HOMILETICS.

The Terms Employed (§ 1).

Theory of Homiletics (§ 2).

Edification the Object of the Sermon (; 3).

Balation of the Sermon to Scripture and the Creeds (§ 4).

Subject and Basis of the Sermon (§ 5).

Varieties of Sermons (; 6).

The Structure of the Sermon (E 7).

Preparation and Delivery (§ 8).

The Occasional Address (§ 9).

History of the Occasional Address (f 10).

Homiletics in Great Britain and America (§ 11).

Definition and Treatment (1 12).

Homiletics as the name of a discipline is of late origin, since only in recent times have theologians begun to treat in special works the r. The theory of the sermon. Gregory of Terms Em- Nazianaen, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and

ployed. Gregory the Great offer only occasional remarks on the subject. Augustine, in the fourth book of his De dodgy-ins Christiana, first treated the subject explicitly, and he was followed by Rabanus Maurus, who, in the third book of De insOutione clerimmm treated the liberal arts as related to ecclesiastics. Humbertus de Romanis (fl. c. 1275) dealt with the subject more extensively in his Enidrttio rdigiosorum prtedwestorum. Finally, toward the end of the Middle Ages Ulrich Surgant wrote a Manvale auratorum which treats the sermon especially with reference to technique, structure, and delivery. The transition to the homiletics of the churches of the Reformation was formed by the Ecclesiaatm of Erasmus (1535). Of the works of Protestant theologians on homiletics from the six teenth century may be mentioned: Andreas Ger hard Hyperius, De formandis concionslua sacris (1553); Lucas Osiander, De rations concicrnandi (1597); Jacob Andrefi, Mdhodus concionarudi, ed. P. Lyser (1594); and Egidius Hunnius, Methodua concionandi (1596). The term "homiletics" 8 e the designation of a special discipline seems to have originated with the Methodologies homildicce (1672) of Sebastian G6bel and the Compendium theologise homtZeticce (1677) by J. W. Bajer; but other names retained their authority, and new names were chosen; thus Mosheim in his Anweisung erbaulich eu predigen (1771) used the term " spiritual elo quence" which is still employed in H. Bassermann, Handbuch der geisdichen Beredsamkeit (Stuttgart, 1885). There is no doubt that the terms homaTein and homilies were used of the sermon in the earliest times (cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl., VI. xix.). The word homtZia passed over into the Occident; but in the Middle Ages the terms sermo and prteddiwre with its derivatives were frequently used. For the churches of'the Reformation Preduo and "sermon" became the established designations in the church orders. In modern times "sermon" has become the collec tive name, while "homily" is restricted to a special kind of sermons.

Homiletics, treats of the discourse or address customarily delivered in the church service of the Christian congregation. There was early mani-

fested a tendency to incorporate homiletics in the theory of rhetoric; even Augustine was governed

by the classical theories of rhetoric, 2. Theory of and the medieval custom of subordiHomiletica nating the liberal arts to the service of

theology brought about a still closer union with rhetoric. Melanchthon established in the interest of the sermon a new rhetorical genus, the 9en- didascolicum, but the opportunity to raise homiletics to the rank of an independent discipline was not seized. Hyperius, in his attempt to base the theory of the sermon upon Scripture, found no imitators and successors. It is impossible to arrive at a worthy treatment of this theological discipline until the starting-point is sought within systematic theology and in the churchly community. Thus considered, homiletics branches off as a apeeial discipline. The Christian community has come into being, is in a state of growth and therefore of imperfection, consequently exposed to the influences of sin and evil. Since now the possession of spiritual blessings in the congregation must be continually kept alive and the influences of sin and evil combated, the Word adapted to the needs of the congregation is the means to accomplish the one ss well as the other. The mere possession of Holy Scripture is not sufficient; it must be used and applied to the needs of the congregation; hence the necessity for preaching. Even if the congregation could ever leave behind its imperfection, the very possession of Christian truth would still necessitate a continual presentation of the Word (cf. Schleiermacher, Der christliche GTaube, § 134, 3, Berlin, 1821). This presentation originates therefore in the pedagogical and practical needs of the congregation, and is an essential factor in its upbuilding. Alexander Schweizer distinguished between general or theoretical, material and formal, homiletics, a division which correctly designates the course which homiletics must take, and the writers on homiletics adhere to it, treating first the conception of the sermon, then its content, and finally its diction and delivery.

