that upon theory, as we shall now see.
One of the most significant, far-reaching and abiding effects of the Reformation on preaching was that it brought in and established a better interpretation and application of Scripture in sermons. On this point I venture to quote at length a paragraph from Lectures on the History of Preaching by Dr. John A. Broadus, where, speaking of the Reformation and preaching, he says (p. 114): “It was a revival of Biblical preaching.
Instead of long and often fabulous stories about saints and martyrs, and accounts of miracles, in stead of passages from Aristotle and Seneca, and fine-spun subtleties of the Schoolmen, these men preached the Bible. The question was not what the Pope said; and even the Fathers, however highly esteemed, were not decisive authority it was the Bible. The preacher’s one great task was to set forth the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Word of God. And the greater part of their preaching was expository. Once more, after long ] centuries, people were reading the Scriptures in I their own tongue; and preachers, studying the original Greek and Hebrew, were carefully explaining to the people the connected teachings of passage after passage and book after book. For example, Zwingli, when first beginning his minis try at Zurich, announced his intention to preach, not simply upon the church lessons, but upon the whole Gospel of Matthew, chapter after chapter.
Some friends objected that it would be an innovation, and injurious; but he justly said, It is the old custom. Call to mind the homilies of Chrysostom on Matthew, and of Augustine on John. And these sermons of Zwingli’s made a great impression. There was also at the basis of this expository preaching by the Reformers a much more strict and reasonable exegesis than had ever been common since the days of Chrysostom. Luther retained something of the love of allegorizing, as many Lutherans have done to the present day. But Calvin gave the ablest, soundest, clearest expositions of Scripture that had been seen for a thousand years, and most of the other great Re formers worked in the same direction. Such careful and continued exposition of the Bible, based in the main upon sound exegesis, and pursued with loving zeal, could not fail of great results, especially at a time when direct and exact knowledge of Scripture was a most attractive and refreshing novelty. The same sort of effect is to some extent seen in the case of certain useful laborers in our own day, who accomplish so much by Bible readings and highly Biblical preaching. The expository sermons of the Reformers, while in general free, are yet much more orderly than those of the Fathers. They have themselves studied the great scholastic works, and been trained in analysis and arrangement, and the minds of all their cultivated hearers have received a similar bent. And so *hey easily, and almost spontaneously, give their discourses something of plan.”
What has been said involves a point which must be emphasized again. It is that the Reformation exemplified and expressed in its preaching a 1 deeper interest in the spiritual life of the people, I both as regards doctrine and conduct. The good of the hearers was its predominant aim, it must therefore be adapted in form and language to the hearers. This gave it, when combined with its Biblical content, a decidedly instructive character.
It was more didactic than evangelistic. Naturally this reacted strongly upon the form of preaching, and the reaction was not entirely wholesome, tending to produce a scholastic style of preaching rather than that which was evangelistic and popular. In the homiletics of the Reformation and of the following period this tendency to scholastic treatment of sermon-making shows itself. Among some of the Germans it went to ridiculous extremes, as we shall see in a later lecture.
Practice and Teaching of the Leaders
None of the great outstanding leaders of the Reformation Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Knox left any treatise or definite instruction on the art of preaching. But all of them had something to say about the practice of preaching, and so their example and instructions had much to do in helping others to formulate principles into theory.
Careful and admiring students of Luther have collected and put together a number of the sayings of the great reformer which show that on homiletical subjects as on others he did not lack clear and strong convictions nor the faculty of giving them vigorous expression. These utterances are gathered from Luther’s sermons, from his Table Talk, and a few from his correspondence. Following chiefly the discussion of Dr. A. Nebe * I offer the following brief summary as presenting at least some of Luther’s teachings on Homiletics. i Zur Geschichte der Predigt, von Dr. A. Nebe, Bd. II., S. Iff.
(1) Luther held it as a fundamental conception that preaching must have the central place in worship as being the veritable and living Word of God coming through the preacher. It must be, there fore, an exposition and application of the written Word of God as contained in Holy Scripture. In his Table Talk, as quoted by Nebe, he says: “I am sure and certain, when I go up to the pulpit to preach or read, that it is not my word I speak, but that my tongue is the pen of a ready writer, as the Psalmist has it. God speaks in the prophets, and men of God, as St. Peter in his epistle says: The holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Therefore, we must not separate or part God and man, according to our natural rea son or understanding. In like manner every hearer must say: I hear not St. Paul, St. Peter, or a man speak, but God Himself.”
