Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 7.djvu/503

 HOMILETICS

445

HOMILETICS

philosophers. It is scarcely necessary to say that many Scholastics, such as Sts. Thomas and Bona- venture, were noted preachers. It is a pity, however, that St. Bonaventure did not treat a little more fully of Dilatalio, which forms the third part of his work "De Arte Concionandi".

In a sketch, however brief, of the history of preach- ing, a reference to the mystics is called for; but, as their preaching cannot be explained without an ex- position of their system, the reader is referred to the article on Mysticism. Suffice it to say here that the tendency of mysticism is, in the main, the opposite to that of philosophy. Mysticism makes for warmth; philosophy, for coldness — " Cold as a mountain in its star-pitched tent stood high philosophy." The next noted period in the history of preaching is the Renais- sance. Tliis period, too, is treated in its proper place. As to preaching. Humanism contributed more to oratorical display than to piety in the pulpit. The motto of its two representative types, Ileuchlin and Erasmus, was: " Back to Cicero and Qmntilian." Erasmus on visiting Rome exclaimed: "Quam mellitas eruditorum hominum confabulationes, quot mundi lumina." Batiffol (Hist, of the Roman Brevi- ary, p. 230) says: "One Good Friday, preaching be- fore the pope, the most famous orator of the Roman Court considered that he could not better praise the Sacrifice of Calvary than by relating the self-devotion of Decius and the sacrifice of Iphigenia." Fortu- nately, this period did not last long; the good sense of ecclesiastics rebelled against it, and the religious up- heaval that soon followed gave them something else to think of. In the Reformation and post-Refor- mation period the air was too charged with controversy to favour high-class preaching. The Council of Trent recommended [ireachers to turn aside from polemics; it also (Sess. V, cap. ii) pronounced that the pri- mary duty of preaching devolved on bishops, unless they were hindered by a legitimate impediment; and ordered that they were to preach in person in their own church, or, if impeded, through others; and, in other churches, through pastors or other representa- tives.

The famous names of the French preachers of the classical seventeenth -century period — according to Voltaire, probably the greatest in pulpit oratory of all time — are fully dealt with in their proper place. It is sufficient to state here that the greatest were Bossuet, Bourdaloue, and Massillon; Fenelon, matchless, probably, for purity of style, burnt his sermons. The first was the most majestic; the second, the most logical and intellectually compelling; the third, the greatest searcher of hearts, the most like Chrysostom, and, taken all in all, the greatest of the three. We are told that Voltaire kept a copy of his " Grand Careme" on his table, side by .side with the " Athalie" of Racine. In this age Chrysostom was the great model for imita- tion; but it was Chrysostom the orator, not Chrysos- tom the homilist. It would be a mistake at the pres- ent day to imitate their style, which was influenced not a little by the unhealthy stimulus of the admiring court of Louis XIV. Their majestic style, with its' grand exordium and its sublime peroration, became the fashion in the succeeding age; but it was a case of ordinary men trying to don the armour, and to handle the weapons, of giants, or of the unskilful rider ven- turing on the horses of Achilles. The result was that the imitators became proficient only in mannerisms and affectation, and dropped into sickly sentimen- tality and mechanical formalism. The sensible " Dialogues" of Fenelon, however, remained as a great check, being in fact to preaching what Hamlet's address to the players has been to acting. Of these "Dialogues" Bishop Dupanloup has said: "If the precepts of F<5nelon had been well understood, they would have long since fixed the character of sacred eloquence among us." Sound principles, too, were

laid down by Blaise Gisbert in his "L'Eloquence chretienne dans I'idee et dans la pratique", by Amadeus Bajocensis in " Paulus Ecclesiastes, seu Eloquentia Christiana", and by Guido ab Angelis in "De Verbi Dei Praedicatione", all of which sounded a return to the simplicity of style of the Fathers.

In this brief historical sketch we are noticing only epochs, and the next important one is that of the so- called conferences in Notre-Dame in Paris, following the Revolution of 1S30. The most prominent name identified with this new style of preaching was that of the Dominican Lacordaire, who, for a time, with Montalembert, was associate editor with de Lamen- nais of "L'Avenir". This new style of preacliing discarded the form, the division, and analysis of the scholastic method. The power of Lacordaire as an orator was beyond question; but the conferences, as they have come down to us, while possessing much merit, are an additional proof that oratory is too elusive to be committed to the pages of a book. The Jesuit Pere de Ravignan nol)ly shared with Lacordaire the honour of occupying the pulpit of Notre-Dame. For some years, other able but less eloquent men followed, and the semi-religious, semi-philosophic style was beginning to grow tiresome, when Monsabrt"', a disciple of Lacordaire, with a single stroke set it aside, and confined himself, in a masterly series of discourses, to an explanation of the Creed; where- upon it was sententiously remarked that the bell had been ringing long enough, it was time for IMass to be- gin (cf. Boyle, "Irish Eccl. Rec", May, 1909).

As to preaching at the present day, we can clearly trace the influence, in many respects, of Scholasticism, both as to matter and form. In matter a sermon may be either moral, dogmatic, historical, or liturgical — by moral and dogmatic it is meant that one element will predominate, without, however, excluding the other. As to form, a discourse may be either a for- mal, or set, sermon; a homily (for different kinds see Ho.MiL^-); or a catechetical instruction. In the for- mal, or set, sermon the influence of Scholasticism is most strikingly seen in the analytic method, resulting in divisions and subdivisions. This is the thirteenth- century method, which, however, had its beginnings in the sermons of Sts. Bernard and Anthony. The underlying syllogism, too, in every well-thought-out sermon is due to Scholasticism; how far it should ap- pear is a question that belongs to a treatise on homil- etics. As to the catechetical discourse, it has been so much favoured by Pope Pius X that it might be re- garded as one of the characteristics of preaching at the present day. It is, however, a very old form of preaching, as the name (from Kara and vx'^) implies, i. e. the instruction that was given by word of mouth to the catechumens. It was used by Christ Himself, by St. Paul, by St. Cyril of Jerusalem, by St. Clement and Origen at Alexandria, by St. Augustine, who wrote a special treatise thereon (De catechizandis rudibus), also, in later times, by Gerson, chancellor of the Uni- versity of Paris, who wrote " De parvulis ad Christum trahendis"; Clement XI and Benedict XIV. gave to it all the weight of their authority, and one of the greatest of all catechists was St. Charles Borromeo. There is the danger, however, from the very nature of the subject, of this form of preaching becoming too dry and purel}' didactic, a mere catechesis, or doctrin- ism, to the exclusion of the moral element and of Sacred Scripture. In recent days, organized mission- ary preaching to non-Catholics has received a new stimulus. In the United States, particularly,this form of religious activity ha.s flourished; and the Paulists, amongst whom the name of Father Hecker is deserving of special mention, are to be mainly identified with the revival. Special facilities are afforded at the central institute of the organization for the training of those who are to impart catechetical instruction, and the non-controversial principles of the association