of each author prefixed, containing critical observations on their writings. These prefaces were afterwards republished in four separate volumes, to which was given the title of Johnson's "Lives of the Pocts." It is here that the philosophical talents of this great man were fully developed. If a vigorous understanding, a sound judgment, a scrutinizing penetration, comprehensive knowledge, and a discriminating sagacity, were qualifications for such an undertaking, it would have been difficult to discover an individual whose native energy of mind, and critical talents, more peculiarly fitted him than Johnson. He possessed the ability to discern, the judgment to commend, and the taste to admire the excellences of his authors, while, at the same time, he had the independence to condemn their failings, even should his animadversions be in opposition to public opinion. The man who would singly dispute the admiration of his contemporaries, chooses for himself a hazardous undertaking. But the mind of Johnson did not deign to stoop to vulgar prejudices, and his nobleness of spirit spurned at opposing the dictates of truth and sound judgment, though error was popular in the best of company. When we compare the decision of his criticisms with the rules of taste, and the learned Institutes of Aristotle and Quintilian, we are irresistibly compelled to revere his opinions. The "Lives of the English Poets" may justly be considered as the noblest specimen of elegant and solid criticism which any age has produced. It is, however, a matter of surprise, that he should have included many in his list of English Poets, who are much less entitled to this distinction, than others, who are omitted. In all his work he gives no excuse for excluding the admired author of the Fairy Queen.

His enemies accuse him of writing, in his life of Milton, with a mind warped by unmanly prejudice, and mingling the feelings of party spirit and bigotry in his delineation of the poet. If he has not bestowed the just meed of panegyric as the biographer of Milton, all must allow that he has done him ample justice as his commentator. His criticism of "Paradise Lost" would have done honor to any pen. As that poem is a production which the genius of Milton only could have produced, so the criticism of Johnson is such as only Johnson could have written.

His "Life of Pope " is a masterly effort of acute judgment and critical skill. He was, perhaps, as justly able to estimate the genius and poetical talents of that English bard, as any man living. Friendship had induced him to write the "Life of Savage," which is prized as one of the finest pieces of biography now extant. His other lives more or less partake of the genius of a writer, who, for nervous elegance and justness of sentiment, has scarcely a competitor. His two prefaces, the one to his "English Dictionary," the other to an edition of Shakspeare, which was published under his superintendence, will long remain the astonishment and admiration of mankind. Few writers have obtained any approach to competition with these pieces. Though entirely different in their subject, the same closeness of thought, purity of diction, nervous strength, and dignity of style, in each are equally conspicuous. Never had an estimate of the genius and merits of Shakspeare been given to the world, to which it would have been safe to yield implicit credence. The truth was, no one had perfectly understood him. He threw light upon parts of his character, which had never before been exposed to view. Learned investigation enabled Johnson to see his author in an aspect which previous commentators had either never noticed, or never had the sagacity to discern. He compares his performances with the rules which the genius of antiquity had discovered and illustrated, and not with the prejudices of modern arrogance and imbecility. He gave the most exalted commendation to a mind, whose intuitive intelligence rendered the laborious acquirement of knowledge, and the culture of study, as but a secondary assistance to its operations; and, though mankind should place but little value upon his commentaries on the text, they may justly feel indebted for his development of the genius of Shakspeare. It is

not a matter of wonder, that the exquisitely beautiful preface to the edition of Shakspeare's plays, should lay claim to such superlative merit. Whether we regard the abundance and classical selection of its allusions, the accuracy and justice of the criticisms, or its just appreciation of the excellences and defects of the poet, it is equally the subject of admiration.

The literary character of Dr. Johnson, may, perhaps, receive illustration by examining his life, as well as by criticising his writings. That prejudice should have found no place in a mind of such astonishing energy, would seem as wonderful as it must have been rare. It would seem equally strange, if his antipathies were not sometimes manifested in the heat of passion, or in the ardor of debate. The Scotch and Dissenters, the scholars of Cambridge and the Whigs, were often mentioned with more acrimony than discretion. There was, perhaps, no man who more strenuously advocated the principles of subordination, and few who displayed them less in practice. The tempers of men are more under the influence of external circumstances than moral writers in general are disposed to allow. Dr Johnson too severely felt the weight of disappointment and penury in his early years. At a later period, he was gratified by applause and universal adulation. Can it be wonderful, then, that, with the strong feelings of vigorous passions, and the common failings of human nature, he should, at times, be carried away in conversation, and in hasty compositions, farther than his maturer judgment would sanction, or the better feelings of his heart approve. There were few men whose colloquial powers could give more delight to those around him, and scarcely another whose insulted feelings were more awfully dreaded. Though he might not pass for a scientific scholar, the world can have little reason to doubt the extent of his learning, or the unbounded range of his information. His desultory manner of reading made his knowledge more comprehensive than minute; and his quickness of perception gave him an astonishing facility in grasping the ideas of an author without tiring his patience by perusing a whole book. His extraordinary powers of understanding were much cultivated by study, and still more by reflection. The accuracy of his observations, and the justness of his remarks, were the result of mature deliberation and depth of meditation, before he uttered his sentiments; and his memory furnished him with an inexhaustible fund, from which his reasonings were assisted and enforced. The aptness of his illustrations was a strong evidence of the sagacity of his perceptions, and the soundness of his judgment. His observations received additional weight from the loudness of his voice, and the solemnity with which they were delivered. The sophistry of an antagonist always fell a prey to the piercing glance of his penetration; and he became the more elated by triumph when his opponents had been most decided. The great originality which appeared in his writings, resulted from an activity of mind, which habit had accustomed to reason with precision. His conceptions of things sprang not from idle thought or indolent reflection, but from the keen energies of a vigorous intellect, assisted by the efforts of a soaring imagination. His conversation was striking, interesting, and instructive, and required no exertion to be understood, from the perspicuity and force of his remarks; and his zeal for the interests of religion and virtue was often manifested in his discourse. He was expert at argumentation, and the schools of declamation could not boast of a more subtle reasoner, or a more artful sophist, when his side was a bad one; for he often disputed as much for the sake of victory as of truth. His answers were so powerful, that few dared to engage with him. Universal submission, it is likely, gave an apparent dogmatism which he otherwise might not have possessed. If there was an aspect of harsh severity in his retorts, it should be remembered, how frequently they were provoked by the insults of impertinence and the conceit of ignorance. The specious garb of dissimulation he despised. A noble spirit of indepedence actuated his demeanor. He did not violate the integrity of his feelings by stooping to gratify the pride of rank, when unaccompanied