(2) In regard to the training and skill of the preacher as speaker he should be master of the art of public address. In several places Luther declares that the preacher should be master of both logic and rhetoric. Thus again in the Table Talk he says: “A preacher should be a logician and a rhetorician; that is, he must be able to teach and to admonish. When he preaches touching an article he must, first, distinguish it. Secondly, he must define, describe and show what it is. Thirdly, he must produce sentences out of Scriptures, therewith to prove and strengthen it. Fourthly, he must with examples explain and declare it.
Fifthly, he must adorn it with similitudes; and, lastly, he must admonish and rouse up the lazy, earnestly reprove all the disobedient, all false doc trine, and the authors thereof.” And in one of his House-postils (as quoted by Nebe) he declares:
“Dialectic is the body, rhetoric is the dress with which the body is adorned.” These quotations show that Luther deemed it highly important, if not essential, that the preacher should be well grounded in the accepted rules of reasoning and expression. The application and use of these principles in preaching are defined and ennobled by the nature of preaching itself as a message from God and consisting chiefly of the exposition and enforcement of His Word.
(3) Luther repeatedly teaches that the aim of spirifrml The preacher therefore must reach his hearers witE~hTs message. His art ancT sEll must be such as to enlighten and persuade those who listen. He must use words which they can understand; a method of speech adapted to the particular audience and occasion, as these may vary. He must have a deliberate utterance, so as to give the hearer time to catch what is said. Yet the preacher should not draw out his discourse to such length as to weary his hearers. He must speak with authority, yet not sharply nor angrily; with courage, yet not boastfully; cheerfully, not gloomily.
(4) In regard to the general form of discourse the main thing in Luther’s esteem was the subject, or proposition. This should of course be Biblical in substance and definite in the preacher’s own mind. The elaboration of it, as already said, should be chiefly in the way of interpretation and application of Scripture. Introductions and conclusions should not be too elaborate, but brief and pointed.
(5) As to preparation and delivery Luther’s own practice varied, and his suggestions to others seem to have been in line with his own methods.
Two things, however, stand out clearly: There must be careful preparation of some sort; and there must be freedom in delivery. A few of his sermons were written out beforehand, many were spoken from more or less full notes, but all (it ap pears) were spoken and not read. Luther held that a well-trained preacher should out of a full mind and heart be able to speak clearly and instructively on the basis of the Word of God. In brief and in general, according to Luther, a preacher should be able to preach. In his case it is not right that there should be viel Reden und nichts reden much speech and nothing to speak! In the case of Calvin we have less information on the point of his homiletical opinions and teachingsthan in that of Luther. In the long lists of Calvin’s works I have not found any titles to indicate that he wrote definitely on the art of preaching or gave it special attention in his writings on other subjects. Nor have I found that any of his many students and admirers have culled out from his works and put together, as in Luther’s case, any summary of his views on the theory of preaching. But Calvin’s practice was a living and powerful example to the students at Geneva and to his followers everywhere, and it is hardly to be doubted that in his instructions some were included which bore, at least indirectly, upon the homiletical side of the training of ministers for their work.
Calvin’s own views and practice in regard to preaching are easily discovered and well known.
Like all the great reformers he gave to preaching the central place in worship and taught that it must be in spirit and in fact an exposition and application of the Word of God. His sermons were chiefly expository, and his exposition was wonder fully acute, clear, reasoned and sound. In form his sermons are like the ancient homily, consisting of verse by verse comment, but his logical and trained intellect gave both unity of theme and connection of thought to his discourses. In style Calvin was later criticized by some famous French man Bossuet, I think as triste, that is, so serious as to be heavy, wanting in charm and cheerfulness. The point is probably well taken, but other critics have much to say in commendation of the clearness, force and power of Calvin’s style. His main object was to explain and convince, and his manner of speaking was eminently suited to this purpose. He does not seem to have written his sermons before or after delivery, but they were taken down by reporters and preserved in that way. His delivery has been described as deliberate and forcible, not glowing but earnest and impressive. As to the Swiss Reformers, I do not recall any definite homiletical teaching from my slight reading in the works of Zwingli or Bullinger. Yet it cannot be supposed that Bullinger could wholly have neglected this element of teaching in his work with the young preachers at Zurich. And both of them agreed with the other reformers in their estimate of preaching as being the main element in worship, and as consisting chiefly of explanation and enforcement of Scripture.
