CHAPTER XX.

INFLUENCE OF THE PRIVATE CHARACTER OF THE PREACHER UPON HIS HEARER! -MEMORIZING.-EXTEMPORIZATION.

"How do you like him?" inquired the Abbé de Fénélon of his uncle, as they left Bourdaloue's residence.

“I will not pronounce," replied the marquis. "You were right in wishing to defer this visit. We were there at an unfortunate moment."

"I was just going to remark that to you. We have not really seen Father Bourdaloue; the visit is yet to be made."

"Is he then generally so different from what we have seen him ?"

66

'Different, no; I do not know a more even character than his. You have seen the churchman, and a little also of the preacher to-day; but you have not had opportunity to become acquainted with the agreeable man, the man of talent-"

"And that is not what I wanted, either."

"You do not quite understand me. I know that there are churchmen, who consider themselves as lacking nothing because they have talent and are agreeable; I should take good care not to commend such as those. But it seems to me that it is possible to be agreeable with gravity,—and witty with decency. It is difficult, but it is possible, and of this M. Bourdaloue is a proof. At table, for instance, he excels in keeping the guests breathlessly interested. He relates admirably; he calls forth

thought,―he causes laughter; the hours fly. And if you should afterwards go over all he has said, you do not find a single word unworthy of a priest."

"I believe you, and still,-I have already a little less desire to see him again, and to associate with him. Laugh at my scruples if you will; but it seems to me that if a man is really desirous to be edified by the sermons of any preacher, he should avoid seeing him elsewhere than in the pulpit. It is better that I should never hear a man who is to speak to me of God and my sa vation, speak of less serious things, that I should never hear him laugh and jest, even with decorum, and within bounds. I do not insist that laughing or jesting should be interdicted to him; but if I cannot condemn him to unchanging gravity, I can at least condemn myself not to see him in those moments when he is not grave. In truth, it is one of the reasons which induced me to delay becoming acquainted with Father Bourdaloue. Not that I had any particular reason for thinking that in this instance to know the private man would spoil the preacher for me, but it seemed to me more prudent to leave untouched the illusions by which I had always seen him surrounded. You will not go and tell him all that-I hope-"

66

Why do you think he would be offended? It is only a proof of your respect for religion. You are so anxious to honor it and to see its full power, that you do not wish to expose yourself to the liability of seeing the frailties of its ministers. You must however confess, it is fortunate that people are in general less scrupulous, and that the familiar intercourse which one may have had with a preacher out of the pulpit, is not necessarily an obstacle to the efficacy of his discourses. For myself, impossible as it would be for me to listen with profit to a preacher whom I had heard talk unbecomingly in private, it is still quite easy for me again to recognize the man of God in him with whom I may

have happened to jest in an innocent conversation. However, it is fortunate that there are some preachers, as you would wish all to be-always grave, always serious; but it is well also, that there are also those who are fitted to hold intercourse with the world." 'Perhaps so; but it seems to me that all those who meddle with the world go too far."

66

"All? you go too far there; and a second time I beg you to except Monsieur Bourdaloue. But your observation is only too true; if not for all, at least for many. We are but men, alas! it is a difficult position.-Use and abuse are so nearly connected. Some can talk of nothing but religion; others, on the pretext that it must not forever be dwelt upon, never talk of it at all; but when they preach, they have the air of performing a task,-of going into the pulpit because the bell has rung, and they are paid for it. If it were necessary to decide without alternative between these two classes of preachers, you may well think that I should not hesitate to decide for the first; but as to approving of them altogether, I cannot do that."

"I see, indeed, that there must be a medium; but where is it to be placed? And above all, how keep to this medium ?"

"It is not a thing which can be pointed out by rules. If a preacher should ask me about this, I should tell him, 'Be a true Christian, and all will go right of itself. You will then have neither the puerile tone of piety of those who seem to think themselves always in the pulpit, nor the entirely worldly language of those men who know not the language of Christianity or the Bible; you will neither seem to be continually preaching, or to be preaching only at certain hours. Does it follow that everybody will be satisfied with your conduct? No,* certainly not. You must expect to be accused of worldliness by some, and pre

"The people of the world are so strange; they can neither suffer our approbation nor our censures. If we wish to counsel them, they

cision by others

But go on your way. Two contradictory accusations are always the most satisfactory; they indicate that you deserve neither the one nor the other.'"

"Yes; provided always that these two accusations fall upon the same subject, for a preacher could with justice be accused of intolerance in his sermons, and worldliness in his conduct."

"Yes; and some unfortunately do not understand that. Forced to confess that habitually they have neither the gravity nor the piety which they should have, they look upon a sermon as an opportunity for making up for this, for reinstating themselves as it were. They seem to say, 'it will be seen whether the ideas, the doctrines, the language of religion are less familiar to me, than to any one else; it will be seen if I do not know how to be severe And so they are severe, but awkwardly so; they seem to do penance at the expense of their audience, who, indeed, are very little moved by this transient piety and borrowed severity; and it is indeed fortunate if they do not draw from it inferences unfavorable to religion itself, and visit upon those preachers who are sincerely pious and severe, the discredit into which the others have fallen. This indeed, is the great evil. There are few people capable of looking at things in such a light that they will not allow the responsibility of our weaknesses to rest upon our religion. It is unjust,-absurd; and yet so it is. If there is too great a difference between your language in the world, and your language in the pulpit, you will perhaps be listened to as an orator; but as for real and salutary influence, you will have none. You must not seem, then, to possess two different characters, nor must your sermon seem to be something out of the way and exceptional, something for which you gather together all your strength, and metamorphose yourself. Your enthink it ridiculous; if we applaud them, they look upon us as persons inferior to our character."-Persian letters.

tering the pulpit must seem to you to be a simple and natural action, the necessary consequence of your every-day life; you must, in one word, appear there as you do elsewhere, ennobled, but not changed. And I cannot help blaming certain little things, very innocent in themselves, but contrary to the spirit which I should wish to see actuate our preachers. Nothing, for instance, is more painful to me than to hear a sermon spoken of as a labor. It is complained of, fretted about. The composition of it does not get on; the memory is bad; it is this thing or that thing. A conscientious preacher is certainly justified in finding his task a heavy one; let him lament this if he will, since lamentations bring relief; but let it not be in the tone of a schoolboy to whom his master has given a double task.”

"These complaints would not be so frequent, I think," said M. de Fénélon, " if preachers were permitted to read their discourses The exertion of the memory is always accompanied with a cer tain excitability, which easily turns into ill humor. A man studying hard is not altogether at his ease."

“Yes,—we have just seen the proof of that. But the remedy would be worse than the evil."

66

Why so? I know people who read better than they recite." "So do I; but there are a great many more who recite better than they read. And when I say better, I do not mean more correctly, nor more agreeably; I only mean that they make more impression, and that is my touchstone. And even admitting the two to be equally well done, do you count as nothing the destruction of all oratorical illusion by the presence of a manuscript? You know my system; I would have improvisation;—and in default of it, I would have the appearance of it.—And how could that be managed with a manuscript !"

"You exaggerate. If the reading be cold and monotonous, I admit that the unlucky manuscript will succeed in completing the

.