3. Edification the Object of the Sermon.

The teachers of the primitive church cared little for theoretical questions concerning the conception and purpose of the sermon. Preaching was usually considered as teaching, even by Augustine and throughout the Middle Ages. Melanchthon'e conception of the sermon was essentially the same, and even later writers adhered to this idea. This conception may be explained easily from the fact that until the time of the Reformation, and even far beyond it, only imperfect means of religious instruction existed. The Protestants, indeed, had a higher conception of the congregation of Christ; Luther, for instance, speaks of a congregation of pure saints, under one head Christ, called together by the Holy Spirit, in one faith, sense, and understanding, but this new conception had as yet no influence upon the problem of the sermon. Only in modern times have theologians rightly concluded from this higher estimation of the congregation that it can be in no way the exclusive or principal task of the sermon to teach the ignorant and punish sinners. The actual condition

347

of the congregation requires that in the sermon the communion with God as established by him be represented, and, after that, the attitude of the congregation toward him as conditioned by that relationship. In this sense the sermon, like Christian worship in general, may be regarded as an expository activity. Schleiermacher distinguishes between an expository and an effective activity; but it is impossible to exclude from the former the idea of effective purpose. A homiletics which admits the means of grace to be real powers of salvation can not refrain from putting the sermon into the category of effective activity. Thus the question is raised in what the effect of the sermon should consist. It has been shown that instruction is not simply and solely the purpose of the sermon. But it must be admitted that lack of knowledge is a prominent and pervading defect of personal Christianity, to remove which instruction is the only means, and this is accomplished most effectively in preaching. Moreover, the congregation has the promise that the Spirit of truth will guide it into all truth (John xvi. 13). Homiletics must therefore find a designation which does not exclude instruction. A comprehensive designation offers itself in the word "to edify," which leaves room for instruction (I Cor. xiv. 4). This indication of purpose was not unknown to the older church, and has been correctly explained in Mosheim's Anweisung erbaulich zu predigen, Vorb., § 2 (Erlangen, 1771): The hearers are (1) to be confirmed in the knowledge of religion which they have already obtained, and this is to be extended; (2) to be awakened and exhorted to diligence and growth in godliness. This confirmation takes place through the exposition of Christian truth, which has edifying power through the testimony of the Holy Spirit. As a means of accomplishing this it is evident that, above all, the subject-matter of the sermon must be edifying. Thus Hyperius requires that that should be preached which concerns faith, love, and hope. To faith belong all those religious subjects which are contained in the Apostles' Creed. To love belong the doctrine of morals, the decalogue, especially the second table, the doctrine of the Church and of the sacraments. To hope belongs the doctrine of the last things. Hyperius, like other writers on homiletics, thus arrives at the catechism, guided by the correct idea that that should be preached which corresponds to the religious needs of the congregation. But even though the subject-matter be properly chosen, this does not guarantee that the sermon is capable of edifying. The subject-matter becomes edifying or unedifying according to its treatment by the preacher. It was rationalism which made the subject-matter responsible for edification through the sermon, and as rationalism discarded catechetics, it excluded from the sermon the very matters upon which earlier times had laid stress. Recent writers on homiletics again tend toward the opposite extreme by trying to eliminate from the sermon almost all social, economical, and merely philosophical questions. But all such subjects have a religious side, and are therefore subject to sermonic treatment. Theoretical homiletics must insist upon the fact that there is nothing which a priori may be excluded from the sermon as unedifying. Edification lies not in the quality of the subject-matter, but in the quality of the sermon; hence the doctrine of the edification of the sermon must be distributed over both material and formal homiletics.