Among the English Reformers the subject received some attention, for as early as 1613 we find a translation into English of a Latin treatise on “The Art of Prophecying, “ which was of course written earlier and shows a good grasp of the matter. The book was written by William Perkins, and appears to have been the first homiletical treatise by an English author. It will receive fuller notice further on. Here it is sufficient to remark in general terms that the leaders of the Reformation in England were in accord with their brethren on the Continent in their foundation principle as to what true Christian preaching ought to be. I venture to quote here words of my own in another place: x “In 1534 a set of instructions was drawn up (probably by Cranmer him- i History of Preaching, Vol. I., 378. self) and sent to all the bishops for the guidance of the clergy. One of the items is as follows: That from henceforth all preachers shall purely, sincerely, and justly preach the Scripture and Word of Christ, and not mix them up with man’s institutions, nor make them believe that the force of God’s law and man’s law is like; nor that any man is able or hath power to dispense with God’s law. Latimer, in his third sermon on the Lord’s Prayer, thus speaks: And because the Word of God is the instrument and fountain of all good things, we pray to God for the continuance of His word; that He will send godly and well learned men amongst us, which may be able to declare us His will and pleasure; so that we may glorify Him in the hour of our visitation, when God shall visit us, and reward every one according unto his desert. “In general we may remark that while the reformers laid more stress on the content and aim of preaching than on its form and method, they did not wholly neglect these either in their example or their teaching. They seemed to take it for granted that in requiring skill and training for a proper study and proclamation of the Word of God they were demanding that the preacher should both know and know how to use the accepted and tested principles of rhetoric as these were applicable to the preparation and delivery of sermons. Nor was the formal discussion of the subject wholly neglected, as we shall now see.
Treatises on the Art of Preaching In studying the homiletical teaching of the Reformation we come first upon two little works of Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560), written in Latin under the titles Elementorwm Rhetorices Libri Duo, and Ratio Brevissima Concionandi. The theologian of the Reformation and friend of Luther was born and educated in South Germany.
He was kinsman and pupil of Reuchlin, received excellent education, had the scholar’s bent, be came the distinguished professor at Wittenberg, and the teacher of multitudes of Protestant preachers and teachers. In his subjects of instruction at Wittenberg rhetoric was included of course with application to preaching. Among his writings there exists in several editions, and with some variation of title, the compendious treatise on rhetoric mentioned above. 1 Some of the editions give it in two and some in three books. It contains nothing original or profound. It follows the accepted canons of the classical rhetoric, of course with application to preaching. It discusses, in its three general divisions, Invention, Arrangement (Dispositio), and Style (Elocutio). In the introduction the author adds the other two “offices”: Memory and Delivery (Pronunciatio), but does not enlarge upon them in the treatment.
Under Invention he treats the three kinds of ora- i By courtesy of the Library of Princeton Theological Seminary I was enabled to read the original in Vol. XIII of Bretschneider’s Corpus Reformatory, Halle, 1846. tor> forensic, deliberative, demonstrative (or epideictic), and insists that there must be added the genus didascalicum, which embraces preaching. Under Disposition (which is necessary for victory and clearness) he gives examples from Demosthenes and Cicero, and from the Epistle to the Romans. He insists that the arrangement should be logical. Under Style (Elocutio) Me-lanchthon considers the three topics of Grammar, Figures (to which he devotes a very good discussion), and Amplification where he refers with appreciation to the Copia of Erasmus. The work is of trifling importance in itself, but shows that the Reformers gave attention in their education of preachers to the principles of homiletics as based on rhetoric.
Besides this treatise on rhetoric mention is made of a smaller work by Melanchthon more definitely homiletical in character. Translated the title runs A Very Brief Method of Preaching; and the contents are summarized by Kidder 1 as fol lows: I. The different parts of a discourse:
(1) Exordium; (2) Narration; (3) Proposition; (4) Arguments; (5) Confirmation; (6) Ornaments; (7) Amplification; (8) Confutation; (9) Epilogue; (10) Peroration. II. Simple themes with examples. III. Complex themes. IV. Explanation of different meanings. V. An example of deliberative discourse. Remarks: 1. The principal work of the preacher is to instruct. i Homiletics, p. 438.
