what they do.' When natural religion has heard both, ask, which is the prophet of God? But her answer we have already had; when she saw part of this scene through the eyes of the centurion who attended at the cross, by him she spoke and said, truly this man was the Son of God.'

"The high taste with which this figure is conducted, could hardly have been looked for, from the general strain of the reverend prelate's composition. In point of solidity of matter, of acuteness of reasoning, and of a manly and forcible expression, few, if any, of his cotemporaries could rival him. The highest elegance of composition, however, does not present itself; and yet we occasionally meet with a figure introduced and supported with such taste, as would adorn any piece of eloquence whatsoever.

66

The eloquence of Flechier is of a more temperate kind than that of Bossuet. Though possessing great powers as an orator, he appears to be more disposed, and better able, to restrain them, and must have carried his hearers more generally along with him. His Panegyriques,' like the Oraisons Funèbres" of Bossuet, record the virtues of men of eminence after their death. In these there is to be found little of that extravagant flattery of which Cicero complains in the Roman Laudationes.' He draws his characters with a very masterly hand. In the Panegyrique de Saint Louis,' you see as clearly the qualities that give eminence to an illustrious monarch, as in that, De Saint Thomas Archeréque de Canterberry,' you see those that distinguish a persecuted churchman. His sermons upon ordinary subjects are rich in matter, which is clearly his He exhibits a mind that has

own.

no need of any resource without its self. Though Dr. Blair's manner approaches nearer to that of Flechier than to that of any of the other French preachers, yet it does not appear that the Doctor has borrowed any thing from him. In his sermon upon the use of afflictions, you see a preacher deeply interested in the truths which he is enforcing; but, in the midst of his ardour, treating his subject with a simpli city not commonly exhibited in the French pulpit.

Les Oeuvres Spirituelles' of Fenelon, archbishop of Cambray, contain rather loose hints upon a number of religious subjects, than regular sermons upon any one. From these hints, however, owing to the manner in which they are thrown together, succeeding preach ers may have availed themselves; and the plagiarism, at the same time, may not have been easily detected. In his dialogues upon eloquence, the archbishop shews himself a great enemy to the division of sermons into heads. Dr. Blair differs from him upon this point, both in opinion and in practice. Among English preachers, the practice of dividing their discourses is almost constantly maintained; and, among the French, the laying it aside would be productive of the worst of consequences. The latter, from the luxuriance of their imagination, are more apt to deviate from their text; and each head serves as a kind of landmark, to guide the attention of the hearer, and shews him how each part bears upon the general doctrine which it is meant to establish. In these essays of Fenelon's, apostrophes, and quotations from the classics, are as frequent as in the regular discourses of the French. They are, on that account, not adopted as subjects of imitation by preachers

preachers in this country, who have less constitutional liveliness, and are less disposed to make a shew of their learning.

"It is certain, that about the same period, that is, during the reign of Louis XIV., when the most distinguished preachers in France flourished, and before the restoration of Charles II. in England, there was a greater similarity between the sermons of the two countries than afterwards. The English preachers encumbered their discourses with scholastic theology, and classical quotations; but, in certain parts of them, they roused the feelings of their hearers by pathetic addresses. This mode of preaching became unfashionable; and both the pedantry and the animation were laid aside, as unbecoming the dignity of the pulpit. English preaching became dry and argumentative. A sermon was no longer a persuasive popular oration, but approached to a cold metaphysical essay, in which man is treated as a being of pure intellect, and as devoid of imagination and passion. Had the hearer of such a sermon been ignorant of his duty, he would have been ably instructed in it; but were he, as most hearers are, only unwilling to perferm it, no means of persuasion were so much as tried. The sermon did not interest the heart; and the audience retired from it, as little disposed to renounce old vices, and to practise new vintues, as before it was

delivered.

"In the powers of abstract thought and acute reasoning, Dr. Clark, Dr. Barrow, and Bishop Butler, have perhaps no superiors. Respectable as these powers are, however, they will not of themselves form accomplished preachers. Though a false conception is screened by none of the embellishments of language, yet 1807.

by some means only, one that is just and profound gains admission to the heart, and influences, the conduct. Those great divines, who have been now mentioned, shew even a superabundance of logical powers; and, to those who can follow their reasoning, they impart both instruction and delight. În trying to follow their discussions, however, the herd of readers are lost in a maze, from which they can never extricate themselves. By sentiments not accommodated to their apprehension, they gain nothing in point either of intellectual or of moral improvement. The great end of preaching fails, when admission to the heart is not courted by those avenues which lead to it; and the conduct of man can be successfully regulated by those only, who know his compound nature, and who know him as he is.

"The sermons of archbishop Tillotson cannot be held forth as a model, though there is much in them that deserves approbation. He is wise enough not to address men as if they were philosophers merely, but to employ in a certain degree the insinuation of a popular speaker. His piety is sincere, and is regulated by good sense. It is to be regretted, however, that his manner is often uninteresting, and but ill fitted to keep up his hearers' attention. His language, at times, wants nerve; and he seems either disposed to grudge the pains needful to polish it, or to have been mistaken in thinking that those pains would have been mispent.