4. Relation of the Sermon to Scripture and the Creeds.

But there are other problems which theoretical homiletics must try to solve. The congregation possesses in Holy Scripture an authoritative norm, inasmuch as the Spirit of God acts in it and through it. What, therefore, is the connection between sermon and Scripture? All theologians agree that the authority of Scripture is higher than that of the sermon, but a question which arises is whether the sermon is superfluous if Scripture is all-sufficient. The answer must be that the Bible, without detriment to its authority, belongs to the past, though destined for all times, while the sermon is a testimony from the present life of the congregation and in its immediate object applies only to the present. This testimony must agree with Scripture, but must have an independent form, corresponding to modern needs. Therefore the sermon is necessary alongside of Scripture. Theoretical homiletics also asks how far the preacher is bound to the confession of his Church. Protestant Church commmuties have in the past provided for their preachers certain norms of doctrine in which the sum total of Christian doctrine is expressed. These church communities were not contented merely to unite against the Catholic Church and to decide not to have anything in common with fanatics. They felt bound to explain why they dissented, to give to their better knowledge a definite positive expression, and this not merely from reasons of church polity, but because of pastoral interest in their own congregations. This is the deeper reason why preachers were always bound to teach according to such doctrinal standards. Homiletics may not surrender this obligation. It must admit, however, that not everything in the different confessional writings is to be regarded as an integrating constituent of the confession. But this concession does not involve the possibility that the Evangelical confessions will some time be abolished; for homiletics rests upon the presupposition that it is one and the same spirit, the spirit of Jesus Christ, who speaks in Scripture and leads his disciples to the knowledge of truth. From this it is self-evident that the preacher is to be personally devoted to the faith and confession of his Church. It would be too little simply to keep within the limits of the confession without personal fidelity to it, although the effect of the sermon does not depend upon the personal attitude of the preacher to that which he preaches.

5. Subject and Basis of the Sermon.

From these fundamental conceptions concerning the nature and purpose of the sermon in general, homiletics passes to the treatment of the quality of the individual sermon, i.e., material and formal homiletics. Since edification is the purpose of the sermon, while the possibility of edification through the individual sermon is dependent upon its quality, the first question is, What can homiletics teach in regard to the subject

348

to be treated by the preacher? A first requisite is that it be a subject which corresponds to the need of the congregation; the assembled congregation again is to be considered as a part of the great congregation of God which has been founded upon the redemption of Christ. This work of redemption is celebrated by an annual cycle of festivals which forms the basis of the so-called Church Year (q.v.; and see Calendar, the Christian). On such festivals the facts underlying them should form the subject of the sermon. Under certain circumstances there may arise in congregations special needs, independently of the course of the church year, coming with such a force that the sermon must be adapted to them (see �� 9-10). But what should be preached during the long intervals of Sundays on which there are no festivals and no special occasions arising from special needs? The general custom is to take a Biblical text as .basis. While the absolute necessity for a text can not be asserted, such a method has the advantage that it gives the preacher a definite course which is advantageous to the congregation from the very fact that the texts are taken from Scripture and must be treated according to the congregation's need. This method is justified also by the history of preaching and by the fact that congregations are accustomed to it. It would be well if the texts were prescribed by some central authority, because then they would be expounded to a larger number of congregations-a fact of great advantage for ecclesiastical instruction. A well-chosen system of pericopes aids greatly in a survey of the essential truths of the Bible in a comparatively short period. In former times in lieu of texts sermons were based on the catechism and on hymns, these being regarded as paraphrases or presentations of Scripture or its doctrines. The text must really be utilized and not be cited after the manner of a maxim. The indispensable basis for the proper treatment of the text is a comprehensive study of Scripture, and the text should be thoroughly studied in the original language. At the same time the Bible as used in the church must not be discredited before the congregation.

A distinction between the analytical and synthetical sermon was made by Jacob Andrea (q.v.). By analysis he understood the discussion 6. Varieties of the parts of the text, and by syn of Sermons. thesis he understood the union of the individual parts into a whole. The analytical and synthetical activity of the preacher is exercised in his preparation of the sermon, and the audience receives in the sermon the results of this twofold activity. Andrea does not recognize two species of sermons, but every sermon, according to him, contains analytical and synthetical constituents. It was only in the later development that two kinds of sermons were recognized, which, however, were still capable of being combined. Thus Mosheim asserts (ut sup., p. 265): We have three kinds of sermons: (1) Analytical sermons, in which the text is traversed and explained word by word and sentence by sentence; (2) synthetical sermons, in which one doctrine of faith or of life is drawn from the text and then elaborated; (3) mixed sermons, in which first the text is explained and then special truths elicited from the text are worked out. The name "homily" for the sermons that follow the text step by step seems to have arisen in the first half of the eighteenth century.

