they differ. To decide, as Mr. Barr does, is to substitute authority for reason.

In like manner Mr. Markland, in urging the pious and benevolent to bestow their gifts in the erection or improvement of some particular part of church edifices, cites with approbation, in illustration of his views, the Minstrel's column in the church of St. Mary's, Beverly. This column is a pier with clustered shafts, furnished with a double set of capitals placed at a sufficient distance, the one above the other, to contain a group of figures, with musical instruments, representing the minstrels who erected it. If the Gothic architecture be nothing more than a compendium of traditional teachings, then it is only a waste of time to discuss any question connected with it; but if it have any fixed and certain principles, then surely it ought to have been shown that this "Minstrel column" was in keeping with those principles, before it was presented as an example to be imitated in the present age. We believe that the Gothic architecture has a real significancy quite other than that which is derived from any associations connected with it, and we are sure that for the expression of whatever may be its purpose, it is dependent chiefly upon its predominating vertical line. In the interior, which is of necessity the most important part of a Gothic edifice, almost its only means of manifesting this vertical tendency is through the pier shafts of the arches, and the vaulting shafts of the ceiling. To break the continuousness of these shafts for the purpose of receiving a set of statues is to destroy the only significancy of the shaft. Whatever may be its goodliness in other respects, as a part of a Gothic interior, it becomes, when thus broken, an unmeaning appendage. Such admiration as this, of the Gothic architecture, is very much akin to that of the good old lady who was so much moved by the peculiar eloquence of the word Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia was a good old word, it belonged to the time of the patriarchs, and being delivered moreover in a truly unctuous tone, it imparted a savour to the whole sermon into which it entered.

As the Tractarians rest much in outward forms, which are no necessary or rational part of a spiritual system of religion, and which, being perfectly arbitrary and conventional, cannot but hinder the mind in its progress towards the perception of any great central truth; so, in art, the same disposition is manifested to divorce the form from the substance, the body from the spirit which animates it; and then, when the whole has been disintegrated, to assign a superstitious value to each separate part. Each doorway must be made to hint darkly at some mystery, the storied windows must deliver up their venerable traditions, and the shafts and arches, the pulpit, the altar and the font, the quaint carvings and mystical devices, must all be arranged in accordance with some dream or vision. As the religion of such men must be, in a good degree, made up of outward institutions and rites, which,

having lost their only rational meaning through their disconnexion from the inner truth of the system to which they belong, have a superstitious efficacy attributed to them, so their architecture is an assemblage of parts that, having no inward principle of unity, can only exist through some mystical meaning attached to them. Their art is no living reality, but an assemblage of holy relics.

For the same reason that we should be unwilling that any man should judge of religion by the form which it assumes in the teachings and practice of the Oxford Tractarians, we would desire also, to see the noble art of architecture rescued from their hands. Architecture, properly understood, is undoubtedly, as Coleridge pronounced it, the most difficult of the fine arts," it involves all the powers of design, and is sculpture and painting inclusively; it shows the greatness of man, and should at the same time teach him humility." It exhibits the greatest difference from nature, that can exist in works of art, and requires, therefore, thoughtful and earnest study for the discovery and appreciation of its principles. To build a convenient and ornate edifice, whether for domestic or religious purposes, is an easy matter; but to dispose building materials in such forms as shall be expressive of intellectual purposes and sentiments, this is a task that demands, for its adequate discharge, other attainments than technical rules, old traditions, and the narrow dogmas of a sect. The living and life-producing ideas of this art are to be acquired only through "the perception of those relations which alone are beautiful and eternal, whose prime concords can be proved, but whose deeper mysteries can only be felt."*

The Gothic architecture is one of the most wonderful creations of the human mind. The more we study it, the more are we lost in admiration at the skill which has succeeded in employing such an endless multiplicity of details as enter into a Gothic structure, without sacrificing the essential unity of the whole. The idea which evolved it, seems to luxuriate in the greatest abundance of forms, all of which are animated, and all in the same spirit. It is of course symbolical, as all true art must be. Any object which does not irresistibly lead the mind beyond itself, and inspire a feeling due not to the qualities of the object but to something far greater and better than is suggested by it, is no work of art. But the symbolism of Gothic architecture, as of all characteristic art, is dependent upon no accidental associations, or conventional appointments. It is not the work of a man, who, having agreed with his fellows, that certain signs shall represent certain objects or qualities, proceeds to use the power with which they have endowed him; but of one who having worshipped beside the fountain of primal beauty, has drunk in those essential principles of harmony which must speak to the hearts of all men. The forms that enter

Goethe's Works, vol. xxxix., p. 339.

into a Gothic cathedral are a figured language, but it is a universal language.

How preposterous, then, to mix up with this natural symbolism, deriving its efficacy from that which is true as the human mind, and permanent as the race, the purely technical symbolism of any particular creed or age! How absurd to break in upon the harmony that, assimilating to itself the voice of each of its manifold parts, pours forth its choral symphonies from the whole, with the crotchets of a school or sect. The "mystic devices," for which Mr. Barr pleads, the sacred monogram, the vesica piscis, and other technical inventions, what have these to do in conjunction with those harmonious forms and relations, that, partaking of the very essence of beauty, are endowed with natural and indefeasible power to awe, to subdue, to exalt, to refine the human mind?

