but as a scholastic; not to suit individual cases, but man in the abstract. Such preaching will move no one. The pulpit is not the place to theorize, with our thoughts upon imaginary objects, when hungry souls are before us waiting, not for stones, but bread.

A working theology, that will adorn the pulpit, must have at least three elements. (1) It must be free from contradictions. Contradictions, whether real or apparent, put an end to any influence for good. The theory and its conclusions must not only be harmonious with each other, but also with the great end of preaching-conviction. (2) It must accord with the obvious tenor of the Scriptures as a whole, and as the unlettered mind reads. It is eminently true of a large portion of the Scriptures that the unlearned need not, and do not, err therein. The common mind is not so foolish in understanding the Bible, as some divines seem to assume. The ordinary mind becomes bewildered, only when dogmatists patch and fix the Scriptures to suit a theory. Most men, who are not theorists, find no difficulty in understanding that they can repent, and that this is therefore their duty. (3) It must harmonize with the necessary beliefs of the human mind. These beliefs, being founded in the constitution of moral beings, are right. To violate them is to violate truth. We must preach what men will believe.

Without inquiring as to the truth or error of certain theories which seem to lack these three elements, let us examine a few examples with a view to illustrate their effect upon the preacher's power. Take the theory of a limited Atonement. Since we always tell men that salvation is possible only through the death of Christ, how can we consistently urge them to accept of Christ as their Saviour, after we have proved to them that He did not die for all men, and that, therefore, it is possible He did not die for them? How can we urge them to enter in at the straight gate, after having told them that it would not be strange if this gate were shut against them? How can we vindicate the consistency of those exhortations of the Scriptures which seem to invite all men to be saved, if we preach

1

the doctrine that Christ died for a select few? We must distinguish between the scope of the Atonement, and its actual results in redemption. It can not be urged that the preacher does not know but every sinner in his congregation is among the number for whom Christ died. God, who does know, invites all men everywhere to repent: and if the preacher be truly a herald of the Cross, he speaks, not his own words, but the words of God. He has no right to utter any invitation which the Scriptures do not justify. He is stationed to declare the whole counsel of God, and to cry, "Ho, every one that thirsteth;" and when he utters this cry, he has no right to tell men that it does not mean every one.

Take again the theory of constitutional sin, as resulting from the theory that Adam's guilt is literally imputed to us. Men will tell you that they are not responsible for what Adam did. You can not refine their consciousness to such a degree that they will feel guilt for that act of our first parent. Any man, not blinded by theory, will tell you, and truly, that he is not responsible for sin that was created in him; for that is not his sin, and he has nothing to do with it. Tell a man that his sin consists in doing what he knows he ought not to do, and he will believe you. Tell a man that he is a drunkard because he was born with an appetite for strong drink, and he will turn from you in disgust. Tell him that he is a drunkard because he has deliberately gratified that appetite, and he will hang his head in shame because you have told him the truth. You can not make a man believe that he is a sinner, till he has sinned; and you can not make him believe that he has sinned, till he has done a sinful act. His sin must be his act, or he will not feel guilt. Remorse of conscience is not possible except for deeds of guilt. If you preach any theory contrary to this idea, your preaching will not reach him. His conscience may condemn him, but not because of your preaching; because his own sense of right and wrong tells him that he is guilty for guilty acts, and these alone. Men will not believe any such fanciful theory as that of invol untary sins. Tell a man that he is guilty because he chooses

evil, and your words will be so true that he will wince under them. Tell a man that he sins because he can not help sinning that he may be guilty of involuntary disobedience to God, and he will laugh at you for contradicting yourself. That for which men feel guilt is, voluntary disobedience to the known law of God. The sin of act, not of nature, gives them

remorse.