In considering the structure of the sermon, homiletics can dispense with the assistance of rhetoric. As theological conceptions concerning q. The the Church and congregation, the life Structure of communion and Holy Scripture of the are sufficient as a general basis for Sermon. homiletics, the same is true also in regard to all questions that arise with relation to the individual sermon. The structure of the individual sermon may be explained from the sermon itself. The preacher must prepare the congregation for what he intends to deliver, and must awaken its interest. He is further naturally intent upon keeping awake this interest until the close of the church service and beyond it. From these points of view results what homiletics has to say on the introduction, on its necessity and proper quality, as well as on the different ways of concluding the sermon. The preacher will, furthermore, arrange what he has to say according to his purpose (dispositio). In order that the congregation may better follow, it must in time be informed of the course of the sermon (propositio). Homiletics may treat also the linguistic side of the sermon. The preacher must before everything take pains to use expressions intelligible to his congregation; he must take care not to transfer his hearers into the sphere of worldly things by his manner of expression; he must use his own words and not imitate the language of the Bible.

The last duty of homiletics is to treat of the preparation of the sermon and of its delivery. Here, too, homiletics needs no assistance 8. Prepara- from other branches of science. The tion and necessity of preparation is justified Delivery. from the circumstance that the sermon is a regularly recurring act of worship and therefore, like every other act of worship, needs forethought. Moreover, since the sermon is destined to serve the life of the congregation, it follows that sermon-preparation is not an episode in the life of the preacher to be postponed till Saturday, but extends over the preacher's whole life. In the matter of delivery, whether the preacher shall or shall not use manuscript, homiletics can not pronounce unconditionally; the oldest Christian sermon transmitted was read (Clement ii. 19). But it should be remembered that speaking without manuscript corresponds more closely to the nature of the sermon, and that it is no mere whim of congregations which requires this method of their preachers. See Preaching, History of; HOMILARIUM.

(W. CASPARI.)

An occasional address is one that has reference to an event which has importance for the spiritual life of an individual Christian or of a g. The Christian community, such as baptism, Occasional the celebration of marriage, a funeral, Address. and the like. It is distinguished from the sermon only by the form and place of delivery. While the sermon on Sundays and holy days deals with needs common to members of the

349

congregation, the purpose of the occasional address is to use any given occurrence in the life of the individual or of the congregation for the upbuilding of faith of those who take part in the ceremony. The liturgical act of the Church which is occasioned by a special case is purely objective; the species of address under consideration, however, regards primarily the individual or individuals, justly presupposing that the effect of the case and of the Word in connection with it is dependent upon the quality of the persons primarily concerned. Truthfulness and appositeness with reference to the special oocurrence which has occasioned the address are the most fundamental demands. The preacher must therefore have closely observed the life of the members of his congregation and must be in sympathy with their joys and sufferings. He must not exaggerate praise or blame, being guided by the demand for truthfulness. He can not speak at the grave of a man who has kept aloof from the church as he may of a faithful and living member. The purpose of this form of address is to win hearts for Christ; if an address at the baptism of a child in a worldiyminded family, for instance, expresses merely joy over the birth of a son and does not exhort the parents to bring up their child in the fear of the Lord, that address has not been used for the upbuilding of faith. Such an address will produce spiritual gain only if it is based on the Word. It need not necessarily be based upon a special text of the Bible, but its whole substance must be pervaded by the spirit of the Word. Its form is that of the sermon, but although it centers around a uniform thought, it has no theme and divisions like a sermon.

