“And even this is not all. Here is a section on the ‘Different kinds of Address,’ and behold the astute analysis: ‘The Appellatory, the Entreating, the Expostulatory, the Remedial, the Directive, the Encouraging, the Consoling, the Elevating, the Alarming, the Tender, the Indignant, the Abrupt.’

“This is the way that the art ‘Homiletic’ would teach us when and how to be ‘Tender,’ ‘Indignant,’ ‘Consoling,’ and even ‘Abrupt!’ ‘Nonsense!’

“Yes, ‘nonsense!’ says any man of good sense in looking at this folly: a folly which would be less lamentable if it could only be kept to the homiletic professor’s chair, but which has still an almost characteristic effect on pulpit eloquence—not only on the form of the sermon, but as a natural consequence on its very animus. This tireless author gives all these outlines as practical prescriptions. He even presents them in a precise formula. We must yield to the temptation to quote it. ‘There are,’ he says, ‘certain technical signs employed to distinguish the several parts of a discourse. The first class consists of the principal divisions, marked in Roman letters, thus: I., II., III., IV., etc. Next, the subdivisions of the first class, in figures, 1, 2, 3, etc. Under these, subdivisions of the second class, marked with a curve on the right, as 1), 2), 3), etc. Then, subdivisions of the third class, marked with two curves, as (1), (2), (3), etc.; and under these, subdivisions of the fourth class, in crotchets, thus: [1], [2], [3]. As—

“I. Principal division.

1. Subdivision of first class.

1). Subdivision of second class.

(1). Subdivision of third class.

[1]. Subdivision of fourth class.

“Mathematical this, certainly; some of Euclid’s problems are plainer. As a ‘demonstration’ is obviously necessary, the author proceeds to give the outline of a sermon on ‘The Diversity of Ministerial Gifts,’ from the text ‘Now there are Diversities of Gifts,’ etc. He has but two ‘General Divisions,’ but makes up for their paucity by a generous allowance of ‘Subdivisions.’ His ‘General Divisions’ are, I. Exemplify the Truth of the Text. II. Derive some Lessons of Instruction, etc.,—an arrangement simple and suitable enough for any popular audience, if he were content with it, but under the first head he has two ‘subdivisions,’ the first of which is reduced to thirteen sub-subdivisions, and one of these thirteen again to seven sub-sub-subdivisions! The second of his subdivisions again divided into eight sub-subdivisions, while the ‘homily’ (alas for the name!) is completed by a merciless slashing of the second ‘general division’ into no less than eight subdivisions. The honest author, when he takes breath at the end, seems to have some compunctious misgivings about this infinitesimal mincing of a noble theme, and reminds the amazed student that though the plan should be followed ‘in the composition of a sermon,’ the ‘minor divisions’ can be concealed from view in preaching; and he concludes the medley of nonsense with one sensible and very timely admonition: ‘If a discourse contain a considerable number of divisions and subdivisions,’ care should be taken to fill up the respective parts with suitable matter, or it will be, indeed, a mere skeleton—bones strung together—‘very many and very dry!’”

When we have accumulated our materials, stricken out all not needed, and determined what shall be the character of our plan, the remainder of the work must be left to individual taste and judgment. No rules can be given that will meet every case. We might direct to put first what is most easily comprehended, what is necessary for understanding other portions, and also what is least likely to be disputed. But beyond these obvious directions little aid can be given. The preacher must form his own ideal, and work up to it. He may profitably examine sermon skeletons, to learn what such forms should be. And when he hears good discourses he may look beneath the burning words, and see what are the merits of the frame-work on which they rest. This may render him dissatisfied with his own achievements, but such dissatisfaction is the best pledge of earnest effort for higher results.