Images de page
PDF
ePub

of funeral orations to gratify a court audience; he was an ecclesiastic fighting the cause of his church against heresy and schism with the weapons of his intellect and learning, and after all those splendid orations, which we have enumerated, were long passed, it is interesting to find that in the year 1691 he preached for the benefit, not of the Court, but of his clergy, the magnificent sermon on the Unity of the Church. It is a striking proof of the richness of Bossuet's genius, that his eloquent sermons which so delighted the two Queens, Anne and Marie Theresa, of Austria, and thus brought him to the notice of Louis XIV., indeed, that all which were preached during the ten years that he was in Paris, previous to his appointment as Bishop of Condom, and which, therefore, were the cause of his promotion, were never written in a fair copy, but were only dashed on paper, full of corrections and erasions, and were never preached twice, or used at a subsequent period of his life. He could afford to let these MSS., the work of the most vigorous age of man, remain undisturbed in the depths of a confused mass of papers, unpublished, or even unknown to exist, whilst he, far from resting on his oars after his elevation to the highest rank of the church, went boldly on to establish, as it were, another reputation. Nor were these papers ever put together till after the death of his nephew and executor, the Bishop of Troyes, long before which time, and therefore, by other compositions, he had acquired an immortal fame in literature as well as religion. Cardinal Maury, the writer of the preliminary discourse to Bossuet's sermons, goes into raptures of enthusiasm, which in our dull country-whether the fault be in the preachers or the audience we say not-sound unusual as comments on sermon writing. Yet the cardinal's enthusiasm is natural and sincere; and it is also graphic. What has struck me' (we indulge here in a kind of running translation, full of curtailment, for the original would cover our pages far too rapidly,) in his sermons is the constant vigour which marks his style, and which, it appears to me, far surpasses the boasted elegance of modern writers. In the first 'sentence you see his genius in action. You meet with no trivial 'forms, no commentaries on the thoughts of others, no lengthiness, 'sterility, or redundance. He does not walk; he runs, he flies; 'ever in some new path which his imagination opens to him: he 'throws himself at once towards his goal, and carries you with ' him.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Bossuet's fame as a controversialist at one time quite caused him to be forgotten as a preacher. The cardinal, therefore, undertakes to bring out his excellence in this respect, in a manner which implies that, at the time he wrote, his beauties

[blocks in formation]

6

[ocr errors]

were not fully recognised. He says, 'It is commonly thought 'that Massillon and Bourdaloue have placed limits to the diffi'cult art of the pulpit, and that, having borne away the riches of oratory, they have left nothing for others, but the minor 'glory of gleaning in their traces. I have always suspected that this error would not be accredited, if the sermons of Bossuet had been read. Let us admire the productions of genius, but not have the rashness to set bounds to them by saying that none others can surpass those whom we already 'know. How many great beauties shall we find in Bossuet, 'which we shall vainly seek for in Massillon and Bourdaloue. Again, how many new beauties may one day distinguish an 'orator, even after Massillon, Bourdaloue, and Bossuet!' He then compares these three with each other, mentioning their respective characteristics. Thus it is that we cannot enter upon any notice of one, without including the others also. He considers that Massillon, endowed by nature with fine talents, full of the learning of the ancients, and embellished by an exquisite taste, wrote more often with his mind than his imagination; that he was more ornamental, but less brilliant than Bourdaloue; that his enchanting elocution could not conceal his inclination to imitate his great model, Cicero; that though he wrote with interest and charm, yet that, without any uneasiness for his glory, one may say that he sometimes abused the fertility of his style by too great refinement in working out an idea. Without this ravishing elegance of style,' he says, 'one would 'not read Massillon more than once; though with it his sermons are too soon over.' In contrast with this dependence on style rather than matter, he describes Bourdaloue as the great reasoner, always consistent, always nervous, preferring to passing impulses the solid proofs which time engraves more deeply upon the mind. He is pathetic where the matter needs it, but this, in his judgment, was only when the great truths of religion could acquire interest by this manner of stating them. He never allowed his touching passages to come back, as it were, on himself. He instructs others by forgetting himself. The Cardinal brings forward, as an example of Bourdaloue's style, the same Good Friday sermon, about which the 'Preacher and the King' is written, though only to add thereto a termination which was not his own. The first part of that sermon, in which he proves that the death of the Son of God was the great triumph of His power, is considered by Maury to be a perfect chef d'œuvre of eloquence, and that nothing can be put by the side of it. 'Bourdaloue,' he says, 'is still more valued at the third reading than at the first. The more one reads, the more one admires. I thank him that he has made no display

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

of language; he wrote nothing for want of thought.' Bossuet he considers to have been born with more genius, to have been more brilliant in occasional passages of his sermons, to have been more poetic, more picturesque, but the other to have been more even, more complete, and more methodical. He then compares Bossuet to Homer among the classic writers, and to Isaiah among the prophets, and describes his preaching somewhat as follows:-'He endeavours to alarm, then gives them 'up to remorse. He combats with his audience, and fights to 'the death, as Madame de Sevignè described him. He took 'the range of Holy Scriptures, the Old Testament and the New, and explained them as one harmonious whole, not by quoting passages in a dry and barren manner, but by making the very 'thoughts and ideas of Scripture his own, and then setting them forth with all the freshness of an original picture. Did 'he wish to show a king disabused of the greatness of the 'world; he repeated the long groanings of David. If he wished 'to excite pity, he made his audience weep with him over the 'pathetic history of Jeremiah, and in his sympathy with Jere'miah, he seemed to be inspired with a new energy to depict 'the calamities of Zion. Little satisfied, however, with first emotions, he pursued the impression, and deeply penetrated 'all hearts with the interest he created.'