The occasional address is found also in the New Testament. The words of Jesus when sending forth the twelve disciples (Matt. x.) io. History and the seventy disciples (Luke x.) are of the in a certain sense addresses of installaOccasionaltion. The model of a valedictory ser-

Address. mon is found in the address of Paul to the elders at Ephesus (Acts xx. 18 sqq.). Examples of addresses on special occasions are preserved by Eusebius, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, and other Fathers. A collection of such addresses from the fourth and fifth centuries has been translated from Greek and Latin by J. C. W. Augusti (Predigten auf alle SontN and Festtage des Kirchenjahres, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1838-39). In the Middle Ages the development of the liturgical form put free speech into the background. The Reformation, however, by emphasizing the right of the in dividual, engendered a revival of the occasional address. In spite of all decided emphasis upon the objective value of ecclesiastical acts, it made. their effect dependent upon the disposition of the receiving subject. The address usually precedes the ecclesiastical ceremony because its purpose is to prepare the persons concerned for the reception of the blessing which the ceremony confers. On account of this connection with ceremonial, the principal thoughts of the occasional address must center in the essence, effect, and ensuing obligation of those acts. There are addresses on such occasions as baptism, confirmation, confession, marriage,

funerals, ordination, installation, consecration of churches, cemeteries, holy vessels, organs, bells, and the like. There are also to be mentioned sermons on non-ecclesiastical events, such as floods, storms, conflagrations, as well as for special ecclesiastical or general religious occasions.

(J. L. Sommer.)

The history and development of homiletical teaching in the British Islands and the United States have necessarily been guided and formed by the religious, educational, and social character of the peoples and institutions of those 11. Homi- countries. Formal teaching of homiletics in letics seems not to have had so large

Great Brit- a place in the education of the minisain and try in England and Scotland as in the

America. United States; and the output of hom iletical literature is correspondingly larger in America. The seventeenth century is the starting point for a survey of Anglo-American homiletics. The great English preaching of that epoch-both Anglican and Puritan-profoundly and permanently influenced all, that has followed it; and this in respect both to practise and theory. As early as 1613 there appeared a treatise by Will iam Perkins, originally written in Latin but trans lated by Thorpas Tuke under the title The Arte of Prophecying. It contains eleven chapters and dis cusses such topics as The Word of God, Interpre tation and Expounding, Applying Doctrines, Mem orie in Preaching, Promulgation (i.e., Delivery). Several other works of less importance followed this, and in 1667 appeared one from Bishop John Wilkins of Chester, who thus expresses the essence of his teaching: " The principal scope of a divine orator should be to teach clearly, convince strongly, persuade powerfully. Suitable to the chief parts of a sermon are these three: Explication, Confirmation, Application." These subjects are enlarged upon and unfolded in a dry scholastic manner. These and some other works are noticed by Kidder, but none seem to be of great importance. In the eighteenth century a few English and Scotch au thors wrote on the art of preaching. Chief among these treatises are those of Philip Doddridge (1751), George Campbell (Lectures on pulpit Eloquence, 1775), and the once well-known Rhetoric of Hugh Blair, who devotes several chapters of his work to the eloquence of the pulpit. In the nineteenth century the literature greatly increased in amount and value; but interest in the subject, while con siderable, does not seem to have kept pace in Eng land with that displayed in Germany and the United States. In America the first treatise on the theory of preaching was that of the famous Doctor Cotton Mather, which appeared under the title Manuductio in Ministertum (Boston, 1726). Pedantic and quaint, it is characteristic of author and age, but has no other than historic value. The effective beginning of homiletical teaching in the United States dates from the founding of Andover Theo logical Seminary in 1807. There was established a chair of "Sacred Rhetoric," to which was called, in 1812, Ebenezer Porter. He taught the subject with earnestness and success, writing several minor works and finally publishing his Lectures on Homi-

350

letics and Preaching (New York, 1834). This pioneer work has been followed by a long and brilliant line of continuance. Distinguished professors and preachers have produced a literature great in sum, for the most part excellent in quality, and devoted to every phase of the work of preaching. The Yale Lectureship on Preaching, .founded in 1871, has added some notable works to homiletical literature. Homiletics has long been an established discipline in the curricula of theological schools of all the leading denominations of Christians in the United States.