by a superiority of intellect commensurate with its dignity. His utter abhorrence of flattery and adulation lost him that patronage of the great, which he otherwise might probably sooner have acquired; and he rose to eminence rather by the unassisted efforts of his own genius, than the encouragements of the rich and the learned. He was little indebted to the assistance of his friends for his great reputation. The irresistible energy of his character carried him through all his difficulties with an unbroken spirit, and an unblemished fame. If he paid not his court to the noble, it was not from disrespect to the subordinations of rank in society, but a dislike to the arts of dissimulation, and an aversion to the degradation of science at the shrine of patronage. His sarcastic letter to the Earl of Chesterfield is a noble specimen of his independence of spirit, and his contempt of the servile arts of adulation. It is a feeling exposition of the hardships he had endured, until royal munificence placed him beyond the boundaries of want, and smoothed his descent to the grave.

His knowledge of the Greek language, in comparison with his acquaintance with the Latin, was superficial. In his early years, he had devoted himself so closely to the study of the ancient poets, that it may be questioned, if his familiarity with them in his own times could find a superior. His decisive denunciations against the genuineness of Ossian's poems, created him many opponents, upon a subject, respecting which, “truth had never been established, or fallacy detected."

It is not a little strange, that, in many instances, the biographers of Johnson have appeared like enemies. It may, however, be observed, that few men could have stood the ordeal to which the minuteness of Boswell exposed him, with so much honor to the reputation of their heart and their head. This mighty Caliban of literature is here stripped of every disguise, and held up to public view. Though the world has been delighted and improved by the record of his converation, in which his learning, his genius, and his undisguised sentiments have so conspicuously shone forth, it cannot but be allowed, that it is informed of much, which it was not important, and, perhaps, was not proper for it to know; and that the coloring which the painter has given to his portrait, will admit of many different shades, from which the partiality of friendship should have guarded his pencil. It is here, however, that we may trace the incredible vastness of an intellect, destined to become the glory of his country, and the pride of English literature.

We may contemplate the gigantic powers of Johnson's mind with feelings similar to those sublime emotions with which we view the boundless expanse of the ocean, fathomless to human measurement, and whose capacity exceeds our conception. In his writings appears more conspicuously than in his conversation the compass and extent of his understanding. His faculties were vigorous, his curiosity and avidity for knowledge insatiable and unlimited, his mind vehement and ardent, the combinations of his fancy various and original, and his imagination neither clouded or depressed by the discipline of study, or the misfortunes of life. His readers are delighted and astonished at the wonderful beauty of his conceptions, and the depth of reflection which his opinions discover. In his style he is dignified and forcible, in his language elegant and copious. He gives to every word its true meaning, and its illustrative purport. His epithets are used with judgment and discrimination. Every thing which he says has a determinate significancy, and his words convey no more than the import of his conceptions. If he introduces hard words, their peculiar adaptation to his meaning should atone for his grandiloquism. It should also be remembered, that Cicero introduced Greek terms, when treating upon learned subjects, to supply the deficiency of the Roman language, and that the "great and comprehensive conceptions of Johnson could not easily be expressed by common words."

Should it be thought that the style of this learned author has injured our

language, he must have committed this injury by making it more subordinate to grammatical rules. Foreigners and future generations will be more capable of understanding it, since he has excluded expressions which are only to be found in colloquial intercourse and vulgar phraseology. From his example, men may learn to give to their style energy, perspicuity, and elegance. They may acquire a habit of close thinking, and become accustomed to express their ideas with force and precision.