His style, though occasionally careless, exhibits much elegance and purity. In a critical examination of his sermon upon thanksgiving," Dr. Blair does him ample justice, and shews nothing of the jealousy of a rival. Other sermons of his seem to deserve equal commendation, particularly that concerning the miraculous propagation of the gospel.

"Such are the outlines of the character of those distinguished preachers, both in Great Britain and France, with whom Dr. Blair is entitled to be compared. Each preacher, in each country, exhibits, in a certain degree, the merits and the defects of its style of preaching, as well as those that belong to himself. We might be accused of partiality to the country to which Dr. Blair long did honour, were we to affirm, that he bad surpassed the splendid beauties of Massillon, Bossuet, and Flechier, or the clear and ingenious reasoning of Clark, Barrow, and Butler. In the medium between the extremes to which each set may have leant, he seems to bave been desirous to find a place. He wished to temper the glow of passion with the coolness of reason, and to give such scope only to the imagination of his audience, as would leave the exercise of their

judgment unimpaired. He tried to accommodate his discussions to the apprehension of those whom he ad dressed; and, when called to clucidate the mysteries that bear to be inquired into, he enlivened the dark research by the brilliancy of a wellregulated fancy. The reception which his sermons have met with throughout Europe, after being translated into different languages, proves equally the merit of the preacher, and the candour of his judges. Even those in this country who envy his fame, hold it prudent to be silent, and to seem to set every thing like jealousy asleep. They are afraid to encounter that tide of public opinion, by which they are sure they would be borne down. In France, his sermons were never said to be inanimate; nor were they, in Britain, by good judges, said to be superficial. In both countries they have, at once, given pleasure to the gay, and consolation to the serious. By such a mixture of beauty and usefulness, as the world never be fore witnessed in their line, they have given fashion to a kind of reading that had long been discarded. They have stopped even the volup tuary in his career, and made him leave the haunts of dissipation, that he might listen to the preacher's reproof.

"CIT. ANDREWS, "ST once the seat of the metropolitan bishop of Scotland, and even since the abolition of episcopacy, still famous for its university, exhibits

at a distance, by its large extent, and its remaining steeples, turrets, and spires, an appearance of magni ficence and grandeur. But, on a near approach, the general aspect

of the shore, the priory, and other antient monasteries, the cathedral church, the castle, the residence of the archbishops, and not unfrequently of the kings, the city in every quarter, in some of which the streets are grown over with grass and solid turf, and one whole and very long street levelled with the ground; and, I am sorry to say, even of the colleges, suggests nothing but the melancholy idea of former magnificence and grandeur now in ruins. There was nothing in all this at all surprising to me, as I had been more than twenty years ago for many years a student, both at the Philosophy and Divinity College of St. Andrews, except the present state of the university, which has now assumed an air and tone, completely in unison with the general dreary, desolate, and decayed condition, of that antient, large, and once flourishing city. On inquiring into the number of students, and the changes that had taken place in the different chairs, the reflection that first occurred was the marked contrast between the state of the university, under the inspection of the late chancellor, Thomas earl of Kinnoull, and under the present chancellor, the lord viscount Melville. During the subsistence of episcopacy in Scotland, the archbishop was the over-lord of the university, and held visitations of the university once in every two or three years, and also of the different colleges. For though all the colleges, forming the university, were, and are still, in many respects, most intimately connected in patronage and jurisdiction, they enjoyed, as they do now, powers or prerogatives peculiar to each. Upon the abolition of episcopacy, the crown came in place of the archbishop, and they exercise the same powers as he did,

as often as may be judged proper. I believe there has not been any visitation of the university here, since the establishment of presbytery in Scotland. Visitors would find it here just as it was in the days of Noe-men, eating and drinking, and ntarrying, and giving in marriage.'

"Among the professors who flourished before what may be called the present dynasty of St. Andrews, were, principal Tulideph; Dr. Simson, brother to the celebrated professor of Glasgow, and as nearly related by genius as by blood; Mr. David Gregory, professor of mathematics; Dr. Robert Watson, professor of logic and thetoric; Dr. Wilkie, professor of natural philosophy, author of the Epigoniad; and some other professors, who were both admirably well qualified to fill their stations, and distinguished by a professional zeal, or what was called by the celebrated principal Robertson, the historian, in allusion to them, an academical ardour.

"William, duke of Cumberland, chancellor of the university of St. Andrews, died in 1767. Several persons in high political situations were proposed, by different members of the university, for his successor: but a considerable majority of voices declared in favour of Thomas, earl of Kinnoull, after he had retired from an important and honourable political life; for no other reason than that he was an eminent patron and pattern of religion, and private as well as public virtue; that he inherited all that love and respect for learning, which distinguished his father, one of the most accomplished noblemen of the court of George II. and his maternal grandfather, the illustrious Robert, earl of Oxford; and, that he was