As to the word "homiletics" the etymology, while interesting, does not throw much light upon the present usage. After the analogy of other scientific nomenclature the term has obtained rec ognition, though by no means exclu-

12. Definition

sive use, as describing the body of and knowledge and principles pertaining Treatment. to the composition and delivery of sermons. Most of the treatises on the subject appear under other and various titles, though the largest number under any one title employ the term "homiletics." One of the beat known American books on the subject bears the title A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (by J. A. Broadus, Philadelphia, 1870, 25th ed., by E. C. Dargan, New York, 1905), and another is The Theory of Preaching (by A. Phelps, New York, 1881). These may be accepted as definitions of homiletics; to which may be added the elaborate statement of Dr. W. M. Taylor in his article in the first edition of this work: " It is the science which treats of the analysis, classification, preparation, composition, and delivery of sermons, viewed as addressed to the popular mind on subjects suggested by the word of God, and designed for the conversion of sinners and the edification of believers (ii. 1014). " And this may be taken as a representative statement of the Anglo-American view of homiletics. Preaching is primarily a distinctive institution of Christianity, and secondarily a kind of public speaking. This order of thought determines the relation of homiletics to general rhetoric and should make discussion unnecessary. Any wise and earnest study of the beat methods of presenting the truths of the gospel to the people in such manner as to win acceptance for them, must take account of what history, experience, and culture bring forward as the tested principles of suecessful public speaking. Homiletics, therefore, may rightly be regarded as the application of rhetoric to preaching. But the origin, history, concomitants, materials, and aims of preaching are so different from those of other kinds of public speaking as to require distinctive treatment. Treatises and courses of homiletical instruction differ in many details, but the essentials are not far to seek. The four leading topics of homiletics are: Material, Arrangement, Style, Delivery, or, in the old Latin terminology: Inventio, Diapoaitib, Elocutio, Pro. nunciatio. Under "Materials" first place belongs to Scripture, and the selection, interpretation, exposition, and enforcement of Bible texts is to be considered. Other materials of dbecourse, such as narrative, description, argument, illustration, and application have their place. In "Arrangement" or "Division," custom and proprieties call for some peculiarities of sermon analysis; but in general the usual counsels of rhetoric are here applicable. For " Style " or " Diction," homiletics urges the importance of the grammatical qualities of correctness and propriety, and of the rhetorical qualities of clearness and force, with such attention to beauty or ornament as may serve the higher ends of preaching. In "Delivery" homiletics considers three methods: reading from manuscript, recitation from memory of a previously written discourse, speaking freely after various sorts or degrees of previous preparation. Anglo-American homiletics takes little account of recitation; a few homileticians practise and defend reading from manuscript; but the consensus of opinion and practise decidedly favors the so-called extemporaneous method, while insisting upon thorough preparation. Elocution, or the training and practise of voice and gesture, is sometimes taught under homiletics and sometimes made a special discipline. Together with these technical aspects of homiletics there are a number of closely related and highly important subjects which claim incidental or special treatment according to, circumstances, such as the character of the preacher, his view of his work, his relation to his age and people, his habits and methods of study, and many other matters which directly and powerfully influence his preaching.

E. C. Dargan.

Literature.--An exhaustive list is not attempted; only those books which are considered most important or representative are mentioned. Works dealing with related subjects, such as Pastoral Theology and the History of Preaching, are omitted.