His political writings will be read and admired only for the dignity and energy of their style. His compositions are a most valuable addition to the literature of his country, and will confer a lasting reputation on his name. They are replete with "useful instruction, and elegant entertainment," and by perusing them, mankind may advance in knowledge and virtue. The efforts of his mind discover a life of study and meditation. His writings display a genius cultivated with industry, and quickened by exertion. His multifarious productions are an honor to the English nation; and his answer to his sovereign might more fairly be allowed, "that he had written his share," if he had not written so well. His mind has been laid open to the public in his printed works, without "reservation or disguise ;" and, with all his faults and failings, he is still the admiration of mankind.

XCVII.

ON THE COMPOSITION OF A SERMON.*

On the Choice of Texts.

There are, in general, five parts of a sermon: the exordium, the connexion, the division, the discussion, and the application; but as connexion and division are parts which ought to be extremely short, we can properly reckon only three parts: exordium, discussion, and application. However, we will just take notice of connexion and division after we have spoken a little on the choice of texts, and a few general rules of discussing them.

1. Never choose such texts as have not complete sense; for only impertinent and foolish people will attempt to preach from one or two words which signify nothing.

2. Not only words which have a complete sense of themselves must be taken, but they must also include the complete sense of the writer whose words they are; for it is his language, and they are his sentiments, which you explain, For example, should you take these words of 2 Cor. 1: 3. "Blessed be God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort," and stop here, you will include a complete sense; but it would not be the Apostle's sense. Should you go farther, and add, "who comforteth us in all our tribulation," it would not then be the complete sense of St. Paul, nor would his meaning be wholly taken in, unless you went to the end of the fourth verse. When the complete sense of the sacred writer is taken, you may stop; for there are few texts in Scripture, which do not afford matter sufficient for a sermon, and it is equally inconvenient to take too much text or too little; both extremes must be avoided.

These directions and remarks are taken from Hannam's "Pulpit Assistant." The student will also find much aid from Gresley's "Treatise on Preaching.'

General rules of sermons. 1. A sermon should clearly and purely explain a text, make the sense easily to be comprehended, and place things before the people's eyes, so that they may be understood without difficulty. This rule condemns embarrassment and obscurity, the most disagreeable thing in the world in a gospel pulpit. It ought to be remembered, that the greatest part of the hearers are simple people, whose profit, however, must be aimed at in preaching: but it is impossible to edify them, unless you be very clear. Bishop Burnett says, a preacher is to fancy himself as in the room of the most unlearned man in the whole parish, and must therefore put such parts of his discourses as he would have all understand, in so plain a form of words, that it may not be beyond the meanest of them. This he will certainly study to do, if his desire be to edify them, rather than to make them admire himself as a learned and high spoken man."

66

2. A sermon must give the entire sense of the whole text, in order to which it must be considered in every view. This rule condemns dry and barren explications, wherein the preacher discovers neither study nor invention, and leaves unsaid a great number of beautiful things with which his text might have furnished him. In matters of religion and piety, not to edify much is to destroy much; and a sermon cold and poor will do more mischief in an hour, than a hundred rich sermons can do good.

3. The preacher must be wise, in opposition to those impertinent people who utter jests, comical comparisons, quirks, and extravagances; sober, in opposition to those rash spirits who would penetrate all, and curiously dive into mysteries beyond the bounds of modesty; chaste, in opposition to those bold and imprudent geniuses who are not ashamed of saying many things which produce unclean ideas in the mind.

4. A preacher must be simple and grave. Simple, speaking things of good natural sense, without metaphysical speculations; grave, because all sorts of vulgar and proverbial sayings ought to be avoided. The pulpit is the seat of good natural sense, and the good sense of good men.

5. The understanding must be informed, but in a manner, however, which affects the heart; either to comfort the hearers, or to excite them to acts of piety, repentance, or holiness.

6. One of the most important precepts for the discussion of a text, and the composition of a sermon, is, above all things, to avoid excess:

1. There must not be too much genius. I mean, not too many brilliant, sparkling, and shining things: for they would produce very bad effects. The auditor will never fail to say, "The man preaches himself, aims to display his genius, and is not animated by the spirit of God, but by that of the world."

2. A Sermon must not be overcharged with doctrine, because the hearers' memories cannot retain it all; and by aiming to keep all, they will lose all. Take care, then, not to charge your sermon with too much matter.

3. Care must also be taken never to strain any particular part, either in attempting to exhaust it, or to penetrate too far into it. Frequently in attempting it, you will distil the subject till it evaporates.

4. Figures must not be overstrained. This is done by stretching metaphor into allegory, or by carrying a parallel too far. A metaphor is changed into an allegory when a number of things are heaped up, which agree to the subject in keeping close to the metaphor. Allegories may sometimes be used very agreeably: but they must not be strained: that is, all that can be said of them must not be said.

5. Reasoning must not be carried too far. This may be done many ways; either by long trains of reasons, composed of a number of propositions chained together, or principles and consequences, which way of reasoning is embarrassing and painful to the auditor.

to be conducted in a more smooth and easy way.

The mind of man loves

Of connexion. The connexion is the relation of your text to the foregoing or following verses. To find this, consider the scope of the discourse, and consult commentators; particularly exercise your own good sense.