observed the similarity of the two; and says in his note on the latter, This sermon has a great affinity with that on the Incarnation, which begins with the same words.' It is strange that the learned Benedictine did not see the origin of this affinity, or rather identity.

If we proceed from preaching strictly extemporary to preaching from notes, S. Antony of Padua would present the most striking example, could we be certain that he actually delivered the celebrated sermons which we now have from him. There is

a clear distinction made in his life, between those which he preached with such wonderful effect to the people, and those which he wrote for the instruction and improvement of his brethren. The Bishop of Ostia,' says his biographer, 'exhorted him, when he had written his sermons De Tempore, to compose another series for the festivals of Saints. He obeyed, and while still at Padua, gave himself up to this work. But the holy time of Lent coming on, the man of God perceiving that now was the accepted time, now was the day of salvation, put off that composition, and applied himself wholly to preach to the people, 'who thirsted with great eagerness for his sermons.'

6

It is perhaps not improbable that what he wrote in brief, and by way of notes, was afterwards delivered in full, and with such extemporaneous additions as might occur. At all events, his work can only be called sermon skeletons, however much his editors may entitle it Sermones Sancti Antonii.

S. Hildebert, to whom we have just referred, affords, also, instances of preaching from notes. In a Lent sermon, for example, the following paragraph now occurs in the printed copies: Seek ye the Lord while He may be found; call upon Him because He is now swift to pardon, hereafter He will be prepared to judge. Learn by an example how swift He is to 'pardon. And I will give an example. Learn by this example, 'beloved brethren, to be instigated, without loss of time, to peni'tence, and to be converted to the Lord.' Who does not see that the words, and I will give an example,' were merely a marginal note, set down by the preacher for his own private use; such an instance of God's mercy as might happen to occur to him, being inserted, in the heat of delivery, extemporaneously?

Again, in the thirty-eighth sermon, which was preached to the nuns of Fontevraud, we have the following extraordinary abbreviation: Primus populus, homines sunt mali, qui a bono 'retrahunt; secundus, desideria carnis, quæ mala suggerunt; tertius, cogitationes mentis, quæ peccare cogunt. De primo 'populo scriptum est; Si d. m. t. S. t. a. esse pro De secundo: Abstinete vos a carnalibus desideriis, 6 tant adversus animam.'

quæ mili

The after insertions and marginal references which such a system of notes rendered necessary, are referred to by Herbert of Bosham, in the preface to his Gloss on the Psalter. 'If,' says he, to the prelate whom he is addressing, your scribes should undertake the transcription of these commentaries, let them 'take diligent care to insert the references and notes in their right order; lest, as it often happens, through the ignorance or the negligence of the transcriber, it should be more difficult to correct the work than it was to write it; especially when the corrupter of a new work may be called the brother of its 'destroyer.'

The third point which should be considered in the perusal of any medieval sermon is this; whether it were originally delivered in Latin, or in the vernacular language of the country. It is difficult to understand in what sense, and with what limitations, we are to receive the account of Bishops who in those ages preached from one end of Europe to the other. Probably till the death of Charlemagne, an ecclesiastic who could make himself intelligible to any of the Romance nations which his empire embraced, would be comprehended by all; and in like manner, one who was understood by a single Tudesque race, would be intelligible to any other. If two languages only were necessary in an empire which stretched from Mecklenburg to Tarragona, and from Brittany to Rome, a great portion of the difficulty is obviated. But, in later ages, when we know that the dialects of different provinces in the same country had become in effect different languages,-when, for example, the Langue d'oui and the Langue d'oc were unintelligible to each other, then how apostolic missionaries could traverse half Europe becomes a question of greater obscurity. One thing seems next to certain; that the great preachers of those times, whenever they did use the vernacular language, spoke in it extempore; for who would take the trouble of committing his thoughts to a dialect so barbarous that perhaps it could not be written with precision, and so fluctuating that it was certain to be unintelligible within half a century? The Sermones ad Populum of the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries, then, must either have been translated into Latin by some of the disciples of the author, from their remembrance of what he had actually spoken, or by the writer himself, from his recollection of the general scope and aim of his discourse.

