if they were other than they are; whether they do not wish to be different, and will try; whether they are not sure of God's help if they try-surely no better illustration can be given to men than this, their own experience of God and of themselves. Or it might be with enlargement and carrying out into some detail-how do we feel and act to our parents, children, friends, and they to us? For there is a real parallel between the heavenly archetypal Parent and the earthly, between the two sets of affections and the two homes. It is surely well to draw water out of the well which lies in a man's self, and to help him to heal himself, with God's grace ready to enlighten and aid him. The ailments of his. body illustrate to him those of his soul. The care which he takes of his health and his property, his unwillingness to die and be forgotten, which are forecasts of immortality, all these and the like illustrations are understood and felt and acknowledged readily by all men. These references should be fully drawn out, and the constant parables of our earthly condition elucidated. When this is done they are as interesting as any anecdote, and are in themselves more safe and spiritual than most of those aids to sermons which have their use to some men perhaps, but which may easily be overdone and over-relied upon. 5. Style and manner-simple, natural, individual. Exaggeration defeats itself, causing a reaction of feeling. There is a natural love of truth in man, and the moment we feel that the preacher is exceeding the truth we become suspicious and irritable. Truth not only defends herself, but avenges herself. Originality is a dangerous gift, leading the possessor to rely on himself, form rash opinions, and use rash statements. Still it is a gift, and a rare gift; and if sanctified a precious gift, powerful for good. If we have it we have it, as a poet is born a poet, and we are accountable to the Giver. To seek originality is a contradiction, is to be sure not to have it, and violates the rule laid down, Simplicity. To seek originality is to be servile and to lower our moral character. Simplicity of style and manner is not condescension. Nothing is more offensive than, 'Now, my dear friends, I want you to try and understand this. Now I will try to be very plain. I want you to meet me half-way and do your best,' &c. Simplicity is not a conscious sinking to the level of lower intelligence. Simplicity is never conscious. She is always on the level of those she loves by sympathy. If simplicity has any mannerisms she does not know it. They are not assumed; they are only individualities. They may be objectionable, and a kind friend, a real friend, will in that case warn the preacher to restrain them; or they may have all the charm of what is genuine, natural-the true expression of the inward man. A vehement gesture proceeding from vehement feeling is eloquent, whilst to stamp on the pulpit floor, or thump the Bible, or knock the board, is, unless required by the subject and the emotion of the preacher, disgusting. 'In man or woman, but far most in man, What! will a man play tricks, will he indulge Therefore avaunt all attitude and stare, Simplicity of manner, unless it arises from simplicity of character, is only an affectation. Of simplicity of character issuing in that of manner Fénelon said 'This simplicity is manifested in the exterior. As the mind is. freed from the idea of self we act more naturally, all art ceases; we act rightly without thinking of what we are doing, by a sort of directness of purpose that is inexplicable to those who have no experience of it. To some we may appear less simple than those who have a more grave and practised manner; but these are people of bad taste, who take the affectation of modesty for modesty itself, and who have no knowledge of true simplicity. This true simplicity has sometimes a careless and irregular appearance, but it has the charm of truth and candour, and sheds around it I know not what of pure and innocent, of cheerful and peaceful; a loveliness that wins us when we see it intimately and with pure eyes. How desirable is this simplicity ! Who will give it to me?' 3 Strange! Fénelon did not know that he possessed it supereminently; nor did Keble. 1 Only the year before last we 'sat under' a young preacher who leaned his head upon his hand during much of the sermon, showing his white hand and ring, and seeming more complacent than his hearers. 2 Cowper, The Task, book ii. 3 Selections from the Writings of Fénelon, by Mrs. Follen, p. 120. St. Vincent de Paul took the same view as to preaching, and surely he was a master in the work. 'I give thanks to God for the blessing which He has given to the labours of... and for that which you recount that it ought to be attributed, to their manner of speaking simple and familiar. I hope that this example will confirm you in the practice of never speaking in publick nor in private but with simplicity, humility, and charity. It is the greatest secret that one can find to success in preaching, instead of the contrary practice, which only serves to exercise the patience of the hearers and to fill with vanity him who speaks to them.' 1 There are three thoughts helpful in time of need-1, God's Presence, to which Cowper referred above; 2, the thought of those to whom we speak, immortal souls, sheep for whom Christ shed His precious blood; 3, the preacher's own unworthiness to stand where he does and speak in God's name. 