2. There are two kinds of sermons: (1) Didactic; (2) Demonstrative. 3. Of the four senses of Scripture. 4. On method.
Neither of these works has any other than a historic value or interest. They are dry compends, without originality or warmth, ill arranged in form, and scholastic in style. By far the most original and significant work by any early Protestant writer on homiletics is that of Andrew Hyperius (1511-1564). x Andrew Gerard (Andreas Gerardus), better known as Hyperius from his birth-place, was born at Ypres in Flanders, May 16, 1511, to a lawyer of learning and distinction, whose name he inherited. His mother was of an excellent family of Ghent. The boy enjoyed the best early advantages of education, worked for awhile in his father’s office, and then took his degree at the University of Paris, where rhetoric and logic were among his favorite studies. After taking his degree he took post graduate work in theology at the Sorbonne, in tending to enter the church. But he had become touched with the ideas of the Reformation, and the archbishop of Louvain refused to confirm his appointment to a professorship at the University. On this Hyperius went to England and taught there for four years. As yet Henry VIII. had not i Andreas Hyperius, voornamelik als Homileet; door P. Bieater-veld, Kampen, 1805. An excellent study of Hyperius in form of an inaugural address (expanded for publication) by the author on becoming Rector of the School of the Reformed Church in Holland. broken with Rome, and the young Hollander’s infection with Luther’s doctrines being suspected he was required to leave England. In some way he was led to Marburg in Hesse, where an old friend of his, Geldenhauer, was one of the leading teachers in the Protestant school. Here Hyperius was welcomed, and found his life-work. On Gel denhauer’s death he succeeded to the principal-ship, and remained at Marburg during the rest of his life, a beloved teacher and preacher and leader in the religious affairs of Hesse. His type of theology was more Calvinistic than Lutheran, and he was therefore somewhat underestimated among the rigid Protestants, but he was much beloved and very influential in the church life of the principality.
Hyperius was an all-round scholar. His lectures and works in exegetical, systematic and practical theology were useful and justly noted.
He wrote two homiletical books: (1) De Forman-dis Concionibus Sacris, seu de interpretatione sacrae scripturae populari libri duo; and (2) Top-ica Tlieologica. The second is really an appendix to the first and contains, after the manner of the older Homiletics, a list of subjects for preaching with suggestions for their suitable treatment. This has no permanent value, and by his making it into a separate treatise it is possible that Hyperius was already beginning to feel the drift away from this as a necessary part of homiletical instruction. But the earlier treatise, On the Making of Sacred Discourses, was and remains a work of the first importance in the development of Homiletics. Writers like Christlieb, Th. Harnack, and others, do not hesitate to pronounce this work of Hyperius as the first really “scientific” treatise on the theory of preaching. In the preface (dated Oct., 1552) the author says that the book was writ ten at the request of many candidates for the ministry who had heard him lecture and preach at Marburg. The work consists of two books of sixteen chapters each. The First Book treats of the general principles of the art of preaching; the Second Book of the particular parts of the art. Certainly this division of the matter is not very “ scientific” or logical. It reminds us of the course adopted by Erasmus in the two principal Books of his treatise, and may indeed have simply followed that work.
Also the exact subdivision of the two Books into sixteen smaller divisions each smacks rather of artifice than art; but surely we can do nothing else than follow the division which the author himself lays down.
Book I. Here without a heading the general principles of Homiletics are presented. Chapter 1 sets forth the distinction between the “popular” interpretation of Scripture and the “scholastic.” The latter has place in the schools, as academic discussion for students and teachers. The popular method is for the instruction of the common people and has place in the pulpit and must be adapted to its end. The author has treated the academic method in other works this is given to the popular. But before going into the discussion he proceeds (after Erasmus) to consider the dignity and value of the preacher’s office. Chapter 2 takes up this topic and points out three requisites in the preacher: (1) Knowledge (doctrina), and not only of Scripture and theology, but of all truth and current affairs. (2) Purity of morals. His life must be a seal to his teaching. (3) Ability to teach power to set forth sound doctrine clearly and attractively. Chapter 3 takes up the aim of preaching, which is none other than to labor with all zeal and energy for the salvation of sinners and their reconciliation to God. Chapter 4 discusses the points which the preacher has in common with other public speakers. The author refers to Augustine’s treatment and names the five elements (inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, pronunciatio), the three aims of discourse (docere, delectere, flectere), and the three kinds of eloquence (sublime, humble, medium). These gen eral principles of discourse must be wisely applied to the peculiar needs of preaching. Chapter 5 tells of the choice of texts. The servant of the word is compared by Christ to a wise householder, and by Paul to a steward of divine mysteries. Hence the main principle in his choice of Scriptural themes must be what is useful, easy and necessary. These points, with their necessary qualifications, are sensibly discussed.