We will now turn our attention to a few of the most distinguishing features which characterise medieval sermons. And the first of these is, the immense and almost intuitive knowledge of Scripture which their writers possessed. If any one, to take the lowest view of the subject, will be at the trouble of com

paring the number of references to be found in a modern, with those which occur in an ancient sermon, he will find that ten to one is by no means an exaggerated estimate of their relative proportions. Nor is this all. Modern quotations are almost entirely taken from certain books or chapters of the Bible; the more important portions, as men now-a-days irreverently, not to say profanely, call them. The ancient preachers drew their citations from all parts of Scripture alike: equally imbued with the spirit of all, it was impossible that they should quote otherwise than according to analogy. And those who more especially pique themselves on their knowledge of the Bible, and on declaring the whole counsel of God'-we mean, of course, the so-called Evangelicals-would do well to consider, how and why it is that their sermons, in comparison with those of which we are writing, are so jejune in references to the Word of God, and so shallow and common-place in their application when they quote it-why they evince, in short, rather the knowledge of a child than the full grasp of a theologian. Let us be fair, and give an example or two to prove the truth of what we say. We will take an unexceptionable writer on either side. The modern school cannot complain if we bring forward John Newton as their champion; and we will match him, not with S. Bernard, nor with any other such giant in divinity, but with a mere common-place pious writer of the twelfth century, Guarric, Abbat of Igniac. We will take them on the same subject, and on the same text, Prepare ye the way of the Lord.' In Newton's sermon we find nine references to the Gospels, two to the Epistles, nine to the prophets, one to the Psalms; while no allusion is made to any other part of Holy Scripture. In the sermon of Guarric there are seven references to the Gospels, one to the Epistles, twenty-two to the Psalms, nine to the Prophets, and eighteen to other parts of Scripture. Thus, the total number of quotations made by the Evangelical preacher is twenty-one; by Guarric, fifty-seven; and this in sermons of about equal length. Or, to take a more striking example of the same thing. In 1784, when the oratorio of the Messiah' was performed with great splendour in Westminster Abbey, it pleased the same John Newton to deliver a series of discourses on the texts which formed the subject of Handel's music. As those pas

sages of Holy Scripture are so admirably well chosen, the sermons grounded on them were naturally intended to form a complete body of divinity, and as such were published together. By way of index, the author drew up a list of texts quoted or referred to, such as we see universally appended to the earlier editions of the Fathers. It is odd to remark how unequally the evangelical preacher makes his citations. From that part of the

Bible which precedes the Psalms he quotes very sparingly. The minor Prophets hardly furnish him with one passage; the Books of Joel, Obadiah, Nahum, and Jonah, absolutely with none. He nowhere refers to the Song of Solomon. To the Apocrypha, as might be expected, he makes but one allusion. The Epistles, especially those to the Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, occupy a most disproportionable space, as regards the New Testament; and the prophecy of Isaiah, in reference to the Old. Now, if we turn to the same index in the works of S. Antony of Padua, we find at once that Holy Scripture is quoted evenly, and according to analogy. The historical books assume their due prominence; the Epistles are reduced to a lower level; and the quotations from each bear proportion to the length of the book, and not to the preconceived system of the preacher. The one point of similarity between S. Antony and Newton is the greater frequency with which both turn to the Psalms; and their most striking contrast, next to that which we have already specified, consists in the numerous references which the one makes to the Sapiential books, and, above all, to the Canticles; while, by the other, they are comparatively passed over.

But, after all, this is a very poor and imperfect way of representing the difference. Let us take another comparison, to show how, in the one case, the whole composition is imbued with Scripture; in the other, how detached texts are, as it were, tagged on, because it looked proper and sounded scriptural to introduce them. Let our preachers, each of them, commence a discourse upon Advent.