Bibliography: In spite of what is said in the text, such works on rhetoric se J. Genung, Outlines of Rhetoric, Boston, 1893, and A. S. Hill, Principles of Rhetoric, New York 1895 may not be neglected in laying a foundation for the work of preaching. Of historical importance are: W. Perkins, The Arts of Prophayinp, 1813; J. Wilkins, Ecclesiastes, or a Discourse concerning as Gift of Preaching, London, 1649; J. Glanvil, Essay concerning Preaching, ib: 1678; T. Blackwell, Methodus Evangelica, ib. 1712; Sir Richard Blackmore, The Accomplished Preacher, ed. J. White, 1731; P. Doddridge, Lectures on Preaching and the Ministerial Office, London, 1751; G. Campbell, Lectures on Pulpit Eloquence, ib. 1775; E. Porter, Lectures on Homiletics and Preaching, New York, 1834. Among the many handbooks and treatises the following may be reckoned important: T. H. Skinner, Aide to Preaching and Hearing, New York 1839; J. W. Alexander, Thoughts on Preaching, 1861; D. P. Kidder, Treatise on Homiletics ib., 1864; T. J. Potter, Sacred Eloquence, London, 1866; idem The Spoken Word, ib. 1872; W. G. T. Shedd, Homiletics and Pastoral Thlogy, New York, 1867; R. L. Dabney, Sacred Rhetoric, Richmond, 1886; J. Parker, Ad Clerum, London, 1870; G. W. Hervey, Christian Rhetoric, New York, 1873; C. H. Spurgeon, Lectures to my Students, 3 series, London, 1875-94; R. S. Storrs, Conditions of Success in Preaching without Notes, New York, 1875; A. Vinet, Homilitiqae, Paris, 1874, Eng. transl., Homiletics, New York, 1880 (long a standard); M. Simpson, Lectures on Preaching, ib 1879; H W. Beecher Yale Lectures on Preaching, ib. 1881; H. Burgess, The Art of Preaching, London, 1881; R. W. Dale, Lectures on Preaching, ib. 1882; A. Phelps, Theory of Preaching, ib. 1882; idem Men and Books, ib. 1882; idem, English Style in Pulpit Discourse, ib. 1883 (Professor Phelps was reckoned one of the great masters in homiletics); J. M. Hoppun. Homiletics, ib. 1883; A. Kraus, Lelubuch den Homiletik, Gotha, 1883; N. J. Burton, Leeturse on Preach. inp, New York, 1884; F. W. Fiske, A Manual of Preach-

351

imp, ib. 1884; H. Bassermann, Handbuck der peiatlidlien BeredeamkeiR Stuttgart, 1885; A. Stole, Honiletik, Freiburg, 1885; J. A. BroaAus, Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, New York, 1888 (Professor Broadue earned a wide reputation for his .kill in this branch); J. W. Etter, The Preacher and his Sermon, Dayton, O., 1888; C. Palmer, Evangelische Homiletik, Stuttgart, 1887; A. J. F. Behrends, The Philosophy of Preaching, New York, 1890; A. T. Pierson, The Divine Art of Preaching, ib. 1892; T. Christlieb, Homiletik, Basel, 1893; R. F. Horton, Ve bum Doi, Londop, 1893; W. B. Carpenter, Lectures on Preaching, London, 1895; J. Jungmann, Theorie der paiat lichen Beredamkeit, 2 vols., Freiburg, 1895; J. stalker, The Preacher and his Models, London, 1895; 1. Stoek meyer, Homil6tik, Basel, 1895; Phillips Brooks, Lectures on Preaching, New York, 1898; H. Van Dyke, Gospel for an Age of Doubt, ib. 1898; J. A. Kern, Ministry to the Congregation, ib. 1897; T. H. Pattison, The Making of a Sermon,, Philadelphia, 1898; H. Hering, Die Lehre ton der Predipt, 2 vols., Berlin, 1897-1904; J. S. Kennard, Psychic Power in Preaching, Philadelphia, 1901; F. Bar ton, Pulpit Power and Eloquence, 2 vols., Cleveland, 1901 1902; T. H: Pattison, Hist. of Christian Preaching, Philadel phia, 1903; W. J. Fosell, The Sermon and Preaching, New York, 1904; J. J. A. Proudfoot, Systematic Homiletics, ib. 1904; A. S. Hoyt, The Work of Preaching, ib. 19M; L. O. Brastow, The Modern Pulpit, ib. 1908; A. E. Garvie, A Guide to mss, London, 19118; H. C. Graves, Lectures on Homiletics, Philadelphia, 1908; W. Rhodes, Homiletics and Preaching, Baltimore, 1908; P. T. Forsyth. Positive Preaching and the Positive Mind, New York, 1907; S. Horne, The Ministry of the Modern Church, London, 1904; P. Kleinert, Homildik, Leipsic 1907; H. Johnson, The Ideal Ministry, New York, 1908; C. R. Brown, The Social Message of the Modern Pulpit