Chapter 6 treats judiciously the form of sermons, and points out that they should be (1) short, (2) clear in language, (3) well outlined. Hard study and careful previous preparation are needed. Chapter 7 discourses of the kinds of sermons, of propositions, of the forms of themes.
Hyperius rejects, as unmeaning for the preacher, the accepted division of rhetoric into judicial, deliberative, and demonstrative, and seeks to found his division upon Scripture as given in 2 Timothy 3:16 and Romans 15:4. From these passages he works out a scheme of the kinds of pulpit discourse into five, which he gives in both Greek and Latin terms, but which we may translate as follows:
Doctrinal (or Didactic), Argumentative, Institutive, 1 Corrective, and Consolatory. These may be reduced to three, which he names in Greek terms as they relate to Knowledge, Practice and Comfort; but it is better for clearness to retain the five as pointed out, and even to add a sixth, the Mixed, according as two or more of these may be combined in one discourse. Proceeding to discuss propositions and their statement he shows that these are merely brief statements of the whole matter to be discussed, and that their kinds necessarily correspond to the kinds of discourses just considered. Themes may in their statement be either “ simple” or “ composite,” according as they are put in one or more dictiones or terms. i Not a happy term, he afterwards explains that it includes both the deliberative and demonstrative genera of the secular rhetoric so far as available for preaching.
Chapters 8 and 9 treat of the parts of sermons, or rather of the sermon service, since he includes the reading of the Scripture and the invocation.
After these come the exordium, the proposition or division, proof (confirmatio), refutation, and conclusion. Chapters 10 to 14 discuss these in the or der given. The discussion is judicious and excel lent, but need not be detailed, as it gives nothing especially new or profound. Chapter 15 treats of amplification. Hyperius does not highly regard the rhetorical devices usually practiced here, since the preacher must not exaggerate nor diminish the truth for effect. But amplification for emphasis, for getting things in their right proportion, for impressing the importance of neglected truth, etc., is highly important and should be care fully studied and practiced. With caution the usual rhetorical methods may then be employed.
Chapter 16 gives careful and admirable treatment to the matter of moving the feelings in preaching. The aim of the preacher should of course be not mere excitement, but the production of spiritual fruit and the awakening and improvement of the spiritual life. He gives an enumeration of the feelings usually sought to be aroused by orators.
Some of these the preacher should leave alone. He is naturally concerned chiefly with those which stand in closest relations with the subjects which he discusses. The preacher must keep close to life. He has more freedom than the advocate. He must himself feel what he urges, getting in full touch with his subject. His manner must be controlled and appropriate. Hyperius shows how the various kinds of feeling may be properly approached and aroused. The preacher must be master in the use of the various figures of speech, which help in this matter. Many examples are given from Scripture of proper appeal to feeling.
Book II. takes up the subject of Particular Ap plication of General Principles. Really this is a discussion of the various kinds of sermons, as pointed out before, and the best methods of com-posingand delivering them. Chapter 1 treats of the importance of having clear ideas of which kind the particular sermon belongs to. Chapter 2 teaches that in each genus one must seek the things peculiar to that genus, finding the appropriate arguments, illustrations, etc. Chapter 3 shows how the various kinds of sermons may be preached from the same passage of Scripture, using Mark 8:1-38 as an example. Chapters 4 to 7 give a number of excel lent hints on the interpretation and handling of Scripture themes and texts. “One of the chief virtues of the preacher is to explain the Scripture with his eye on the circumstances of the times.”
Thus the allegorical interpretation is discredited.
He must be sure that the theme is really derived from the text, and that its lessons are correctly ap plied. Chapter 8 exemplifies how a “simple” theme of the “didactic” sort may be handled.
Chapter 9 does the like for a “complex” theme.