[ocr errors]

We do not follow Bossuet through his controversial writings. He is charged with haughtiness, with some infirmities of temper, and with such warmth in controversy, that he sometimes thought more of vanquishing his antagonist than of adhering to the true basis on which the question before him rested. Be this as it may, he was a noble and zealous defender of his Church, free from the scandals, secular and ecclesiastic, of his age, and a man of sublime genius. There are times when bishops of active genius and power, and of resolute zeal in their office, who really will fight for the Church, acquire in our estimation a marvellous dignity. Many causes militate against the frequent occurrence of this desired picture, but we value it all the more when so many bright and excellent qualities shine forth in history as raising up the lasting name of Bossuet, Bishop of Meaux, for such he became in 1681, after the education of the Dauphin was concluded. He died in 1704, within a month of Bourdaloue, who was five years his junior.

[ocr errors]

As a kind of appendix to the Preacher and the King,' there is a marvellous narrative, called Two Evenings at the Hotel de Rambouillet,' and supposed to be descriptive of the first occasion on which Bossuet became known for his talent of preaching to the fashionable world of Paris. This was published, it is stated in a note, as long ago as 1839, but no earlier

reference is given as any pretence of its authenticity: and as it is here inserted because it is thought that the readers of the Preacher and the King' would be pleased with it, we presume that the one is no more true than the other; for the lovers of this kind of romantic fiction, which deals so rashly with historic names, and the lovers of sober facts, are certainly distinct classes of readers. The narrative in question relates how that, for the amusement and criticism of an evening party, the young Bossuet erected a temporary pulpit in the saloon of the Hotel de Rambouillet, and actually preached a powerful and a serious discourse, in exactly the same manner that he might have acted charades. This may have been the case, or it may not; we do not pretend to have before us every event that enlivened the saloons of Paris in the 17th century, but as the story is certainly calculated to represent Bossuet in anything but a dignified position, we must claim better authority before we believe that there is any truth in it. Bossuet may have had a natural love of distinction, and his share of ambition; but a ludicrous exhibition of vanity and profaneness is not what we should look for as a commencement of a career which bears the mark of great power and the highest genius, and which claimed an unusual degree of veneration, not only from his own country but from members of our own Church also, as Nelson and Bishop Bull.

[ocr errors]

From the Eagle of Meaux,' an epithet significant of the brilliant genius of Bossuet, we shall now turn our attention to some points in the life and character of Bourdaloue, as set forth in the Preface to his Sermons, by Father Bretonneau.

Nothing so entirely overawes the more ordinary type of mankind, as the contemplation of a life wholly consistent, wholly devoted from the earliest period of youth to one great object and one steady career, especially where there is evidence that this consistency has its foundation in the very disposition of the mind for steadiness of work, and not in any self interest or reward kept always in view. Bourdaloue was a hard steady worker from boyhood. Moreover, he did not put before him any particular object of ambition as the motive of steadiness, but he worked from day to day, and left the issue to Providence. He was one of those men, of whom it is commonly said that they do not owe their success to genius. If a man really plods on through a long and steady life, he is accused of not being a genius. But there may be a cultivated genius as well as an ill-regulated brilliancy which often claims that little all to itself. Bourdaloue proves his genius as well as his reading in every There is the mass of learning which is the result of labour, and there is also the spark of genius which illumines it all with an individual clearness, and makes it all hang round

sermon.

one great idea; which seems to command for the time, with a tenacious grasp of mind, the wisdom of heaven and earth to demonstrate its truth. Bourdaloue was born at Bourges in 1632. His father, a man of good family, had at one time exhibited considerable powers of oratory, but had not cultivated them for any practical purpose. At the age of fifteen the son was given up to the order of Jesus, full of promise and youthful talent. In the Jesuit college he remained no less than eighteen years in profound study, in teaching, and as Professor of philosophy and theology. He gained great distinction in the sciences, and at one time was about to follow them as the main object of his life, a fact which is important as showing that eminence in the pulpit was not any vainglorious object of ambition during his years of study. Various sermons which he preached, as Professor of Moral Philosophy, induced his superiors to confine his talents to the pulpit; and, submissive to their disposal, he henceforth became a preacher. He was known to the great Mademoiselle, who heard him at Eu, and impressed with a certain confidence in him, she summoned him to act as her Confessor in her last moments. After a few years in the provinces he was called, in 1669, to Paris, and there he commenced his Advent sermons before the King. His powers surpassed all hopes, and, far from being sought for only as a novelty, his reputation increased every year, and the more he was heard the more desire there was to hear him. He possessed every advantage physical and mental, that is required for an orator. A solid foundation of reasoning was joined with a lively imagination; and a facility in giving interest and originality to common truths, was combined with a singular power of making all he said to bear the impress of a strong and earnest faith in the spiritual life. His was not the beauty of style or art, but there is about his writing a body and a substance, together with a unity and steadiness of aim that made the simplest language to assume the power and the greatness of the highest oratory. He embodied the Fathers,' says his biographer, who seemed ' indeed to have spoken for him; so easily did their words flow 'from his mind.' Of Scripture writers he most often quoted Isaiah and S. Paul; while, of the early writers of the Church, he was most fond of Tertullian, S. Augustine, and S. Chrysostom. He spoke well without the least apparent wish to do so; his delivery was quick, and void of all affectation; but when he became elevated or pathetic, there was a certain majesty of tone, yet he was never extravagant. His voice was full and resounding, but sweet and harmonious. He inspired a singular confidence in all who heard him from the perfect knowledge he displayed of the human heart, a knowledge which he acquired

[ocr errors]
« PrécédentContinuer »