It may easily be gathered from what we have already said, that we dissent utterly from the sentiment often expressed, that the Gothic architecture is a development of Papal Christianity. It is indeed a religious architecture, as every other true style has been; it is, in some sense, a Christian architecture, but further to limit its generality is to despoil it of its glory and power. Doubtless an architecture might be devised which would be an appropriate symbol of Romanism. So also we might construct a style which would fitly represent the Protestant Episcopal Church, as its doctrines and practices are expounded by the Oxford Tractarians; but it would be widely different from the Gothic. It would be a style which, acknowledging no infallible standards, except as they are interpreted by tradition, would copy" old buildings" without daring to aspire even so high as imitation. It would of course fix attention upon external forms, rather than upon the thought within. Hence also it would limit its views of mental expression to the ideas of power and grandeur through which the mind might be overawed and reduced to an unreasoning submission. It would discourage the robust, and manly exercise of the human intellect, and would care little therefore for strict unity and severe harmony, if it might so manage the details as to produce an extemporaneous impression upon the beholder, sufficiently powerful to compel him to yield a slavish obedience to authority. The deeper mysteries of art which are to be felt only by those who have understood its" prime concords," would be altogether beyond its reach. But we feel little interest in tracing out minutely the idea of an Episcopal art. It will be exhibited in its concrete form whenever the teachings of such architects as Mr. Barr shall have been carried thoroughly into practice.

ESSAY XIX.

A TREATISE ON EXPOSITORY PREACHING.

PUBLISHED IN 1838.

THE pulpit discourses of Roman Catholics as well as Protestants, during several centuries, have been for the most part founded on short passages of Scripture; commonly single verses, and oftener less than more. This has become so prevalent, that in most treatises upon the composition of sermons all the canons of homiletics presuppose the treatment of an isolated text. We are not prepared to denounce this practice, especially when we consider the treasury of sound doctrine, cogent reasoning, and mighty eloquence, which is embodied in productions formed on this model, and call to mind the instances in which such discourses have been signally owned of God in the edification of his church. But there is still another method, which, though less familiar to ourselves, was once widely prevalent, and is recognised and approved in our Directory for Worship, in the following words: "It is proper also that large portions of Scripture be sometimes expounded, and particularly improved for the instruction of the people in the meaning and use of the sacred oracles.' And it may not be out of place to mention here, that in the debates of the Westminster Assembly, there were more than a few members, and among these the celebrated Calamy, who maintained with earnestness, that it was no part of the minister's duty to read the Scriptures in public without exposition.t

It is not a little remarkable that in an age in which so much is heard against creeds and systems as contradistinguished from the pure text of Scripture, and in which sacred hermeneutics hold so high a place in Theological education, we should have allowed the methodical and continued exposition of the Bible to go almost into

Directory for Worship, chap. vi., § 2. † Lightfoot's Works, vol. xiii., p. 36.

disuse.* What our predecessors practised under the name of lectures is almost banished from the pulpit. It is against this exclusion that we now propose to direct our argument. And in what may be offered in the sequel we ask attention to this statement of the question as limiting our purpose. Far be it from us to decry the mode of discoursing which prevails in our churches. We freely acknowledge its many excellences and rejoice in its gracious fruits; but we plead in behalf of another and an older method, which we lament to see neglected and forsaken. With this preface, we shall proceed to give some reasons why a judicious return to the expository method of preaching seems to us to be desirable.

1. The expository method of preaching is the most obvious and natural way of conveying to the hearers the import of the sacred volume. It is the very work for which a ministry was instituted, to interpret the Scriptures. In the case of any other book, we should be at no loss in what manner to proceed. Suppose a volume of human science to be placed in our hands as the sole manual, textbook, and standard, which we were expected to elucidate to a public assembly in what way would it be most natural to go to work? Certainly not, we think, to take a sentence here, and a sentence there, and upon these separate portions to frame one or two discourses every week. No interpreter of Aristotle, of Littleton, of Puffendorf, or of Paley, ever dreamed of such a method. Nor was it adopted in the Christian church, until the sermon ceased to be regarded in its true notion, as an explanation of the Scripture, and began to be viewed as a rhetorical entertainment, which might afford occasion for the display of subtilty, research, and eloquence.

2. The expository method has the sanction of primitive and ancient usage. In the Israelitish, as well as the Christian church, preaching was an ordinary mode of religious instruction. In both it was justly regarded as a means of conducting the hearers to the knowledge of revealed truth. As early as the time of Ezra, we find that the reading of the law was accompanied with some kind of interpretation. In the synagogues, after the reading of the law and the prophets, it was usual for the presiding officer to invite such as were learned to address the people. Our Lord Jesus Christ availed himself of this opportunity to deliver one of his most remarkable discourses; and this was an exposition of a prophetic passage. The apostle Paul seems also to have made portions of Scripture the basis of his addresses in the synagogues. But it is not to be expected that the preaching of the apostolic age, when the speakers were divinely inspired, should be in all respects a model for our own times. It was their province to communicate truth under inspiration; it is ours to interpret what has thus been communicated. The early Christian assemblies naturally adopted the simple and rational

Although the subject of this essay may, in certain particulars, run very naturally into that of critical interpretation, the writer begs leave to disclaim any special right to dwell upon this topic, as his pursuits have not led him into the field of hermeneutics, any further than the performance of ordinary ministerial duty required.