Chapter 10 discusses at length and with excellent judgment how a preacher should apply Scripture themes and texts to his own times. This is really his main business. He must avoid far-fetched and strained applications, and deal honestly both with the word of God and his audience. The author also takes occasion to give a sharp and deserved rebuke to plagiarism. Chapters 11 to 14 treat with care and sense examples of preaching under the genera Argumentative, Institutive, Corrective and Consolatory. Chapter 15 treats of the genus mix-turn, where two or more of these kinds are exemplified as must often happen in one sermon.
Chapter 16 closes the work in emphasizing three very necessary things which the preacher must ever have in mind: (1) The needs of his hearers; (2) decorum in speech and conduct; (3) the peace and unity of the church. The earnest prayers of both preachers and hearers for God’s blessing on the work are urged. This truly great work of Hyperius marks an epoch in homiletical writing. As a fact the book does not seem to have had as wide use as its merits demanded. Yet there are traces of its influence upon other writers, and no doubt its principles found some dissemination in the teaching of the schools. The Humanists, including Melanchthon, had criticized and rejected the errors and extremes of the scholastic homiletics, but they had taught rhetoric as applied to preaching. Hyperius went further and taught preaching only as related to rhetoric.
After him, especially in the seventeenth century, Protestant Homiletics fell into the slough of scho lasticism. Cold and minute analysis and refine ment, with little adaptation to life and need, was the order of the time. Traces of this degeneracy appear already in some of the books of the latter part of our period. Christlieb, Lentz, Biesterveld and others mention various works (which I have not seen) as having some vogue in the latter part of the sixteenth century. Among them those of Hieronymus Weller (1562), Nic. Hemming (1556), Andrew Pancratius (1574), L. Osiander (1582), Jac. Andreae (1595), Aegidius Hunnius (1604). Of these one of the most important was that of Pancratius, who taught the distinction of “textual” and “thematic” sermons, and seems to have given start and vogue to the scholastic tendency which reigned soon after him. Next in value was the work of Hunnius, who set himself against this trend, and taught a more reasonable and Scriptural method of making sermons. But none of these treatises can be compared in value with that of Hyperius. In England, as we have already seen, the theory of preaching received some notice at the hands of the reformers, and there was at least one treatise devoted to the subject. It was written in Latin and early in the seventeenth century done into English. But because of its date and the fact that Latin was deemed the suitable language for its promulgation it clearly belongs to the reformatory period. The author, William Perkins (1558-1602), was an eminent scholar and divine of the English Church. He had been wild in youth, but was a brilliant student and received his university training at Cambridge. He was thoroughly converted while at the University and gave himself to the ministry, receiving ordination at the age of twenty-four. He became rector of the parish of St. Andrews at Cambridge and was recognized and esteemed as a devoted pastor and faithful preacher of the Word. It was said of him that “while his discourses were suited to the capacity of the common people, the pious scholar could not but admire them. Certainly this was no slight qualification for writing a book on the art of preaching.
I have seen neither the Latin original nor the English translation, and am indebted to Kidder 1 for what is here stated. It appears that the book is now very rare even in its English dress. The full title page is: “Arte of Prophecying, or a treatise concerning the sacred and only true manner and method of preaching; first written in Latin by Mr. William Perkins, and now faithfully translated into English (for that it containeth many worthy things fit for the knowledge of men of all degrees) by Thomas Tuke. Motto, Nehemiah 8:4-6. Cambridge, 1613.” In the dedication the author thus speaks of the “Science” of preaching: l The dignitie thereof appeareth in that like i Homiletics, p. 440. a Ladie it is highly mounted and carried aloft in a chariot; whereas all other gifts, both of tongues and arts, attend on this like handmaides aloofe off. There are eleven chapters, of which the subjects are as follows: The Art or faculty of prophcying is a sacred doctrine of exercising Prophecie rightly; Of the Preaching of the Word; of the Word of God; Of the Interpretation of the Scriptures; Of the waies of expounding; Of the right dividing of the Word; Of the waies how to use and apply doctrines; Of the kinds of application, either mental or practical; Of memorie in preach ing; Promulgation or uttering of the Sermon; Of conceiving of prayer. From this list w’T e judge that the book treats more of the interpretation and use of Scripture than of the rules and principles of sermon composition and delivery. But it must be said that the author’s interest in the subject was rather practical than academic, and that his book, though now valuable only as a historic relic, no doubt served useful purposes in its day.