Closely associated with the theory of natural sin, is that of the sinner's absolute inability to obey God. We have alluded to this. Make a man believe that he absolutely can not obey God, and he will tell you, that you need not take the trouble to urge him to repent, for you have just taught him that he can not repent. Are you consistent, if in one breath you tell men that they absolutely can not repent, and in the next, that they ought? If you do, men will not come to hear you contradict yourself. You must be honest, when you exhort men. If one wishes to prepare the way to persuade men to repent, he must first insist upon the fact that they can. If we do not persuade men that they can flee to Christ, with what confidence can we point our fingers to the Cross? and say to men, "behold the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world?" What boldness can the preacher have to repeat Christ's words, "Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden," after he has taught men the harrowing truth that they can not come? If we can make men believe that they can not obey, what coufidence can they have in the promises of the Bible, which all have conditions imposed, with which, we have told them, they absolutely can not comply? The fact is men do not believe that they can not comply with the commands of God. Preachers who have sincere regard for the salvation of souls, dare not teach this doctrine openly, even if they believe it. The only safe and effectual way to present truth is on the assumption, that God requires men to do nothing which they can not do that, if God requires men to repent, they can repent. It is necessary that the preacher exercise care not to teach, nor seem to teach, any theory that at all narrows or seems to narrow the scope of the

universal invitations and promises of the Bible. It is better not to hold any such theory. It cripples the pulpit and fetters the Gospel. As Dr. Alexander says of another error, so we say of this: "He is paralyzed in making the Gospel offer, who can not, without conditions, bid every thirsty soul come and welcome. ** This is preaching a fettered Gospel, and it produces a fettered piety. It gendereth to bondage."

*

*

It is one of the values of that theology, known as the New England, that it holds such anthropological doctrines as are calculated to fix the responsibility upon men, and make them feel it such doctrines, too, as do not at all impair our view of God's universal love for men, and His universal exhortations and promises. For this reason it is rhetorically superior to the opposite system. It is superior, too, because it accords better with the honest and natural convictions of unbiased minds. Hence that preaching, which holds up such views, is and always has been effective. They are Scriptural views, and belong naturally to the pulpit.

It has not been our aim to defend the doctrines alluded to, any farther than to show that they are suitable to appeals from the pulpit; and to illustrate, how vitally associated with them all effective preaching is. One of the best defenses of a doctrine is, that it has value in furnishing an appeal to men. One of the strongest arguments against Rationalism is, that its doctrines give the preacher no power with the consciences of men. The pulpit has not to deal exclusively with intellects; its great aim is to reach the hearts of men. These are to be convinced and subjugated, as well as intellects. Hence any theology which overlooks men's hearts, is an incubus upon the pulpita stumbling-block in the way of success. Success in the pulpit, is to be measured by the spiritual power which it exerts. Measuring by this standard, we fearlessly assert, that the only successful men have been, are, and will be, those who hold the doctrines of the Bible evangelically, and present them in such a way that the common sense of men is not outraged. By this measurement of success, they have been the most

men.

successful preachers, who have always planted their feet upon the doctrines, when they have stood in the pulpit to speak to Without doubt, if success is to be measured merely by crowds and accessions of large numbers, they are the most successful preachers who treat the doctrines in a kind of patronizing way. But when the life-work of the preacher is summed up by one who weighs things accurately, that kind of success may be found wanting. But that solid growth, which springs from due presentation of the doctrines, and above all from their application to all the varied walks of life as the best regulators of human action, will bring the preacher that noblest and highest award of praise: "Well done, thou good and faithful servant."

We are persuaded, too, that preachers are liable to magnify some doctrines at the expense of others equally important. We know of a preacher who seems to have an unfortunate relish for the word hell, and for kindred doctrines, and no patience at all with the idea that God can love men while they are sinners. These doctrines are of vital importance, and must be preached. But they ought not to be pressed so far as to make men forget that God is not willing that any should perish. On the other hand, some preachers magnify love to such an extent as to hide the fact that God is just. These are extremes to be avoided. The one sours men's minds; the other makes Christianity simply contemptible. The golden mean is better. All the doctrines ought to be presented in such proportion and harmony, that our presentations of the character of God shall be as complete and beautiful as that character is. No preacher should allow himself to drop into doctrinal ruts. If he would be an effective preacher, he must be various in his presentations of Scriptural truths, now urging this, now that; now proving, now illustrating; always aiming to build up Christian character, in his hearers, out of those solid materials which the fundamental truths of God's word alone can furnish.

Another error to be avoided in doctrinal preaching, is seeking to prove what does not need proving. Whether we need