'As of sincerity, as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ' (2 Cor. ii. 17). As to whether a sermon should be written or extempore, or midway, i.e. preached from notes, is it not best to leave it to the preacher to find out what he can do well and what he cannot? Only, if he preaches a written sermon, he ought surely to take pains to know it well, and not to keep his eyes upon the manuscript, but look his people in the face. So much depends upon the expression of eye and mouth, so much upon the hearer feeling that the preacher is really speaking to him heart to heart. A sermon should no more be monotonous in delivery than noisy and bombastic, and it need not be so if the preacher be not monotonous himself, any more than it need not be bombastic if the preacher is not so. If his matter varies, and his feelings vary with his matter-which they surely will do—he will not be monotonous, nor indeed can be. The interest which he feels will impart itself to his manner. It is a mistake to prolong a sermon beyond where it should fairly stop. If it is well-reasoned and forcible, although long, it will not be too long; but when it ceases to be this it should stop, even if it were only ten minutes long; and the very abruptness of the cessation would be impressive, because it would be truthful; and nothing is so impressive as truth. We know that to drop the voice at the end of a sentence→ a failing only too common-spoils the period; but to drop intellectually or morally towards the close of the sermon is certainly worse. Too many a good discourse loses power towards the end, and the disappointed hearer wishes that it had 1 Letter, June 14, 1656. concluded before. 'Why did he not stop when he had reached such or such a point? but now he has marred his work, undone himself.' Prayer before preaching is needful, in order that what is .preached may be true and good, and have good success in the hearts of the hearers; but prayer after preaching is needed for the preacher's self. Whatever was good in the sermon was God's, the Giver of all good gifts; where it failed the weakness of man appeared. The less a preacher thinks of his sermon after it is over, the better. He need not think of it at all except as Dupanloup did, to humble himself in the dust. All glory to God and humiliation to man. The good is His; the evil, man's. 'It is God who gives His ministers, such as are humble, power over the hearts and souls of men; when distrusting themselves they ascribe all glory to God. 'We take the work out of the hands of God when we are pleased with what we have done, and rob Him of the honour due to Him alone. 'There have been many who, without any great learning or eloquence, yet by their communication in a humble and low way have instructed and converted more than famous preachers; for that they preached not themselves, but Christ Jesus, placing all their confidence in God.' 1 The writer of these words was an instance. His sermons were devoid of eloquence, but he produced a profound sensation in London pulpits when he left his island for a time. It was said to a clergyman in our times, 'What an admirable sermon you preached to-day.' He answered, The devil told me this first, as I was coming down from the pulpit.' Nor is this all, for the preacher cannot but feel that he has condemned himself when condemning sins; and has spoken beyond himself and above himself when speaking of high and holy things, from which he is far removed, although it has been his duty to urge others to seek that which he has never attained. Too often the preacher is his own accuser, and he is more sad than vain, if he only reflects. Well, then, let preachers fear their indolence and their own vain hearts' and their want of faith; and doing their very best fear nothing else, but be of good heart. Then, although they may not be admired or run after, they will have accomplished all that they had a right to expect, and more than they will know of until that Day.' They will have peace in their hearts, 'that best and truest gift,' and will receive the reward of those who 'turn many to righteousness." 1 Wilson's Sacra Privata, Friday Med. ART. VII.—THE NATIONAL SYNOD. 1. Synodus Anglicana. (London, 1702.) 2. Fasti Eboracenses. Lives of the Archbishops of York. By the Rev. JAMES RAINE, M.A. (London, 1863.) 3. York Journal of Convocation. (1861-1865.) THEY who care to recall the stolid resistance so long maintained against the revival of Convocation, are aware that among the captious and irrelevant objections heaped together from all quarters by prelates, dignitaries, lawyers, leading journalists, Liberal statesmen, and the heavy Low-and-Slow train of Church-obstructives, in and out of Parliament, there were three genuine difficulties, always more clearly discerned by the party of progress than by its opponents. We did not suffer ourselves to be diverted from the object in view. 'Convocation' could only be revived as it stood; but when revived we all knew that it would be confronted, first by the inadequacy of the representation of the clergy, next by the demand for a lay element, and then by the need of securing the concurrent action of the two provinces. The first was promptly disposed of at York by the happy thought of revising the various writs in conformity with the earliest precedents, and so restoring the archidiaconal representation throughout the province. The question was treated as a matter of ecclesiastical procedure, which Lord Selborne acknowledges to be within the archbishop's prerogative; and the result is a Lower House of twenty-seven dignitaries and forty-eight proctors returned by direct election of the clergy. A similar process in the larger province, where the representation was originally archidiaconal, as it still is in principle, would give 150 elected proctors (in place of seventy-two) against the eighty-eight ex officio seats. Here, however, a larger scheme has been framed, which was set forth in our last number (p. 459). If the law officers of the Crown continue inexorable we hope it is not too late to fall back on the powers of the president. The archbishop's authority has proved sufficient to meet the second difficulty, by calling into existence the House of Laymen. One effect of this experiment is to retort on the northern province the disparity experienced in the other with respect to the clerical representation. If it were possible to create an effective House of Laymen at York, it would |