'One strong internal proof that the Bible is a divine revelation, may be drawn from the subject matter, and particularly that it is the book, and the only book, which teaches us to think highly and honourably of God. I say the only book; for there is no right knowledge of God where the Bible is not known. What is the Jupiter of Homer compared with the God of Israel, as He is represented to us by His servants the Prophets? And if the heathen philosophers in some detached passages have sentiments not altogether unworthy of Him, history honestly tells us how they obtain them. They travelled, and they are generally said to have travelled into Phenicia or Egypt, to the confines of that people who alone thought rightly of God, because to them only He had made Himself known by a revelation. If such a description as we have in the fortieth chapter of Isaiah, from the twelfth verse to the end, had been known only of late years, recovered, we will suppose, out of the ruins of Herculaneum, there is little doubt but it would have engaged the attention and admiration of the learned world; for the most admired writings of antiquity, upon a candid comparison, are unspeakably inferior to it. The inimitable sublimity of the prophets is natural, just, and unforced, and flows from the grandeur of their subject, because they were influenced by Him Who alone can speak worthily of Himself.'

So much for the Rector of S. Mary Woolnoth; now for the writer of the dark ages:

We look for the Saviour. Verily, the expectation of the just, the joy of those that wait, is in that blessed hope, and the glorious Advent of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ. And now, saith the righteous man, what is my hope? Truly my hope is even in Thee. And turning to the Lord, I know, he saith, that I shall not be disappointed of my hope, because my substance is before Thee; because our nature taken from us, and offered up for us, is glorified in Thee; leaving us the hope that all flesh shall come to Thee; and that the members may follow the Head, so that the burnt offering may be accomplished. But with fuller trust, because with safer conscience, that man may expect the Lord, who can say, The substance of my little possessions is before Thee, O Lord; because either by contributing them to Thee, or in despising them for Thee, I have treasured up my talents in heaven, and have laid them down at Thy feet, knowing that Thou art able to keep that which I have committed unto Thee; and not only to keep it, but to give me also an hundred-fold in the present life, and in the world to come eternal life. Blessed are ye, the poor in spirit, who, according to the counsel of the Wonderful Counsellor, lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven; lest, if your treasures should remain on earth, your hearts should also rot there. For, saith he, where thy treasure is, there will thy heart be also. Therefore let our hearts go after their treasure; let our cogitations be fixed on high; let our expectation be suspended on the Lord, that we may say with the Apostle, Our conversation is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour. For our fathers trusted in Thee, even all the just from the foundation of the world, they trusted in Thee, and were not confounded. And now we have received Thy loving-kindness in the midst of Thy Temple, and the band of Thy rejoicing servants sings together, Blessed is He That cometh in the name of the Lord: I waited patiently for the Lord, and He inclined unto me.'

Can there be a stronger contrast than between these two styles? The one priest speaks because it is Sunday morning, because the congregation are waiting for him, and because the publication of his sermons may possibly add to his fame or to his conveniences. The other, because his heart is full of his subject, because in Advent-time he can manifestly think of nothing but the Advent, and therefore out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Guarric, indeed, gives us no laboured panegyric on Scripture, nor does he even state, as Newton does, the superiority of the God of Christians over Jupiter. But he is in the heart of his subject in a moment; he seems to quote the Bible because it is his own natural language, because his thoughts have been so accustomed to flow in scripture channels that they will run in no other; and it is sometimes difficult to tell, nor would he perhaps always have known himself, whether he were employing his own words or those of the inspired writings.

But this subject of scriptural allusion is inseparably connected to that of the mystical interpretations with which primitive and mediæval sermons overflow. Those-as is perhaps the case with most of the present generation-who have been taught to look in scripture doctrines for doctrines only, and in scripture facts for facts only, naturally reject with scorn much